Re: [MOPO] WSJ: Paramount terminates ties with Tom Cruise
I think that there's truth on both sides. Tom's antics did hurt MI III and the studio noticed. Yes, the press seized on his antics but he gave them rich material to exploit. That's this business. And there's no changing it.I'm sure Cruise-Wagner were low-balled and MI III was used as a tool against them. Every studio is going to use that. These mega-corporations are going to watch out for their bottom-line. I don't think Paramount or Cruise-Wagner is going to be seriously hurt by any of this. Paramount is growing and Tom Cruise has got investors and a large fan base. They will both make great projects and some not so great ones. Perhaps another studio will jump on the Cruise wagon. ToochisJR <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Judith, Seriously girl friend, do you ever do anything but preach the party line? Cruise made a couple on insensitive comments, but he was talking about drug abuse (in a blundering way), and I'm surprised someone as intelligent as you can't see past the media blowing his comments up into a frenzy. He hasn't been accused of child molesting, you know... or even of Jew-Baiting while being arrested for DUI. Give us all a break from your righteous feminine wrath, please. -- JR - Original Message - From: Judith Weaver To: MoPo-L@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDU Sent: Wednesday, August 23, 2006 2:23 Subject: Re: [MOPO] WSJ: Paramount terminates ties with Tom Cruise OK, I'm going out on a limb here, so everybody get your ammunition ready and take good aim at me! My personal opinion is that Tom Cruise should be strung up on a tree at high noon and every woman who has ever suffered post-partum depression should take a few good shots at him with whatever weapon they feel appropriate. I don't know any of Paramount's bigwigs, but I am PROUD of them! Cruise should have been shot down long ago, whether he makes good movies or not because of his proselytizing and so-called "antics", whatever they may be. (Frankly, I thought some of his movies were real clunkers, including Vanilla Sky and MI:III.) And until one of you men are pregnant for nine months and give birth, I don't want to hear a peep out of one of you Sincerely, Judi WeaverJudith Weaver PSC 98, Box 0039 APO AE 09830From: David Kusumoto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>Reply-To: David Kusumoto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>To: MoPo-L@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDUSubject: Re: [MOPO] WSJ: Paramount terminates ties with Tom CruiseDate: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 20:36:08 -0700>More from today's VARIETY -- Cruise's people say they walked away on >their own because they got low-balled, with Paramount (my guess) >apparently leveraging MI:III's performance as a way to avoid giving >him more money:>>-koose.>>=>>VARIETY MAGAZINE>Tue., Aug. 22, 2006, 8:12pm ET>FRISKY BUSINESS>Spunky Sumner severs Par's ties to Cruise>By CHRIS GARDNER, Variety>>The 14-year Tom Cruise-Paramount relationship has ended on a note of >anger and outrage.>>Cruise and his production partner, Paula Wagner, say they have >raised a revolving fund of $100 million from two hedge funds and are >striking out on their own.>>Wagner denounced Sumner Redstone's comments about Cruise as >"outrageous and disrespectful.">>Redstone told the Wall Street Journal on Tuesday that Paramount was >ending its relationship with Cruise because "his recent conduct has >not been acceptable.">>In fact, Wagner said, CAA, Cruise's agent, has terminated >discussions with Par earlier in the week.>>After making 14 films in 14 years, the studio had declined to renew >the original Cruise deal and offered a sharply reduced pact.>>Cruise has been a tabloid-regular over the past year due to his >relationship with actress Katie Holmes and his increasingly >outspoken nature about the Church of Scientology.>>Wagner defended Cruise/Wagner's longtime success for the studio, >saying that in the last 10 years, the shingle's product has >accounted for 15% of Paramount's theatrical revenue and for the past >six years it has tallied 32%.>>Their credits include the "Mission: Impossible" franchise, "Vanilla >Sky" and "War of the Worlds.">>Original Message Follows>>From: "JR" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>>To: "David Kusumoto" ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,>Subject: Re: [MOPO] WSJ: Paramount terminates ties with Tom Cruise>Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 22:58:16 -0400>>Hollywood has always been about &
Re: [MOPO] WSJ: Paramount terminates ties with Tom Cruise
Judith, Seriously girl friend, do you ever do anything but preach the party line? Cruise made a couple on insensitive comments, but he was talking about drug abuse (in a blundering way), and I'm surprised someone as intelligent as you can't see past the media blowing his comments up into a frenzy. He hasn't been accused of child molesting, you know... or even of Jew-Baiting while being arrested for DUI. Give us all a break from your righteous feminine wrath, please. -- JR - Original Message - From: Judith Weaver To: MoPo-L@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDU Sent: Wednesday, August 23, 2006 2:23 Subject: Re: [MOPO] WSJ: Paramount terminates ties with Tom Cruise OK, I'm going out on a limb here, so everybody get your ammunition ready and take good aim at me! My personal opinion is that Tom Cruise should be strung up on a tree at high noon and every woman who has ever suffered post-partum depression should take a few good shots at him with whatever weapon they feel appropriate. I don't know any of Paramount's bigwigs, but I am PROUD of them! Cruise should have been shot down long ago, whether he makes good movies or not because of his proselytizing and so-called "antics", whatever they may be. (Frankly, I thought some of his movies were real clunkers, including Vanilla Sky and MI:III.) And until one of you men are pregnant for nine months and give birth, I don't want to hear a peep out of one of you Sincerely, Judi Weaver Judith Weaver PSC 98, Box 0039 APO AE 09830 From: David Kusumoto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>Reply-To: David Kusumoto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>To: MoPo-L@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDUSubject: Re: [MOPO] WSJ: Paramount terminates ties with Tom CruiseDate: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 20:36:08 -0700>More from today's VARIETY -- Cruise's people say they walked away on >their own because they got low-balled, with Paramount (my guess) >apparently leveraging MI:III's performance as a way to avoid giving >him more money:>>-koose.