CHUD.com Community › Forums › SPECIFIC FILMS › The Franchises › Mission Impossible: Cruise Like Thunder
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Mission Impossible: Cruise Like Thunder

post #1 of 47
7/18/04 at 11:35pm
Thread Starter 
Now that Joe Carnahan has pulled the ejection cord on Mission Impossible III (to apparently keep his creative dignity intact), leaving the film one month away from a director-free shoot -- I think this is as good time as any to ask:

Does anyone else wonder about the mental and emotional state of Thomas Maphother IV?

I've always enjoyed his 310%-PERCENT-COMMITTED approach to everything he does: be it emoting in a million-dollar acting gig, or shaking the hand of some lowly E! celebrity interviewer -- whatever he's doing, the bastard locks on like a laser-beam and gives it hell. Absolute and total focus and committment, eyes bulging, teeth flared, huge smile. THE SYSTEM IS... PERFECT.

But lately I've noticed something -- something about the way he laughs way too hard at jokes that just aren't funny, something about the weird stories (dumping Nicole, unloading his publicist and replacing her with his sister, not allowing stunt doubles to be photographed, insane lawsuits against gay slurs), something about his increasingly bizarre appearances on Larry King Live ("I was NEVER dyslexic, Larry, NEVER... It's an applied religious technology, Larry, not a cult... Lenny Kravitz is a VERY talented musician...") - something is giving me the feeling that Cruise is trying to hold his entire world together through sheer FORCE OF WILL, solely by the power that beams through his hypno-blue eyes. Like he's about to crack. I'm not kidding -- I am really curious if all is not well in Cole Trickle's world. I could care less about his sexual orientation, or his belief in a space-alien religion, but the thought of a star his size having some kind of internal meltdown, and ABSOLUTLEY TRYING TO SUPRESS IT AT ALL COSTS is endlessly facinating.

Who knows, maybe I'm completely wrong and he's dancing the Risky Business dance right now on piles of cash with three euro babes.

Anyway, just curious if anyone felt the same. I wonder what the real story is behind Carnahan's departure, and if it had anything to do with Mister Cruise (how could it not?). This sucks -- I was hoping for a good wrap-up to the MI series, now I bet we get Renny Harlin.

No way Cruise can rip Stone away from Alexander, and get him to sign in less than 30 days -- but you know what, with those 310% hypno-eyes, maybe he can.


Reply
post #2 of 47
7/19/04 at 12:04am
That is the creepiest face I have ever seen. If he wasn't an A-list celebrity, I'd expect to see someone with that sort of expression saying "Heeey little kid, want some candy?" somewhere.
Reply
post #3 of 47
7/19/04 at 12:08am
That photo's fucking hilarious.

Maybe he's just going a bit Pat Bateman - the eyes are vibrant but hes just. not. there.

I personally think he's just a garden variety pampered uber-rich whacko scientologist persoanlly.

But an interesting theory none the less.
Reply
post #4 of 47
7/19/04 at 1:02am
You know, I hated Tom Cruise too, until I watched The Making Of documentary for M:I2. He seems to have finally grown up, grown into his face. He's earned my respect, he puts everything into his films, and seems like a nice guy as well. Carnahan wants out of M:I3? His loss.
Reply
post #5 of 47
7/19/04 at 1:18am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Van Jones
You know, I hated Tom Cruise too, until I watched The Making Of documentary for M:I2. He seems to have finally grown up, grown into his face. He's earned my respect, he puts everything into his films, and seems like a nice guy as well. Carnahan wants out of M:I3? His loss.
Because MI:2 did wonders for John Woo.

Hey - Im a Cruise fan myself I dont mind admitting, but Carnahan would be leaving for a reason and after the last installment, its hardly like the franchise is infallable.
Reply
post #6 of 47
7/19/04 at 1:56am
Actually, I'm a big fan of M:I2, and since the film made an absolute boatload of money, easily turning a huge profit, it's difficult to conclude that the franchise is in trouble. Woo used the success of that film to gain even more Hollywood power, in order to renounce action films and make Windtalkers...

