I'm not "confident" Amazon will do right by Bond. But you said "With Amazon, you can be sure there will be radical changes..." We cannot be sure there will be radical changes. I've given an example where they did not make radical changes to source material. We shall see.
But I will say this, I don't trust Barbara Broccoli any more than I trust Amazon.
I just watched the trailer for Reacher season 3 from Amazon Prime. Looks legit to me and true to Lee Child's Jack Reacher. Amazon doesn't screw up every property they acquire.
The two movies were 100% kickass. Many of the book fans couldn't get past Reacher's height, which for the uninitiated is 6'5" in the books. So Tom Cruise isn't exactly the right actor for the job. And I get that. But the stories were excellent.
I thought the second one was a bit weak, but the first film is fantastic. It has a real 1970s Hollywood thriller vibe, like a Dirty Harry movie, and is terrific stuff.
I think it kind of compares to the Bond casting conversation, because there's always calls that the actor should be exactly as Fleming described; but I've seen Tom Cruise play Reacher, and I've seen a large man play Reacher, and I know Reacher is large in the books, but for me Tom Cruise was much better because he's one of the best movie stars ever and gave the better performance. The other guy is indeed large, but that didn't change anything about the character for me- he still did the same things, and there's no difference other than a lot of scenes opening with other characters saying "oh you're large". Once you're beyond that you have a middling actor who's not as good as Tom Cruise.
I get that if you've read the books apparently his largeness is somehow key, but that didn't really come across in the three-quarters or so of a series I made it though (before I got bored of them travelling between half a dozen boring houses and asking questions over and over again).
Sir MilesThe Wrong Side Of The WardrobePosts: 28,061Chief of Staff
If you enjoyed them, then good. The first is passable, the second is poor…the stories are good, just executed poorly…no wonder Lee Child didn’t want Cruise anywhere near Reacher…
I can't see any interviews where he expressed that view: it's mostly that he said the fans felt his size was too important. I think the point he makes in this interview is good:
However, he said that it was “interesting” that those who hadn’t read his books “really liked those movies” as “they were kind of convinced by Cruise”.
The first film is absolutely terrific; no idea why you think it's executed poorly- maybe take it on its own terms rather than worry about how close it is to the book. I can find Moonraker to be enormous fun and not worry too much that it's not exactly a perfect representation of Fleming's novel.
Sir MilesThe Wrong Side Of The WardrobePosts: 28,061Chief of Staff
Lee Child actively tried to keep Cruise away from Reacher…Cruise ended up using a third party and a BIG check…once Child saw it was going to happen anyway, he changed his tune…
If you like very formulaic movies - go ahead…it’s not particularly scripted well…but if you like that sort of thing 🤷🏻♂️
I've seen no evidence for your claim about Child, if it's out there: fine, I can't claim to be invested in Reacher lore, but nothing I've seen has supported your claim and you haven't backed it up, so I've no reason to believe it just yet.
It's a very well-made and quite stylish thriller, much better than the Amazon series, which is boring. The film is written by one of the best blockbuster scriptwriters in the business- the way it deals with the sniper's identity (which I believe is hidden in the book from the outset but obviously can't be in a movie) is very clever indeed. The show is formulaic without the style, flair or charismatic central performance. Maybe the books are just formulaic, they seem it as far as I can tell.
Sir MilesThe Wrong Side Of The WardrobePosts: 28,061Chief of Staff
It’s not my fault you have “seen no evidence” - go and do a proper search…I’m not here to spoon feed you.
Believe it or don’t - I don’t care.
The Amazon series is FAR superior…if you haven’t got the attention span to watch it - don’t.
I don't understand why you're trying to make this so aggressive and personal: you feel you have to try and insinuate there's something wrong with me (I like 'formulaic' stuff, I haven't 'got the attention span' etc.) because I like a film or don't like a show, it's a very underhand way of debating about a bit of media and seems unnecessarily designed to try and raise the temperature of a conversation and turn it into an argument. I don't get why you feel the need to do that.
