Can't We Just Leave Tom Cruise Alone?
Posted on Tuesday April 8, 2008, 17:26 by Olly Richards in Empire States
Why is everyone still picking on Tom Cruise? OK, jumping on a sofa to declare your love for someone is weird. And, yes, he is part of a religion that sounds, to some of us, like it may use Star Trek fan fiction as its holy scripture. But I don’t care about any celebrity’s religious beliefs. The thing is, Cruise has done nothing bad to anyone and, most importantly, continues to make very good movies and be very good in them. So why does he continue to be entertainment blog whipping-boy number one?
I ask the question because, after a couple of years of mild snarking at Cruise’s expense, things seem to be turning vitriolic. A recent article by Roger Friedman on the FOX News website (I hate to encourage eyes to such bilge, but you can read it here) tears the actor apart without restraint or any pretence at objectivity, saying that his next film Valkyrie is destined for ridicule – based chiefly on a line from the trailer – and that his future projects are equally doomed. This is from a man who works for the company that’s releasing Valkyrie is some countries.
Valkyrie could be dreadful. It could also be the greatest film ever made. Right now, nobody knows because it’s not finished. I’d prefer to remain optimistic – even if I do find the lack of German accents in the trailer somewhat bizarre – because I honestly believe Cruise is one of the most reliable and discerning movie stars working today.
Look at his last three films. War of the Worlds was extremely entertaining sci-fi and one of most successful movies of the year. Mission Impossible III wrenched the series from the doldrums of II (which I secretly enjoy, despite its obvious not-very-goodness) and recaptured the thrill of the first. Lions for Lambs had something interesting to say, or encouraged everyone else to say something interesting and think a little. The latter wasn’t for everyone – I personally loved it – but it was the sort of secondary role that most A-listers wouldn’t bother with. Also, crucially, Cruise was different in all of them. Where he could very easily fall back on a ‘one size fits all’ performance, like some other people in his pay-bracket, he’s still trying to test himself. He’s not just a star; he’s an actor.
Cruise’s next appearance will be as a fat, balding studio boss in Tropic Thunder – which, despite Friedman’s citation of one Ain’t It Cool user review, is said to be very good. Then he might try broad comedy with Todd Philips’ Men or Hardy Men with Ben Stiller. Friedman idiotically dismisses Men due to Philips being “less-than-elegant”, as if this is some kind of failing in a man who makes populist comedy. Then, of course, there’s Valkyrie. The newly announced shift to next year is worrying, but it’s hardly an obvious pay-cheque star vehicle. In six films that’s quite a considerable breadth of work. You won’t find many A-listers with so many fingers in so many pies. Cruise has made some stinkers, but he’s never been one to take the money and run. He cares about each film he makes and that’s to be respected.
So, I ask, can’t we leave him alone now? If he keeps making entertaining, interesting movies – and I’ll happily allow him the odd slip – can’t we just let him worship whatever he likes, be it space lizard or man who can return from the dead and do magic with fish? Being a bit odd every now and again shouldn’t be a reason to pick on someone continually. Robert Downey Jr was a nut-job for ages, and he’s awesome.
Login or register to comment.
Posted on Tuesday April 8, 2008, 19:52
Can't say i have anything against the man... in fact I have very little against him, I'm not a fan of his early work, but in recent years I've been yet to see a bad performace from him and since he's a movie actor, I think that's all I can ask from a man, that he act. What he does with his time off is his business (at least until he actually starts hurting people).
Posted on Tuesday April 8, 2008, 20:03
There is no doubt about the Cruiser's talent and his desire to display his acting range, but the whole Holmes/couch/scientology thing has absolutely screwed his credibility. But the real damage is that he has badly damaged his believability in any given role. He colud hit the highs of the past (Magnolia, Jerry Maguire) again but will it matter if he is dismissed as a fool at every given moment ?
Plus War Of The Worlds was a shambles ! Spielberg however is as much to blame ! How did they drive through the city rubble ? How did the car survive when a plane landed on their lawn ? Why did Cruise's character have to be so disagreeable with everything - the situation was already tension filled - he had to act like a prick throughout the fiilm ? Oh and then suddenly become the world's greatest dad ! Plus, the end worse than A.I. but Cruise continued the trend with the very end of M. I. 3 !
Damm I was making a good point until my feelings for War Of The Worlds had to go and spoil it all !
Posted on Tuesday April 8, 2008, 20:23
Thank you, Olly!!! At last someone is sticking up for the Cruise. I personally don't agree with the guys politics or religious views, but let's face it, the man can act.
I guess the problem is, as Scotch put so aptly before he went ape-shit over WOTW, is that the majority of audiences will now steer clear of his movies, or watch them and mock him throughout. Personally, his actions in the media and his public persona haven't affected how I watch him on-screen, but I completely understand if it does to others.
As for Scotch's comments on WOTW, since when does logic really enter into sci-fi movies. Can you really ridicule a film because of some rather minuscule plot-holes?
Posted on Tuesday April 8, 2008, 20:52
Ok I agree about suspension of disbelief but in WOTW case I was just so disappointed. Minority Report was one of the best sci fi movies of the decade, amalgamating the collective genius of Speilberg and Cruise. It had its faults but they were forgivable as it papered over any loose threads with its excellent pacing and steadfast commitment to the story. But for me WOTW just contained too many problems to excuse (and I didnt even mention the Tim Robbins bit !)
As for Cruise, I still look forward to his movies and I really hope he can regain his fans trust and belief.
Posted on Tuesday April 8, 2008, 21:01
Well said, Olly. Though I would say it's been more than mild snarkery since WOTW.
Posted on Tuesday April 8, 2008, 23:56
He is one of the finest actors alive today and gives a stellar performance even in a mediocre film.
I promise to leave him alone from now on... provided he promises to keep his crazy views to himself. If he can't keep his wacky religion to himself then he is fair game.
Posted on Wednesday April 9, 2008, 01:02
The problem is that when 'The Press' continually shove someone's personal life into the public eye (and like Britney Spears, when Cruise hits the headlines it's almost impossible to avoid, even for those of us who do our best to ignore all that hack tabloid celebrity gossip shite), it becomes harder and harder to separate their on and off-screen personas.
With Cruise it's particularly difficult because he pushes a lot of his business into the public arena himself. So, while he may not have done anyone any harm, he goes out of his way to portray himself as a smug, obnoxious, self-righteous, manipulative, batshit crazy arsehole (and forget the sofa-jumping, that was just embarassing, remember instead the criticisms of Brooke Shields, and that "If there's a car crash, only scientologists can help. Whoo." video. They were something else.), and for all his talent, that's what comes to mind for many of us when we see him on-screen.