Another good M:I film would've put Carnahan into the spotlight (how many people saw Narc, really? my theatre had five other people in it).

I hope his 'creative difference' was at least a good one, cause if he walked away from a huge blockbuster because he didn't like the catering, then he's an idiot.
Reply
post #7 of 47
7/19/04 at 2:02am
What if its cause he thought the script was a piece of shit and that any and all creative decisions would have to be passed by The Cruise beforehand.

Still an idiot then?

Oh - and just cause a films popuklar doesnt make it good cinema Van - IMO MI:2 was a bland piece of shit - others may have dug it, but all I saw was Woo almost becomingh a caricature of himself and a plot I could not give a shit about.


But hey, thats me.
Reply
post #8 of 47
7/19/04 at 3:06am
Yeah, that's you. 'Paycheck' is Woo becoming a bland caricature of himself. M:I2 is Woo goodness. Your 'franchise isn't infallible' crack seemed like a reference to the health of the franchise, but I guess that's just me.

If Carnahan thought the script sucked and hated that everything had to go through Cruise, then why the hell did he sign up in the first place, and more to the point: why the hell did he pick now, so close to filming, to quit? I suspect there's more to it than that.
Reply
post #9 of 47
7/19/04 at 3:13am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Van Jones
Yeah, that's you. 'Paycheck' is Woo becoming a bland caricature of himself. M:I2 is Woo goodness. Your 'franchise isn't infallible' crack seemed like a reference to the health of the franchise, but I guess that's just me.

If Carnahan thought the script sucked and hated that everything had to go through Cruise, then why the hell did he sign up in the first place, and more to the point: why the hell did he pick now, so close to filming, to quit? I suspect there's more to it than that.
I suspect you may be completely correct.

As a consequence - speculating on his reasoning is probably a wasted effort.

Dont get me wrong Van.

I adore Woo

I loved the first MI.

The second one left me utterly cold.

It had Woo, Cruise and was entirely set in my own country - and it left me utterly cold.

But yeah - thats just one guys opinion
Reply
post #10 of 47
7/19/04 at 3:48am
Well, I for one am bummed at the fact that Carnahan left. Like you, RD, I liked the first M:I but wasn't wild about the second one save for a couple of cool action moments. The fact is that the M:I franchise has always had the potential to be something more than say the recent Bond outings. Carnahan (Man, did I love the fuck out of Narc) could really have done something with this and it would've hopefully brought him the good graces to get the kind of projects HE wants onto the big screen. For me though, this is unfortunate. But knowing the kind of power The Big T.C. has in Hollywood, I wouldn't be at all surprised if this film gets a high profile director on board... or Renny Harlin... God, punch me.

On a more important Tom Cruise note, what's the word on War of the Worlds???
Reply
post #11 of 47
7/19/04 at 4:33am
I hear McG is looking for work.
Reply
post #12 of 47
7/19/04 at 5:29am
i think its pretty unfair considering how much tom cruise did for carnahan's career by giving so much support to narc.
Reply
post #13 of 47
7/19/04 at 6:14am
Very interesting take on Cruise there Cereal. I see that at times. I also see a guy who seems to be getting more and more independent maybe thats a good thing or a bad one who knows.

I'm with Rain Dog every step of the way here. M:I 2 sucked donkey testicles. The first film that sobered me up on John Woo and ended his entertaining streak with me. Cruise was like Superman on a bike in that flick killing fools with HK sub machineguns while riding a ducati using a handgun. Give me a break. Carnahan is talented and RD just like me thinks the man probably pulled out because Cruise wanted more slo-mo Superman junk. I'll go to my grave wishing M:I 2 was even half as good as the original and that Woo got a better script and grew some balls and told Cruise no. Its a shitty awful film with a pathetic villain (Dougray Scott) who thankfully never touched Wolverine.

