‘Rock of Ages’ performs terribly at the box-office: is Tom Cruise to blame?

Tom Cruise

I was fully prepared to concede that the box-office prowess of Tom Cruise had prevailed once again after the opening of Rock of Ages, but something strange has happened — the movie proved itself to be an utterly terrible performer and has earned a mere $15 million over the weekend. For a movie with a $75 million budget, that’s pretty dismal news, and ROA even landed in third place after Madagascar 3 and Prometheus, which took in $35 million and $21 million, respectively, during their second weekends. Of course, I don’t feel badly at all for the latest Adam Sandler movie, That’s My Boy, landing in fourth place since kind of Adam’s overdue for a serious flop because he makes such crappy movies.

In retrospect, I wonder if Tom’s people suspected that Rock of Ages wouldn’t fare so well in theaters because of (hidden) poor tracking data. That could explain why — after going all out a month ago in that embarrassing W mag shoot — Tom wasn’t really promoting the film over the past few weeks aside from solo appearances at the premieres and a few half-hearted interviews. There was no huge “family man” photo op over the weekend and, in fact, Tom skipped town and headed to Iceland with Suri. It seems like Tom wanted to distance himself from the movie after his team figured out it would be a disaster. Is it fair to assign any blame to Tom for ROA‘s poor showing? While it was an ensemble movie, it was certainly marketed as the movie where Tom Cruise rocks out. Here’s a brief analysis of what went went wrong with Rock of Ages:

Tom Cruise

[T]his weekend’s newcomers each should have earned over $20M because of their star power. But New Line/Warner Bros’ Rock Of Ages (3,470 theaters) fell to earth with a thud. Which Hollywood expected because the pic had been tracking poorly for weeks (and even went down at one point week to week). The studio felt the 1980s period piece was a hard sell to younger moviegoers. I suspect the problem was casting. Russell Brand has been repellant to moviegoers, while Tom Cruise as iconic rocker proved just too incredulous for audiences. The PG-13 musical is looking to open to only $15M this weekend after taking in just $5.3M Friday and $5.4M Saturday. Given that the pic was based on the Broadway warbler, it did worse than the studio expected and far worse than Mamma Mia which with the same pedigree opened to $27M. Warner Bros was holding out hope for this $75M-budget pic, thinking that a good CinemaScore could generate great word of mouth and therefore great legs for the film. It didn’t materialize: audiences only gave Rock Of Ages a mediocre ‘B’. There’s just no way to save this s(t)inker with hack director Adam Shankman at the helm: in fact, weekend gross may fall below $15M by Monday.

Columbia/Sony’s That’s My Boy> (3,030 theaters) starring Adam Sandler also was bottoming. An actor who reliably takes in $30M to $40M every opening weekend and then dropping to $13M after grossing only $4.5M Friday and $4.8M Saturday can’t go unchastized. Especially if he hurt his brand with his most recent pic, that execrable flop Jack & Jill. (How much you wanna bet Andy Samberg is rethinking that SNL exit now?) No one will be surprised if weekend gross falls below $13M by Monday.

[From Deadline]

So does the financial failure of Rock of Ages mean anything in the grand scheme of Tom Cruise’s career? Not really. MI4 has proven that people will still watch Tom perform crazy-ass stunts in an action movie, so he’ll have that option at least for the next decade or so. Still, this news does mean that studios will rethink casting Tom in out-of-his-norm roles like Clint Eastwood’s upcoming A Star is Born remake, and that silly Les Grossman movie probably won’t happen now either. Small mercies, folks.

As for Deadline passing a lot of the blame towards Russell Brand, he obviously appeals only to a certain demographic. In animated movies where he can show off his voice work (Despicable Me, Hop), he’s financially viable, and the stoner audience loves him in in movies like Get Him to the Greek, but for anything more outside-the-box for his persona (Arthur), he’s not a box-office draw. Rusty will be fine. He’s got his new FX show coming up and will probably host a zillion more MTV Awards shows, so I’m not worried about him. Likewise, Alec Baldwin will be okay because he’s got his television work to fall back on as well. Julianne Hough, however, probably won’t have too many more movies in her future, so she might want to contemplate heading back to “Dancing with the Stars” because, honestly, that seems like a great gig.

