Jules Winfield

The problem is that you think that I care whether you like Looper and you keep talking about the what you liked and didn't. I don't care. There's opinion and that's fine but the fact that you called it one of the worst movies you've seen is absurd. You even state what you liked. To me, if you liked something, anything about the movie, it's not one of the "worst" you've ever seen. It's that kind of hyperbolic bullshit that gets so boring. It seems so weird to tell you this because I know you've seen a few movies but go watch some more movies if Looper is one of the worst you've seen.

P.S.-What the fuck is wrong with you for bringing up Alex Cross? I've been trying to forget that movie exists.

DaveyJoe

The stuff at the farm is the best part of Looper, the problem is misleading trailers. Rocshemp wanted a specific movie and when he didn't get it, he hated it. I've seen Looper 3 times and love it more on each viewing. In a more formulaic movie the hero would have been Kid Blue, and he would have saved the day, but in this movie he gets taken out unceremoniously. Willis/Levitt's character is actually kind of the villain, it's an interesting movie.

Jules Winfield

Yep. He had a fully formed idea of what he wanted the movie to be that he now considers it one of the worst movies ever.

P.S.-BTW, I really liked Edge of Tomorrow. Some good action, some slight twists on the usual time travel stuff you see in other time travel movies. I had a bit of a problem with the ending. Standard generic action movie ending but everything else is solid. My favorite Summer movie so far.

Lara Means

RocShemp

I didn't really have anything fully formed in my head but there was a definite bait & switch from the initial premise. My issue was that the farm stuff was boring and predictable. The earlier stuff was also predictable but the difference was that it was entertaining. I would have been able to go with the sudden turn if what followed hadn't been boring and therefor left me longing for what had come before.

And liking something from a movie doesn't automatically negate the movie being bad. The opening action sequence of Legend of the Fist is a lot of over-the-top fun. That doesn't stop the rest of the movie being a chore.

RocShemp

Gotcha. I always liked Cruise so this has been on my radar for some time. And I have no problem separating his beliefs or his antics from his movies.

TomOpus

Same here. And I think more people are coming around. Maybe it's partly due to less real life stuff showing up in the trades and/or his movie selection has been pretty good for a bit.

Jules Winfield

Agreed. Read my comments again. You gotta admit "one of the worst" is a little over the top.

RocShemp

I guess I don't watch as many bad movies as you.

Just kidding. I don't count legitimately bad movies (like anything that might be a SyFy Original) as "real" movies anyway. So that can obviously color my opinion.

OldBoy

so on to the reviews...

dsa_shea

I'm interested in seeing both of these movies. So, 25 bucks a person to watch the movie followed by a Q&A session that took places elsewhere? No thanks!

rocket1312

I have a hard time separating his beliefs from his movies for one reason. At least for the last decade or so, all the movies Cruise does feel so sterile and calculated as if their only purpose is to advance the legend of Tom Cruise aka the public face of Scientology. I know he's worked for a lot of big name directors, but it almost feels like his films exist in their own world outside of mainstream Hollywood. It wasn't always that way. I don't know. Maybe I've read one too many Vanity Fair exposes. What I do know is that I had absolutely no desire whatsoever to see Edge of Tomorrow, but the early reviews are beginning to pique my interest.

Deftones

Saw it. Enjoyed the heck out of it. Took a little while to get going, but once it does, it's fantastic. The battle sequences are pretty spectacular. Say what you want about Tom Cruise as a nutjob in real life, but he's always pretty damn good in the movies he does. I enjoyed this and definitely agree this feels like a mashup of Groundhog Day/Starship Troopers/Saving Private Ryan.