Oh and Spielberg and Cruise want to start War of the Worlds ASAP.
Reply
post #14 of 47
7/19/04 at 6:17am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny Daywalker
Oh and Spielberg and Cruise want to start War of the Worlds ASAP.
Hopefully.

This has my interest peaked.
Reply
post #15 of 47
7/19/04 at 9:38am
Hell, they should try to get Brian De Palma back. He did a terrific job on the first one, and it's not like his last several movies have set the box office on fire.
Reply
post #16 of 47
7/19/04 at 9:51am
Maybe Fincher is back in the picture. They courted him orignally for the picture and I don't think he's doing anything now.

I think Fincher would do a great job.

I loved the first, the second was blah...
Reply
post #17 of 47
7/19/04 at 12:49pm
How about Quentin Tarantino?

Before you roll your eyes, think how fucking badass MI3 could be in his hands. The man is a God when it comes to action sequences and scoring a movie. I think he could give MI3 a fresh new feel and put that John Woo shitfest to bed.
Reply
post #18 of 47
7/19/04 at 1:19pm
An unrelated, yet amusing story:
Quote:
Mission Improbable
Monday, July 19, 2004

A would-be Tom Cruise lowered himself by rope into an art gallery — only to find he couldn't get out.

As in the 1996 movie "Mission Impossible," an unnamed man removed a skylight and lowered himself down a rope into Saper Galleries (search) in East Lansing, Mich., early in the morning of July 11.

"He shimmied down like Spider-Man," East Lansing police Sgt. Carl Nowak told the State News, the Michigan State University newspaper.

But unlike either Cruise's Ethan Hunt character or the webcrawler's alter ego Peter Parker, the dangling doofus had no escape plan — in fact, no plan at all.

"The moment he entered the skylight, he was picked up by two video cameras, two passive infrared detectors and one motion detector," gallery owner Roy Saper said.

The video cameras clearly showed the man, said to be in his early 20s, trying in vain to climb back up the rope and out of the gallery. No dice.

So he threw in the towel — and used the gallery's phone to call 911.

Even before the police responded, Saper walked in to confront the man, who he doesn't think was a burglar.

"He's not an art connoisseur," Saper told the newspaper, "and he could have waited until we opened at 1 p.m."

Cops soon showed up and arrested the man, who will probably be charged with breaking and entering.

"There are professional thieves, but this guy was not only not a professional, he wasn't even an apprentice," said Saper. "He was a total loser."
My guess is that Tom Cruise would find this simply hilarious.
Reply
post #19 of 47
7/19/04 at 2:34pm
Thread Starter 
I'm sure he'd recommend the petty crook try Narconon, Study Tech, or any other of L Ron's fine life-enhancing programs.
Reply
post #20 of 47
7/19/04 at 6:51pm
Why do people get off on the first M:I film so much? I mean, it has it's moments (barely), but it's so freaking juvenile. Helicopter into the chunnel, breaking into the CIA, stealing the thing you're not meant to steal to sell to the bad guys in order to catch them, Jim Phelps shooting himself - and then that turns out to be the big surprise (duh), taking four hours to copy a file onto a diskette (with the helpful 42point font), the super-graphical internet chatrooms, and lets not forget the death of the entire team in the first ten minutes. I don't get where DePalma got to piss over the whole IMF dynamic, but Woo comes in and makes an exciting and passionate spy flick and everyone moans. What is *wrong* with you people?!
Reply
post #21 of 47
7/19/04 at 7:09pm
Van Jones wrote:
Quote:
Why do people get off on the first M:I film so much?
Because the first movie actually felt like the source material, whereas the sequel seemed like an excercise in ego. This was both on the part of John Woo and Tom Cruise. I mean the cinematography is stunning but it just doesn't fit the feel of the franchise. Way too sappy and melodramatic! And while the stunts were unbelievable enough in MI1 they are campy and lame in MI2. I mean, enough of guys firing machine guns on motorcycles already!!

