Tom Cruise is playing JACK REACHER?

[sr71plt]

This message is hidden because lovecraft68 is on your ignore list.

[PennLady]

Originally Posted by RjThoughts

It's appearing more and more that Cruise is Paramount's "Golden Boy." He's still not what one would think of when you think action.

And yet they keep casting him that way, don't they? No, I don't think of him as "action hero" type either.

Originally Posted by sr71plt

I'm still sort of interested in how much Anne Rice paid for him. I once was interested in how much Mae West paid for John Wayne, but that interest sort of went away after they both were dead.

Perhaps he used some Scientology magic powers. :-p

[sr71plt]

Originally Posted by RjThoughts

It's appearing more and more that Cruise is Paramount's "Golden Boy." He's still not what one would think of when you think action.

As for his height, I've been near him. I'm 5' 9", and in barefeet I was at least 2 inches taller when I shook his hand.

But that sort of flies in the face of reality, doesn't it? Unless Hollywood is lying (which is always a possibility), he does his own stunts, which is more than you can say for 99 percent of the action hero actors (now that that very thing did Bruce Lee in). So, in reality and comparatively speaking, he is an action actor.

You want someone in the public light who is waaaay shorter than you imagine, try to get a shot of former White House spokesman and now political commentator George Stephanopolous without his booster crate. I stood next to him in a reception line once and even standing on his crate he only came up to my elbow.

[Bramblethorn]

Originally Posted by sr71plt

But that sort of flies in the face of reality, doesn't it? Unless Hollywood is lying (which is always a possibility), he does his own stunts, which is more than you can say for 99 percent of the action hero actors (now that that very thing did Bruce Lee in).

Brandon, I think. Bruce Lee's death is still a bit of a puzzle, but it wasn't stunt work.

[lovecraft68]

Originally Posted by Bramblethorn

Brandon, I think. Bruce Lee's death is still a bit of a puzzle, but it wasn't stunt work.

You're correct it was Brandon, during the filming of the Crow

[PennLady]

Originally Posted by lovecraft68

You're correct it was Brandon, during the filming of the Crow

Also, Brandon Lee was killed during a scene where his character is held by two guys, then a third shoots at him. There was a problem with the gun, which was supposed to have blanks, not firing properly (I forget exactly how). I'm not sure if that comes under stunt work the way other things -- chases, falls, etc. -- do.

As for Tom Cruise, SR is right, I've read that he does his own stunts and things like that. And no doubt he's in good physical condition. Even so, he's not what I think of in terms of "action hero." But that could just be me.

[sirhugs]

Originally Posted by alex_d

Reacher is a giant who's built like a brick shithouse. Cruise is none of the above, and too old for the part. Any nonsense about "a metaphor" for the juggernaut is just Child trying to go Anne Rice and believe that a mad ugly midget could possibly do his character justice. I certainly won't be watching it.

if they wanted a powerful little person, they could have gone with Peter Dinklage (Tyrion in Game of Thrones), who can actually act, and is a wonderfully unexpected action hero!

[Bramblethorn]

Originally Posted by PennLady

Also, Brandon Lee was killed during a scene where his character is held by two guys, then a third shoots at him. There was a problem with the gun, which was supposed to have blanks, not firing properly (I forget exactly how). I'm not sure if that comes under stunt work the way other things -- chases, falls, etc. -- do.

Story seems to be that in an earlier scene the gun was loaded with a dummy round (real bullet, no propellant), and the bullet lodged in the barrel without anybody noticing. Later on they used the same gun for a scene where Lee was supposed to be shot with blanks - but blank in the chamber + bullet in the barrel = live round. There were a couple of other factors that contributed, and all in all it looks like somebody was cutting corners on safety.

Compared to a lot of the other things in that movie, it shouldn't have been dangerous, but it's often the "not-dangerous" things where people get hurt because they stop thinking about safety.

[PennLady]

Originally Posted by Bramblethorn

Story seems to be that in an earlier scene the gun was loaded with a dummy round (real bullet, no propellant), and the bullet lodged in the barrel without anybody noticing. Later on they used the same gun for a scene where Lee was supposed to be shot with blanks - but blank in the chamber + bullet in the barrel = live round. There were a couple of other factors that contributed, and all in all it looks like somebody was cutting corners on safety.

