"across the gulf of space intellects vast and cool and unsympathetic, regarded our planet with envious eyes, and slowly and surely drew their plans against us" This is probably the most terrifyingly awe-inspiring phrase in science fiction horror.
The 1953 opening gives me chills every time. Morgan Freemans narration is great too but the chilling soundtrack of the original fills me with dread. It's one of the greatest pieces of sci-fi storytelling I've ever experienced in my life.
I saw the 2005 War of the Worlds in the theater with my father and my uncle and I think I was never scared of this movie fact I thought it was so interesting I grew up with it I watch the countless times I have it on DVD and it's still one of the best films that was adapted from the book of HG Wells
@@michaelproctor8100 Its more than twilight. The whole premise is that Mars is dieing. The water canals allude to Percival Lowell's concept of the Martians as an ancient race on a dieing Mars. The canals brought water from the planet's thirsty cities. Exhaustion refers to all the natural resources being used up, with even the atmosphere declining.
Orson Welles' version is my favorite. Mainly because his version includes even more amazing dialog but he also has a great voice: "With infinite complacency people went to and fro over the Earth about their little affairs. Serene in the assurance of their dominion over this small, spinning fragment of solar drift wood. Which by chance or design, man has inherited out of the dark mystery of time and space." {{CHILLS}}
But I think that may have been on purpose. If I remember correctly in the book it saod that the Martians gave up after so many died to disease that they decided to just occupy Venus.
Nicholas Pasty Probably one of those things where people prefer to hate on the newer. If Freeman was the first to narrate the quote, he'd probably be everyone's favourite.
I too have good taste for literature. When I read the book and saw the 2005 movie for the first time, the line that really got me was "...and slowly and surely drew their plans against us."
Essentially a metaphor for colonization, except in that case the diseases kill the natives, not the invaders. Well, there was some death by disease on both sides, but my point stands.
I have to say that I like the opening to the 1953 version better. It's less melodramatic, and more scientifically educational, and yet still manages to mesmerize the viewer. And it paints the Martians in a slightly more sympathetic light. They're only invading Earth because they are desparate; their planet is dying and they need a new one. Earth is simply the only option.
youruglymugg All movies have their faults and mistakes, originals and remakes, every one of them. Jurrasic Park, Indiana Jones, The Fly 1958 and The Fly 1986 remake, The Marvel Super hero films, and many other big films have there faults and short commings. Still the 1953 film still surpasses the Tom Cruz one hands down and was way ahead of its time.
I heard that during the 50s it was a radio show called The Mercury Theater with Orson Welles and I believe he read War of the Worlds it was broadcasted in New Jersey where are some of my family members lived and as far as my memory serves me after he read War of the Worlds during the broadcast everybody wanted to panic because they thought the Martians were coming because during the 50s it was the whole belief of the nuclear age and fighting the Russians as well as the belief that martians would come to wage war on us
The year was 1938, the time Hallowe'en, and the context the imminent outbreak of hostilities in Europe, in which almost everyone believed would featureg the widespread use of poison gases against cities and the immediate destruction of large portions of countries by round-the-clock aerial bombardment.
@Eric Santana.....well, Eric....wherever or from whomever you "heard" that information from.....was an uninformed idiot ! The Orson Welles broadcast was made in 1938. The information above, from @Robert Haworth is correct and accurate. Next time - don't believe every thing that you "hear" - because when you repeat such idiocy - it reflects badly on your credibility.......and you don't want to go through life being labeled a fool......do you ??
When I first saw this movie one thing I had always wondered about was this scene where the Narrator talked about the planets and they're hostile and deadly environments and that is how the heck did he know about this I mean we didn't start sending out unmanned space probes to explore our solar system till sometime between the late 60's and early 70's with the Viking and Voyager space probes heck it was the Voyager probes that helped map out the solar system in the first place.
They were making some pretty good guesses based on what they could see with their telescopes. Based on what we know now they were definitely way off on Jupiter although I do wonder when exactly it became apparent that Saturn/Jupiter/Neptune and Uranus were gas giants with no solid surface.
I think the reason Venus was left out of the 1953 version was that scientists did not know much about it, some actually thought that dinosaurs lived on the surface. Still the movie speculated that Jupiter had molten cliffs of flowing lava even though we now know it is just a big ball of gas.
