OK, I am tired of not liking him and avoiding his movies.
Maybe I am just being nostalgic for a bygone era where there were actual movie stars larger than the studios that produced their films.
But I just watched Rock of Ages tonight and I must say I see why he was/is a major star. He gives a 110% and is brilliant when he is not playing himself. Maybe he should have just been a character actor.
Catherine Zeta shines in her insanity and I love Alec Baldwin as well.
Next to the leads and Russell Brand, you genuinely see the great divide between mere actors/personalities and movie stars like Catherine, Alec and Tom.
|by Anonymous||reply 49||01/07/2013|
Thank god it is not only me. I have seen him from The Outsiders to Mission Impossible and it was only Rock of Ages that turned me into a Tom Cruise fan.
|by Anonymous||reply 1||01/05/2013|
[quote]But I just watched Rock of Ages tonight and I must say I see why he was/is a major star.
Really? Because it was a major
F L O P !
|by Anonymous||reply 2||01/05/2013|
The major star was used to refer to Tom as a major star, not the movie Rock of Ages as a hit. Next time, read first.
|by Anonymous||reply 3||01/05/2013|
He is a crazy control freak who is deeply involved with a money grabbing criminal enterprise masquerading as a religion. I'll pass.
|by Anonymous||reply 4||01/05/2013|
Was Julian Hough good in the movie?
|by Anonymous||reply 5||01/05/2013|
It's a terrible film. And no, it's not Cruise or CZJ's fault.
It's a terrible script. The two love interest leads are awful. And the musical numbers are incredibly disappointing. Engaging performers like Alec Baldwin and Mary J Blige are wasted.
Still not enough to make me a Cruise fan, though.
|by Anonymous||reply 6||01/05/2013|
I can't stand Cruise or his odd, off-putting, holier than thou facade. But, he is a movie star. He just is. He just has that It Factor. So is Brad Pitt. The only two male movie stars around, IMHO. And I can't stand either. I'm 33 and wish we had movie stars for my generation, but we don't.
|by Anonymous||reply 7||01/05/2013|
I've never had the impression that Cruise had anything like an IT factor. From the days of Risky Business onward, my only impression of him has been "what the Hell do people see in this bland little nothing?"
When in later years he turned out to be a psychotic wacko freak, my attitude has only been "why the Hell is this bland but freaky little nothing still in the public consciousness?"
It took no effort all to boycott his movies, since I've done that for several decades now already.
|by Anonymous||reply 8||01/05/2013|
TC is like a corporation. His movies employ hundreds of people. I would feel bad for him because he seems trapped and unhappy, but he continues to support $cientology. They work him like a mule.
|by Anonymous||reply 9||01/05/2013|
I remember when Siskel and Ebert reviewed "Rain Man" and declared that Cruise was - for real - a big fucking movie star.
He can be mannered, at times so self conscious that it's painful to watch but then sometimes he really does know what he's doing and it works like a charm. Above all, he holds the screen when so many, many, many actors (male and female) working in film today just don't. They may actually be better actors than Cruise but the lens - it does not love them.
I haven't seen "Rock of Ages" but I will eventually. I register my revulsion for Cruise and his Scientology fuckery by never paying to see anything he's in.
|by Anonymous||reply 10||01/05/2013|
R10 - He is a big fucking star, and he was excellent in Rainman.
|by Anonymous||reply 11||01/05/2013|
Years ago, Siskel and Ebert did a whole show about how all of TC's roles all contain the same plot points/character elements. I think Ebert even wrote a piece about it, comparing ten of his films.
In a nice way, they were saying he only knows how to play one character.
The Co$ did him no favor. He was wildly successful but not a good actor. I know that it must burn his ass that nobody Nicole eclipsed him, at least in terms of critical admiration.
I honestly think he could have been a very fine actor without the Co$ shaping his mind and, at the same time, repressing his emotional expression. He's robotic now.
He was very good in Born on The Fourth of July and might have won the Oscar. The Academy loves BO success and tales of overcoming mental and/or physical handicaps.
Unfortunately for him, My Left Foot came out the same year. It was Cruise's last chance for an Oscar.
|by Anonymous||reply 13||01/05/2013|
Has anyone seen "Valkirie" and did you like it? I ust bought the dvd on Amazon because it was 2 bucks. I don't care for Cruise but love the story of von Stauffenberg.
|by Anonymous||reply 14||01/05/2013|
I've noticed how the past year, age has started to sneak up on him. Don't get me wrong - he still looks very good compared to most 50 year olds, but the lines and sagging skin around the jaw is starting to kick in.
|by Anonymous||reply 15||01/05/2013|
I can appreciate him only in 'Magnolia' and 'Collateral': dark characters, control freaks, good movies/directors.
