Another lesson in the importance of proofreading And once again this lesson is courtesy of the free newspapers available on the streets of Dublin. This time from the Metro. Because, however mental Tom Cruise may appear jumping about on couches, I doubt that he is insane enough to actually say to a newspaper source, what the Metro have as one of their mini-headlines:
Cruise: “I’ll eat baby after birth”
Yes, that’s right. The Metro are reporting that Tom Cruise is going to eat his baby after it is born. When in fact they mean that Tom is going to eat the afterbirth. Slight difference there.
All this talk of Cruise and cannibals reminds me. His cousin, freaky Ethan from Lost turned up in an episode of The Inside, playing…. a cannibal. A really overweight gross cannibal. I didn’t recognise him, but read that it was him later on.
And speaking of Lost:
telling people you are showing a double episode of Lost and then only actually showing a shitty-recap-thingy and then one episode is false advertising.
Please do not do so again.
Dear Makers of Lost,
We have actually been watching your crappy tv show, and so do not need to be reshown all those scenes that we only just fucking saw. We do have brains. We can remember what happened last week. We don’t need to turn on your show and watch the same scenes over and over and over and over and over and over and over again.
Enough with the recaps pretending to be offering insight.
"Haunting eyes and brooding demeanor", says Answers.com. Are we really talking about him?
Also, Tom Cruise scares me.
How funny that the link appears in the preview, but not in the actual comment.
See? Tom Cruise is scary.
Yeah, that may be my fault for messing around with the allowed tags while making the spoiler tag work.
Naw, we'll blame Cruise :)
I think those "previously on Lost.." type scenes are for people like me, with goldfish-like memories….
Fence, I laughed so hard at your Tom Cruise headline that the other people in the office thought I had finally snapped, two days ahead of schedule. Love it. Love it.
Weenie, it isn't the two minute recap at the start of each show that I mind so much. Its the hour long shows of recaps that they try to pass off as entertainment that bugs me.
Mal, you can give thanks to the people at TomCruiseIsNuts.com
That's my new favourite example of poor phrasing/editing. My past example was in our church bulletin years ago – "The women's choir will be servicing the 10:30 mass."
And don't you have naughty thoughts :)
Anybody who smiles as much as Tom Cruise is hiding a really deep dark secret. There could be something in this baby-eating thing. I'm just saying.
My favourite is quoted in Gower's Plain Words: "Young women are not interested in the opinion of old men on the Pill".
Fence, I've tried to leave two comments here but have deleted them both due to rampant stupidity. I don't know what's wrong with me. I'm just gonna say hi and go, okay? Gah.
I would not be overwhelmingly shocked if he actually did try to eat his baby.
You know Alan, you may be right. Smiling is clearly the sign of "something wrong". Just look at Tony Blair.
Mal, thats quite true :)
Livewire, Its ALIVE! we'll see for how long :)
A girl. Suri. Seven pounds, seven ounces. He ate the afterbirth with some fava beans and a nice chianti…
Nines, that's disgusting but very, very funny.
I almost wish he would eat the baby so that we won't have to go through years of hearing about this child who is no doubt destined to grow up to be a total and complete whack job.
The child is totally screwed but will never be allowed to take antidepressants. Poor thing. Let's start a prayer chain! Christian Science pray-ers only, please.
Um, I hope everyone knows I was kidding. Fence? I didn't mean to start a prayer chain on your site.
I saw Tom on American TV talking about how he hasn't been sick in a long time. Really Tom?
Suri, or sushi? Hmmmm. Hmmmm?
Now Carl, I'm sure that the whole scientology doctrine will result in the growth of a well-adjusted young person. Look how well Tom turned… ahhh.
See how many people joined in Kelly :) You couldn't have a prayer chain even if you were serious.
Are you doubting the great-god-Tom? Are you UI? Cause if so the squid'll punish you. Or was that clamshell, I can't remember
It's a sad state of affairs when you can't even bully people into prayer. Wait, I didn't TRY that. CRAP. Cajoling never works.
I laughed my madly attractive arse off on a bus recently, reading a film magazine where the director of the new Mission Impossible film was saying how surprised when he heard Tom Cruise wanted to talk to him. He said his first thought was "Am I in trouble?". I thought that hilarious, as if Tom wielded some kind of vague jurisdiction over everything.
Does Tomosexuality cover the Cruise too?
And what would happen if Tom Cruise and Bono met? Would there be some kind of cosmic conflagration?