Russell Brand Alec Baldwin

Julianne Hough

Tom Cruise

Photos courtesy of AllMoviePhoto

 

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

206 Responses to “‘Rock of Ages’ performs terribly at the box-office: is Tom Cruise to blame?”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Eve says:

    I actually liked Russell Brand in “Arthur” — the scene where his fiancée makes him ride a horse had me in stitches.

  2. original lucy says:

    The few reviews I read of ROA, actually said the TC was the best part of the movie, but of course I don’t know because I certainly wasn’t going to see that crap!

    • Amelia says:

      I heard that too, apparently he’s got a good voice on him.
      I think the problem is that there’s quite a specific fan base for this. I saw the stage production (which I loved) but I think musicals really only attract a certain type of fan. The era of music used didn’t help either. Because I’m a bit of a music geek and was known to ‘borrow’ CDs from my parents when I was a kid, I know the music even though I didn’t grow up on it. But I don’t think young teenagers now are really up for listening to 80′s hits.
      The producers were probably hoping ‘Don’t stop believing’ alone would bring in revenue thanks to Glee. Yeaaaah … dream on.

      • OhMyMy says:

        Agreed. I heard that the movie’s just not hitting the demographic they were hoping for because of the age of the music. Apparently the audience was heavily made up of women. Now they’re counting on more women seeing it. Um….sorry, not all women that age like TC.

      • pwal says:

        I think HW was oblivious about ROA’s potential. I wasn’t a rock fan, much less an 80s hair band rock fan, but even I know that snobbery is pervasive among rock fans. In many ways, rock fans and rock music artists are worse than hip hop fans and artists when it comes to decreeing what is real and what isn’t, which is why both genres are repellant to a lot of people like me. I don’t appreciate being told that I suck if I don’t go along with the music that encourages sausage worship.

      • Mandi says:

        I would bet money that Tom’s voice is as good live as the crazy-ass stunts he “performs” in his action movies. In other words, it’s not real.

    • beyonce's bump says:

      SO I heard lucy, so I heard. I will go see it this coming weekend. I also think the film was not really promoted as a potential big office film should be promoted. I mean there were the promotions done for like two weeks but that was pretty much it.

      • RocketMerry says:

        I too think that the promotion of this movie was quite inaccurate, but not because it was short: I saw posters and online marketing for months.

        I firmly believe they misinterpreted the public and its expectation, Tom Cruise’s craziness was accentuated instead of minimized with his “super serious creates comedy” acting approach and they marketed his performance one way and the other actors’ performances another way.
        Cruise’s presence in a movie nowadays needs to be carefully managed and presented to the public with great caution, which they did not; it’s not the ’90s any more!

        They (producers, director, acting coaches, Tom Cruise) botched it, basically.

      • bluhare says:

        RocketMerry: Agree with you. The whole roll up to this was how bad Cruise was going to be.

      • Carolyn says:

        I am right in this movie’s target demographic and the promotion has been wrong. Can’t put my finger on why I’m ambivalent. There’s nothing in it that would appeal to young people. I’m OK about Tom being a rock star. You’d expect Russell to be his character. Julianne leaves me cold (I had big hair in the 80′s but that shot of her spraying it just makes me go WTF?). The cute guy also leaves me cold. Reviews I’ve seen all point to the director mucking it up. It’s easy to blame Tom but the responsibility lies elsewhere. I’ll see it either on a Cheapskate Tuesday or wait till DVD.

      • sarahtonin says:

        @RocketMerry, it might’ve helped if someone told Tommy it was a comedy.

        He’s supposed to be a jaded, washed up singer, who can’t be f^cked with anything anymore. But Tommygirl brought all his motivation speech intensity and drive and ambition and ‘yay team’ sh-t that he plays every character with, so he had it all wrong from the start. Doesn’t matter that he wasn’t jumping on the couch in the film, it’s his essence. Perhaps he should go do motivation speeches on Weight Watchers camps or something.

