Mission: Impossible 5

[Luminous]

Originally Posted by Marvelito

I feel the same way. I sometimes refrain from posting my opinion after Scott has for fear of being labeled a Hellboy fanboy!

The thought has crossed my mind as well.

[Hellboy]

Ronald, Tony, your pledge pins are in the mail.

[Luminous]

Good. I was wondering when I was going to receive one.

[Marvelito]

Originally Posted by Hellboy

Ronald, Tony, your pledge pins are in the mail.

[Vracula]

Tom cruise is one of my fav's , I hope he keeps making movies till Xenu comes to take his soul.

[Bullseye]

Some on set photos.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz...I-5-scene.html

[Spideristic]

Tom Cruise Hangs from a Plane 5,000 Feet in the Air on the Set of MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE 5

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz...ing-plane.html

After the first one Mission: Impossible movie, Ghost Protocol was my favourite one. Edge of Tomorrow was one among the good entertaining films of this year, which sadly underperformed.

People on their high horses will continue to badmouth Cruise for reasons which apparently at times have nothing to do with his movies.

We moan about too much CGI in movies, while he is adding realism to scenes by actually hanging out from a plane at 5000 feet in the air. Granted there are safety harnesses, still it's a daring stunt. The guy is obviously a thrill seeker, but at the same time he is dedicated to his acting and his action roles for entertaining the audience, which is commendable everytime.

[OrangeCrush]

Originally Posted by DarkKni9hT

Sure, if you discount the fact that the lead actor was in no way, shape or form even close to resembling the character from the novels. Worse casting than Ahnold as Mr. Freeze.

Also, the MI movies have worn out their appeal, IMO. Cruise jumps off something tall, a hot chick gets out of a car in slow motion, the team gets disavowed, something blows up, Ethan and the gang get their jobs back. How many times can you do that and maintain any interest?

I have never understood this mentality when it comes to films. Books and films are 2 completely different mediums, with thier own strengths and weaknesses. Just becasue something works in one, doesn't mean it will work in the other and just becasue a character is one way in the book, doesnt mean he can't be another way in the movie. Comprimises are always made in adaptations from books.

I still remember all of the Tolkien fans going balls out crazy in regards to the changes Peter jackson was making in The Lord of the Rings films. Some of those discussion boards were downright scary during those times, as if Peter was desecrating the Holy Bible. It was insane. Of course, many believed that LotR was simply unadaptable. That it was simply too long, with way too many characters, to ever work in movie form. Ultimately, Jackson had to make some very tough decisions, in regards to what stays and what goes, but in the end he created a truly amazing adapation of that story. I am actually a die hard Tolkien fan and I loved the films.

I actually think Jack Preacher was a decent film. A bit slow at times, but all in all a decent detective/crime film. He may not have been like the character in the book, but the character worked for the film.

[nbr3bagshotrow]

Originally Posted by OrangeCrush

I have never understood this mentality when it comes to films. Books and films are 2 completely different mediums, with thier own strengths and weaknesses. Just becasue something works in one, doesn't mean it will work in the other and just becasue a character is one way in the book, doesnt mean he can't be another way in the movie. Comprimises are always made in adaptations from books.

I still remember all of the Tolkien fans going balls out crazy in regards to the changes Peter jackson was making in The Lord of the Rings films. Some of those discussion boards were downright scary during those times, as if Peter was desecrating the Holy Bible. It was insane. Of course, many believed that LotR was simply unadaptable. That it was simply too long, with way too many characters, to ever work in movie form. Ultimately, Jackson had to make some very tough decisions, in regards to what stays and what goes, but in the end he created a truly amazing adapation of that story. I am actually a die hard Tolkien fan and I loved the films.

I actually think Jack Preacher was a decent film. A bit slow at times, but all in all a decent detective/crime film. He may not have been like the character in the book, but the character worked for the film.

From my avatar and member name I also am a diehard Tolkien fan. Jackson did a great job with LOTR. Hobbit, not so.

[Python]

Not far down the road from me today, cool job if ever there was one.