Will new Scientology doc affect Tom Cruise’s new “Mission: Impossible?”
Short answer. No. The “does it look like it will suck?” factor will hurt it more.
But you didn’t come here for short answers, did you?
An article in “International Business Times” does the fear monger thing. The article (reposted by Raw Story here) implies that the revelations about all the crooked shit the Church of Scientology does as revealed in the HBO-aired documentary “Going Clear” will affect audience opinion on Cruise.
Therefore, his new movie “Mission: Impossible — Rogue Nation” won’t do well and Cruise will have to worry about his career.
He’s worrying about his career? Maybe future jobs, but it’s not like the residuals from his prior works don’t leave him a millionaire a million times over. I wish I had to “worry about my career” like that!
But I digress.
The article states that his last “M:I” movie, “Ghost Protocol” did well, but his subsequent movies did not.
Let’s look at those movies.
“Oblivion.” “Jack Reacher.” “Rock of Ages.” “Edge of Tomorrow.” True, none of them did the usual Cruise over-$100-million box office.
“Oblivion” pretty much sucked.
Musicals like “Rock of Ages” are always a hard sell, and that really wasn’t a “Tom Cruise” movie, so I don’t hold that against him.
“Edge of Tomorrow?” Let’s talk about the title. It had nothing to do with the content of the movie. It was so bad, Warner Bros. retconned the title to “Live. Die. Repeat.” That just shows that the studio had no idea how to market the movie, which means no one knew what to expect.
Subsequently, nobody went to see what even Rotten Tomatoes calls “certified fresh” with a 90%. The much-loved (I hated it) “Guardians of the Galaxy” only got a 91%.
Full disclosure: I didn’t see “Reacher,” but the advertising didn’t make it look like anything I needed to rush out and see anyway. Still grossed $80 million, which puts it on par with Liam Neeson’s “Taken 3,” a sequel in a highly popular franchise and not an original IP like “Reacher.”
BTW — original IPs are a MUCH harder sell, even if they’re based on popular books. Unless you put the “Marvel” logo in front of it, I guess.
“Reacher” nearly tripled Neeson’s “A Walk Among the Tombstones” B/O, and that film only kinda sucked.
Granted, Neeson doesn’t have Scientology rumors against him. But I’d argue that the world outside of the movie matters little in this fickle America we live in. What does matter is if the movie is marketed correctly and if it follows two basic maxims — “Do. Not. Suck.” and “Give them what they want.”
In the summer, American audiences want action, adventure, big explosions, pretty faces and maybe, if the filmmakers get around to it, a decent plot. And don’t be preachy or show me any negative things ’bout ‘Merica.
Here’s the trailer for “Mission: Impossible: Rogue Nation.” What do you think about the “suck” potential? I think it looks more exciting than the last three James Bond movies.
But that’s just me thinking out loud.