Tomosexuality is defined as the condition of being irrationally attracted to celebrity Toms to whom no-one should be attracted. No-one should ever say the following, if they do not want to be accused of Tomosexuality: "I wouldn't kick Tom Welling (Superman in Smallville) out of bed for eating potato chips", "Tom Hanks looked so fine-ass in that trailer for the Da Vinci Code" or anything positive about Tom Cruise whatsoever.
See also Francophilia – the condition of being inexplicably attracted to James Franco.
I know I'm guyslexic but surely Tom Welling is a handsome chap? Where's the irrationality?
Many people find the Welling good looking, however, his lack of charisma and acting ability means that he aint attractive. imo.
He has a friendly face.
Have you ever actually seen an episode of Smallville? If so, nuff said. Can't act, can't emote. Total blah
No, no Smallville…I liked The Fog though.
And, speaking of Smallville, I can't decide whether the trailer for the new Superman film is brilliant or awful. The chainsaw-subtle Jesus metaphors were cringe-inspiring, but the shot of a postbox marked "Kent" against a fiery dawn was a touch of genius. The way it exploits our knowledge of the story, and the mythical atmosphere it creates…good stuff. Still, I'm sure the film will be awful.
I've actually grown almost fond of Smallville in all its awfulness. What's truly tragic about it is the casting. Practically everyone in it is so awful you want to tear your skin off rather than watch them any more. And Tom Welling isn't even the worst actor in it! It's very sad that it got so many seasons. Gargh.
I honestly don't get all this about acting. With both hands on my heart I can say that I've never enjoyed a film or a television programme one whit the more or less because of an actor's "performance". I know it's fiction, I don't need somebody to convince me otherwise. That's what we have imagination for.
It's the same thing with special effects and CGI. What does it matter if the CGI is obvious or the special effects are crummy? Or even if you can see the strings?
And it wouldn't be so bad except for the importance people place on acting…the very first thing they ask you about a film is, "Was Tom Cruise good in it?". Even if Tom Cruise wasn't it at all. No, y'all know what I mean. I mean, the set designer makes more of a creative contribution to a film.
I can understand somebody going to see Angelina Jolie (or Tom Welling, indeed, if you're a Tomo) but aside from that…
Obviously none of this applies to comic acting, because timing and facial expression and stuff is important there. It's intrinsic rather than extrinsic in that case.
How do you get on Grumpy Old Men?
Actors are so important. Sure you can enjoy something with bad actors, as NM has just shown, but when the actors are good it makes something so much better. They can bring so much more than just the words to the screen.
Adam Baldwin's Jayne in Firefly, for example. With a different actor he coulda been just a mindless thug. Baldwin made him a mindless thug that we all love :)
But it isn't just about acting ability. Some actors just have presence, or charisma. They make the screen come alive, to use a clichÃ©.
Bad cgi is more forgivable, but not in something that is all about the special effects. If the film is all about the story then the effects dont' make a difference.
And set design is important, but if the acting is wooden even the most beautiful set won't make you enjoy it, most of the time. My enjoyment of King Arthur is actually just down to the look and style. The acting and plot didn't really do anything for me.
So basically its a combination rather than any one thing. But I think that acting is the most important parts of a good film. But they are all linked together and its pretty hard to take them apart.
The three most important elements in a film are the script, the script and the script. Then comes direction and music and set design and all that stuff. And, oh, acting is probably down there somewhere.
But I have to retract my claim that an actor's performance has never diminished my pleasure in a film. I LOVED The Chronicles of Riddick and Pride and Prejudice but Dame Judi Dench near ruined both of them by being all actorly and making heavy weather of it. I suppose the best you could say about an actor is that you didn't notice their performance.
The charisma part is true though. Michael Caine for instance.
And a film all about special effects is a bad film full stop.
Ah, but there is very rarely such a thing as The Script. It changes constantly. Rewrites, directors deciding they want to change something, actors changing the meaning of the words through the way they speak them.
The script is important, but bad acting and bad direction can ruin a good script.
Mal, you might like to read this post by screenwriter John August, where he reveals how even good scripts can go bad :)
Thanks for that, Fence, it was very interesting. I suppose if a cast and crew do their absolute damnedest they can fuck up any script, but I wonder if what the guy writing the response says might not be true…maybe it was a rubbish script in the first place.
Of course, I also didn't take into account films like This is Spinal Tap (the funniest film ever). The actors improvised all of that, astonishingly, so obviously they were its main creators. When I say a script I suppose I mean the action and (above all) the words rather than the actual screenplay.