WorstPreviews.com Logo Join the community [Login / Register]
Follow WorstPreviews.com on Twitter
What\ News Coming Soon In Theaters On DVD Trailer,Posters,Pictures,Wallpapers, Screensavers PeliBlog.com Trivia/Quizzes
News/Headlines
Trailer for "Midnight Special" Sci-Fi Film, with Michael Shannon and Joel Edgerton
Nov 23rd, 2015
Trailer for "Central Intelligence" Comedy, with Dwayne Johnson and Kevin Hart
Nov 23rd, 2015
Trailer for Melissa McCarthy's "The Boss" Comedy
Nov 23rd, 2015
Trailer for Juan Antonio Bayona's "A Monster Calls"
Nov 23rd, 2015
First Look at "Central Intelligence" Comedy, with Dwayne Johnson and Kevin Hart
Nov 19th, 2015
Trailer for "Zoolander 2" Arrives Online
Nov 19th, 2015
Official Trailer for "Now You See Me" Sequel
Nov 19th, 2015
Trailer for Chris Hemsworth's "The Huntsman: Winter's War"
Nov 19th, 2015
Trailer for Keanu Reeves' "Exposed" Thriller
Nov 19th, 2015
First Look at Chris Pine on "Wonder Woman" Set
Nov 16th, 2015
Ridley Scott Reveals Another Title for "Prometheus" Sequel
Nov 16th, 2015
Gerard Butler is a God in "Gods of Egypt" Posters
Nov 16th, 2015
First Look at Liam Neeson in Martin Scorsese's "Silence"
Nov 16th, 2015
New Trailer for "The Divergent Series: Allegiant"
Nov 16th, 2015
Trailer for "Moonwalkers" Comedy, with Ron Perlman and Rupert Grint
Nov 16th, 2015
Trailer for Charlie Kaufman's "Anomalisa" Stop-Motion Film
Nov 3rd, 2015
Poster for "Warcraft" Arrives Online, Trailer Coming on Friday
Nov 3rd, 2015
There's a Good Reason Why Luke Skywalker Isn't on "Star Wars: The Force Awakens" Poster
Nov 2nd, 2015
First Trailer for Sacha Baron Cohen's "The Brothers Grimsby" Comedy
Nov 2nd, 2015
"Spectre" Breaks Box Office Records Overseas
Nov 2nd, 2015
Final Trailer for Ron Howard's "In the Heart of the Sea," with Chris Hemsworth
Nov 2nd, 2015
New Photos From "Warcraft" Video Game Movie
Nov 2nd, 2015
Lots of New Photos From "Suicide Squad"
Oct 30th, 2015
Trailer for "Dirty Grandpa" Comedy, with Robert De Niro and Zac Efron
Oct 30th, 2015
Sandra Bullock to Star in Female Version of "Ocean's Eleven"
Oct 30th, 2015
Trailer for Jared Hess' "Don Verdean" Comedy, with Sam Rockwell
Oct 30th, 2015
"Indiana Jones" Producer Says Harrison Ford Will Not Be Recast
Oct 28th, 2015
Trailer for Adam Sandler's "The Ridiculous 6" Comedy
Oct 28th, 2015
"The Walking Dead" Fan Kills Friend Who Turned Into a Zombie
Oct 28th, 2015
Another "Monopoly" Movie in the Works
Oct 28th, 2015
"Jumanji" Remake Hires "Con Air" Writer
Oct 26th, 2015
Disney's "Tower of Terror" Park Ride Movie Moving Forward
Oct 26th, 2015
Johnny Depp and Edgar Wright Team for "Fortunately, the Milk"
Oct 26th, 2015
Previous News Stories Next News Stories

Tom Cruise to Star in "Halo"?

Posted: August 28th, 2009 by WorstPreviews.com Staff
Tom Cruise to Star in "Halo"?Submit Comment
According to The Sydney Morning Herald, Tom Cruise flew all the way to New Zealand to meet with Peter Jackson. The reason for his trip is unknown, but it's safe to assume that it's business related. And we can only guess at what that business could be.

We know that Jackson is a producer on the upcoming "The Hobbit" prequels and that both he and director Guillermo Del Toro have already chosen their Bilbo Baggins. There is no contract in place because they wanted to wait until the script was ready and to give their star a chance to look at it. Ian McKellen recently revealed that the chosen actor will be getting the script this week. And it just so happens that Cruise is flying to New Zealand during this time. Coincidence?

The other reason why Cruise may be meeting with Jackson is to star in his "Tintin" sequel. Steven Spielberg is developing the first film and it will soon be time for Jackson to begin work on the second installment.

And finally, the biggest assumption of all. Could Cruise be the missing piece needed to push forward with a "Halo" movie?

We know that Jackson was previously involved in turning the popular game into a feature film and that Spielberg recently announced that he's interested in the franchise as well. The only problem is that Microsoft doesn't want to fund the movie and don't want to give up too many percentage points to a studio. So could a team of Jackson, Spielberg, and Cruise change Microsoft's mind?

Source: Sydney Morning Herald, TheOneRing


Bookmark and Share
You must be registered to post comments. Login or Register.
Displaying 132 comment(s) Profanity: Turn On
masKritic writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 6:15:04 AM

Step 1 to ruin a Halo Movie: Tom Cruise.
Hitodama writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 7:07:59 AM

...is he really that bad? No wait...don't answer that.
rocketman writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 8:03:36 AM

if they cast this twat as Bilbo i will sh*t in a BAG AND post it to NZ WETA head offices...
SACdaddy writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 8:12:40 AM

Cruise hasn't messed up any movie. Jesus Christ, the guy was just nominated for an Academy Award for 15 minutes of scene time (half of it dancing and cursing) in a main stream comedy. When's the last time that happened! The guy has made over 30 films and maybe 3-5 (War of the Worlds, Valkyrie, Lions for Lambs) have sucked or been a little questionable. Give him a break you jealous c*nts and stick to bashing twats like Lohan and Michael Bay who deserve it.
VN1X writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 8:39:41 AM

As an actor he gets the job done, just a shame he went on that rampage a few years ago.

Anyway, I think a Halo movie could do better then the games but I also think they should cast low-profile actors for it.
Ronsauce writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 8:42:57 AM

Agree with SACdaddy. You might dislike Cruise personally, but his acting chops are awesome.

