Jack Reacher: Never Go Back [2016]

[Michael^Heaven]

I was pleasantly surprised with the first one. So, I'm looking forward to seeing this.

[AchtungBaby!]

Re: Jack Reacher: Never Go Back [2016]

I was pleasantly surprised with the first one. So, I'm looking forward to seeing this.

Absolutely... TC on this type of roles is always a good deal imo..

[DIDI]

Re: Jack Reacher: Never Go Back [2016]

Funny I stopped reading the books when they cast Tom Cruise

[floridaorange]

Re: Jack Reacher: Never Go Back [2016]

shocker

[Krystyan]

Re: Jack Reacher: Never Go Back [2016]

i thought the first one was lame. one cliche after another.

[AchtungBaby!]

Re: Jack Reacher: Never Go Back [2016]

i thought the first one was lame. one cliche after another.

Most of the times, well done cliches are the only thing i need to have a good time

but yeah, defo wont win any Oscars

[Michael^Heaven]

Re:

Don't even bother. I want my $ back.

[el presidente Highsteppa]

Re: Jack Reacher: Never Go Back [2016]

Didn't care for the first one - it had some good elements, like casting Werner Herzog as the bad guy (he really needs to be a Bond Villain). But, the difference between the physicality of Reacher in the books vs. Tom Cruise's acutal stature, just ruined it for me right from the start.

That and Reacher came across as a serious asshole whenever he talks - Tom Cruise doesn't come across as instantly intimidating badass. And Rosemund Pike's role was a joke as well.

[DIDI]

Re: Jack Reacher: Never Go Back [2016]

the difference between the physicality of Reacher in the books vs. Tom Cruise's acutal stature,

This !! I saw a trailer on the Graham Norton show, and I swear all the camera shots were shot from below to make Tom look taller.

Sad thing it's put me off reading anymore of the books.

[AchtungBaby!]

Re:

Don't even bother. I want my $ back.

lol thanks for saving me some cash.. i was about to watch it this weekend