If you think the series is superior I'm happy to consider any viewpoints you have on it. I think the film is a top bit of pulpy fun because of the elements I mentioned (the 70s thriller Dirty Harry-ish style, the clever writing, the good direction, the charismatic star etc.), and I found the series dull because it had none of the panache of the film and felt very by-the-numbers, and together with a repetitive investigation where they just went backwards and forwards between the same few places strung out over many episodes, it failed to keep my interest. Much like the second film, which I guess didn't bore me but I felt had the same slightly cheesy source material without that extra something the first movie had. If you do something as trite and old hat as a mysterious, hard-as-nails drifter character, you've got to do it really well to lift it.
We could all insult each as much as we like to claim there's some deficiency in one another because we liked or disliked things which we all feel differently about, but that would make any forum unbearable to take part in. If you want an argument (about Jack Reacher of all things!) you can have it on your own.
Sir MilesThe Wrong Side Of The WardrobePosts: 28,061Chief of Staff
I’m not making anything personal or aggressive…that’s your MO…I probably still have an PM from you calling me all sorts of stuff…and quite a few complaints about you…I always find it strange that you start niggling at people and then try and claim the high ground 🤷🏻♂️ send me another PM if you like…but lets leave this here…
I'm happy to chat on PM if you want but please don't accuse me of 'calling you all sorts of stuff' on a thread for others to read - that didn't happen.
I can’t imagine any Jack Reacher book fans (I am one) thinking the movies are a good representation. The stories are understandably edited down and suffer for that, and the second one, in particular, is far removed from the novel. Tom Cruise is totally wrong for the role. If you take the two movies as a man called Jack Reacher (nothing to do with the book character) then they are perfectly adequate thrillers. I do not get the Dirty Harry comparison, it’s totally different in style.
The Amazon series is terrific. Very close to the books. The 8-episode format lends itself to the more detailed adaption of the books. I like a slower pace so the complexities of the plot can be developed properly. Alan Ritchson is as good a match for the book Reacher as could possibly be, he brings the character to life, his acting is perfectly good for the role. The series format is perfect for the Reacher books which are detailed and complex, something that is not possible to convey in a 2 hour movie.
Yeah, well, sometimes nothin' can be a real cool hand.
Sir MilesThe Wrong Side Of The WardrobePosts: 28,061Chief of Staff
I think yeah, having not read the books I see them as good thrillers (or the first one anyway), as I say above: I'm not too worried about how close they are to the books as I'm coming to them as films. I totally get that fans of the books would be annoyed at his lack of largeness as it seems a defining character trait: I guess it's not unlike a Batman adaptation having the main character not dressing up as a bat. And they are very popular books so obviously they're good at what they do. But as it is I think the film is effective without it, and comparing the series and film the character's traits seemed very close in the two to me.
I think it's absolutely got the 70s thriller style to it though, I guess even down to the car Reacher ends up driving about. And the opening sniper sequence is very evocative of the Scorpio sequences from DH, that slow lingering style. I went back and checked out some reviews and I can see I'm not the first to say it (and most reviews are very positive- I even found the Reacher subreddit and surprisingly even some of the fans there say the movies are better: opinion is more divided than I expected). Even the main characters of Jack and Harry are hardly too different in their approach and outlook, I think it works very well.
I guess as we're talking about it from the point of Amazon doing source material well, I'd have to say that I found their Jack Ryan pretty disappointing overall although fairly watchable fluff. He got turned into a special forces superhero, which didn't feel right for Ryan to me- I know he had a backstory of the marines in the books, but they really leant on that a lot with him leading all of these special missions in full military fatigues all the time.
JACK REACHER is pretty great. I have no dog to kick with Cruise not being the book character's size...it's a film, and it's a very well executed film at that.
JACK REACHER: NEVER GO BACK is the film that we all feared the first film would be. Flat out terrible.
I like the new REACHER series. It's a different dynamic than the films so it feels like its own thing. On a level of delivery, it feels akin to the first film in terms of overall quality, so I'm satisfied.
I think the first Reacher movie worked very well. Cruise was good in it in spite of his size. To put it another way: His size worked against him, but Cruise's skill and star power made it work anyway.
