Tom Cruise action star...

[CTTT]

I feel like is getting stale at this point. He's a really great actor and should go back to doing drama again. Magnolia and Born on the Fourth of July are proof of his talent. It's kind of a wasted opportunity that since 2000, he's settled into this action hero role with the M:I movies and Edge of Tomorrow. I get that the M:I movies are moneymakers but he's branched out a lot less than earlier in his career.

[Kieran_Frost]

I think he's a very underrated actor, but sadly he's probably paying most of his fortune to Scientology, so has to keep doing the well paid depthless action gigs to keep the big bucks coming in, or he'll go bankrupt. Very sad, really.

[Castle]

With Tom Cruise, I always cannot help but compare him to another Tom when it comes to life-run careers. Tom Cruise and Tom Hanks have such parallels.

They both started out in the 80s but Cruise was seen as a far more versatile actor than Hanks, taken on many dramatic acclaimed roles such as the Colour of Money, Risky Business and Born on the 4th of July, while Tom Hanks was mostly seen as a comedy actor with movies like Splash, Turner and Hooch and Big. Tom Hanks levelled it up with Tom Cruise by the time the 1990s rolled in with dramatic movies.

However, I would have never imagined that now nearing 40 years, Tom Hanks has now surpassed Tom Cruise when it comes to dramatic roles by a big big margin.

Cruise been a dramatic actor for some weird reason peaked in the 2000s or mid 2000s with Collateral and Jamie Foxx apparently was the one that stole the show in that film. Apart from Mission Impossible, most of his other films have not done that well both critically and financially.

It feels now like the Mission Impossible series is the only thing he has going. Hollywood just wont cast him in any dramatic roles anymore or maybe he has no interest in doing them.

Lastly his religion of scientology has hurt his career, this could also explain why he can no longer really do dramatic roles but now chooses to only focus on action driven movies that will be more of a guarantee hit.

[inisideguy]

Most of his movies are pretty good. Honestly there are maybe 3 or 4 current actors who have been in so many hit movies. His career is pretty much legendary if you ask me. Most people who don't like him don't like his personal life. I could care less.

[Kirby101]

Cruise produces the movies he is in. So I think he could do dramatic movies if he wanted to. I think he loves doing action movies. He is very involved in the stunts and does much of his own stunt work.
I expect that as he gets older, he will start doing more dramatic movies again.
And he doesn't give all his money to Scientology. While he probably gives them a lot, he is still worth over half a billion $.

[CTTT]

Cruise produces the movies he is in. So I think he could do dramatic movies if he wanted to. I think he loves doing action movies. He is very involved in the stunts and does much of his own stunt work.
I expect that as he gets older, he will start doing more dramatic movies again.
And he doesn't give all his money to Scientology. While he probably gives them a lot, he is still worth over half a billion $.

Yeah major props to him doing his own stunts and on a broken foot too. His dedication is something to be commended. Talking about favorite roles, loved him in Interview with the Vampire. Tom got a lot of backlash at the time including Anne Rice herself, but then she changed her mind once she saw the movie. He was fantastic as Lestat.

[Vakanai]

I just think he prefers doing action movies over dramatic roles - I think he just enjoys it more. And what's wrong with that? I think we as a culture have often held up drama as a "elite, better, most mature genre over all others" and that just seems elitist. I'm not knocking drama of course, like everyone else I've enjoyed more than a few, I just don't like it on a pedestal. It is no better than action, horror, or comedy. And not all actors need to aspire to serious drama rolls that win all the Oscars. Like Kirby101 says, Cruise produces his movies and isn't hurting for money in the least, if he wanted to be in dramas he'd be in dramas. Since he's not, one has to assume he's not interested.

[Castle]

I just think he prefers doing action movies over dramatic roles - I think he just enjoys it more. And what's wrong with that? I think we as a culture have often held up drama as a "elite, better, most mature genre over all others" and that just seems elitist. I'm not knocking drama of course, like everyone else I've enjoyed more than a few, I just don't like it on a pedestal. It is no better than action, horror, or comedy. And not all actors need to aspire to serious drama rolls that win all the Oscars. Like Kirby101 says, Cruise produces his movies and isn't hurting for money in the least, if he wanted to be in dramas he'd be in dramas. Since he's not, one has to assume he's not interested.