THEButterFingerBatMan you can excuse the effects because it was done in the 50s. The effects back them where ground breaking and looked more realistic than the CGI of today. And again this was the 1950s. Our knowledge of space has changed drastically since then. You can excuse that.
Matthew Smith I'm not /going/ to excuse the effects, because of how bad they looked, even for the fifties. Sure, it may have been great at the time, but nowadays there isn't a single redeeming quality to it.
THEButterFingerBatMan these effects were ground breaking. Some of the effect still hold up. The effects of the remake is all CGI, and I find less convincing than the organic practical effects of the 53 film. Besides a movie fan doesn't judge a movie based on the effects. They base it on the story and chatacters. The character in the remake were annoying and the story barely followed the novel. The 53 film was more faithful and the characters were better.
Matthew Smith I preferred the effects of the 2005 one, and I didn't really focus on the characters. This one felt less realistic all around... I believe I should judge it by it's effects, because if they're so bad that it pulls me out of the action, it fails in one of the major ways movies need to succeed.
So in the fifties they still thought the gas giants had solid surfaces (Jupiter with cliffs of lava?!?). And why didn’t they mention Venus? Did they still think it was a steaming rain forest planet?
Maybe so. The first radio-astronomic measurements on the surface temperature were made during the 1950s but were inconclusive. Only in 1962, Mariner 2 measured high temperatures in the lower atmospheric layers but couldn't provide data about the surface conditions. Any remaining doubts were erased after the Soviet Venera-7 lander reached the surface, only in 1970.
Compare the '53 intro with the final 15-or-so minutes of When Worlds Collide, when the spaceship fleeing the doomed Earth descends and lands on the planet Zyra. Read up as well on the artistry of one Chesley Bonestell.
Always liked the artwork in the 53 version, no matter how inaccurate Hollywood envisioned it at the time. It's the way the solar system Should have been.
Saturn= 200 degrees below zero with 15,000 miles of deep ice. Jupiter= 1k pounds square inch atmosphere Mercury= it's equator would melt molten lead and Since lead melts at 621 °F (327 °C), you also need a powerful yet reasonably safe heat source.
My favourite is the Jeff Wayne Musical, particularly the version with Liam Neeson. It has that great music and is actually faithful to the book rather than just referencing it sort of. Also, the 1950s movie is one of my favourite movies of all time and I also do live the 2005 version, they’re not truly accurate versions of War of the Worlds, and I think they suffer because of it
@MikeProductions1000 that’s true, something about them being models with no moving parts made them easier back in the day, I don’t really know. I will agree that it isn’t at all a good adaptation of the novel (which is why I think the musical is so good because it is probably the most faithful version I know of) but it is fun as a cheesy, 50s B-Movie.
@@jct9099 no, MF is mediocre at best.. So tired of him always sounding exactly the same and being continuously given the voice of God or other important roles.
1:33 I like the narrator's description of Jupiter😁. It looks like Mustsfar from Star Wars. I think the artist Chesley Bonestall drew all those pictures in the 1953 movie.
To be fair, in our actual universe; the upper atmosphere of Venus isn’t that bad. So it’s still possible, the Martians could settle on the upper atmosphere of Venus.
Was Wells the first writer to talk about earth being invaded by aliens from another planet? I'm not an expert on literature. Wells was certainly ingenious in his ideas. Today lots of movies feature alien invasions, Battleship the most recent. It's now a common sic-fi genre.
x WAKA x Actually, No. This was the first. Wells wrote this novel based on his observations of the British Empire and Colonization. He wrote it in 1897 & was the first to write about an Alien invasion to Earth. What writer / writers (and when) wrote about an alien invasion "way earlier"?