>>=>>VARIETY MAGAZINE>Tue., Aug. 22, 2006, 8:12pm ET>FRISKY BUSINESS>Spunky Sumner severs Par's ties to Cruise>By CHRIS GARDNER, Variety>>The 14-year Tom Cruise-Paramount relationship has ended on a note of >anger and outrage.>>Cruise and his production partner, Paula Wagner, say they have >raised a revolving fund of $100 million from two hedge funds and are >striking out on their own.>>Wagner denounced Sumner Redstone's comments about Cruise as >"outrageous and disrespectful.">>Redstone told the Wall Street Journal on Tuesday that Paramount was >ending its relationship with Cruise because "his recent conduct has >not been acceptable.">>In fact, Wagner said, CAA, Cruise's agent, has terminated >discussions with Par earlier in the week.>>After making 14 films in 14 years, the studio had declined to renew >the original Cruise deal and offered a sharply reduced pact.>>Cruise has been a tabloid-regular over the past year due to his >relationship with actress Katie Holmes and his increasingly >outspoken nature about the Church of Scientology.>>Wagner defended Cruise/Wagner's longtime success for the studio, >saying that in the last 10 years, the shingle's product has >accounted for 15% of Paramount's theatrical revenue and for the past >six years it has tallied 32%.>>Their credits include the "Mission: Impossible" franchise, "Vanilla >Sky" and "War of the Worlds.">>Original Message Follows>>From: "JR" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>>To: "David Kusumoto" ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,>Subject: Re: [MOPO] WSJ: Paramount terminates ties with Tom Cruise>Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 22:58:16 -0400>>Hollywood has always been about "what have you done for me lately?" >-- but this is ridiculous. It was only 1 year ago that Tom Cruise >starred in WAR OF THE WORLDS which was one of last summer's >mega-hits. Since then, the god-awful MISSION IMPOSSIBLE III came >out. Clearly Cruise did nothing "controversial" enough between the >release of those two films to cause audiences to turn against him >personally as an actor. The difference was that one film was worth >watching and the other wasn't. On the other hand, I expect Cruise >will land on his feet and go on to make many more hundreds of >millions in other films, they just won't be Paramount's. It's a very >odd world where a billion-dollar corporation makes critical >financial decisions based on the sort of things cited against Cruise >in this arti
Re: [MOPO] WSJ: Paramount terminates ties with Tom Cruise
I cannot disagree with you more about Tom Hanks... Like John Wayne, Humphrey Bogart, Clint Eastwood, Cary Grant, Robert Taylor and many others I think that Hanks' career will continue to offer us many surprises and very many wonderful starring roles. He is a top actor with a great range and like the actors I mention above who once had a boyish look and became fairly gruff looking - but their popularity with both sexes never deteriorated even when they made stinkers because they made so many great films that showcased their ability Cruise on the other hand suffers from something none of the others did he has allowed himself to lose control and he has become to believe his own ego is greater than all others and while that could work for an actor like Marlon Brando, Cruise may have just alienated many with his diatribe criticizing post partem depression and medications and also his recent behind the scenes censoring of South Park. Then you add that foolishness of him jumping on Oprah's couch which made him look .. well... wimpish! No doubt the repercussions he was seeing from the media made him back off the huge promotional tours he made when getting War of the Worlds to the theatres was not apparent for Mi3. Maybe his wimpishness made the audience think twice about him in an action role. I have no doubt that Paramount made a business decision based on dollars and I have no doubt that they also are now thinking twice about Cruise as an action hero. As such, with action being the most successful genre in the theatres today, maybe Paramount doesn't see him as having the value to their company that he did before & they wish to cut & run prior to having their own money involved in a downturn in his career. I also believe that what they call his "antics" is a factor, but not as much as financial of course. Tom will have to redirect his career possibly. maybe he needs to do a western - a genre he has not attempted I don't think - and start working himself into an older & soon to be grizzled looking actor ... Richy At 11:38 PM 8/22/2006, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Truth be told... It's more like Paramount don't want to pay the big bucks...lets face it Cruise opens films, all his films are successful. However could it be age? Cruise is now not getting any younger, is Paramount looking at the writing on the wall, Cruise tied into a huge contract but perhaps his star quality is waning to character acting. Certainly that is what appears to be happening with Tom Hanks. Both actors are openers, but not opening BIG anymore. Or am I just being a cynic Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com ___ How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List Send a message addressed to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L The author of this message is solely responsible for its content. Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com ___ How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List Send a message addressed to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L The author of this message is solely responsible for its content.
Re: [MOPO] WSJ: Paramount terminates ties with Tom Cruise
Truth be told... It's more like Paramount don't want to pay the big bucks...lets face it Cruise opens films, all his films are successful. However could it be age? Cruise is now not getting any younger, is Paramount looking at the writing on the wall, Cruise tied into a huge contract but perhaps his star quality is waning to character acting. Certainly that is what appears to be happening with Tom Hanks. Both actors are openers, but not opening BIG anymore. Or am I just being a cynic Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com ___ How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List Send a message addressed to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L The author of this message is solely responsible for its content.