Comments
Phew, I was worried y'all wouldn't find another woman to blame this on.
🤣
I'm not "confident" Amazon will do right by Bond. But you said "With Amazon, you can be sure there will be radical changes..." We cannot be sure there will be radical changes. I've given an example where they did not make radical changes to source material. We shall see.
But I will say this, I don't trust Barbara Broccoli any more than I trust Amazon.
I just watched the trailer for Reacher season 3 from Amazon Prime. Looks legit to me and true to Lee Child's Jack Reacher. Amazon doesn't screw up every property they acquire.
It helps when the author is alive and they have a significant input so it can't be screwed up.
https://torontosun.com/entertainment/television/lee-child-says-alan-ritchson-nails-jack-reacher-in-new-amazon-series
I got very bored in the middle of the first series and gave up. The first film was much better if you ask me.
Yes, he's taller now.
Didn’t help in the two films…at all.
The two movies were 100% kickass. Many of the book fans couldn't get past Reacher's height, which for the uninitiated is 6'5" in the books. So Tom Cruise isn't exactly the right actor for the job. And I get that. But the stories were excellent.
I thought the second one was a bit weak, but the first film is fantastic. It has a real 1970s Hollywood thriller vibe, like a Dirty Harry movie, and is terrific stuff.
I think it kind of compares to the Bond casting conversation, because there's always calls that the actor should be exactly as Fleming described; but I've seen Tom Cruise play Reacher, and I've seen a large man play Reacher, and I know Reacher is large in the books, but for me Tom Cruise was much better because he's one of the best movie stars ever and gave the better performance. The other guy is indeed large, but that didn't change anything about the character for me- he still did the same things, and there's no difference other than a lot of scenes opening with other characters saying "oh you're large". Once you're beyond that you have a middling actor who's not as good as Tom Cruise.
I get that if you've read the books apparently his largeness is somehow key, but that didn't really come across in the three-quarters or so of a series I made it though (before I got bored of them travelling between half a dozen boring houses and asking questions over and over again).
If you enjoyed them, then good. The first is passable, the second is poor…the stories are good, just executed poorly…no wonder Lee Child didn’t want Cruise anywhere near Reacher…
I can't see any interviews where he expressed that view: it's mostly that he said the fans felt his size was too important. I think the point he makes in this interview is good:
However, he said that it was “interesting” that those who hadn’t read his books “really liked those movies” as “they were kind of convinced by Cruise”.
The first film is absolutely terrific; no idea why you think it's executed poorly- maybe take it on its own terms rather than worry about how close it is to the book. I can find Moonraker to be enormous fun and not worry too much that it's not exactly a perfect representation of Fleming's novel.
Lee Child actively tried to keep Cruise away from Reacher…Cruise ended up using a third party and a BIG check…once Child saw it was going to happen anyway, he changed his tune…
If you like very formulaic movies - go ahead…it’s not particularly scripted well…but if you like that sort of thing 🤷🏻♂️
If you like very formulaic movies - go ahead
You know this is a forum for Bond movies, yeah? 😂
I've seen no evidence for your claim about Child, if it's out there: fine, I can't claim to be invested in Reacher lore, but nothing I've seen has supported your claim and you haven't backed it up, so I've no reason to believe it just yet.
It's a very well-made and quite stylish thriller, much better than the Amazon series, which is boring. The film is written by one of the best blockbuster scriptwriters in the business- the way it deals with the sniper's identity (which I believe is hidden in the book from the outset but obviously can't be in a movie) is very clever indeed. The show is formulaic without the style, flair or charismatic central performance. Maybe the books are just formulaic, they seem it as far as I can tell.
It’s not my fault you have “seen no evidence” - go and do a proper search…I’m not here to spoon feed you.
Believe it or don’t - I don’t care.
The Amazon series is FAR superior…if you haven’t got the attention span to watch it - don’t.
I don't understand why you're trying to make this so aggressive and personal: you feel you have to try and insinuate there's something wrong with me (I like 'formulaic' stuff, I haven't 'got the attention span' etc.) because I like a film or don't like a show, it's a very underhand way of debating about a bit of media and seems unnecessarily designed to try and raise the temperature of a conversation and turn it into an argument. I don't get why you feel the need to do that.
