# Tom Cruise: Lots Of Years, Lots Of Starring Roles, Double Your Money Back **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [July 23, 2014, 3:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tom-cruise-lots-of-years-lots-of-starring-roles-double-your-money-back/693811 "2014-07-23T03:01:13Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/the_other_waldo_pepper/32/12370_2.png) [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Other_Waldo_Pepper)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2014, 3:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tom-cruise-lots-of-years-lots-of-starring-roles-double-your-money-back/693811/1 "2014-07-23T03:01:13Z")
Tom Cruise’s latest flick, _Edge of Tomorrow_, recently grossed more than double its budget, having just passed _Top Gun_ on the all-time list. If he’d had no other starring roles from 1986 to 2014, that’d be kind of interesting. Thing is, he was top-billed in, like, twenty-three films during those years – every one of which grossed more than double its budget. Has anyone else been a top-billed movie star that many times, over that long a span, headlining flicks that rake back in more than twice their budget each time? Look at his contemporaries: Kevin Costner was profitable in _Bull Durham_ and _JFK_ and _Dances With Wolves_ – but it wasn’t long before history was repeating itself as a farce, since he couldn’t break even playing baseball in _For Love Of The Game_, or going back to the JFK well with _Thirteen Days_, or heading back to the Old West in _Wyatt Earp_. He couldn’t break even with _Swing Vote_, either. Not to mention _The Postman_. Or… …look, Costner’s not the point; Mel Gibson, Harrison Ford, et cetera: they failed to break even that many times straight over that many years; and not Stallone, and not Schwarzenegger; and not Redford, and not Newman either; Clint Eastwood? No. John Wayne? Nope. Reasonable people can disagree over whether Sean Connery or Daniel Craig makes for a better James Bond, but this ain’t that. George Clooney hit it big starring in _Ocean’s 11_, and then failed to break even with _Solaris_. So he came back for _Ocean’s 12_, and then failed to break even heading up _The Good German_. So he came back for _Ocean’s 13_, and then failed to break even in _Leatherheads_; movie star, yes; return on investment, no. Heck, forget the white guys for a second: Denzel Washington fails to break even once in a while, and Will Smith likewise, and Samuel L. Jackson too, and Jamie Foxx, and Eddie Murphy, and – dang, this has the makings of a long list. Angelina Jolie is headlining a smash hit as we speak, but her _Life Or Something Like It_ days ain’t that far behind her. Charlize Theron? No way. Julia Roberts? Nuh-uh. Meryl Streep? Sandra Bullock? Someone? Anyone? Warren Beatty had his _Ishtar_. Bruce Willis had his _Hudson Hawk_. Tom Hanks had his _Bonfire Of The Vanities_. Daniel Day-Lewis? _Nine_. Liam Neeson? _Gun Shy_. Mike Myers? _The Love Guru_. Johnny Depp? Michael Douglas? Jim Carrey? Hugh Jackman? Woody Allen? Russell Crowe? Adam Sandler? How much time have you got? (Best I can come up with is Jackie Chan, but not because his schtick didn’t get old; after _The Tuxedo_ grossed a disappointing $104 million on a $60 million budget, and _Shanghai Knights_ likewise stalled out at $88 million from $50 million, he failed to break even with _The Medallion_ and _Around The World In 80 Days_. I just have a hard time figuring out how his earliest top-billed roles did, is all.) ---
**Author:** ![Maserschmidt](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/maserschmidt/32/18829_2.png) [@Maserschmidt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Maserschmidt)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2014, 3:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tom-cruise-lots-of-years-lots-of-starring-roles-double-your-money-back/693811/2 "2014-07-23T03:24:47Z")
Rock of Ages? Lion for Lambs? Those are quibbles, though…even before the thread I thought he was the most bankable star in history, and my family and I recently watched a dozen or so of his movies over the space of a few months. Even though he mostly plays the same character, he’s still compelling to watch. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/the_other_waldo_pepper/32/12370_2.png) [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Other_Waldo_Pepper)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2014, 4:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tom-cruise-lots-of-years-lots-of-starring-roles-double-your-money-back/693811/3 "2014-07-23T04:06:49Z")
> [@Maserschmidt](#): > > Rock of Ages? > Lion for Lambs? He wasn’t top-billed in those, so I’m not counting 'em against him. Same reason I’m not counting _Rain Man_ or _The Color Of Money_ in his favor; I’m not even giving him an arguable point for _Interview With The Vampire_. ---
**Author:** ![Wendell\_Wagner](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/8491ac/32.png) [@Wendell\_Wagner](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wendell_Wagner)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2014, 7:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tom-cruise-lots-of-years-lots-of-starring-roles-double-your-money-back/693811/4 "2014-07-23T07:32:15Z")
And he was well compensated for all the movies he’s done. He’s been paid more for his work in Hollywood pictures than anyone else. Yeah, Jerry Seinfeld is richer, but he made his money from television. Shah Rukh Khan is also richer, but he made his money from Bollywood movies: [http://magazine.foxnews.com/celebrity/and-worlds-10-richest-actors-possibly-are](http://magazine.foxnews.com/celebrity/and-worlds-10-richest-actors-possibly-are) ---
