Jack Reacher

[jacobed]

It's definitely the marketing and release date thats the main reason it didn't do as well as the company expected.

 

[Erzengel]

I think audiences for the most part appreciate quality which was MI4. I think MI4 did well because it was a good movie, and not because people were drawn in by Cruise. I still think that his star has diminished and honestly, one movie which, is part of a well known franchise helps. Look at Depp and the Pirates movie. Of course Depp has also success in movies that weren't franchises, Alice in Wonderland and Charlie & the Chocolate Factory.

I guess a good barometer would be his Oblivion movie. See how that does.

But I think we look at MI4 two different ways, you see a movie that surpassed the other 3 and I see a movie that could have done better domestically.

 

[dustbros]

well erz you will say its because its a good film not because of cruises appeal if oblivion is a hit. doh. tc is the man. he even produced mi4 and scaled the worlds tallest building. no cruise no such a film like mi4. period.

 

[Hunter Rider]

In fairness Erz you have never liked Cruise, I recall us having these convos when WOTW's beat Batman Begins at the box office amid his Oprah antics.

Flickchick is absolutely spot on, there are no movie stars that guarantee a movies success these days, most of the biggest movies are headlined by people who couldn't come close to opening movies like Cruise has, but they are adaptions of comics, young adult fantasy books and other built in fanbase material (Bond, Sherlock etc....) that draw in the audience. I mean does anyone really think Daniel Craig or RDJ could open a medium budget thriller in holiday season that is based on novels aimed at middle aged men and turn more of a profit? I highly doubt it.

dont think it is, you could read it wihtout having read the one before it. Funny story, Reacher is mentioned in Stephen Kings' Under the dome. Echo burning is also a good choice.

Isn't 61 Hours the one that ends in a cliffhanger though? Under the Dome is pretty close to debuting btw.

I'm sure Erz is probably right, even though I don't understand the mentality behind the popularity loss all that much. I really don't care about an actor's personal life at all, just whether they are a good actor or not. I don't avoid movies because of something the actor does outside the movie. Its kinda hard for me to wrap my head around to be honest.

But ours is a tabloid culture.

It's a phenomenon mostly found in the US I'd say, in Europe and Asia it's not an issue.

 

[ThePhantasm]

It's a phenomenon mostly found in the US I'd say, in Europe and Asia it's not an issue.

Yeah, there's quite a bit of it in the UK too, though perhaps not as much as in the US.

 

[Jack Napier]

I think audiences for the most part appreciate quality which was MI4. I think MI4 did well because it was a good movie, and not because people were drawn in by Cruise. I still think that his star has diminished and honestly, one movie which, is part of a well known franchise helps. Look at Depp and the Pirates movie. Of course Depp has also success in movies that weren't franchises, Alice in Wonderland and Charlie & the Chocolate Factory.

They can't acknowledge MI4 is a good movie until they see it. Same with "Jack Reacher", which I would argue is a better movie structurally than MI4, but not all good movies make bank. It's a roll of the dice sometimes.

Depp also did "Dark Shadows", "The Tourist", "The Rum Diaries", and "Public Enemies". Not exactly knocking the ball out of the park every time he's at bat. It doesn't mean people don't embrace Depp. Everyone I know can acknowledge he's a legitimate actor.

 

[EML420]

I think if this gets a sequel thats were the real big bucks will be, because it got pretty good reception(It did right)¿ So that would pay off the second time around.

 

[jacobed]

It did get very good reception

 

[Erzengel]

well erz you will say its because its a good film not because of cruises appeal if oblivion is a hit. doh. tc is the man. he even produced mi4 and scaled the worlds tallest building. no cruise no such a film like mi4. period.

I don't think people care whether Cruise scaled a tall building or not.

In fairness Erz you have never liked Cruise, I recall us having these convos when WOTW's beat Batman Begins at the box office amid his Oprah antics.

Actually, if I stated my true suspicions about Cruise, I think most people here would jump down my throat.

It's a phenomenon mostly found in the US I'd say, in Europe and Asia it's not an issue.

Which I've been saying, but in the internet and real circles that I frequent, I don't find too many US people, Cruise crazy.

They can't acknowledge MI4 is a good movie until they see it. Same with "Jack Reacher", which I would argue is a better movie structurally than MI4, but not all good movies make bank. It's a roll of the dice sometimes.

Depp also did "Dark Shadows", "The Tourist", "The Rum Diaries", and "Public Enemies". Not exactly knocking the ball out of the park every time he's at bat. It doesn't mean people don't embrace Depp. Everyone I know can acknowledge he's a legitimate actor.

I'd compare Jack Reacher with Taken. I know Taken didn't cost or make as much as Reacher, but kinda like that suspense/thriller/action and there was real buzz about that movie and talk after seeing that movie. The same places I go to, there just doesn't seem to be as much talk about this movie, well except for here.

 

[dustbros]

I don't think people care whether Cruise scaled a tall building or not.

I don't care whether people care whether Cruise scaled the tallest building or not.
No Cruise means no such a "good" film like MI4 in which he climbed the tallest building for real, that's my point.

