Help support TMP


"After Earth" Topic


7 Posts

All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.

For more information, see the TMP FAQ.


Back to the SF Media Message Board


560 hits since 12 Dec 2012
©1994-2014 Bill Armintrout
Comments or corrections?

Rassilon Inactive Member12 Dec 2012 7:48 p.m. PST

So we have Oblivion with Cruise, now we have After Earth with Smith:

YouTube link

darthfozzywig Supporting Member of TMP12 Dec 2012 10:48 p.m. PST

Both of which look pretty cool to me.

Personal logo nazrat Supporting Member of TMP13 Dec 2012 7:10 a.m. PST

Me too. On the other thread about these movies it seems most already hate Oblivion simply because Tom Cruise is in it. Sure, he's a nut, but that certainly does not preclude him making a good flick.

Me, I'm just happy to see more SF on the horizon.

Personal logo Chalfant Sponsoring Member of TMP13 Dec 2012 11:01 a.m. PST

Ha!

"On the other thread about these movies it seems most already hate Oblivion simply because Tom Cruise is in it. Sure, he's a nut, but that certainly does not preclude him making a good flick."

There may be some truth to that….

I think I like the looks of After Earth better, but I still have regrets for having watched Lady in the Water. Liked the Happening, Unbreakable, the Village, and Signs, so, we'll see.

Chalfant

Chief Lackey Rich Supporting Member of TMP Fezian13 Dec 2012 11:39 a.m. PST

"On the other thread about these movies it seems most already hate Oblivion simply because Tom Cruise is in it. Sure, he's a nut, but that certainly does not preclude him making a good flick."

There may be some truth to that….

It doesn't exactly improve the odds of it happening, though. Insanity is an overrated quality in an artist IME. :)

Personal logo Parzival Supporting Member of TMP15 Dec 2012 10:45 p.m. PST

Saw the preview last night. Terrific imagery, but the line "everything here has evolved to kill humans" made me want to scream. What an absolutely ignorant statement. Evolution doesn't work that way. Evolution is about survival, which comes down to 1) improving access to food 2) improving protection from environment and predators 3) improving odds of reproduction. None of that could possibly drive any creature, aside from microbes, towards "the ability to kill humans." There's nothing on the planet today (again, aside from microbes) which is evolved to "kill humans" not even lions, tigers or bears (or sharks, snakes, etc.). We're lousy prey (or food), and as predators go we're easier to hide from/run from than attack. In fact, the two best defenses against humans are 1.) being useful (dogs, cats, horses, cows, pigs, etc., are not endangered species) and 2.) being cute and cuddly. The third is simply to be so innocuous and/or ubiquitous as to make humans either not care whether you're around or not, or be unable to do something effectively about it. (Horseshoe crabs for the former, insects for the latter.)
So if that's the premise of this "science fiction" movie, then it's utterly junk science (probably motivated from some idiotic extremist environmentalist view). But that's Hollywood for you.

As for the Cruise flick, I saw the preview for that, too. Yeah, nice machines and CGI, but the dialogue was standard retread action fare and I smelled a very familiar set up in the story.

So I'm very much taking a skeptical "wait and see" attitude on both films.

billthecat18 Dec 2012 1:07 p.m. PST

DELETED

billthecat18 Dec 2012 1:09 p.m. PST

Ahem…

Yes, the Smith movie certainly smells of a sentimental enviornmentalist sermon.

The Cruise movie LOOKED better, but smelled of another half-witted akshun-adventure-romance cookie-cutter GGI romp.

Sorry - only trusted members can post on the forums.