Re: [MOPO] WSJ: Paramount terminates ties with Tom Cruise
OK, I'm going out on a limb here, so everybody get your ammunition ready and take good aim at me! My personal opinion is that Tom Cruise should be strung up on a tree at high noon and every woman who has ever suffered post-partum depression should take a few good shots at him with whatever weapon they feel appropriate. I don't know any of Paramount's bigwigs, but I am PROUD of them! Cruise should have been shot down long ago, whether he makes good movies or not because of his proselytizing and so-called "antics", whatever they may be. (Frankly, I thought some of his movies were real clunkers, including Vanilla Sky and MI:III.) And until one of you men are pregnant for nine months and give birth, I don't want to hear a peep out of one of you Sincerely, Judi Weaver Judith Weaver PSC 98, Box 0039 APO AE 09830 From: David Kusumoto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>Reply-To: David Kusumoto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>To: MoPo-L@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDUSubject: Re: [MOPO] WSJ: Paramount terminates ties with Tom CruiseDate: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 20:36:08 -0700>More from today's VARIETY -- Cruise's people say they walked away on >their own because they got low-balled, with Paramount (my guess) >apparently leveraging MI:III's performance as a way to avoid giving >him more money:>>-koose.>>=>>VARIETY MAGAZINE>Tue., Aug. 22, 2006, 8:12pm ET>FRISKY BUSINESS>Spunky Sumner severs Par's ties to Cruise>By CHRIS GARDNER, Variety>>The 14-year Tom Cruise-Paramount relationship has ended on a note of >anger and outrage.>>Cruise and his production partner, Paula Wagner, say they have >raised a revolving fund of $100 million from two hedge funds and are >striking out on their own.>>Wagner denounced Sumner Redstone's comments about Cruise as >"outrageous and disrespectful.">>Redstone told the Wall Street Journal on Tuesday that Paramount was >ending its relationship with Cruise because "his recent conduct has >not been acceptable.">>In fact, Wagner said, CAA, Cruise's agent, has terminated >discussions with Par earlier in the week.>>After making 14 films in 14 years, the studio had declined to renew >the original Cruise deal and offered a sharply reduced pact.>>Cruise has been a tabloid-regular over the past year due to his >relationship with actress Katie Holmes and his increasingly >outspoken nature about the Church of Scientology.>>Wagner defended Cruise/Wagner's longtime success for the studio, >saying that in the last 10 years, the shingle's product has >accounted for 15% of Paramount's theatrical revenue and for the past >six years it has tallied 32%.>>Their credits include the "Mission: Impossible" franchise, "Vanilla >Sky" and "War of the Worlds.">>Original Message Follows>>From: "JR" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>>To: "David Kusumoto" ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,>Subject: Re: [MOPO] WSJ: Paramount terminates ties with Tom Cruise>Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 22:58:16 -0400>>Hollywood has always been about "what have you done for me lately?" >-- but this is ridiculous. It was only 1 year ago that Tom Cruise >starred in WAR OF THE WORLDS which was one of last summer's >mega-hits. Since then, the god-awful MISSION IMPOSSIBLE III came >out. Clearly Cruise did nothing "controversial" enough between the >release of those two films to cause audiences to turn against him >personally as an actor. The difference was that one film was worth >watching and the other wasn't. On the other hand, I expect Cruise >will land on his feet and go on to make many more hundreds of >millions in other films, they just won't be Paramount's. It's a very >odd world where a billion-dollar corporation makes critical >financial decisions based on the sort of things cited against Cruise >in this article. How shocking! He bounced up and down on Oprah >Winfrey's couch (the bastard!)... he criticized drug abuse (in an >incompetent way, yes, but that's clearly what he was talking >about)... and he talked about Scientology (so did John Travolta and >many others).>>-- JR>>- Original Message ->>From: David Kusumoto>To: MoPo-L@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDU>Sent: Tuesday, August 22, 2006 19:14>Subject: [MOPO] WSJ: Paramount terminates ties with Tom Cruise>>FYI, below.>>-koose.>>=>>Paramount Ends Relationship>With Tom Cruise's Company>>By MERISSA MARR, WALL STREET JOURNAL>August 22, 2006 6:43 p.m.>>Viacom Inc. Chairman Sumner Redstone said his company's Paramount >Pictures is terminating its 14-year relationsh
Re: [MOPO] WSJ: Paramount terminates ties with Tom Cruise
oops... before one of my many admirers jumps on that momentary brain slip... yes, I was temporarily confusing Sumner Redstone with Rupert Murdock... the point remains unchanged. - Original Message - From: "JR" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "David Kusumoto" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Sent: Wednesday, August 23, 2006 0:51 Subject: Re: [MOPO] WSJ: Paramount terminates ties with Tom Cruise Ah, the truth comes out. It seems that the "unacceptable behavior" Sumner Redstone mentioned was actually perfectly acceptable -- at a reduced price -- and when Cruise's agent walked out on the negotiations over the attempt to low-ball that Redstone got pissed and decided to make the "behavior" crack in public out of pique. The fact that someone as obviously petty, vindictive and manipulative as Sumner Redstone controls a huge amount of the Television we see in this country should be more of a concern than anything else. -- JR - Original Message - From: "David Kusumoto" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Tuesday, August 22, 2006 23:36 Subject: Re: [MOPO] WSJ: Paramount terminates ties with Tom Cruise > More from today's VARIETY -- Cruise's people say they walked away on their > own because they got low-balled, with Paramount (my guess) apparently > leveraging MI:III's performance as a way to avoid giving him more money: > > -koose. > > = > > VARIETY MAGAZINE > Tue., Aug. 22, 2006, 8:12pm ET > FRISKY BUSINESS > Spunky Sumner severs Par's ties to Cruise > By CHRIS GARDNER, Variety > > The 14-year Tom Cruise-Paramount relationship has ended on a note of anger > and outrage. > > Cruise and his production partner, Paula Wagner, say they have raised a > revolving fund of $100 million from two hedge funds and are striking out on > their own. > > Wagner denounced Sumner Redstone's comments about Cruise as "outrageous and > disrespectful." > > Redstone told the Wall Street Journal on Tuesday that Paramount was ending > its relationship with Cruise because "his recent conduct has not been > acceptable." > > In fact, Wagner said, CAA, Cruise's agent, has terminated