Is Tom Cruise cruising on cruise control?

nyarlothothep

All his recent films from Jack Reacher to Oblivion to this new one that's coming out are so generic? Is he not bored by what he does? He just plays conventional, by the numbers action roles in action films of the same description. There's nothing challenging or wow about them, just serviceable money making vehicles. In a way he's become like a 70s action man, I can't really put words on it but like some character in a cheap 70s sci fi action film, like a wind up toy-man that you can place into action scenarios and watch him go. All his films are ego trips and I'm thinking the new one may have Cruise clones or multiple Cruises. I thought he used to play interesting roles like in Born on the fourth of July or Interview with the Vampire, now he's just in films that come across as if they were assembled by computers.

krudler

Recently yeah, I'd like him to go back to somewhat interesting roles like Collateral or hell even Tropic Thunder, do a full blown comedy, he's got good comic timing and has done enough of the running and jumping thing for a while now.

constitutionus

always think of this when i think of cruises films.

i actually do like the guy but all his films lately do feel like different variation on the same theme.

but hey generally theyve been fun.

i LOVED jack reacher and i almost missed it in the cinema i was so unenthused for it.

.jacksparrow.

Cocktail was one of his best.

kryogen

Tom Cruise is a great actor, he really is, he is picking very non challenging roles the last while now but if that's what he wants to do at this stage of his career he is entitled to it. They are no worse then any of the other action films you would see out and Scientology always needs $$$ from him Im sure. He has now also got two ex wives to pay for and another kid

It would be fantastic to see him take a role he can really sink his teeth into again and Im sure some day we will

Josey Wales

Don't forget his recent roles like Lions for Lambs, Rock of Age or Valkyrie. These are not standard action fare.

I thought Valkyrie in particular was good.

catallus

Valkyrie was a great film. But to blame Cruise for starring in pedestrian films is a bit like blaming the waitress for bringing a bland meal; it ain't her fault if it isn't to your liking. Actors just read the lines they're given.

Hello_MrFox

I really like Tom, in interviews these days he just says what is expected of him - he looks bored. He is a very talented actor and i would love to see him in some more challenging roles, saying that i am really looking forward to Mission Impossible 5.

dark crystal

catallus wrote: »

Valkyrie was a great film. But to blame Cruise for starring in pedestrian films is a bit like blaming the waitress for bringing a bland meal; it ain't her fault if it isn't to your liking. Actors just read the lines they're given.

Tom Cruise can pick and choose his roles, such is his star power, so it's not like he's being made to star in these generic actioners where he's merely required to run very fast a lot - he chooses to do them.

I do think he's been shortchanging himself as an actor for a while now. The last meaty, dramatic role he had was probably Valkyrie back in 2008. It's a shame, as I think he's very underrated as an actor and given the right roles, he could be one of the best actors in Hollywood.

He was the best thing about Rainman and was really unlucky to miss out on the Oscar for Born On The Fourth Of July, being up against the mighty Daniel Day Lewis that year. His portrayal of TJ Mackey in Magnolia really should have won him the Oscar that year too.

I'd love to see him get his teeth into something a bit more challenging again and not end up like Neeson or Cage, two fine actors now playing tough guys in material far below what their talent merits.

catallus

Looking through his list of films, he's done 36 films in the last 32 years and there are very few duds. A cursory examination of the list debunks the opening post. It is self explanatory.

pixelburp

I dunno, looking at recent material like Oblivion, Jack Reacher, the Mission Impossible franchise and even Edge of Tomorrow (by the look of the trailer) I can't shake the feeling that the productions are just egotistical indulgences for Cruise; almost like the films are built around Cruise & Cruise alone. Of course that's to be somewhat expected in big Hollywood pictures, and he certainly wouldn't be the first star to do this (looking at you Will Smith!), but you start to see patterns in his films that make them seem like middle-aged ego trips.

Oblivion was the most egregious of recent memory, which may colour my theory a little; a film where Cruise is literally the most important person in the world, with whole scenes consisting of him showing off his piloting / motorbiking skills (not for the first time there either) - when not otherwise running about with his famous 'running' acting. You see the same thing in other films, and future ones by the look of Edge of Tomorrow, but it was with Oblivion that it really struck a chord. Whereas other 'stars' of his age seem keen to either get behind the lens or take on interesting background characters (see Pitt or Clooney), Cruise seems to be indulging himself a lot.

