Posted on 06/16/2014 5:27:52 AM PDT by Macoozie
With an opening weekend take of $28 million, Tom Cruise’s new sci-fi film “Edge of Tomorrow” — which debuted June 6 — did even worse than his last sci-fi movie, 2013’s “Oblivion.” In the last eight years, Cruise has had only one hit (2011’s “Mission: Impossible — Ghost Protocol”). It looks like he’s nearing the end of his run as a major movie star, though we’ll see how “Mission: Impossible 5” does when it comes out next year.
The 51-year-old is not alone in his midlife crisis: Here are seven more movie stars whose careers are in trouble.
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
They can always start mouthing off about those damn Conservatives... that’s always good for a couple months free publicity and popularity! :)
It’s the movie industry. They’re putting out crap.
“Robin Hood” was a tragedy. If you read what the original script was about, then you’ll see just how creatively bankrupt Hollywood is. The “Sheriff of Notthingham” script sounded awesome. “Robin Hood” was OK, but it wasn’t particularly interesting. Such a shame...
There is a lot of empirical evidence that there is no correlation between box office performance and if that movie has A list stars.
A shame for Cruise Edge of Tomorrow is quite good. Oblivion was lightweight and deserved to do poorly. The guy is a good actor in great shape for his age but people are turned off to him. Knight and Day was really good too.
That's the biggest factor. They rely on big name stars, instead of quality storytelling.
With the price of a movie ticket being so high, people aren't going to see a movie, just because a certain actor is in it.
Note that the most popular TV series have no top tier actors in them. "Top tier" referring to pay-line, not talent. I often think that having a known star places another hurdle on the storytelling, as the audience must set aside the fact that they already know the person. Instead of easily accepting that they are following the life of say Colonel Claus von Stauffenberg, the audience is constantly reminded that its Colonel Claus von Stauffenberg, as played by Tom Cruise. When the audience doesn't know the actor, they quickly accept the character being genuine without distraction.
The industry moved away from strong writing and acting, into weak story, weak acting and computer generation.
Fascinating. All eight are male.
Male roles and stars dominate today, whereas back during the horrible days of oppression of women, there were lots of good roles for actresses.
9 of 10 box office draws last year were male.
BTW, Russell Crowe, listed as washed up in this article, was #3.
http://www.deadline.com/2013/12/2013-top-10-international-box-office-stars/
There are only so many ways to repackage Top Gun and Tom Cruise is getting a little old to be a matinee idol. He never was much of an actor anyway, and his personal peculiarities have caught up with him.
Johnny Depp can only play so many pirates and is a weird disaster in anything else. That Tonto thing with the dead bird on his head, what on earth were they thinking?
The industry is losing control, the crowds aren’t materializing, their old formula isn’t working and their stable of “stars” is dwindling. Overt politicization has offended a good percentage. Other avenues of entertainment are cutting into the audience.
I don’t think there will be another Tom Cruise in his heyday, the critical mass is just no longer there to support it, and he really wasn’t all that great to begin with.
You can’t forget Tom Cruise is Tom Cruise. That worked in his favor when people liked who Tom Cruise was, but now we know him as a control-freak, bat-sh!+ insane cultist... not so much.
You also can’t forget Clooney is Clooney. He is still likeable, but he is also boring as an actor; he never seems togo beyond a handsome smile. That served OK as a character actor (Gravity, ER), but makes for a poor lead role.
Likewise, Johnny Depp is a great actor, but a seriously off-putting lead. He’s weird. It’s wonderful for when the role calls for weird ( a perfect match for Tim Burton), but not great as a blockbuster lead. Case in point: His Charlie and the Chocolate Factory nailed Dahl’s novella, but reminded so many people, “No, it’s not just me... this is a disturbing story.”
On the other hand, Matt Damon works as an action hero. He’s likeable, but a bit boring, so he works as an everyman. Put him in something character-driven, and he just doesn’t hold up. And all but a few action-hero movies should be at least somewhat character driven.
Vince Vaughn screams out “douche!” That works great for roles that demand a douche (”Wedding Crashers”), but again... not an action hero.
Collin Ferrel just looks.... dirty. You know what? A lot of these guys are starting to look dirty... Adam Sandler... Vince Vaughn... Johnny Depp...
I can’t go see Edge of Tomorrow because they knocked Emily Blunt down to 2% body fat and are trying to make her an action star. What a waste!
Nose-diving? Nose-bleeding is more like it. Usually vile language and digging deeper into more immorality does it for Depp. These popular stars used to be able to make money without soiling one’s spirit by watching them.
I would add:
Theater tickets are expensive, and the treats are OUTRAGEOUSLY expensive, the stories are weak, and weakly told, the CGI effects all look like computer games (Edward Wood's special effects almost look good beside some of the stuff I see) and the images are blurry to the point of maddening (why do we have IMAX, 3D, 1080p, and on and on, and then the director blurs the image to make it look like a lot is going on?).
The Last time we went to a movie, the theater bombarded us with very loud advertising and promos for coming attractions. To heck with that !
The screwy ending in Edge of Tomorrow leave you wondering what happened.
I agree w/ you.
Except I never go to the movies. I wait for the Netflix DVD.
Watch it in my own home when ever I want. Always have the best seat. No obnoxious people to spoil the movie. I can pause the movie if I get a phone call or need a bathroom break.
And the popcorn and soda is just as good and costs MUCH less :)
CGI has in many ways ruined Hollywood action movies as they tend to over rely on them. The story is not as important, it’s how much action can we pack into it. In the last few years, there were really only two movies (IMO) that I think were really good. That is “The Book Thief” and “The Grand Budapest Hotel”. They were good stories and the biggest actor in either of them is Ralph Fiennes who is not a top tier actor.
I have to say that the best shows are not in the movies any longer. T.V. and especially cable T.V. has some of the most ground breaking stuff out there today.
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.