“Slide to the left, now slide to the right.”
The Internets today: Tom Cruise’s career is on life support, yadda yadda. Is the Internets correct? I’m not fond of talking about Tom Cruise around the water cooler, but I’d say the Internets are wrong. Does that make me a relevant revolutionary? United Artists, which is headed up by Cruise and Paula Wagner, has pushed back the release date for Bryan Singer’s expensive kill-Hitler flick, Valkyrie, from October ‘08 to February 13th, 2009. Yes, that means Tom Cruise will battle Jason Voorhees. Amazing.
This marks the second calendar move for the poorly buzzed and semi-mocked war film. Previously, Valkyrie was set for a release this June, but when the original trailer–which lacked the kinetic action of a summer blockbuster and memorably showed Cruise as an eye-patched Nazi who talks like a Santa Cruz sensimilla dealer–bombed the film suddenly became a “prestige picture.” Fall called. Now President’s Day Weekend calls. Here’s what MGM’s distribution president, Clark Woods, had to say to The Hollywood Reporter…
“When an opening became available for Presidents Day weekend, we seized the opportunity. Having seen a lot of the film and how great it is going to play once it’s finished, moving into a big holiday weekend is the right move.”
Over at The Hot Blog, David Poland speculates that Cruise will rev up Mission: Impossible 4 for a start in September in order to get a sure thing in the basket. Poland doesn’t give specifics but says he’s 90% sure that M:I 4 will happen. Really? Given how poorly M:I 3 did domestically, I can’t imagine Cruise resorting to Ethan Hunt for the save. Peter disagrees, but I think Cruise should follow-up his cameo in Ben Stiller’s Tropic Thunder, which has great w.o.m., with another comedy. Hardy Men with Stiller needs to happen, stat. After Lions For Lambs (which cannot be blamed on The Cruise, it was a terribly marketed talk-fest war film) and Valkyrie (which clearly has identity issues), I really don’t think audiences want to see this guy in another serious role.
The only way for Cruise to avoid more stabs from Perez Hilton’s ilk, boisterous Scientology haters and the Net’s endless celebrity career strategizers is to take aim at the very notion that it’s getting to him. Showing American audiences how fast The Cruise can sprint from million-dollar missiles is not going to prove anything at this point.
As for Valkyrie’s new date, I think it’s actually smart. It meets expectations for the film, and while February is considered a dead zone, The Wolf Man and The Pink Panther 2 were formerly parked there. When it comes to marketing, the main thing with Valkyrie is “what in the hell is it?” At this point, it just needs to be entertaining and not accidentally hilarious. If it flops during Valentine’s Day, there will be less eyes and less surprise.
Discuss: Do you think M:I 4 will happen? Would Cruise be better off following-up his Valley Nazi with Hardy Men or even Risky Business 2? Is it action film or bust at this point?
April 8th, 2008 at 1:19 pm
Bust.
April 8th, 2008 at 1:29 pm
The movie probably needed some reshoots and other stuff because Germany was hating. Who really cares? Other than the fact that Cruise looks like the dude that tried and failed and was executed isn’t enough to save the film. I’m kind of neutral about Cruise. Obviously he’s a quirky individual but I’m never one to knock any person’s hustle or “religion” (notice the quotes). I actually kind of enjoyed MI3, and even the John Woo one too.
MI4 will and can happen. Something tells me after Tropical Thunder people will start to change opinion and I agree that another comedy would be best for his career. Maybe even a part where he makes fun of himself, and my his lover David Miscaviage (sp???)
Paz!
April 8th, 2008 at 1:35 pm
The movie just doesn’t look very interesting. Everyone knows they don’t kill Hitler.
April 8th, 2008 at 1:42 pm
cruise should really embrace his cameo in tropic thunder, it may or may not improve his image but what could you lose?
anyways, i believe valkyrie should have been a 40 million dollar film. for some reason, i feel valkyrie might play out like usual suspect’s tone. im curious but not enough for me to watch in theaters.
April 8th, 2008 at 1:46 pm
Smart move? puhlease! If this were some other star-actor, the negative buzz would be all over the place. The movie doesn’t look good and who thought Mapother could play anything other than Mapother? His roles always needed to be cut according to his persona. They moved it 2ce and that means it is just not good. February is the dump month for a movie that was supposed to be a summer blockbuster then a potential award-winning movie and now, it is in the dump month when all eyes are on the award movies released months before.
It is funny tjat he will get some praise for his role in a Ben Stiller movie but his own movie that will be released months later will have him centrepage and he is going to fail royally.
What next? Hardy Men and Men, the mighty Cruise is going to be directed by Shawn Levy. Heavens above. It couldn’t have happened to a nicer guy!
April 8th, 2008 at 1:54 pm
For the record, MI3 didn’t “do poorly”, it just didn’t meet expectations. Scoring $134mil in the US and total $400mil worldwide is not “doing poorly.”
