Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Cyborg dude looks like a hybrid twixt Snoke for Star Wars, and Detective Valentine from Fallout 4.

I saw Mortal Engines last night too, since it's on Netflix.

I was really pleasantly surprised as well. I liked the refreshing sci fi design / style to it.

Mortal Engines had some really cool ideas, but they tried sooooo hard to make it a sweeping epic which did detract from some bits.

There was some really unnecessary padding too; the baddie's daughter sub plot that went nowhere or the visit to the sky city for example.
I assume they were more important in the book!

The film did a great job or making you feel this clash of civilizations though. I was genuinely invested in the pathos of these mighty motorised cities being slowly starved by the Chinese wall, and the desperate measures required to save their way of life. It made Hugo Weaving's character pretty cool.

 Matt Swain wrote:

I've always wanted to ask something: Is all the hostility against tom cruise based on his involvement in what many people regard as a fraudulent and possibly dangerous cult? I'm not saying the name as someone might accuse me of getting into R&P, but is that the only reason people have such hostility towards tom cruise? I really am curious here.

In "The Media" it certainly does appear that way, and not without reason. . . In the past, I do recall that on red carpet interviews, he'd spout some cult propaganda lines which, in more recent years, he has strayed from (as honestly, the place is high profile enough he doesn't need to any more) doing. It was that type of previous activity that I'm sure lead to Mr. Valkyrie's offspring's desire to have him not play the role, however I am not familiar with that organization actually putting its content IN movies (well, except for Battlefield Earth. . .but that's a bit different), so I may be somewhat ignorant of the full breadth of the protests.


On these forums, go through enough movie threads, and you will see a few people who don't like him because of his style of acting, or that he was miscast (Jack Reacher. . . apparently) in a role, or a number of reasons that do not pertain to that other thing.

 Kroem wrote:
Mortal Engines had some really cool ideas, but they tried sooooo hard to make it a sweeping epic which did detract from some bits.

There was some really unnecessary padding too; the baddie's daughter sub plot that went nowhere or the visit to the sky city for example.
I assume they were more important in the book!

The film did a great job or making you feel this clash of civilizations though. I was genuinely invested in the pathos of these mighty motorised cities being slowly starved by the Chinese wall, and the desperate measures required to save their way of life. It made Hugo Weaving's character pretty cool.

Agreed - watched it the other night and enjoyed it alot - plenty of intriguing steampunk and epic cities on wheels etc.

And yeah the daughter seemed like she was going to be much more important - guessing either it did not work or had to be cut down due to length - its not a short film anyway.

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:

Spoiler:

 Matt Swain wrote:

I've always wanted to ask something: Is all the hostility against tom cruise based on his involvement in what many people regard as a fraudulent and possibly dangerous cult? I'm not saying the name as someone might accuse me of getting into R&P, but is that the only reason people have such hostility towards tom cruise? I really am curious here.

In "The Media" it certainly does appear that way, and not without reason. . . In the past, I do recall that on red carpet interviews, he'd spout some cult propaganda lines which, in more recent years, he has strayed from (as honestly, the place is high profile enough he doesn't need to any more) doing. It was that type of previous activity that I'm sure lead to Mr. Valkyrie's offspring's desire to have him not play the role, however I am not familiar with that organization actually putting its content IN movies (well, except for Battlefield Earth. . .but that's a bit different), so I may be somewhat ignorant of the full breadth of the protests.

On these forums, go through enough movie threads, and you will see a few people who don't like him because of his style of acting, or that he was miscast (Jack Reacher. . . apparently) in a role, or a number of reasons that do not pertain to that other thing.

If you've read any of the Reacher books by Lee Child, then Cruise is a poor choice for the casting, purely on the physical characteristics - the guy is no 6' 4", 220lb, one-man-wrecking-crew. Now, I've not watched either film in full, so I'm not going to comment too much on the performance - but in the clips I saw from the first film, especially the fight outside the bar? He definitely seemed to have the right sort of attitude in place.

Still, after 20+ books, if I'm gonna go watch a film about Jack Reacher, I kinda want the actor to at least be in the right ballpark for how Jack Reacher is described, y'know?

I didn't mind the Reacher film but physical discrepancies aside it's the thing where wee Tommy C is more a brand than an actor and is hired to be that rather actually acting hence all his movies become Tom movies rather than movies with Tom in them

Well, I'm glad my question about the hate for tom cruise didn't get any hostility. I've seen so much of it i finally just had to ask. Thanks for the honest answers.

I just watched The Hunt.

Cheesy mismatch of actors you know that don't survive more than 5 minutes (LOL). Feels like a cheesy shock-horror late night movie, but in a good way.

Will it win an Emmy? LOL, no way. It is fun for what it is though. The credits are enjoyable, as the characters don't have names, so they accredit the actors with such parts as "Yoga Pants" and "Shut the F*** Up Gary".

Mutant Chronicles.

I bought the dvd for a dollar having seen the game mentioned at times.

Yeah, the budget and effects were college students on a "we're making LSD in chem lab and selling it to finance this" level but it had some amazing acting chops, like tomas jayne, ron perleman and John Malkovich.

I think that very cheap and excessive blood splatter was poorly matted in after the movie was made for some reason.

it was worth the dollar i paid and the time i spent, i'd say. Good grimdark vibe for 40k fans. I've heard mutant chronicles, the game, was inspired by 40k so it's not surprising.

 Frazzled wrote:
Tank girl was awesome.

This!