discussions with > Par earlier in the week. > > After making 14 films in 14 years, the studio had declined to renew the > original Cruise deal and offered a sharply reduced pact. > > Cruise has been a tabloid-regular over the past year due to his relationship > with actress Katie Holmes and his increasingly outspoken nature about the > Church of Scientology. > > Wagner defended Cruise/Wagner's longtime success for the studio, saying that > in the last 10 years, the shingle's product has accounted for 15% of > Paramount's theatrical revenue and for the past six years it has tallied > 32%. > > Their credits include the "Mission: Impossible" franchise, "Vanilla Sky" and > "War of the Worlds." > > Original Message Follows > > From: "JR" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "David Kusumoto" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, > Subject: Re: [MOPO] WSJ: Paramount terminates ties with Tom Cruise > Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 22:58:16 -0400 > > Hollywood has always been about "what have you done for me lately?" -- but > this is ridiculous. It was only 1 year ago that Tom Cruise starred in WAR OF > THE WORLDS which was one of last summer's mega-hits. Since then, the > god-awful MISSION IMPOSSIBLE III came out. Clearly Cruise did nothing > "controversial" enough between the release of those two films to cause > audiences to turn against him personally as an actor. The difference was > that one film was worth watching and the other wasn't. On the other hand, I > expect Cruise will land on his feet and go on to make many more hundreds of > millions in other films, they just won't be Paramount's. It's a very odd > world where a billion-dollar corporation makes critical financial decisions > based on the sort of things cited against Cruise in this article. How > shocking! He bounced up and down on Oprah Winfrey's couch (the bastard!)... > he criticized drug abuse (in an incompetent way, yes, but that's clearly > what he was talking about)... and he talked about Scientology (so did John > Travolta and many others). > > -- JR > > - Original Message - > > From: David Kusumoto > To: MoPo-L@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDU > Sent: Tuesday, August 22, 2006 19:14 > Subject: [MOPO] WSJ: Paramount terminates ties with Tom Cruise > > FYI, below. > > -koose. > > = > > Paramount Ends Re
Re: [MOPO] WSJ: Paramount terminates ties with Tom Cruise
Ah, the truth comes out. It seems that the "unacceptable behavior" Sumner Redstone mentioned was actually perfectly acceptable -- at a reduced price -- and when Cruise's agent walked out on the negotiations over the attempt to low-ball that Redstone got pissed and decided to make the "behavior" crack in public out of pique. The fact that someone as obviously petty, vindictive and manipulative as Sumner Redstone controls a huge amount of the Television we see in this country should be more of a concern than anything else. -- JR - Original Message - From: "David Kusumoto" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Tuesday, August 22, 2006 23:36 Subject: Re: [MOPO] WSJ: Paramount terminates ties with Tom Cruise > More from today's VARIETY -- Cruise's people say they walked away on their > own because they got low-balled, with Paramount (my guess) apparently > leveraging MI:III's performance as a way to avoid giving him more money: > > -koose. > > = > > VARIETY MAGAZINE > Tue., Aug. 22, 2006, 8:12pm ET > FRISKY BUSINESS > Spunky Sumner severs Par's ties to Cruise > By CHRIS GARDNER, Variety > > The 14-year Tom Cruise-Paramount relationship has ended on a note of anger > and outrage. > > Cruise and his production partner, Paula Wagner, say they have raised a > revolving fund of $100 million from two hedge funds and are striking out on > their own. > > Wagner denounced Sumner Redstone's comments about Cruise as "outrageous and > disrespectful." > > Redstone told the Wall Street Journal on Tuesday that Paramount was ending > its relationship with Cruise because "his recent conduct has not been > acceptable." > > In fact, Wagner said, CAA, Cruise's agent, has terminated discussions with > Par earlier in the week. > > After making 14 films in 14 years, the studio had declined to renew the > original Cruise deal and offered a sharply reduced pact. > > Cruise has been a tabloid-regular over the past year due to his relationship > with actress Katie Holmes and his increasingly outspoken nature about the > Church of Scientology. > > Wagner defended Cruise/Wagner's longtime success for the studio, saying that > in the last 10 years, the shingle's product has accounted for 15% of > Paramount's theatrical revenue and for the past six years it has tallied > 32%. > > Their credits include the "Mission: Impossible" franchise, "Vanilla Sky" and > "War of the Worlds." > > Original Message Follows > > From: "JR" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "David Kusumoto" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, > Subject: Re: [MOPO] WSJ: Paramount terminates ties with Tom Cruise > Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 22:58:16 -0400 > > Hollywood has always been about "what have you done for me lately?" -- but > this is ridiculous. It was only 1 year ago that Tom Cruise starred in WAR OF > THE WORLDS which was one of last summer's mega-hits. Since then, the > god-awful MISSION IMPOSSIBLE III came out. Clearly Cruise did nothing > "controversial" enough between the release of those two films to cause > audiences to turn against him personally as an actor. The difference was > that one film was worth watching and the other wasn't. On the other hand, I > expect Cruise will land on his feet and go on to make many more hundreds of > millions in other films, they just won't be Paramount's. It's a very odd > world where a billion-dollar corporation makes critical financial decisions > based on the sort of things cited against Cruise in this article. How > shocking! He bounced up and down on Oprah Winfrey's couch (the bastard!)... > he criticized drug abuse (in an incompetent way, yes, but that's clearly > what he was talking about)... and he talked about Scientology (so did John > Travolta and many others). > > -- JR > > - Original Message - > > From: David Kusumoto > To: MoPo-L@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDU > Sent: Tuesday, August 22, 2006 19:14 > Subject: [MOPO] WSJ: Paramount terminates ties with Tom Cruise > > FYI, below. > > -koose. > > = > > Paramount Ends Relationship > With Tom Cruise's Company > > By MERISSA MARR, WALL STREET JOURNAL > August 22, 2006 6:43 p.m. > > Viacom Inc. Chairman Sumner Redstone said his company's Paramount Pictures > is terminating its 14-year relationship with actor Tom Cruise's production > company, citing the actor's controversial and sometimes erratic behavior of > the past year. > > Mr.