Pastor Dr. Matthew Collins: I think we should try to make them understand we mean them no harm. They are living creatures out there. Sylvia: But they're not human. Dr. Forrester says they're some kind of advanced civilization. Pastor Dr. Matthew Collins: If they're more advanced than us, they should be nearer the creator for that reason. No real attempt has been made to communicate with them, you know? Sylvia: Let's go back inside, Uncle Matthew. Pastor Dr. Matthew Collins: I've done all I can in there. You go back. Sylvia, I like that Dr. Forrester, he's a good man. Soldier: Who's that? What's he think he's doing? Sylvia: Uncle! Uncle Matthew! Major General Mann: It's too late now. He's too far away. Pastor Dr. Matthew Collins: Though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil. Forrester: It's seen him! Pastor Dr. Matthew Collins: Thou anointest my head with oil. My cup runneth over. And I will dwell in the house of the Lord, forever. [Martians kill Uncle Matthew] Sylvia: [scream] Col. Ralph Heffner: Let'm have it! Soldier: Fire! 😎
HG Wells wrote the story in serial form in 1897. Then in book form in 1898 by William Heinemann publishing. He was fascinated by the then new biological sciences & sci-fi proposed tech of the day. But also by our search to find utopia, being surrounded by dystopia.
It's not to do with what he said it was how he said it. If you listen at the end it just seems like he overdid it, like I said. I think Orson Welles was better than either of them really.
@@youruglymugg I think you can teach people whilst being entertaining, the point of the opening is to build up to the invasion in a subtle way. None of the films have done it right in my opinion. Orson Welles and Richard Burton are the only ones who did it well, from what I've heard. Ashame Blake Ritson didn't have the monologue in the version he was in because he was an amazing actor in BBC Radio 4's adaptation.
The 1953 version is actually very educational and had big words that civilized audiences were expected to understand, the 2003 version is just not educational and is so simple
the 2005 film as a whole is more book accurate (although none of them are very faithful to the book) but i do prefer the opening in the 50's version, its more cold and haunting. Both films have their merits, though the 50's is a bit cheesy lmao
The difference between the two for me, the 1953 one at least gives the why. The narrator had a gripping voice. Morgan Freeman is great but the 2005 just has no detailed info. Where did the aliens come from? Why did they envy us? What was their culture? Why bury tripods millions of years ago and then invade? Why use teleportation to these old machines and not just appear in prime locations with ray guns? If they were watching so intensely people going about their day, why not study bacteria? 😬😂
jack ryan I messed up the pun: Putin's intellect is only cool and unsympathetic, not vast; so I should have said, "Intellects vast and cool and unsympathetic. Putin's intellect is two thirds of that." lol
"across the gulf of space intellects vast and cool and unsympathetic, regarded our planet with envious eyes, and slowly and surely drew their plans against us"
This is probably the most terrifyingly awe-inspiring phrase in science fiction horror.
HappyPantsTime scary to think it may be true, that we are being studied from afar in such a way
HG Wells was a genius, no doubt. It’s great that even though the 1953 film changes a lot of things from the book, they kept that intro.
Dax Garcia people we're idiots to think sentient alien life exists on Mars.
Robert Kelly It’s obvious he means from outside our solar system
@@Cybermat47 I assure you HG Wells wasn’t dumb.
The 1953 opening gives me chills every time. Morgan Freemans narration is great too but the chilling soundtrack of the original fills me with dread. It's one of the greatest pieces of sci-fi storytelling I've ever experienced in my life.
I've always enjoyed the artists depiction of the martian city in cold twilight.
Mars only gets about half of the sunlight that the earth does....perpetual twilight.
I saw the 2005 War of the Worlds in the theater with my father and my uncle and I think I was never scared of this movie fact I thought it was so interesting I grew up with it I watch the countless times I have it on DVD and it's still one of the best films that was adapted from the book of HG Wells
@@michaelproctor8100 Its more than twilight. The whole premise is that Mars is dieing. The water canals allude to Percival Lowell's concept of the Martians as an ancient race on a dieing Mars. The canals brought water from the planet's thirsty cities. Exhaustion refers to all the natural resources being used up, with even the atmosphere declining.
@@blindandwatching
Also the reason, why the Martians invaded earth- They needed a new home.
Sir Cedric Hardwicke. Wonderful narration..
Orson Welles' version is my favorite. Mainly because his version includes even more amazing dialog but he also has a great voice:
"With infinite complacency people went to and fro over the Earth about their little affairs. Serene in the assurance of their dominion over this small, spinning fragment of solar drift wood. Which by chance or design, man has inherited out of the dark mystery of time and space." {{CHILLS}}
I like those old matte paintings. Reminds me of my old childhood.
....??? .......what about your new childhood ??
Its pretty charming how off they were about Jupiter back then. But I do like the special effects, especially the Rings of Saturn. :)
But look how much they known already back in the 50s!
