posted
Liked the first one. Hated the second one. The reviews I read seemed to indicate that the third movie addressed the problems of the second, so I went.
I liked it.
It isn't The Tom Cruise Show!!! the way the second one was, which was completely wrong for a movie based on a classic show about a team. He's more vulnerable, he screws up, he gets saved by other people at times, and there are no silly CGI motorcycle stunts.
Decent story, if a bit light. Some good misdirection. Cruise's abilities are back to merely incredible, instead of superhero level, And you finally get to see how they make those masks so fast.
The issue of whether to support Cruise's movie because he's a nutjob wasn't an issue for me - I don't let my opinion of an actor affect my opinion of that actor's work.
Posts: 7790 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'll probably go see it. Not going would be like failing to read the 3rd book in a trilogy...even if the 2nd and 1st books were terrible.
Posts: 22497 | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I haven't seen any of the MI movies and have no plans to. Not because Cruise is a nutjob but simply because I didn't care for the original series and so the movies didn't appeal.
I think the last Cruise movie I saw was probably Magnolia. Oops, take that back. Minority Report. His character in Magnolia did definitely turn me off, and yes I know it's a character but I wonder if there's a seed there.
Posts: 4515 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Not liking the original series should be no impediment to liking these movies, as they are nothing like the original series. I won't even tellyou what heresies they do to Mr. Phelps.
But, meh, it's not like they're very good movies.
Posts: 22497 | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I thought the first one was pretty clever, and I liked it. But I thought the second was a horrible follow up.
I'll see this one if I can get in to see it for free, but it fails what I consider to be the most important test for a movie: Am I willing to pay $7.50 to see it?
Has nothing to do with the fact that Cruise is a whack job these days either. I half expect him to jump out and say "You've been punked!" to all of America one of these days. But I don't care how crazy the person is who makes the movie, I judge it on its merits, or lack thereof.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
yeah, I kind of feel that way about several actors who are far better than Tom Cruise at portraying a chacter.
Posts: 22497 | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Why is there this idea that Cruise is crazy these days? The media may cast him as such a lot of the time, but in general I think it is almost always unwise to assume famous people actually are the way gossip reports make them out to be.
Posts: 8120 | Registered: Jul 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Let's see... how about the couch jumping episode? Or the verbal attacks on Matt Lauer and Brooke Shields? Those certainly didn't need the gossip sheets to get around.
Posts: 4515 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Lyrhawn: I'll see this one if I can get in to see it for free, but it fails what I consider to be the most important test for a movie: Am I willing to pay $7.50 to see it?
Wow, movies where you live only cost $7.50? That's cheap. I wish I only paid $7.50 for a movie.
Posts: 1214 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
He is an idiot, and I won't see this....or at least I won't pay money for it. I don't care if anyone else does, I just refuse to support his ego any further after his recent ignorant, insulting diatribes.
Posts: 15082 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tresopax: Why is there this idea that Cruise is crazy these days? The media may cast him as such a lot of the time, but in general I think it is almost always unwise to assume famous people actually are the way gossip reports make them out to be.
Yah, the media totally misconstrued the way he said that he has the ability to cure people of heroin addiction in three days. Also they cast him in a really unfavorable light when he married a woman half his age, then they totally boned him when he jumped on a couch and screamed about it. Then they totally blew out of proportion the fact that he bought an ultrasound machine to watch his child.
Its obvious this is the media's fault, not Cruise for rubbing his craziness everywhere he goes.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Lyrhawn: I'll see this one if I can get in to see it for free, but it fails what I consider to be the most important test for a movie: Am I willing to pay $7.50 to see it?
Wow, movies where you live only cost $7.50? That's cheap. I wish I only paid $7.50 for a movie.
Used to be $9.50 when it was owned by Loews, but they were bought out by AMC, so it was lowered to $8.50, but with a student rate of $7.50. It's a moot point, I don't pay for movies that often anyway, but I AM glad they lowered it. Almost ten dollars was ridiculous.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Let's see... how about the couch jumping episode? Or the verbal attacks on Matt Lauer and Brooke Shields? Those certainly didn't need the gossip sheets to get around.
Anywhere these things are reported as legitimate news stories is gossiping, as far as I'm concerned.