Re: [MOPO] WSJ: Paramount terminates ties with Tom Cruise
Perhaps Tom and Mel will now form their own production company: "Religious Nuts Unlimited!" Joe B in NOLADavid Kusumoto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: More from today's VARIETY -- Cruise's people say they walked away on their own because they got low-balled, with Paramount (my guess) apparently leveraging MI:III's performance as a way to avoid giving him more money:-koose.=VARIETY MAGAZINETue., Aug. 22, 2006, 8:12pm ETFRISKY BUSINESSSpunky Sumner severs Par's ties to CruiseBy CHRIS GARDNER, VarietyThe 14-year Tom Cruise-Paramount relationship has ended on a note of anger and outrage.Cruise and his production partner, Paula Wagner, say they have raised a revolving fund of $100 million from two hedge funds and are striking out on their own.Wagner denounced Sumner Redstone's comments about Cruise as "outrageous and disrespectful."Redstone told the Wall Street Journal on Tuesday that Paramount was ending its relationship with Cruise because "his recent conduct has not been acceptable."In fact, Wagner said, CAA, Cruise's agent, has terminated discussions with Par earlier in the week.After making 14 films in 14 years, the studio had declined to renew the original Cruise deal and offered a sharply reduced pact.Cruise has been a tabloid-regular over the past year due to his relationship with actress Katie Holmes and his increasingly outspoken nature about the Church of Scientology.Wagner defended Cruise/Wagner's longtime success for the studio, saying that in the last 10 years, the shingle's product has accounted for 15% of Paramount's theatrical revenue and for the past six years it has tallied 32%.Their credits include the "Mission: Impossible" franchise, "Vanilla Sky" and "War of the Worlds."Original Message FollowsFrom: "JR" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>To: "David Kusumoto" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,Subject: Re: [MOPO] WSJ: Paramount terminates ties with Tom CruiseDate: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 22:58:16 -0400Hollywood has always been about "what have you done for me lately?" -- but this is ridiculous. It was only 1 year ago that Tom Cruise starred in WAR OF THE WORLDS which was one of last summer's mega-hits. Since then, the god-awful MISSION IMPOSSIBLE III came out. Clearly Cruise did nothing "controversial" enough between the release of those two films to cause audiences to turn against him personally as an actor. The difference was that one film was worth watching and the other wasn't. On the other hand, I expect Cruise will land on his feet and go on to make many more hundreds of millions in other films, they just won't be Paramount's. It's a very odd world where a billion-dollar corporation makes critical financial decisions based on the sort of things cited against Cruise in this article. How shocking! He bounced up and down on Oprah Winfrey's couch (the bastard!)... he criticized drug abuse (in an incompetent way, yes, but that's clearly what he was talking about)... and he talked about Scientology (so did John Travolta and many others).-- JR- Original Message -From: David KusumotoTo: MoPo-L@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDUSent: Tuesday, August 22, 2006 19:14Subject: [MOPO] WSJ: Paramount terminates ties with Tom CruiseFYI, below.-koose.=Paramount Ends RelationshipWith Tom Cruise's CompanyBy MERISSA MARR, WALL STREET JOURNALAugust 22, 2006 6:43 p.m.Viacom Inc. Chairman Sumner Redstone said his company's Paramount Pictures is terminating its 14-year relationship with actor Tom Cruise's production company, citing the actor's controversial and sometimes erratic behavior of the past year.Mr. Cruise, the star of Paramount hits like "Mission: Impossible," "Top Gun" and "Days of Thunder," has based his moviemaking company, Cruise/Wagner Productions, on the Paramount lot since 1992.But in the past year, Mr. Cruise's star has fallen in the wake of a series of public incidents in which he stumped for his faith in the Church of Scientology; severely criticized the use of antidepressant drugs; and engaged in sometimes offbeat behavior, such as jumping up and down on Oprah Winfrey's couch to proclaim his love for actress Katie Holmes.Paramount now believes that Mr. Cruise's behavior hurt the box office of his most recent film, "Mission: Impossible III." Now, Mr. Redstone said he wants to sever the studio's connection to its biggest star."As much as we like him personally, we thought it was wrong to renew his deal," Mr. Redstone said in an interview with the Wall Street Journal. "His recent conduct has not been acceptable to Paramount."A spokeswoman for Cruise/Wagner Productions declined to comment.Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com___How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing ListSend a message addressed to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-LThe author of this message is solely responsible for its content. Get your email and more, right on the new Yahoo.com
Re: [MOPO] WSJ: Paramount terminates ties with Tom Cruise
I'll just say this, my word I've seemed awfully vocal recently, and now this. MI3 was much better reviewed than 2. It opened better than one (ignoring inflation) and made less than either. There is a factor here. Time of month released. MI3 came out a whopping, and excuse me folks, this is a huge amount of time, 2 weeks before when MI1 and MI2 came out. Dang, half a month. But, inflation, ticket prices, everything aside there's a stat that holds true, MI1's opening weekend was 25.1% of it's total take, MI2's was 26.9%m and MI3's was 35.8%. Now that's a big difference. When the film came out Cruise's production studio actually tried to claim that it was simply too early in the summer, it didn't open as well as MI2 only because it was a couple weeks earelier. SORRY. I don't buy it. Hey, Tom Cruise was all over the news when War of the Worlds came out, it's opening weekend? 27.7 of the total. Any wide release film that suffers from more than a third opening weekend syndrome is facing bad word of mouth. Leave it to a studio though to act on last years trend alone. Don't notice that for several years Cruise's openings were growing and overall box office takes were growing too, there was a bad year. That's enough. Been their policy for years. Isn't stopping with Cruise, just more apparent in ways. Ron Get your own web address for just $1.99/1st yr. We'll help. Yahoo! Small Business. Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com ___ How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List Send a message addressed to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L The author of this message is solely responsible for its content.