True, they were actually describing Venus lol.
Maybe they were talking about Io, the moon with a bunch of volcano's
Well, it's what was considered the inside of Jupiter, not necessarily the upper atmosphere that you see on pictures.
Fantastic..music is so atmospheric. This was decades before space probes yet pretty accurate..(except for mars and jupiter)
„They couldn’t go to Uranus...“
*well, obviously*
Well, If the martians was a micro specie, they could Go there, i think...
pay the toll
0:52 The narrator certainly got it right about Pluto.
I've often wondered why the opening of the 1953 release failed to mention the Martians' opinion about Venus.
They left out Venus!
I know right!
But I think that may have been on purpose. If I remember correctly in the book it saod that the Martians gave up after so many died to disease that they decided to just occupy Venus.
@David Still forgot melting it would crush it.
True, likely why the Martians would attempt a second invasion.
Who ever is the science advisor for Martian foreign policy must of mixed up Jupiter and Venus.
......must HAVE mixed up ........third grade grammatical error......the education system today is very poor......
The 1950's version of Jupiter is hilarious..
Mustafar
@@camille0352
🤣🤣
The depiction did resemble that!
@@camille0352 i have the low ground
@@camille0352 the Martians considered mustafar but they couldn't go there because it's atmosphere would not allow them the high ground.
It looks more like Hell!
Winston Smith's comment is bang on, that's exactly how I hear the new version, "Morgan sounds like he's reading a scary story to 3rd graders".
Nicholas Pasty Probably one of those things where people prefer to hate on the newer. If Freeman was the first to narrate the quote, he'd probably be everyone's favourite.
I actually went back and listened to the original, it was the first time I'd heard that part, so they're both new to me, just a preference.
He did get his start on The Electric Company.
Morgan Freeman has a fabulous talent for narrative, but I think he was miscast here.
And worse, wasted on poor remake of a classic film
"It takes a while grinding up a whole pers-" - Fargo
+Jacques De Vere Haha came here directly after finishing the episode.
So did i XD
+Jacques De Vere Same here!
As a writer, I LOVE the phrase, "...intellects vast and cool and unsympathetic..." When you think about it, that's two-thirds of a Putin.
Great line. Love it too..
HA!
This is exactly what would happen , they wouldn't make friends, its cold logic, the law of the universe
I too have good taste for literature. When I read the book and saw the 2005 movie for the first time, the line that really got me was "...and slowly and surely drew their plans against us."
Essentially a metaphor for colonization, except in that case the diseases kill the natives, not the invaders. Well, there was some death by disease on both sides, but my point stands.
I have to say that I like the opening to the 1953 version better.
It's less melodramatic, and more scientifically educational, and yet still manages to mesmerize the viewer.
And it paints the Martians in a slightly more sympathetic light.
They're only invading Earth because they are desparate; their planet is dying and they need a new one. Earth is simply the only option.
Disagree the old one was to long. I don't give a shit about mars atmosphere or pluto. The updated version is swift clean and right to the point.
I love the old version
youruglymugg All movies have their faults and mistakes, originals and remakes, every one of them. Jurrasic Park, Indiana Jones, The Fly 1958 and The Fly 1986 remake, The Marvel Super hero films, and many other big films have there faults and short commings. Still the 1953 film still surpasses the Tom Cruz one hands down and was way ahead of its time.
1953 one was better
i know right these remakes cant beat our classics ^_^
My personal favourite is Richard Burton but both of these are good too.
I heard that during the 50s it was a radio show called The Mercury Theater with Orson Welles and I believe he read War of the Worlds it was broadcasted in New Jersey where are some of my family members lived and as far as my memory serves me after he read War of the Worlds during the broadcast everybody wanted to panic because they thought the Martians were coming because during the 50s it was the whole belief of the nuclear age and fighting the Russians as well as the belief that martians would come to wage war on us
The year was 1938, the time Hallowe'en, and the context the imminent outbreak of hostilities in Europe, in which almost everyone believed would featureg the widespread use of poison gases against cities and the immediate destruction of large portions of countries by round-the-clock aerial bombardment.
@Eric Santana.....well, Eric....wherever or from whomever you "heard" that information from.....was an uninformed idiot ! The Orson Welles broadcast was made in 1938.
