Paramount severs ties with Cruise

Alex · 08-22-2006, 08:11 PM

Eh, it has nothing to do with his Scientology and weird behavior, that is just an excuse. It doesn't even have to do with his "recent deline in popularity."

Cruise and Paramount have been increasingly bickering over money for several years. The relationship nearly came to an end three years ago because Paramount balked at the fees Cruise and his production company wanted for M:I:III.

Over the last year a trend of the studios turning away from the megadeals that were the way of doing business for the previous decade and Cruise had one of the most favorable in Hollywood.

RStar · 08-23-2006, 07:23 AM

I saw the AOL online article about his antics. Is couch jumping and girl friend fondling realy unacceptible behavior? I can understand people being tired of hearing about it, but I wouldn't avoid his movied because of it.

LSPoorEeyorick · 08-23-2006, 09:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RStar

I saw the AOL online article about his antics. Is couch jumping and girl friend fondling realy unacceptible behavior? I can understand people being tired of hearing about it, but I wouldn't avoid his movied because of it.

Well, while Paramount is probably happy to be rid of the deal for financial terms (as Alex said), I have no doubt that they're happy to have him off their hands for other reasons as well.

These other reasons probably have nothing to do with his couch jumping and crazy, crazy eyes.

During the filming of-- I can't remember if it was MI III or War of the Worlds--Cruise had an item in his contract that allowed him to set up a Scientology booth on-set and solicit the production staff/cast/etc. Also, his contract once included requiring all producers to take a tour of the Scientology facilities with him. That would make me want to shake him loose even if financial dealings were fine.

Alex · 08-23-2006, 09:21 AM

As an aside on the financial issues, Paramount is in a fair bit of trouble. They recently overpaid for Dreamworks and the reason they were willing to do so is because their inhouse development had almost completely halted and the slate of films under development by Spielberg and company provides nice cover for that. Almost every film released by Paramount in the next 18 months will be one developed by SKG and not Paramount.

Simply put, I wonder if Paramount is in a position that it can afford Cruise. If Cruise is willing to cut his price for whatever he wants to do next I have no doubt Paramount would be more than happy to continue working with him. Polls may show his popularity dropped but M:I:III still made $400 million worlwide and will make another $150-$200 million in the secondary markets. His film before that made almost $600 million.

Mr. Cruise isn't going to have any problem finding work and he'll probably still get it on his terms.

AllyOops! · 08-23-2006, 10:20 AM

I find Tom Cruise to be obnoxious, pompous & controlling. I've really never been a fan of his from the get-go, but the bottom line is this:

He made Paramount a lot of money. I'd like to believe Paramount's reasoning to be true, I really would. but I'm with Alex. In my opinion, if every Studio severed ties with an actor or actress due to their irresponsible behavior, who in Hollywood would be working?

Yes, Lindsay Lohan & Co., I'm talkin' to you!

08-22-2006, 08:11 PM	#1
Alex . Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 13,354	Eh, it has nothing to do with his Scientology and weird behavior, that is just an excuse. It doesn't even have to do with his "recent deline in popularity." Cruise and Paramount have been increasingly bickering over money for several years. The relationship nearly came to an end three years ago because Paramount balked at the fees Cruise and his production company wanted for M:I:III. Over the last year a trend of the studios turning away from the megadeals that were the way of doing business for the previous decade and Cruise had one of the most favorable in Hollywood.
	Submit to Quotes

08-23-2006, 07:23 AM	#2
RStar Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Me & Manyard hangin out! Posts: 5,433	I saw the AOL online article about his antics. Is couch jumping and girl friend fondling realy unacceptible behavior? I can understand people being tired of hearing about it, but I wouldn't avoid his movied because of it. __________________ Meddle not in the affairs of Dragons, for you are crunchy and good with ketchup! www.StarTownGifts.com
	Submit to Quotes

08-23-2006, 09:21 AM	#4
Alex . Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 13,354	As an aside on the financial issues, Paramount is in a fair bit of trouble. They recently overpaid for Dreamworks and the reason they were willing to do so is because their inhouse development had almost completely halted and the slate of films under development by Spielberg and company provides nice cover for that. Almost every film released by Paramount in the next 18 months will be one developed by SKG and not Paramount. Simply put, I wonder if Paramount is in a position that it can afford Cruise. If Cruise is willing to cut his price for whatever he wants to do next I have no doubt Paramount would be more than happy to continue working with him. Polls may show his popularity dropped but M:I:III still made $400 million worlwide and will make another $150-$200 million in the secondary markets. His film before that made almost $600 million. Mr. Cruise isn't going to have any problem finding work and he'll probably still get it on his terms.
	Submit to Quotes

08-23-2006, 10:20 AM	#5
AllyOops! It's Peanut Butter Jelly Time!!! Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Introspection Intersection Posts: 1,207	I find Tom Cruise to be obnoxious, pompous & controlling. I've really never been a fan of his from the get-go, but the bottom line is this: He made Paramount a lot of money. I'd like to believe Paramount's reasoning to be true, I really would. but I'm with Alex. In my opinion, if every Studio severed ties with an actor or actress due to their irresponsible behavior, who in Hollywood would be working? Yes, Lindsay Lohan & Co., I'm talkin' to you!
	Submit to Quotes