It's kind of hard to put into words exactly but MI1 "felt" like a Mission Impossible movie to me and MI2 felt like Japanimation to me.
Reply
post #22 of 47
7/19/04 at 7:31pm
Yeah, I thought MI1 was a Mission Impossible movie, and MI2 tried to be a James Bond movie.
Reply
post #23 of 47
7/19/04 at 7:40pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eye_H8_U
Because the first movie actually felt like the source material, whereas the sequel seemed like an excercise in ego. This was both on the part of John Woo and Tom Cruise.
But, the first film broke all the rules too! Remember the whole team getting killed? Jim Phelps, being turned into a bad guy? Hunt stealing the *actual* noc list just in order to catch whatsherface?

I agree the sequel was a big melodramatic ego-excercise, but what's actually wrong with that? How can someone get tired of people shooting machine guns on motorcycles? And I've got to disagree with the stunts in M:I - that chunnel helicopter thing is pathetic, as if from the Bay school of physics and the McG school of believability. At least you could believe seeing Cruise and Scott shoot at each other on motorcycles.
Reply
post #24 of 47
7/19/04 at 10:27pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Van Jones
At least you could believe seeing Cruise and Scott shoot at each other on motorcycles.
Wrong. I didn't believe it and a Beretta will lose to a german HK submachinegun everytime. The film is junk ok so you like action junk no problem. I enjoy a few 80's cheesefests myself but don't act like M:I2 was quality it certainly was not.
Reply
post #25 of 47
7/19/04 at 11:51pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny Daywalker
Wrong. I didn't believe it and a Beretta will lose to a german HK submachinegun everytime.
They both shoot bullets, don't they? I mean, if so, then it's really down to the shooter - Superspy Cruise or the Villanous Scott. This film is not 'junk action'. Ecks vs Sever is junk action. M:I2 is Operatic Action, ie: action so stylised it could be scored to Beethoven. Obviously it's not for everyone, but it certainly is not a 'cheesefest', under my understanding of the term anyway.
Reply
post #26 of 47
7/20/04 at 12:25am
Then Van - I have to say, personally, I completely disagree with your understanding of the term cheesefest.

MI2 was a shallow vacuous, narcissitic ego trip on behalf of its star and a paint-by-numbers caricature of its directors past canon.

You may have enjoyed it and thats cool.

But for me, it was Ecks vs Sever with a bigger budget.
Reply
post #27 of 47
7/20/04 at 12:47am
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Rain Dog
MI2 was a shallow vacuous, narcissitic ego trip on behalf of its star and a paint-by-numbers caricature of its directors past canon.
Shallow? Vacuous? Compared to what, exactly? Shawshank Redemption? This film is just as 'shallow', (or just as deep), as the first film, and (apparently, from everyones reaction) equally as pandering to the audience. Woo presented a stylish action spy film, while DePalma served up a lukewarm noir-lite that skewered what the TV show was supposed to be about. Having set the bar, Woo then comes in and ups the ante, and he's the one who gets attacked! DePalma's film is not Mission: Impossible!!! It's (also) a vanity project for Tom Cruise, a ripoff of a cool old tv show, with a nonsensical plot. As for caricature, compare Woos work here with his 'efforts' in Paycheck and tell me with a straight face that M:I2 is the caricature.
Reply
post #28 of 47
7/20/04 at 12:59am
MI2 is a caricature.

Just because he;s continued to ape hios past work in subsequent films does not negate that fact in my mind.

Look - youre welcome to like MI2 - I personally thought it sucked big sweaty donkeys balls - and Im a longtime fan of Cruise and Woo.

Thats just me.

Not even it being set in my own country saved it for me.
Reply
post #29 of 47
7/20/04 at 1:04am
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Rain Dog
But for me, it was Ecks vs Sever with a bigger budget.
You'll burn in hell for that comment. When Woo is on, there's no one on earth who can match him for fantastical action sequences. And he was on for at least 10 minutes of MI2 because it had the greatest, most spectacular motorcycle chase in the history of cinema. Kaos on the other hand, showed in Ecks vs Sever that he had no fucking clue how to put together an action scene (and he had $70 million bucks - That's hardly low budget on a film where your biggest star is Banderas). His film had what must be the slowest motorcycle chase in the history of cinema. They should've got off and ran. Ecks vs Sever is literally the film I think of first when it comes to wasted opportunity. You could tell that the staging was there. The stunts and what not were set up well. But they simply couldn't shoot and edit and score it in a way that made it work. As an action geek, I almost cry about how "close" that film was to being a cool action flick.