Shannon Nutt

I disagree. I think he's continually picked good projects, despite all the press about his religion. Heck, he was even good in the underseen Lions for Lambs. Rock of Ages is the only thing recent I can think of that wasn't any good. Everything else he's done a great job in. His boyish good looks have distracted from the fact that the guy is actually a REALLY good actor. He's still the best actor in RAIN MAN, as far as I'm concerned - never got the credit, because Hoffman had the 'flashy' part.

fumanstan

Caught a morning show today and really, really enjoyed it. Cruise and Blunt had really good chemistry together, and the movie ended up being far funnier then I expected going on. Something about Cruise's expletives and screams every time he dies was just fantastic and funny. The action is really well done, although I was disappointed that it was so dark at the end after the brightly lit battlefield throughout the rest of the movie. And this was a case where everything was done so well that not being rated R didn't hurt the movie much with the lack of blood and gorier deaths. My only other complaint would be the ending which was a bit predictable; I had a feeling Cruise was going to get that power back. Anyway, just a good solid entertaining movie all around.

Also, I didn't even think about Paxton in this movie, and he's just naturally awesome. Paxton as a solider is always gold.

As far as Looper is concerned, I know this was stated by many of us during that movie's thread but I didn't give two shits about the logistics of the time travel, so any paradoxes didn't bother me. I treated this movie the same; I'm sure there were a lot of holes in Cruise and Blunt returning repeatedly, but I didn't really care or think about it at all.

Patman

Tom Cruise returns to the big screen with "Edge of Tomorrow". Harkening back to "Groundhog Day" with Cruise's character, Major Cage, seemingly able to relive a day over and over again. The story deals with humans having to deal with a threat that could mean the end to humankind. While it sounds like it could be a repetitive chore to sit through, the script is actually quite funny in spots (mining humor from the premise), and moves the film along at a nice pace, didn't really feel it slowed down much at all, and the amount of character development over the course of one day being lived over and over was a solid effort. Emily Blunt was fine as the face of the human military resistance. .

I give it 3 stars, or a grade of B.

My Other Self

Pretty much my sentiments. Cruise was very funny in this. I didn't get the vibe anyone else in the theater knew that it was going to be that kind of movie, though. Every time Blunt shot him in the head was hilarious.

I didn't see it in 3D. The theater I saw it in had the 2D version only playing on one small screen, but it was pretty packed for noon on a Friday.

Hopefully it does relatively well, but it doesn't sound like it's going to really make an impact this weekend. It's a shame, too, because the movie is really a lot of fun.

P.S. I hated the last act and ending of Looper as well. I hadn't been that disappointed leaving the theater in a long time.

RocShemp

All in all, is it as awesome as Top Gun?

<iframe width="640" height="360" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/UxFq16IG_k0?feature=player_embedded" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

rocket1312

Hmmm. We'll have to agree to disagree then. I'd say he's a good movie star in the right role, but I'd hardly call him a REALLY good actor and it has nothing to do with what he looks like. At least earlier in his career there is some variety to the kinds of roles he took. Collateral is pretty much the last thing that he did that's of any real interest to me (I never saw Lions for Lambs, but it's reputation is pretty bad). The M:I movies are fun, but they're just more of the same. In retrospect, M:I 2 is probably where it started to go wrong for me. That was the genesis of Tom Cruise the big time action star, a persona that's never felt like a good fit to me.

RocShemp

I never knew Lions for Lambs had a bad rep. I recall it being a very good flick.

Hazel Motes

For my money, this is Tom Cruise's best film in about 15 years. Since he made Jerry Maguire, Magnolia and Eyes Wide Shut back to back to back. There wasn't a false note in the whole picture. Excellent performances by everyone involved, great cgi, great monster design, a very clever script, humour, suspense. Plus Emily Blunt's terrific body.

4.5/5.

Mike86

I liked it quite a bit and agree that it's one of Cruise's better films in a while. The story is decent and the action was good. Definitely felt like a sci-fi version of Groundhog Day and it worked pretty well. Emily Blunt is also pretty easy on the eyes and her and Cruise had good chemistry. I gave it a 4 out of 5. I can see myself picking this up and rewatching it.

EctoCooler

How does it compare to Minority Report? Better? Not as good? About the same?

--

Solid Snake

I'd say it was better cuz of the interactions involved in this film. The cast is pretty cool. Premise is unique. Really good humorous bits. Great action.

Hazel Motes

better than minority report. its top 5 in his career i'd say.