I, for example, put off seeing Magnolia due to his presence. When I finally got round to watching it I loved it, and I was as stunned by the quality of his performance as everything else about it. But I was still very much aware that it was 'that nutjob Tom Cruise' pretending to be a different nutjob and I found it jarring (arguably because I expected to, I know).
Ultimately, if he wants us to all take him seriously as an actor again, he needs to start working under layers of prosthetics so we don't have to be reminded of Himself every time we see his face, or alternatively just zip the lips. Preferably both. See, once you say something in a public forum people have a right to call you on it, and he just can't resist running his mouth off at times. It can grate.
Posted on Wednesday April 9, 2008, 02:33
Hear, hear, Olly. Tom Cruise, despite his star status and addiction to big commercial vehicles, is actually still a consistently underrated actor. Everyone gave all the plaudits to Hoffman in Rain Man and yet it's Cruise's character that had to actually drive and progress every scene as well as go through a night-and-day character arc - but everyone ignored him. What about Magnolia? Say what you want about Vanilla Sky, but I think his performance is fantastic? And even though people take his blockbuster ventures for granted, he's still lends a great level of credibility to them - Minority Report being the best example I can think of where among all the spectacle and plot twists, you've got a father utterly driven with the abduction of his son - not exactly easy, and yet he's taken completely for granted. I for one really want this man to get his Oscar.
On a more controversial note, people only pick on Scientology more because it's the newest ludicrous ideology. So it's based on impossible nonsense and takes in an absurd amount of money every year - what popular religion doesn't?! Until countries are being invaded or governed by it, contraception isn't being banned, prejudices aren't being promoted, or extremist fringes aren't killing people over it, frankly I don't have too much issue with it. Just don't try and sell it to me Mr. Cruise, I'd rather spend my money on one of your films.
Posted on Wednesday April 9, 2008, 13:49
There ain't much wrong ith a lot of what he does. I quite like most of his films and when you look at his entire back catalogue there are some real Clinkers. i think the problem some people have with tom is that he came across as being cheesy in his early films and it's hard to get past that notion of him as a person. This seems to be equally reinforced by his perosnal life antics, for which i have no time. As far as i'm concerned if he's happy and he ain't annoying me then fair play. He seems to have been slotted into this kind of mold that he can't get put of. Time for some major reinvention i think.
In Closing, i think the mans personal life has influenced his popularity and therefore his films in the eyes of those who are addicted to celeb lives but from a purely cinematic point of view, he's hard to beat.
Posted on Wednesday April 9, 2008, 13:53
Before the antics of the last few years Cruise, despite his box office popularity, was an actor who some people (journalists, well certain ones, some film critics etc) never liked.
Despite Magnolia, Rain Man, Born on the 4th of July etc there were still people who never considered him a great actor (or even a good one ludicrous as that opinion may be it existed/exists). Take in the gay rumours, the fact that he never seemed like a natural interview, and the Scientology connection and you had a performer who clearly some people had by then already made their minds up about.
Cruise, quite frankly, hasn't helped himself in the last 3 years with public displays of idiocy that get more WTF each time they've occurred.
Mad Dog Tannen
Posted on Wednesday April 9, 2008, 15:32
I disagree that he hasn't done anything bad to anyone.
The man went on live television and patronised his interviewer and audience by essentially claiming to be a world authority on post-natal depression and how it should be treated. He was making out that any woman who uses prescribed drugs to treat the condition must be a bad mother or something.
He's asking for all the criticism because he keeps talking absolute shit in public.
Besides, since when does being good at your job mean that your dubious beliefs and public pronouncements can go unchallenged? The criticism does go too far, but on the whole there's nothing wrong with a bit of healthy debate.
Posted on Wednesday April 9, 2008, 15:43
I have to agree with Mad Dog above. like it or not, celebrities wield influence in our culture and Tom Cruise is a highly vocal supporter of a dubious ideology. While Olly's and other people's points are well taken and Friedman's article is unfairly vitriolic Cruise has invited criticism with some of his behaviour over the last few years - sure his family life should remain private, but disguising bias and prejudice on subjects like drug abuse and depression as religious views is plain wrong and he should be challenged on that.
Also, I have to say over a long career there are only two films I find him watchable on, can't really say I enjoy him as an actor at all - he's just a movie star to me
Posted on Wednesday April 9, 2008, 16:01
I've been a huge fan for many years now and I also had a pleasure of meeting the man in person. He was, as you would expect, very charming and friendly. I think as an actor he is very underated and personally i believe his performance in Jerry Maguire deserved an oscar. The trouble seems to be when someone who is as succesful, talented and good looking with pots of money as Tom Cruise, people as is their nature are going to want to shoot them down. I thought the moments on the Matt Lauer show were really awkward as indeed the Couch jumping episode, but hey we all make mistakes, just not in front of millions of people who all have something to say about you. As a motion picture actor he has made some dam fine films and some real duds, cocktail springs to mind. I personally will be looking forward to all his new pictures.
Posted on Wednesday April 9, 2008, 16:43
Yeah, the couch thing was weird, but if that's how he wants to publicly express being in love, well, he's Tom Cruise at the end of the day, just go with it. The Scientology stuff, it's not my cup of tea, but I've seen and read about people acting much crazier in the name of other religions.
At the end of the day, Cruise makes some damn entertaining films, and that's all I (and clearly most of the people here) care about.
Posted on Wednesday April 9, 2008, 16:59
So what he jumped on a couch and has different views and beliefs I mean he hasn't ever broken any laws, so give it a rest and stop giving him grief over something so mild as a bit of couch jumping as far as I am concerned the only damage done was maybe to the couch and let it go for gods sake it happened a couple of years ago and if Brooke Shields can get over his medication comments and move on, why can't everyone else.I think that know one can forget these incidents because he is famous, but for gods sake move on and leave him alone already.
Posted on Wednesday April 9, 2008, 17:02
Word. Let the work speak for itself. I thought his performances in MI3 and WOTW were well above what many actors would think a blockbuster worthy of. The pleading sequence at the very start of MI3 is one of many instances where I have thought, like him or not, Cruise is a top actor who always gives 100% to any project.
Posted on Wednesday April 9, 2008, 18:11
What a lovely post, I completely agree with you.
Posted on Wednesday April 9, 2008, 18:16
for his turn in collateral, he at least deserves everyone off his back. leave the cruiser alone Fox guys.
