planetf1.com

Mr-E wrote:2 movies this year that really made an impact on me were:
"End Of Watch"
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1855199/

"Savages"
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1615065/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1

2 great movies imo.

This. Also recently watched The Bourne Legacy which was surprisingly good (had very low expectations though) and Looper, which was IMO the best out of these four.

Covalent wrote:

Mr-E wrote:2 movies this year that really made an impact on me were:
"End Of Watch"
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1855199/

"Savages"
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1615065/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1

2 great movies imo.

This. Also recently watched The Bourne Legacy which was surprisingly good (had very low expectations though) and Looper, which was IMO the best out of these four.

Yeah agree on those too. THe Bourne movie was much better than expected and I enjoyed Looper as well. But my fav out of those four would be End Of Watch. But I guess that has to do with personal reasons.

Savages was ok. I enjoyed it, but nothing special

mac_d wrote:Okay, with the possible exception of the Hobbit to be inserted here, the top 10 grossing films of 2012 are as follows (according to wikipedia):

Spoiler (click to show)

Rank Title Studio Worldwide gross
1 The Avengers Marvel Studios / Disney $1,511,757,910
2 The Dark Knight Rises Warner Bros. / Legendary Pictures $1,081,041,287
3 Skyfall MGM / Columbia $951,066,000
4 Ice Age: Continental Drift Fox / Blue Sky Studios $874,992,418
5 Twilight: Breaking Dawn Pt 2 Lionsgate / Summit Entertainment $778,265,000
6 The Amazing Spider-Man Columbia / Marvel Studios $752,216,557
7 Madagascar 3 Paramount / DreamWorks $742,110,251
8 The Hunger Games Lionsgate $686,533,290
9 Men in Black 3 Columbia $624,026,776
10 Brave Disney / Pixar $535,272,145

Avengers - basically a sequel.
DKR - Sequel
Skyfall - possible considered a sequel? Set in the same universe at least as previous films
Ice Age - Sequel
Twilight - Sequel
Spider Man - Reboot
Madagascar 3 - sequel
Hunger Games - new adaptation
Men in Black 3 - sequel
Brave - new

And if the Hobbit jumps in there, it is in a similar place to Skyfall. Given the story is closely related to LotR.

So here is the question, does it bother you that movies seem to be very sequel orientated these days?

I think it bothers me, but in saying that I saw 4 of the sequels in the top 10 (and bought the Blu-Rays for Avengers and DKR). I also saw Expendables 2 and American Pie Reunion. I started off the year with Mission Impossible 4. I don't think I saw a film at the cinema this year that wasn't either a direct sequel type or a Skyfall/Avengers continuation of the same characters type. So, it can't be too much of a bother to me. I just worry that we are creating an atmosphere that stifles something new and exciting in place of either continuing the same thing or rebooting a film series that is not even that long since stagnated (Spiderman!). We also have another 2 X-Men films (A first class era one and another Wolverine one). All the Avenger's characters sequels and the like. I just worry that while the going is good, we are going to force Hollywood into a situation where they only want to make sequels etc and then when the sequels all turn to crap, we are left with nothing.

But maybe that won't happen.

http://www.metacritic.com/browse/movies ... =condensed
Skyfall is the only 'sequel' on the first page of the highest rated films of 2012.

But if you go to http://www.imdb.com/chart/top you'll see that Skyfall isn't on the list while Argo is the fourth highest rated film of this year (after TDKR, The Hobbit and Avengers), yet based upon critics' reviews, Argo is rated higher than all of those on Metacritic.

Go to http://boxofficemojo.com/yearly/chart/?yr=2012&p=.htm and in the top ten only two are new IPs and not a franchise film. One is Brave, which for the sake of argument could be said to be part of the Pixar franchise and not without an automatic fanbase. So that leaves only Ted, which has the MacFarlane Family Guy and American Dad fanbase pre-built in.

