|
Post by Cromwell on Nov 18, 2019 8:14:47 GMT
I watched the first episode last night and enjoyed it. Looks like it could be good.
|
|
|
Post by hammurabi70 on Nov 18, 2019 11:03:37 GMT
Who does 6mm Martian tripods? Pendraken do 10mm ones. Not sure about 6mm. Simon Thanks; maybe the small one would do for 6mm usage.
|
|
|
Post by stevie on Nov 18, 2019 12:26:14 GMT
I used the small Pendraken tripods, also their 6-legged 'crawlers', for my HoTT army. But I didn't use the legs they came with, as they spread-out too much and won't fit on 40mm x 40mm bases (plus they look a bit too 'cartoonish', and the feet are too big). So I've used thin copper rods for the legs...the same copper rods that Xyston Figures sell for use as pikes (100mm long, but cut in half so that my 50mm legs, even with an insect like bend in them, are tall enough). As for the first episode of the new BBC "War of the Worlds" mini drama...I liked it. I give it 4 out of 5 stars. ⭐⭐⭐⭐ I would have given it all 5 stars, but as a first episode it has to introduce all the characters and their background stories...but I also liked them too. (Mind you, the legs of their CGI tripods, what with their weird leg joints, look like they were glued together by me!)
|
|
|
Post by mthrguth on Nov 18, 2019 18:41:29 GMT
Lurkio Miniatures Home Army figures in 15mm......
Shameless plug.
Guth
|
|
|
Post by hammurabi70 on Nov 25, 2019 18:17:09 GMT
I used the small Pendraken tripods, also their 6-legged 'crawlers', for my HoTT army. But I didn't use the legs they came with, as they spread-out too much and won't fit on 40mm x 40mm bases (plus they look a bit too 'cartoonish', and the feet are too big). So I've used thin copper rods for the legs...the same copper rods that Xyston Figures sell for use as pikes (100mm long, but cut in half so that my 50mm legs, even with an insect like bend in them, are tall enough). As for the first episode of the new BBC "War of the Worlds" mini drama...I liked it. I give it 4 out of 5 stars. ⭐⭐⭐⭐ I would have given it all 5 stars, but as a first episode it has to introduce all the characters and their background stories...but I also liked them too. (Mind you, the legs of their CGI tripods, what with their weird leg joints, look like they were glued together by me!) My view is that you are too generous. After the first episode it was three-star in my view and the second episode confirms this. A little too consideration for political correctness of the moment although I will give the script writers fair dues for flexing the original storyline in 'modernising' it. However, for me it does not really stack up as a proper retelling of the story in a credible way.
|
|
|
Post by stevie on Nov 25, 2019 23:04:58 GMT
Oh I don’t know. I’d give it four stars ⭐⭐⭐⭐
Three stars because the coastal sea battle could have been better by seeing some of the pre-dreadnought ironclads sinking, and the Martians seem to be a bit too vulnerable to 1905 Edwardian weapons... ...but add a star because I like the future ‘what-happened-after-the-Martians-died’ bit... ...are they terraforming the Earth?...and will the journalist return? We will have to see next week...
|
|
|
Post by Cromwell on Nov 26, 2019 7:54:16 GMT
I enjoyed the first episode, but felt a little let down by the second. I appreciate they have modernised things but sometimes you cannot improve a classic.
I get the same feeling when I see Shakespeare "adapted".
Often, in my humble opinion these classics are messed with by directors,screen writers and producers who want to be seen to be doing something, they want to be seen as enlightened.
That's great. just go and create something original to do it with, do not ride on the backs of the greats.
That is it. Rant over!
|
|
|
Post by Simon on Nov 26, 2019 12:11:05 GMT
|
|
|
Post by nangwaya on Nov 26, 2019 12:22:12 GMT
Interesting take on this Simon.
I know that the show is getting quite a bit of bad reviews, and in light of what I read about Wells from the link you provided, I am wondering if many of the bad reviews are coming from people more interested in a faithful retelling of the book and not looking much further than that.