Posted on Wednesday April 9, 2008, 18:48
I've got to say I agree with everyone here by and large. Yes Scientology is being jumped on as it's the newest 'trendy' religion (remember the fuss people kicked up about Kabbalah or however you spell it five years ago?), and yes admittedly his public appearances since the Katie Holmes thing have done him no favours in terms of how he's perceived by the average person on the street in our age of gossip magazines and Perez Hilton, and his comments about post-natal depression medication were hugely offensive regardless of who they came from.
However I will say this: he is not a bad actor. I personally would not specifically choose to go out and see a film where the fact Tom Cruise was in it was the main draw - nothing against the man himself, it's just he doesn't appeal to me - but what I have seen of him does give me respect for him as a performer. Unfortunately the sad fact remains that in the society we live in where if you're rich and famous the media will want to tear you down and will jump on everything you do that is somehow not 'normal'. Live and let live people.
Posted on Wednesday April 9, 2008, 19:09
God bless Fox and their consistently unbiased reporting.
Through further investigation I have a source which told me Tom Cruise eats babies.
Posted on Wednesday April 9, 2008, 19:50
Who's Roger Friedman!? After reading the article I was reminded of a quote from the Bruce Willis-starring classic, The Last Boy Scout: "We're witnessing the death of good journalism." I'm as skeptical of Cruise's personal life as the next man (especially the Scientology thing) but I agree with the blog on many points. Cruise is a constantly entertaining actor who won't just commit to any old rubbish just for the paycheck. Yes, Mission: Impossible II was a car crash of a movie, but its predecessor and sequel were superior entertainment. Of course Valkyrie should've been a German production, with German actors, speaking in German, but I don't like judging films before I've seen them. It may be a turkey, but it certainly won't be the end of Cruise's career. Oh, and Todd Philips..."less-than-elegant"? Roger Friedman..."more-than-useless".
Posted on Wednesday April 9, 2008, 20:00
i hope the wanker burns in hell. He's so called religion cons old people out of money. Scientology is nothing more then a shit ass religion thats run by dick heads
Posted on Wednesday April 9, 2008, 20:27
I personally couldn't care less about any actor's personal lives, it's what they do at work that interests me. What actors get up to off-screen is entirely up to them, I'm sure they are equally as interested in my life.
Since Magnolia, Tom Cruise's respectability as an actor has been second-to-none and he has appeared in some of my favourite films or recent years: Minority Report, Collateral and M-I: III. Working with Ben Stiller is also good as it shows a willingness to laugh at himself on screen. I am admittedly worried about Valkyrie, but this is the same writer and director as The Usual Suspects so I'm prepared to reserve judgement.
Posted on Wednesday April 9, 2008, 20:55
I just dont understand how he got into acting. He must have known someone. He has to stand on stools to actually look fairly tall!
Posted on Wednesday April 9, 2008, 21:03
I'm with the majority on here, sure the guy makes some crazy choices in the real world (The rumour of Tom having future wife 'auditions' is a corker), and the whole Scientology thing sounds absolutely mental.
But none of that stuff affects me personally in the slightest, the only thing he does that affects me, as a film lover, is what movies he stars in and his performance in said film. And in that respect he rarely, nowadays anyway, puts a foot wrong.
I bloody loved WOTW, MI3 was good fun, and Minority Report is one of my fave sci-fi films of all time.
And it was all largely due to his involvement.
If his crazy religious beliefs ever start worming their way into his films it'll be a different story, until then you can count me as a fan.
Posted on Wednesday April 9, 2008, 21:07
Journalists like to kick someone who is at the top of their game and point out some personal flaws they believe that person has. Tom Cruise is an actor and we have the right to judge him on his films that he produces and acts in I don't think we have the right to label him as some kind of wack job due to his personal beliefs or who he chooses to marry. It is quite obvious that as you say Tom takes care in the choices he makes when he does films and I think he shows a great range from MI series to Magnolia to Collateral. Tom gets to pretend to jump off buildings save people in peril and get the girls and get paid millions to do so, I think they're just jealous.
Posted on Wednesday April 9, 2008, 21:58
Ah, the Cruiser - aka 'The Evil Face of Commercialism' to many people.
Yes, his sofa antics are ridiculous, as is his worrying faith, which hints at a very, very insecure person beneath that toothpaste grin and all the success of the past decades (I'll rest my part-time psychiatrist duties for now). Unfortunately too many people only ever take notice of Cruise's mainstream, blockbuster oeuvre - a classic kind of cause and effect. These people were among the first to scream in terror when they heard that Cruise and 'that director of superhero movies' were about to play games with German history and thus either demonising ze Bundesrepublik or undeservedly making heroes of a bunch of elitist noblemen. In both cases one thing was clear: Cruise can only do stupid, only cares about box office returns and will mess things up - the man has no artistic conscious and, lest we forget it, believes in a strange cult.
I always have a hard time pointing out Cruise's good efforts to these people: Magnolia, above all, acting-wise; or the fact that he pushed Narc into cinemas; or that, at the peak of his career, he gave two years of his life to Stanley Kubrick, no questions asked. After a moment's hesitation my dialogue partner counters that he's a creep nonetheless and will mess up Valkyrie.
I guess correcting Tom Cruise's public image will be the ultimate task of any PR specialist. I look forward to Mr. Mapother's future projects, but I'm afraid his reputation has been tarnished forever.
Posted on Wednesday April 9, 2008, 22:38
To the list of great performances in the last decade, I would add Last Samurai.
Mel Gibson might be a better comparison, with what I personally feel are more glaring gaffes to overcome. Tom's are pretty much out of sight out of mind, but I will not watch a Gibson film again. RDJr is just a party animal, which is easily forgiven, but Mel is completely insane (which may explain his brilliant turn as Riggs in LW1/2). Next to Mel, Tom is almost "normal".
Posted on Wednesday April 9, 2008, 23:04
Whilst I've never felt compelled to watch a film because 'it's the latest Tom Cruise one', he seems to generally pick average to decent fare. I can't remember a film he was in recently that was utter dogshite but I could be wrong. Anyway that whole 'death of good journalism' quote was absolutely spot on. The Roger Friedman article was a badly written hissy fit that sounded like it came from a bunch of middle aged women slagging someone off behind their back rather than an actual journalist. Whats more, he shouldn't be using Tropic Thunder as evidence that Cruise is going down the pan. I've yet to meet anyone who doesn't think that looks like it will be utter genius. In fact, I tried to find the 'lukewarm response' it got on Aintitcool and the closest fit to Friedman's description was the following quote...
'All in all it was a good movie and a funny one. It is always walking on a thin red line between comedy that is more realistic and comedy that is huge and over the
top. I would give it a 4 out of 5.'
