When a studio doesn’t allow critics to pre-screen a movie, that’s usually a terrific sign that it’s a dud. In the case of “War of the Worlds”, debuting today, critics were allowed to see it ahead of time but couldn’t publish their reviews until June 29th. Was that just a way to pique curiosity, or does it mean that the studio knows it’s a stinker?
Looks like the latter. Drudge Report has the following links:
VARIETY RAVE FOR ‘WAR OF THE WORLDS’…
SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER: ALIENS IMPRESS, BUT LACKS HUMAN IDENTITY…
EBERT: ‘BIG, CLUNKY, CONTAINING SOME SENSATIONAL SIGHTS’…
SACRAMENTO BEE: DOESN’T SET ITSELF APART…
LA DAILY NEWS: THRILLING, BUT REMAKE EVENTUALLY RUNS OUT OF AMMO…
NEW YORK TIMES: ‘REASONABLY ENTERTAINING RENDERING’…
LA TIMES: ‘RIVETING AND RELEVANT’…
SAN JOSE MERC: ‘A PICTURE WITHOUT A THOUGHT IN ITS PRETTY HEAD; NOT END OF WORLD, JUST WISH IT WERE BY END OF MOVIE’…
AP: DISJOINTED AND EPISODIC, ALIENS LOOK ‘BEGGED, BORROWED AND STOLEN FROM EVERY RECENT MOVIE’…
ORLANDO SENTINEL: ‘GRIM, HEAVY AND PONDEROUS’…
Meanwhile, Ebert gives it two stars. He also says that the budget was only $130 million.