If you think the series is superior I'm happy to consider any viewpoints you have on it. I think the film is a top bit of pulpy fun because of the elements I mentioned (the 70s thriller Dirty Harry-ish style, the clever writing, the good direction, the charismatic star etc.), and I found the series dull because it had none of the panache of the film and felt very by-the-numbers, and together with a repetitive investigation where they just went backwards and forwards between the same few places strung out over many episodes, it failed to keep my interest. Much like the second film, which I guess didn't bore me but I felt had the same slightly cheesy source material without that extra something the first movie had. If you do something as trite and old hat as a mysterious, hard-as-nails drifter character, you've got to do it really well to lift it.
We could all insult each as much as we like to claim there's some deficiency in one another because we liked or disliked things which we all feel differently about, but that would make any forum unbearable to take part in. If you want an argument (about Jack Reacher of all things!) you can have it on your own.
I’m not making anything personal or aggressive…that’s your MO…I probably still have an PM from you calling me all sorts of stuff…and quite a few complaints about you…I always find it strange that you start niggling at people and then try and claim the high ground 🤷🏻♂️ send me another PM if you like…but lets leave this here…
I'm happy to chat on PM if you want but please don't accuse me of 'calling you all sorts of stuff' on a thread for others to read - that didn't happen.
I can’t imagine any Jack Reacher book fans (I am one) thinking the movies are a good representation. The stories are understandably edited down and suffer for that, and the second one, in particular, is far removed from the novel. Tom Cruise is totally wrong for the role. If you take the two movies as a man called Jack Reacher (nothing to do with the book character) then they are perfectly adequate thrillers. I do not get the Dirty Harry comparison, it’s totally different in style.
The Amazon series is terrific. Very close to the books. The 8-episode format lends itself to the more detailed adaption of the books. I like a slower pace so the complexities of the plot can be developed properly. Alan Ritchson is as good a match for the book Reacher as could possibly be, he brings the character to life, his acting is perfectly good for the role. The series format is perfect for the Reacher books which are detailed and complex, something that is not possible to convey in a 2 hour movie.
If you say so.
I agree wholeheartedly 😃
I think yeah, having not read the books I see them as good thrillers (or the first one anyway), as I say above: I'm not too worried about how close they are to the books as I'm coming to them as films. I totally get that fans of the books would be annoyed at his lack of largeness as it seems a defining character trait: I guess it's not unlike a Batman adaptation having the main character not dressing up as a bat. And they are very popular books so obviously they're good at what they do. But as it is I think the film is effective without it, and comparing the series and film the character's traits seemed very close in the two to me.
I think it's absolutely got the 70s thriller style to it though, I guess even down to the car Reacher ends up driving about. And the opening sniper sequence is very evocative of the Scorpio sequences from DH, that slow lingering style. I went back and checked out some reviews and I can see I'm not the first to say it (and most reviews are very positive- I even found the Reacher subreddit and surprisingly even some of the fans there say the movies are better: opinion is more divided than I expected). Even the main characters of Jack and Harry are hardly too different in their approach and outlook, I think it works very well.
I guess as we're talking about it from the point of Amazon doing source material well, I'd have to say that I found their Jack Ryan pretty disappointing overall although fairly watchable fluff. He got turned into a special forces superhero, which didn't feel right for Ryan to me- I know he had a backstory of the marines in the books, but they really leant on that a lot with him leading all of these special missions in full military fatigues all the time.
JACK REACHER is pretty great. I have no dog to kick with Cruise not being the book character's size...it's a film, and it's a very well executed film at that.
JACK REACHER: NEVER GO BACK is the film that we all feared the first film would be. Flat out terrible.
I like the new REACHER series. It's a different dynamic than the films so it feels like its own thing. On a level of delivery, it feels akin to the first film in terms of overall quality, so I'm satisfied.
I think the first Reacher movie worked very well. Cruise was good in it in spite of his size. To put it another way: His size worked against him, but Cruise's skill and star power made it work anyway.