But anyway, back on topic, I liked MI2. It was gorgeous and had one amazing action scene. It could've been better paced, but that's not a deal breaker. The movie was different from MI1, but that's the point: Cruise wanted a different feel & auteur for each MI movie. If you think about it, that makes the series kinda cool, especially for us film geeks. They're not chained to maintaining the same feel like in Bond or Bourne. It's like a potential showcase for the director in the action genre.

I saw them mentioning Tsui Hark in the AICN talkbacks. I'd like to see that. Tsui needs the work and if his last few films are any indication, then he has developed the ability to shoot an unremarkable script and somehow make a totally fucked up, nonsensical, but highly interesting version of it. I'd like to see Cruise & Wagner find out that they got the MI version of Knock Off. "Surprise, motherf**kers!"
Reply
post #30 of 47
7/20/04 at 10:39pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by reverse_viagra
I saw them mentioning Tsui Hark in the AICN talkbacks. I'd like to see that. Tsui needs the work and if his last few films are any indication, then he has developed the ability to shoot an unremarkable script and somehow make a totally fucked up, nonsensical, but highly interesting version of it. I'd like to see Cruise & Wagner find out that they got the MI version of Knock Off. "Surprise, motherf**kers!"
M:I2 is a shitty waste of a film. I won't budge from that. Tsui Hark would be a good choice if Cruise muscles the production like he did on M:I2. Don't forget Van Damme tampered with both of Hark's films and Tsui remained pissed long after. I don't see John Woo returning to what was a very successful sequel financially either. Speaks volumes doesn't it?
Reply
post #31 of 47
7/21/04 at 2:04am
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Rain Dog
Because MI:2 did wonders for John Woo.

Hey - Im a Cruise fan myself I dont mind admitting, but Carnahan would be leaving for a reason and after the last installment, its hardly like the franchise is infallable.
John Woo did "wonders" for himself. Well I guess the script helped.

You can't deny that the first one was awesome. The second one was a damn nightmare.
Reply
post #32 of 47
7/21/04 at 2:07am
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Rain Dog
But for me, it was Ecks vs Sever with a bigger budget.
You sir, should be a critic. I would read your reviews.
Reply
post #33 of 47
7/21/04 at 6:07pm
I liked MI:2 until 5' 7" Tom Cruise put on a mask of 6' 5" Dougrey Scott and no one seemed to notice the difference. That and that flip kick Tom did that would be impossible even in the Matrix.
Reply
post #34 of 47
7/21/04 at 6:48pm
This article was posted on AICN today:

Quote:
Is JJ Abrams Directing M:I3?!
Hi, everyone. "Moriarty" here with some Rumblings From The Lab...
The good folks over at Cinescape reported today that JJ Abrams is set to take over for Joe Carnahan as director of the upcoming MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE 3, which Frank Darabont has been scripting for the last several months.
That’s certainly a distinct possibility. We’d heard that Tom Cruise had recently spent some time on the ALIAS set, talking things over with Abrams, and that Abrams “really wants to do it,” but as late as yesterday afternoon, Paramount refused to confirm Abrams as even being one of the directors in the running.
If he does take over the third film in the franchise, it’s a strong choice. I may not have liked Abrams’ script for SUPERMAN, but I’m a huge admirer of ALIAS, and there’s no question that the work he’s done on that show (particularly in that amazing Super Bowl episode where he turned the entire premise of the program inside out) would be in tune with the tone needed to make a great MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE film.
The only problem I can see is the logistics of it. Abrams has his new series LOST about to premiere on ABC, a Greg Grunberg bounty hunter pilot that's about to shoot, and he’s said several times (including in a recent interview that Herc linked to) that he wants to really focus his attention on getting ALIAS back on track after a third season that disappointed some fans. I haven’t seen it yet (hurry up with the damn DVDs!!), but I’m looking forward to it.
Whoever Paramount chooses is going to have to move quickly, as production is set to start in a few months in Berlin. We’ll keep you posted.
http://www.aintitcool.com/display.cgi?id=17997

