Geek moment but when I saw the title I was hoping it was an Elder Scrolls movie
[quote]Big Kahuna wrote:
Tom Cruise is incredibly good at playing an insufferably egotistical arsehole. Maybe it’s all the practice he’s getting.
On that note, what is a Cruise thread if it doesn’t have this polished gem on display?
I expect good things from this, Cruise has a nice track record for tense action films. He had the one slip up with that Cameron Diaz film a couple years back, but aside from that he’s been pretty consistent lately in choosing good action films and rising to the occasion. I mean god damn, Mission Impossible 4 was a brilliant film.
[/quote]
Actually I thought Day & Knight(or whatever the title was) was a pretty good action flick.
Why is he flying a ship that looks like a cock and balls?
[quote]optheta wrote:
[quote]Big Kahuna wrote:
Tom Cruise is incredibly good at playing an insufferably egotistical arsehole. Maybe it’s all the practice he’s getting.
On that note, what is a Cruise thread if it doesn’t have this polished gem on display?
I expect good things from this, Cruise has a nice track record for tense action films. He had the one slip up with that Cameron Diaz film a couple years back, but aside from that he’s been pretty consistent lately in choosing good action films and rising to the occasion. I mean god damn, Mission Impossible 4 was a brilliant film.
[/quote]
Actually I thought Day & Knight(or whatever the title was) was a pretty good action flick.
[/quote]
It was reasonable as a fun action movie, I’d pit it around the same as that ‘Olympus Has Fallen’ from the other thread, but I didn’t feel it was anything too special. It’s nothing that would stick with you like MI4 or Minority Report as a memorable title. It had everything people need for an action movie, but to me it didn’t have that much more.
Lol @ Ghost Protocol being a good movie. Sawyer from Lost was the best thing in it by far. There was no reason to climb the Burj Kalifa at all other than to polish Cruise’s ego. Ethan Hunt was supposed to unlock something on a higher floor using his sticky wanking gloves, he climbed up only to find he couldn’t unlock shit, then like an extreme Old King Cole, climbed down again and the mission continued as if nothing ever happened.
[quote]roybot wrote:
Lol @ Ghost Protocol being a good movie. Sawyer from Lost was the best thing in it by far. There was no reason to climb the Burj Kalifa at all other than to polish Cruise’s ego. Ethan Hunt was supposed to unlock something on a higher floor using his sticky wanking gloves, he climbed up only to find he couldn’t unlock shit, then like an extreme Old King Cole, climbed down again and the mission continued as if nothing ever happened. [/quote]
Really? You didn’t enjoy it?
Man the Burj Khalifa sections with the climbing and the sandstorm were one of the most impressive aspects of the film. The location and filming of the surrounding area made for some incredible visuals. The action scenes were incredible throughout, but those in particular were incredibly satisfying for me. As much as the film’s magnum opus is in it’s action sequences, there was something about this one that just seemed more classy and a lot more cleverly sequenced than previous entries.
The character dynamics were better than in previous films, I like the way their personalities were set up in this one, Simon Pegg’s character in particular was a stand out for me, he played it extremely well.
To me the Mission Impossible films have only gotten progressively better with each title, I can’t wait to see if they make another one.
[quote]Big Kahuna wrote:
[quote]roybot wrote:
Lol @ Ghost Protocol being a good movie. Sawyer from Lost was the best thing in it by far. There was no reason to climb the Burj Kalifa at all other than to polish Cruise’s ego. Ethan Hunt was supposed to unlock something on a higher floor using his sticky wanking gloves, he climbed up only to find he couldn’t unlock shit, then like an extreme Old King Cole, climbed down again and the mission continued as if nothing ever happened. [/quote]
Really? You didn’t enjoy it?
Man the Burj Khalifa sections with the climbing and the sandstorm were one of the most impressive aspects of the film. The location and filming of the surrounding area made for some incredible visuals. The action scenes were incredible throughout, but those in particular were incredibly satisfying for me. As much as the film’s magnum opus is in it’s action sequences, there was something about this one that just seemed more classy and a lot more cleverly sequenced than previous entries.
The character dynamics were better than in previous films, I like the way their personalities were set up in this one, Simon Pegg’s character in particular was a stand out for me, he played it extremely well.
