May 26, 2006

Wow you mean an artist is eccentric?

I've been reading a few blogs and reviews that seem pretty pleased with the underwhelming box office showing of Mission Impossible 3. A lot of people are happy that Tom Cruise is receiving less money than he normally would, because they can't get over him being a Scientologist and mildly insane. It's if they feel that somehow Tom Cruise will soon be standing in line for soup because he jumped on a couch. It's amazing that an artist being out of touch with the mainstream is shocking to the public.

I have no interest in viewing Mission Impossible 3 and his religion makes no difference to me. Yes I think the faith of L. Ron Hubbard is a scam, but I just didn't care for the first two films so I don't feel inclined to torture myself sitting through a third one. Plus if I did take a stand on never going to see a Tom Cruise film because of his devotion to a sham faith I'd be a hypocrite. One of my favorite films of 2002 was directed by a fugitive pedophile rapist after all.

"If you have a great passion it seems that the logical thing is to see the fruit of it, and the fruit are children." - Roman Polanski


Scott said...

Excellent post and insight! I agree with exactly what you are saying. So many great artists have lots of problems, who cares if Tom is a little off, is it really that big a deal?


Mattbear said...

I think the biggest beef, at least the legit part of it, is that he, as a star and therefore role model of sorts (for better or worse) is telling people lies that they may believe, and using other famous people (a la Brooke Shields) as examples of what he thinks people shouldn't do.

Should any of it influence whether you go see his movie? I don't think so. What I think should influence that decision is the fact that MI2 was a stinking pile of dung, and sequels rarely get better.

And Tom Cruise is a jerk. He wrecked Katie Holmes. Damn him. I can't fantasize about a Scientologist; the evident stupidity ruins any kind of physical attraction.