Re: [MOPO] WSJ: Paramount terminates ties with Tom Cruise
More from today's VARIETY -- Cruise's people say they walked away on their own because they got low-balled, with Paramount (my guess) apparently leveraging MI:III's performance as a way to avoid giving him more money: -koose. = VARIETY MAGAZINE Tue., Aug. 22, 2006, 8:12pm ET FRISKY BUSINESS Spunky Sumner severs Par's ties to Cruise By CHRIS GARDNER, Variety The 14-year Tom Cruise-Paramount relationship has ended on a note of anger and outrage. Cruise and his production partner, Paula Wagner, say they have raised a revolving fund of $100 million from two hedge funds and are striking out on their own. Wagner denounced Sumner Redstone's comments about Cruise as "outrageous and disrespectful." Redstone told the Wall Street Journal on Tuesday that Paramount was ending its relationship with Cruise because "his recent conduct has not been acceptable." In fact, Wagner said, CAA, Cruise's agent, has terminated discussions with Par earlier in the week. After making 14 films in 14 years, the studio had declined to renew the original Cruise deal and offered a sharply reduced pact. Cruise has been a tabloid-regular over the past year due to his relationship with actress Katie Holmes and his increasingly outspoken nature about the Church of Scientology. Wagner defended Cruise/Wagner's longtime success for the studio, saying that in the last 10 years, the shingle's product has accounted for 15% of Paramount's theatrical revenue and for the past six years it has tallied 32%. Their credits include the "Mission: Impossible" franchise, "Vanilla Sky" and "War of the Worlds." Original Message Follows From: "JR" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "David Kusumoto" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Subject: Re: [MOPO] WSJ: Paramount terminates ties with Tom Cruise Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 22:58:16 -0400 Hollywood has always been about "what have you done for me lately?" -- but this is ridiculous. It was only 1 year ago that Tom Cruise starred in WAR OF THE WORLDS which was one of last summer's mega-hits. Since then, the god-awful MISSION IMPOSSIBLE III came out. Clearly Cruise did nothing "controversial" enough between the release of those two films to cause audiences to turn against him personally as an actor. The difference was that one film was worth watching and the other wasn't. On the other hand, I expect Cruise will land on his feet and go on to make many more hundreds of millions in other films, they just won't be Paramount's. It's a very odd world where a billion-dollar corporation makes critical financial decisions based on the sort of things cited against Cruise in this article. How shocking! He bounced up and down on Oprah Winfrey's couch (the bastard!)... he criticized drug abuse (in an incompetent way, yes, but that's clearly what he was talking about)... and he talked about Scientology (so did John Travolta and many others). -- JR - Original Message - From: David Kusumoto To: MoPo-L@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDU Sent: Tuesday, August 22, 2006 19:14 Subject: [MOPO] WSJ: Paramount terminates ties with Tom Cruise FYI, below. -koose. = Paramount Ends Relationship With Tom Cruise's Company By MERISSA MARR, WALL STREET JOURNAL August 22, 2006 6:43 p.m. Viacom Inc. Chairman Sumner Redstone said his company's Paramount Pictures is terminating its 14-year relationship with actor Tom Cruise's production company, citing the actor's controversial and sometimes erratic behavior of the past year. Mr. Cruise, the star of Paramount hits like "Mission: Impossible," "Top Gun" and "Days of Thunder," has based his moviemaking company, Cruise/Wagner Productions, on the Paramount lot since 1992. But in the past year, Mr. Cruise's star has fallen in the wake of a series of public incidents in which he stumped for his faith in the Church of Scientology; severely criticized the use of antidepressant drugs; and engaged in sometimes offbeat behavior, such as jumping up and down on Oprah Winfrey's couch to proclaim his love for actress Katie Holmes. Paramount now believes that Mr. Cruise's behavior hurt the box office of his most recent film, "Mission: Impossible III." Now, Mr. Redstone said he wants to sever the studio's connection to its biggest star. "As much as we like him personally, we thought it was wrong to renew his deal," Mr. Redstone said in an interview with the Wall Street Journal. "His recent conduct has not been acceptable to Paramount." A spokeswoman for Cruise/Wagner Productions declined to comment. Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com
Re: [MOPO] WSJ: Paramount terminates ties with Tom Cruise
"His recent conduct has not been acceptable to Paramount." That's a very odd turn of phrase coming from Redstone in what is simply - it would seem - a business decision. The question arises, exactly what behaviour would he be talking about? I doubt very much that TC's Oprah outburst and misjudged comments on anti-depressant drugs from his Scientology background would actually mean that much in the big scheme of things. Movie stars are saying and doing dumb-ass things all the time. And while MI:3 was less than successful, it will still show on the profit side at the end of the day for Paramount. The "recent conduct" referred to may well be something that isn't public knowledge at all, or may never be, if indeed it is anything specific at all. One can only wonder why the Redstone statement needed any kind of qualifier like this. Business deals get reviewed all the time at contract time and it would have been sufficient to say that Paramount were not renewing their contract with Cruise Wagner Productions. The most common reason that previously successful such deals have not been renewed at contract time is that one side or the other wants more than the other is prepared to concede. Making a specific statement about "recent conduct" which is no more odd than what many Hollywood stars get up to is very strange indeed. Phil JR wrote: Hollywood has always been about "what have you done for me lately?" -- but this is ridiculous. It was only 1 year ago that Tom Cruise starred in WAR OF THE WORLDS which was one of last summer's mega-hits. Since then, the god-awful MISSION IMPOSSIBLE III came out. Clearly Cruise did nothing "controversial" enough between the release of those two films to cause audiences to turn against him personally as an actor. The difference was that one film was worth watching and the other wasn't. On the other hand, I expect Cruise will land on his feet and go on to make many more hundreds of millions in other films, they just won't be Paramount's. It's a very odd world where a billion-dollar corporation makes critical financial decisions based on the sort of things cited against Cruise in this article. How shocking! He bounced up and down on Oprah Winfrey's couch (the bastard!)