So Born on the Fourth of July was his worst film?
The More Tom Cruise Runs, The Better His Movies Do, According To Science - SlashFilm
A study by Rotten Tomatoes suggests that the more scenes of Tom Cruise running a movie has, the better received those films are by critics.www.slashfilm.com
Yeah it's one of those series that keeps getting better and better in my opinion. I've rewatched Fallout so many times since it came out and it's such a kick ass action movie, such a blast to watch.
They are pretty nice. The "theatrical" imax screens around me are really just jumbo screens with better sound, really, not that giant curved screen with the seats almost vertically stacked inside. Those are great for slow moving high res stuff like documentaries or laser light shows, trying to watch an actual movie on one would probably have me vomiting in less than 10 minutes. But the "regular" ones are really nice, good seats, and great sound so that's my preference for spectacle films.
I think britts must NEED to work to maintain their us visa so they work for less. They do seem to be very prominent over here. Are there lots of yanks on the BBC? Or it's just the ease of faking the accent
I think britts must NEED to work to maintain their us visa so they work for less. They do seem to be very prominent over here. Are there lots of yanks on the BBC? Or it's just the ease of faking the accent
And plastic surgery
And CGI (in the movies)
Yeah I don’t understand why this is reviewing so well. I just got out from watching it and I thought it was a convoluted and contrived mess. The previous film was way better and I’m no longer excited for part two.
Damn, then thie film must be full of social pandering, left wing political grandstanding, and overwrought speeches about the evils of colonialism and the patriarchy, right?
might wanna watch the first one, but not essential as there's flashbacksDamn, then thie film must be full of social pandering, left wing political grandstanding, and overwrought speeches about the evils of colonialism and the patriarchy, right?
We do tend to believe when we want to believe, don't we?
More importantly, how critical is it to re-watch any previous M:I films for this? I know Dougray Scott is the surprise villain revelation, but other than that....
I would say MI:1 would give you a bit of background on one of the main characters and maybe 5-7 to get a sense of his team and what they mean to each other and have been through, but nothing would really prevent you from enjoying this one.Damn, then thie film must be full of social pandering, left wing political grandstanding, and overwrought speeches about the evils of colonialism and the patriarchy, right?
We do tend to believe when we want to believe, don't we?
More importantly, how critical is it to re-watch any previous M:I films for this? I know Dougray Scott is the surprise villain revelation, but other than that....
To me the saga end with the first movie.
They are just big action set pieces now.
96%
My biggest takeaway from the film is that the suits missed the boat on Atwell badly. She absolutely should have had a live action stint as Lara Croft or some other vehicle for herself by this point. All the women killed it in DR.
I thought Pom is a Quebecer?
deadline.com
Oh good grief, tracking a premier opening day versus the VERY NEXT DAY before the opening weekend seems a bit of a limited data set to be drawing conclusions.So is this underperforming currently?
‘Mission: Impossible – Dead Reckoning Part One’ Seeing $78M 5-Day US, $240M WW: Why Sequel Is In Better Position Than ‘Indy’ – Box Office Update
Mission Impossible - Dead Reckoning' Eyes $6M-$7M in Tuesday Previews, $90M 5-day Domestic Box Office opening
^^^^^Note the bolded comments.
Seemed like clickbait article to fill the day between friday grosses. Given the runtime, MI isn't likely to break records, but I'm not sure it really needs to, just be a solid performer. I wonder how much of "part 2" was paid from that 300 mill in part 1. I'm sure expectations are for a TG:Maverick performance but thats a tall order for a cruise film I think, he is solid but rarely spectacular in BO.
In the old days an editor would savagely beat that reporter about the head and shoulders with a typewriter and kick them out of the building.Ha! They updated it. Check it out:
A case of truly shitty writing that the author's sneaky stealth edit tried to resolve. Fuck you, Deadline!
Not quite dead. The writers go where the audiences go. It's a symbiotic relationship. If the audience becomes smarter, so does the content. If the audiences dumb down, the content is put into something basic for the mouth breathers to grunt to.
