Paramount Dumps Tom Cruise

[green]

well obviously cruise didn't go to vanity fair to ask for photos to be taken and released, but they obviously had the photoshoot and wouldn't let them release it yet, and cruise's crew thought it would be a good marketing strategy to release them during tom's darkest hour

Ummm the interviewer spent 5 days at Cruises Colorado home with them. A 22 page spread in Vanity Fair with photos taken by Annie Leibowitz(who does alot of work for Vanity Fair) does not happen overnight and as spin control. This was obviously planned for awhile.

 

[gvcool2]

ummmm i don't get what your trying to prove?

 

[ultimatefan]

Tom has to get back to valueing his privacy like he used to, and it´d be a good thing for him to go for some challenging role in a smaller movie to remind people he can still be a fine actor when he´s not just in Maverick mode, and avoid these big blockbusters for a while, IMO.

 

[Erzengel]

I just checked IMDB and Cruise has no movies on the horizon. Interesting. Which means by the time he actually does get a movie roll, it'd be up to a year before it's released. Maybe that's the time he needs to keep quiet and avoid any media attention.

 

[ultimatefan]

well obviously cruise didn't go to vanity fair to ask for photos to be taken and released, but they obviously had the photoshoot and wouldn't let them release it yet, and cruise's crew thought it would be a good marketing strategy to release them during tom's darkest hour

Maybe "darkest hour" is a bit of an overstatement. The man has one of the most accomplished movie careers ever, is rich enough to support three generations, has just had a baby with a woman he´s supposed to be head over heels in love with... Doubt he´s had depression or something...

 

[gvcool2]

I think what he needs right now is some normal publicity, no baby, no antics, no scientology, just tom cruise attending red carpets like any celebrity and keeping his interviews low key and purely about buisness

 

[gvcool2]

Maybe "darkest hour" is a bit of an overstatement. The man has one of the most accomplished movie careers ever, is rich enough to support three generations, has just had a baby with a woman he´s supposed to be head over heels in love with... Doubt he´s had depression or something...

i'm talking purely his career, I have no interest in the man's personal life, I'm saying his career has taken a major blow, hence no movies on the horizon and being dropped by his studio and so far in his career this is his 'darkest hour'.

 

[ultimatefan]

i'm talking purely his career, I have no interest in the man's personal life, I'm saying his career has taken a major blow, hence no movies on the horizon and being dropped by his studio and so far in his career this is his 'darkest hour'.

MI III was a disappointment, but not such a failure that Tom could spend years outta work or something. He still has one of the most accomplished resumees of any actor in Hollywood. He has his own producing company, so he can even hire himself if he wants to.

 

[gvcool2]

to go from one of the busiest working men in hollywood to an empty slate (and laughing stock), is a large downfall regardless of the money his last movie made

 

[Chris Wallace]

I think what he needs right now is some normal publicity, no baby, no antics, no scientology, just tom cruise attending red carpets like any celebrity and keeping his interviews low key and purely about buisness

I'm under the impression that that's his plan.

 

[gvcool2]

who knows anymore with the cruisemeister

 

[7Hells]

MI III was a disappointment, but not such a failure that Tom could spend years outta work or something.

Mission Impossible III is marked at $393 million worldwide.
Tom Cruise was paid upwards of 80 million not including his %revenues.
Thats why MI3 was a failure with Cruise.

He still has one of the most accomplished resumees of any actor in Hollywood. He has his own producing company, so he can even hire himself if he wants to.

The problem with Cruise is his name is the only thing that keeps him in work. Its not like hes a great thespian. I mean how many of his characters are actually different from one another? People hire Tom Cruise to be "Tom Cruise" and now that "Tom Cruise" is a joke they arent going to be hiring him.

 

[Sava]

Mission Impossible III is marked at $393 million worldwide.
Tom Cruise was paid upwards of 80 million not including his %revenues.
Thats why MI3 was a failure with Cruise.

you got a link to this claim?

The problem with Cruise is his name is the only thing that keeps him in work. Its not like hes a great thespian. I mean how many of his characters are actually different from one another? People hire Tom Cruise to be "Tom Cruise" and now that "Tom Cruise" is a joke they arent going to be hiring him.

have you seen any of his movies?.. really, cause thats just f**king retared what you just said. Collateral, WOTW, Jerry Maguire, Vanilla Sky, The Last Samurai, Eyes wide shut, Magnolia..yeah, he played the same character in all of these movies

 

[Darthphere]

I saw on E! News or something that Tom got like 75% of the profits for MI:3 because thats how his deal worked out.

 

[Sava]

I saw on E! News or something that Tom got like 75% of the profits for MI:3 because thats how his deal worked out.

there is no way a studio would that much profit to ANY actor... thats just unbelievable

 

[Darthphere]

there is no way a studio would that much profit to ANY actor... thats just unbelievable

I think thats how it worked out with his production company being a part of it and his actual salary and percentages. E! News isnt reliable, but thats what they said.

 

[gvcool2]

you'd be suprised how much power a celeb like cruise has

 

[Sava]

I think thats how it worked out with his production company being a part of it and his actual salary and percentages. E! News isnt reliable, but thats what they said.

damn..thats alot

you'd be suprised how much power a celeb like cruise has

not really, just that the percentage of the profits bit is just way too much

 

[Erzengel]

From marke****ch.com

And Cruise's last film, "Mission: Impossible 3," didn't perform up to expectations, leaving the Viacom division with little to show for the film after Cruise got his take.

 

[Darthphere]

From marke****ch.com

And Cruise's last film, "Mission: Impossible 3," didn't perform up to expectations, leaving the Viacom division with little to show for the film after Cruise got his take.

Ha-ha! **** is censored.

 

[gvcool2]

damn..thats alot

not really, just that the percentage of the profits bit is just way too much

as I said, with such a money drawer as cruise you'd be suprised how much a studio is willing to sacrifice

 

[Erzengel]

Ha-ha! **** is censored.

LOL. That's funny so I can't say marke****ch but I can say market watch.

 

[Darthphere]

as I said, with such a money drawer as cruise you'd be suprised how much a studio is willing to sacrifice

Seriously, they were expecting big bucks and it underperformed, and they got the shaft. Not necessarily Cruise's fault, but the studio knew the risk.

 

[gvcool2]

Seriously, they were expecting big bucks and it underperformed, and they got the shaft. Not necessarily Cruise's fault, but the studio knew the risk.

oh ye exactly, I wasn't saying it was cruise's fault, they were just hoping for the monster smash, but it just didn't quite hit that

 

[Erzengel]

I think it was used more as an excuse. I'm sure if MI3 was the top of the box office, Cruise wouldn't have been let go. I think they were willing to tolerate his antics if his movies did well.