Half the people I know do stranger things than these all the time. The difference is that they aren't in the public's eye while doing them. Celebrities are called crazy for doing the things that normal people would get away with doing every day. Look at how Bush gets portrayed as stupid when he does things like choke on a pretzel or mix up a word - things that are not unusual among reasonably smart people. While these people do typically get to be rich and famous, that doesn't justify drawing conclusions about how they are bad people from a handful of news stories, when you have never even met them. It's gossiping on a junior high level - but for some reason it's considered okay for adults to draw such conclusions publicly when it comes to famous people.
Posts: 8120 | Registered: Jul 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Personally, I'd prefer NOT to see famous people in the public eye outside of their actual performances. I have no interest in who married who, who's having kids, who's getting a divorce, any of that stuff. But as long as people keep buying Hello and OK and People and Entertainment Weekly in the quantities they do, that type of "coverage" will never go away. Or maybe when the celebs start putting their collective feet down and refusing to get into personal details that have nothing to do with their jobs. And I only can justify a small portion of the appearances on shows like Letterman. The part that specifically pertains to a coming movie or TV show or concert tour. Getting into what should be their personal lives? No thank you.
Were movie stars always covered this intimately? I don't know, but somehow I think not. How long did it for the news that Rock Hudson was homosexual to become public, for example? So what changed - and why? Why did we as a society lose respect for the fact that these people have private lives? Was it because the stars were ramming it down our throats or because interviewers kept pushing for details?
Posts: 4515 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Tres...they weren't just reported, he DID them on TV, during either shows or interviews, so there isn't any sort of spin possible.
Posts: 15082 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I tend to avoid anything with Tom Cruise in it, and have for a lot longer than he's been acting nuts. I just don't like him. The only thing I've ever seen him in that I liked was "Born on the Fourth of July", which I only saw because I had read the book and liked it a lot.
On the other hand, this new film has Philip Seymour Hoffman in it. I like him a lot. So, I might end up breaking down and seeing the stupid movie.
Posts: 2454 | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote: The issue of whether to support Cruise's movie because he's a nutjob wasn't an issue for me
He's an actor. It's a movie. All I care about is his performance.
That was pretty good. Whatever else I might have to say about him, Cruise is a reasonably competent actor.
The script, on the other hand, lacked stuff like plot and characterization that no amount of acting or direction could make up for. IMO. It was like a made-for-TV movie-of-the-week with a 50-million-dollar effects budget.
Posts: 196 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Bob_Scopatz: I'll probably go see it. Not going would be like failing to read the 3rd book in a trilogy...even if the 2nd and 1st books were terrible.
I don't want to support a franchise that never should have made it to #2, and certainly not to #3.
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
Half the people I know do stranger things than these all the time. The difference is that they aren't in the public's eye while doing them. Celebrities are called crazy for doing the things that normal people would get away with doing every day. Look at how Bush gets portrayed as stupid when he does things like choke on a pretzel or mix up a word - things that are not unusual among reasonably smart people.
Bush wanted to become the President of the United states. You don't give somebody the benefit of the doubt when he's trying to be the most powerful person in the world.
You think these celebrities don't use and cultivate all this press? You think they don't feed all the gossip and the magazines and TV shows to get publicity? This is playing with fire, you get burned just like a normal person would, but you were the one that wanted to be famous, you were the one that wanted all that money. Celebrities shouldn't whine and complain that they have lost the ability to manipulate the public to their advantage. They started it. Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote: The issue of whether to support Cruise's movie because he's a nutjob wasn't an issue for me
He's an actor. It's a movie. All I care about is his performance.
That's like buying a book and saying the only thing that matters is that its well written. It matters who wrote the book and why, and who that person is and what they believe in should affect the book. I'm not saying you need to exlude an author based on who or what they are, but you do need to know things like that too, in order to understand where the writing (or in this case the performance) is coming from. Isn't this the reason why DVD commentaries and documentaries have become so popular? It gives you an idea of where the film is coming from... otherwise we might as well just develop computer programs that can write our movies for us and do it all with CGI. If the performance of a computer is on par with a human, and that is all you need, then why not.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Early morning show for you cheapskates like me. Two people, $10.50. I liked it. I honestly think it's hilarious that people have such polar opinions when it comes to Tom Cruise. Sure, he went completely off topic when he went to show a preview for War of the Worlds.
I think it's silly that people won't go see a movie because an actor said something they dislike. Tom Cruise doesn't play himself on screen, he plays Ethan Hunt, ok? If you don't like Ethan Hunt, don't go see the movie.