... he criticized drug abuse (in an incompetent way, yes, but that's clearly what he was talking about)... and he talked about Scientology (so did John Travolta and many others). -- JR - Original Message - *From:* David Kusumoto <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> *To:* MoPo-L@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDU <mailto:MoPo-L@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDU> *Sent:* Tuesday, August 22, 2006 19:14 *Subject:* [MOPO] WSJ: Paramount terminates ties with Tom Cruise *FYI, below.* *-koose.* *=* *Paramount Ends Relationship With Tom Cruise's Company* By MERISSA MARR, WALL STREET JOURNAL August 22, 2006 6:43 p.m. Viacom <http://online.wsj.com/quotes/main.html?type=djn&symbol=via> Inc. Chairman Sumner Redstone said his company's Paramount Pictures is terminating its 14-year relationship with actor Tom Cruise's production company, citing the actor's controversial and sometimes erratic behavior of the past year. Mr. Cruise, the star of Paramount hits like "Mission: Impossible," "Top Gun" and "Days of Thunder," has based his moviemaking company, Cruise/Wagner Productions, on the Paramount lot since 1992. But in the past year, Mr. Cruise's star has fallen in the wake of a series of public incidents in which he stumped for his faith in the Church of Scientology; severely criticized the use of antidepressant drugs; and engaged in sometimes offbeat behavior, such as jumping up and down on Oprah Winfrey's couch to proclaim his love for actress Katie Holmes. Paramount now believes that Mr. Cruise's behavior hurt the box office of his most recent film, "Mission: Impossible III." Now, Mr. Redstone said he wants to sever the studio's connection to its biggest star. "As much as we like him personally, we thought it was wrong to renew his deal," Mr. Redstone said in an interview with the Wall Street Journal. "His recent conduct has not been acceptable to Paramount." A spokeswoman for Cruise/Wagner Productions declined to comment. Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com ___ How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List Send a message addressed to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L The author of this message is solely responsible for its content. Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com ___ How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List Send a m
Re: [MOPO] WSJ: Paramount terminates ties with Tom Cruise
Hollywood has always been about "what have you done for me lately?" -- but this is ridiculous. It was only 1 year ago that Tom Cruise starred in WAR OF THE WORLDS which was one of last summer's mega-hits. Since then, the god-awful MISSION IMPOSSIBLE III came out. Clearly Cruise did nothing "controversial" enough between the release of those two films to cause audiences to turn against him personally as an actor. The difference was that one film was worth watching and the other wasn't. On the other hand, I expect Cruise will land on his feet and go on to make many more hundreds of millions in other films, they just won't be Paramount's. It's a very odd world where a billion-dollar corporation makes critical financial decisions based on the sort of things cited against Cruise in this article. How shocking! He bounced up and down on Oprah Winfrey's couch (the bastard!)... he criticized drug abuse (in an incompetent way, yes, but that's clearly what he was talking about)... and he talked about Scientology (so did John Travolta and many others). -- JR - Original Message - From: David Kusumoto To: MoPo-L@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDU Sent: Tuesday, August 22, 2006 19:14 Subject: [MOPO] WSJ: Paramount terminates ties with Tom Cruise FYI, below. -koose. = Paramount Ends RelationshipWith Tom Cruise's Company By MERISSA MARR, WALL STREET JOURNALAugust 22, 2006 6:43 p.m. Viacom Inc. Chairman Sumner Redstone said his company's Paramount Pictures is terminating its 14-year relationship with actor Tom Cruise's production company, citing the actor's controversial and sometimes erratic behavior of the past year. Mr. Cruise, the star of Paramount hits like "Mission: Impossible," "Top Gun" and "Days of Thunder," has based his moviemaking company, Cruise/Wagner Productions, on the Paramount lot since 1992. But in the past year, Mr. Cruise's star has fallen in the wake of a series of public incidents in which he stumped for his faith in the Church of Scientology; severely criticized the use of antidepressant drugs; and engaged in sometimes offbeat behavior, such as jumping up and down on Oprah Winfrey's couch to proclaim his love for actress Katie Holmes. Paramount now believes that Mr. Cruise's behavior hurt the box office of his most recent film, "Mission: Impossible III." Now, Mr. Redstone said he wants to sever the studio's connection to its biggest star. "As much as we like him personally, we thought it was wrong to renew his deal," Mr. Redstone said in an interview with the Wall Street Journal. "His recent conduct has not been acceptable to Paramount." A spokeswoman for Cruise/Wagner Productions declined to comment. Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com ___ How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List Send a message addressed to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L The author of this message is solely responsible for its content. Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com ___ How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List Send a message addressed to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L The author of this message is solely responsible for its content.
