Finally, someone is crying foul on Steven Spielberg! Harlan Ellison. Ever heard of him? Unless you're a big fan of sci-fi literature (beyond Star Wars and Star Trek novels) you probably haven't . However, you've likely seen pieces of his influence scattered throughout popular sci-fi culture (click here to see his list of books, movies and tv shows). Isaac Asimov had good things to say about him. To top it all off, the guy is an arrogant big mouth who can verbally duke it out and win almost every time. But does that make him right?

Sci Fi Wire reported that Ellison has publicly come out with his own complaints about Spielberg's latest effort, War of the Worlds. In his own words: "What annoys me is that Spielberg is such an egomaniac these days that it has to be 'Steven Spielberg's War of the Worlds. No, you puss-bag. It's H.G. Wells' War of the Worlds, and it wouldn't kill you to put his f--king name on it." He continued, "That shows his arrogance. It's like Disney. Disney didn't write Snow White or Robin Hood or Bambi, but it's 'Walt Disney's universe.' It's the universe according to frozen Walt."

I personally don't know what Ellison is talking about. He makes it sound like Spielberg should be giving Wells more credit. I couldn't agree less. After all, Spielberg has changed the story so much that Wells probably wouldn't want his name attached. The plot has been fast forwarded several decades, presumably so today's movie going audiences can "relate". The main character has been given children to haul around with him, a situation totally invented by Spielberg, allegedly so it will appeal to a wider audience. Maybe it's fitting that Spielberg's name appears where Wells' should be. But, then, it probably deserves a different name, like Human Good, Martian Bad, or How to Find A Cure for the Common Alien or 101 Ways to Rescue Your Kids From an Invasion.

Of course, that's not to say we won't all run out to see the movie. It's Spielberg sci-fi for crying out loud. While most of his projects are fairly original and exciting, the movie could be two and a half hours of E.T. pruning a shrub and we'd all flock to see it. Ellison had something to say about that too. After commenting on his distaste for movie remakes, he said "We live in a society that values less and less the original." I don't know what he's talking about. It's not like anybody has been rehashing The Manchurian Candidate or resurrecting Herbie movies or anything like that.

Is Ellison right? Who cares. The guy has a big mouth and I have a news story quota to meet. At least someone out there has the guts to stand up to Spielberg's creative shenanigans.