To me the Mission Impossible films have only gotten progressively better with each title, I can’t wait to see if they make another one.[/quote]
The scaling of the Burj Khalifa was narratively redundant, which makes it the largest, most cynical example of product placement ever. It buried the movie for me. It seemed like an ultra-glamorous travelogue, so much so that I’m willing to bet that Dubai paid to be featured.
The first ten minutes were the best, basically being a showcase for Josh Holloway as a viable leading man - and I didn’t particularly like him until he died in this movie.
[quote]super saiyan wrote:
I vowed never to see another Tom Cruise movie in the theaters after what he did to Oprah.
I may catch it on DVD.[/quote]
What did he do?
[quote]roybot wrote:
[quote]Big Kahuna wrote:
[quote]roybot wrote:
Lol @ Ghost Protocol being a good movie. Sawyer from Lost was the best thing in it by far. There was no reason to climb the Burj Kalifa at all other than to polish Cruise’s ego. Ethan Hunt was supposed to unlock something on a higher floor using his sticky wanking gloves, he climbed up only to find he couldn’t unlock shit, then like an extreme Old King Cole, climbed down again and the mission continued as if nothing ever happened. [/quote]
Really? You didn’t enjoy it?
Man the Burj Khalifa sections with the climbing and the sandstorm were one of the most impressive aspects of the film. The location and filming of the surrounding area made for some incredible visuals. The action scenes were incredible throughout, but those in particular were incredibly satisfying for me. As much as the film’s magnum opus is in it’s action sequences, there was something about this one that just seemed more classy and a lot more cleverly sequenced than previous entries.
The character dynamics were better than in previous films, I like the way their personalities were set up in this one, Simon Pegg’s character in particular was a stand out for me, he played it extremely well.
To me the Mission Impossible films have only gotten progressively better with each title, I can’t wait to see if they make another one.[/quote]
The scaling of the Burj Khalifa was narratively redundant, which makes it the largest, most cynical example of product placement ever. It buried the movie for me. It seemed like an ultra-glamorous travelogue, so much so that I’m willing to bet that Dubai paid to be featured.
The first ten minutes were the best, basically being a showcase for Josh Holloway as a viable leading man - and I didn’t particularly like him until he died in this movie. [/quote]
That’s an interesting point, I’m not sure I could take the same stance though. Is it all product placement that affects you? Would you feel disdain for James Bond films realising their allegiance to Smirnoff vodka? Or You’ve Got Mail for featuring AOL predominantly? (I could give more examples, but usually the movies that feature them aren’t very good.) Or is it Dubai and it’s history that heightens your disapproval above those?
I like Holloway as an actor, I don’t think he’s quite set to take a leading role at this point in his career, at least not an action one. He just doesn’t give me the same kind of feeling great actors like Cruise, Willis and Damon have done. He’s not bad by any means, and his career is still in it’s adolescent stages, so I hope to see him expand on his potential in the future and maybe prove me wrong, but for right now I think he just needs a little more practice.
[quote]Big Kahuna wrote:
[quote]roybot wrote:
[quote]Big Kahuna wrote:
[quote]roybot wrote:
Lol @ Ghost Protocol being a good movie. Sawyer from Lost was the best thing in it by far. There was no reason to climb the Burj Kalifa at all other than to polish Cruise’s ego. Ethan Hunt was supposed to unlock something on a higher floor using his sticky wanking gloves, he climbed up only to find he couldn’t unlock shit, then like an extreme Old King Cole, climbed down again and the mission continued as if nothing ever happened. [/quote]
Really? You didn’t enjoy it?
Man the Burj Khalifa sections with the climbing and the sandstorm were one of the most impressive aspects of the film. The location and filming of the surrounding area made for some incredible visuals. The action scenes were incredible throughout, but those in particular were incredibly satisfying for me. As much as the film’s magnum opus is in it’s action sequences, there was something about this one that just seemed more classy and a lot more cleverly sequenced than previous entries.
The character dynamics were better than in previous films, I like the way their personalities were set up in this one, Simon Pegg’s character in particular was a stand out for me, he played it extremely well.