I have to tolerate him in 'Eyes Wide Shut' (because it's Kubrick). He was miscast, and his limitations as an actor make him even more implausible.
|by Anonymous||reply 16||01/06/2013|
Are you sissies nuts? Cruise was great in Tropic Thunder, and before he became the Tom Cruise you know and love, his performances in Risky Business were 180 degrees away from his previous turns in Taps and The Outsiders.
That said, I agree that as a leading man he's repetitive and doesn't have a great deal of range. However OP was right in noting Cruise's does well in character roles.
[quote]I'm 33 and wish we had movie stars for my generation, but we don't.
Christian Bale, Joseph Gordon Levitt and Ryan Gosling with Aaron Taylor-Johnson waiting in the wings. All talented, all with range.
|by Anonymous||reply 17||01/06/2013|
I really enjoyed Valkyrie. He wasn't too annoying in it.
|by Anonymous||reply 18||01/06/2013|
Some people may be able to ignore Tom Cruise's control freak image and Scientology connection in order to enjoy his movies, but I can't.
|by Anonymous||reply 19||01/06/2013|
He went to Grahhan Norton Show in 12/31,22 million viewers in UK alone. The rumour has it.He is leaving SC. I'm a hater of TC by the way
|by Anonymous||reply 20||01/06/2013|
His best roles/performances were in Magnolia, Minority Report, War of the Worlds, and Jerry Maguire.
The movie Oblivion, coming up, might be good (or maybe not).
|by Anonymous||reply 21||01/06/2013|
[quote]Was Julian Hough good in the movie?
Oh aren't you sweet for wondering, alas no, but thanks for asking.
[quote]The rumour has it.He is leaving SC. I'm a hater of TC by the way
You want to run that by us in English?
|by Anonymous||reply 22||01/06/2013|
"Cruise's does well in character roles"
Uh, no he does not. He is laughable in them.
In any case, OP has got to be kidding, suffers from bad taste, or is a Scienobot bored at work.
Rock of Ages was a flop, Knight and Day underperformed, and Jack Reacher is another fresh flop on his resume.
Movie stars don't deliver flop after flop.
Also, movie stars of old didn't promote a sinister cult. Tom Cruise, by being the face of Scientology, is co-responsible for everything his cult has done in the last 25 years, and that includes murder.
Boycotting his films is a moral imperative.
|by Anonymous||reply 23||01/06/2013|
R33 - I'm 25 and find it very hard to view him as a real "movie star" because his antics have turned him into such a joke that I can't think of anything else whenever I see him. Most people around my age seem to feel the same. I was still a teenager during the era of the couch jumping and him first coming out publicly with the scientology crap so that probably has a lot to do with why I can't view him as a real "star."
|by Anonymous||reply 24||01/06/2013|
It's hilarious how OP and a few others on this thread try to make him 'happen', when the public has clearly stopped seeing him as a star.
He deserves none of your goodwill.
Scientology happily supported prop. 8, and if anything, gays should boycott Tom Cruise even more because of that.
Reason #321 to avoid his crappy films.
|by Anonymous||reply 25||01/06/2013|
Not just people your age R24. I can't get past all the baggage. Maybe I could if he was more talented.
|by Anonymous||reply 26||01/06/2013|
I don't think r23 knows what a character actore is.
Knight and Day and Jack reacher are leading man roles.
Rock of Ages flopped but not because of Cruise. He gave actually one of his bes performances.
I get excited when I see him doing something different. Unfortunately in his long career that is three roles in my mind - Rock of Ages, Magnolia and Tropic Thunder.
|by Anonymous||reply 27||01/06/2013|
That's correct, r27. I don't know what a 'character actore' is.
I do know what a 'character actor' is, though. And TC most certainly is not one of them.
He tried to be one, in Lions for Lambs/Magnolia/Valkyrie and a few others, and he is shit every time. He cannot disappear into roles, nor is he an actor in command of his instrument, nor is he classically trained.
He played himself in Magnolia. No accomplishment whatsoever.
He is a FORMER movie star. I'll give you that.
Rock of Ages flopped for a number of reasons, and Cruise was one of them. His character is a maniac and exhausting, like his real life self, and these days, that is off putting to people.
Tom Cruise = made Rock of Ages a flop.
Tom Cruise = drove people away from Jack Reacher.
