--- title: "War of the Worlds: the reviews" canonical: "https://film.one/film/war-of-the-worlds/reviews" title_page: "https://film.one/film/war-of-the-worlds" critics_score: 65 critics_reviews: 14 licence: "© Fi1m Ltd. Written by AI under a human editor; checked against sources before publication. Quote with attribution and a link to the canonical URL." --- # War of the Worlds (2005): what the critics said Critics' score 65 from 14 reviews: 6 positive, 7 mixed, 1 negative. Most critics rate the invasion itself highly and the film around it less so. The reviews cluster on Spielberg’s staging of the attack from ground level: the machines erupting out of the road, the crowd panic, the farmhouse basement, all praised for their immediacy and for effects that look naturalistic rather than showy. Several find the first half tense and frightening, and a few read it as a film about post-9/11 dread. The reservations cluster almost entirely on the ending, which even admirers call sentimental, tidy or silly. The spread is wide, from Variety’s near-rave to The Independent, which finds the whole thing undermined by its last minutes. The New Yorker objects on different grounds, faulting the narrow focus on Cruise’s character and a lack of curiosity about the aliens, and The Guardian hears too many echoes of Spielberg’s earlier hits. ## Variety — Todd McCarthy Fi1m's normalised score 90/100 (inferred from the text). 28 June 2005. McCarthy finds the film gritty, intense, and supremely accomplished, with its visceral attack sustaining the tension. He especially praises the naturalistic visual effects and the precisely staged farmhouse basement sequence. [Read the review](https://variety.com/2005/film/awards/war-of-the-worlds-2-1200524860/) ## Radio Times — Alan Jones Rating 4/5. Jones calls it a spectacular disaster epic, though he finds its first half much stronger than its second. He praises the escalating tension and transfixing human drama. [Read the review](https://www.radiotimes.com/movie-guide/b-02g0ow/war-of-the-worlds/) ## RogerEbert.com — Roger Ebert Rating 3/4. 29 June 2005. Ebert’s verdict is positive but qualified. He singles out the film’s most effective sequences, while finding it uneven overall. [Read the review](https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/war-of-the-worlds-2005) ## Slant Magazine — Jeremiah Kipp Rating 3/4. 28 June 2005. Kipp finds the film powerfully humane and morally ambitious, though its ending weakens that achievement. He praises Spielberg’s visceral, ground-level depiction of the invasion and the human cost of its destruction. [Read the review](https://www.slantmagazine.com/film/war-of-the-worlds/) ## IndieWire — robbiefreeling Fi1m's normalised score 70/100 (inferred from the text). 30 June 2005. The discussion finds the film a powerful and worthwhile disaster movie, despite criticizing its ending and some script logic. It especially praises Spielberg’s unsettling depiction of panic and violence, including the scene of a man clawing through a shattered windshield. [Read the review](https://www.indiewire.com/news/general/war-of-the-worlds-some-kind-of-monster-225532/) ## Empire — Colin Kennedy Fi1m's normalised score 65/100 (inferred from the text). 1 January 2000. Kennedy finds the film an impressive but uneven blockbuster, with its final act and sentimental ending weakening the overall effect. He especially praises the terrifying, immediate staging of the alien attack and its post-9/11 resonance. [Read the review](https://www.empireonline.com/movies/reviews/war-worlds-review/) ## Time Out — JWin Fi1m's normalised score 65/100 (inferred from the text). The review appears to begin by questioning the film’s secrecy, then hints it may exceed those suspicions. The available text is too truncated to identify what the critic praises or criticizes. [Read the review](https://www.timeout.com/movies/war-of-the-worlds) ## Screen Daily — John Hazelton Fi1m's normalised score 64/100 (inferred from the text). 29 June 2005. The review’s verdict is unavailable because the article text is behind a paywall. Its specific praise or criticism cannot be determined from the accessible page. [Read the review](https://www.screendaily.com/war-of-the-worlds/4023613.article) ## The Guardian — Rob Mackie Fi1m's normalised score 60/100 (inferred from the text). 11 November 2005. Mackie finds the film worth seeing, though it lacks the jolt of its inspirations. He praises its effective opening and memorable scenes, but says key moments recall Spielberg’s earlier hits. [Read the review](https://www.theguardian.com/film/2005/nov/11/dvdreviews) ## The AV Club — Scott Tobias Fi1m's normalised score 50/100 (inferred from the text). 1 July 2005. Tobias praises the film’s gripping visual storytelling and sustained tension, but finds its ending hollow and damaging. He singles out Spielberg’s command of effects and suspense as the film’s chief strength. [Read the review](https://www.avclub.com/war-of-the-worlds-1798200784) ## The New Yorker — David Denby Fi1m's normalised score 45/100 (inferred from the text). 3 July 2005. Denby finds the film’s disaster sequences stunning but criticizes its narrow, star-driven focus and lack of curiosity about the aliens. He particularly praises the weight and surprise of Spielberg’s moving-camera destruction scenes. [Read the review](https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2005/07/11/stayin-alive) ## The Independent — Colin Maccabe Fi1m's normalised score 35/100 (inferred from the text). 30 June 2005. The critic finds the film bleak and ultimately undermined by its silly ending, despite its spectacle and Cruise’s effective performance. He especially praises the scenes of the alien machines erupting from the ground and the film’s vivid paranoid imagery. [Read the review](https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/films/reviews/war-of-the-worlds-12a-295856.html) ## Eye for Film — John Gallagher Fi1m's normalised score 80/100 (inferred from the text). 8 July 2005. Gallagher gives the film an enthusiastic verdict, while admitting his fondness for Spielberg may make him biased. He praises the breathtaking destruction, striking sets and distinctive alien designs. [Read the review](https://www.eyeforfilm.co.uk/review/war-of-the-worlds-film-review-by-john-gallagher) ## Collider — Scott Wampler Fi1m's normalised score 50/100 (inferred from the text). 14 June 2010. Wampler remains a fan but finds the Blu-ray release and the film’s ending disappointing. He praises the film’s intense alien-invasion sequences, while faulting its grainy presentation and abrupt, overly tidy conclusion. [Read the review](https://collider.com/war-of-the-worlds-blu-ray-review/) --- © Fi1m Ltd. Written by AI under a human editor; checked against sources before publication. Quote with attribution and a link to the canonical URL. Our review: https://film.one/film/war-of-the-worlds.md