Also, f*ck you WP for posting yet ANOTHER bullsh*t rumour. Cruise meets with Peter Jackson and all of a sudden he's in the Halo movie...despite Jackson not being currently attached to Halo in any way? Good job guys.
c-prime writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 8:49:56 AM

Best headline and picture...ever. The thing Tom's doing with his hands...exceptional. Is he firing a pretend gun or showing off the two pointers he fingered Katie Holmes with? BANG! BANG!

"Tom Cruise in Halo". Savor the cadence of the phrase. Can anybody picture that? Cruise running around a ring-shaped planet blasting aliens with an E-meter. Take it back, he'd probably fight on the side of the aliens. "Coming this fall: the 'Halo' movie. Starring Tom Cruise as Grunt #4." (you know, 'cause he's too short to play a Jackal). "Special Cameo Appearance by L. Ron Hubbard's thetan as Cortana."
SACdaddy writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 8:53:07 AM

lol Another great picture WP!
Ranma-Irias writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 9:14:31 AM

he's not bad as an actor he is good...but he is really f*cked up out of his mind!
makingcircles writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 9:43:33 AM

I don't care if he's in Tintin and I don't care if he's in Halo....but please god don't let him be cast in The Hobbit unless it's a piece of Smaug's sh*t.
The Skippy Spartan writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 9:58:02 AM

Tom Cruise: "Halo is about Aliens vs humans, right up my alley!!"
NatG83 writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 10:37:28 AM

Who would Cruise play? Master Chief? I guess camera tricks can be used, but I envisioned a more imposing actor.
PrevalentMind writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 10:47:28 AM

Honestly guys- Tom Cruise acting in this thing would secure MANY things for Halo:

1. A noteworthy director who's fully capable of effects and being faithful, because Cruise always NEEDS to look awesome and can't do that alone.

2. A huge budget increase on top of the initial studio budget because the man is worth a sh*tload of money and likes to take on producer credits.

He may be a douche in real life for some, but he's AWESOME in the movies.

You people really need to be able to distinguish Nicholas Cage from Tom Cruise...

...and Microsoft needs to stop being a bunch of faggoty bitches. Everytime time there's a bit of progress on this Microsoft pussies out the second a single fanboy shows negativity.
SpookyCupcakes writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 11:09:57 AM

Get out get out get out get out get out get out get out get out get out get out get out get out get out get out get out get out get out get out get out get out get out get out get out get out get out get out get out get out get out get out get out get out get out get out get out get out get out get out get out get out get out get out get out get out get out get out get out get out get out get out get out get out get out get out get out get out get out get out get out get out get out get out
SpookyCupcakes writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 11:11:16 AM

"if they cast this twat as Bilbo i will sh*t in a BAG AND post it to NZ WETA head offices..."

I'll do that too, except I'll be sh*tting a c4 bomb
TH3D4RKKN1GH7 writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 11:28:02 AM

Who gives a sh*t he'll have a helmet on most of the time unless they want an onslaught of fan hate mail. Just cast an unknown or someone big since Cheif doesn't have much to say most of the time.
SACdaddy writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 11:30:41 AM

Why do we care so much about what an actor does offscreen? Most of the time the best actors in Hwood are f*cked up in some way or another. Deniro, Brando, Bale, Travolta, Gibson, Kiefer, Sizemore, and Jon Voight are all batsh*t crazy in there own way. At least Cruise isn't digging holes in his backyard looking for aliens like Shelly Long.
nope.com writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 12:11:07 PM

I wonder how they will incorporate Scientology into this and L. Ron Hubbard's body
Lowryder writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 12:14:49 PM

i will go see this if tom cruise is in it for sure, but sacdaddy, he has ruined 1 movie that i know of, the worst movie of all time, VANILLA ICE!!!!!!! i hated that piece of sh*t movie lol
lost_addict writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 12:19:08 PM

is cruise trying to show in the picture what size was in his ass last night?
Rarehunter writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 12:23:57 PM

Master chief jumping of couches, i could see it...
SpookyCupcakes writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 12:25:01 PM

Tom cruise, guys, be serious.

If Tom Cruise was in this, we'd be seeing his face left and right, which isn't what master chief is about. The reason we never see chiefs face is because it's implying that we're chief. Just like why Freeman never speaks.

Remember when Eric Foreman was in Spider man? He had such a kick ass mask but then it got peeled back just because Eric was playing him.

If they got an unknown actor, then he wouldn't give a sh*t about having face time, maybe they should just get a stuntman. But not cruise.

Besides, Cruise would want to change the script to add scientolology elements. so instead of fighting the arbiters he'd be like fighting xenu or mc would be fighting the thetans in his body or something.

Don't say he's a great actor, because there's a lot of people who can act, it's not hard to find someone who can run, shoot, and kill aliens.

"So could a team of Jackson, Spielberg, and Cruise change Microsoft's mind?"

If it does, then they better not even dare start crying when it sucks.
minkowski writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 12:30:09 PM

All this talk, and Cruise's affiliation with Halo, a film that may NEVER get made, hasn't even reached the credibility level of a f*cking rumor, yet.
SACdaddy writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 12:36:57 PM

So Spooky you really want to watch a movie were the lead character's face is covered the entire film. You might as well wait for the next V for Vendetta film to come out. Serioulsy, you don't think they're gonna spend this much money on a film and not show the star's face.
SACdaddy writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 12:38:17 PM

V for Vendetta licked balls by the way.
minkowski writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 12:39:03 PM

"i will go see this if tom cruise is in it for sure, but sacdaddy, he has ruined 1 movie that i know of, the worst movie of all time, VANILLA ICE!!!!!!!"

Umm, I do think you mean Vanilla SKY. Vanilla ICE was some faggot white wannbe rapper who had a career high point of starring, briefly, in Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles II.

And I'm going to laugh my ass off if Halo, after years in limbo and development hell, finally makes it to the big screen, and ends up as bad a film as Doom.
SpookyCupcakes writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 12:39:41 PM

"So Spooky you really want to watch a movie were the lead character's face is covered the entire film."

Uh, yes. Because that would be faithful to the games, and I wouldn't have to see Cruise's Dyke face.

"Serioulsy, you don't think they're gonna spend this much money on a film and not show the star's face."

