Tom Cruise

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Not all messages are displayed: show all messages (341 of them)
But his glimmering chompers!

na (Nick A.), Thursday, 12 August 2004 18:00 (nineteen years ago) link

(and pssst, amateurist, that's called acting)

na (Nick A.), Thursday, 12 August 2004 18:00 (nineteen years ago) link

what's called acting? and who's whispering in my ear?

|a|m|t|r|s|t| (amateurist), Thursday, 12 August 2004 18:01 (nineteen years ago) link

I agree with you, amtrst, about 90%. Only difference is that I *would* call it loathing. That could just be me, though. I think I sympathize with Nicole too much.

Harold Media (kenan), Thursday, 12 August 2004 18:03 (nineteen years ago) link

is it a problem that he's not acting? that's a (bigger) different question.

I've not seen so many of his interviews and if I try to think of what he looks like being interviewed I get 'the stock smile' or his 'uncomfortable consternation' looking back at me. those are just images not memories. in fact, I'm not sure, have I any memories of tom cruise? probably definitely so it would be silly for me to argue fr his images over my memories. well, not entirely but I won't. I always think of him as insecure but always remember him as outgoing, confident, good look-ing.

cºzen (Cozen), Thursday, 12 August 2004 18:05 (nineteen years ago) link

Acting = the crafting of folksy gestures. Look it up.

na (Nick A.), Thursday, 12 August 2004 18:05 (nineteen years ago) link

that was me talking to myself.

cºzen (Cozen), Thursday, 12 August 2004 18:05 (nineteen years ago) link

Amateurist SOOOOO OTM. He's frightening but bewitching somehow. Cruise that is.

Jaymc's story about Leno kinda sums up the confusion i feel about him.

jed_ (jed), Thursday, 12 August 2004 18:07 (nineteen years ago) link

See, I agree with a lot of what you've said, which is why I find the guy so damn fascinating. It's much easier for me to hate someone who I find just plain dull or untalented.

jaymc (jaymc), Thursday, 12 August 2004 18:07 (nineteen years ago) link

i think of his stage laugh, which he pulls out in interviews: slight cock of the head, "ha's" in perfect intervals of 0.46 seconds, and then a corrective lowering of the head/returning of the mouth and brow to "expectant thoughtful position" in 2.87 seconds.

xpost

i mean yeah, i was being a little hyberbolic. i can see him as good looking and sexy and all that.

|a|m|t|r|s|t| (amateurist), Thursday, 12 August 2004 18:07 (nineteen years ago) link

i find him fascinating in exactly the way i find bigtime politicans fascinating, there's all this obviou ambition and talent at work but, one also wonders, perhaps a certain cynicism/shallowness/emptiness.

|a|m|t|r|s|t| (amateurist), Thursday, 12 August 2004 18:09 (nineteen years ago) link

also he is very talented too.

cºzen (Cozen), Thursday, 12 August 2004 18:09 (nineteen years ago) link

I don't know about emptiness. I think he's wound too tight. He could snap at any moment. Like jed said, frightening.

Harold Media (kenan), Thursday, 12 August 2004 18:10 (nineteen years ago) link

no, i'm sure the "emptiness" is just an illusion (dude why am i now hearing the four tops' "reach out--i'll be there" in my head?!) created by the mass of publicity he does.

|a|m|t|r|s|t| (amateurist), Thursday, 12 August 2004 18:12 (nineteen years ago) link

interpol, "no-one's empty".

cºzen (Cozen), Thursday, 12 August 2004 18:12 (nineteen years ago) link

he's not VERY talented but he has something.

xpost

well Madchen put it more succinctly upthread:

He doesn't look like a zombie so much as he looks like he's always concealing the desire to launch across a room and beat someone to death with their own shoes.

more xposts

jed_ (jed), Thursday, 12 August 2004 18:13 (nineteen years ago) link

If we didn't know he was a Sci3nt0l0gist would we still feel he was unnaturally self-controlled? He seems that way to me too, but I wonder how much I'm filling in from that knowledge.

Also, I saw him on a different talk show recently where he started laughing uncrollably for a good minute, if not more, and when he tried to speak he couldn't. I wasn't paying enough attention beforehand to know the context or to understand what was going on when he finally was able to talk, but that was a definite chink in the armor moment.

nickn (nickn), Thursday, 12 August 2004 18:24 (nineteen years ago) link

That was Melissa who said the bit about the shoes!

jaymc (jaymc), Thursday, 12 August 2004 18:26 (nineteen years ago) link

sorry melissa!

jed_ (jed), Thursday, 12 August 2004 18:45 (nineteen years ago) link

You're suck a dick, jed.