The information above, from @Robert Haworth is correct and accurate. Next time - don't believe every thing that you "hear" - because when you repeat
such idiocy - it reflects badly on your credibility.......and you don't want to go through life being labeled a fool......do you ??
In the 1953 version, the narrator mentions every planet but Venus.
Ray Klu that might be because the Martians invade Venus in the original book.
Venus is more viable than the three outermost planets.
53: classic
05: chilling
When I first saw this movie one thing I had always wondered about was this scene where the Narrator talked about the planets and they're hostile and deadly environments and that is how the heck did he know about this I mean we didn't start sending out unmanned space probes to explore our solar system till sometime between the late 60's and early 70's with the Viking and Voyager space probes heck it was the Voyager probes that helped map out the solar system in the first place.
My guess would be by what we knew of physics on earth, how certain gases reacted etc
They were making some pretty good guesses based on what they could see with their telescopes. Based on what we know now they were definitely way off on Jupiter although I do wonder when exactly it became apparent that Saturn/Jupiter/Neptune and Uranus were gas giants with no solid surface.
I think the reason Venus was left out of the 1953 version was that scientists did not know much about it, some actually thought that dinosaurs lived on the surface.
Still the movie speculated that Jupiter had molten cliffs of flowing lava even though we now know it is just a big ball of gas.
Michael Proctor
The films speculation about the conditions on Jupiter, is more fitting to Venus
Jupiter is not all gas. It has a rocky core at the bottom of its immense and very dense atmosphere.
@@robertromero8692 Arthur C Clarke thought there might be a giant diamond at the core.
They described Venus when referring to Jupiter.
@@tom8715 You are wrong, go watch the beginning again. There is no mention of Venus, just a vague reference of "all the other worlds."
05 intro was very good, but the 53 intro was more ominous and chilling.
+Metalhead15712 And it was full of incorrect facts, with a crappy effect in front of it, and bad music over it.
THEButterFingerBatMan you can excuse the effects because it was done in the 50s. The effects back them where ground breaking and looked more realistic than the CGI of today.
And again this was the 1950s. Our knowledge of space has changed drastically since then. You can excuse that.
Matthew Smith I'm not /going/ to excuse the effects, because of how bad they looked, even for the fifties. Sure, it may have been great at the time, but nowadays there isn't a single redeeming quality to it.
THEButterFingerBatMan these effects were ground breaking. Some of the effect still hold up. The effects of the remake is all CGI, and I find less convincing than the organic practical effects of the 53 film.
Besides a movie fan doesn't judge a movie based on the effects. They base it on the story and chatacters. The character in the remake were annoying and the story barely followed the novel. The 53 film was more faithful and the characters were better.
Matthew Smith I preferred the effects of the 2005 one, and I didn't really focus on the characters. This one felt less realistic all around... I believe I should judge it by it's effects, because if they're so bad that it pulls me out of the action, it fails in one of the major ways movies need to succeed.
So in the fifties they still thought the gas giants had solid surfaces (Jupiter with cliffs of lava?!?). And why didn’t they mention Venus? Did they still think it was a steaming rain forest planet?
Maybe so. The first radio-astronomic measurements on the surface temperature were made during the 1950s but were inconclusive. Only in 1962, Mariner 2 measured high temperatures in the lower atmospheric layers but couldn't provide data about the surface conditions. Any remaining doubts were erased after the Soviet Venera-7 lander reached the surface, only in 1970.
Compare the '53 intro with the final 15-or-so minutes of When Worlds Collide, when the spaceship fleeing the doomed Earth descends and lands on the planet Zyra. Read up as well on the artistry of one Chesley Bonestell.
Only day this will happen
Always liked the artwork in the 53 version, no matter how inaccurate Hollywood envisioned it at the time. It's the way the solar system Should have been.
At least they got Pluto right...
2:50 to 2:59 music is something different and good ... Listen carefully
Saturn= 200 degrees below zero with 15,000 miles of deep ice.
Jupiter= 1k pounds square inch atmosphere
Mercury= it's equator would melt molten lead and Since lead melts at 621 °F (327 °C), you also need a powerful yet reasonably safe heat source.
The Martians invaded Earth but failed to vamquish the giant ball of blue and green colors.