Only Ted, The Hunger Games and The Lorax have a budget under $100, with Ted being the only one significantly under that number, and definitely the only one which is possibly still under that if you include marketing, while the others will be approaching $200M.

Channing Tatum is the only theme of non franchise lower budget films in the top 20. And his $7M budgeted film is at number 21! And due to his exponentially increasing popularity (rumours are that GI Joe 2 is being re-shot to increase his screen time) his 'cheap' films will not exist past this year.

You have to look to number 24, Argo to find a moderately budgeted film without an inbuilt audience. The only films higher than it have Tatum, Denzel and Spielberg acting as the main draw.

All of that leads to the conclusion that if you want to make money in film, spend £/$100M+ and or make a kids film, or spend $5 million and make a horror/found footage film with which it's impossible to not make a profit.

Edit: Only 26 films have broken the 100M Barrier, and the majority are between 30M and 65M, so you can see why so few films are budgeted at that level - it's too risky.

bbobeckyj wrote:
All of that leads to the conclusion that if you want to make money in film, spend £/$100M+ and or make a kids film, or spend $5 million and make a horror/found footage film with which it's impossible to not make a profit..

The latter is the Steven Seagal model. With a low budget, writing, starring and directing as well as producing he manages to actually make a very healthy living despite not being at Hollywood.

Then again, Avengers made $1.25 billion profit. While that is only 7x the budget, with that much potential reward if you get it right, I can understand why they still make it.


Anyway, you gave nice analysis and reached a conclusion that I agree with. I'm basically discussing the exact same thing in the videogame thread actually, just realised that.

I'm a screaming Tarantino fangirl so this is probably a given but I am SO excited about Django Unchained.

Pedrosa_4_Ever wrote:I'm a screaming Tarantino fangirl so this is probably a given but I am SO excited about Django Unchained.

Me too. But I doubt it will be as good as Inglorious basterds.. Opening scene in that movie with Landa is absolutely epic!

mac_d wrote:

bbobeckyj wrote:
All of that leads to the conclusion that if you want to make money in film, spend £/$100M+ and or make a kids film, or spend $5 million and make a horror/found footage film with which it's impossible to not make a profit..

The latter is the Steven Seagal model. With a low budget, writing, starring and directing as well as producing he manages to actually make a very healthy living despite not being at Hollywood.

Then again, Avengers made $1.25 billion profit. While that is only 7x the budget, with that much potential reward if you get it right, I can understand why they still make it.


Anyway, you gave nice analysis and reached a conclusion that I agree with. I'm basically discussing the exact same thing in the videogame thread actually, just realised that.

It was the gaming which reminded me of what I wanted to post in this one once I got to a PC.
The Avengers was always going to make a profit though. Whedon has a huge fanbase, the previous films did well too. The amount at the box office was no doubt a surprise though.
At the other end of the scale, you have the two Taylor Kitsch films, Battleship and John Carter (of Mars!) which both had huge budgets and died at the box office.
Also of note is the merchandise, Lucas made it with Star Wars and now Disney have perfected it so much that they've been able to buy Lucasfilm. Cars 2 made something over 500M in the cinema, but somewhere near 13bn in merchandising! Or, in other words, just one film from Pixar, the studio that Lucas sold years ago, has generated enough money to buy his own company off him and then some!

Mr-E wrote:

Pedrosa_4_Ever wrote:I'm a screaming Tarantino fangirl so this is probably a given but I am SO excited about Django Unchained.

Me too. But I doubt it will be as good as Inglorious basterds.. Opening scene in that movie with Landa is absolutely epic!

I've read a few reviews that have described it as a "return to form"... I loved Inglourious but it did seem to lose its way a little near the end and, in my opinion, had some pacing issues. Christoph Waltz was fabulous though and I'm so glad Tarantino's got him back. He has such charm about him.

Pedrosa_4_Ever wrote:

Mr-E wrote:

Pedrosa_4_Ever wrote:I'm a screaming Tarantino fangirl so this is probably a given but I am SO excited about Django Unchained.

