No the holiday falls on a monday..so that is the day you get off. Although Many I am sure will take the day after off..since fireworks are late at night.

As i said in another thread,Fat disgusting looking head of AICN Harry Knowles says its the best film of the year.

http://www.aintitcool.com/display.cgi?id=20580

Im suprised he thinks that,he's been critical of spielberg since the lost world.

The review seems strange, he likes it but he says things about it that will not get people hopeful. For example he says it is like early speilberg, but doesn't have the sense of fun that Jaws had. It's more like Duel. That is not a good sign at all for a movie that hopes to be a giant blockbuster.

And what to make of this line "And it’s tougher than SCHINDLER’S… it’s more along the lines of THE PIANIST." Knowles may like the movie, but he's sure not selling it, his review might be a sign of mixed word of mouth to come.

I think Harry means that this is a very seriouse film and not a dumb down sci-fi action film.

I'll be watching it tonight, so let's see whether Knowles is right or not (though, I usually don't buy AICN's stuff most of the time anyways).

I know what's going on with AICN and War, I think.

AICN had already set itself up as pro-WOTW with Quint and his sappy set visits. Maybe Harry expects once the embargo is lifted the WOM to be mixed, so he's already put himself out there before hand saying how its more like Duel and not more popular fare.

I agree. He's setting it up for a "I respect it, i didn't say it was a lot of fun" approach.

I read the first little bit of Knowles' review and the comparisons he was making to Duel and Schindler's List really brought a smile to my face. It's this kind of tone that will separate War of the Worlds from the usual summer blockbuster fare. It might suffer at the box-office because of it's lack of "fun", but it will be a more rewarding experience for myself and others who expect a little more.

Another positive review.

http://www.latinoreview.com/films_2005/ ... eview.html

The positive reviews are total BS.

This film will have 50%+ drops. Just wait and see.

What a terrible ending.

If that's true, and since the ending is the thing that stays with a moviegoer, it would bode well for Fantastic Four's opening.

i dont know if these were already posted, here are some good reviews from RT

9.2/10 "War of the Worlds is, hands down, the best big budget film of the summer. Maybe the year. Spielberg has crafted a real classic." CHUD

4/5 "the most adult film to come out during the summer season in years."Hero Realm

4/5 "if you like heart attacks with your movie-nights out, then sign yourself up for the war" Peterborough This Week

Its already got a tomatometer.Its at 100%
6 fresh and 0 rotten so far.

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/war_of_ ... /?show=all

Update,another review in and its positive.

7 fresh and 0 rotten.

From Joblo
everything you’d look for in a summer blockbuster and more!" ["movie review] JoBlo's Movie Emporium

One of those reviews is a soundtrack review.

I see.

well,another review up and its positive. 7 fresh and 0 rotten.

It seems that the reviews will be coming in from today on.

No offense box, but you know how I feel you have a tendency to... well, "slightly overstate things" , and in this case, I'm not convinced the crowds will scream and hiss and throw the popcorn at the screen. Signs had amazing legs despite a LOT of people online having similar feelings about the ending, and this thusfar has had much better WOM. I'll see it for myself tomorrow at 7:00 PM.

Up to 9 fresh reviews 0 rotten.

12 fresh and 1 rotten,the one rotten from film freak central is a lot like the dark shape's review,saying that 90% of the film is some of the best ever made but the ending is not good so for that he gave it a negative review.

Walther Chaw is a moron. His review of ROTS was pathetic.

"Spielberg is the only one who can mess up a Spielberg film."

what the hell...

Most of the reviews talked about the ending. I don't know why RT has the average at 8.0 when it seems a lot of them mentioned how the last 17 minutes ruined the brilliance of first 100 mins.

Not saying that Box's points are all valid but the Signs also had a religious theme and seems to have stronger family ties as Box suggested that seemed to help the movie alot

Any kind of brilliance that the first 100 minutes might have had (it's not brilliant though; the effects are, but the dialogue and acting are not, and the pacing is off at times, the editing seems odd in some parts, etc- had the ending been good, the film would still not have been great) are undermined and discounted by the ending.


You have to really suppress any attempts at logic and sound reason to still like the film when taking all things (incl. the ending) into consideration.

I'm sure a lot of sheep will merely follow Spielberg where-ever he goes. However, a lot of them will not. I still see 50% drops.

What he means is that this film is without question the work of a brilliant and experienced filmmaker who showcases his talent in different parts here and there, but does not display it in the work as a whole. The end-result is that much worse for being so good in parts. Think of someone falling from a greater height.