1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Has Cruise lost it?

Discussion in 'Anything goes' started by Evil ... Thy name is Orville Redenbacher!!, Dec 24, 2012.

  1. Mizzougrad96

    Mizzougrad96 Active Member

    A $15 million opening can be misleading at this time of the year. During the Summer, it would be a complete disaster, but it wouldn't surprise me if it makes $15-$25 million in the next week. This is such a big moviegoing week that a lot of movies frequently do better during the second week since every day this week is a big movie day. Having Christmas on a Tuesday will actually probably help. Anything under $100 mil domestically would be disappointing and it's probably not going to make that, but as Chris mentioned, he's still a big international draw and the movie will easily become profitable overseas.

    As far as not being No. 1, there was no way in hell it was going to beat The Hobbit.
     
  2. I would include Van Helsing in that as well.
    I saw (part of) the Jackman version. It stunk and I have little hope for the Cruise version.
     
  3. Yea, but he's wasn't a star in it. He had a bit part. Throw out the dancing horse shit at the end and he's in - what? - 10 minutes of the movie? And as I recall, he wasn't even billed in the flick when it opened.

    But an action flick with Cruise can't beat the second week run of the Hobbit? Money numbers aside. It was second. A distant second.
     
  4. Mizzougrad96

    Mizzougrad96 Active Member

    Cruise's part in Tropic Thunder wasn't supposed to be billed. It was a fun cameo. The movie was great across the board, but he was the "holy shit" moment.

    Action films aren't what they used to be at the box office and haven't been for a long, long time... It's the sci-fi, adventure/fantasy/superhero stuff where all the money is.
     
  5. SpeedTchr

    SpeedTchr Well-Known Member

    The 100 trillion people who have read, and loved, the Reacher series are certainly not paying to see a movie with that dwarf playing their hero.
     
  6. PCLoadLetter

    PCLoadLetter Well-Known Member

    I agree with this. If you haven't read the books the name "Jack Reacher" means nothing to you.

    If you have read the books, you know Reacher is a 6'6", menacing guy, and Cruise seems horribly miscast.
     
  7. Johnny Dangerously

    Johnny Dangerously Well-Known Member

    This is not what I thought this thread would be about.
     
  8. Mizzougrad96

    Mizzougrad96 Active Member

    So who should have played him? The Rock?

    I do think it's funny that someone as short as Cruise would think he would be perfect for the role.
     
  9. Songbird

    Songbird Well-Known Member

    Yes I was.
     
  10. Buck

    Buck Well-Known Member

    I don't usually care for his movies, but didn't 'War of the Worlds' and 'Collateral' do well, not mention two MI movies?
     
  11. Care Bear

    Care Bear Guest

    I could see Martin Short as Jack Reacher.

    Seriously, I don't know who should have played the guy. The Rock is too cartooney to me. Maybe Neeson? Clive Owen? Russell Crowe?

    Tom Cruise seems horribly miscast. Granted, I haven't seen the movie, but I'm not running out to see it partly because I hate the idea of Cruise in that role.
     
  12. shockey

    shockey Active Member

    no threadjack intended, but 'tropic thunder' was da bomb... and cruise was sensational. his time on screen was minimal but it was prime choice.... ;D ;D ;D
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page