**Author:** ![Alessan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/alessan/32/465_2.png) [@Alessan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alessan)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2014, 7:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tom-cruise-lots-of-years-lots-of-starring-roles-double-your-money-back/693811/5 "2014-07-23T07:43:37Z")
That’s the thing about Tom Cruise - I \*want \*to dislike him, but I’ve never not enjoyed a performance he’s given. ---
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2014, 9:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tom-cruise-lots-of-years-lots-of-starring-roles-double-your-money-back/693811/6 "2014-07-23T09:44:25Z")
I don’t even want to dislike him, I like him just fine. Not a fan of his religion, but then, not a fan of any religion, so there’s that. He’s never been associated with any actual repulsive behaviour that I’m aware of. Well, there was the Brooke Shields thing, but he apologized to her personally about that, so I’m OK with it. ---
**Author:** ![Absinthe\_Anecdote](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/f6c823/32.png) [@Absinthe\_Anecdote](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Absinthe_Anecdote)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2014, 10:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tom-cruise-lots-of-years-lots-of-starring-roles-double-your-money-back/693811/7 "2014-07-23T10:54:59Z")
There is so much more as to what determines if a movie will be profitable or not, than the leading man. Maybe he has the knack of only signing on to good projects? Perhaps he knows what to look for in terms of writers, directors, and producers? ---
**Author:** ![buddha\_david](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/ee7513/32.png) [@buddha\_david](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/buddha_david)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2014, 11:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tom-cruise-lots-of-years-lots-of-starring-roles-double-your-money-back/693811/8 "2014-07-23T11:03:46Z")
I, for one, have no problem disliking Tom Cruise. He’s smarmy and annoying. That being said, there’s nothing really offensive about the guy either – I wouldn’t boycott a Tom Cruise movie just because he’s in it. (Instead, I boycott most of his movies because they suck.) But it’s indeed curious that his only real box office stinker was _Rock of Ages_ which like you said he wasn’t even top-billed in. One thing I did notice, which is probably significant, is that he’s only averaged one movie _per year_ since the start of his career – so he’s had far fewer chances for starring in a major turkey. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/the_other_waldo_pepper/32/12370_2.png) [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Other_Waldo_Pepper)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2014, 11:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tom-cruise-lots-of-years-lots-of-starring-roles-double-your-money-back/693811/9 "2014-07-23T11:17:58Z")
> [@buddha\_david](#): > > One thing I did notice, which is probably significant, is that he’s only averaged one movie _per year_ since the start of his career – so he’s had far fewer chances for starring in a major turkey. Like I said, though, compare him to disproportionate Academy Award heavy hitters like Warren Beatty and Daniel Day-Lewis: fewer movies over the same span, and _still_ they can’t break even as top-billed leading men in a smaller string of films. ---
**Author:** ![JKilez](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/e5b9ba/32.png) [@JKilez](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JKilez)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2014, 12:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tom-cruise-lots-of-years-lots-of-starring-roles-double-your-money-back/693811/10 "2014-07-23T12:08:31Z")
> [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](#): > > Like I said, though, compare him to disproportionate Academy Award heavy hitters like Warren Beatty and Daniel Day-Lewis: fewer movies over the same span, and _still_ they can’t break even as top-billed leading men in a smaller string of films. Huh? Quallity films often have niche markets and do not have a high ROI. Good actors often take on smaller projects because they like the screenwriter or director and enjoy a chance to stretch. > [@Absinthe\_Anecdote](#): > > Maybe he has the knack of only signing on to good projects? That is like saying McDonald’s has the knack of only using quality beef in its hamburgers. After all, that must be why they do so well–they only use the finest ingredients. ---
**Author:** ![Nava](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/da6949/32.png) [@Nava](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nava)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2014, 12:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tom-cruise-lots-of-years-lots-of-starring-roles-double-your-money-back/693811/11 "2014-07-23T12:16:56Z")
> [@Alessan](#): > > That’s the thing about Tom Cruise - I \*want \*to dislike him, but I’ve never not enjoyed a performance he’s given. Legend made my teeth ache. But yeah, even if I can never see him as the character but always as “Tom Cruise”, in general I’ll enjoy the movie. Then again, I usually only watch movies (whether he’s in them or not) because I expect to enjoy them, they’re sort of pre-filtered. ---