Then don't hire a "star", hire an "actor".
SpookyCupcakes writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 12:40:11 PM

"and development hell, finally makes it to the big screen, and ends up as bad a film as Doom."

Exactly.
SpookyCupcakes writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 12:45:18 PM

"You might as well wait for the next V for Vendetta film to come out."

And I don't know what kind of superficial f*ck you are, but if you can't sit through a movie because someones face isn't clearly shown, then you shouldn't be watching movies.
SACdaddy writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 12:47:12 PM

What's all this sh*t about Microsoft not wanting to flip the bill for this film? Hasn't Halo made enough money for Bill Gates. Like Gates would miss a couple $100 mill.
SpookyCupcakes writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 12:51:45 PM

"$100 mill."

I know he makes fire with 50 dollar bills.
SACdaddy writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 12:58:59 PM

@Spooky, if you want to cover the actor's face, why not just get an some nobody to do a voice over for the lead the entire movie. You're not being realistic. They went cheap on Doom and look what happened. Lets face it video game movies always go cheap and have terrible results. Maybe a big "star" can add something all the others were missing. BTW, Peter Jackson doesn't miss on much either so why would this film be any different?
minkowski writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 12:58:59 PM

Considering that most of Gates' wealth isn't liquid, but tied up in Microsoft assets, losing a few hundred million might just piss off the majority shareholders.

Microsoft's playing the game. Sell the rights to a studio, exert creative control, have them make the film but also let them take the loss if the film bombs. Collect any profit. Again, like I've said, Microsoft is a software company. They think like a software company. They have software company culture. Having them directly involved in the creation of a video game film is a bad idea, and the only group of people to not know better, save a few foolish internet posters that think MS would make a good film studio, is Microsoft.
minkowski writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 1:00:08 PM

Besides, Gates isn't in direct control of MS, Steve Ballmer has the reins.
SpookyCupcakes writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 1:04:30 PM

"if you want to cover the actor's face, why not just get an some nobody to do a voice over for the lead the entire movie."

Sounds like a plan.

"Lets face it video game movies always go cheap and have terrible results. Maybe a big "star" can add something all the others were missing."

Max payne.

Doom.

Super Mario Brothers.

Lara Croft movies.

Resident Evil.

Silent hill.

Hitman.

Street Fighter: legend of Chink-Lee.

These weren't cheap movies, and they all sucked.

The "star" isn't a problem, clearly. Good storytelling is what is missing from these movies. You don't need to have some big actor showing off his pearly whites in an alien vs. human movie, it's just not needed whatsoever.
SpookyCupcakes writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 1:06:25 PM

Neill Blomkamp, the original guy who was signed to make "Halo" made District 9 for 30 million and no name actors, and it has an over 80% tomatometer rating, so there goes your "BIG STARS + BIG BUDGET > STORY" argument.
SACdaddy writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 1:09:24 PM

@Lowryder: I thought Vanilla Sky was one of Cruise's better performances. True the movie didn't make much sense but that wasn't Tom's fault.

@Mink: GO WHITE BOY, GO WHITE BOY, GO! How'd we let Vanilla Ice get so popular? That had to be some kind of low point for human evolution.
minkowski writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 1:09:30 PM

'Lets face it video game movies always go cheap and have terrible results."

Well. Resident evil 1 has a 33 mil dollar budget.

Max Payne had a 35 mil dollar budget.

Resident Evil II had a 45 mil dollar budget.

Silent Hill had a 50 mil dollar budget.

Doom had a 60 mil dollar budget.

So, I could argue that bigger budgets for video game films actually equal worse and worse movies, not better. Throwing money at sh*t ideas, and most video games aren't high quality concepts, Halo being no exception, doesn't solve the fundamental issue: having the film possess a GOOD story that remains true to it's fanbase.

So, I say good luck. The only reason Jackson is so high on Halo is because he's a fat f*cking nerd.
minkowski writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 1:10:54 PM

Vanilla Sky was good. Vanilla Ice was an entertainment abomination. Nuff said.
synthetic1985 writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 1:11:10 PM

@ spooky...i agree entirely...it's why i thought even by today's standards....the 1st mortal kombat movie was nicely executed...it was everything and more than what i was expecting...i thought we'd just see characters from the first game only...instead they did that and added in characters like kitana...but i didn't like how kung lao is a descendant and that he no longer fights...he should have been introduced later....it's why i thought the 2nd mortal kombat movie was not so good, wouldn't it have been sweet to see lui kang fight human smoke?...or see lui kang do something besides using his hands and execute some kind of special move besides animality?...maybe they can make up for that with a 3rd...and bring in kintaro instead of motaro or goro....that would be awesome
SpookyCupcakes writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 1:11:49 PM

"Halo is because he's a fat f*cking nerd."

He WAS fat, but whenever he gets filming on something he always gets really fat for some reason.
minkowski writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 1:12:32 PM

"@Mink: GO WHITE BOY, GO WHITE BOY, GO! How'd we let Vanilla Ice get so popular? That had to be some kind of low point for human evolution."

I'd agree if I thought Vanilla Ice was human.
synthetic1985 writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 1:14:40 PM

another great thing about the first mortal kombat movie....lots of actors....not all of them EXTREMELY well known....and best of all...better acting than sorry excuses for movies i've seen from this decade
DoucheNozzle writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 1:16:42 PM

I would be okay with Cruise if he just provided his voice, but I doubt that will happen. This is a bullsh*t rumor, though.
SpookyCupcakes writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 1:18:41 PM

Totally Synth, Mortal Kombat isn't my cup of tea, but it was well executed.

And I don't know why SACdaddy thought that Tom Cruise would make this movie better.

You know, I've never even played Halo once in my life, I just see it as a good potential movie. Too bad People like SACdaddy think it'd be a good idea if they went with a super huge budget with tom cruise as master chief.
SACdaddy writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 1:22:17 PM

@Spooky, But D9 wasn't a VG movie with a built-in audience that needed to be pleased. Plus, can you imagine how much money it would have made with huge star in the lead? It might not have been any better of a movie but they could have marketed it better and gotten a much broader audience. War of the Worlds sucked but it made almost $600 mill. If Blomkamp could have spent another $20 mill on Cruise and made a few $100 mill in return I think he'd be happy.
NatG83 writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 1:25:10 PM

Whomever the actor for Master Chief, they should have him doing the voice-over. At the end of the movie, Master Chief starts to take off the helmet and then...