Compared to a lot of the other things in that movie, it shouldn't have been dangerous, but it's often the "not-dangerous" things where people get hurt because they stop thinking about safety.

Thank you. That meshes with what I remember, so I'm sure you're right. (And to date myself with trivia, a similar incident killed Jon-Eric Hexum, a young actor who was on a show called "Voyagers.")

[sr71plt]

Originally Posted by sirhugs

if they wanted a powerful little person, they could have gone with Peter Dinklage (Tyrion in Game of Thrones), who can actually act, and is a wonderfully unexpected action hero!

Who???

Which, I think, makes the movie box office name point. Like millions of folks, I don't even get the channel that shows Game of Thrones.

[PennLady]

Originally Posted by sr71plt

Who???

Which, I think, makes the movie box office name point. Like millions of folks, I don't even get the channel that shows Game of Thrones.

Yes and no. Dinklage is certainly more well-known than he used to be since being cast in GoT, and he's one of the best on the show. However, he has a lot of credits before that, including roles in one of the Narnia movies, both versions of "Death at a Funeral," and "The Station Agent," which was a small movie that garnered a lot of attention, and pretty much all positive for Dinklage.

But I don't think he'd be right as Jack Reacher, either.

[alex_d]

Why ruin the image of a well-loved character just for that first "smash"? A lesser known but more suitable actor would've been better in the long run - and there are a lot of Reacher stories to be told. Tom Cruise will always be just Tom Cruise. Can anyone remember without looking on Google, the name of any character he's ever played?

[soflabbwlvr]

Originally Posted by alex_d

Why ruin the image of a well-loved character just for that first "smash"? A lesser known but more suitable actor would've been better in the long run - and there are a lot of Reacher stories to be told. Tom Cruise will always be just Tom Cruise. Can anyone remember without looking on Google, the name of any character he's ever played?

Ethan Hunt
Jerry Maguire

[PennLady]

Originally Posted by alex_d

Why ruin the image of a well-loved character just for that first "smash"? A lesser known but more suitable actor would've been better in the long run - and there are a lot of Reacher stories to be told. Tom Cruise will always be just Tom Cruise. Can anyone remember without looking on Google, the name of any character he's ever played?

LOL It took me a minute and I didn't use Google I promise, but I finally recalled that his character in War of the Worlds was named Ray. But I don't know the last name. And I think the M:I character was Ethan Hunt? Others I recall: in Top Gun he was Maverick but I don't remember his real name, if you were ever told. In Legend, his name was Jack.

But it's an interesting point b/c mostly I think of Cruise as "he played [character description]." In Collateral, he was a hit man (again, maybe his name is never said); he was the Civil War veteran in The Last Samurai; he was the self-help guy (I think) in Magnolia; etc.

[PennLady]

Originally Posted by soflabbwlvr

Ethan Hunt
Jerry Maguire

LOL Totally forgot Jerry Maguire, which is sad since that was the movie title.

[soflabbwlvr]

Originally Posted by PennLady

LOL It took me a minute and I didn't use Google I promise, but I finally recalled that his character in War of the Worlds was named Ray. But I don't know the last name. And I think the M:I character was Ethan Hunt? Others I recall: in Top Gun he was Maverick but I don't remember his real name, if you were ever told. In Legend, his name was Jack.

But it's an interesting point b/c mostly I think of Cruise as "he played [character description]." In Collateral, he was a hit man (again, maybe his name is never said); he was the Civil War veteran in The Last Samurai; he was the self-help guy (I think) in Magnolia; etc.

Which leads to the conclusion that, despite his size, Cruise is usually bigger than the movie. He sells tickets on his name, alone. That is precisely why he was chosen for the role.

[PennLady]

Originally Posted by soflabbwlvr

Which leads to the conclusion that, despite his size, Cruise is usually bigger than the movie. He sells tickets on his name, alone. That is precisely why he was chosen for the role.