To me the Mission Impossible films have only gotten progressively better with each title, I can’t wait to see if they make another one.[/quote]
The scaling of the Burj Khalifa was narratively redundant, which makes it the largest, most cynical example of product placement ever. It buried the movie for me. It seemed like an ultra-glamorous travelogue, so much so that I’m willing to bet that Dubai paid to be featured.
The first ten minutes were the best, basically being a showcase for Josh Holloway as a viable leading man - and I didn’t particularly like him until he died in this movie. [/quote]
That’s an interesting point, I’m not sure I could take the same stance though. Is it all product placement that affects you? Would you feel disdain for James Bond films realising their allegiance to Smirnoff vodka? Or You’ve Got Mail for featuring AOL predominantly? (I could give more examples, but usually the movies that feature them aren’t very good.) Or is it Dubai and it’s history that heightens your disapproval above those?
[/quote]
The crucial difference is that The Burj Khalifa was the major selling point of the movie. There was absolutely no reason to spend so much screen time outside the building…other than to promote the building. Bond swigging a Heineken in Skyfall isn’t the same thing at all.
[quote]roybot wrote:
[quote]Big Kahuna wrote:
[quote]roybot wrote:
[quote]Big Kahuna wrote:
[quote]roybot wrote:
Lol @ Ghost Protocol being a good movie. Sawyer from Lost was the best thing in it by far. There was no reason to climb the Burj Kalifa at all other than to polish Cruise’s ego. Ethan Hunt was supposed to unlock something on a higher floor using his sticky wanking gloves, he climbed up only to find he couldn’t unlock shit, then like an extreme Old King Cole, climbed down again and the mission continued as if nothing ever happened. [/quote]
Really? You didn’t enjoy it?
Man the Burj Khalifa sections with the climbing and the sandstorm were one of the most impressive aspects of the film. The location and filming of the surrounding area made for some incredible visuals. The action scenes were incredible throughout, but those in particular were incredibly satisfying for me. As much as the film’s magnum opus is in it’s action sequences, there was something about this one that just seemed more classy and a lot more cleverly sequenced than previous entries.
The character dynamics were better than in previous films, I like the way their personalities were set up in this one, Simon Pegg’s character in particular was a stand out for me, he played it extremely well.
To me the Mission Impossible films have only gotten progressively better with each title, I can’t wait to see if they make another one.[/quote]
The scaling of the Burj Khalifa was narratively redundant, which makes it the largest, most cynical example of product placement ever. It buried the movie for me. It seemed like an ultra-glamorous travelogue, so much so that I’m willing to bet that Dubai paid to be featured.
The first ten minutes were the best, basically being a showcase for Josh Holloway as a viable leading man - and I didn’t particularly like him until he died in this movie. [/quote]
That’s an interesting point, I’m not sure I could take the same stance though. Is it all product placement that affects you? Would you feel disdain for James Bond films realising their allegiance to Smirnoff vodka? Or You’ve Got Mail for featuring AOL predominantly? (I could give more examples, but usually the movies that feature them aren’t very good.) Or is it Dubai and it’s history that heightens your disapproval above those?
[/quote]
The crucial difference is that The Burj Khalifa was the major selling point of the movie. There was absolutely no reason to spend so much screen time outside the building…other than to promote the building. Bond swigging a Heineken in Skyfall isn’t the same thing at all.
[/quote]
Hmm, I think I’m beginning to understand your perspective more, but are you really willing to cut apart the other scenes on the basis of that one? It sounds strange for that to be such a deal-breaker. If that scene weren’t in the film, what would be your overall impression?
[quote]Big Kahuna wrote:
[quote]roybot wrote:
[quote]Big Kahuna wrote:
[quote]roybot wrote:
[quote]Big Kahuna wrote:
[quote]roybot wrote:
Lol @ Ghost Protocol being a good movie. Sawyer from Lost was the best thing in it by far. There was no reason to climb the Burj Kalifa at all other than to polish Cruise’s ego. Ethan Hunt was supposed to unlock something on a higher floor using his sticky wanking gloves, he climbed up only to find he couldn’t unlock shit, then like an extreme Old King Cole, climbed down again and the mission continued as if nothing ever happened. [/quote]
Really? You didn’t enjoy it?