All seems rather lazy, and while I still don't rate him as an actor at all, it'd be nice to see him grow a little and try to develop his craft. I will concede he has been pretty good in comic roles, it's just a pity his apparent ego wouldn't let him let go of the limelight even a little.

catallus

pixelburp wrote: »

I ..............

All seems rather lazy, and while I still don't rate him as an actor at all, it'd be nice to see him grow a little and try to develop his craft. I will concede he has been pretty good in comic roles, it's just a pity his apparent ego wouldn't let him let go of the limelight even a little.

I'm sorry but the man is one of the best actors in the business. I know this isn't a big deal but how can you not rate him as an actor? He was doing fantastic stuff in 1986 (Top Gun, The Colour of Money), Rainman and Born on the Fourth of July in 1988 and 89, The Firm in 1993, A massive dramatic and subtly comic (in the true sense of the word) turn in Interview With the Vampire in 1994, Eyes Wide Shut and Magnolia in 1999 (He is the sole reason to watch either of them, imo), and on and on and on. It is lazy to detract from this and say he hogs the limelight.

Sincerely, Catallus, President of the Tom Cruise Fan Club, (apparently)

pixelburp

catallus wrote: »

I'm sorry but the man is one of the best actors in the business. I know this isn't a big deal but how can you not rate him as an actor?

Honestly, I don't think he has much of a range, certainly not as much as you seem to think! I find his style very empty, very vacuous & often apparently unable to disappear into a role in the way many of the greats can. I will concede Magnolia was an excellent performance, but that felt like the material overlapping with his template, rather than Cruise stretching himself to play the part. It also doesn't help I find Cruise, as a leading man, utterly charmless. I dunno *shrug* he doesn't seem to be worth the billing half the time - and that's all ignoring his personal life and beliefs btw, that sometimes gets dragged into the debate and it should be irrelevant to the discussion imo

catallus wrote: »

He was doing fantastic stuff in 1986 (Top Gun, The Colour of Money), Rainman and Born on the Fourth of July in 1988 and 89, The Firm in 1993, A massive dramatic and subtly comic (in the true sense of the word) turn in Interview With the Vampire in 1994, Eyes Wide Shut and Magnolia in 1999 (He is the sole reason to watch either of them, imo), and on and on and on. It is lazy to detract from this and say he hogs the limelight.

I don't think it's lazy to simply observe that lately his films seem more like middle-aged ego trips than creative propositions; nor would it negate the material he did in the 80s. I watched stuff like MI4 and Oblivion and just couldn't shake the feeling I was watching an actor's equivalent to buying the coupé and having an affair with a younger woman If Tom Cruise wants to ride around on bikes and think he's the messiah, does he have to clog up Multiplexes in doing so?

JP Liz V1

I would like to see him take on more villainous roles

catallus

For all its faults, one cannot describe Oblivion as being uncreative. IM4 is a comedy-action flick, and it is because of his range he's able to fit so seamlessly into the role. And as for coupés, what's he supposed to do, buy a passat and hook up with a granny?? "What were you thinking???????" © Apu, 1996

pixelburp

catallus wrote: »

For all its faults, one cannot describe Oblivion as being uncreative. IM4 is a comedy-action flick, and it is because of his range he's able to fit so seamlessly into the role. And as for coupés, what's he supposed to do, buy a passat and hook up with a granny?? "What were you thinking???????" © Apu, 1996

I can; Oblivion looked great, and had a nice soundtrack, but everything beyond the surface made no sense. I defended it at the time on boards, but on reflection Oblivion was a mess of a film & just felt like an excuse for Cruise to drive around in some concept vehicles hung off a poor script with 'Messiah Complex' written all over it. As for Mission Impossible 4, I'm struggling to think what Cruise brought to the role beyond "Generic Action Lead" that a half-dozen other actors couldn't have brought.