        Exhibit A: cockhead, not cockrock.
        http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_turTOJpluow/SZlr3F3VycI/AAAAAAAAABE/0tnKWUPK48U/s400/Tom+Cruise-1.jpg

      • Wilby says:

        @Sarahtonin, is madam a dlisted fan? I noticed the (Tommygirl) reference. :)

    • Chris says:

      Tom Cruise is definitely not to blame for this failure and I don’t think they marketed the movie around Tom. The TV ads did not play him up and they should have. Tom Cruise has also gotten great reviews for his performance so overall, Tom did great in a poor film.

    • Anna says:

      The movie is awful, but Tom Cruise is definitely, definitely the best part of it . I’m not a fan of his but I was genuinely impressed, he’s truly great in the movie. The big problem for me is that Julianne Hogh and (especially) Diego Boneta are HORRIBLE actors. Whenever they weren’t around the movie even managed to be quirky and funny (I adore cheesy musicals after all), but since they’re the main characters, it was ruined.

      • Becky1 says:

        I agree with you in regards to the two young leads. They had no chemistry and very little charisma. I thought Julianne Hough was particularly bad. She’s a very pretty girl and a good dancer but she’s not an actress. However, aside from that I thought ROA was pretty craptastic. Cheesy and way over the top but entertaining. I particularly enjoyed Alec Baldwin and Tom Cruise. Not a good movie but sometimes it’s fun to watch something silly and mindless.

    • REb says:

      Yep, all the reviews i read said his performance was the single positive aspect of the movie. Wowzers.

    • Karen says:

      If you haven’t seen it, how can you write it off as crap?
      I went to it and there was lots of funny parts. TC wasn’t believable as a wasted rock star but his singing was really good. Russel Brandt was funny and so was Catherine Zeta Jones. It was a cheesy good time.

    • fancyamazon says:

      We watched reviews of the movie after seeing the preview, and from the reviews I saw that were negative, most of them missed the point, IMO. One in particular had negative things to say about the lack of developed plot, etc…

      This movie was everything I expected it to be, and we and our friends had a blast. The music was from my high school years, although most of it was not as heavy as what I listened to at the time (Judas Priest, Black Sabbath, etc…I was into stuff that was already old, with a mix of newer metal, and a bit of Nazareth and Clapton, stuff like that). But I knew all the songs, and knew from the previews that they were going for over-the-top kitsch.

      The movie was worth seeing just for CZJ doing her thing. Hough was not impressive to me, she barely enunciates and it drove me crazy.

      It was never supposed to be a serious movie, and even Cruise is obviously just having a ball with it.

      I have not enjoyed Cruise at all since his couch-jumping etc…, but as in Pineapple Express (? I think that’s the one) he pokes fun at himself and the character he is portraying.

      In all, I think the movie was poorly marketed and should have done far better. They should have marketed it as a bit of a girl’s night out for my age bracket, like they did with those dumb sex and the city movies. (Don’t get me wrong, the TV show was good, the movies were shadows of the show, and awful)

  3. Marianne says:

    I think it bombed because it looked cheesy as f***! I sure as hell didn’t want to see it, for that reason. From reviews that I’ve read Tom wasn’t actually bad. Russell was probably the highlight…but the worst was Julianne Hough. That doesn’t surprise me as she’s not much of an actress or a singer.

  4. Cleveland Girl says:

    I think this movie will catch on with the older housewife generation ( ones who grew up the 80s ) and eventually come out ok. This was a really busy weekend for people. I will definitely see this, in fact it is the one movie I am looking forward to.

    • lucy2 says:

      older housewife = grew up in the 80s? Ouch.

      • Anguishedcorn says:

        Wow, way to piss in my Cheerios this morning.

      • midnightmoon says:

        BELLY LAUGHING at that comment. folks, if you didn’t live through the 70s & 80s w/a hot body & no guilt around sex, drugs & rock’n'roll, you haven’t LIVED. oy gevalt. and i probably won’t see this movie until it gets to Netflix, and i will give Tom Cruise exactly 60 seconds to prove he is the epitome of a burnt out sex god. which he WON’T. i was lucky enough to the babysitter to a rock & roll impresario who was the east coast version of Bill Graham. i got to hang out, at the age of 14, behind the scenes of the Capitol Theatre, and watched the rock’n'roll’ers go upstairs with the groupies. i saw Yes on their first american tour, Traffic, the Grateful Dead (had NO idea what all the fuss was about, and STILL DON’T!), Johnny Winter, Leon Russell (a favorite) and god knows how many other concerts. it was a BLAST and if i was the kind of writer who could tell a great story, and if i could REMEMBER it all (car accident wiped a LOT of memories out, or at least stowed them somewhere i can’t locate them anymore), i would have a very popular book on my hands. thing is, when you’ve seen the REAL DEAL, all these rock movies like Almost Famous and Rock of Ages just don’t CUT IT. and the reason they don’t do all that well at the box office (well, Almost Famous did well, but I hated it!), is that nothing can recreate the smells, sounds, tastes, feelings. something was DIFFERENT in the 60s and 70s, and life since then has seemed like a re-tread. very little newness is happening, and people are walking around like zombies.

        so, as an ANCIENT HOUSEWIFE w/an extremely hot 30 year old lover, i am thinking that this movie is going to die because it wasn’t made with authenticity-it was made to make money. and all the people who signed up for it didn’t make a stink about their horrific costumes, and they didn’t think about what a ‘crowd-pleasing’ stage play was going to look like in a movie. sorry for another long screed.

        i just HAD TO LAUGH. if you are under the age of 40, you don’t GET it. you weren’t there and you didn’t see what it was like. and for all the ‘coolness’ and ‘hipness’ of whatever you think is cool & hip these days, believe me. we broke the rules. we MADE the rules. we LIVED.

      • Zelda says:

        Yes, midnightmoon, the generations that came after yours, well we just might as well have not been born. I should just off myself for having graduated in the 90s. There’s nothing left for me. The only kind of fun that could possibly exist is your fun, obviously.

        *eyeroll*

        Watch it with the “back when I was your age things were so much better” statements. Nothing makes a person seem more out of touch.

        Also, Almost Famous was written and directed by Cameron Crowe, who was indeed an on-tour journallist for Rolling Stone in the 70′s. He based the entire screenplay on his actual experiences. So try again, on that one.

      • Zelda says:

        Yes, midnightmoon, the generations that came after yours, well we just might as well have not been born. I should just off myself for having graduated in the 90s. There’s nothing left for me. The only kind of fun that could possibly exist is your fun, obviously.

        *eyeroll*

        Watch it with the “back when I was your age things were so much better” statements. Nothing makes a person seem more out of touch.

        Also, Almost Famous was written and directed by Cameron Crowe, who was indeed an on-tour journallist for Rolling Stone in the 70′s. He based the entire screenplay on his actual experiences. So try again, on that one.

      • Zelda says:

        Yes, midnightmoon, the generations that came after yours, well we just might as well have not been born. I should just off myself for having graduated in the 90s. There’s nothing left for me. The only kind of fun that could possibly exist is your fun, obviously.

        *eyeroll*

        Watch it with the “back when I was your age things were so much better” statements. Nothing makes a person seem more out of touch.

        Also, Almost Famous was written and directed by Cameron Crowe, who was indeed an on-tour journallist for Rolling Stone in the 70′s. He based the entire screenplay on his actual experiences. So try again, on that one.

    • Cherry says:

      the ‘older housewife generation who grew up the 80s’? You mean women between 30 and 35?
      EDIT: You beat me to it, lucy2!

      • TheOriginalTiffany says:

        Wow, that was my age demographic. I don’t consider myself older. My 20 something friends don’t either, nor do I think of my friends that way who are still vital at 55.
        Not only are women my age still smart, strong and sexy, they have their own minds, money and know what they want in life AND are mature enough to achieve it. No offense to you younger gals, but growing up definitely has its perks.
        no matter, I might watch this on Netflix if it as bad as showgirls just for laughs. I’d never pay money to see this mess and you can hear all those songs played in cheesy bars every night. Better yet, get sirius radio and sing along in your car.

        Stacee Jaxx- ugh, eww and gross ninja turtle stomach.

