Cruise Crash Causes Paramount Panic

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,194910,00.html ^ | 05/10/2006 | Roger Friedman

[theFIRMbss]

>This is the same theme that Heinrich Himmler embraced ...

"Considering the thousands of volumes covering every aspect of the Nazis, it's becoming increasingly difficult to say anything new about their dreadful era. Nevertheless, Pringle (The Mummy Congress), a contributing editor to Discover magazine, gamely steps up to the plate—and has produced a fascinating volume detailing the Nazis' crackpot theories about prehistory and the Indiana Jones–style lengths they went to prove them. Employing a team of researchers, Pringle investigates Heinrich Himmler's private think tank, the Ahnenerbe, which dispatched scholars to the most inhospitable and distant parts of the world to discover evidence of ancient Aryan conquests and the Germans' racial superiority. Some believed their own bizarre garbage; others perverted the facts for personal advancement or prostituted their reputations for the greater glory of Hitler. While it would be otherwise easy to laugh off the Ahnenerbe's ludicrous theories, Pringle argues that the institute provided the "academic" justification for the Holocaust and assembles a powerful body of evidence to that effect. Though one may wonder just how central the Ahnenerbe actually was to Hitler's thinking, when Pringle meets one of the most sinister of Himmler's scholars, his pride about the institute's "research" is distinctly disquieting. This is first-rate popular history—supported by an immense amount of scholarly apparatus in a range of languages. (Feb. 15) Copyright © Reed Business Information"

[uncitizen]

they might not have been attractive as young men, but they actually seem to be getting better looking with age. Sean Connery is another.

You've got a point there. I just love their personalities. That helps too.

Now Tom Cruise's personality is so self centered and what a turn off that is. He thinks he's hot sh!t. Man is he wrong. Handsome face, ok, i'll give him that. But the whole package isn't attractive to me at all.

[fatnotlazy]

And I also figure that pretty boys like Cruise might not age well. A lot of them don't. Wonder what he is going to look like in, say, another 20 years or even 10.

[uncitizen]

He'll probably have plastic surgery. Altho i suspect he might already have. If he does, i hope he uses the same plastic surgeon that Burt Reynolds used.

Speaking of pretty boys, two of the best examples were Paul Newman and Robert Redford in their youth. Newman has had no discernible plastic surgery and still looks great. I don't know if Redford has had any work done, i haven't seen him lately cuz i never ever watch the Sundance Channel. Do you know how he's looking these days?

[Phsstpok]

Thank you. I had not seen that book before. The topic fascinates me and I'll see about getting a copy.

I recommended a fiction series in a post earlier which touches briefly on this topic a couple of times: The Adept series by Katherine Kurtz and Deborah Turner Harris. Fun reads and they obviously did some very good research. Their fiction caused me to start going off and researching on my own the real histories they weave into their fiction, the occult aspects of the SS, the Templars (they presume they're good guys) and much more. It's been about 10 years of stumbling across very fascinating stuff. Some loony, but mostly verifiable things that are really neat.

[fatnotlazy]

He'll probably have plastic surgery. Altho i suspect he might already have. If he does, i hope he uses the same plastic surgeon that Burt Reynolds used.

***

Or maybe Michael Jackson's? LOL

As for Redford, I don't think he has aged well....certainly not as well as Newman.

[Armedanddangerous]

I was worried about Casino Royale for a while, but I think it will turn out to be great.

From what Ive read on some of the Bond fan sites, and from the script I read on some other site, and most recently, strangely enough, the FRENCH trailer for the film, my confidence is high that the film will rock.

There is no doubt in my mind it will be the most violent Bond in history though. I think it will end up sort of being like a BOURNE movie.

Being a purist, there is one silly thing that bothers me.

They are making Bond into a member of the British SAS, instead of a Royal Navy Commander. I guess it makes more sense in this context, but it bugs me nonetheless.

Miami Vice will be good too, but it wont be as great as the bank shootout scene in HEAT.

That is just about the best five minutes in a film that Ive seen.

[discostu]

I'm most looking forward to Scanner Darkly, I love that book and the approach they're taking with the movie seems very interesting. Probably won't make a lot of money but I'm OK with that.

X-Men is next on my list, like what they've done with the franchise. Never really got into Superman still not convinced I'll even watch it, maybe if my friends do a group outing.

Totally with you on Michael Mann and Miami Vice, I love the locations he picks, some of the most interesting buildings on the planet wind up in Michael Mann's stuff, sometimes the stories are even cool.

Got bored with Bond a long time ago and will probably ignore Casino Royal.

[diamond6]

I'm not a huge fan either, so make it six women.

I did like MI II though, and loved Far and Away. When he dumped Nicole Kidman for whats her name, I lost all respect for him.

[theFIRMbss]

>The topic [Ahnenerbe] fascinates me

Me too. I enjoyed
this book so much that I read
all of the end notes

(took almost as long
as the book but was worth it).
I have since learned that

the "occult" Nazis
were constantly at odds with
high ranking Nazis

who saw themselves as
"positive Christians" [!] and who
frowned on pagan stuff.

Himmler and his crowd
are well known for occult stuff,
but "Christian" Nazis

aren't that well known.
I am currently reading
a book about them:

[A CA Guy]

Yeah I think Cruise is a flake, but I have found some of his stuff entertaining and he isn't a bad actor.

I think it isn't so much a Tom Cruise issue as it is a current trend like the ones that hit newspapers.

#1 Quality has been crap.
#2 Politics has been on the rise and more stay home.
#3 Prices have gotten steep to go to films, and they release the DVDs real soon to avoid piracy getting the first fruits of their work.

I as an example have no problem not going to a movie and then renting the DVD later.

I only am interested in seeing films that would be best viewed on a big theater which could be as few as a couple a year.

I do have a home theater with a 13 foot wide HD screen, so if I rent a DVD, I have a better time at home. :)_

[Blueflag]

Like you, I no longer enjoy the paid theatre experience like I used to.

$7+ for tickets + $10 for snacks

add rude patrons who won't shut up
add rude patrons who talk to the movie
add rude patrons whose cel-phone lights pop on and off as they text message
add way too many 'commercials' that I didn't pay to see

PLUS

Like you, we have a 9' cinema room in the finished basement, right around the corner from kitchen, popcorn maker, 'free' cokes, etc. Plus, I can pause the movie to use the loo, answer the phone (if I must) - control the experience on my terms. If we missed some dialog, we can rewind.

I vote for DVD. Home. My terms.

[A CA Guy]

$8 for a noon mid day flick and $14 all other times.

Very expensive and unless you have a date that insists, it is a better deal to watch a few at home on a nice system.

I think between the HD at home for TV and the near HD with movies that I am happy at home and I think this is killing the movie industry.

It will get better if they charge $25 a ticket! LOL