Shit, with reviews like that, Cruise should just pack up right away, in fact, Downey, Stiller and Black should be surprised if they ever work again!! Oh, hang on, just before that quote there was this one...
'Now for the best actor in the film. The man who steals the film. Tom Cruise! Yes Tom Cruise was brilliant in this, I won't go into detail because it will be an
awesome surprise but Tom Cruise played a role I never in a million years thought he would ever play, and I truly think after this film comes out he will redeem
himself to the public and from all the bad press he has gotten lately, because I don't see how you could not like the guy after seeing him really go for it in
I have to ask, is Roger Friedman one of the 3am Girls in disguise?
Sure, Tom Cruise should leave his crazy at home and stop bringing it to work but until he actually starts making terrible films, what harm is he doing?
Posted on Thursday April 10, 2008, 01:28
He's getting all this criticism because he's the spokesperson for a con-job. It's not a religion, it's organised fraud and more than that, it has already cost people their lives. So forgive me for hoping that his movie career dies a quick death.
Posted on Thursday April 10, 2008, 03:01
I gotta ask ollie. Are you gonna do a crying you tube video screaming "Leave tom alone"?
If not, why not?
Posted on Thursday April 10, 2008, 07:45
I totally agree with you.
And do we want to forget THE LAST SAMURAI? Brilliant movie and
Tom read books about Samurai for 6 months (6...) to get everything possible on the issue!
And World Of The Worlds was bad because of Spielberg and his always-has-to-be-an-happy-ending Ending.
Posted on Thursday April 10, 2008, 09:28
I had always enjoyed Tom Cruise's films but I found myself guilty of beginning to avoid them around the time of the couch hopping because instead of investing in his character on screen I was just thinking, "it's that weird little creep". But then I was watching Collateral again recently and I just realised what a bloody good actor he actually is. Yes, his claims regarding post natal depression are at best misguided but he's not the first actor to have dubious views-Mel Gibson anyone?
P.S. WOTW would have been much better if Speilberg had had the courage to bump off the son-I mean come on, how the fuck did he survive?!?
Posted on Thursday April 10, 2008, 10:14
I dont get how people are so affected by what an actor does or says in his spare time, even if the guy is crazy and we see him next week on oprah saying he's the messiah.... so what
there's alot worse going on in the world so watch his films their great.
Posted on Thursday April 10, 2008, 12:03
Yes, I'd like it if Empire left Tom Cruise alone and stopped acting as his British PR department.
Posted on Thursday April 10, 2008, 12:18
DAMN! Another one claimed by Scientology. We still love you Olly, just don't jump on any couches for christs sake!
Posted on Thursday April 10, 2008, 12:33
Someone may have already mentioned this, but some people have made pretty long comments and I'm pretty lazy -
I think Cruise is a pretty good actor that's been in some pretty good films. I don't care who he's married to or what his beliefs are - or if he's gay for that matter. It's really not any of my business.
What impresses me is that when he comes to London for a premiere he spends hours signing autographs and talking to fans in Leicester Square. Of course this is a good PR move for him, but I don't see anyone else spend that much time in the cold and rain making that much effort.
I would say 'let's give the guy a break', but let's face it - that ain't gonna happen. They didn't leave Britney Spears alone despite the fact she was having serious psychological problems (which was covered in a very funny recent episode of South Park).
P.S. bocedisimone - good point well made about Speilberg. I haven't seen War of the Worlds (couldn't hack the idea of it being all Americanised), but the whole "always-has-to-be-an-happy-ending" thing has been driving me mad for years. Obviously A.I. is the best example.
Posted on Thursday April 10, 2008, 12:37
Cruise is a fine actor indeed. Rain Man is a fantastic film and really established him as more than just a blockbusteer fly boy. However, as such a big star what he does in his time off is shoved down our throats by the gamut of celebrity magazines an "news" sites.
The Scientology is not a good thing for someone in his positiion (I used to live near East Grinstead and it was a turf war between them, the Mormons and the Jehovahs Witnesess) and I think the whole Katie Holmes saga just pushed the media over the edge with regards to what he could get away with.
So, in summing up I would say: Tom Cruise, great actor but otherwise a bit of a twat when it comes to life choices.
Posted on Thursday April 10, 2008, 12:40
The whole thing has been blown out of all proportion mainly by the tabloid press. This planet has a habit of stamping on anyone whose head raises above the acceptable status quo. The only crime Tom Cruise can be accused of is being there and communicating. Since when is expressing your enthusiasm and love been unnacceptable, since when has telling people that shouldn't take drugs become acceptable. I personally think Tom Cruise is a great actor and a great person and it's the media that have created a twisted view of him. If one listens to the people that really know him and have worked with him they all say, one for one, what a great guy he is. It's so easy to slag someone off on the internet or in a newspaper but it's a gutless thing to do. There is no place in the world for religious bigotry and no place for destroying someone's reputation on manufactured media. It's disgusting. Tom Cruise certainly doesn't deserve it and so yes Olly you are absolutely right - he should be left alone.
Posted on Thursday April 10, 2008, 12:44
You heard the lady fellas, let's leave Tom alone.
Posted on Thursday April 10, 2008, 12:47
I think the man deserves respect for continually challenging himself differently in every film he stars in, look at the evidence....Top Gun, Born 4th July, Rainman, Jerry Maguire, Few Good Men, Mission Impossible, Minority Report, Magnolia, Last Samurai... say what you will about his private life but the man is pure blockbuster who allways add a touch of power acting to his roles.
Posted on Thursday April 10, 2008, 13:04
I aboslutely agree with you. We should get back to judging actors by their movies and performances and not because of their private lives. Tom in all these years has proven to be a great actor.
Posted on Thursday April 10, 2008, 14:30
He makes great movie choices. I can't remember being disappointed in a film he's been in, particularly the last 10 yrs. Consistently entertaining films. Few actors today have that kind of back catalogue. Can't wait for Tropic Thunder.
Posted on Thursday April 10, 2008, 15:06
I think he is actually in many ways an underatted actor - but its kind of his own fault and doing. Their is so much baggage that comes with him now that people forget he is an exceptional actor. I thought his performance in Interview With The Vampire was superb and one of, if not his best performances in a film !!
The article sounds like it was written one of those bitter twats that appears in those MTV dosumentrys (word used very loosely) on most richest celebrity kids, or biggest houses or largest arses !!
