> New York Post - NEW WOE FOR CRUISE'S NAZI FLICK

FYI...

> Tom Cruise Fails Again (film flops) - and yet another postponement of VALKYRIE 'Nazi' film until early 2009 (3rd time it's been re-scheduled)

(expanded in link above) - also see NYPost article

> Wikipedia 'Valkyrie' Film INFO (more details)

SYNOPSIS - During World War II, the German Colonel Claus von Stauffenberg (Cruise) is severely wounded in Africa and returns home to Nazi Germany. Stauffenberg helps conceive Operation Valkyrie, a plan approved by Adolf Hitler which, in order to manage turmoil within Germany, would implement a shadow government in the event of the Nazi Führer's death. The Colonel eventually joins the German Resistance and becomes part of the July 20 Plot, a conspiracy to assassinate Hitler and execute Valkyrie in order to take control of the country and make peace with the Allies. Stauffenberg finds himself taking on not only the responsibility of leading the coup, but also the task to assassinate Hitler himself.

> View VALKYRIE Film Trailer (2:31)











-JIMI (the Voodoo Child)

[Post edited by Love Hendrix! on Apr 9, 2008]

That really is too bad because I really want to see this.

Okay, honestly, dozens of movies get reshuffled and rejiggered on a yearly basis. The new Star Trek movie is on its second official release date. Punisher 2 got pushed from September to December. Seriously, it doesn't matter. I'll still see this when it comes out.

Jason, release date never changed

Yeah Jason, come next February maybe people will be interested in it (as long as Cruise behaves till then ), as the public's mood/awareness will be shook up somewhat - with a new President, the DTV changeover (from analog) that month, etc. Well, maybe some interest?

The film's subject (and adaptation from true events) is intriguing, and I'm not bothered by the lack of native German-language (replaced with English) among the actors. We've heard enough German with Das Boot, Downfall, etc. (and seriously, had Cruise decided to speak in German, his attempt/accent would probably get severely mocked and criticized, and also be an audience distraction from the storyline, IMO).

Some reader comments (from the main site I linked in above post) -

"Cruise's people are saying the rescheduling to February is to take advantage of President's Day weekend. Everyone who knows February is one of Hollywood's slowest box-office months is laughing at that lame attempt at saving face."

"Von Stauffenberg, Cruise's character, was not a Nazi...which was why he tried to kill Hitler. He was a member of the Prussian aristocracy who hated Hitler."

"Because Scientology fixes all the problems in your life... except having a career in free-fall and being considered a massive joke. That, and having a huge crazy grin that creeps people out. Maybe the only reason he was a star was because the people in charge got moderately good roles for him. On his own, his movie choices SUCK."

"Maybe the new movie is bombing because he doesn't know how to speak with a german accent! The trailer I saw was not at all believable."

"When is hollywood going to learn that most people don't want to see anti-american movies like LFL (Lions For Lambs). The hate has gotten so bad they don't even care that their losing money at the box office."







-JIMI (the Voodoo Child)

[Post edited by Love Hendrix! on Apr 10, 2008]

Tom Cruise with Paula Wagner (his long-time Producer partner) - Cruise/Wagner Productions

[Post edited by Love Hendrix! on Apr 10, 2008]

Oh, for the love of Pete! This is so damn stupid! Look, I'm not a big fan of Cruise's personal antics but the bottom line is I do enjoy a lot of his work. The only reason he gets so much flack is he has a bigger than life persona in the public light. If most of us knew the personal crap behind other, less popular, less important, actors we may put them under the same microscope as Cruise.

So what, he's a Scientologist nut, so is Travolta, Alley and probably a whole slew of other actors. I don't go to movies based on what an actor's stance on personal views on life or society are, I go because I expect them to do their job of ACTING! Yeah, let's all boycott a film or actor because they don't fit into what the masses consider right from wrong! That is such an ignorant, cop-out way to view life! It's just like Gibson getting drunk and expressing himself in way we know to be wrong, but yet we've all done stupid shit when we've been drunk! However, where in the hell does it say it's a LAW that actors are supposed to set examples for all the rest of us?!

People in the grand scheme of life ARE NOT PERFECT! Yet anyone in the limelight screws up and we're ready to stone them to death but we fail to take blame for anything the average Joe does wrong, or anything we do wrong ourselves.

I'm so sick of the brainwash media cramming it down our throats when stars F**k up! I'm not perfect, either! I've screwed up lots of times in life, but I realize my faults, yet I also know I'm not here to set examples and nor should movie stars! I expect actors to do their job in acting and I could care less what stance they take in morale and neither should anyone else.

People need to remember actors are humans, too. They screw up, make personal messes for themselves just like all of us do in life. For Christ's sake, stop judging if you're unwilling to look at your own faults! Learn to forgive and you will learn to empower all of us through positive reinforcement. Stop the hate and remember we ALL make mistakes, we ALL have views that don't agree with others and it is by no means right for any of us to judge others on their shortcomings when we are flawed ourselves! What's sick is all the damn media coverage when actors f**k up -- as though we can all sit there and act like we're all better than them when in fact we've all had moments that others would look down on us for.

