Looper was awesome.
Djanjo Unchained also.
Harold & Kumar Xmas 3D had a few laughs in it.
Djanjo Unchained also.
Harold & Kumar Xmas 3D had a few laughs in it.
G
Guest
Guest
Saw Jack Reacher today and quite enjoyed it. While I haven't read the novel, I understand Cruise is nowhere near a physical match for the fictional character, he does a good job and played the role well. The film is not big on special effects or explosions and the action scenes are far more realistic, with a well executed car chase scene the highlight. I don't think this film had a massive budget either, so a sequel may be on the cards given the film has made decent (but not outstanding) money so far.
AmericanHistoryX
Well-known member
I cant contribute my money to scientology.
\
\
_Posted using RoarFEED 2012_
\
\
_Posted using RoarFEED 2012_
AmericanHistoryX
Well-known member
but don't get me wrong. i think Tom Cruise is a brilliant actor who albeit is always snubbed by his peers & industry leaders.
\
\
_Posted using RoarFEED 2012_
\
\
_Posted using RoarFEED 2012_
cruise is a moron
@Demps said:
QFT.
AmericanHistoryX
Well-known member
The public has become accustomed to weird news headlines surrounding Hollywood veteran Tom Cruise, but this most recent story may very well take the cake. According to a report by the New York Post, Cruise -- who's ranked number 3 in Scientology -- believes he was born into this world with the noble mission to vanquish aliens. Yes, you read that correctly. Tom Cruise thinks he's an alien exterminator.
\
\
This is all revealed in a new book penned by Lawrence Wright called, "Going Clear: Scientology, Hollywood & The Prison of Belief." In the book, Wright shares all the juicy details surrounding Cruise's "demigod status" within the Church of Scientology. Also detailed in the book is the church's ultimate purpose: to protect humanity from aliens residing in the human body. These aliens are believed to have the mission of destroying humans and planet Earth. But fear not -- Tom Cruise is here to save us all.
\
\
This bizarre news story, as stated, is just one of many that Tom Cruise has been a part of. Below are 3 additional weird things Tom Cruise has said.
\
\
"If f--ing Arnold can be governor, I could be president."
This was allegedly said by Tom during a conversation with former Scientologist Marty Rathbun.
\
\
"I'm not going to hide it. I am so happy and I am not going to pretend or hide it or be shy. This woman is magnificent! I got to tell ya', this woman is magnificent and I'm having the best time... and I'm really, really, really happy. And I can't contain it. And I'm not going to pretend. I'm not going to pretend."
It wasn't the actual words that made this Tom Cruise quote so strange. It was his delivery that made it bizarre. Him jumping up and down on Oprah Winfrey's interview couch to declare his love for Katie Holmes is what made people question his sanity.
\
\
"I'm gonna eat the placenta. I thought that would be good, very nutritious."
Tom Cruise said this before Katie Holmes gave birth to their daughter, Suri. Others have eaten the placenta before, but it's particularly strange coming from a man.
The public has become accustomed to weird news headlines surrounding Hollywood veteran Tom Cruise, but this most recent story may very well take the cake. According to a report by the New York Post, Cruise -- who's ranked number 3 in Scientology -- believes he was born into this world with the noble mission to vanquish aliens. Yes, you read that correctly. Tom Cruise thinks he's an alien exterminator.
\
\
This is all revealed in a new book penned by Lawrence Wright called, "Going Clear: Scientology, Hollywood & The Prison of Belief." In the book, Wright shares all the juicy details surrounding Cruise's "demigod status" within the Church of Scientology. Also detailed in the book is the church's ultimate purpose: to protect humanity from aliens residing in the human body. These aliens are believed to have the mission of destroying humans and planet Earth. But fear not -- Tom Cruise is here to save us all.
\
\
This bizarre news story, as stated, is just one of many that Tom Cruise has been a part of. Below are 3 additional weird things Tom Cruise has said.