|
|
|
Post by stevie on Nov 26, 2019 12:38:45 GMT
I have to agree. War of the Worlds is a tired 120 year old plot that has been done to death in books, radio adaptations, several films, PC games, oh and a rock musical. If a director had followed the original to the letter then people would know exactly what was coming next and there would be no surprises, and they would be surely disappointed. So I like the new bits, and the fresh sense of mystery. Like Edwardians in 1905 seeing things for the first time that are beyond their understanding or everyday experience, I too get to feel the same when I see the Royal Astronomer’s still reflection in the black tar covering the surface of the Martian sphere, and that same sphere being a strange new weapon as it hovers and spins in the air instead of just being a lid that fell off as I was expecting. And the future flash-forwards into the red Earth period following the war is a whole new situation that H.G.Wells himself never attempted to explore. However, having read several disappointing reviews, I do understand why some viewers feel a bit underwhelmed. Their main concern seems to be with the bland special effects and CGI, but then that doesn’t bother me so much, as I like the depth of the characterizations (indeed, I still play some old school computer games such as “Master of Orion II” and the original “XCOM: UFO”... ...certainly not for their dated visual appeal, but because of their depth and detail). So perhaps my 4 stars is optimistic, but it has to be taken in context with the current crap dished up on telly today, such as ‘I’m-a-nobody-celebrity-who-can-dance-cook-live-in-a-jungle-and-have- -wild-wanton-sex-on-a-holiday-island’. Compared to such offerings, my 4 stars seems quite modest...
|
|
|
Post by hammurabi70 on Nov 26, 2019 16:53:09 GMT
I know that the show is getting quite a bit of bad reviews, and in light of what I read about Wells from the link you provided, I am wondering if many of the bad reviews are coming from people more interested in a faithful retelling of the book and not looking much further than that.
I have to agree. War of the Worlds is a tired 120 year old plot that has been done to death in books, radio adaptations, several films, PC games, oh and a rock musical. If a director had followed the original to the letter then people would know exactly what was coming next and there would be no surprises, and they would be surely disappointed.I think it is getting mixed reviews: the wiki entry gives a wide range of responses from the critics. However, having read several disappointing reviews, I do understand why some viewers feel a bit underwhelmed. Their main concern seems to be with the bland special effects and CGI, but then that doesn’t bother me so much, as I like the depth of the characterizations (indeed, I still play some old school computer games such as “Master of Orion II” and the original “XCOM: UFO”... ...certainly not for their dated visual appeal, but because of their depth and detail).The general tenor of the approach seems an updated CGI driven version of the polystyrene sets that generated so much merriment in the 1960s ... and beyond. I find it very unconvincing as with the general story line. Our journalist hero seems to be the only one conscripted to join the army as no other civilians are shown in the group. (It is interesting to note that they deploy a gatling gun rather than a maxim). This is not a credible approach and they could have just as easily written it so that he, a journalist, went with them voluntarily. I do not feel that there is depth of characterisation but with only three episodes there is a limit to what one might expect the script writers to achieve. The conversations within the plot seem rather weak to me and not very credible. The 'government response' seems to be shown by having two extra characters but for me it would have been done much better by having someone come from a cabinet meeting. It hardly seems credible to have a response from the government of the British Empire, at the height of its powers, through a meeting of three men and a woman in an ante-chamber. And so on... . So I like the new bits, and the fresh sense of mystery. Like Edwardians in 1905 seeing things for the first time that are beyond their understanding or everyday experience, I too get to feel the same when I see the Royal Astronomer’s still reflection in the black tar covering the surface of the Martian sphere, and that same sphere being a strange new weapon as it hovers and spins in the air instead of just being a lid that fell off as I was expecting. And the future flash-forwards into the red Earth period following the war is a whole new situation that H.G.Wells himself never attempted to explore. A good point about the sense of mystery. I think the storyline does the asymmetric nature of events rather well. We, and the characters, have no idea of what is going on and how the invaders are executing their invasion. However, is the red earth going to be a tag to hang warnings about global warming? My understanding is that the redness of the original book is Wells making an emphasis about people being treated as food like cattle and to exaggerate the effect of turning civilised counties in Britain into abattoirs. Is the refugee camp supposed to give us sympathy with events in Syria and parallel hopes for a return home to a better normality? On the beach Dunkirk, a sleepy little French coastal village gets mentioned rather than the actual port of Calais, a nod to recent films and anniversaries? I just feel there is a little too much playing to the gallery as if in a greek tragedy wearing masks. It just feels to me like too much wooden scripts, wooden acting, wooden storyline. They may only have three episodes but that is more time than many films would have. So perhaps my 4 stars is optimistic, but it has to be taken in context with the current crap dished up on telly today, such as ‘I’m-a-nobody-celebrity-who-can-dance-cook-live-in-a-jungle-and-have- -wild-wanton-sex-on-a-holiday-island’. Compared to such offerings, my 4 stars seems quite modest... I have no experience of such shows but from what I have heard they do not merit a single star and I am not sure I would want to measure a real programme against such dross. At least the BBC have made such a show as WotW, which we can discuss. I am disappointed that they did not do more of what I would want but pander or bend too much towards contemporary concerns. Such and always is the TV mass market. What about the appropriate HOTT armies?
|
|
|
Post by stevie on Nov 26, 2019 18:30:41 GMT
|
|