Another thing that chaps my hyde is the “double standard” that many people take on entertainers, or sports figures. An actor is exposed for having a drug addiction and we all go into shock and awe and are quick to pass judgment. A sports figure is exposed for steroid use and we’re all ready to set rules on them as if they were murderers. Yet, a rock star is exposed for a pot or cocaine addiction and we just figure it’s expected and comes with the territory! Yeah, the ol’ it’s ok for one group of people to have flaws but not ok for others!

So what Mel, Tom, Brittney, Lindsay have all been under the microscope for their failures in morale. However, we all seem to think it's our business to know when it is anything but! These people are flawed humans like all the rest of us and we're all hypocrites to judge otherwise! In my opinion, the media makes me sick to think is perfectly OK to smear someone's mistakes for the world to see. Stars are not here to set examples for the rest of us -- they are actors and I expect them to do their jobs as actors and I could care less what their damn moral views are on society, and neither should anyone else!

..!..

"Lighten up Francis!"

[Post edited by Tim Raynor on Apr 10, 2008]

Holy rant Batman.
I agree with you Tim.

I noticed the following posted a few days ago on IMDB.com news...



Hollywood actor Tom Cruise has launched a new website to celebrate the 25th anniversary of his first starring role in a movie - as a "thank you" to his fans for supporting him throughout his career. Cruise landed his first major part in 1983's RISKY BUSINESS, a role that catapulted him to Hollywood superstardom. He has gone on to appear in over 30 major motion pictures and has become one of the biggest stars in the world. And the 45-year-old has now launched TomCruise.com, writing a personal message to his supporters on the homepage. The note reads, "In celebration of this occasion, and my 27 years of making movies, I created this site as a thank you, to you, for sharing the journey with me and to invite you to continue to explore what the future will bring... My hope with this site is to bring you in and share with you the fun I experience every day during the filmmaking process, from working on the script, to the making of the film, through to what we finally see when we settle into our seats and the lights go down."

Check-out the montage of films clips (about 10 minutes) that load upon visiting the site - Jimi

______________
-JIMI McLovin (the Voodoo Child)

How in the holy hell was Lions for Lambs an "anti-American" movie?

No wait, I'm afraid someone who's dumb enough to think that will actually offer an answer. Which, of course, will be a dumb answer.

It's a godawful bad movie, but anti-American? WTF?

[Post edited by csjlong on May 9, 2008]

Hi Chris... now don't shoot the messenger. I'm just providing some FYI info on the posts above (and reader comments), whether I personally agree or not. And hey, in reviewing this thread I noticed that even Tim gave us a rare 'spew salad' long post.

As for the film, I haven't seen it myself - but did notice the bad reviews, and that some have labled it 'propaganda', and other terms, since the story's scenario is another Hollywood production critical of the US. I'll end up renting it one day myself, just to see about the fuss.

Whether a film is labled by some as an "anti-American" movie or not, occasionally a film succeeds that has a critical message against the American government's policies, and is powerfully written and acted, like the case with Costa-Gavraz/Thomas Hauser's classic MISSING - excellent, realistic, and sympathetic drama, also featuring a fantastic musical score by Vangelis.



_____________
-JIMI McLovin (the Voodoo Child)

[Post edited by Love Hendrix! on May 11, 2008]

Quote:
even Tim gave us a rare 'spew salad' long post

Oh, I agree Jimi, and it's not like me to carry on that way, but I just get so sick of people sucking into the media's bandwagon, smear campaign any time an entertainer does something in disrespect to the national morale of the world. Plain and simple, nobody is perfect and, IMO, it shouldn't give the media or others the right to go on a witch hunt.

I just think it's so silly when people say "I'll never see that guys movies again because (place whatever bad morale f-up here)"! I mean, for the love of Pete, the Beatles did a lot of shit in their career that didn't sit well with many people's morale structure, but their music changed music as we know it today, and that's all that should matter! And yeah Jimi, you can say I'm getting emotional and I'll admit it is something that gets me all fired up. Joking around and ribbing each other is one thing, like you and I do (I hope you realize most of the time I'm laughing my ass off with all the crap we dish out to each other), however, to seriously smear someone's life choices and mistakes just irks me to no end! Again, nobody is perfect!

"...occasionally a film that's anti-American is very powerfully written and acted, like the Costa-Gavraz/Thomas Hauser classic MISSING - excellent." --Love Hendrix!

Love,

Maybe it's the way you use the term "anti-American" that is confusing people. It actually means something close to "un-American," and I don't think that's what you mean to say. "Anti-American" is defined by the Random House Unabridged Dictionary as "opposed or hostile to the United States of America." Whereas "un-American is defined as "opposed to the characters, values, standards, goals, etc., of the U.S."