\
\
"If f--ing Arnold can be governor, I could be president."
This was allegedly said by Tom during a conversation with former Scientologist Marty Rathbun.
\
\
"I'm not going to hide it. I am so happy and I am not going to pretend or hide it or be shy. This woman is magnificent! I got to tell ya', this woman is magnificent and I'm having the best time... and I'm really, really, really happy. And I can't contain it. And I'm not going to pretend. I'm not going to pretend."
It wasn't the actual words that made this Tom Cruise quote so strange. It was his delivery that made it bizarre. Him jumping up and down on Oprah Winfrey's interview couch to declare his love for Katie Holmes is what made people question his sanity.
\
\
"I'm gonna eat the placenta. I thought that would be good, very nutritious."
Tom Cruise said this before Katie Holmes gave birth to their daughter, Suri. Others have eaten the placenta before, but it's particularly strange coming from a man.
G
Guest
Guest
Let's try and keep the discussion to actual movies rather than this crap.
AmericanHistoryX
Well-known member
Anybody seen Hitchcock yet? Any good.
BrissieTiger67
Well-known member
yeah saw hitchcock last week, i really enjoyed it and hopkins was amazing! just completely transformed. But i studied hitchcock at uni so i might be bias…
I recommend everyone see Rear Window or Vertigo because they are two of my fave hitchcock films :slight_smile:
I recommend everyone see Rear Window or Vertigo because they are two of my fave hitchcock films :slight_smile:
AmericanHistoryX
Well-known member
the colour in Rear Window is bliss. Just the color of the film makes one happy.
AmericanHistoryX
Well-known member
has anyone seen that new Quentin Tarantino film sonething Django - is it any good.
@AmericanHistoryX said:
Django Unchained…Yeah I have seen it. Typical Tarantino...over the top in every way.
Gruesome violence - both visually and implied through language (it is really racist, as it should be seeings it is set in times of slavery), hillarious dialogue and great set pieces. I loved it. It is a superb revenge flick. It is certainly politically incorrect and will I am sure, upset a lot of (white) people, but if you take it for what it is....entertainment....it is a sure fire winner and IMO on par with Resvoir Dogs and Pulp Fiction.
All the main actors, Waltz, Foxx, DiCaprio and Jackson are excellent. Minimum 9/10.
@stryker said:
Wicked, I really want to see this.
GNR4LIFE
Well-known member
Dicaprio alone makes it a potential epic. Some of the movies he's been over the last few yrs have all been phenomenal
The Departed
Shutter Island
Blood Diamond
Body Of Lies
Inception
Just to name a few
The Departed
Shutter Island
Blood Diamond
Body Of Lies
Inception
Just to name a few
Agreed gunners…he is a top actor and most of his performances have prodeuced great films...
also
The aviator
Catch me if you can
Gangs of New York
The Beach
Whats eating Gilbert Grape?
The basketball diaries.....
He is awesome in this as well. Truly evil charcter who is both charasmatic and menacing....
also
The aviator
Catch me if you can
Gangs of New York
The Beach
Whats eating Gilbert Grape?
The basketball diaries.....
He is awesome in this as well. Truly evil charcter who is both charasmatic and menacing....
G
Guest
Guest
@Cultured Bogan said:
It is also Tarantino's highest grossing film too, so it's proving to be quite popular.
AmericanHistoryX
Well-known member
whats eating gilberts grape was Di Caprios break thru performance. Johny Depp played the older brother.
AmericanHistoryX
Well-known member
make of this what you willow…. sorry willow.... i meant will, make of this what you will
Nonsensical? ... Christoph Waltz and Jamie Foxx in Django Unchained.
OK, let's get this over and done with. I'm going to talk about Django Unchained, the new Quentin Tarantino movie out in cinemas on Thursday and I'm going to use the 'N' word. Oh yes I am, and you can't stop me. Nonsensical.