Crash to Blue screen.
SpookyCupcakes writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 1:25:46 PM

"Plus, can you imagine how much money it would have made with huge star in the lead?"

Why would I give a sh*t how much money it would make? I just want it to be good.

"War of the Worlds sucked but it made almost $600 mill."

Cool story bro, it made so much money yet I don't have it on DVD, because it sucked.

"If Blomkamp could have spent another $20 mill on Cruise and made a few $100 mill in return I think he'd be happy."

No, he wouldn't. You know why? Because Blomkamp is a good director. He cares about making a good movie, not profit machine.
TH3D4RKKN1GH7 writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 1:28:41 PM

I think the budget for this will be big regardless. I don't see a Halo film being made with a District 9 budget. Halo is much grander in scale than District 9.
TH3D4RKKN1GH7 writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 1:31:25 PM

Blomkamp has made one film let's not start sucking his d*ck just yet.
SpookyCupcakes writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 1:40:29 PM

"Blomkamp has made one film let's not start sucking his d*ck just yet."

Clearly you haven't seen his short films, I've been watching them since they were coming out, the messages conveyed in those 5 minutes say more than anything a speilberg movie with tom cruise could say.
minkowski writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 1:41:51 PM

"He cares about making a good movie, not profit machine."

He's still hungry. That's why he cares about making something good.

And, I'm sorry, but how the f*ck does anyone make a good film from a video a game like halo, a game that is nothing but running and shooting? I've played the games. The goddamned story in the single-player isn't exactly stellar, no pun intended. And the multi-player is repetitive. Why do people think this sh*t has a chance to work? Because they have fond memories of whooping some ass in mp mode? Because the game is chock full of sh*t borrowed from every sci-fi corner? Whatever. The only people that'll got to see this are Halo fans and bored moviegoers. It'll make money

minkowski writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 1:42:26 PM

..on that merit alone, and none other.
SpookyCupcakes writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 1:46:48 PM

"The goddamned story in the single-player isn't exactly stellar, no pun intended."

It was gonna be based off of the prequel novel, which had some enders' game feel to it.

also, the movies would take place like with other characters besides the chief, and it would have probably focused on what humans think about the military defending them and stuff. But that would've been in a Blomkamp movie, but in a speilberg movie? Tom Cruise jumping on couches in space fighting xenu.
synthetic1985 writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 1:46:52 PM

this is the same aspect for if zelda was ever made into a movie...big budgets would obviously show special effects, good or bad...but professionals working on a big budget is another thing...professionals doing a superior job on a big budget is an even bigger thing
minkowski writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 1:48:02 PM

"Clearly you haven't seen his short films, I've been watching them since they were coming out, the messages conveyed in those 5 minutes say more than anything a speilberg movie with tom cruise could say."

Blomkamp has had like two or three short stories, one of which was an immediate precursor to D9. One was Tempbot, and the other he worked along side Jackson in a supporting role. So he's had ONE short film that wasn't either a D9 ancestor, or a film wehre he played the apprentice.

And Blomkamp is a VFX guy, not neccessarily a man with a fountain of ideas. More than likely, in about five years, this guy's fountain is will dry up and we'll hear nothing more from him. That happens alot.
SACdaddy writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 1:48:32 PM

Blomkamp cared about making a movie. It was his 1st like DK said. Nobody was gonna throw him Halo money until they saw his talent. I can guarantee they're not gonna shell out that type of cash for a film with a faceless lead. Anyway, doesn't Master Chief where that helmet because he's on alien planets? The Halo fans alone wont be enough to make it extremely profitable.
SpookyCupcakes writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 1:50:56 PM

Alright, enjoy your sh*tty popcorn sci fi flick.
SACdaddy writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 1:51:21 PM

"wear" sh*t
minkowski writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 1:51:40 PM

"It was gonna be based off of the prequel novel, which had some enders' game feel to it."

Yeah, I have the books, and they suck. making a Halo film has fail written all over it. The books are based on the damn game, and have only a little more substance. But whatever. rather than making good sci-fi, rather than looking back at Asmimov and Clark, Bradbury and Bester, Baxter and Niven, they want to translate sh*tty video game novels aimed at droned-out teenagers and basement recluses. f*cking stupid.
minkowski writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 1:56:28 PM

'The Halo fans alone wont be enough to make it extremely profitable. "

That's right, you gotta sell it to the general public. And how the f*ck do you sell a video game film past the fanbase into the wider market without ruining the game material its based on? Inquiring minds want to know. And then with Avatar coming, the bar is going to be set even higher. People will rememeber Avatar, even if it lives up to SOME of Cameron's promises, so Halo will need even MORE money to sell itself. The bar for space sci-fi will have been raised, and that means Halo will need a massive budget to look modern and relevant. Now, who, which studio, wants to shell out 180mil or more on a video game film?

And Spooky, don't restart the Avatar argument, because the fact is Avatar WILL set the bar higher, whether you want to believe it or not.
SpookyCupcakes writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 1:58:30 PM

Yea, it'll set the bar for sh*t higher.
minkowski writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 1:58:55 PM

And if anyone wants to see Tempbot, just ask.
minkowski writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 2:00:21 PM

Avatar's going to win, Spooks. And that's something you're going to have to deal with after December 18th.
SACdaddy writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 2:01:05 PM

Not to mention Avatar looks almost exactly like a film version of Halo.
TH3D4RKKN1GH7 writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 2:01:58 PM

"And Blomkamp is a VFX guy, not neccessarily a man with a fountain of ideas. More than likely, in about five years, this guy's fountain is will dry up and we'll hear nothing more from him. That happens alot"

that's exactly my thoughts indeed. However I am a big Halo fan mainly for MP. I don't really care for the story stuff. I just enjoy the gameplay immensely. In other news Hans Zimmerman doing the score for Modern Warfare 2. Sweeeeet.
minkowski writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 2:15:35 PM

Even the f*cking robot in the Tempbot isn't original. Blomkamp or whoever just ripped off the head from a Macross Valkyrie.

http://www.mwctoys.com/images/review_valkyrie_1.jpg

And there's others. I've got one that has the single eye reen orb instead of the visor.
minkowski writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 2:19:29 PM

But it has an older Wonder Woman's Linda Carter, so that's cool, and he uses Echo and the Bunnymen's The Killing Moon, so that's even more cool.
rocketman writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 3:58:01 PM

Bollocks to this Halo Cruise sh*t,gimmie a COD4 FILM.
SpookyCupcakes writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 3:59:49 PM

"COD4 FILM."
It's called "Saving private Ryan"
SpookyCupcakes writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 4:00:26 PM

oh wait, MODERN warefare.

