Valkyrie ... why, why why?

[ghouck]

Actually, those movies you mention were the same I was going to mention about his horrible acting, among others. (He was ok in Interview). Not to mention many others that he just seemed to suck the life out of. In "A Few Good Men" he looked like a little kid playing dress-up with his dad's old Navy uniforms, and his acting sucked there also, looked like he was perpetually trying to take a dump, and overacting on a Jim Carrey scale..

He gets alot of hate from me because at the end of the movie, all I really know is that Tom Cruise was in it.

[CheezeFlixz]

Cheeze, other than Cruise, did you have any other major problems with the film? 

Other than Cruise appearing to be the turd in the punch bowl it was awful, being a bit of a history buff and former military I tend to not be to forgiving of factual errors, incorrect uniforms, wrong protocol, etc. etc. I not a "rivet counter" (this is someone who will actually count rivets on equipment for accuracy.) however I don't like to much latitude being taken with a supposedly fact based movie. The movie had errors, but nothing that average Joe would notice. I'd really have to watch it again to nail down what was what.

Overall it's watchable, and worth seeing ... as for Cruise and your comments, true part of it is his personality and part of it is his acting or lack thereof. He might have been the Executive Producer of the film but that doesn't mean he has to be in it, as I said many others would have been a better choice for the role.

He just to, to, to Tom Cruise in it ... I don't see the character I see and hear Tom Cruise and that's his biggest fault as a actor he is the same damn person in every film, he has the depth of a parking lot puddle.

[Newt]

He might have been the Executive Producer of the film but that doesn't mean he has to be in it.

AH: but *would* the movie have been made, then?  I got the impression rather strongly from the TV spots I saw that it was made as a "Tom Cruise" vehicle.

He just to, to, to Tom Cruise in it ... I don't see the character I see and hear Tom Cruise and that's his biggest fault as a actor he is the same damn person in every film, he has the depth of a parking lot puddle.

Indeed: he is the same person in every film.  He is not the first actor to be a 'one trick pony', yet some others get away with it...is it just that those others choose more appropriate roles?

[CheezeFlixz]

He might have been the Executive Producer of the film but that doesn't mean he has to be in it.

AH: but *would* the movie have been made, then?  I got the impression rather strongly from the TV spots I saw that it was made as a "Tom Cruise" vehicle.

He just to, to, to Tom Cruise in it ... I don't see the character I see and hear Tom Cruise and that's his biggest fault as a actor he is the same damn person in every film, he has the depth of a parking lot puddle.

Indeed: he is the same person in every film.  He is not the first actor to be a 'one trick pony', yet some others get away with it...is it just that those others choose more appropriate roles?

Let's see Keanu Reeves? He hasn't changed his acting since "Bill & Ted" but he picks some pretty cool films to make. But then again neither has Pacino, Nicholson, Deniro, Eastwood and a few others but they all make cool films ... I think Cruise just picks roles he's really not suited for, like why does he pick so many military-ish roles when he's just not a convincing military-ish man? If he wants to play a convincing role, try playing "The Secret World of a Sears Underwear Model." on Lifetime TV? As I think he could really nail that role.   

[Jim H]

I just saw this.  I did note one or two historical changes, though I'm hardly an expert on the subject. 

I dunno, I thought Cruise was fine in it.  Well-paced film, with a good structure.  Nothing fantastic though, really.  It is not exactly an action filled film, and will play fine on the small screen, so I think it would make a good rental.

On a side note, while I thought Cruise was OK in the role, I feel he stuck out much worse in A Few Good Men than in Valkyrie. 

Indeed: he is the same person in every film.  He is not the first actor to be a 'one trick pony', yet some others get away with it...is it just that those others choose more appropriate roles?

I think a very high percentage of actors are like this - that is, they don't completely change themselves for a new role.  I think it is only really a problem when they're cast poorly.  Being able to convincingly portray a person similar to yourself, and performing in a way that lets the audience in while emoting correctly is still good acting, in my book. 

Let's see Keanu Reeves? He hasn't changed his acting since "Bill & Ted" but he picks some pretty cool films to make.

I thought his most entertaining acting job in years was as Constantine.  He's not much like the comic character, but he still was pretty entertaining playing a guy who is basically a giant prick.

