The horrible ending explanation by Morgan Freeman
-
fp_ff_fp — 9 years ago(August 21, 2016 01:00 PM)
Yes, I know. I've seen the 1953 version and the explanation there was acceptable for the times. But in 2005 it seems anachronistic to say "god" "put" bacteria and viruses on Earth.
I'm referring to the theological views here. Freeman should've said that organisms which evolved on Earth built tolerance for each other whereas the Martians did not evolve to tolerate these foreign organism and hence succumbed and that would've made for a better explanation - simply removing the entire god angle. -
Razojackmw — 9 years ago(November 18, 2016 01:14 PM)
Exactly my thoughts. The part about God triggered my atheistic ass like hell. Should have been replaced by "nature" or otherwise circumvented and left for audiences' interpretation based on whatever they believe in.
-
winomaster — 9 years ago(December 30, 2016 12:11 AM)
H.G. Wells according to Wikipedia was a pacifist. Speilberg was being true to the original book by putting a pacifist spin on it all. That is why we see that the military and anyone who acts against the aliens, suceeds only in making things worse. H.G. Wells plot device of having the aliens undone by bacteriaits there just to make pacifism a plausible philosophy. The message is when the conqueror comes, just run away and hide. And in time everything will work out. But its a curious message for someone of Speilbergs Jewish background. His people were being systematicly being exterminated by the invader. Does he really believe that the message of his filmthat pacifism is the best wayis a great truth?