It’s difficult to explain why the Mission: Impossible movies did well without citing Cruise’s involvement. The movies were extremely middle-quality action fare of the sort that gets released every month. Knockoff movies from TV shows are not exactly a revolutionary idea, and there wasn’t anything spectacular about them, nor were there any huge A-list actors aside from Cruise. Nobody was paying $12 to see Philip Seymour Hoffman, and I say that despite thinking he put on a sensational performance in MI3.
Nevertheless the films made absolute gobs of money. “Ghost Protocol” has raked in $700 million. I believe Tom Cruise was the main reason.
Look, it is inescapably true that Tom Cruise pulls in money. YOU may not like him, but that does not mean someone doesn’t. I watch no reality TV, not one minute of a single show, but it would be insane for me to conclude reaity TV isn’t popular. There is a limit as to how far you can claim an actor is getting work for no reason. An actor can have a few bombs, but sooner or later if they don’t demonstrate marquee value the phone calls will stop.
I won’t belabor the point that the number of people who will go to the movie because it’s Tom Cruise is much, much larger than the number who will boycott it because he doesn’t match the book’s description of the character.
It works the other way, too. When I was in high school, we read a short story called “The Quiet Man.” I won’t say it was the whole point of the story, but much of the drama came from the fact that the protagonist was NOT large or intimidating, and in fact was a target of abuse by his hulking brother-in-law because he was so UNmanly. It’s been decades since I read it, so I don’t remember whether it wasn’t revealed until the end that he was a former pro boxer, but the climactic scene was the thrashing that the meek little shrimp gave to the bully twice his size.
The movie version, which did very well, is hailed by many as one of John Wayne’s best roles.
Who cares if Cruise pulls in the fans? There’s no goddamn way you’d ever mistake him for Reacher. Not in a million years. The trailer confirmed all of my fears - they’ve turned Reacher into a short action hero with a muscle-car fetish.
Good Lord…
The problem now is: if it bombs, no more Reacher movies will likely be made. If it’s a hit, they’ll bring back Cruise again and again until he’s about 70 years old, a’la Harrison Ford in the Indy movies. The fan of the Reacher books can’t win here.
Thanks. Of course with a relatively unknown star, the movie would have to actually be good, and they wouldn’t make serious bank until the DVD release and follow-up sequel.
I saw him [the author] being interviewed on TV here [Ireland] and they were commenting on casting Tom Cruise as Reacher and how ridiculous it was to have Cruise playing a character known mainly for his hulking build. Child shrugged it off, but I got the impression he had no say in the matter and there was nothing he could do about it, so he was going along with it.
This was part of Child’s argument for Cruise, that there aren’t any 6’6" actors in Hollywood
Was my first thought when I heard Child’s [above mentioned] comment.
Allow me to interject…knowing nothing of the story but only the name “Jack Reacher” and the involvement of Tom Cruise.
Tee hee hee.
I’m sorry. Go about your business.
Possibly limited acting ability as well. Hard to say with little to work with. He was good as Khal Drogo but that was a limited role. The Conan movie was a bad idea all around.
The Rock might have better range, but mostly in the realm of family comedies. He’s fairly one note as an action star, at least recently. I’ve seen bits of “The Rundown” and he was a good leading man in that, but he seems to be either going for the light comedy or popcorn action flick these days and neither is good medium for showing off you acting chops.
Ryan Reynolds failed as an A-lister obviously, but I think he could hold a movie on his own given the right role. He can play a quasi- badass, but only if its a wise-cracking action hero badass. Not the right fit from the sounds of it.
Ray Stevenson-not a big enough name.
Christian Bale can certainly play menacing and physically intimidating.
How about an Eric Bana? Not really A-list but can play intense and brooding well enough. Not necessarily physically intimidating but he is about the right height.
Or maybe Viggo Mortensen?
Of course, if you want to put butts in the seats, you go with a Tom Cruise or a Brad Pitt or maybe Matt Damon and work around the character differences the best you can.
He could publicly bash the studio for picking Cruise to play someone that he couldn’t possibly play, only to eat crow after seeing Cruise do a very good job of it.