Hey look, maybe I got it all sideways; if I had Cruise's money and clout perhaps I'd be hanging off the side of the Burj Khalifa for the laugh as well, but I'd not have the cheek to call it acting

catallus

That was the best part of IM4 afaic.

"You've run out of rope!!!!!"

"YA THINK????????"

That's brilliant!

Goldstein

catallus wrote: »

Looking through his list of films, he's done 36 films in the last 32 years and there are very few duds. A cursory examination of the list debunks the opening post. It is self explanatory.

Actually watching those films proves it.

The OP mentions "recent films" so they're clearly not talking about his entire career. If your statement had been made around 2004/2005 then I'd agree but there's been an undeniable and clear drop in the quality of movies he chose to star in since around that time with MI3 and Valkyrie being the peaks of that second part of his career. Collateral is as good a line in the sand as any to illustrate the divergence. Look what he's doing next - yet another by the numbers sci-fi, another Jack Reacher, a Top-Gun cash grab, another Mission Impossible and Van Helsing? He's a great actor and it's a shame to only get to enjoy such a small range of those talents in these generic ego-boosting blockbusters.

catallus

Without looking to be too contrary I thought Collateral was one of the duds. It was soulless. Had a few good bits but wasn't my cup of tea. War of the Worlds wasn't great. But any guy who can star in The Last Samurai, basically carrying that film on his head, even with a glittering supporting cast, can't be put down.

pixelburp

catallus wrote: »

That was the best part of IM4 afaic.

"You've run out of rope!!!!!"

"YA THINK????????"

That's brilliant!

You were the one mentioning his range somehow improving the MI films; I'm saying the only thing Cruise brought to the scene was its authenticity, helped by his action-junkie indulgences. His acting ability had nothing to do with it, and is kinda the point I made originally: he's a middle-aged man using studio money to go on successive adventure holidays. Heck, the interchangeability of the MI role was only emphasised by the inclusion of Jeremy Renner who played pretty much the same character.

Snake Plisken

At least he hasn't turned into an asshole like Willis has who seems to be rude and a bit of a money grabber, maybe Tom is resigned to his faith of not getting interesting acting roles, maybe he'll get another chance like McCoughey has in his last couple of movies! But I do appreciate that he still does a lot of his own stunts and I still would prefer to watch a Tom Cruise movie then a Will Smith one any day!

JP Liz V1

Josey Wales wrote: »

Don't forget his recent roles like Lions for Lambs, Rock of Age or Valkyrie. These are not standard action fare.

I thought Valkyrie in particular was good.

He stole the show in Rock of Ages

Adamantium

He has the most amazing eye for scripts and partnerships, his choices are always above average in terms of what they are for the genre they're in, in and not your typical summer blockbuster. He is in good stuff.

He is one of the only genuine movie stars like the days of old, who you just enjoy watching and can elevate bad material simply by presence and charisma alone. Isn't that after all what actors aspire and dream of?

He has that elusive indefinable X factor, either through birth/experience/work.

They're all atypical , Minority Report, Oblivion.

Tropic Thunder.

What ever happened to his own spin off?

scroll to 2.00 or so.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RLcNgawiCJM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dROwEc4VyJA

"We'll weep for him................ in the press."

You're right about the whole 1970's sci fi b movie leading man vibe tho, but there a wonderful guilty pleasure
It reminds me of those lonely, atmospheric Charles Heston movies of that era

AngryHippie

Tom Cruise is Tom Cruise Crazy

Oafley Jones

The thing I most admire about Cruise is his professionalism.  There’s no doubting his commitment when’s onboard a project.  I also think he’s a capable actor and he can be pretty damn great with the right material.  He’s worked with some amazing directors, been clever enough with script choices and doesn’t over expose himself.  However, there has been a fair few cracks since he had a clear out of his people in 2008 (crucially his partner Wagner).  So I’m just going to briefly comment on those...

The first I heard of Knight and Day was opening week.  It was if it appeared out of no-where.  It’s still weird to me how ineffective the marketing was for it because Cruise vehicles are normally flagged months out. 

Ghost Protocol was perfectly serviceable.  Cruise for the first time looks old.  The choice of Brad Bird (I expected more from him) showing that Cruise’s reptilian brain is still functioning.