Posted on Thursday April 10, 2008, 15:50
Apart from the fact I disagree about the quality of his acting (extremely limited - doing lots of different roles doesn't argue against that if he broadly plays the same in them all, and not often that well) and his films (lots of stars doesn't make tosh like MI 3 watchable), this alone should not be a reason to rag on anyone. Even the arrogant way I think he comes over in interviews, combined with him often seeming to come across as more than a little dim (my favourite remains a wonderful awful interview on Ross re Vanilla Sky) shouldn't encourage vitriol but dismissal.
But to say he leaves others alone when he actively proselytises for his mindless little cult is being overly kind. If one person listens to his irresponsible BS about psychiatry that is one person too much. If his role model status lets one person blinded by the shiny smile join up with his venal and dangerous little group? Remember he is the one bringing these things up. Why doesn't Travolta get it for being equally thick about the invisible aliens? He is intelligent enough to keep his beliefs to himself.
All this is reason enough to remove all publicity from the man, so fair enough. But I DO mean ALL. He doesn't get to pick and choose.
Posted on Thursday April 10, 2008, 15:58
I love a lot of his movies, I think he's a wicked actor and ain't brilliance usually equated with slight madness anyways?
Let him believes what he wants (such as it is) but if he's big enough to be patronising then he's big enough to take some well deserved flack for it.
Posted on Thursday April 10, 2008, 16:11
I personally don't have anything against him....if he wishes to spend his money on his chosen, albeit weird religion that is his choice.
As an actor he's very good, and to echo many others sentiments, i have yet to see a bad performance from him yet...he's very reliable.
Mission Impossible 3 was a lot better than it was reviewed and as a result of his public personna it unfairly flopped.
I'm looking forward to Valkyrie it should be a goodun...whether guilty pleasure or geunine treat!
Posted on Thursday April 10, 2008, 16:42
all right so he's a bit of a loony- this wouldn't honestly be such an off-put were it not for the fact that he's a revolting, obnoxious c**t with it. that interview where he yacks on about the supposed 'evils' of pharmacutical companies and ritalin casts him in a very dim light (basically it exposed him as the arrogant prick he is). he thinks he's a fucking genius, but the reality is that he's an imbecile and, in my humble opinion, not a particularly good actor.
Posted on Thursday April 10, 2008, 16:43
Why do people care about his religious views at all? If pressed I would say that I disagree with them, but how many actors of other religions are discredited so roundly on the same basis? Just because we believe we can see the root of scientology's absurdity given its chronological proximity to our own time on this planet doesn't make it any more preposterous than any other religion.
The guy has entertained us for years and will continue to do so, and more power to him for not being a slave to perceived 'credibility' in the eyes of self-appointed guardians of good taste and decency (or atistic integrity, or coolness, or whatever you happen to put greatest stock in).
Oh, and he's a top and completely watchable actor in almost anything he does, crap film or otherwise.
Posted on Thursday April 10, 2008, 16:53
It's not a religion, it's organised fraud and more than that, it has already cost people their lives
Sorry, just saw this above and I had to say something. Seriously, does anyone else fail to see the distinction being made here?
Religion / organised con job that costs lives.
People are idiots. Cruise himself got 'conned' into scientology - at what point does somebody stop being the victim? When it suits otherwise baseless loathing?
Posted on Thursday April 10, 2008, 17:33
Yes, Cruise has had some PR disasters over the last few years and his tub-thumping about Scientology might not have done him any favours, but I agree with the above.
Cruise is a good actor and his last few films have indeed been very watchable, entertaining efforts. Here's a man who, as mentioned in the article, does not go out of his way to hurt anyone, has a beautiful wife and is very successful as a Hollywood actor and I think that cuts to the core of the problem - jealousy. Cruise seems to take a lot if crap from people who are probably very jealous of his lifestyle, the 'Why him and not me?!?!?!' crowd of haters.
Perhaps the hysteria about him will die down, but then again, maybe not.
Posted on Thursday April 10, 2008, 17:43
As someone who has missed all of the gossip on Tom Cruise I just know him for the movies and the fact that he spends hours with fans on the red carpet before premiers. His movies are always worth watching and you have to respect someone who treats their fans so well.
Posted on Thursday April 10, 2008, 17:58
In a word, no. The guy has brought alot of this on himself.
This whole Valkyrie venture has appeared to me like a PR move on Cruise's part to ingratiate himself with the german public. He isn't popular there. The idea of Scientology isn't popular there.
Empire reported on Valkyrie back in March 2007, omitting that at that point the film had been cast. Just waiting for UA greenlight, which was given: as long as Tom got the lead. Punting Thomas Kretschmann who'd been a couple of days off of signing the contract. This kind of stuff happens all the time, I agree. However, if you are going to nab someone else's role, do have the decency to give it your best shot. The american accent sticks out like a sore thumb. Even if he's tried an english one he would have at least been consistant with the rest of the cast. Kretschmann was at least given a consolation role.
Posted on Thursday April 10, 2008, 19:36
Tom Cruise Rocks!
OK, so he may have beliefs that are a little "out there" but who cares? making fun and talking derogatory of it is bigotry. No two ways about it.
But first and foremost, he is one of the most talented actor of his generation, and can virtually guarantee success for a movie as first lead.
I'm in agreement, leave the bloke alone!
Posted on Thursday April 10, 2008, 19:51
I dislike Tom Cruise but damn if he ain't a great actor and I will continue to donate my £6.10 to the cause of scientology every time he makes a film :p
Posted on Thursday April 10, 2008, 19:54
I just re-read my comment and it sounds a bit harsh. You know what, I'm giving Tom Cruise a clean slate.
Posted on Thursday April 10, 2008, 20:25
Yes I totally agree with you Olly on the fact that he's a fine actor and i do give him a lot of credit for all the work he's done. In fact let me just say right now, Well done Tom!(I'll jump on my couch as soon as i'm done writing this)
But for me it's just the scientology crap. C'mon did anybody watch that Panorama episode on scientology with that freakazoid stalker dude??
Posted on Thursday April 10, 2008, 21:24
Yeah, people's incessant Cruise bashing is getting absurd.
Whatever his religion, or whoever he's in love with (both of which are stupid things to mock, anyway), the point is that he's always been said to be a nice, giving, charitable guy to all the people he doesn't even need to be nice to. It's said that, from the janitor up, Cruise will thank every single member of the crew after a days work.
That's not something he has to do. It's just what makes him decent.
And even away from his personal life, his filmography is pretty damn impressive.
More than just a few iconic roles.
Posted on Thursday April 10, 2008, 21:57
This is a great post and i agree with it entirely. I've said this about Cruise for years. He's consistently been one of the biggest and hard-working movie stars of the last 20yrs and he's an extremely underrated actor. He know's how to work the movie system and he know's how to play and sustain his own image as a movie star. He comes across as an extremely shrewd and intelligent man a hundred percent 'work-horse' personailty, being extremely comitted to anything he does, and you have to give him credit for that.