Me too. But I doubt it will be as good as Inglorious basterds.. Opening scene in that movie with Landa is absolutely epic!

I've read a few reviews that have described it as a "return to form"... I loved Inglourious but it did seem to lose its way a little near the end and, in my opinion, had some pacing issues. Christoph Waltz was fabulous though and I'm so glad Tarantino's got him back. He has such charm about him.

Actually, the ending was my favourite part of Inglourious because

Alienturnedhuman wrote:

Pedrosa_4_Ever wrote:

Mr-E wrote:

Pedrosa_4_Ever wrote:I'm a screaming Tarantino fangirl so this is probably a given but I am SO excited about Django Unchained.

Me too. But I doubt it will be as good as Inglorious basterds.. Opening scene in that movie with Landa is absolutely epic!

I've read a few reviews that have described it as a "return to form"... I loved Inglourious but it did seem to lose its way a little near the end and, in my opinion, had some pacing issues. Christoph Waltz was fabulous though and I'm so glad Tarantino's got him back. He has such charm about him.

Actually, the ending was my favourite part of Inglourious because

Spoiler (click to show)

The film, as well as being a fantasy WW2 allied propaganda film when the soldiers successfully killed the leadership of the Third Reich, also looked in on itself - one moment the audience is feeling hate at the Nazis cheering a film where a Nazi soldier shoots American after America however at the next minute is then cheering on the American soldiers shooting the Nazis. It's similar to what the computer game Spec Ops: The Line did with regards to modern 'realistic' shooters.

I like your point, I just thought it got a bit too revengey (is that a word?) towards the end, I actually (and I hate having to admit this) feel sorry for Landa, I'm not sure if this was the intended effect or not. For me, it is a movie that is made by individual scenes, not an over-arching narrative. The introduction of the Bear Jew is one, the cafe scene where Shoshanna meets Landa again is another but my favourites are the interrogation scene that opens the film and the lead up to the bar shootout. The rest almost feels like "filler". I also think that the film is really made by the European actors (Waltz, Bruehl, Laurent etc.), the Hollywood actors like Pitt feel a bit shoehorned in and it starts to revolve around them more as the movie reaches its conclusion.

Films I've seen recently,

The Perks Of Being a Wallflower - Brilliant film. One of the real surprises and hidden gems of 2012.

Hobbit - Absolute rubbish. Full of pointless filler, dodgy acting from some of the main cast and it is awfully slapdash with it's humour when it really doesn't need to be.

Skyfall - Stunning. Simply faultless IMO and I've been super critical of the newest Bond films. Daniel Craig has finally won me over.

Laura23 wrote:
Skyfall - Stunning. Simply faultless IMO and I've been super critical of the newest Bond films. Daniel Craig has finally won me over.

Interesting. I was quite underwhelmed with Skyfall. Saw the midnight screening with a few friends (I wanted to go as I'd never been to a midnight screening before) and it just didn't click with me as a Bond film. The antagonist seemed far too much to me like a Batman personality than a Bond character.

Casino Royale was brilliant.
Quantum of Solace was terrible, i think. I can't remember it - it was that bad.
Skyfall had its interesting moments, but lacked something that made it - to me - a James Bond great.

Toby. wrote:

Laura23 wrote:
Skyfall - Stunning. Simply faultless IMO and I've been super critical of the newest Bond films. Daniel Craig has finally won me over.

Interesting. I was quite underwhelmed with Skyfall. Saw the midnight screening with a few friends (I wanted to go as I'd never been to a midnight screening before) and it just didn't click with me as a Bond film. The antagonist seemed far too much to me like a Batman personality than a Bond character.

Casino Royale was brilliant.
Quantum of Solace was terrible, i think. I can't remember it - it was that bad.
Skyfall had its interesting moments, but lacked something that made it - to me - a James Bond great.