Godzilla vs biolante was a great godzilla movie, and much under appreciated.It actually had some believable plot elements in it.

"Last Christmas" with Emilia Clarke.

It had a pretty big twist to it that made me pay less attention to the commission I was working on and more attention to my background noise film!

Seventh Son.

I'm not a fan of fantasy movies in general and I know it was considered a semi-fiasco but I found this one was quite entertaining and I watched it 3 times already. Alicia Vikander is also one of my favorite actress, so it's a bonus.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kroem wrote:
Mortal Engines had some really cool ideas, but they tried sooooo hard to make it a sweeping epic which did detract from some bits.

There was some really unnecessary padding too; the baddie's daughter sub plot that went nowhere or the visit to the sky city for example.
I assume they were more important in the book!

The film did a great job or making you feel this clash of civilizations though. I was genuinely invested in the pathos of these mighty motorised cities being slowly starved by the Chinese wall, and the desperate measures required to save their way of life. It made Hugo Weaving's character pretty cool.

I consider it a decent B movie. Definitely not worth of a modern successful blockbuster but it's not trash either.

I recently watched the Roland Emmerich “Midway” film. I’d skipped it last year as it got absolutely panned in reviews (and the trailers did NOT look good), but recently I’d seen some comments / user reviews that said it was alright, so I gave it a go. It’s...fine, maybe a 6/10. CGI is mostly decent and there’s some good actors in there (unfortunately Ed Skrein’s performance is not brilliant; not got anything against him, just slightly miscast I think). Not something I’d ever pay to own, but as a background/lazy afternoon filler I’d happily watch it again, so definitely better than expected.

Saw Galaxy Quest for the first time the other day as it's now on Netflix.
How did I miss this film for so long?
Was a lot of fun, just thoroughly enjoyable Saturday night fair that completely kept your attention.
Everyone was perfectly cast in it (especially Alan Rickman, with a role made for his dry delivery) and Sigourney Weaver was !

 Dysartes wrote:

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:

Spoiler:

 Matt Swain wrote:

I've always wanted to ask something: Is all the hostility against tom cruise based on his involvement in what many people regard as a fraudulent and possibly dangerous cult? I'm not saying the name as someone might accuse me of getting into R&P, but is that the only reason people have such hostility towards tom cruise? I really am curious here.

In "The Media" it certainly does appear that way, and not without reason. . . In the past, I do recall that on red carpet interviews, he'd spout some cult propaganda lines which, in more recent years, he has strayed from (as honestly, the place is high profile enough he doesn't need to any more) doing. It was that type of previous activity that I'm sure lead to Mr. Valkyrie's offspring's desire to have him not play the role, however I am not familiar with that organization actually putting its content IN movies (well, except for Battlefield Earth. . .but that's a bit different), so I may be somewhat ignorant of the full breadth of the protests.

On these forums, go through enough movie threads, and you will see a few people who don't like him because of his style of acting, or that he was miscast (Jack Reacher. . . apparently) in a role, or a number of reasons that do not pertain to that other thing.

If you've read any of the Reacher books by Lee Child, then Cruise is a poor choice for the casting, purely on the physical characteristics - the guy is no 6' 4", 220lb, one-man-wrecking-crew. Now, I've not watched either film in full, so I'm not going to comment too much on the performance - but in the clips I saw from the first film, especially the fight outside the bar? He definitely seemed to have the right sort of attitude in place.

Still, after 20+ books, if I'm gonna go watch a film about Jack Reacher, I kinda want the actor to at least be in the right ballpark for how Jack Reacher is described, y'know?

Agree 100%. It takes a certain amount of arrogance I think for an actor to think "I can act up this extra 8 inches in height and 100lbs". For that kind of boys-own role which was basically someone beating people up for 90 minutes it needed someone that was big and physical; Jason Mamoa with a crewcut, Henry Cavill or even Chris Hemsworth. If Tom Cruise wanted that kind of role he should have done another Mission Impossible.

Other films with similar miscastings where you feel they have bought their way into a role are Tom Hanks in The Da Vinci Code (him with a mullet, again actor was meant to be 6'4" and square jawed) and Nicole Kidman in the Goldon Compass (meant to be a petite brunette).
Actually also Daniel Craig in the Hollywood remake of the Girl with the Dragon Tattoo. Character was meant to be with middle-aged spread and unremarkable to look at, not someone who can walk out of the water with sun glistening on his oiled six-pack and an uzi in each hand

Perhaps the studio felt a dad-book movie would only work with a dad-movie actor, and Tom Hanks was holding out for a more directly military role?

 Pacific wrote:
Saw Galaxy Quest for the first time the other day as it's now on Netflix.
How did I miss this film for so long?
Was a lot of fun, just thoroughly enjoyable Saturday night fair that completely kept your attention.
Everyone was perfectly cast in it (especially Alan Rickman, with a role made for his dry delivery) and Sigourney Weaver was !

Its a fantastic movie as not only is it clever and very funny with as you say a perfect cast but it mocks with love and understanding AND also manages to be a decent action movie as well.

very few like it.

I watched Birds of Prey tonight. Was pleasantly surprised - I was expecting a trainwreck, but it was actually quite entertaining.

It's always a pleasant surprise when a movie exceeds your expectations! I can totally relate to your list of surprisingly good films. "Amazon Women on the Moon" had its unique charm, and "Catwoman" had an intriguing premise despite the mixed reviews.

Please stop committing acts of thread necromancy, locking now.