Harold Media (kenan), Thursday, 12 August 2004 18:46 (nineteen years ago) link

oh i totally missed this thread. bravo cozen

(it's midnight for now tho, but later)

cruise's magnolia = von trier's five obstructions?


prima fassy (mwah), Thursday, 12 August 2004 21:40 (nineteen years ago) link

re: the Leno consternation: One would never hear Mr. Cruise described as "awkward and inarticulate" when speaking without a script.

Mr. Tony Plow (Leee), Thursday, 12 August 2004 22:35 (nineteen years ago) link

i haven't seen the collateral thread but he was fantastic in it and i normally hate him. well he was ok in minority report too but only when he took his eyes out.

keith m (keithmcl), Thursday, 12 August 2004 23:43 (nineteen years ago) link

he masturbates in risky bussiness. which is nice.

erik, Friday, 13 August 2004 12:18 (nineteen years ago) link

Why Erik, you passionate man!

Ned Raggett (Ned), Friday, 13 August 2004 13:00 (nineteen years ago) link

he has always seemed so alone, hasn't he. poor tom!

g--ff (gcannon), Friday, 13 August 2004 13:26 (nineteen years ago) link

Being as I am the only person in the world who has watched Vanilla Sky with Cameron Crowe's commentary, there's a bit where as he's talking Crowe calls Cruise up on the phone out of the blue while the recording of the commentary is happening, to talk about the movie. In they're chat Cruise comes across as very down to earth and personable, and never once demands royalties for being on the commentary. He's just hanging out at home, and not taking himself seriously - it's a really nice moment. However, I realise he probably is a cunt.

Huey (Huey), Friday, 13 August 2004 13:29 (nineteen years ago) link

"they're"? Oh the shame...


"Vanilla Sky" commentary? Oh the shame...

Huey (Huey), Friday, 13 August 2004 13:30 (nineteen years ago) link

britain, days of thunder is on tonight, bbc 1, 11.15pm.

cºzen (Cozen), Friday, 13 August 2004 18:46 (nineteen years ago) link

fassy say more.

g--ff (gcannon), Friday, 13 August 2004 19:01 (nineteen years ago) link

did erik just turn up?

amateur!!!st, Friday, 13 August 2004 19:01 (nineteen years ago) link

oooh...hello!

http://sportsmed.starwave.com/i/magazine/new/risky_business.jpg

erik, Saturday, 14 August 2004 05:26 (nineteen years ago) link

three good tom cruise movies
risky business
a movie in favour of american capitalism at its most free, frisky, sexy, fun and makes the young and hung tom cruise an erotic icon, attempts at flirting with nostaliga, but really a conflation of sex and buisness (the scene with the house as brothel, and the princeton interview--"We need the room"/"I'll take them again"/'' Q: what are you planning to major in. A:Buisness") The first meeting of the black drag hooker; the masterbating in white briefs, clean and pure--(b4 aids?), the football helmet (all american protection), etc etc etc.
top gun
i think its queer, but then all that butch phallocentricism in one place would make me think that, the weak guy dies, the arrogant fuck gets rewarded, and cruise gets life handed to him on a plate of piverlege and skill (see he isnt cocky, he is that good)--first real action movie and war movie that is not a bout war at all, that is shot with the sheen and gloss of commericals, that is cut and edited like porn (rising action--money shot, over and over again).
eyes wide shut
three levels here.
real--what most people see it as, an exciting night that concludes safely, the narrative is consistint and happens normally.
surreal--an allegorical tale about fantasy and fiedilty-- a bored rich man dreams of a life of sexual freedom and exoticism after his wife has admitted pseudo infeidlity. (the opera, the orgy, the medical card, the wanting to cheat on nicole kidman, the russian whore and the mask makers daughter, the sailor--all standard devices, works best when thinking of schiltzlers(sp) original novel)
metareal--an assumption because nic and tom are married, that there marriage is on view to us, an examantion of the nature of celebrity, something to make us feel dirty about looking at "stars", a nasty beating down of these peoples reputaitons--(tom called faggot, tom unable to gain an erection around whores, tom being unfaithful, tom being egotistical vs nicole being a whore herself, nicole faking sophistication, nicole being nothing more then arm candy); a movie that holds secerts--(most people only got the first meaning)

anthony, Saturday, 14 August 2004 08:20 (nineteen years ago) link

This thread is tremendous!

I very strongly agree with all the people who have criticized the Cruiser, on this thread, articulating their disquiet at him. I am not just backing a consensus or being ... knee-jerk - no, I find the actual comments on the thread incredibly accurate, insightful; they describe the way I feel about the Cruiser but have never been able to name so well.

I like RJG's post: about the colons.