He's made the odd turkey like all stars but by and large the success rate is very high with some crackers amongst them, and in all of them he's very rarely given a bad performance. In fact, in some he's been extremely good indeed. Holding the screen in a more challenging part against Hoffman's own in Rainman, a nicely understated, minimal and deep performance in Last Samurai and two film-stealers in Jerry Maguire and Magnolia.
The problem with Cruise is, 'you live by the sword you die by it' and unfortunately too much over-confidence, outspokeness and media time in his personal life is beginning to over-shadow his on-screen credibility and work. Which is a shame, as at the moment i really think he's hitting his stride and peak. Anyone knows if you give the media even the slightest opening for questioning and scandal as a star and they'll have you. Pulling you down as fast as they pull you up. Hopefully, it'll blow over in time and we can see Cruise at his best again on-screen and perhaps finaly getting some long over-due credit, even if it's just for his work ethic alone :p
Posted on Thursday April 10, 2008, 22:33
I, personally, have nothing as such against the man. In a proffesional capacity, he has generated a serious amount of money. This means people are obviously interested in seeing him on the screen. He also has very few turkey's to his name. Far & Away, Days of Thunder, Legend are about the only ones that spring to mind in a career spanning some 25 years. No mean feat considering.
What has caused the down turn in his popularity is the fact that he sacked his long term public relations manager and then supplanted this person with his Sister, also a Scientologist. His previous publicist was ovbioulsy very adept at reigining in the guff about Scientology...as frankly, as a person of reasonable intelligence ans sound judgement...I find it the biggest load of bollocks I have ever come across. The fact that this religeon (and I use the term loosely indeed) seems strangely fixated on handing over large amounts of cash in order to progress, is a point most people have problems with. What religeon has anyone else heard of, where the more you donate in terms of cash, the more a devout follower you are?
The main problem with all this is not Cruise's beliefs, he can believe in the Easter Bunny and Elvis being alive for all I care, but it is his insistance that other people are not worthy if they subject themselves to medicinal drugs - who can forget his rather foolish comments regarding Brooke Shields and the fact that she used anti depressants to combat post natal depression, which Cruise objected to? I am fairly certain Cruise has never given birth, so perhaps he could of just kept his mouth shut as he has no clue what he is talking about. Factor into that his sensational wigging out on Oprah Winfreys couch and his strange asertions that he can get people off heroin, without the aid of drugs and assist people in road accidents (!) and you have one movie star who is sytematically alienating himself from his audience. They are tired of the Scientology and PR, simple as.
Posted on Thursday April 10, 2008, 23:09
I think the main problem here is that some of Tom Cruises more outlandish stunts (i'm thinking of the settee incident here) could be seen as publicity stunts. When other events such as the Scientology videos and the press reaction are added on top, the effect is multiplied.
I agree that we should base our opinions on Cruises work alone, but until the gossip, rumours and lies stop then it is not likely to happen as OK doesn't feature in-depth film reviews.
Robert Downey Jr was mental for ages but at his worst his films flopped and the press criticised him constantly. Downey Jr had to pull off a huge career rejuvination to stop his descent and he is now awesome (if we forget the shocking album from last year.)
Cruise is still pulling in high box office numbers which show that people ARE willing to see his films and that his situation is nowhere near as bad as Downey Jr's was. The trend seems to be that many actors are now criticised and gain more publicity for events away from their films, the reason Cruise may seem worse is that 25 years ago the press was different and so were the ways of sending information.
Posted on Friday April 11, 2008, 01:21
It's not a religion. There is a huge issue in the states that they will lose their tax status cos it's not a religion!! It's a cult full of crazy rich people.
Posted on Friday April 11, 2008, 10:54
I could'nt agree with you any more Olly Richards, well said.
Posted on Friday April 11, 2008, 11:23
Cruise is NOT a great actor. He is merely average.
The scientology nonsense is a red-herring. One need only look at his acting to see his inadequacies.
As an actor he is one dimensional, un-sophisticated and deeply limited - indeed limited to only three expressions - intense bug-eyed stare (his 'determined' look), anxious bug-eyed stare (usually when running) or extremely SMUG grin (everything else). Thats it. That's his range.
Yeah he was great in Magnolia but only 'cause a role had finally come along that fit his personality perfectly - sad parody of masculinity with Dad issues - he basically played himself.
Compare Kevin Bacon's nuanced, layered performance to Cruise's one dimensional shouty turn in a Few Good Men and one sees how flat he is as an actor.
Cruise just does Cruise. He IS a 'one size fits all' actor. His main talents are being pretty and running fast. It is a symptom of a very shallow, celebrity obsessed culture that this article is even being written.
Just think of real heavyweight leading actors who can really act - Daniel Day-Lewis, Christian Bale, Heath Ledger, Robert De Niro, Ralph Fiennes, Al Pacino...
And then compare to Tom Cruise. The comparison is laughable. Cruise is the lightest of lightweights. A pointless pop culture pixie.
Big directors cast him because he puts bums on seats. Too many promising films have ended up with a very average lead performance from Cruise because his status as a 'star' brought financing to projects that really needed a more sophisticated intelligent lead performance than he could muster.
And finally, of all the causes in contemporary film culture that need defending (like art house cinemas, ignored underrated talents, intelligent cinema generally) you choose to fight for multi-millionaire, successful filmstar Tom Cruise??!! Someone needs to re-think their priorities.
need for spped
Posted on Friday April 11, 2008, 13:50
The Oprah Winfrey episode was the first 'wrong' step Cruise had ever made. Up until then, all of those jealous people had nothing on him and his constant success just made them more angry.
The first actor to make 5 consecutive films take over $100m at the US box office. Following Eyes Wide Shut and Magnolia, the next 7 all did the same. Only jealous people would get on his case following 20 years of being at the top.
Spielburg, Kubrick, Scorsese, DePalma, Ridley Scott, Michael Mann, Oliver Stone - who else from his generation can claim to have worked with the same calibre directors throughout their career? None spring to my mind.
Jealousy is a terrible thing.
Posted on Friday April 11, 2008, 14:00
Let's face it the problem people have with Cruise IS the scientology factor. He is a good actor, I love Minority Report myself, but it's the fact that he is so fucking pushy with his religion, such a self-righteous TWAT that really get's up people's noses. Now Olly Richards has written a decent enough article, but even he cannot deny that Cruise being a scientologist doesn't get on his tits, though he would be reluctant to share it on here, for the fear of being seen as a hypocrite.