      • Cherry says:

        @The original Tiffany: I know, it’s my age demographic, too, hence the comment. Seriously though- I think Cleveland Girl didn’t mean to offend anyone. I mean, I think it’s obvious to everyone that a woman between 30 and 35 does not belong to ‘the older housewife generation’ (if there is such a group of people)

      • Choupette says:

        Your ages are a bit off. Age 30 would have you born in 1982. Age 35 would have you born in 1977. 10 year olds don’t count for the ’80′s.

      • Rosie says:

        LOL, I’m 40 and not offended. Her day will come! :)

    • Chatcat says:

      Well Cleve Girly…coming from, as you describe, “the older housewife generation of the 80′s”, it takes alot to offend me and you have accomplished it! Having said that, let me tell you what us “older women” think. Tom Cruise is washed up (the MI series is carried by it’s name and genre)…right along side of Johnny Depp. Both their latest movies are big budget busts because us OLD LADIES have no interest in them. I called it here over a month ago when Tommygirl started hot and heavy promo for this movie.

      • ahoyhoy says:

        No offense to Cleveland Girl, but I can’t wait ’til she turns 40, and realizes she is still vital, sexy, smart, and worth a damn. And then some kid on the internet will call HER an ‘older housewife’. lol

        “Oh yeah…Life goes on…Long after the thrill of living is gone.
        They walk on.”

      • ahoyhoy says:

        Maybe we should use the old ‘Eskimo tradition’ and strap our ‘older’ women to boogie boards and shove them out to sea, so we don’t have to deal with so many ‘older housewives.’

        Sorry, I can’t stop laughing and/or crying at that statement.

      • Chatcat says:

        Ahoy…I agree! I will take all that I am and have been in my 40′s over anything under 35 (except giving birth to my 3 sons…my greatest accomplishement(s) bar none).

        Besides, who wants to go back and be reminded of all that was the 80′s hair! Having lived it I can assure you I don’t want to revisit THAT again! lol

    • NYC_girl says:

      I graduated high school in ’87 and I’m not a housewife, nor do I consider myself old. Damn. However, I don’t feel like listening to Poison again – most of the music back then (aka hair bands) was terrible. I don’t think I want to spend $12 to watch that again.

      • KardASSian Butt says:

        I was in HS in the 80s. I can’t say I graduated but I did end up with a college degree so it all worked out in the end. I was on the Sunset Strip playing underaged groupie because they were there. Poison was good live and at the time they were really nice guys but when I got my copy of “Look What the Cat Dragged In” and popped it in my Walkman – it SUCKED! I gave up hair metal the minute I heard it on cassette.

        I have very little 80s nostalgia. I hated most of the 80s and I thought we were gypped. Our older siblings had Led Zeppelin and The Who and we had Poison and Guns and Losers.

        I still listen Depeche Mode and the Cure. I like the random stuff like Lords of the New Church. I love Metallica and old U2 from before Bono decided to just phone it in from Africa (or those fancy White House parties to be honest).

        I’m thankful I was still young enough to get the early 90s because really that is what I still listen to. DM had several great CDS in the 90s. Metallica had the black album, the one decent Motley Crue Album came out in 89-90, all setting the stage for Nirvana, Soundgarden, Pearl Jam and my beloved NIN.

        When the Rock of Ages musical came to LA, I wasn’t going to touch it with a 10 foot pole. I wasn’t sure what it was about but I heard it was somehow related to Bret Michaels and while he was a cute and sweet boy in 1985 he was not attractive in 2009.

        My friend born in 1976 dragged her hubby born in 1968 to the musical. She loved it because it reminded her for being a little girl. He fell asleep.

        I don’t think anyone wanted to see this. I think even those who might have been curious stayed away because they already saw the musical.

        I can’t quite blame Tom Cruise, I blame the topic and the genre. It made me think of Cop Rock or Glee with adults (and I hate Glee).

        It didn’t have a gimmick like John Trashvolta dressed as a fat chick married to Chris Walken (it would have been less funny without Chris!).

        If making movies out of musicals is Adam Shankman’s schtick – how about Wicked? I would see it for the sets alone.

        PS: Unlike the fawning masses I have not been impressed with TCs singing. It sounds like a bad Def Leppard coverband. However, I saw an extended trailer on Extra and Alec Baldwin who I find hideous and heinous, IRL has a GREAT voice.

