Posted on 05/10/2006 7:36:59 AM PDT by Blueflag
The real "failure to launch" of Mission: Impossible III at the box office has caused an immediate problem at Paramount Pictures.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
I bet he's wishing Dan Brown had written the script now.
Dan Brown: Great fiction -- pi$$ poor research.
I live behind the times. Story was published MAY 10th, not APRIL 10th.
Please correct my error if you see the need. ;-)
There's no way that MI:III will actually lose money. Paramount will make millions, but they will be able to re-claim a dominant position over Cruise. That's what this is about.
I never got passed the first Mission Impossible...when they had the original character turn.
Tom'll be called in fr a meeting and after he, his agents, lawyers etc say their piece, the PP leadership will say: "Tom, you're a Dixie Chick. Just STFU." and the meeting will then end.
Wow, couldn't see this coming. Way to stay up to date on public sentiment. This guy has been damaged goods for, what 2 years now?
And the fact that a three-quel to a remake of a TV show doesn't get great box office should be a lesson to the lazy asses in the entertainment industry.
Too bad, so sad.
People don't want to see TC jumping up and down anymore.
I caught O'Reilly say the words "Dixie Chicks" in his Talking Points last night and couldn't change the channel fast enough. Why on earth is he covering this ages-old fiasco?
Paramount doesn't own Cruise. His dealings with them are on a picture by picture basis. It is folly to suggest that they are intentionally sabotauging their summer blockbuster to gain the upper hand with him in future dealings. If this flic fails these folks will be out of a job. If it succeeds wildly then they will gladly pay Cruise whatever he wants next time.
You would think but they are interminably stupid.
Sequels are not my thing anyway. Usually, they don't live up to the first. I saw the first MI -- it was ok, but that was enough for me. I would be happier if, instead of sequels and remakes (particularly the trend of bringing lousy tv shows to the screen), Hollywood would come up with something original. Seldom does.
A $50 million opening weekend is a "failure"?
}:-)4
Do you suppose it has to do with a "Tom Cruise is a nutcase" reaction? I mean, hell -- Tom and Katie and Their Strange Pregnancy" are one of the three or four current trainwrecks on recurrent display at every supermarket checkout stand. Who'd want to go watch that guy in a movie?
That wouldn't have helped. Cruise is a chick magnet. When he raises his voice, I swear he sounds like a nagging wife. Manly men all know they could clean his clock in a street fight and don't respect him. He just can't project like an Eastwood or a Ford.
He'll do well to stay in the Jerry MacGuire roles for the rest of his career.
Cruise is a chick magnet. When he raises his voice, I swear he sounds like a nagging wife. Manly men all know they could clean his clock in a street fight and don't respect him. He just can't project like an Eastwood or a Ford.
****
This is one "chick" who isn't drawn to him. Cruise was talented, had promise. Operative words there are "was" and "had." Not now.
I guess I'm the odd man out regarding Cruise though. I never did think he was a good actor and he only seemed to get worse as his career took off. I agreed to see War of The Worlds with the wife (she isn't a big cruise fan but wanted to see the movie). Dakota Fanning carried that movie...Cruise sure didn't.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.