Re: [MOPO] WSJ: Paramount terminates ties with Tom Cruise
Yup, you gotta love Hollywood!... Not that I have much respect for Tom Cruise (although anyone who can get Katie Holmes into bed gets a big check-mark in my book). But, if they think it was Tom Cruise who hurt Mission Impossible III - they are way off-base (yet again). What hurt MI3 wasn't Cruise - it was the fact that the first installment was brutally awful and the 2nd one was even worse! Two of the very worst movies ever made (and in Hollywood, that's saying a lot). Perhaps that has more to do with MI3's disappointing box office - than some fool jumping up and down on a couch. But, then again, that's just me... - Original Message - From: David Kusumoto To: MoPo-L@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDU Sent: Tuesday, August 22, 2006 4:14 PM Subject: [MOPO] WSJ: Paramount terminates ties with Tom Cruise FYI, below. -koose. = Paramount Ends RelationshipWith Tom Cruise's Company By MERISSA MARR, WALL STREET JOURNALAugust 22, 2006 6:43 p.m. Viacom Inc. Chairman Sumner Redstone said his company's Paramount Pictures is terminating its 14-year relationship with actor Tom Cruise's production company, citing the actor's controversial and sometimes erratic behavior of the past year. Mr. Cruise, the star of Paramount hits like "Mission: Impossible," "Top Gun" and "Days of Thunder," has based his moviemaking company, Cruise/Wagner Productions, on the Paramount lot since 1992. But in the past year, Mr. Cruise's star has fallen in the wake of a series of public incidents in which he stumped for his faith in the Church of Scientology; severely criticized the use of antidepressant drugs; and engaged in sometimes offbeat behavior, such as jumping up and down on Oprah Winfrey's couch to proclaim his love for actress Katie Holmes. Paramount now believes that Mr. Cruise's behavior hurt the box office of his most recent film, "Mission: Impossible III." Now, Mr. Redstone said he wants to sever the studio's connection to its biggest star. "As much as we like him personally, we thought it was wrong to renew his deal," Mr. Redstone said in an interview with the Wall Street Journal. "His recent conduct has not been acceptable to Paramount." A spokeswoman for Cruise/Wagner Productions declined to comment. Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com ___ How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List Send a message addressed to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L The author of this message is solely responsible for its content. Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com ___ How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List Send a message addressed to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L The author of this message is solely responsible for its content.
[MOPO] WSJ: Paramount terminates ties with Tom Cruise
FYI, below. -koose. = Paramount Ends RelationshipWith Tom Cruise's Company By MERISSA MARR, WALL STREET JOURNALAugust 22, 2006 6:43 p.m. Viacom Inc. Chairman Sumner Redstone said his company's Paramount Pictures is terminating its 14-year relationship with actor Tom Cruise's production company, citing the actor's controversial and sometimes erratic behavior of the past year. Mr. Cruise, the star of Paramount hits like "Mission: Impossible," "Top Gun" and "Days of Thunder," has based his moviemaking company, Cruise/Wagner Productions, on the Paramount lot since 1992. But in the past year, Mr. Cruise's star has fallen in the wake of a series of public incidents in which he stumped for his faith in the Church of Scientology; severely criticized the use of antidepressant drugs; and engaged in sometimes offbeat behavior, such as jumping up and down on Oprah Winfrey's couch to proclaim his love for actress Katie Holmes. Paramount now believes that Mr. Cruise's behavior hurt the box office of his most recent film, "Mission: Impossible III." Now, Mr. Redstone said he wants to sever the studio's connection to its biggest star. "As much as we like him personally, we thought it was wrong to renew his deal," Mr. Redstone said in an interview with the Wall Street Journal. "His recent conduct has not been acceptable to Paramount." A spokeswoman for Cruise/Wagner Productions declined to comment. Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com ___ How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List Send a message addressed to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L The author of this message is solely responsible for its content.