Ok, go watch "buckethead" or some stupid pro america sh*t
Ranger writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 4:53:13 PM

Haven't read the full article... just a few of the posts.

Dislike Cruise if you'd like... I'm a fan of his (diff. opinions make this site what it is).

Cruise - not even 50... yet worth over $600mil. Until a couple of years ago... the #1 Actor in the World. Someone MUST be liking him. Someone MUST be going to his movies.

As far as him 'wigging out' a couple of years ago. For WHAT?!

1. Jumping on Oprah's couch expressing love for his woman? Would you rather him selling crack to kid's?

2. Expressing his OWN opinion that Brooke Shields didn't need meds for her depression?! f*ck... everyone on here DAILY has opinions. If Tom can't talk... neither can you!

3. He's the Member of a Cult Religion?! What... like Catholics aren't?!

4. He gives of him time TIRELESSLY to charities (mostly children bases). How much time do you volunteer?

5. The man loves his family. Is an accomplished actor, sky-diver and Pilot (also holds his stunt license), and businessman. How is your life going by comparison?

Tom is successful because he has a passion for his life. He loves learning and he loves loving. He is unique. We may secretly admire a unique person privately in this cookie-cutter world... but also disdain that very uniqueness publicly because we have to join the jealous mob mentality?! How f*cked up is that people.

How many movies of Tom's have you paid to go see (I'll bet a few).

How many of his DVD's have you rented (I'll bet a few).

I'll bet some of you even own Top Gun.

We're ALL entitled to our opinions (thx. for letting me express our own). If you want to pick on someone... maybe someone obviously not quite so successful, that has Hollywood Co's tripping over themselves to get he on their roster, because the bottom line is... Tom is the sh*t. He makes Hollywood BILLIONS of $'s. Which, believe it or not, it the ONLY measure of success in the entertainment business.

Dislike him if you want... but I'm a fan.

Oh... and Lohan is a c*nt.

Thx. for reading.
Space_Ghost11 writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 4:58:08 PM

The first wrong idea was to ever make Halo into a film at all. That picture ^^^ of him is hilarious, reminds of when Ben Stiller played him on SNL on Celebrity Jeopardy. The only way I'll ever have respect for Tom Cruise is if he does waaaay more roles like he did in Tropic Thunder.
Ranger writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 6:08:20 PM

Sorry 'bout the typos above folks. Was on the phone for part of that...

SpookyCupcakes writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 6:08:41 PM

"5. The man loves his family. Is an accomplished actor, sky-diver and Pilot (also holds his stunt license), and businessman. How is your life going by comparison?"

I'm not a scientologist, so my life is going spades better.
SpookyCupcakes writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 6:09:28 PM

"Tom is the sh*t."

Is sh*t*
synthetic1985 writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 6:20:58 PM

Ranger is right....despite what has happened so far...he's still a very good actor compared to many others...can't argue there...but it does suck when even stars of his magnitude still manage to sell out and do unnecessary remakes or sequels...but like i said before....these new stream of remakes are only making it easier for me to avoid...good films are still out there...just don't get so fooled when bad people in the movie industry try to get every last penny out of you through any form of trickery...i'll forgive whatever caused halo to stop production or whatever happened there, but if they keep saying halo is gonna be a movie for another 5 years with NO status...count me out
TH3D4RKKN1GH7 writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 6:23:14 PM

I don't see why his religious beliefs are such a big deal. Christians and Catholics are just as bad as Scientology believers. Anyone who believes that a person can be born from a virgin and talking snakes can exist is an idiot. He's an actor what the f*ck does his beliefs have to do with his craft? LOL. Now if you think he's a bad actor okay, but what does his personal life have to do with anything? The man is important to more people than most of us are.
c-prime writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 6:25:41 PM

I think he can act, too, Ranger. I just think he's a nutjob is all. I think he means well most of the time with the things he says and does but just comes off as rather peculiar sometimes (beyond just Scientology).

Don't feel bad about having an opinion, man. You're entitled to say whatever you feel is appropriate (whether it's vulgar, offensive to some, or whatever). Moreover, I highly enocourage it as practically everything you say on here is a complete zinger. Keep dishing out the funny (or serious) comments as much as you want. I certainly won't ostracize you for anything.
Lowryder writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 6:33:17 PM

@ SACDaddy, oops lol i havent seen vanilla sky in forever and i said vanilla ice on accident ahaha
Ranger writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 6:37:17 PM

Thx. folks.

If I had Tom's money, I'd be a far bigger wing-nut than he appears to be at times.

He loves the life he's created... no doubt. I just feel the guy shouldn't lose the right to speak his mind because of his celebrity. The same right we exercise here with every post.

Will Smith is into Scientology. You NEVER hear ANYone up in his face about it... ever.

As for taking commercial remakes. If I had his bills (planes, trains and automobiles), I'd take a lot worse sh*t than he has. $20mil for 6 months work (yes... 6 months by the time ALL the media junket work is done on top of filming, etc.) is making great bank. Tom is an 'industry' unto himself. He has large staffs, expensive homes and toys... he needs to 'pay the rent.' I can't fault him for anything he's picked.

Any doubt his acting ability when he's fed great material (that's way a lot of movies suck these days... the actor's are fine (sans Lohan)... just the material sucks sh*t!) - watch Thomas Cruise Mapother the IV tackle: Born on the 4th of July. Just one of many projects he wanted to see done because it was worthy... he didn't take a salary (but took the big take as the ticket sales counter... savvy).