Deal with it, deluded you.
|by Anonymous||reply 28||01/06/2013|
Why does he keep doing back to back to back films? It's one forgettable film after another. Why not try focusing more on quality instead of quantity? I know he may make more money the more films he does but still. Hold off and wait for an actual decent script.
|by Anonymous||reply 29||01/06/2013|
[quote]His best roles/performances were in Magnolia, Minority Report, War of the Worlds, and Jerry Maguire.
AND, "Born on the Fourth of July." That's when I knew he was a respectable actor. He was excellent in that movie.
|by Anonymous||reply 30||01/06/2013|
[quote]Hold off and wait for an actual decent script.
It seems likely that the best new scripts don't get near him. Why should they? He's a fast-fading brand without the courage or talent to take any creative risks.
I doubt Spielberg is the only one to steer clear. That's why TC is piling on the second-rate work, while he's still lukewarm.
|by Anonymous||reply 31||01/06/2013|
[quote] without the courage or talent to take any creative risks.
|by Anonymous||reply 32||01/06/2013|
Wow, this thread doesn't sound like a PR plant at all.
|by Anonymous||reply 33||01/06/2013|
He is not a great actor. Have you seen him in Cocktail?
|by Anonymous||reply 34||01/06/2013|
Cruise hasn't caught on yet that the public does not buy him in these macho action star roles that he insists on doing over and over.
|by Anonymous||reply 36||01/06/2013|
I actually agree with OP. Tom Cruise is a bizarre and odious human being but for some reason he is extremely engaging as an actor. FOR ME, not for everyone. I feel the same way about Woody Allen - can't stand the man, love most of his movies.
|by Anonymous||reply 37||01/06/2013|
I heard he might be a homosexual. Anyone else head that rumor?
|by Anonymous||reply 38||01/06/2013|
I would like Tom Cruise if he wasn't involved in that crazy $cientology cult, which makes him crazy too.
|by Anonymous||reply 39||01/06/2013|
[quote]Was Julian Hough good in the movie?
Let's just say that she should stick to dancing.
|by Anonymous||reply 40||01/06/2013|
r32, Les Grossman was not a 'creative risk', but a clownish and self-serving act to make people forget he is Hollywood's David Koresh. Cruise playing him changed absolutely nothing with regard to his reputation as an actor.
How many interesting parts has he been offered after Grossman? None.
A truly 'creative risk' would have been the male lead in Melancholia (played by Kiefer Sutherland), or indeed Willem Dafoe in 'Antichrist', or Penn in 'Milk', Mark Ruffalo in 'Kids Are Alright', or even Brad Pitt in 'Benjamin Button' and 'Tree of Life' (not that Pitt is a good actor, but he tries).
TC has never stepped out of his comfort zone, and he cannot deliver nunaced work, for lack of talent. 'Born on the Fourth of July' is just as overacted as every other performace in his entire career. He is always too 'on' to be a good actor.
He is a robot, and his damaged real life persona has destroyed whatever movie star qualities he has previously had.
End of story.
|by Anonymous||reply 41||01/06/2013|
I don't like his cocky obnoxious movie persona. He's not really handsome either.
|by Anonymous||reply 42||01/06/2013|
"Tom, as your career deepens, do you ever feel like tackling more challenging roles? For example: Sean Penn, Tom Hanks, Matt Damon, Jake Gyllenhaal, Will Smith, Kevin Spacey, Leo DiCaprio and Philip Seymour Hoffman, among others, have all played gay men, often to high acclaim. If an A-List director with a great script wanted you first for a gay role, would you be interested?"
The question that, if submitted, would ensure that a) TC and his people denied the journalist and his/her organisation access for ever and b) would ensure further mysterious blockages and career reversals for all 'responsible.'
|by Anonymous||reply 43||01/07/2013|
I saw Valkyrie, Mission Impossible 4:Ghost Protocol, and recently Jack Reacher. I enjoyed all three thoroughly. I thought Jack Reacher was kick ass, and the villain is gorgeous!
|by Anonymous||reply 44||01/07/2013|
I'm a female and seriously had Risky Business and All the Right Moves posters in the old tiny room at my folks house. he seems asexual these days.
|by Anonymous||reply 45||01/07/2013|
Streep Troll - I've disagreed with you and called you nuts in many a thread, but you're dead on in this one. Great analysis.
|by Anonymous||reply 46||01/07/2013|
I thoroughly enjoyed his performance on Oprah's couch.
|by Anonymous||reply 47||01/07/2013|
Yes indeed, Streep troll (I love Streep BTW)!
|by Anonymous||reply 48||01/07/2013|
Having recently re-watched Interview, his Lestat was atrocious - too horrible for words.
|by Anonymous||reply 49||01/07/2013|