To the important stuff: Mi1 was awesome. Mi2 had some cool stuff in it but overall was a dissapointment in many ways. Mi3 I think takes more of the cool stuff from the 2nd and puts it in the style like the 1st. Overall I thought it was a well done action movie. And definately worth $10.50 to go see it.
Orincoro: I disagree. A person can make many types of works that are completely unrelated to their own values and tastes. It's unlikely to have a sole author do that, but when you have a script and a director, it would be pretty hard for him to act like he has done on TV as himself. That's not his goal, his goal is to be someone else.
If someone were to write a book because someone commissioned it from them and had specific guidelines on how to write it, you could get away with the same thing. You're almost comparing apples to oranges there.
Next, to mention your comment about CGI vs Human acting. Look at any CGI movie, Take any Pixar film as an example, you'll see that they are good on screen actors, even though they have human voices.
I'm probably misunderstanding your comment about that, because I can't say I really understand what you are getting at by saying that.
Posts: 1132 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'll probably wait until Netflix. I hate to give Cruise money because it supports the idea that these inane publicity stunts are beneficial. If you encourage Tom Cruise to act crazy and insult people and spew a bunch of garbage, you'll have more and more actors doing it.
Posts: 3950 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Only if you wouldn't have seen it otherwise.
Russell Crowe as a human being interests me not at all, he seems to be a jerk with anger control issues. Russell Crowe as an actor is someone I'll pay to see. From all reports actors like Dustin Hoffman and Val Kilmer are incredibly difficult to work with, yet the end result is often wonderful.
Or, to go another direction: I am not Mormon. I do not agree with any of the beliefs specific to Mormons and I have no interest in supporting the Mormon religion with my money. Doesn't stop me from buying OSC's stuff the day it comes out, even the stuff that has heavy Mormon themes in it.
Your mileage may vary, of course. I just don't see the point in denying myself entertainment because of differing beliefs.
Posts: 7790 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Others do, apparently. Seems MI:III made 10 mil less than expected, which means that "only" making 48 million on the opening weekend was somehow a disaster even though it wasn't a holiday weekend or anything.
I wish Serenity had made "only" 48 million the first weekend...
Posts: 7790 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
MI:II totally turned me off to Cruise. My wife and I saw this in the theater (with my mom who is a diehard Cruise fan) and we had to stifle our laughter at the increasing un-believability of what was on the screen.
I understand that MI:III fixes some of those issues, but I still won't pay to see it. If someone gives me the III DVD someday, then I'll watch it... maybe.
It was because of Cruise that I still haven't seen War of the Worlds.
Posts: 90 | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Actually I think I saw MI:III in spite of Cruise being in it. I remember not having the slightest interest in The Last Samurai or War of the Worlds.
Posts: 7790 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Chris Bridges: Liked the first one. Hated the second one.
Same here (although there's a plot hole that still bothers me about the first one). The trailer for III didn't get my interest, so I'll be waiting for the DVD.
Posts: 326 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
See, for me, with Russell Crowe, I can forget it's him, he's just whatever character he plays. I forget it's him. I'm finding it increasingly hard to do that with Cruise.
Posts: 239 | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
That's an interesting point. I noticed that when he was using disguises in MI3, his essential "Tom Cruiseness" was still there. I didn't believe him in any of the disguises, whereas I did believe his IMF teammates.
However, I did believe (and really like) Cruise in Collateral. So he can do it.
Posts: 10886 | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Tres...they weren't just reported, he DID them on TV, during either shows or interviews, so there isn't any sort of spin possible.
That's how spin always works. The incident may be public, but the spin comes afterwards, from the way people talk about it. There's nothing crazy about jumping around couches on Oprah, other than that celebrities don't usually act that way on TV. But when people start to gossip about it as if it is, then people come to believe it is.
quote:That's like buying a book and saying the only thing that matters is that its well written. It matters who wrote the book and why, and who that person is and what they believe in should affect the book.
No it doesn't.
A good book is a good book no matter who wrote it or where it is "coming from". It's value is determined by it's impact on the reader, which is not determined by where the author is coming from, but rather by how good of a book it is and by how the reader comes to approach it.
If a computer could write a great novel, then there'd be nothing wrong with that. The trouble is, no computer has yet been able to.
Posts: 8120 | Registered: Jul 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Tom Cruise doesn't play himself on screen, he plays Ethan Hunt, ok?
