by Elsewhere 64 Replies latest jw friends
I used to like the guy, til he tried to prove he HADN'T had sex with nicole during a certain month so he wouldn't have to pay her more in divorce settlement because it meant they had been together 10 years. Because I mean, he was obviously so strapped for cash
Then it came out she was pregnant with his baby.. Utter, total complete B*****D!!! Hate him with a passion.
Poppy,.(wont be seeing the movie!)
Cruise blows anyway! I sent them a line!
so he wouldn't have to pay her more in divorce settlement because it meant they had been together 10 years. Because I mean, he was obviously so strapped for cash
Well to be fair what the hell does she need nickle one of his money for anyway? I mean come on!
Not a case of needing his money is it!!!
Its a case where he LIED in court to try and save his money, and smear his wifes reputation, she had to prove that the baby was his!!!!
But he would rather humiliate her than divide the assets up fairly. Because this wasn't a case of her having everything, just a fair division at the end of a long marraige.
Very Christian, methinks. NOT
Poppy x
maybe this tomkat thing is all a ploy to get a new leader, and what better seed than tom himself??:)
maybe this tomkat thing is all a ploy to get a new leader, and what better seed than tom himself??:)
Sounds like a new movie plot to me!
They pissed me off in the first movie. Jim Phelps has always been a good guy. He was never a bad guy, and never would be. It was one of the few movies I went to the theater to see. I was disappointed in the end where Jim died a villain.
The second movie I waited for on TV so I could see it free. I watched it because I thought maybe it wasn't Jim Phelps who died, but some enemy agent with a rubber mask impersonating Jim. I had hopes the second movie would be about finding the real Jim was alive and imprisoned somewhere and they would rescue him.
Nope. It was some Tom Cruise as James Bond vehicle, with an overly convoluted plot. There was very little development of the other team members. It was almost like they threw them in as an afterthought. What a disappointment! Nothing at all like the old TV show.
I was sad to hear they were wasting their time making number 3. I doubt I'll even watch it even when it comes out on free TV.
Tammy
I pledge only to go see a Tom Cruise movie again if its about cults and what twats/jerks they make of those who join them.
Amen!
While I enjoy the M.I. movies, and I am looking forward to seeing this one (more to see Phillip Seymore Hoffman as a "bad guy"), I will not be seeing it. I have emailed, and signed e-petitions.
Greetings:
Cruise has had to deal with rumours and jokes regarding his sexuality all his career. (Whether he really is gay or not isn't the point.) The fact is that being perceived as homosexual hurts him in his career as a leading man and the types of roles that is suited for.
Isn't it possible that the guy is just fed up a bit with yet another parody involving his sexuality? Wouldn't YOU also feel a bit upset. Sure it comes with the territory of being a hollywood actor but these folks do have feelings.
Then if it weren't bad enough, the same parody also makes fun of his religion. As wacky as we might objectively view it to be, to HIM he is sincere and his (religion) is important to him.
Yes, we all should just laugh about the whole thing and he would hopefully laugh with us - just as we ask minorities to laugh at ethnic jokes, or husbands and fathers to laugh at "dumb dad" or "boyfriend" jokes and women to laugh at "dumb blonde" or "wife or girlfriend jokes." Religion, being such an important cultural aspect, has long been an accepted as fair game and a source for humor. So in some sense Cruise and other Scientologists should consider it a compliment that they are now in the same club as Irish Catholics and Middle-American Protestants, Jews and Jehovah's Witnesses.
Most of the time we laugh. But humor, like beauty, is always in the eyes of the beholder. If a person doesn't laugh at what others think is funny, we might say they don't get it, or as in the article, label them "humorless." Yet, sometimes what others find to be very funny (Andrew Dice Clay, Andy Warhol, Eddie Murphy, Chris Rock, etc.) is considered quite offensive to some. When this is the case, we don't begrudge them if they walk out of the performance, or boycott or protest. That is their right and option.
So Cruise (if such "insider information" is accurate) threatens to bail out of any publicity for MI3. [I wonder whether such info is accurate however, as most players have contract provisions locking them into a certain amount of publicity commitment; and also, not doing publicity for MI3 would only hurt the movie (and his own pocket) not South Park or Comedy Central.].
The guy is upset, he is sick of being portrayed as a homo and to add insult to injury, his sincerely held religiious beliefs are made fun of. Are we really surprised that he might be upset. I know that I probably would be after a certain point.
Humorless? Maybe so. But irrational or abnormal? Probably not.
-Eduardo