PS: serious... I think Lohan gave me a f*cking rash!!!
c-prime writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 6:55:11 PM

TH3D4RKKN1GH7, anybody with SENSE isn't bashing the followers of Scientology because they don't follow someone's own personal beliefs. I believe that every person should be allowed to follow whatever spiritual path they wish in order to find happiness and fulfillment. Christianity, Buddhism, Islam, whatever so long as it doesn't cause harm or inequality to non-followers (this usually is not the case, however). It's anybody's choice what god they serve.

But when this religion is founded by L. Ron Hubbard, THE SCIENCE FICTION AUTHOR, born in 1911, died in 1986, you must concede to humor behind the situation. I know that comment is intrinsically a quasi form of ethnocentrism and I don't mean for it to be, so let me stress again that people have the praise whatever deity they please, ancient or contemporary. It's just the fact that Scientology was founded by a fiction storywriter sucks out most of the feasibility behind their explanations of creation for most folk. I can also assume why some people like to bash the religion, given that most of their respective affiliations were around centuries ago. It doesn't make those people more right, but that those religions' keystone events supposedly occurred hundreds upon hundreds of years ago seems to coax people into perceiving those institutions are based on historical accuracy or probability. This is a shameful fallacy to rely on, but that's my guess as to why they think that way.

For the record, I, myself, don't have a beef with any religion. I just like to rip on everybody. And for the last couple of days, my target has been Scientology. No offense intended to anyone on this site that might actually practice it.
AP102390 writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 6:55:25 PM

idk if he'd be good as bilbo so i'm hoping this is for tintin or halo. i'm not saying that because i dislike him, i'm just saying i'm trying to visualize him as a hobbit and it isn't happening.
TH3D4RKKN1GH7 writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 7:00:51 PM

"But when this religion is founded by L. Ron Hubbard, THE SCIENCE FICTION AUTHOR, born in 1911, died in 1986, you must concede to humor behind the situation. I know that comment is intrinsically a quasi form of ethnocentrism and I don't mean for it to be, so let me stress again that people have the praise whatever deity they please, ancient or contemporary. It's just the fact that Scientology was founded by a fiction storywriter sucks out most of the feasibility behind their explanations of creation for most folk."

And you have proof the bible isn't fiction? It's essentially a narrative which was written by someone which makes that person a storyteller. They both hold no real factual base whatsoever. Scientology is just the new kid on the block (in comparison to Christianity) and it's not so cemented in world culture. Both beliefs are pretty f*cking ridiculous if you ask me. The world would be better off without religion, it's complete and utter bullsh*t.
synthetic1985 writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 7:07:40 PM

@ c-prime...you made an excellent point there....'you can choose whatever god you want to serve'...i just think it's sad that some people don't understand how valuable free will is....the sadder thing? they never use their best abilities to their fullest potential when they could have...take it from a writer like myself, you don't get any better unless you keep trying...but by today's standards...i wouldn't keep trying more remakes...that just doesn't help the cause in the film industry today
TH3D4RKKN1GH7 writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 7:12:29 PM

synthetic1985 writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 7:07:40 PM
@ c-prime...you made an excellent point there....'you can choose whatever god you want to serve'...i just think it's sad that some people don't understand how valuable free will is....the sadder thing? they never use their best abilities to their fullest potential when they could have

I agree 100%.
synthetic1985 writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 7:16:22 PM

btw speaking of the bible....it was written by man, inspired by God, not written by Him...so there's your logical explanation...just watch out though...lots of false bibles out there....people ages ago believed in God...people today still do...i do too and i'll admit, i had doubts and felt like i didn't believe there was a God...this world is just crazy more so than it ever has been, and it really does make people question those things
c-prime writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 7:17:38 PM

I never said I had proof the Bible wasn't fiction. Nowhere in that comment did I take any religion's defense over another. If you read again, what I said was:

"It doesn't make those people more right, but that those religions' keystone events supposedly occurred hundreds upon hundreds of years ago seems to coax people into perceiving those institutions are based on historical accuracy or probability. This is a shameful fallacy to rely on, but that's my guess as to why they think that way."

There. I didn't take sides at all. I never said "Christianity is the way to go and all you pagan outsiders are going straight to hell." I'm not one of those people. I'm just making speculations. You're right, for all we know, the Bible could be complete lies. Maybe it was penned by some whackjob devoted to a mythic cause. Maybe that guy was a science-fiction author of his day. I don't know. All I'm doing is guessing what makes people think they are more right than the people whose views aren't in sync with theirs.

Oh, and to automatically assume that I was justifying Christianity is an error in itself. Why Christianity? I didn't favor any group over another. If I were the extremist type, I could've been speaking for any of a number of spiritual organizations. Voodoo, anyone? (Only joking, friend.)
synthetic1985 writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 7:20:05 PM

there's still hope though...some people lose hope....and some never do...and some lose it and somehow get it back again...funny how that works...just like when i thought there wouldn't be any better movies after 2002 or 2003...well, that's only partially true, and only because morons in hollywood somehow managed to make mediocre entertainment the new mainstream...so sad
synthetic1985 writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 7:23:32 PM

actually to be honest...i think this whole country has been too devastated since 9/11...i used to hear people say 'no writer can make any new melody because all possible melody arrangements have been done'....LOL...that is so untrue
c-prime writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 7:28:37 PM

Thanks, synthetic1985. And you also, TH3D4RKKN1GH7. You posed an excellent point: spiritual beliefs should have no bearing on the aptitude a man displays in his profession. And neither should politics. I don't judge people based on that criteria, but sadly most people can't separate their views of him as a person from his views of him as an actor. I wouldn't care if he was Christian, Scientologist, or Rastafari - his performance in "Collateral" was a friggin' freight train. He has my respect.
TH3D4RKKN1GH7 writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 7:43:20 PM

Yeah I'm sorry for that CPrime the topic just get's me fired up. I have a couple religious friends (a lot of my friends either aren't or have their doubts), my girlfriend is as well and when we talk about it its always like war. I just don't get how a species so intelligent in so many ways can believe in something that clearly goes against several things we've come to know as plausible.
Rich k writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 8:15:16 PM

No, cruise would never do the halo movie.
minkowski writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 8:16:44 PM

All religion is bullsh*t. All spirituality is bullsh*t. You have no soul. There is no f*cking god. When you die, you die. These are the facts. Until you realize this, you are useless.
Ranger writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 8:18:42 PM