I agree completely! Critics and early reviewers claimed that it was better than Casino Royale. I think it was average by James Bond standards and the middle bit was achingly slow.

Toby. wrote:

Laura23 wrote:
Skyfall - Stunning. Simply faultless IMO and I've been super critical of the newest Bond films. Daniel Craig has finally won me over.

Interesting. I was quite underwhelmed with Skyfall. Saw the midnight screening with a few friends (I wanted to go as I'd never been to a midnight screening before) and it just didn't click with me as a Bond film. The antagonist seemed far too much to me like a Batman personality than a Bond character.

Casino Royale was brilliant.
Quantum of Solace was terrible, i think. I can't remember it - it was that bad.
Skyfall had its interesting moments, but lacked something that made it - to me - a James Bond great.

I agree with Toby.
If the film wasnt a Bond film, I'd have been more impressed with it. It just didn't feel like a Bond film at all, so it left me a bit like "Hmmmm... not sure if serious"

Still a good film though, I did enjoy it. The antagonist was actually very good, I loved his intro scene.

This week I watched the following films (not really new, but I watched them!)

How to Train Your Dragon
I was rather skeptical as some of the animated films can be a bit tedious and generic. But I really enjoyed this and actually felt something towards the dragon protagonist, I kinda liked him and wanted a pet of him. His effort at smiling was funny, as was his general bonding with Hiccup the Viking, and his fire-ball attack thing is pretty awesome. The film was funny and had plenty of action and entertainment for all ages I would say. As ever, the animation was top notch from Dreamworks.

The Bourne Legacy
A nice Christmas present to watch, with two of my favourite actors in Jeremy Renner and Rachel Weisz. High octane entertainment which follows on very well from the previous three Bourne films and sets up well for future films. Although it was a little confusing in places, I think the way they've worked the Bourne adventures into a widespread problem for US agencies is interesting and effective, and Renner carried out his role very well. Rachel Weisz was good as well. I think I need to rewatch it though before saying it's great, as I did miss a bit due to festive people speaking over it and giving me chocolate.

Halo 4: Forward Unto Dawn
Not really a film, but a web series of 5 15 minute live action pieces, but I watched it all in one go anyway. As a Halo fan, I enjoyed it, and think it bodes well for a full on Halo film. I enjoyed the backstory to the main character, and I enjoyed the hints at various aspects of the wider franchise. Also I thought the way the young UNSC cadets found classified information and found the first "picture" of the alien threat and Spartans was good, as both were unknown to the characters, but well recognised by the audience (if you know Halo anyway). The action was very good and I liked the way that the enemies were more often than not shrouded in dust clouds or darkness, silhouettes most of the time. It added a sinister effect to the Covenant. Biggest disappointment though was the Master Chief having a different voice. This upset me.

Battleship
Fail of a film. I'm all for bad sci-fi films, I liked AVP, and can handle a certain amount of cheese and plot holes, and lack of realism. But this took the biscuit for me. The ideas were moronic to say the least. The aliens travelled across the galaxy all the way to Earth, passing many dangerous obstacles in the galactic void no doubt, yet their ships collide with a tiny satellite in Earth's orbit, and their entire communications array is destroyed, crashing into Honk Kong/China/somewhere. They don't have shields, and no other form of communication on any other ship? Then went night falls in the film, apparently neither alien nor human ship can see each other for some apparent reason. Maybe I missed something, maybe infrared or thermal or any other kind of imaging equipment were knocked out at some point, but I find it hard to believe that at night, neither alien nor human can see one another. It felt like a contrived effort just to make the whole 'grid of bouys' firing blindly to try and tie the film in with the board game it supposedly stems from. It was kind of stupid. The alien design was good until they took their helmets off, at which point I wondered why the troll had stuck a porcupine on it's chin. Then there's the case of aged battleship versus advanced spare-faring aliens, and the latter coming off worse. Sure, a bit of underdog success story is usually good, but not in this case. It just didn't work.
Funnily enough the best bit for me is the fact that Rihanna isn't as bad an actress as I would have expected. That was a surprise.