I can take or leave Cruise, if I forget he is a scientologist for even 90 minutes then I don't mind him. It basically falls into two catagories: Tom Cruise *Actor*: GREAT...Tom Cruise *Person*: FUCKING TWAT! Scientology is NOT a religion, it's a cult, so you can't berate people for saying that's what bugs them about Tom Cruise.
Posted on Friday April 11, 2008, 16:03
Well done, Fierce Hairdo for posting what I always say. Tom Cruise runs fast and shouts (sometimes simultaneously) in many of his films. I wonder if it is written into his contract?
Now, the man isn't my favourite, yet he is very dependable. I have often questioned why he is so popular, but it always boils down to personal taste.
However, the guy has made some great films, my favourite being Collateral, as I felt he wasn't really being 'Tom Cruise'.
I have always seen him as a film star rather than an actor, and with some, you can make that distinction.
Now, everyone leave War of The Worlds alone. That is another one I liked him in. However, you blame Spielberg for a happy ending. You mean the bit where the Martians die? Surely that was HG Wells...
(I would have killed off the son though; he was very, very annoying.)
Posted on Friday April 11, 2008, 16:05
I love the fact that so many reports take the piss out of him because of scientology. I personally agree the whole scientology thing is laughable but lets be honest here it's certainly no weirder or far fetched than every other major religion. So once you accept that every religion is based enitrely on fictious events you go back to judging him as an actor and he's a good one...
Posted on Friday April 11, 2008, 16:42
It's because, almost every time I watch him, with rare exception (the first Mission Impossible), every time he's got a serious moment, or he's slicing up the Japanese, I get this vibe from him: "Hey. I'm bein' an ACTOR!!!!!! I'm bein' all SERIOUS. Dig me."
Posted on Friday April 11, 2008, 18:42
totally agree with everything #64 said, well done.
Also, I think it's beyond naive to say "who cares what religion he belives in"
I guess I wouldn't care what religion an actor was....if it was an actual religion and not a dangerous mafia-like cult. He brought this ALL on himself with his pompous arrogant attitude regarding his "religion"
For me the gloves came off when he went on national television and attacked Brooke Shields. She is the epitome of a positive role model. She's been in the business since she was a toddler, yet she has NEVER been in the tabloids for anything, no drugs, no drinking, no ridiculous behavior, etc and THIS is who he chooses to attack. Oh HELL no. She graduated from Princeton, he's a high school drop out. She had 5 miscarriages before she had Rowan, and did the universe a serious service by humbling herself enough to tell the world of her terrible ordeal with PPD. Theres no telling how many women out there she helped by telling her story.
I have absolutely NO RESPECT for someone who has the audacity to pimp a "religion" by USING the media because the public has made them a movie star.
Because of that I will not stop my online bashing of the gay midget til the last nail is in his coffin...actually the last nail IS in his coffin, and will be pounded in as soon as that piece of shit Nazi movie goes straight to DVD
Bottom line....if I all of sudden found out George Clooney was the #2 of the KKK, I would be boycotting his movies too...to me tom cruise being the #2 guy of $cientology is NO DIFFERENT
Posted on Friday April 11, 2008, 21:13
He comes over as a control freak which makes him a bit mad. And he has one of those faces that begs to be punched. He also has that 'little man' personality problem as well. AND he has got a big nose!
Posted on Friday April 11, 2008, 21:51
Word. WHAT is up with his nose? Sweet Jesus it looks like it's trying to make a right turn
Posted on Friday April 11, 2008, 22:47
I can't take this blog post seriosuly as it is not shouted tearfully into a camera.
Oh and for the record, cruise is not rated as a person cos there's so many stories, some must be at least true. However, he can be standed in certain films so long as he does not develop a hero complex.
Posted on Friday April 11, 2008, 23:16
dam right olly! recently done an essay for uni about 'Born on 4th July' and watched it for the first time. He was brilliant in it and although hasn't had so many roles recently that give his acting such a stretch he's still awesome. Shit to see that an actor's personal satus has such an impact on his work - the wole Opera thing, and beliefes....who cares!?
Posted on Saturday April 12, 2008, 00:59
Posted on Saturday April 12, 2008, 05:48
Some are so jealous because this man is so powerful. Add he runs a studio and most of all a happy family that's so rare to find in Hollyweird.
He's also the nicest guy to everyone and a real talented American actor who deserves an Oscar long long time ago. Bullying Cruise is part of this evil society that's getting worst proof of that on the internet,tabloid business,tacky media and so on. Practicing a religion of your choice is part of our freedoms as Americans. Its not up to us to judge.
Friedman can fry in hell(he writes trash not movies). His network Fox hates everything Hollywood stands for and everyone in Hollywood. Im prowar and Republican but I dont hate those that disagree with my views. What I cant grasp are Hollywood stars that are messing up their lives from rehab,drugs,prostitution,DUI,life in the fast lane,adultery and yes many of them practice various beliefs and religions too and even hate America yet they make their living in Hollywood. And Tom Cruise didnt even do any of this. Some forget Brooke Shields and Cruise are now bff's.
I suppose only Cruise should have a higher and perfect standard than the rest of the Hollywood idiots.
Posted on Sunday April 13, 2008, 12:28
I read Olly's article with interest as well as all the comments so far. I felt I should stick my two cents in. The most fascinating thing I thought was the fact people used this simple article to have a go at something I can absolutely guarantee 95% of the people reading this have no knowledge of.
I am a Scientologist and an avid fan of Tom Cruise and Empire. I like Tom Cruise due to his great quality films and his ability to entertain. But there are some points I wish to make and I hope, in order to be fair, people read this with an open mind.
1) I am a Scientologist of 23 years and am certainly not rich. My husband and I between us make around £30,000 p/a. Quite a standard, perhaps mediocre sum of money, especially if you enter in the equation children. My parents, parents in-laws and every other Scientologist I personally know are not rich either. There are some well-off scientologists of course but we live in West Sussex so there are a lot of middle to upper class people here and its quite a wealthy area.
2) Scientology does not make money for L Ron Hubbard. If you think about it thats quite absurd. LRH is no longer alive. How could it possibly make money for him?
3) I would love to know where the idea we have 'bizarre practices' comes from. As well as the 'invisible space aliens'. Sound like stuff made up by other nutcases to me. I have studied a great deal of LRH's books and I have yet to discover anything about invisible space aliens etc. It simply doesnt exist.
4) On the same vein, have any of you people ever actually conducted a proper evaluation of scientology? Ever been inside one of the churches? Know about the many social and community activities we participate in? Realise that at 9/11, the New Orleans floodings and Asian Tsunami many of our volunteer ministers were there to help? Perhaps you should conduct a proper investigation before judging.