**Author:** ![Absinthe\_Anecdote](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/f6c823/32.png) [@Absinthe\_Anecdote](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Absinthe_Anecdote)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2014, 12:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tom-cruise-lots-of-years-lots-of-starring-roles-double-your-money-back/693811/12 "2014-07-23T12:30:29Z")
> [@JKilez](#): > > Huh? Quallity films often have niche markets and do not have a high ROI. Good actors often take on smaller projects because they like the screenwriter or director and enjoy a chance to stretch. > That is like saying McDonald’s has the knack of only using quality beef in its hamburgers. After all, that must be why they do so well–they only use the finest ingredients. Kind of a cheap shot to edit out the sentence that put that in context, and then slam me for it. When I say good, I mean financially sound, as in a good return on the investment. Either way, although there are some surprises on how well films do in the box office, there have to be people in Hollywood who are better at picking out which projects have more of a chance to make a high return. Evaluating the other people involved in the project is undoubtedly part of this. ---
**Author:** ![SciFiSam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/47e85d/32.png) [@SciFiSam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SciFiSam)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2014, 1:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tom-cruise-lots-of-years-lots-of-starring-roles-double-your-money-back/693811/13 "2014-07-23T13:46:38Z")
> [@Absinthe\_Anecdote](#): > > There is so much more as to what determines if a movie will be profitable or not, than the leading man. > > Maybe he has the knack of only signing on to good projects? > > Perhaps he knows what to look for in terms of writers, directors, and producers? I agree. And the McDonald’s comparison isn’t accurate because, while his movies are mostly blockbusters, even blockbusters are not guaranteed to make a fortune or even break even; many of them don’t. Cruise always seems to pick interesting films to star in and while his performances are never outstanding they never detract from the film either. Him being involved generally means the film is worth watching, as long as you like action/sci-fi movies. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/the_other_waldo_pepper/32/12370_2.png) [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Other_Waldo_Pepper)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2014, 1:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tom-cruise-lots-of-years-lots-of-starring-roles-double-your-money-back/693811/14 "2014-07-23T13:47:30Z")
> [@JKilez](#): > > Huh? Quallity films often have niche markets and do not have a high ROI. Good actors often take on smaller projects because they like the screenwriter or director and enjoy a chance to stretch. Well, look, the year Day-Lewis did a well-received biopic about a man confined to a wheelchair, Cruise beat him out for the Golden Globe with _his_ well-received biopic about a man confined to a wheelchair. Day-Lewis takes the occasional break from top billing to get nominated as an unlikeable dick in **Gangs of New York** ; Cruise takes a break likewise, to _win_ playing an unlikeable dick in **Magnolia**. Day-Lewis got his first and only Comedy/Musical nomination for the aforementioned **Nine** , which failed to break even; Cruise of course won one for **Jerry Maguire** , which did great. Cruise does his share of award-bait drama like **The Last Samurai** , and Day-Lewis does his share of comedic dreck like **Stars And Bars** ; neither of 'em is all or nothing. ---
**Author:** ![Dewey\_Finn](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dewey_finn/32/4222_2.png) [@Dewey\_Finn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dewey_Finn)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2014, 1:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tom-cruise-lots-of-years-lots-of-starring-roles-double-your-money-back/693811/15 "2014-07-23T13:50:39Z")
Except that even if a movie’s gross doubles its budget, it’s still not guaranteed to be profitable. (For one thing, does that budget include marketing expense, which is a lot today.) ---
**Author:** ![The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/the_other_waldo_pepper/32/12370_2.png) [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Other_Waldo_Pepper)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2014, 1:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tom-cruise-lots-of-years-lots-of-starring-roles-double-your-money-back/693811/16 "2014-07-23T13:56:32Z")
> [@Dewey\_Finn](#): > > Except that even if a movie’s gross doubles its budget, it’s still not guaranteed to be profitable. (For one thing, does that budget include marketing expense, which is a lot today.) Still, to the extent that I’m maybe setting too low a bar for Cruise, it’s even more remarkable that all the other folks I mentioned can’t even clear that too-low bar of doubling the budget – or even the comically lower bar of a breaking-even streak while he’s up there at two and ten and twenty and et cetera. ---
