NEWS: Spielberg Swindles Another Witless Sap

CULTURE: Spielberg Swindles Another Witless Sap

Steven Spieberg appropriated an astounding $200 million to direct an allegory to the "War on Terror".

The film unites a scientologist, a puppet, and the king of Rohan's niece against faceless, nameless foes proven to be non-existent since 1965.

Didn't Polar Express cost $200 million?

thats hollywood baby!

I prefer the radio show

pft, 200 million to create war of the worlds and they don't even bother to keep the original story or setting.

excessive amounts of money doesn't make a film good example "waterworld".

[Edited on Nov 30, 2004 by fiendish]

i actually enjoyed waterworld and i still do everytime i see it, there's a difference between a bad movie and a bad movie that's excellent entertainment

Heh, I'm the other guy who liked Waterworld.

I'm really glad I'm not alone on this one. ;>

Place bets on this being another 'Ishtar '(aka BOMB)? Anyone?

That's great. I hope Cruise uses his new loot to finance Battlefield Earth II: Electric Bugaloo.

But Jeff Goldblum has already starred in
a bad, overpriced remake of "War of the Worlds."

Well, the biggest problem with TOm cruise...He is always Tom cruise. He never becomes his part. It was TOM CRUISE in, "the last samuri." TOM CRUISE IN, "minority report." Interveiw with the vampire being the only movie I have seen Tom Cruise in were he wasnt TOM CRUISE.

But he was in Top Gun, one of the awesomest movies of my childhood. So he gets a pass on alot of a stuff (not scientology).

i guess i'm the fourth person to enjoy waterworld.

yeah, Tom Cruise should definitely not act in the War of the Worlds. sigh...I bet it's going to be all CGed out and look crappy like the new Star Wars movies.

Nothing can beat the original 'War of the Worlds.' And not just because it was my favorite movie as a kid. It's still awesome, with the flying wing, the A-bomb, and stock footage of the military. Plus three-eyed martians are the bomb.

P.S. anyone remember the crappy t.v.show? I think it was on Fox.

Someone should tell Steven that the movie of the decade has already been made.

I like Tom Cruise as an actor, I like Spielberg as a director. But alas, I guess they're too mainstream to be "cool."

-Billy Billy

See Magnolia, see Born on the Fourth of July.

-Billy Billy

I wouldn't take that bet. The idiot majority will flock to this thing. I think as a people, we've proved definitively that we're fascinated by bright, shiny things.

I like Waterworld. Has anyone seen Alexander? I think this has got to be one of the worst films ever. How does Oliver Stone manage to get anyone to give him money to make this crap.

just because i like me some massive scifi action with my dirty pretty things, houses of sand and fog, and station agents doesnt mean i'm part of an idiot majority. i like to be entertained, and spielberg and cruise have both proven themselves to be pretty damed good at it. didn't they do minority report together? i liked that movie, so sue me.

Make that five, and I thought I was the only one.

The movie is going to suck. I'm pretty convinced. I hope it doesn't, it would be awesome if it was the best movie ever made. I don't think that's a possibility.

I don't really care about the budgets of movies, but I wish they'd made it in the original setting. Maybe they're basing it on the radio play. That sounds like something Spielberg would do.

Bah, I trump you all, I even liked The Postman. And Tom Cruise isn't that bad, he brings some subtlety to roles, and while he doesn't have the ability to dissapear into them like, say, Russel Crowe or (recently and surprisingly) Jamie Foxx, getting a full emotional range onscreen isn't an easy thing to do. He may not have the versatility of Anthony Hopkins, but that doesn't mean that Tom Cruise is a bad actor. He's convincing and engaging.

Spielberg knows the secret to cutting trailers that packs people into theaters. This flick will be fine.