There, I've said it. Read it and weep, fan-boys; this is a film with more holes in it than a crocheted bikini. Does Tarantino not have anyone around him who can say, without fear or favour: ''I'm sorry Quent, but that's a load of rubbish?''
Perhaps the absence of Tarantino at this week's red carpet premiere in Sydney was a blessing in disguise. Because someone, surely, would have had to have asked him, in the post-show Q&A, ''when was the last time you heard the word 'no'?''
\
\
Overlong, overcooked and underdone (not an easy thing to do), this is not up there with Tarantino's best. That it's being considered for a best film Oscar beggars belief. Even Jackie Brown made more sense than this unoriginal mishmash of cliches and non-sequiturs.
\
\
It's probably too late. Someone should have stepped in on the set of Inglourious Basterds and told him that the ridiculous denouement in the theatre belonged to another, not very good, film.
But perhaps there comes a point in every auteur's success story when those voices are either silenced, or silence themselves. It's why rock bands can get away with demanding only green Smarties in their dressing rooms.
As any journalist/writer worth their salt knows, everyone benefits from a good editor. But try telling that to Neil Gaiman, whose wonderfully inventive 2001 book American Gods was re-issued as a 10th anniversary special with 12,000 extra words. The original paperback came in at a massive 501 large format pages.
The 12,000 extra words are called ''the author's preferred text'', also known as all the stuff the editors wouldn't let the author put in the first time around.
Stephen King, too, has gone down the reissue road with his book The Stand. His ''director's cut'' turned an 800-pager into 1100 pages. Again, to no great advantage.
Of course, King's publishers could print the man's shopping list and it would sell its socks off so why even bother editing anything he does?
Well, perhaps to prevent the debacles of his last two books, Under The Dome and 11/22/63, his J.F.K. assassination time travel romp. In both of them, King gradually paints himself into a plot-line corner and has to resort to utterly unlikely and unsatisfactory endings.
These otherwise excellent books could have done with a brave, experienced editor writing ''B -, could do better'' in the margin.
That same editor could have been redeployed to work on A Dance With Dragons, the latest 1000-page instalment in George R.R. Martin's Game of Thrones franchise. A great, sprawling breezeblock of a thing that would choke a sperm whale, it cried out for a firm hand from someone who could perhaps have said: ''George, seeing as it's called A Dance With Dragons - maybe fewer feasts and a tad more dragon?''
As it is, even rusted-on Game of Thrones readers have come away disappointed. As one online review site, The League of Ordinary Gentlemen, put it: ''For a thousand or so pages almost nothing happens and then we get a bunch of cliffhangers. The End.''
Are these hugely successful creative writers victims of their own success? Can they just disregard editors, or have editors become mere pipelines to the public? As the League of Ordinary Gentleman site added: ''I just can't imagine reading a manuscript of this book and thinking 'This is good. This is ready for publication.'''
Tarantino is reported to have said he would like to release a director's cut of his spaghetti western that is five hours long. Good, then we might find out some more about Django's wife Broomhilda, who seems to have been dropped into the plot from a circling spaceship (maybe King helped out there); and maybe it will solve the mystery of Zoe Bell and her bizarre eyeballs-only appearance. It certainly had better explain the stupid dancing horse, that's for sure.
All of which should have been picked up and corrected before we crammed into the State Theatre to watch Tarantino strained through Tarantino.
*This story has been brought to you by me, followed by my partner, the opinion page editor, a subeditor and, with any luck, a final proofread. And it's all the better for it; the first draft read like a Tarantino movie.
Keith Austin is a freelance writer.
Follow the National Times on Twitter
\
\
Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/tarantinos-lost-the-plot-and-needs-a-good-editor-20130123-2d78t.html#ixzz2IrSosflI
make of this what you willow…. sorry willow.... i meant will, make of this what you will
Nonsensical? ... Christoph Waltz and Jamie Foxx in Django Unchained.