I have the film Limitless to watch in the coming days, the girlfriend seems to think I'll enjoy it because I'm a writer. We'll see!

Bought Iron Sky on a whim today, and it's brilliant.

It's basically Transformers 3, but instead of robots, it has space Nazis instead. It's beautifully silly.

Watched 'The Hunger Games' this evening. Really enjoyed it and the lead actress was excellent.

Toby. wrote:

Laura23 wrote:
Skyfall - Stunning. Simply faultless IMO and I've been super critical of the newest Bond films. Daniel Craig has finally won me over.

Interesting. I was quite underwhelmed with Skyfall. Saw the midnight screening with a few friends (I wanted to go as I'd never been to a midnight screening before) and it just didn't click with me as a Bond film. The antagonist seemed far too much to me like a Batman personality than a Bond character.

Casino Royale was brilliant.
Quantum of Solace was terrible, i think. I can't remember it - it was that bad.
Skyfall had its interesting moments, but lacked something that made it - to me - a James Bond great.

Here in Oz, Channel 7 have been replaying all the Bond movies, in order, from the very first one &, being a huge Daniel Craig fan, I recorded Casino Royale (even though I had seen it before) & Quantum of Solace (which I hadn't seen). I thoroughly enjoyed watching Casino Royale again & I really liked Quantum of Solace even though I had heard plenty of people saying, like Toby, that they didn't like it. As Quantum of Solace is really a sequel to Casino Royale rather than a standalone Bond film, I am thinking that maybe I liked it because I watched one straight after the other & Quantum of Solace made more sense than if I had watched them totally separately &, say, a year apart. Just a thought. The only disappointment I found in Quantum of Solace was that Danel Craig didn't take his shirt off . Anyway, I will be interested to see what Skyfall is like as all the clips & specials I have seen make it look rather interesting.

DrG wrote: Here in Oz, Channel 7 have been replaying all the Bond movies, in order, from the very first one &, being a huge Daniel Craig fan, I recorded Casino Royale (even though I had seen it before) & Quantum of Solace (which I hadn't seen). I thoroughly enjoyed watching Casino Royale again & I really liked Quantum of Solace even though I had heard plenty of people saying, like Toby, that they didn't like it. As Quantum of Solace is really a sequel to Casino Royale rather than a standalone Bond film, I am thinking that maybe I liked it because I watched one straight after the other & Quantum of Solace made more sense than if I had watched them totally separately &, say, a year apart. Just a thought. The only disappointment I found in Quantum of Solace was that Danel Craig didn't take his shirt off . Anyway, I will be interested to see what Skyfall is like as all the clips & specials I have seen make it look rather interesting.

You're wrong about the bold bit. There are two clips in the trailer at 1.28 & 1.34
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1klscL-tFGU
Though I worry that that's your only disappointment.
That you forgot that indicates how utterly bad the film is - you wiped it from your memory
There are some reasons for it being bad, such as being filmed around the writers' strike. I think it's of a quality which without its history would otherwise have killed the franchise if it was the first instalment, such as The League Of Extraordinary Gentlemen, or John Carter et al. Or perhaps forced a re-boot such as the Batman or Spider-Man films.

I agree how to train a dragon was awesome. Night fury is now my favourite dragon, he's like the stealth bomber of dragons!

Recently watched:

The Bourne Legacy: Didn't really enjoy this to be honest. It was good action wise but I thought the actual story was a bit boring to be honest, the ending wasn't particularly good as well... Can't say much more besides that the bourne films really lost their appeal with the third one anyway. 7/10

The Amazing Spiderman: Thought the lead actor was awful to be honest, the story line was better that the other ones and thought the enemy was good in this. Also liked the small changes in it. 6/10

End of Watch: Brilliant film, it was good how they filmed it as well, mixture of the police camera and proper camera. Jake Gyllenhaal was great as well and the ending was top class, unexpected to be honest. 9/10.