With regard to the couch-jumping, sorry but Oprah et all thought that was hilarious at first.
Posted on Sunday April 13, 2008, 12:47
By the way, I agree with Olly. Leave him alone. He is a great actor who obviously has passion and interest in his work, makes some brilliant films and each one is completely different from the first. The last thing you can accuse him of is being a 'one size fits all' actor. Generally he seems a pretty decent guy and I'll always look forward to his projects.
Posted on Sunday April 13, 2008, 21:43
I've always enjoyed Tom Cruises work and will continue to do so. To dismiss and mock scientology, while knowing nothing more about it than wikepedia has to offer is just ignorant. No one would dare mock any other religion so openly. And for those of you who say "I don't care what he believes, so long as he keeps it to himself" - thats absurd, the guy believes in something - he's allowed to express it without fear of judgement! Its no different to boycotting an actor because they're gay, or because of some other social prejudice.
As for jumping on a couch to declare your love for someone, people have been known to do crazier things when they're in love. He jumped on a couch! Get over it!
Man it annoys me when people can resent someone for such trivial misderminors.
Posted on Monday April 14, 2008, 03:27
Always put my eyes on this sexy and perfect man. LOVE YOU FOR EVER. BTW, someone told me that you appear on the Black or White singles dating site called (BlackWhiteKiss dot com). Is it really you? If it's true, I will send an email because the profile looks sincere, attractive and sexy. Charlie sheen already found his girl at that site
Posted on Tuesday April 15, 2008, 10:13
Siobhanmonster, you should go to xenu.net. And by the way, that Tsunami thing? The only thing your ministers did there was handing out leaflets. If you call that "help", alrighty then. And I personally KNOW that your so-called church is all about the money. It sucked my poor aunt dry, and then when she didn't have any more money to give, your church just kicked her out. But I guess that they were "just trying to help"...
Posted on Tuesday April 15, 2008, 18:47
Hekla, xenu.net is total crap, set up by some psychos. I really am not interested in getting into an argument with you over the Church. I know what they do and what they have done, more than you could ever do seeing as I have first-hand knowledge and experience of it.
This blog was supposed to be about Tom Cruise, not Scientology. Those of you who harbour some personal hatred against the Church shouldn't be posting on here, its the wrong place to be doing it. I hope in future Empire have more sense than even mentioning the Church as Tom Cruise's religion has got nothing to do with movies or anything else.
Posted on Tuesday April 15, 2008, 18:49
Btw Hekla, I dont understand how anyone, you or any of the others, could possibly comment on anything the church does. I bet none of you visited a Church, read a book or helped at one of the disasters. All you are doing is forwarding rubbish from some unreliable source. In my opinion that makes you look pretty stupid.
Posted on Wednesday April 16, 2008, 10:50
For me I only know Cruise the movie star. What he does in his own life should be his own business. He does fine work. In fact a lot of his movies in recent years have turned out to be my "must see" movies.
People are obsessed with celebrity these days. Our magazines are posted with pics of "famous" people caught during moments with their guard down. New papers hot columns regarding who is doing what and when. Most this have the should purpose of making the celebrity look back. Cheap shots by cheap journalists.
Do we need to care how MR. Cruise lives his life or should our concerns be what movie is in he next?
He's a movie star (and producer). Being a movie goer, my interest is in his work not his life.
We are expected to criticize these people like we know them. When in fact all we actually know of them is what we are being told. With Cruise most of the shots at him is because he is "insanely happy". I mean come on. I want to know his secret. Not accuse him of being nuts because he seems to enjoy his life.
I live my life using an old method of "believe none of what I hear and only half of what I see".
To be fair I prefer who things use to be. A time when you knew very little or nothing regarding movie stars lives. You knew them on the screen, playing the characters they played. Who cares if someone is gay, into drugs or believes in something other than god? It’s neither my business or concern.
To think his next movie could perform badly because people are fed up with the leading actor is a little sad. He is not the only artist involved. Not to mention the people than are fed up with him, may even be the ones blogging and slagging him off in the first place. Judge people on their work not their life’s. As this is what they get paid for in the first place.
I say bring in Valkyrie, I for one am looking forward to another Tom Cruise movie....
Posted on Wednesday April 16, 2008, 18:07
one of the greatest actors of the past 20 years. The following are films that are either brilliant or films that he is brilliant in or both : Rain Man, Born on the 4th of July, Magnolia, Minority Report, Collateral, The Last Samurai, War of the Worlds(awful but he was very good in it), The Firm, Jerry Maguire, A few good men. Who else can boast such a brilliant body of work? Not many.
Anyone who says he can't act is a fool. Plain and simple. It has always amazed me how other scientoligist actors like John Travolta (who is in roughly 2 good films) aren't portrayed in half as much negative publicity despite being half the actor. It reminds me of when David Beckham was a world class footballer but people thought he was crap just because they didn't like his image that the media and his wife created.
Posted on Thursday April 17, 2008, 14:45
I disagree wholeheartedly, Empire has been kissing Tom Cruise's backside for years, Tom Cruise is not a great actor, as fierce-hairdo so rightly pointed out, he's just capable of doing himself, be it WOTW (which was crap), The Last Samurai, Mission Impossible or Minority Report, all the same. He's boring, flat and how he got to be such a star is beyond me. It's not his acting capabilities that have got him so far, and the reason many studios are so keen on him is his "Star Allure", and that they know he'll pack the cinemas. Much like people going to see the Spice Girls, it certainly hasn't got anything to do with talent. They're going for the show, It's all money, if you want great acting you go see a film starring Philip Seymour Hoffmann, William H Macy, even George Clooney.
His fanatacism for Scientology is sickening, he doesn't have a "happy family" as Skynet pointed out, he is a control freak, himself controlled by Scientology. Scary.
As far as Valkyrie goes, I absolutely agree, he made it to suck up to the germans, I myself find it offensive that someone like Tom Cruise is playing Von Stauffenberg, for me he should be playing the other side. My opinion.
No, Scientology-zombies aren't very popular over here, thank god for that, one thing the germans have got right, although come the premiere there'll be thousands of raving fans come to see the his famous shit-eating grin.
Who wanted to punch him on his big nose? zpider242, I'm in the queue behind you, we'll need a stepladder though.
Posted on Friday April 18, 2008, 07:27
No one has EVER made fun of his religious beliefs, because he doesn't have any!!! He is the most visible member of a very dangerous corporation which happens to be using the label of 'religion' to try to deflect criticism.
Sooner everyone gets that, the better...