Never seen the show- what does everyone here think of it?
Reply
post #35 of 47
7/22/04 at 8:48pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Van Jones
Why do people get off on the first M:I film so much? I mean, it has it's moments (barely), but it's so freaking juvenile. Helicopter into the chunnel, breaking into the CIA, stealing the thing you're not meant to steal to sell to the bad guys in order to catch them, Jim Phelps shooting himself - and then that turns out to be the big surprise (duh), taking four hours to copy a file onto a diskette (with the helpful 42point font), the super-graphical internet chatrooms, and lets not forget the death of the entire team in the first ten minutes. I don't get where DePalma got to piss over the whole IMF dynamic, but Woo comes in and makes an exciting and passionate spy flick and everyone moans. What is *wrong* with you people?!
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!
Reply
post #36 of 47
7/22/04 at 8:58pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Van Jones
Shallow? Vacuous? Compared to what, exactly? Shawshank Redemption? This film is just as 'shallow', (or just as deep), as the first film, and (apparently, from everyones reaction) equally as pandering to the audience. Woo presented a stylish action spy film, while DePalma served up a lukewarm noir-lite that skewered what the TV show was supposed to be about. Having set the bar, Woo then comes in and ups the ante, and he's the one who gets attacked! DePalma's film is not Mission: Impossible!!! It's (also) a vanity project for Tom Cruise, a ripoff of a cool old tv show, with a nonsensical plot. As for caricature, compare Woos work here with his 'efforts' in Paycheck and tell me with a straight face that M:I2 is the caricature.
Brian DePalma is not a friend to Cruise after Tom flashed his 100 Watt smile and fucked him up the ass in post. (I still dig the film).

John Woo checked his fucking career at the door the moment he set foot in this country, Face/Off is as good as it gets here, and that ain't saying much.
(M:I 2 is trash all around).

Fuck being grateful to Cruise, Carnahan probably realized that he couldn't tolerate Cruise's shit, and bailed, good for him (if not his career, time will tell).

All this and I still like Cruise, that goddamn smile can go a long way!
Reply
post #37 of 47
7/23/04 at 3:49pm
Okay it's official--

Posted on AICN today:

Quote:
Hey folks, Harry here with the line on the new director that has been chosen to helm MISSION IMPOSSIBLE 3 after Carnahan bid the project adieu. Looks like Brett Ratner will be dishing out the missions this time, and only time will tell if the film will quickly self-destruct as a result.
Actually, I think Ratner will do a fine job with it. I just hope to god, that they bring back the concept that there is actually an IMF "TEAM" instead of it basically just being a one man show. This isn't fucking James Bond, it's MISSION IMPOSSIBLE... and I want Leonard Nimoy to be brought in to be an old IMF-er that helps them pull a swami scam. Having it be a series of grifts that undue the criminals by deception, as much as by action. That's what made that series so fucking cool. That, and of course the theme!
http://www.aintitcool.com/display.cgi?id=18019

This guy is the director of the Rush Hour movies, Money Talks, and Red Dragon.

I wonder if Chris Tucker and Jackie Chan will be brought in as MI "team" members this time! It boggles the mind!
Reply
post #38 of 47
7/23/04 at 7:16pm
Save your Chan hate or i'll pimpslap you.

Heh Ratner I think this film is gonna suck now. I like Scarlett and Carrie though we'll see what happens.
Reply
post #39 of 47
7/23/04 at 7:24pm
Good Lord...
Reply
post #40 of 47
7/23/04 at 7:30pm
Johnny Daywalker wrote:
Quote:
Save your Chan hate or i'll pimpslap you
You must have me confused with one of your boyfriends.