My favourite is the Jeff Wayne Musical, particularly the version with Liam Neeson. It has that great music and is actually faithful to the book rather than just referencing it sort of.
Also, the 1950s movie is one of my favourite movies of all time and I also do live the 2005 version, they’re not truly accurate versions of War of the Worlds, and I think they suffer because of it
what
@MikeProductions1000 that’s true, something about them being models with no moving parts made them easier back in the day, I don’t really know. I will agree that it isn’t at all a good adaptation of the novel (which is why I think the musical is so good because it is probably the most faithful version I know of) but it is fun as a cheesy, 50s B-Movie.
I grew up on the original, but prefer the updated music of the new one.
Ah man, I remember that year when watching Walking Dead we thought it was gonna come true, haha!!!
Cedric Hardwicke narrates the introduction much better than Morgan Freeman.
Victor Murillo sorry, disagree
Couldn't agree more.
MF is just MF.
SCH read the introduction like a friendly, yet stern teacher, and actually makes you sympathetic for the Martians.
And Richard Burton does it better than either in Jeff Wayne's Musical Version....and more accurately!
DeltaWarrior MF Really did much better in this Spielberg film
@@jct9099 no, MF is mediocre at best.. So tired of him always sounding exactly the same and being continuously given the voice of God or other important roles.
I love how they considered the gas and ice giants a place to go, too bad back then they didnt know they were just big balls of gas
1:33 I like the narrator's description of Jupiter😁. It looks like Mustsfar from Star Wars. I think the artist Chesley Bonestall drew all those pictures in the 1953 movie.
The Walking Dead has been around for such a long time.
Odd, they left out Venus.
At the time they didn't know it was uninhabitable. In fact, in the book the Martians go to Venus after failing to invade Earth.
I thought that too. There's a bit about Venus at the end of the book.
+That Guy the novel was written in the late 1800s. Our knowledge of space changed drastically since then.
To be fair, in our actual universe; the upper atmosphere of Venus isn’t that bad. So it’s still possible, the Martians could settle on the upper atmosphere of Venus.
Audio is too low....got AC hum.
The 2005 version is far more respectful of H.G. Wells's original preface in the book.
I'm not sure if I'm the first one to point this out but the narrator in the 1953 version skipped over Venus.
Venus was thought to be habitable by the 1950s and in the book the Martians occupied it after their failure to conquer Earth.
We actually once thought Jupiter and Saturn had solid surfaces?
Awesome !
They couldn't go to Uranus. I don't blame them.
They maybe here among us right now and we just don't know it.
Was Wells the first writer to talk about earth being invaded by aliens from another planet? I'm not an expert on literature. Wells was certainly ingenious in his ideas. Today lots of movies feature alien invasions, Battleship the most recent. It's now a common sic-fi genre.
no. there's stuff about aliens way earlier.
x WAKA x Actually, No. This was the first. Wells wrote this novel based on his observations of the British Empire and Colonization. He wrote it in 1897 & was the first to write about an Alien invasion to Earth.
What writer / writers (and when) wrote about an alien invasion "way earlier"?
These things might taste like lobster, with the texture of veal. Let's invade Mars!
Pastor Dr. Matthew Collins: I think we should try to make them understand we mean them no harm. They are living creatures out there.
Sylvia: But they're not human. Dr. Forrester says they're some kind of advanced civilization.
Pastor Dr. Matthew Collins: If they're more advanced than us, they should be nearer the creator for that reason. No real attempt has been made to communicate with them, you know?
Sylvia: Let's go back inside, Uncle Matthew.
Pastor Dr. Matthew Collins: I've done all I can in there. You go back. Sylvia, I like that Dr. Forrester, he's a good man.
Soldier: Who's that? What's he think he's doing?
Sylvia: Uncle! Uncle Matthew!
Major General Mann: It's too late now. He's too far away.
Pastor Dr. Matthew Collins: Though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil.
Forrester: It's seen him!
Pastor Dr. Matthew Collins: Thou anointest my head with oil. My cup runneth over. And I will dwell in the house of the Lord, forever.
[Martians kill Uncle Matthew]
Sylvia: [scream]
Col. Ralph Heffner: Let'm have it!
Soldier: Fire!
😎
The Nazis were technologically advanced but they certainly weren't closer to The Creator.