Taken 2: I was looking forward to this but was disappointed when I actually watched it. Liam Neeson played a good part again but I thought it the daughter and mother were awful, the daughter couldn't really act in the first one but she wasn't present much in it. However she has more of a lead role in this one and just becomes annoying really badly. The storyline wasn't that great as well. The action bits made up for it. The film however had nothing on Taken. 6/10.

jammin78 wrote:

Toby. wrote:

Laura23 wrote:
Skyfall - Stunning. Simply faultless IMO and I've been super critical of the newest Bond films. Daniel Craig has finally won me over.

Interesting. I was quite underwhelmed with Skyfall. Saw the midnight screening with a few friends (I wanted to go as I'd never been to a midnight screening before) and it just didn't click with me as a Bond film. The antagonist seemed far too much to me like a Batman personality than a Bond character.

Casino Royale was brilliant.
Quantum of Solace was terrible, i think. I can't remember it - it was that bad.
Skyfall had its interesting moments, but lacked something that made it - to me - a James Bond great.

I agree with Toby.
If the film wasnt a Bond film, I'd have been more impressed with it. It just didn't feel like a Bond film at all, so it left me a bit like "Hmmmm... not sure if serious"

Still a good film though, I did enjoy it. The antagonist was actually very good, I loved his intro scene.

After all the praise, and with Sam Mendes at the helm, I had high hopes for Skyfall. Indeed, the pre intro credits sequence is one of the best from any Bond films, if not the best, and the character development of Bond was excellent as well (the controversial "Bond drinking beer" scene made sense even if it hadn't been product placement)

I also liked the way they 'rebooted' it to the traditional franchise at the end of the film. However, the overall plot of the film made no sense and was full of cliches. It was entertaining and fun to watch, but falls apart under even a hint of scrutiny.

I suppose I should spoiler tag what I am going to say just in case there are people out there who haven't seen it yet and don't want it spoiled.

bbobeckyj wrote:

DrG wrote: Here in Oz, Channel 7 have been replaying all the Bond movies, in order, from the very first one &, being a huge Daniel Craig fan, I recorded Casino Royale (even though I had seen it before) & Quantum of Solace (which I hadn't seen). I thoroughly enjoyed watching Casino Royale again & I really liked Quantum of Solace even though I had heard plenty of people saying, like Toby, that they didn't like it. As Quantum of Solace is really a sequel to Casino Royale rather than a standalone Bond film, I am thinking that maybe I liked it because I watched one straight after the other & Quantum of Solace made more sense than if I had watched them totally separately &, say, a year apart. Just a thought. The only disappointment I found in Quantum of Solace was that Danel Craig didn't take his shirt off . Anyway, I will be interested to see what Skyfall is like as all the clips & specials I have seen make it look rather interesting.

You're wrong about the bold bit. There are two clips in the trailer at 1.28 & 1.34
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1klscL-tFGU
Though I worry that that's your only disappointment.
That you forgot that indicates how utterly bad the film is - you wiped it from your memory
There are some reasons for it being bad, such as being filmed around the writers' strike. I think it's of a quality which without its history would otherwise have killed the franchise if it was the first instalment, such as The League Of Extraordinary Gentlemen, or John Carter et al. Or perhaps forced a re-boot such as the Batman or Spider-Man films.