**Author:** ![OneCentStamp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/13edae/32.png) [@OneCentStamp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/OneCentStamp)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2014, 2:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tom-cruise-lots-of-years-lots-of-starring-roles-double-your-money-back/693811/17 "2014-07-23T14:12:23Z")
Up until After Earth flopped last year, Will Smith was arguably even a safer bet than Cruise. From 1995 until 2013, every single film he starred in was a massive hit: Bad Boys Independence Day Men in Black Enemy of the State Wild Wild West The Legend of Bagger Vance Ali Men in Black II Bad Boys II I, Robot Shark Tale Hitch The Pursuit of Happyness I Am Legend Hancock Seven Pounds Men in Black 3 ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2014, 2:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tom-cruise-lots-of-years-lots-of-starring-roles-double-your-money-back/693811/18 "2014-07-23T14:42:43Z")
He is good because I don’t think he has ever “cruised” through a role(sorry). I just watch “Oblivion” for the first time last night, and didn’t see one scene where it looked like he was phoning it in. ---
**Author:** ![JKilez](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/e5b9ba/32.png) [@JKilez](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JKilez)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2014, 2:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tom-cruise-lots-of-years-lots-of-starring-roles-double-your-money-back/693811/19 "2014-07-23T14:47:52Z")
> [@Absinthe\_Anecdote](#): > > Kind of a cheap shot to edit out the sentence that put that in context, and then slam me for it. Nothing personal, I was not trying to “slam” you for anything. > [@Absinthe\_Anecdote](#): > > When I say good, I mean financially sound, as in a good return on the investment. This is more in line of what I was trying to say. Cruise is good at picking projects that have mass appeal, solid financial backing, big marketing budgets, and play to his strengths as a box office draw. He seems to choose things that will make a good financial return, and not things that may be artistically interesting. Many other actors switch between large and small projects and therefore do not have the string of hit (profitable) movies. The closest parallel to Tom Cruise’s film choices would be Will Smith’s as **OneCentStamp** notes. One could argue that Smith takes more chances. ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Lowry](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e95f7d/32.png) [@Sam\_Lowry](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Lowry)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2014, 3:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tom-cruise-lots-of-years-lots-of-starring-roles-double-your-money-back/693811/20 "2014-07-23T15:04:59Z")
This is an interesting perspective to read. I like Tom Cruise just fine. He’s a decent actor, and he’s pretty smart about choosing parts and movies. He’s good at picking roles that fit him well and movies that turn out pretty well. He also picks good directors to work with. However, it seems that the common consensus is that he’s no longer a box office winner. When I googled “Tom Cruise box office”, the top 5 choices that Google automatically puts out are history, flops, bomb, poison, failure. His movies do make their money back overseas. There will be a Jack Reacher sequel, because even though it didn’t succeed in the US, it made enough money in foreign markets. > [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](#): > > Heck, forget the white guys for a second: Denzel Washington fails to break even once in a while, and Will Smith likewise, and Samuel L. Jackson too, and Jamie Foxx, and Eddie Murphy, and – dang, this has the makings of a long list. It seems that Will Smith is often held as the last real movie star. There have been a lot of articles about how movie stars don’t matter anymore for film success. [Here’s one article that talks about it](http://www.craveonline.com/film/articles/181303-b-movies-extended-movie-stars-dont-matter-anymore), and I could find many others. But Will Smith would often be mentioned as the one exception. [Here’s one article](http://www.forbes.com/sites/scottmendelson/2013/06/04/after-earth-aside-why-will-smith-may-still-be-the-last-old-school-movie-star/)about how despite After Earth not succeeding, he’s the last “old school movie star.” But when I was looking up articles about box office,[I found this article in Vulture from last year](http://www.vulture.com/2013/10/most-valuable-movie-stars.html#/all/vulture-rankings), ranking the most valuable stars. It seems very thorough, taking into account domestic box office, foreign box office, studio value, likeability, Oscars, critics’ scores, Twitter mentions, and tabloid score. Will Smith is number 6, because After Earth hurt him and he fell down in ratings. Tom Cruise is number 14, with the subheadline “Americans may be wary of him, but Cruise’s movies still clean up overseas.” It also says he has one of the lowest likability scores on the list. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tom-cruise-lots-of-years-lots-of-starring-roles-double-your-money-back/693811.md?page=2)