• NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.

The Last Samurai reviews start to come in

I find it hard to imagine that a movie about the samurai rebellion of the late 1800's won't mention the Tokugawa Shogunate. What are they going to be rebelling against?

I know, it's Hollywood, so anything possible, but honestly...
 

log in or register to remove this ad

barsoomcore said:
When I read a review that says Zwick approaches the ability of Kurosawa, I kind of want to see it just to see if this is yet another critic who knows nothing about cinema throwing around names, or if it's true. I don't mind saying I'm skeptical.

Glory was pretty good, but it was no Seven Samurai.

You know I'm gonna sound like a philistine, but Seven Samurai didn't impress me all that much. I personally think Magnificent Seven was a better movie. Heck I think Fistfull of Dollars was better than Yojimbo.

Must be that Western Barbarian than I am. Damned gaijin.

buzzard
 

Joshua Dyal said:
I don't like Cruise, but I don't dislike him either. He's done some movies that I quite enjoyed (Minority Report for instance) and others that I did not.

Minority Report was a very good movie. It's sad that Cruise and the film didn't get more attention come awards time. But, there's the whole science-fiction/fantasy aren't serious films element to overcome. Good luck ROTK.

I saw a few more reviews trickle in for this film. The overall impression I'm getting is good, not great. Definitely not the Oscar nomination many are pushing it to be, but who can ever tell there. I feel bad for it in a way, everyone is comparing it to Dances with Wolves each time I glance at a review.

Of course this time of year, every review mentions the O word. I saw one up informally on a messageboard by someone who saw an advance screening of Cold Mountain. I believe the exact quote to express the viewer's dissatisfaction with the film was, "If this film gets nominated for an Oscar, it will be Miramax's biggest triumph yet."

Ouch.
 

Mercule said:
Kevin Costner _is_ a good reason to avoid seeing a movie.

Best joke I read in the past few weeks in Entertainment Weekly:

"This January, Kevin Costner will be honored by the Palm Spring International Film Festival for his contribution to film. This gives Costner just two months to make a contribution to film."

Tina Fey on Saturday Night Live.
 

Mercule said:
No, that would be Kevin Costner. Fortunately, he isn't cranking out as much drek as he used to, though.
Kevin Costner over-rated? I thought pretty much everybody agreed that his work was drek, at least ever since Waterworld. Even the critics typically sigh and roll their eyes about the latest Costner movie. Although his newest Western with Robert Duvall is getting good reviews.
 

Where did this "Tom Cruise playing Tom Cruise" stuff originate? Seriously, a lot of people who've brought up the movie repeat this idea like they came up with the snarky little comment. I think I've read or heard it at least half a dozen times in the past couple of weeks.

And in regards to that, Tom Cruise isn't doing anything differently than, say, Jack Nicholson, Clint Eastwood, Harrison Ford and lately, Al Pacino (HOO-HAH! HOO-HAH!) and Robert DeNiro.

A lot of actors end up playing themselves. So why does Cruise get burned in effigy for doing it? Sheesh! :rolleyes:
 

TiQuinn said:
Where did this "Tom Cruise playing Tom Cruise" stuff originate? Seriously, a lot of people who've brought up the movie repeat this idea like they came up with the snarky little comment. I think I've read or heard it at least half a dozen times in the past couple of weeks.

And in regards to that, Tom Cruise isn't doing anything differently than, say, Jack Nicholson, Clint Eastwood, Harrison Ford and lately, Al Pacino (HOO-HAH! HOO-HAH!) and Robert DeNiro.

A lot of actors end up playing themselves. So why does Cruise get burned in effigy for doing it? Sheesh! :rolleyes:

to seriously attempt to answer (without defending the unorriginal snarkiness of the comments) afaik, the other actors slowly moved into that sort of 'rut' after making a fair number of very good films. Cruise started out there. ;) The earliest Cruise films I have seen were all the same. They had the same basic plots, the same characters, the same endings. In the 80's it was worthwile to joke about tom cruise playing tom cruise.

HOWEVER, my feeling is that he may be breaking out of that. Nothing I have seen in the last few years makes me say "great, Days of Top Cocktail..." the way I would have before. However, since a lot of people have that cookie cutter time as the definitive Who Cruise Is idea, the simple mention of his name causes a pavlovian reaction towards boring, tired refried snarkyness.

As opposed to oppositional anti-snarkiness snarkiness. :cool:

kahuna burger
 


TiQuinn said:
A lot of actors end up playing themselves. So why does Cruise get burned in effigy for doing it? Sheesh! :rolleyes:

Because I am petty and jealous. Plus, he gave up Nicole Kidman for Penelope Cruz. If you're going to trade in, trade up at least.

But, his Lestat was amazing. Kirsten Dunst got robbed of an O nomination in that film.
 

Sirius_Black said:
Because I am petty and jealous. Plus, he gave up Nicole Kidman for Penelope Cruz. If you're going to trade in, trade up at least.

I thought he traded up, did you see Vanilla Sky? Cruz was really cute in that movie. I really don't find Kidman that attractive at all (and yes, I've seen Eyes Wide Shut). They all bow to Catherine Zeta-Jones in the Mask of Zorro though.
 
Last edited:

Into the Woods

Remove ads

Top