[Psycho Circus]

Let's see Keanu Reeves? He hasn't changed his acting since "Bill & Ted" but he picks some pretty cool films to make. But then again neither has Pacino, Nicholson, Deniro, Eastwood and a few others but they all make cool films ...

Al Pacino!? The same in every film!? I won't stand for such an insult to the great man! Err, try watching Dog Day Afternoon, Scarface, Scent Of A Woman and Heat. 

[Susan]

The award for the same man in every film goes to....

::::drum Roll:::::



Kevin costner!


Take a bow kevin

[CheezeFlixz]

Let's see Keanu Reeves? He hasn't changed his acting since "Bill & Ted" but he picks some pretty cool films to make. But then again neither has Pacino, Nicholson, Deniro, Eastwood and a few others but they all make cool films ...

Al Pacino!? The same in every film!? I won't stand for such an insult to the great man! Err, try watching Dog Day Afternoon, Scarface, Scent Of A Woman and Heat. 

For the record I really like Pacino ...

But lets see ... in Dog Day Afternoon, Scarface, Scent Of A Woman and Heat what do these all have in common? He yells and cusses a lot in a very Pacino style.

[Allhallowsday]

IMHO, the surrender terms they would have sought (and probably gotten from the war-weary Allies) wouldn't have included a divided Germany, full exposure of what was going on in the camps, and a massive, multi-decade occupation (or else why bother killing Hitler?), hence, the Holocaust might conceivably have been scaled back a little, but wouldn't have ended. It wasn't in the interest of any of the Nazis to let millions of eye witnesses loose. What they were trying to avoid was the kind of un-conditional surrender that was forced on them by Hitler's clinging to his fantasies while the whole country was suffered total defeat (there's losing a war, and then there's having Russians build a giant wall through your capitol). Without the total defeat, occupation, etc, a lot of the existing power structure stays in place to deal with trying to mitigate the defeat by solving problems like "what are we going to do with all of this evidence that fortunately hasn't physically fallen into the hands of the Allies yet...?"

You're assuming the Nazis would have stayed in power.  That would not have been likely if an assassination attempt on HITLER had been successful. 

[indianasmith]

Well said, AH.  The purpose of VALKYRIE was not just to kill Hitler but to completely remove the Nazi Party from power, negotiate a peace deal with the Western Allies, and then try to save Germany from being crushed and destroyed by the Soviets.  That was why Beck and the others asked Gen. Rommel to be the Head of State once Hitler was dead - Rommel was no Nazi and was widely respected by the West's military commanders.

[Justy]

The trouble with Tom Cruise and movies is that those movies become Tom Cruise movies and not movies with Tom Cruise. He always seems to be hyped so much more than the movie. I don't think that he so bad of an actor, he just needs to tone down his billing. He did a great job in Tropic Thunder because he was in a supporting role. Valkyrie is just over the top. This  movie should have been cast with another actor.

[Jack]

He always seems to be hyped so much more than the movie.

Exactly, watching the trailer for Valkyrie, it seems like two-thirds of it is Tom Cruise's face. 

[Newt]

He always seems to be hyped so much more than the movie.

Exactly, watching the trailer for Valkyrie, it seems like two-thirds of it is Tom Cruise's face. 

Yup. Like a thumb in the eye every time too.

[BoyScoutKevin]

Too bad, I'd like to see a big budget WWII movie, but I'm completely uninterested in another Tom Cruise vehicle.  Like one of the reviews asked, "How many movies can they make around this one character?"

If anyone is interested in a big budget WWII movie, then they might try Spike Lee's "Miracle at St. Anna." Some critic rated it as one of the worst movies of 2008, but I enjoyed it. It looks at WWII from the experience of the black American soldier who fought in the war.

Another WWII movie, while not quite as big of budget, is Mark Herman's "The Boy in Striped Pyjamas." Again rated by one critic as one of the worst movies of 2008, but there again, a movie I enjoyed. This one is also a little different, because, instead of looking at the Nazi concentration camps from the perspective of those who were its inmates, it looks at them from the perspective of those who ran them, and the effect this had on them and their families.