I am going to disagree with that because Cruise at one time wanted to be called an Academy Award winning actor and he fought really hard to be taken seriously as an actor because he looks kept up getting in the way, there was a myth that Tom Cruise would never have been big star, if he was not such a pretty boy and Tom had to work against that typecasting.

I think maybe it could fear, fear in the sense that, a part of tom realises that he may no longer be a big relevant film star if he does more drama. Action films at least makes sure he stays and remains an A-List Actor in every sense of the word. Meaning he can still bring in the big box at the box office because the truth now is, there are many actors in their 50s and 60s, who are still A List actors but they don't just have the box office draw anymore as they once did in their 30s and 40s .

My theory could be wrong but, I would not say it is far fetched

[CosmiComic]

I just think he prefers doing action movies over dramatic roles - I think he just enjoys it more. And what's wrong with that? I think we as a culture have often held up drama as a "elite, better, most mature genre over all others" and that just seems elitist. I'm not knocking drama of course, like everyone else I've enjoyed more than a few, I just don't like it on a pedestal. It is no better than action, horror, or comedy. And not all actors need to aspire to serious drama rolls that win all the Oscars. Like Kirby101 says, Cruise produces his movies and isn't hurting for money in the least, if he wanted to be in dramas he'd be in dramas. Since he's not, one has to assume he's not interested.

As a culture we hold it up, yet also make fun of people who like watching dramas. I never understood that.

[Zero Hunter]

I think action movies are just more fun for him. Just look at some of the crazy stuff he gets to do when shooting and action movie and how fun it looks. Compare that to a drama where he is sitting around talking. Given the choice I would take having fun or being a "serious" actor every time. He proved a long time ago he can do drama and when he finally gets to old for all the stunt work he will probably go back to that, but right now he is having a blast.

[Mace Dolex]

With Tom Cruise, I always cannot help but compare him to another Tom when it comes to life-run careers. Tom Cruise and Tom Hanks have such parallels.

They both started out in the 80s but Cruise was seen as a far more versatile actor than Hanks, taken on many dramatic acclaimed roles such as the Colour of Money, Risky Business and Born on the 4th of July, while Tom Hanks was mostly seen as a comedy actor with movies like Splash, Turner and Hooch and Big. Tom Hanks levelled it up with Tom Cruise by the time the 1990s rolled in with dramatic movies.

However, I would have never imagined that now nearing 40 years, Tom Hanks has now surpassed Tom Cruise when it comes to dramatic roles by a big big margin.

Cruise been a dramatic actor for some weird reason peaked in the 2000s or mid 2000s with Collateral and Jamie Foxx apparently was the one that stole the show in that film. Apart from Mission Impossible, most of his other films have not done that well both critically and financially.

It feels now like the Mission Impossible series is the only thing he has going. Hollywood just wont cast him in any dramatic roles anymore or maybe he has no interest in doing them.

Lastly his religion of scientology has hurt his career, this could also explain why he can no longer really do dramatic roles but now chooses to only focus on action driven movies that will be more of a guarantee hit.

I was thinking about this analogy for many years now and realizing that both Tom Cruise and Tom Hanks have consistently had the most box office hits for nearly four decades now and neither actor has ever had a dry spell so to speak, sure whenever Cruise has had a dramatic role such as American Made it's usually at #1 even if it doesn't make money but then you have turds like The Mummy which despite being criticized was still #1 and made some money.

[Castle]

I was thinking about this analogy for many years now and realizing that both Tom Cruise and Tom Hanks have consistently had the most box office hits for nearly four decades now and neither actor has ever had a dry spell so to speak, sure whenever Cruise has had a dramatic role such as American Made it's usually at #1 even if it doesn't make money but then you have turds like The Mummy which despite being criticized was still #1 and made some money.

Yes, I have already discussed both actors on another thread.

https://community.cbr.com/showthread...the-90s-Decade

The blame for the Mummy flopping goes to Sony and Alex Kurtzman. Although it struck me as odd Cruise took such a role at this time in his career. that been said I do admire Cruise , who is such a big star for sometimes letting no experienced first rime directors make a movie, where he is the lead. Mission Impossible 3 was JJ Abrams first directed film, so was Alex Kurtzman with The Mummy.