Paramount Dumps - Tom Cruise

[MinionZombie]

$87 frickin' million???!!! For pint size? WTF, are they freakin' crazy. It was a decent performance, but it wasn't worth 87 mil, geez! I'll put my head up and say that yep, I enjoyed Spielberg's WOTW as well. I liked the modern day retelling of it, scenes like the crowds swarming maniac style on the only working car were terrifying, good special effects too. It suffered a the hands of a somewhat dodgy script, it's certainly not a great film, but it's a solid blockbuster, I liked it. Tom Cruise though, what a strange little man... Damn straight, Hollywood need to tighten them thar purse strings and stop blowing so much money on actors, jebus, I thought 30 mil for Arnie in T3 was a buttload, but damn, 87 mil ... no wonder Hollywood is dying on it's box office arse. I wonder where they learnt how to manage money, from the Labour party?!

[zombie04]

After seeing Scary Movie 4, I really think Michael Madsen would've been better in the actual role in War of the Worlds instead of Tim Robbins. That guy just needs to stop making anything for a buck.

[Danny]

As of November 22, 2005, (the last day it was at the box office) it has earned $234.3 million domestically and $357.1 million overseas, making the total $591.4 million. It is the 4th highest grossing movie of 2005. Budget $132 million how can you call that a failure. thats not really that good movie wise, cus not only does it have to make back the budget but all the things that happens over budget, csu anyone in hollywood who said they stayed underbudget is ether cheap or a liar. with all the poster campaigns and tv spots ect. they had more to pay than the budget and they never say how mutch over budget they whent. case in point spiderman 2 though a sucess it didnt make back all the money they spent yet you still saw posters saying nothign but "6 million in the first week!" or some such stuff. as for cruise ive never liked his acting becuase lets face it, he cant, and if you get stuck in the spot light you gonna go all "james brown" after a while it happens to all of em. jebus, I thought 30 mil for Arnie in T3 was a buttload, but damn, 87 mil ... no wonder Hollywood is dying on it's box office arse. I wonder where they learnt how to manage money, from the Labour party?! *some random quiz show host* bing- that is correct 10 points to mr M. zombie

[DjfunkmasterG]

$87 frickin' million???!!! For pint size? WTF, are they freakin' crazy. It was a decent performance, but it wasn't worth 87 mil, geez! I'll put my head up and say that yep, I enjoyed Spielberg's WOTW as well. I liked the modern day retelling of it, scenes like the crowds swarming maniac style on the only working car were terrifying, good special effects too. It suffered a the hands of a somewhat dodgy script, it's certainly not a great film, but it's a solid blockbuster, I liked it. Tom Cruise though, what a strange little man... Damn straight, Hollywood need to tighten them thar purse strings and stop blowing so much money on actors, jebus, I thought 30 mil for Arnie in T3 was a buttload, but damn, 87 mil ... no wonder Hollywood is dying on it's box office arse. I wonder where they learnt how to manage money, from the Labour party?! Well his salary was Something like $25 million plus a percentage of the Domestic... the figure doesn't include DVD sales of which he gets 50% of every DVD sold. The dude had the most lucrative deal in Hollywood and ****ed it up

[general tbag]

it was 20 percent take on everything, well over a 100 million on war of the worlds alone.

[Andy]

Dude, why is it that you always seem to think that how much money a film makes determines whether or not it's a good film? Money doesn't determine whether or not a film is in fact a good or bad film. Money only matters to the studios. i thought you guys were talking about the studios

[MinionZombie]

Although, you have to admit, Cruise did a good job in Born On The 4th Of July, that's some powerful sh*t ... he hasn't done anything that risky in quite some damn time, so he's just played it safe and signed lots of people's sh*t. And I'll take "Entertainment" for 20 points...

[Neil]

Oh well....he's one of the biggest stars in the World right now. He'll just pack up and go somewhere else with ease.... I guess this means no more "Mission: Impossible" flicks... Shame, the last one was an pretty good flick!

[bassman]

Shame, the last one was an pretty good flick! Oh yeah, I agree. I didn't mean that was a good thing. I actually like all three of them.

[Neil]

Well, again, knowing someone who has worked with Cruise, so having heard a bit about what he's actually like 'personally', I don't really have anything bad to say about him. If his worse issue is he gets excited and jumps up and down on a couch, then we're pretty much all fruit cakes... To be honest I get a bit fed up with the attitude of once something/someone is big/successful/famous it's simply the "done thing" to try and bring them down...

[bassman]

Well, again, knowing someone who has worked with Cruise, so having heard a bit about what he's actually like 'personally', I don't really have anything bad to say about him. If his worse issue is he gets excited and jumps up and down on a couch, then we're pretty much all fruit cakes... To be honest I get a bit fed up with the attitude of once something/someone is big/successful/famous it's simply the "done thing" to try and bring them down... Yeah, I know what you mean. Some people say things like, "I'll never go see another movie that he stars in again!" It doesn't make any sense. As if his personal life has anything to do with his acting abilities... I think it just makes some people feel better about themselves to make fun of someone famous because they know someone else will be on their side. I mean, I would understand if someone doesn't like one's body of work.....but to dismiss an actor because of their "personal life"(and let's be honest....nobody knows JACK about stars' personal lives except themselves) is just ridiculous. i thought you guys were talking about the studios No, GeneralTbag quoted Rottedfreak saying that "War of the Worlds" wasn't what it could have been(as in film quality) because of time difficulties. Then GeneralTbag responded with a statement about how much money the film made and that meant it wasn't a failure. That was my point, thank you.

[MaximusIncredulous]

he made a 100 million from war of the worlds i doubt he isnt to worried. I wonder how much the Scientologists take of that.

[DjfunkmasterG]

A few celebs practice that BS, but I doubt they really give up their fortunes to the place. I mean no one is that friggin' stupid.

[Dommm]

you will be suprised how many people are stupid enuff to give up there money to this dark society. take a look saround on the web, there are numbers of people who have fallen into depression and suicide after joing said society. Though this does not intrinisicaly prove anything....

[Neil]

you will be suprised how many people are stupid enuff to give up there money to this dark society. Can you believe some people are even stupid enough to just sit in little bitching circles and rattle off each other to feel better