Yep, I'd agree. Cruise is pretty much the biggest star in movies right now, no matter how you feel about him or his acting ability. And studios play it so safe these days -- with this they probably felt extra secure. You have both a known franchise (well, not to me, but to a lot of other people) with the Reacher books, plus the biggest celebrity to play him.

You know who probably could have done this? Viggo Mortenson. And I say that b/c he just becomes any character I've ever seen him play, even in not-great movies. I had no trouble believing him as the goofy horse rider in Hidalgo, or Aragorn in LOTR, or the Russian gangster in Eastern Promises.

[sr71plt]

OK, I'm now officially beyond tired of the "who should play Jack Reacher" conunbrum. I just remembered that I don't plan on seeing a Jack Reacher movie anyway.

[soflabbwlvr]

Originally Posted by sr71plt

OK, I'm now officially beyond tired of the "who should play Jack Reacher" conunbrum. I just remembered that I don't plan on seeing a Jack Reacher movie anyway.

I don't either. I never heard of the franchise before last week, and the trailer doesn't look that interesting to me.

[sirhugs]

Originally Posted by PennLady

Yes and no. Dinklage is certainly more well-known than he used to be since being cast in GoT, and he's one of the best on the show. However, he has a lot of credits before that, including roles in one of the Narnia movies, both versions of "Death at a Funeral," and "The Station Agent," which was a small movie that garnered a lot of attention, and pretty much all positive for Dinklage.

But I don't think he'd be right as Jack Reacher, either.

my point being not that he'd be right, but that he'd be less wrong than Cruise.

[PennLady]

Originally Posted by sirhugs

my point being not that he'd be right, but that he'd be less wrong than Cruise.

True.

I was addressing the issue of how well-known Dinklage is or isn't, which of course depends a lot on a person's TV/movie viewing habits.

[lovecraft68]

Originally Posted by PennLady

Also, Brandon Lee was killed during a scene where his character is held by two guys, then a third shoots at him. There was a problem with the gun, which was supposed to have blanks, not firing properly (I forget exactly how). I'm not sure if that comes under stunt work the way other things -- chases, falls, etc. -- do.

As for Tom Cruise, SR is right, I've read that he does his own stunts and things like that. And no doubt he's in good physical condition. Even so, he's not what I think of in terms of "action hero." But that could just be me.

He doesn't have the "edge" and that is beyond being in shape. He played in Collateral and was a hit man who pretty much kidnaps a taxi driver (Jamie Foxx)

he is supposed to come across as cold and chilling and "bad". He came across as vanilla and boring.

He's just not a bad ass psycho type. he is sure as hell not a "force of nature" type character like Reacher.

[D_Lynn]

Originally Posted by sirhugs

if they wanted a powerful little person, they could have gone with Peter Dinklage (Tyrion in Game of Thrones), who can actually act, and is a wonderfully unexpected action hero!

I love him as Tyrion.

[Bramblethorn]

Originally Posted by PennLady

You know who probably could have done this? Viggo Mortenson. And I say that b/c he just becomes any character I've ever seen him play, even in not-great movies. I had no trouble believing him as the goofy horse rider in Hidalgo, or Aragorn in LOTR, or the Russian gangster in Eastern Promises.

Saw him in Eastern Promises and then as an awkward professor in Good in the same week. The contrast was impressive.

IIRC, he spent a couple of weeks in Russia hanging out with the real gangsters in order to get into character for EP. Man's dedicated to his trade!

[PennLady]

Originally Posted by lovecraft68

he is supposed to come across as cold and chilling and "bad". He came across as vanilla and boring.

He's just not a bad ass psycho type. he is sure as hell not a "force of nature" type character like Reacher.

Well, I'd have to disagree in that particular instance. Like I said, I am not a Cruise fan. I'm not a hater, but I'm not a fan. But in Collateral -- which I'm sure I wanted to see more b/c Michael Mann directed it than anything else -- I thought he was great. I think he's actually good as a cold, calculating bad guy, b/c that's how he looks, naturally, to me.

I think part of the reason I could take him in that role was that he didn't look like "Tom Cruise," if only in that he'd dyed his hair gray. But in nearly everything else, he looks like himself and that makes it harder to get past the fact that hey, Tom Cruise is playing this role.