All the stuff about the Cruiser, in interviews, laughing, and smiling uneasily, and being unable to answer - is hilarious!

the cruisefox, Saturday, 14 August 2004 08:36 (nineteen years ago) link

Also, DAYS OF THUNDER: I saw the end of it, last night. I can hardly bring myself to express how mediocre it is, or was. It is so bad, the way that when the Cruiser has won a race, he kisses Kidman, once, then puts her down and runs off to his coach, and the end of the film is all about them.

Some people would say that this makes it queer, or gay, or homosocial, which is, OK, a different thing. It may be homosocial, but it's definitely not queer. It is annoying, to me, the way that peoplem, in general, think that straight men are queer when, in films, they hang about together. This distracts from the real problem of rampant heterosexuality, which (rather than homosexuality) is what submerges and demotes Kidman in this film, or other women in similar films.

I am pleased with that last thought - it is the best expression of a somewhat interesting idea that I have managed for a while, in my seemingly intellectually declining years.

the bellefox, Saturday, 14 August 2004 08:40 (nineteen years ago) link

the wheelchair race through the hospital is plain odd.

cºzen (Cozen), Saturday, 14 August 2004 08:44 (nineteen years ago) link

joel

i think that conflating homosocial and homosexual can be dangerous, and i think that we need to pay attention when those things converge...i dont know about days of thunder (which is an artifical refinement of the themes of top gun), but i did say "i think" about top gun, which means that i am unsure, that my own desires and complications may get in the way

anthony, Saturday, 14 August 2004 08:45 (nineteen years ago) link

Yes -- my post was not meant to be a riposte to you - just to lots of imaginary people in general.

the bellefox, Saturday, 14 August 2004 08:47 (nineteen years ago) link

i saw part of that vanilla sky commentary, it was atrocious (nancy wilson strums her guitar while cameron crowe marvels at his extraordinary achievement, mentions billy wilder every 5 minuts)

s1ocki (slutsky), Saturday, 14 August 2004 14:46 (nineteen years ago) link

but amateurist i think your take on tom cruise is interesting, because his overriding cruiseishness, no matter what the role, is that not basically what makes a movie star? can you ever forget that bogey is bogey? is tom cruise different though, is he like the ultimate manifestation of star-as-immovable-presence?

s1ocki (slutsky), Saturday, 14 August 2004 14:47 (nineteen years ago) link

sam fuller, of all people, used to go on about how gay "top gun" was

xpost

duh s1ocki i just woke up i can't answer these heavy questions

amateur!!!st (amateurist), Saturday, 14 August 2004 14:49 (nineteen years ago) link

I think Bogart is has even more of that than Cruise and in a different (and infinitely better) way. I suppose Bogart is my ultimate movie star so i am biased. Bogart seems like an "immovable presence"; perhaps Cruise is an immovable absence?

jed_ (jed), Saturday, 14 August 2004 20:05 (nineteen years ago) link

He's like Mr. Square in Flatlad.

br-u-no, Saturday, 14 August 2004 23:44 (nineteen years ago) link

I meant Flatland

br-u-no, Saturday, 14 August 2004 23:45 (nineteen years ago) link

I still think that Eyes Wide Shut works because Cruise is such a phony actor, and the character is constantly thrown into situations where he has to lie, and he comes across like such a tool. Except for dumb shit like Mission Impossible, that's pretty much the only movie I like him in.

kyle (akmonday), Sunday, 15 August 2004 01:24 (nineteen years ago) link

overriding cruiseishness

excellent

gabbneb (gabbneb), Sunday, 15 August 2004 01:43 (nineteen years ago) link

>but amateurist i think your take on tom cruise is interesting, because his overriding cruiseishness, no matter what the role, is that not basically what makes a movie star? can you ever forget that bogey is bogey? is tom cruise different though, is he like the ultimate manifestation of star-as-immovable-presence?

I can kind of understand this post but am somewhat horrified at the same time.

Yes. Bogey many times just played Bogey (def. not always) but there was a presence there that outweighed these issues. I mean Jack Nicholson (who I many problems with btw) is not the title on this thread for a reason, no? Tho he has for the last - what, 25 years? - been playing the same character, his charisma/JackNicholsonness allows him for many to get away with it.

Tom Cruise's appalling absensce of such presence but simultaneous ability to get away with playing that absence is what I think distresses many.

H (Heruy), Sunday, 15 August 2004 01:48 (nineteen years ago) link

this is all too easy.

cºzen (Cozen), Sunday, 15 August 2004 08:35 (nineteen years ago) link

yes H but WHY does he get away with it? obviously there is something about his screen presence that people like to watch, maybe it's some cocky alpha-male appeal or something like that (which is kinda what nicholson does too).

s1ocki (slutsky), Sunday, 15 August 2004 13:54 (nineteen years ago) link

this thread is about colin farrell.

cºzen (Cozen), Sunday, 15 August 2004 21:01 (nineteen years ago) link


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.