In most movies I've seen him in, he wasn't playing any part other than Tom Cruise.
Tom Cruise in a figher plane Tom Cruise in a race car Tom Cruise with an autistic brother Tom Cruise in the future Tom Cruise as a spy Tom Cruise as a boxer/immigrant
He seems to play almost exactly the same character in most movies, just with different cool stuff they get to do.
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
If I avoided movies, music, or books because the actor(ress)/singer/author said or did something in RL that made me think they were an idiot, I'd have to take up knitting or something.
Edited for mph: Not that there's anything wrong with knitting is or anything
posted
Cruise's episode with Lauer has actually made me more favorably disposed toward him, but he still really creeps me out. To be fair, I still hold "Eyes Wide Shut" against his then-wife. I also never go to the movies anymore.
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Bob_Scopatz: I'll probably go see it. Not going would be like failing to read the 3rd book in a trilogy...even if the 2nd and 1st books were terrible.
And this is why Hollywood could care less about making good sequels.
Posts: 3134 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Orincoro: That's like buying a book and saying the only thing that matters is that its well written.
It is!
quote:If the performance of a computer is on par with a human, and that is all you need, then why not.
Thus far, that conditional has yet to be satisfied. But when and if it is, bring on the computer-generated entertainment! (I, for one, welcome our new silicon overlords.)
Posts: 884 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I may have to go see it for Philip Seymour Hoffman. I adore him. But the fact Cruise is in it is turning me off. I've never really cared for him but when he started going off about post partum depression he lost me for good. I wish actors would just act and leave the doctoring to the doctors. I hope his fiancee doesn't have any problems. But I am sure if you have to give birth in silence that talkig about your feelings is right out.
Posts: 601 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by BaoQingTian: If I avoided movies, music, or books because the actor(ress)/singer/author said or did something in RL that made me think they were an idiot, I'd have to take up knitting or something.
You say that as though it's a bad thing.
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:But when people start to gossip about it as if it is, then people come to believe it is.
While I do agree that this might be true of the majority of people in general, I don't believe this to be true for the majority of people that have posted here on this topic.
quote:There's nothing crazy about jumping around couches on Oprah, other than that celebrities don't usually act that way on TV.
If it's not crazy, it's at least a little weird. I don't know any adults that jump on their couches in the privacy of their own homes, let alone in front of millions of viewers.
I get irritated with him when I watch his interviews, hear his public statements on certain issues, and see his very public actions. OK, maybe that doesn't make him crazy, but it certainly makes me not like the guy.
That said, I wouldn't let that stop me from watching a movie that he's in. If anything, it's the characters that he plays that turn me off to his movies.
Posts: 1256 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
There are people who start campaigns to damage my father financially because they don't agree with his opinions, too. I think those people are jerks.
I love Tom Cruise's work, and I'll keep watching him, even if he is a bit eccentric. I don't see why I should "refuse to support" him in ... what? Being a bit crazy? Believing strange things? There are millions of people who do those things who take home a good paycheck every day and deserve it. Despite his personal eccentricities, he makes great movies, and as long as he sticks to that last bit, I'll be in the audience.
Posts: 1907 | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
In most movies I've seen him in, he wasn't playing any part other than Tom Cruise.
True. So the interest for me comes in when he's put in a difficult situation where I can see how Tom Cruise the character will react.
Posts: 7790 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:There are people who start campaigns to damage my father financially because they don't agree with his opinions, too.
*laugh* Seriously? I've heard a few people in the industry complain about his opinions, but I've never seen an orchestrated campaign -- even a recommended boycott -- of any kind. When did it happen?
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
True. Which is why I generally only watch him when he's playing a cocky, over-confident person who's in over his head. When he's a cocky, over-confident character in a situation where he's not really threatened, such as in a poorly written drama or an action movie where he is apparently invulnerable (or, say, when he's being interviewed by Matt Lauer), I couldn't care less.
Posts: 7790 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm sure that if EG ever becomes a blockbuster hit, there will be plenty of people who come across one of OSC's essays, or hear he's a Mormon, etc. and come to the conclusion that he must be a religious neoconservative wacko. I'd guess that sort of thing happens a lot when most people hear only your most outrageous aspects from the news and think they can then make judgements about your character without ever having met you.
Posts: 8120 | Registered: Jul 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
If I can't even remember the first two movies in a series, I'll rarely go see the third one. All I remember about either previous MI movie is exploding sunglasses.
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