Never said I hated Chan don't know how you came to that conclusion.
Reply
post #41 of 47
7/23/04 at 11:01pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eye_H8_U
Johnny Daywalker wrote: Never said I hated Chan don't know how you came to that conclusion.
Ah very good then.
Reply
post #42 of 47
7/23/04 at 11:31pm
Oh no not Ratner!
Reply
post #43 of 47
5/31/05 at 9:16am
Thread Starter 
Bumped this thread, because SADLY, it seems I was right about Cruise a year ago when i started it (see last weeks OPRAH, ACCESS HOLLYWOOD, KATIE HOLMES adventures...)

http://www.nationalwatercooler.com/tomono.mov

-- but I'm really damn curious if this bit on the Huffington Post is true (yes, god help me, I looked at the Huffington Report) -- and if true, has anything to do with his spectacular behavior of late:

"The Huffington Post has learned that Paramount is considering pulling the plug on “Mission: Impossible III,” the Tom Cruise sequel that is set to start production later this year. On the surface, things seem to be moving forward with the film, with production crews scouting locations in China, and the Hollywood trades filled with casting announcements and rumors (was Michelle Monaghan in, was Lindsay Lohan out, was new Cruise love interest Katie Holmes being considered?). But behind the scenes, the studio appears ready to cancel the mega-pricey film."
Reply
post #44 of 47
5/31/05 at 11:18am
That clip was terrifying. It was really hard to finish watching it.
Reply
post #45 of 47
5/31/05 at 3:56pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cereal Offender
That was . . . beautiful.

I have written some HaiCruise:

i met ol' tom boy,
one day, eating an apple . . .
satan's sweetest fruit.

* * *

of all those wrong for
tom: nicole, penelope--
i am the least wrong.

* * *

in illinois, joel,
there's a university.
so screw princeton, right?

* * *

we're like two young girls,
tom. and like two young girls, tom,
we have enough time.

* * *

freshly shaven chest--
my tom. my god, my tom. i
could be that razor.

* * *

i misremembered
you with elf's ears in legend.
two ears. no points. love.

* * *

scientology,
with its dianetic wiles,
robbed god of his tom.

* * *

tommy boy: the pipes,
the pipes are calling. but all
i hear is my heart.

* * *

i'd end a life to
please you. oh, please, mr. cruise,
answer my fan mail.

* * *

maphother IV is
not so bad. tell us, though, tom:
will there be sequels?

* * *

brace yourself, tomboy.
right those pearlies, if you must . . .
but let us see them.

* * *

battlefield: earth? that's
not Ron--and you know it, tom.
you'll have none of that.

* * *

by watanabe's
goatee, tom, ye be worthy.
now wear that red suit.

* * *

the iceman cometh,
but his gun is not tops. he's
no maverick. no sir.

* * *

take a few months' break
for the hair to fill in, tom.
no stunt beard for you.

* * *

who's on first, raymond?
your lamborghini-dealing
brother is. that's who.

* * *

seger. socks. slide. briefs
or boxers? briefs. seen all too
briefly. shirt's . . . too . . . long.

* * *

"i too can fail," said
tom. doughray? me? so far and
away. ride for plots.

* * *

katie! oh, katie!
katie, do! katie's home. katie
did? bearing what gift?


* * *
* * *

Some are recent. Others are not. I also have some Keanuku (quite a few less of those, but less is always more in SeventeenSyllableLand) and twelve "reviewku" of Catch Me if You Can--if anyone is interested.
Reply
post #46 of 47
5/31/05 at 4:42pm
Just when I thought the hospital hallway scene in THE EXORCIST III was the scariest thing I had ever seen...
Reply
post #47 of 47
6/1/05 at 3:32pm
I suppose no one wants to see any of my Keanuku.

I could always post them in the Matrix thread.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: The Franchises
CHUD.com Community › Forums › SPECIFIC FILMS › The Franchises › Mission Impossible: Cruise Like Thunder