Didn’t see Rock of Ages.   Another role designed to mix it up for Cruise’s image, but according to anyone I know it just didn’t work at all. 

Jack Reacher and Oblivion: Two really sloppy films, that needed an awful lot of polishing.   I’m still not sure which is worse, but Reacher stunned me in that there’s a one or two scenes where Cruise just doesn’t sell the moment.  It’s like they used a bad take.  I’m not sure whether McQuarrie didn’t either see it or was too afraid to push for another go.

Edge of Tomorrow has me concerned.  From the trailer, It just looks slightly janky, seems to riffing on other better movies (see Oblivion) and Cruise looks old as fawk for the role.

Tipsy McSwagger

Have to laugh at people who mock TC for his religious beliefs (which he keeps to himself) but don't bat an eyelid when someone wins an Oscar or a Grammy and thanks Jesus/God.

wandatowell

I think he's great. He does comedy very well too.

LuckyLloyd

This phase of his career will end and there will be more interesting work when he starts playing older men.

krudler

Tipsy McSwagger wrote: »

Have to laugh at people who mock TC for his religious beliefs (which he keeps to himself) but don't bat an eyelid when someone wins an Oscar or a Grammy and thanks Jesus/God.

That's the thing, I've no love for Scientology, it's a dangerous cult that should be done away with, but you don't hear him praising Xenu or thanking L Ron Hubbard for winning him an MTV Award or something. Yet it's perfectly fine for footballers to thank god for that few million quid transfer or musicians to be bawling about Jesus on stage at the Grammys.

FlashD

Seems to me, like he is just milking the whole action thing right now, before he gets too old. I do hope he returns to more serious roles at some stage.

krudler

FlashD wrote: »

Seems to me, like he is just milking the whole action thing right now, before he gets too old. I do hope he returns to more serious roles at some stage.

He's in his 50's now so tbh if he does the action stuff now and then moves to more dramatic roles I'd be fine with that, would rather that than the Harrison Ford/Bruce Willis thing of someone in their late 50's or early 60's playing the action man. Cruise is in great shape as well and it can never be said he doesn't commit to a role physically. His insurance company must have a stroke every time he signs up for a new MI movie.

constitutionus

i dont think he's engaging in an ego trip as others have said.

i think he's just playing it safe. yes the last load of stuff he's come out with has been incredibly pedestrian (id rate reachers as probably his best) and undeniably oblivion was THE derivative film of the decade.

but they make money. maybe not great money but enough to keep the careeer going.

look at how will smith is doing now. in fact now i think about it how many of toms peers from the 80s of the "pretty boy" set are still getting regular work?

theres no harm in being in "cruise control". it means if theres something he's really pasionate about some day he'll have the finance's to do it himself, and besides that means he's still a "name" and can snap up a role he really likes when it comes along ala tropic thunder.

i fully expect edge of tomorrow to be more of the same that ive seen before, but on a boring day in the cinema thats ok. nothing wrong with a bit of popcorn every now and again and generally toms a good bet on that.

JP Liz V1

He seems to treat his fans very well, spending hours signing autographs at premiere etc., and always polite and friendly in interviews from what I have seen

He can still pull off the action roles despite his age as he is in great shape

splashthecash

I thought Vanilla sky was quote good too..must remember to check that out again soon

Corholio

I agree with the op on the point. In the past he's put himself into roles that were a bit unexpected, Tropic Thunder for example. But his last run of films, and seems to be continuing, were just basically Tom Cruise in a leather jacket....acting.

I'd like to see Cruise with Paul Thomas Anderson again. I think he'd be able to start challenging Cruise again.

BopNiblets

catallus wrote: »

Valkyrie was a great film. But to blame Cruise for starring in pedestrian films is a bit like blaming the waitress for bringing a bland meal; it ain't her fault if it isn't to your liking. Actors just read the lines they're given.

Yeah I agree with this, imagine reading the scripts for the last few movies he's done, on paper they would look awesome, but he would no idea how they'd actually turn out (good for the most part I thought)
Must watch Jack Reacher.