      • Esmom says:

        I graduated high school in ’85 and I have a ton of nostalgia for the 80s…but not this genre of music. I didn’t listen to it back then and I have no desire to listen to it now.

        The music that still makes me smile at remembering the magic of the times (and my teenage and college years) is early REM, early U2, The Smiths, Depeche Mode, OMD, Tears for Fears, Til Tuesday, to name a few…and none of the music from ROA. I guess I was more of an “alternative” girl than a rocker chick, lol.

      • Tara says:

        Omg KardASSian, haven’t thought of Lords of the New Church in forever! Think I’m gonna go buy me some in iTunes… And a little Echo & the Bunnymen to boot. As for ROA, yeah that’s just the sorta thing I spent the 80s trying to avoid.

    • Choupette says:

      Let me set you straight. I graduated HS in 1987. I am not old. Am I older than you? Most likely. A lot less judgemental too. I am not a housewife. I am NOT going to see this crap. Lots of us that grew up in the ’80′s didn’t listen to Hair Bands. Talk about stereotyping!

      And TC can sing? I sure hope he did a better job than when he sang “Freefallin” by Tom Petty in “Jerry Maguire”. That was painfully embarrassing.

    • NerdMomma says:

      Damnnnnn! Well, I grew up in the 80′s and I’m tempted by the music to suffer through this film- because I love some Bon Jovi and Poison! So that’s fair enough.

      But I’m a single working mother. Who on earth uses the term “housewife” anymore anyway?

      • Carolyn says:

        Hehe I’m loving this thread. Class of 1988. Jon Bon Jovi, Simon Le Bon and John Taylor are still ridiculously good-looking. YES with all who still like old U2 before Bono decided to go all righteous and preachy!!! Joshua Tree still is an amazing album. Yes I used the world “album”. No I’m not living in the 80′s….just recognise the good stuff for what it was.

    • bluhare says:

      I get comments about being old all the time due to my posting name which came out of going grey very prematurely and not colouring it. Half the time I say something someone doesn’t like I get “yeah right, grandma” or something like that. Interesting how people think getting older is bad. It isn’t. I wouldn’t go back for anything.

    • hairball says:

      Older house wife….? Most women actually went to college and have careers. They’re not wearing an apron only there to serve their chillins’ and man.

    • RN says:

      Don’t hold your breath. We “older housewives” are much too intelligent to waste our money on this tripe.

    • mayamae says:

      And so it begins.

      Cleveland Girl – this too shall pass. Keep your head down and do not respond.

    • TXCinderella says:

      I’m one of those older “ladies from the 80′s” and I will own that, but this movie didn’t really catch my interest that much, and to this day I’m still a fan of “hair band” rock music. I just think they should have picked someone younger to play the lead, despite the fact that people said TC was great in it.

    • I would go see this movie,but I can’t seem to find the strength to get up out of my…rocking chair

    • anne says:

      Hey – I had no desire to see this movie and I was in my prime in the 80′s.

      • NYC_girl says:

        Does this movie have the original music in it, or covers? I can see the movie not doing well if there are covers of all of those 80s songs – unlike “The Wedding Singer,” which had the originals and did very well. I think I heard a cover of the Poison song – didn’t sound good back then, and the remake is even worse! Just sayin…

    • sarahtonin says:

      This older housewife was having too much fun being a kid in the 80s and 90s to be a teenage housewife. Call me old-fashioned, but I waited until I was “old” and in my 30s to settle down. (Contraception is good like that). I have to take my apron off and unchain myself from the sink to go to work every day though. Lucky hubby is really good about not expecting me to be at the door with his whisky and slippers at 5pm every day because I work 12 hours shifts. ;)

      For the record, this old has-been doesn’t get nostalgic about hair bands. I didn’t like them then, so I sure as hell don’t need to see some crazy man do a poor imitation now. Besides, if I dance I might piss myself from loss of bladder control, slip over in the puddle and break my other hip, or electrocute myself with my hearing aid.

  5. lucy2 says:

    It got bad reviews, so I bet many people decide to save their $10 or spend it on a different film.
    I don’t think Tom has much appeal anymore (MI is it’s own thing that people will go see, regardless of him I think), and it’s based on a musical that isn’t nearly as popular as something like Mamma Mia.