Oops , maybe you're right although I was thinking more along the lines of the scene in Casino Royale of Bond coming out of the sea in his swimming trunks. Gives me goosebumps every time I see it . I don't think that Quantum of Solace is a great film, it just wasn't as bad as I was expecting it to be after all the negative comments I had heard

It's New Years Eve & I am sitting at home here in North Sydney just waiting to see the fireworks & watching Graham Norton's New Year's Eve Special with special guest Tom Cruise. Of course Tom Cruise is on promoting his latest movie. I dislike this guy so much I haven't watched one of his movie's since the first Mission Impossible movie. One of the reasons being the way he treated our Nicole when he suddenly divorced her without telling her why but also because I just don't find him that great of an actor. Add crazy behaviour since then & I haven't wanted to watch any of his movies recently. I've just edited this as I am now watching Hugh Jackson & Billy Crystal, also promoting their latest movies, plus English comedian, John Bishop, whose face I knew long before his name but he also does a lot of physical challenges for charity, & they are much more entertaining & also less pretentious. I guess what I am asking is, does anyone here like Tom Cruise & his movies - agree, disagree & why! Edited again because, as with all Graham Norton shows, he has a final musical act. Tonight it's Pink. Talk about a superstar without any pretensions....

DrG wrote:It's New Years Eve & I am sitting at home here in North Sydney just waiting to see the fireworks & watching Graham Norton's New Year's Eve Special with special guest Tom Cruise. Of course Tom Cruise is on promoting his latest movie. I dislike this guy so much I haven't watched one of his movie's since the first Mission Impossible movie. One of the reasons being the way he treated our Nicole when he suddenly divorced her without telling her why but also because I just don't find him that great of an actor. Add crazy behaviour since then & I haven't wanted to watch any of his movies recently. I guess what I am asking is, does anyone here agree, disagree & why!

I disagree.

I don't like Scientology in general, but he doesn't turn up to premiers saying we should convert. Stuff going on within people's marriages is their own business, and Kidman seems to be the one who has found true love anyway. Crazy behaviour? Who hasn't done something silly because they are in that super happy zone when you first start going out with someone? Most of us don't end up on TV, but still. And frankly, none of this stuff bothers me.

As for Tom Cruise's movies, this is where I really disagree.

Risky Business
Top Gun
Cocktail
Rainman
Born on the Fourth of July
A Few Good Men
The Firm
Interview with a Vampire
Mission Impossible
Jerry Maguire
Eye's Wide Shut
Magnolia
Mission: Impossible II
Vanilla Sky
Minority Report
Last Samurai
Collateral
War of the Worlds
Mission: Impossible 3
Lions for Lambs
Valkyrie
Knight and Day
Mission: Impossible - Ghost Protocol
Rock of Ages

Most of these are, at worst, watchable. And some of these are great films. And while the Top Gun - A Few Good Men era is his best, most of the rest have been pretty good too. Top Gun is my favourite, then A few Good Men, then Jerry Macguire.

That said, I have some serious man-love for Tom Cruise. Last new year when very, very drunk my attempt to get fired into the only single girl at the party was to talk about why Tom Cruise is the man.... for two hours...

Tom Cruise is a great actor, one of my faves along with Mr. Pitt and Mr. DiCaprio.

his performance in Tropic Thunder is absolutely out of this world. Should've got an Oscar for that.


watched Dictator yesterday. Very good movie and nice speech about 'what you could have in America if you had dictatorship'.

mac_d wrote:

DrG wrote:It's New Years Eve & I am sitting at home here in North Sydney just waiting to see the fireworks & watching Graham Norton's New Year's Eve Special with special guest Tom Cruise. Of course Tom Cruise is on promoting his latest movie. I dislike this guy so much I haven't watched one of his movie's since the first Mission Impossible movie. One of the reasons being the way he treated our Nicole when he suddenly divorced her without telling her why but also because I just don't find him that great of an actor. Add crazy behaviour since then & I haven't wanted to watch any of his movies recently. I guess what I am asking is, does anyone here agree, disagree & why!

I disagree.

I don't like Scientology in general, but he doesn't turn up to premiers saying we should convert. Stuff going on within people's marriages is their own business, and Kidman seems to be the one who has found true love anyway. Crazy behaviour? Who hasn't done something silly because they are in that super happy zone when you first start going out with someone? Most of us don't end up on TV, but still. And frankly, none of this stuff bothers me.

