EscObAR123

.

edit.

how do you embed tweets?

You have seen?

Embargoed until the world premier which is on the 12th. I don't doubt its good though. I am thinking 95% RT with an average of around 8/10.

http://loaded.co.uk/ online mag.

Cruise badly needs this to be good to recover from the last two turkeys.

There is a huge fan backlash against the casting of Cruise as Jack Reacher with many refusing to see the movie with him as the lead. There were petitions and even many mainstream news outlets covered the fan outcry: http://articles.latimes.com/2012/dec/21/entertainment/la-et-jc-tom-cruise-jack-reacher-fans-react-20121220 http://www.smh.com.au/entertainment/movies/cruise-comes-up-short-over-giant-new-role-20110816-1iwo4.html Cruise is not Reacher fb page: https://www.facebook.com/reacherfriends Taking a look at the author's facebook page, you would be hard pressed to find many positive comments from Reacher fans about the casting of Cruise and all urge him to recast the role. So while in theory you would expect the many fans of the books to rush to the cinema to watch their favorite character brought to big screen, in reality many were put off by the casting and in all likelihood chose not to go and see it. I agree on Edge though, even though its Cruise only non MI 100M domestic film this decade, it should have done a bit better than it did. It was probably a mix of mishandled marketing and Cruise already having lost the trust of audiences by that time, especially since just a year earlier he had been in a lackluster sci fi. Will be interesting to see how the sequel does.

Leo's movies typically have more going for them than his mere presence though. Django, Wolf, Revenant benefited from strong reviews and awards buzz and were all until recently in the top 250 (Revenant has dropped out now). Also with wolf there was the Leo/Scorsese team up which in itself seems to be a draw and Django had QT who has mostly been a reliable draw in his own right over the years. Compare that to Cruise who has been starring in films with mixed to downright career worst level reception and it is not really an apples to apples comparison. Looking at it another way, would a film like Never Go Back or The Mummy really make significantly more money with Leo instead of Cruise, provided all other factors remained the same? And by the same token, would the likes of Django, Wolf etc do that much worse with Cruise in Leo's roles? I am not quite sure the answer is a resounding yes in either case. Cruise has only himself to blame though with his less than stellar project selection in the last decade.

nope

So Pandorum but with a love story added in. Could be good.

How is this underrated? 83% RT and is, laughably enough, #154 in the IMDB top 250 (higher than Rocky ). Nick Nolte was (deservedly) nominated for the Oscar and a bunch of other major awards, what else should it have been up for? Best screenplay? lol Anyway, this was a good movie and I enjoyed it despite the cliche ridden script and increasingly ludicrous and predictable plot. Nolte was amazing and that hotel room scene with Hardy is one of the most emotional in recent memory. The rest of the cast were adequate and nothing more. 6.5-7/10

Since when does a movie need to make 4-times its budget to get a sequel

Has a cool 70's cop thriller feel to it ala Bullit/Dirty Harry. I thought Cruise was perfect and there was great chemistry between him and Rosamund Pike. The action sequences were done really well, and there was just enough humor injected to ensure it didn't get too dark/serious. Really enjoyed Robert Duvall's work in a small but memorable role.8/10

Affleck missing out on director nom makes up for the BAFTA abomination

If Bigelow hadn't glorified torture she and the movie likely would have gotten inhappy with the noms overall

EightMovies were (not in order):Rabbit Proof Fence (2002)Session 9 (2001)Smallest show on Earth (1957)The bucket List (2007)Disturbia (2007)I Now Pronounce you chuck and Larry (2007)Young Frankenstein (1974)To Be or Not To Be (1983)