Certainly, it's not "anti-American" (or "un-American" ) to criticize U.S. government policies. Otherwise, people like myself who vehemently oppose Mr. Bush's Iraq war and tax breaks for the rich and endorsement of CIA torture techniques and the like are all "anti-American," and I don't think we are, and I don't think you mean to label us as such. We love America and are not "anti" or "against" it. We want to see it improved, and our criticsims are meant to be constructive.

Anyway, perhaps you could clarify your position on the meaning of "anti-American," and there would be less confusion.

John

[Post edited by John J. Puccio on May 9, 2008]

Good comments Tim... and I have not stopped watching Tom Cruise movies either (or Mel Gibson, etc). If we personally got offended at every 'report' (or an actor's actual audio/video embarassment clip) coming out of Hollywood about this star, or that director, etc, we'd miss out on a lot of films (if we decided to boycot the person). And when I post some criticism here on the Msd Bd, it doesn't mean I personally agree with it... often it's just to stir the pot, or for entertainment value, kinda. I guess.

___________
-JIMI Lovin (the Voodoo Child)

Good observation John. I re-read the post and it was confusing in that final paragraph, so I changed it just now, and hope it reflects what you are meaning. I've seen MISSING several times now, and it's a great movie! Yet obviously un-American in regards to criticism of the USA's CIA operations and the 'disappearance' (actually murdered) of a American citizen who was anti-war while residing in that country (with his wife's character, played by Sissy Spacek).

___________
-JIMI McLovin (the Voodoo Child)

"...obviously un-American in regards to criticism of the USA's CIA operations." --Love Hendrix!

Love,

Maybe we'll have to agree to disagree. I don't think it's "un-American" to disagree with or criticize the American government (in this case the CIA) any more than I am "anti-Love" or "un-Love" if I disagree with you.

John

I know plenty of conservatives had no trouble criticizing the Clinton administration and probably still considered themselves to be "pro-America." Being critical of the Bush administration and of the war in Iraq is also hardly anti-American.

I actually found "Lions for Lambs" a bit of a turn-off because it worked hard to be "patriotically-correct" with its anti-Iraq-war message. That and the terrible script and one-note performances.

You want anti-American, go watch "Mr. Freedom," the most hilariously anti-American film I've ever seen. There's no ambiguity about the term with "Mr. Freedom" either - it is anti-American in every fiber of its being.

Take 3... (oops)

Hey John, I was tired Friday night, and after reading again what I posted, I can agree with your last message above.

So, I re-wrote that paragraph again (posted the change today), and again here (below)... I think this wording won't imply that those who disagree, or are critical of a government's policies doesn't mean they are 'anti' or 'un' just because they oppose the government's (or administration's) position, as there will always be multiple sides/opinions on an issue.

Whether a film is labled by some as an "anti-American" movie or not, occasionally a film succeeds that has a critical message against the American government's policies, and is powerfully written and acted, like the case with Costa-Gavraz/Thomas Hauser's classic MISSING - excellent, realistic, and sympathetic drama, also featuring a fantastic musical score by Vangelis.

On a related note (politics), yes I support McCain - BUT have been very impressed (can't believe I'm now admitting this, but honestly it's not a put-on to 'tickle your ears') ... been very impressed with Hillary Clinton's campaign the last few months. She's improved her image/message to voters, had a fantastic and candid interview on The O'Reilly Factor (Fox News) where she often gave direct yes/no answers to questions (rare among politicians), and is clearly more experienced than Barack Obama for president (one of the toughest jobs - if the person in this office really cares about change).

Plus, she has the respect of Republican senators who have worked with her in Congress (as some in the GOP have mentioned in interviews etc), also her tax plan (concerning the rich) is quite reasonable, and can be argued is fair. And frankly, I've lost my first impressions of Barack Obama (from many months back), and think his "change" message is misleading, as he rarely ever mentions real, workable specifics beyond the emotional issues like ending the war, or the over-blame on 'big oil' for high gas prices (overlooking Democratic opposition to drilling in our outer belt regions, as well as opposing new refineries, etc)... so IF the Democrats win back the White House this November (and it does look that way based on their great success in the primaries, with increased voter registration and heavy turnout) - well, I'm saying I won't be 'scared' -or- extreme right wing (in considering Hillary as a 'communist', 'evil' etc)... and would definitely be respectful of her being our next President... so just wanted you to know this, as a fellow American who loves our country, and can admit that some of our governement's policies need improving, changing, and/or ended.

(and am glad I'm NOT a politician)

By the way, I personally feel (for both parties benefit, and for all Americans) that Ron Paul would have been the best candidate to become President. Everyone knows his strong convictions on ending the war (makes the Dems happy), as well as controlling government spending/taxes (makes Conservatives happy, and most anyone). And despite the battle he would face against Congressional members who oppose some of his views, I think he would have been successful in getting his positions realized, albeit with some compromises (which always happens in politics).

______________
-JIMI McLovin (the Voodoo Child)

[Post edited by Love Hendrix! on May 11, 2008]

Sounds reasonable, Love. Thanks for the reply. But I still don't think you'll get Eddie's vote.

John