As for Tom Cruise's movies, this is where I really disagree.

Risky Business
Top Gun
Cocktail
Rainman
Born on the Fourth of July
A Few Good Men
The Firm
Interview with a Vampire
Mission Impossible
Jerry Maguire
Eye's Wide Shut
Magnolia
Mission: Impossible II
Vanilla Sky
Minority Report
Last Samurai
Collateral
War of the Worlds
Mission: Impossible 3
Lions for Lambs
Valkyrie
Knight and Day
Mission: Impossible - Ghost Protocol
Rock of Ages

Most of these are, at worst, watchable. And some of these are great films. And while the Top Gun - A Few Good Men era is his best, most of the rest have been pretty good too. Top Gun is my favourite, then A few Good Men, then Jerry Macguire.

That said, I have some serious man-love for Tom Cruise. Last new year when very, very drunk my attempt to get fired into the only single girl at the party was to talk about why Tom Cruise is the man.... for two hours...

How could you forget Days of Thunder (or as I like to call it, Top Gun with cars)?

Denorth wrote:his performance in Tropic Thunder is absolutely out of this world. Should've got an Oscar for that.


watched Dictator yesterday. Very good movie and nice speech about 'what you could have in America if you had dictatorship'.

Cameo of the century for me. I loved that role!

Pedrosa_4_Ever wrote: How could you forget Days of Thunder (or as I like to call it, Top Gun with cars)?

I've actually never see it. I only included films I've seen and liked.

Watched Lawless last night and to be honest it was an really good film. Enjoyed it all the way through really and it had a really good storyline. Shia Le Bouf and Tom Hardy played there roles excellently and had some unexpected twists in it. Could be a little bit slow at times but it had the action needed in it.

9/10.

Watched the life of Pi over Christmas.

What a boring sh*tfest that was. Just a few good old CGI tricks (everything turns luminous blue-green colour in the ocean for some reason at nights) and at times sandbagging like hell.

A little twist at the end and that was that. Very disappointed. Especially for the £34 (for two people) I had to spend to watch it in London...

Moore wrote:Watched Lawless last night and to be honest it was an really good film. Enjoyed it all the way through really and it had a really good storyline. Shia Le Bouf and Tom Hardy played there roles excellently and had some unexpected twists in it. Could be a little bit slow at times but it had the action needed in it.

9/10.

I enjoyed it, but not 9/10 for me. In any case I really liked Hardy, I think he is turning out to be a very cool actor.


Good surprise was Le Bouf, this role kind of suited him

The Ghost http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1139328/

Read the book a while ago and now watched the film. I liked it but the books was better. McGregors london accent is less than convincing and that really grated on me at times during the film Brosnan plays his part well and the supporting actors are all reasonably good at least but there is no standout performance from anyone and thus the film seemed well written but slightly poorly put together.

6/10.

MrMuttley wrote:The Ghost http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1139328/

Read the book a while ago and now watched the film. I liked it but the books was better. McGregors london accent is less than convincing and that really grated on me at times during the film Brosnan plays his part well and the supporting actors are all reasonably good at least but there is no standout performance from anyone and thus the film seemed well written but slightly poorly put together.

6/10.

Exactly how I saw it also.

Saw Skyfall today. Massively overhyped. Basically Goldeneye with the plot of the first Mission:Impossible film to replace the EMP threat.

The debate about the use of MI6 is amusing as well because:

just watched Schindler's List

speechless

I think Schindlers List is a bit of a special case. It's one of those films everyone should see even if they're not movie fans. I saw that in the cinema when it first came out and and that's the only time I have seen an entire movie audience sit through the credits of a film in my life.

vikz22 wrote:just watched Schindler's List

speechless

It is a properly powerful film isn't it.

Makes me ashamed that some people seem to think Liam Neeson wasn't in anything until Taken (i.e. my friends).