1. Some good posts here my friends!

2. Lohan is still a skank, right?

3. But we'd still nail her, yes?

4. I'm not joking... she gave me a rash!!!
Ranger writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 8:20:27 PM

To further clarify Mink's point:

1. Taking the Big Dirt Nap!

2. A compost heap!

3. You life becomes unto it self as Lohan's career does to her.

4. I mean... the even the ointment the Dr. prescribed isn't even putting a dent into this f*cking rash!!! THAT BITCH!!!
TH3D4RKKN1GH7 writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 8:21:59 PM

While I'm with you for most of this Mink, I don't think we should disregard people who believe in religion because we'd be doing the same things all the religious nuts do when they kill each other for difference in beliefs just not to the same extent. We must judge people on their character and actions not their religious beliefs, so while I'm with you on most of the post I wont fully go through with the "they are useless bit". Mainly because I know too many folks who are nice and I consider incredibly intelligent but believe in God and such... I know I totally don't get how that works either.
TH3D4RKKN1GH7 writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 8:23:48 PM

LMAO @ the Lohan remarks. Ah they never get old. BTW did she get lip implants or something? She went from having flatties to having a set of DSLs.
minkowski writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 8:30:34 PM

Tom Cruise is a fine actor, but he sucks as a person. I don't give a flying sh*t how much money he makes. He sh*ts like the rest of us, and he'll rot in the ground like the rest of us. Money means nothing except that you're good at suckering people out of their paycheck. Fools and their money are soon parted. Quality of life and the size of your f*cking bank account are not equal. Sorry, Ranger, but your totally wrong.

And I don't give a sh*t how much money he gives to charity. Real giving hurts. Tom Cruise donating a grand or even a million here an there is nothing. It's like me dropping off quarters to bums.

Scientology is bullsh*t. It's more bullsh*t than any other religion because it was f*cking invented by a guy barely dead. It's a wackjob story of aliens and other crap designed to sucker people. Your expected to give to the Church of Scientology, to buy their junk. Equating Scientology with Catholicism or even Islam is a joke. Those religions at least have hundreds and hundreds of years between the inception of the scam and today. Scientology is a unveiled scam, not a f*cking religion. Labling Catholics and Muslims and Buddhists 'cultists' is disgusting. It's a level of equivalence only someone with no knowledge of religion would entertain. What's next? Accepting the Heaven's Gate cult as a bona fide religion? Way too much open-minded cynicism these days. And I'm an atheist.

f*ck Tom Cruise. How much do I volunteer Ranger? What dumb question. I have to pay bills, keep the lights on, pay rent, sh*t like that. I don't work eight months and make twenty f*cking million. Don't compare the extraordinarily lucky with the hard working slobs. That's a very insensitive remark.

And I don't care what Cruise says or does, he's still a f*cking nut. Compare him to other actors that make as much. They don't act like him, do they? No, it's an issue with the flaws in his character, magnified by his fame, wealth and power. He was born and raised with issues, and all the glory his career has earned has only exacerbated them.

Like I said, great actor, f*cking nutty person.
minkowski writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 8:31:34 PM

"so while I'm with you on most of the post I wont fully go through with the "they are useless bit"

Jesus Christ, that was Fight Club movie quote.
minkowski writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 8:38:03 PM

'I don't think we should disregard people who believe in religion because we'd be doing the same things all the religious nuts do when they kill each other for difference in beliefs just not to the same extent."

I never suggested otherwise. I support real religions, and truly religious people, even if what they believe is absolute bleeding-ass horsesh*t. In fact, politically, I'm in favor, against organizations like the ACLU, of maintaining the public nature of religions, primarily western ones. I'm not sure I'd want to live in a world of moral relativity, so advocated by my fellow moron atheists. And some of the nicest people I've met have been Christians. As for judgement? Well, I judge people like I judge myself. By what's going on on the inside, and not even necessarily by the actions on the outside. Everyone is entitled to falter, to do what we might call wrong.
theo3320 writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 8:46:07 PM

wait isn't master chief supposed to be tall
minkowski writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 8:49:12 PM

Yes, he is, and also sanely heroic.
minkowski writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 8:51:48 PM

Or is that heroically sane?
TH3D4RKKN1GH7 writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 9:07:32 PM

To be honest none of you are in position to make character calls on a person you don't know. You only know of what you heard, you aren't a close friend or a relative of Tom so you really don't know him. That's my position, I don't see how you can argue otherwise. Oh and sorry about that Mink, haven't seen Fight Club in ages, not as big a fan of it as you are either lol. Though when I read it again it did sound familiar.
minkowski writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 9:12:54 PM

Well, I haven't been to Paris, but I know it's beautiful. I haven't been to the moon, but I know it's lifeless. And I have't been to Ethiopa, but I know it sucks.
TH3D4RKKN1GH7 writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 9:15:26 PM

You're comparing apples and oranges my friend.
minkowski writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 9:20:37 PM

More like comparing fruits to nuts. But it's allt he same diffrence. To say I have to know something intimately to have an opinion is silly. I have opinions about all sort of things. I'm not a practicing politician, but I have strong political beliefs. I've never met Joseph Stalin, but I hear he was a bad guy. what, am I going to reserve judgment till I meet the guy?

And anyone telling me I can't or shouldn't form an opinion of someone like Cruise till I meet him or know him is as equally an invalid position as the opposite.
minkowski writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 9:25:14 PM

"To be honest none of you are in position to make character calls on a person you don't know. "

Sure we are. By inference, rumor, speculation, innuendo and simple fact. And you're in no position to tell someone they shouldn't have an opinion of a person without knowing that person. Ielling me when and how to have an opinion is, imo, worse than having an opinion about someone I've never met. Much worse.
minkowski writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 9:26:22 PM

And I'm not trying to piss you off, but that's the way to is.