I think UA should just release Valkyrie now and get it over with. The sooner they release theatrically the sooner they can release on DVD and recoup some of their losses.
April 8th, 2008 at 2:05 pm
Okay, just wanted to point out the typo in the second sentence, “Is the Internets correct?” Please never correct it ever, as there is something profound about it. Is the Internets correct? I sure hope so!
April 8th, 2008 at 2:10 pm
@bc9b89
That’s not a typo.
April 8th, 2008 at 2:12 pm
@ Enrique
Requisite unnecessary M:I 3 box office debate. If you re-read it, it says “domestically.” The film did not meet box office expectations in North America, simple as that.
April 8th, 2008 at 2:23 pm
Tom Cruise is washed up IMO
April 8th, 2008 at 2:33 pm
Tom Cruise needs to pull a Ben Affleck and lay low for a year or two. After winning a Razzie, Affleck did nothing until his well-reviewed turn in Hollywoodland and directed Gone Baby Gone. Cruise needs to stop headlining films right now, live off his earnings for a little, and then come back in in a year or so, possibly in a supporting role, and try and build his image up again.
April 8th, 2008 at 3:34 pm
I hope Jason Vorhees kicks his a**!
April 8th, 2008 at 4:57 pm
ALL HAIL PRINCE XENU!
April 8th, 2008 at 5:01 pm
Visually this movie looks good but as soon as Cruise opened his mouth this film went down hill. This movie had so much potential.
Top Gun 2 anyone?
April 8th, 2008 at 5:13 pm
Bush doesn’t care about Tom Cruise.
April 8th, 2008 at 5:42 pm
@Antibodies
And most people knew that the Titanic was going to sink at the end.
I understand what you’re saying but historic inevitability doesn’t necessarily mean all too much in terms of the audiences enjoyment of a movie. Anyone who was even vaguely familiar with the Zodiac Killer knew that he was never caught, but that didn’t stop people from loving Zodiac. Though there are examples of this hurting a film, there are plenty of great films (or crappy, but commercially successful ones) that weren’t hindered by people having a vague sense of what’s going to happen at the end of the film due to outside historical knowledge.
And Hunter, regardless of what “expectations” were, M:I:III still made a bundle of money for everyone involved, so it’s pretty silly to continue to push the myth of it being a commercial failure. That’s saying nothing about its quality as a movie, just that it made plenty of money.
April 8th, 2008 at 6:03 pm
Tom Cruise is probably the most dubious actor of our time. Maybe it’s dumb to believe Scientology’s lies in the first place, but I don’t wanna know how many lifes he destroyed indirectly by lobbying them. As the most recognized face of a ruthless and dangerous sect he is outright dangerous as well. I can’t stand to watch his movies and I can only hope his career is finally over.
April 8th, 2008 at 6:19 pm
FRANK T.J. MACKEY SPINOFF!!!
April 8th, 2008 at 8:19 pm
“Criss Cross! Criss Cross”
April 8th, 2008 at 11:09 pm
I’m with Tony,
Top Gun 2: The Ghost of Goose
April 9th, 2008 at 7:29 am
Call me insensitive, but I don’t think watching a movie based on a plot to kill Hitler is something I would pay money to watch. Tom Cruise may have boxed himself in with the action genre with no way out. He needs to get back to some rather eye catching performances like Magnolia. Something bold and different is what’s needed now for him to shed the typecasting. Look at Jake Gyllenhal and the late Heath Ledger, their performance in Brokeback Mountain (which I have not seen myself as of yet) had supposedly shaken up the foundation on which genre the public thought they were headed towards. Now Ledger’s performance in Dr. Parnursaus I am going to definitely watch.
It is with that same premise that Cruise needs to do something bold against his comfortable ways, take a chance. Again no offense to your acting Cruise but I’m not heading out to pay 8 bucks for a movie/history lesson that I can’t catch on the History channel for free.
April 10th, 2008 at 1:42 pm
On Cruise:
People may not like or agree with his religion, but since when is that a reason to discriminate against anyone. That’s just bigoted.
He’s known to be someone who thanks everyone on a set, from the janitor up. People have said he’s a kind, giving charitable individual who treats everyone around him with the utmost respect.
This isn’t something that he has to do. It’s just something that makes him decent.
On the film front, just look at his filmography. He’s done some great roles in some great films. He’s done some timelessly iconic roles, too.
The hatred towards him has become utterly vicious, and I think it should stop immediately.
On Scientology:
By certain estimations, there are crazier religions out there than Scientology.
What’s that? Scientology asks for donations from its members?
Gee, now what kinda kooky religion does that…?
Every religion has its rules and code of conduct. To pick on Scientology because it was invented by an eccentric writer instead of a Jewish carpenter is bigoted discrimination of the highest order.