Thanks. Do you know the name of any author who wrote about it earlier? I don't know a lot about science fiction....
Wells was the first.
thanks
HG Wells wrote the story in serial form in 1897. Then in book form in 1898 by William Heinemann publishing. He was fascinated by the then new biological sciences & sci-fi proposed tech of the day. But also by our search to find utopia, being surrounded by dystopia.
I wasn't talking about HG Wells, I just wondered if another author ever had the idea before Wells....thanks
The story was a Wells original. But sci-fi, as we now call it, came from earlier writers, all the way back to the ancient Greeks.
1953 is better to me...........anyone notice they didnt say venus?
Heck, soon people will be going to Mars.
Not like those frickin aliens will be there or anything
right?
There was a time before Morgan Freeman?
And there were many ones before the one before Morgan Freeman, including the original novel.
Enigma Dubz - Against Us
He missed venus out ?
Nope."Of all the planets that the Martians could see and study..."
CLASSICALFAN100 Oh, so they couldn't see Venus.
Fair point, it is covered in very thick clouds..
Yes, but he described it when he was describing Jupiter. lol
ephabouyed he was talking about Io, it's obvious
Personally I think Morgan Freeman overdone it... then again I'm British so maybe I have a bias? :P
Freeman is a lot better it's a movie not a science class.
It's not to do with what he said it was how he said it. If you listen at the end it just seems like he overdid it, like I said. I think Orson Welles was better than either of them really.
@@youruglymugg I think you can teach people whilst being entertaining, the point of the opening is to build up to the invasion in a subtle way. None of the films have done it right in my opinion. Orson Welles and Richard Burton are the only ones who did it well, from what I've heard. Ashame Blake Ritson didn't have the monologue in the version he was in because he was an amazing actor in BBC Radio 4's adaptation.
What about Venus?! 🤷♂️
1:15: You know even in 1953 people snickered at that.
Aliens are jealous of the Earth?
Yeah sensitive bitches
Its Just fiction lol😊
Cecil Hardwick, not Richard Burton
agreed! and certainly not MF, ugh.
@@kennywowie nigga
The 1953 version is actually very educational and had big words that civilized audiences were expected to understand, the 2003 version is just not educational and is so simple
what
1953 version vastly superior to Mr Cruise 2005 version !
shut up
Definitely not. The first half of the 2005 film is among the most incredible science fiction ever put to film
What? They knew nothing about Jupiter, which is fair enough.
Try Venus next time
Im sorry but i like 2005 more
Same.
the 2005 film as a whole is more book accurate (although none of them are very faithful to the book) but i do prefer the opening in the 50's version, its more cold and haunting. Both films have their merits, though the 50's is a bit cheesy lmao
The difference between the two for me, the 1953 one at least gives the why. The narrator had a gripping voice. Morgan Freeman is great but the 2005 just has no detailed info. Where did the aliens come from? Why did they envy us? What was their culture? Why bury tripods millions of years ago and then invade? Why use teleportation to these old machines and not just appear in prime locations with ray guns? If they were watching so intensely people going about their day, why not study bacteria? 😬😂
Dzheep, i think its "vast, cruel, and unsympathetic"
? Oh! *Putin's* "intellect" is cruel and unsypathetic. I see. lol
Um, It's "intellects vast and cool and unsympathetic". Cool, not Cruel.
jack ryan I messed up the pun: Putin's intellect is only cool and unsympathetic, not vast; so I should have said, "Intellects vast and cool and unsympathetic. Putin's intellect is two thirds of that." lol
War of Wdls
Too bad the Morgan Freeman intro to the WOTW remake was the high point of that film.
It wasn't a fucking remake racist
lol clouds on all the fckin planets haha
Morgan Freeman
2005 one is better I’ve watched both
The original was better than the ridiculous Tom Cruise remake.
1953 version is better 👿
no
Morgan Freeman wins.
the bad as can be award
Shut up
2005is worthless
I hate the 1953 version so much...
say that to the billions of 1953 fans
Careless Corey Well, I'm trying. And there probably aren't billions of them...
1953 version was epic!
Like me - I first got that film for my birthday, and I was hooked. Then again we're talking when I was in my early teens.
Behave
Terribly anti-Semitic sentiments.
Say what?!
What? Where??