 

[Erzengel]

And obviously, that's what was missing from the 3rd movie that underwhelmed?

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

Finally got to see this today, just in the nick of time as my local cinema isnt showing it after today by the looks of things.

Anyway, I really enjoyed it, never read the books but Cruise made me love the character, Cruise was superb in it, and was more than ably supported by Pike, Courtney, Herzog, Jenkins, Oweluyo and Duvall. It is a really good detective movie but one were Reacher seems ahead of everyone else each step of the way. Its helps that he is a badass and a very good investigator. Some great direction by McQuarrie as well, though I did enjoy his last movie The Way Of The Gun more than this.

This was all supported by some great action sequences that, on first sight anyway, didnt contain ANY CGI, which was amazingly refreshing for a movie today and takes you back to the type of movies they made in the 80's.

Anyway, really enjoyable and I hope it gets a sequel, 8/10.

 

[grout]

I don't care whether people care whether Cruise scaled the tallest building or not.
No Cruise means no such a "good" film like MI4 in which he climbed the tallest building for real, that's my point.

I find it funny over all the "height" stuff with cruise playing reacher... Hugh plays wolverine which is like 5'2 or something in comics.. Hugh is like 6'1 and nobody complains about that.

 

[Erzengel]

Could be a bunch of reasons.

X-Men came out in 2000. While the internet was around, I think it was 2002-2003 when it finally just blew up. So not everyone had a voice back in 1999 when filming began.

Not everything in comics is transferable to movies. Galactus's costume, Wolverine's height?

Maybe it's easier accepting a character as imposing as Wolverine who grows a foot, as opposed to Reacher who shrinks a foot.

 

[ThePhantasm]

I'd compare Jack Reacher with Taken. I know Taken didn't cost or make as much as Reacher

How much has Reacher made right now? Taken made about 225 million dollars.

 

[TheVileOne]

Reacher has made $154 million so far according to BOM, though I imagine it still has some more markets to come out in. Cruise is really popular in China and Japan so that will probably pad the numbers a little more.

Taken 2 did about $370 million worldwide on a $45 million budget.

There's no telling if Hollywood will go back to Reacher anytime soon either. I think the height thing is a minor sticking point IMHO.

 

[jacobed]

The height thing is one of the most pathetic complaints I've ever seen. I don't want to hear oh its an important part of the character because its not. As long as he's intimidating that's all that matters. Which Cruise was

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

The height thing is one of the most pathetic complaints I've ever seen. I don't want to hear oh its an important part of the character because its not. As long as he's intimidating that's all that matters. Which Cruise was

I havent read the books, but I found Cruise more than intimidating in the role, he was like a James Bond character to me, he always seemed in control and when he was in danger he still always seemed confident, I think its Cruise's most badass role for a while, and this guy specialises in that type of role so thats saying something.

 

[terry78]

The sad thing is the comics pretty much gave Wolverine an extra foot in height after Jackman became popular.

 

[antonydelfini]

IMO, the height is an essential part of the character. It's practically mentioned a lot of times in the book. A person's height and size affects a character's way of thinking, moving and behaving, and it also affects how other people perceive him and react around him. So the height thing is really essential when talking about Reacher, since it's always mentioned and emphasized in the books. Like I said, Tom gave his best shot, but he's just too far the Reacher I imagine while reading the books. I have the same issue with Jackman's Wolverine actually.

 

[gwynplaine]

IMO, the height is an essential part of the character. It's practically mentioned a lot of times in the book. A person's height and size affects a character's way of thinking, moving and behaving, and it also affects how other people perceive him and react around him. So the height thing is really essential when talking about Reacher, since it's always mentioned and emphasized in the books. Like I said, Tom gave his best shot, but he's just too far the Reacher I imagine while reading the books. I have the same issue with Jackman's Wolverine actually.

I take it you don't like Craig's blond Bond or Keaton's skinny Batman very much

 

[antonydelfini]

Bond's hair ain't mentioned all that much in the books. And I don't think the color of the hair makes much difference in the way a person thinks and behaves, and how others behave around you, the way Reacher's size do in the books. Keaton's a great Batman, but I would have preferred if he had a better built.

 

[antonydelfini]

Consider Logan's height. He is usually underestimated in the comics because he's short, he's called a runt actually. It makes him more ferocious and eager to show how mean and tough he is, and it shows others perceiving him not to be too much of a threat. That's what I mean by the height being important to certain characters like Reacher and Logan, especially when the writers emphasize it in the source material.

 

[gwynplaine]

I havent read the books, but I enjoyed the film. To me it's more about capturing the essence of the character. Anyway to each its own.

 

[gwynplaine]

Consider Logan's height. He is usually underestimated in the comics because he's short, he's called a runt actually. It makes him more ferocious and eager to show how mean and tough he is, and it shows others perceiving him not to be too much of a threat. That's what I mean by the height being important to certain characters like Reacher and Logan, especially when the writers emphasize it in the source material.

I'm not sure height matters that much in film, but like I said before to each its own.