Also, my apologies for the spelling/grammatical errors.
minkowski writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 9:32:12 PM

"You only know of what you heard, you aren't a close friend or a relative of Tom so you really don't know him. "

Or what I've seen, or what's been reported in the news. What, I should disregard everything Tom Cruise related in the news now? Because if I can't begin to accept that, then I can't accept anything I read news wise. War in Afghanistan? Well, I haven't been there. GWB made a verbal gaffe? Well, I wasn't there. I don't know GWB personally. I mean, that must mean that because I don't know Oprah personally, I can't decide if she's a nice person or an evil bitch. I'll have to invite her to dinner before I decide. In other words, it's ok to have a nice opinion without knowing the person, a very subjective stance, but I can't have a negative opinion unless I know the person directly? Or else, I have to remain in opinion jail, in limbo?
minkowski writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 9:38:19 PM

Again, I'm not trying to piss you off, I just think this whole 'no opinion' thing passes no logical muster. It's based on feelings and the connotation of negativity with respect to making judgements. I'm just extrapolating the postin to its logical conclusions.
Ranger writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 10:01:49 PM

I may be totally wrong. But not about Lohan.

She's a skank!

SpookyCupcakes writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 10:12:55 PM

Ehh, at the end of the day, it's the internet, so I don't really give a sh*t.

...unless it's avatar.
minkowski writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 10:29:21 PM

We really need to stop talking about religion, politics and other sh*t. Let's just stick with the movies and Lohan jokes. This sh*t gets too heated for me. and I'm so tired my spelling and grammar is getting worse by the second. Fuke.

And Spooky. STFU about Avatar! Just kidding. Or not? No, seriously, not. Or....?
rob writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 10:48:25 PM

Cruise has been the king of the hill for a while now. Halo? I'm not so sure about. Def not Bilbo. But seriously, how often does he NOT bring in the big bucks? No other actor is as bankable as he is.
SpookyCupcakes writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 10:52:35 PM

naw man, it might be good, but sometimes fanboy pessilence needs to be evened out with hater pessilence too.
minkowski writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 11:00:26 PM

Like I did with TDK, huh? That got 'em riled up something awful.

Eh, I was in a bad way that day with the avatar thread. I really don't give a f*ck about the film. I just wanted a fight.
vwkombi writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 11:10:23 PM

Tom Cruise isn't a terrible actor, but as the Master Cheif, it wouldn't work. I hope they go with Stuart Beatties script based of both Halo and the first book "The Fall of Reach". To do that thought they would need to cast an talented actor, with an intimidating screen presence.
vwkombi writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 11:10:24 PM

Tom Cruise isn't a terrible actor, but as the Master Cheif, it wouldn't work. I hope they go with Stuart Beatties script based of both Halo and the first book "The Fall of Reach". To do that thought they would need to cast an talented actor, with an intimidating screen presence.
Kara writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 11:56:04 PM

quick question.. mink.. are you really 98??
TH3D4RKKN1GH7 writes:
on August 28th, 2009 at 11:56:25 PM

Yeah I didn't have a chance to respond cause I'm packing, off to college tomorrow and this debate seems to be over so we're just agree to disagree on this situation. Let the movie based discussions commence. Good night gents.
BrandoFresh writes:
on August 29th, 2009 at 12:12:01 AM

This isn't even funny. Whoever starts these rumors has lost all their creativity.
RastaMuffin writes:
on August 29th, 2009 at 4:18:47 AM

In all honesty Tom could possibly pull this off but why use someone already famous to appeal to the audience? why not cast some fresh blood who are actually good actors like people on worstpreviews haha. I have to affirm this may be a rumor why would he meet peter jackson? so are peter and steven working together now?
synthetic1985 writes:
on August 29th, 2009 at 1:40:29 PM

@ brandofresh....when rumors start...we see a huge string of comments like on this article....everyone needs to stop falling for rumor bullsh*t...if you don't see a lot of this sh*t coming out of the director's mouth or actor's mouth...then why would you believe it?...did anybody here believe that 50 cent was rejected in 'the expendables' just because 50 cent had his representative say so on mtv?....f*ck no...unless 50 cent said it himself, MAYBE i'd believe him...but seriously you morons in the news industry, STOP STARTING RUMORS!
padfootbob writes:
on August 30th, 2009 at 1:38:53 AM

What about Neill Blomkamp?!?!?!
Lander writes:
on August 30th, 2009 at 1:01:58 PM

Tom Cruise? You know i would accept him if he would die in first twenty minutes of movie.
spiderguitar7 writes:
on August 30th, 2009 at 3:44:12 PM

I think that Tom Cruise is a good or well fairly descent actor only that to put him in a Halo movie that tons of fan boys of halo like my self will be watching is going to ruin the movie of Microsoft Bungie damn even Ubisoft and anything that goes with the hole halo. I love halo the books all the games im a halo junkie this review of mine is going to show how bad a movie its going to be if you put Tom Cruise in his movies

-Spiderguitar7
ksplatt writes:
on August 31st, 2009 at 2:37:22 AM

idk whats worse, have cruise play in this movie or jake gylennhal in prince of persia...lol...at least in this movie if they want him as chief his face'll be covered.
TRUEMAN writes:
on August 31st, 2009 at 5:10:53 PM

TOM CRUISE 8=====D ( ) RANGER MOUTH, hahhaha ranger is a tom cruise fan hahahah, or maybe lover? hahhaha
eLgAtO187 writes:
on September 3rd, 2009 at 1:17:09 AM

i think pitt would fit halo better
AzSol writes:
on September 4th, 2009 at 10:30:26 AM

No, never in a million years should Cruise do this

There's a Good Reason Why Luke Skywalker Isn't on "Star Wars: The Force Awakens" Poster

"The Walking Dead" Fan Kills Friend Who Turned Into a Zombie

Ridley Scott Reveals Another Title for "Prometheus" Sequel

"Indiana Jones" Producer Says Harrison Ford Will Not Be Recast

Johnny Depp and Edgar Wright Team for "Fortunately, the Milk"

"Spectre" Breaks Box Office Records Overseas

Sandra Bullock to Star in Female Version of "Ocean's Eleven"

Paul Bettany Responds to Jason Statham's "Avengers" Insult

"Star Wars: The Force Awakens" Demolishes Pre-Sale Records

Daniel Craig Would Rather Commit Suicide Than Return as James Bond
Lace Wedding Dresses from ViViDress UK online shop, buy with confidence and cheap price.
WorstPreviews.com hosted by pair Networks WorstPreviews.com
Hosted by pair Networks
News Feeds | Box Office | Movie Reviews | Buzz: Top 100 | Popularity: Top 100
Poster Store | About Us | Advertising | Contact Us | Privacy Policy | Web Tools | Site Map
Copyright © 2009 WorstPreviews.com. All rights reserved