sergebroom: (tripod)
[personal profile] sergebroom
Yesterday, I went to local bookstore Page One and bought "Nemesis" - the latest (and possibly last) of Lindsey Davis's "Falco" mysteries set in Ancient Rome. (My wife had recently given me the series's Official Compendium so I thought I'd finally get the novel.)

While there, I bought a small tin of "Juvenile Delinquent" mints. I mean, how could I resist a tin with 1950s art that warns us against "...wild, depraved youth with minty fresh breath..."?

Later that evening, I watched 2005's "War of the Worlds" because I wanted some shots of the Tripods for my "Steampunk and Hollywood" presentation, which I've been asked to do at Bubonicon in August. Also, I wanted to see if I'd dislike the movie as much as I originally did. The answer is: yes. Spielberg's film may have had better SFX than George Pal's, but the latter had a few aces up his sleeve.

A good story.
Characters you didn't want to see wiped out by alien invaders.

That being said, I won't begrudge Spielberg that the Tripods were awesome.

Date: Mar. 16th, 2011 02:07 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] ogre-san.livejournal.com
Totally in agreement. Film was *eh* Tripods (and the sound!) was awesome.

Date: Mar. 16th, 2011 02:25 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] serge-lj.livejournal.com
I remember reading soon after 9/11 that the project would be moved from a contemporary setting to a Victorian one. Too bad they changed their mind. On the other hand, Spielberg's "Time Machine" did have a Victorian setting, but it was still 'meh', compared (again) to George Pal's.

Date: Mar. 16th, 2011 07:28 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] medievalist.livejournal.com
I loved the set dressing/props of Pal's version.

And his time machine was gorgeous.

Date: Mar. 17th, 2011 01:37 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] serge-lj.livejournal.com
Same here. And another thing that Pal's movie had that Spielberg's didn't was a sense of wonder.