OK, let's get this over and done with. I'm going to talk about Django Unchained, the new Quentin Tarantino movie out in cinemas on Thursday and I'm going to use the 'N' word. Oh yes I am, and you can't stop me. Nonsensical.
There, I've said it. Read it and weep, fan-boys; this is a film with more holes in it than a crocheted bikini. Does Tarantino not have anyone around him who can say, without fear or favour: ''I'm sorry Quent, but that's a load of rubbish?''
Perhaps the absence of Tarantino at this week's red carpet premiere in Sydney was a blessing in disguise. Because someone, surely, would have had to have asked him, in the post-show Q&A, ''when was the last time you heard the word 'no'?''
\
\
Overlong, overcooked and underdone (not an easy thing to do), this is not up there with Tarantino's best. That it's being considered for a best film Oscar beggars belief. Even Jackie Brown made more sense than this unoriginal mishmash of cliches and non-sequiturs.
\
\
It's probably too late. Someone should have stepped in on the set of Inglourious Basterds and told him that the ridiculous denouement in the theatre belonged to another, not very good, film.
But perhaps there comes a point in every auteur's success story when those voices are either silenced, or silence themselves. It's why rock bands can get away with demanding only green Smarties in their dressing rooms.
As any journalist/writer worth their salt knows, everyone benefits from a good editor. But try telling that to Neil Gaiman, whose wonderfully inventive 2001 book American Gods was re-issued as a 10th anniversary special with 12,000 extra words. The original paperback came in at a massive 501 large format pages.
The 12,000 extra words are called ''the author's preferred text'', also known as all the stuff the editors wouldn't let the author put in the first time around.
Stephen King, too, has gone down the reissue road with his book The Stand. His ''director's cut'' turned an 800-pager into 1100 pages. Again, to no great advantage.
Of course, King's publishers could print the man's shopping list and it would sell its socks off so why even bother editing anything he does?
Well, perhaps to prevent the debacles of his last two books, Under The Dome and 11/22/63, his J.F.K. assassination time travel romp. In both of them, King gradually paints himself into a plot-line corner and has to resort to utterly unlikely and unsatisfactory endings.
These otherwise excellent books could have done with a brave, experienced editor writing ''B -, could do better'' in the margin.
That same editor could have been redeployed to work on A Dance With Dragons, the latest 1000-page instalment in George R.R. Martin's Game of Thrones franchise. A great, sprawling breezeblock of a thing that would choke a sperm whale, it cried out for a firm hand from someone who could perhaps have said: ''George, seeing as it's called A Dance With Dragons - maybe fewer feasts and a tad more dragon?''
As it is, even rusted-on Game of Thrones readers have come away disappointed. As one online review site, The League of Ordinary Gentlemen, put it: ''For a thousand or so pages almost nothing happens and then we get a bunch of cliffhangers. The End.''
Are these hugely successful creative writers victims of their own success? Can they just disregard editors, or have editors become mere pipelines to the public? As the League of Ordinary Gentleman site added: ''I just can't imagine reading a manuscript of this book and thinking 'This is good. This is ready for publication.'''
Tarantino is reported to have said he would like to release a director's cut of his spaghetti western that is five hours long. Good, then we might find out some more about Django's wife Broomhilda, who seems to have been dropped into the plot from a circling spaceship (maybe King helped out there); and maybe it will solve the mystery of Zoe Bell and her bizarre eyeballs-only appearance. It certainly had better explain the stupid dancing horse, that's for sure.
All of which should have been picked up and corrected before we crammed into the State Theatre to watch Tarantino strained through Tarantino.
*This story has been brought to you by me, followed by my partner, the opinion page editor, a subeditor and, with any luck, a final proofread. And it's all the better for it; the first draft read like a Tarantino movie.
Keith Austin is a freelance writer.
Follow the National Times on Twitter
\
\
Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/tarantinos-lost-the-plot-and-needs-a-good-editor-20130123-2d78t.html#ixzz2IrSosflI