Man the Burj Khalifa sections with the climbing and the sandstorm were one of the most impressive aspects of the film. The location and filming of the surrounding area made for some incredible visuals. The action scenes were incredible throughout, but those in particular were incredibly satisfying for me. As much as the film’s magnum opus is in it’s action sequences, there was something about this one that just seemed more classy and a lot more cleverly sequenced than previous entries.
The character dynamics were better than in previous films, I like the way their personalities were set up in this one, Simon Pegg’s character in particular was a stand out for me, he played it extremely well.
To me the Mission Impossible films have only gotten progressively better with each title, I can’t wait to see if they make another one.[/quote]
The scaling of the Burj Khalifa was narratively redundant, which makes it the largest, most cynical example of product placement ever. It buried the movie for me. It seemed like an ultra-glamorous travelogue, so much so that I’m willing to bet that Dubai paid to be featured.
The first ten minutes were the best, basically being a showcase for Josh Holloway as a viable leading man - and I didn’t particularly like him until he died in this movie. [/quote]
That’s an interesting point, I’m not sure I could take the same stance though. Is it all product placement that affects you? Would you feel disdain for James Bond films realising their allegiance to Smirnoff vodka? Or You’ve Got Mail for featuring AOL predominantly? (I could give more examples, but usually the movies that feature them aren’t very good.) Or is it Dubai and it’s history that heightens your disapproval above those?
[/quote]
The crucial difference is that The Burj Khalifa was the major selling point of the movie. There was absolutely no reason to spend so much screen time outside the building…other than to promote the building. Bond swigging a Heineken in Skyfall isn’t the same thing at all.
[/quote]
Hmm, I think I’m beginning to understand your perspective more, but are you really willing to cut apart the other scenes on the basis of that one? It sounds strange for that to be such a deal-breaker. If that scene weren’t in the film, what would be your overall impression?[/quote]
There wouldn’t be a movie.
Maybe just because im a sci fi fan, but i thought the movie was excellent. Much better than the alien prequel from last year. Best sci fi ive seen in a while
I just got home from watching it, great movie and story but the end bit in space was a tad confusing for me.
Saw it, thought it was meh sci-fi movie with amazing scenery shots. But after reading peoples thoughts about it and critics I’m starting to realize that, it was just a standard Sci-Fi movie that didn’t try to hide what it was, sure there were plot holes/discrepancy in pacing but if you look at it sort of objectively(hard to do for a movie in general) you can see that it hit it all the standard points ANY good sci-fi movie worth a grain of salt should have.
I always like TC. He has passion for his roles and his enthusiasm always bleeds through. I think his best roles were Rain Man, Eyes Wide Shut and Magnolia. MI 4 was pretty bad ass!
[quote]MytchBucanan wrote:
I always like TC. He has passion for his roles and his enthusiasm always bleeds through. I think his best roles were Rain Man, Eyes Wide Shut and Magnolia. MI 4 was pretty bad ass![/quote]
You lost all credibility when you didn’t mention Collateral. That is easily one of his best roles. He went out of his comfort zone and played a trained killer.
Thought the movie was fantastic. Did it have elements of Moon, Independence Day, and 2001 Space Odyssey? Sure, but I liked all those movies. I don’t see what everyone was bitching about. Being different for difference sake is how we ended up with emo kids. I’m glad they just made a good sci-fi movie.
Although I will say this, I have no idea why the human survivors made such an effort to act like aliens lol.
[quote]csulli wrote:
Although I will say this, I have no idea why the human survivors made such an effort to act like aliens lol.[/quote]
Because the drones were designed to kill humans. They were attempting to confuse them. But you think they would have revealed themselves to cruise earlier. But it is a movie.
[quote]strungoutboy21 wrote:
[quote]MytchBucanan wrote:
I always like TC. He has passion for his roles and his enthusiasm always bleeds through. I think his best roles were Rain Man, Eyes Wide Shut and Magnolia. MI 4 was pretty bad ass![/quote]
You lost all credibility when you didn’t mention Collateral. That is easily one of his best roles. He went out of his comfort zone and played a trained killer.
Wow, I forgot about that one. Yeah he was surprisingly good as a villain. It shows how much range the guy has.