  6. paola says:

    I guess those creepy eyes don’t help the cause..

  7. GoodCapon says:

    I want to watch it but everyone I know doesn’t want to and I never want to go to theatres alone! I guess I dodged a bullet here :D

  8. neelyo says:

    On Broadway, the audience for this show is primarily tourists who came of age with these songs and want to see some theatre that’s not too ‘theatre-y’. They drink beer, sing along with the actors, etc. It’s as much of an event as it is a show. As far as shows go, it’s weak with a very narrow appeal.

    This cast was never going to set the box office on fire, Cruise included. The only way he still makes money is when he jumps off of buildings or things are blowing up around him. The director Adam Shankman is a hack. Sure he’s done several musicals but none of them are good. He lacks vision, originality or any wit. He’s certainly no Vincente Minnelli or Stanley Donen. Looks like it’s back to Proactive commercials for Julianne Hough!

    • Jover says:

      +1 neelyo for hough and proactive ads; she’s a more likable version than megan fox, the studios desperately tried to make megan happen but her complete lack of talent and crappy bitchy attitude killed it no amount of pr makeover could rescue her; no fan of rock is going to buy hough as a rocker chick – didn’t she start in country pop. SHe’s just a generic average talent blonde as if hollyweird isn’t filled with enough of that.

  9. the original bellaluna says:

    The 80′s have already been done, lived through, and NOTHING short of all those hair bands and the rest of the music scene at that time will substitute sufficiently.

    Did anyone else notice that all the citizens of The Capitol look like they stepped right out of an Adam Ant video? (Hunger Games – watched it this weekend.)

    • TheOriginalTiffany says:

      Haha! I hate the biggest crush on him back in the day. Ant music, stand and deliver.

      Good eye on the movie. What did you think? Had even my big kids crying when Rue died. They never cry, whilst I cry at everything.

      Including the win by the douchebag Heat last night. Grrrrrr.

      • the original bellaluna says:

        Thanks! I liked it, but I felt like they left out quite a bit. (How are supposed to feel Katniss’ pain when she realizes that the mayor’s daughter – who gave her the Mockingjay pin – and her entire family died in the bombing, when they made it Prim who gave her the pin?)

        I did cry when Rue died, and Katniss decorated her body with flowers and gave her salute to District 11. But where was her gift of bread from them? That’s really important!

      • OriginalTiffany says:

        ITA, as did my son. There were so many important details in the book.
        I think everyone should read them before seeing the movies. Kind of like HP, the books were great. Yo just can’t fit in all the stuff in 2 or so hours.
        Stephen King-another author whose books are so much more nuanced than the movies.
        The Shining and Misery excepted.

  10. Candyland says:

    Spinal Tap did it best.

    • TheOriginalTiffany says:

      That’s because it went to 11!

      You are so right.

      “talk about mudflaps my girls got em.”

      You cannot beat smell the glove for rock irony. Hello Cleveland!

      • Veruca says:

        Hey Tiff,

        If you’re ever in Milwaukee, we’ll have to go to Shank Hall and see if the dwarves will crush Stonehenge…

      • OriginalTiffany says:

        If I get there you’ll know! Going on 15 cities in 2.5 years, that is crazy.
        Boston until August, DC, then end the year in Atlanta and start the new in Miami.

        AWESOME news though, they extended us in SoCal for next year. Nov-to June in Irvine and Santa Monica. I can have my horses back, compete and train for endurance rides and see family and live on the beach. Happy Dance-followed by Puerto Vallarta then Austrailia and NZ for 18 months!

  11. sup says:

    The promoting thing aside I think it’s ’cause Tom is too old to play a rocker. It’s not convincing. Had they found a younger (and less frowned upon) actor it could have worked. Also from what I gather this is a musical, and most people I see don’t seem to like musical unless the songs are really great (like Chicago) but if they’re below average like in Burlesque, the average Joe will not see your movie. And gay people are still in the minority so even if they love it it might still bomb at the box office. Anyway. who didn’t see this coming? BTW I’m planning to catch it on DVD, just for the heck of it

  12. lisa says:

    A lot of people that have seen it say that Tom was the best part. I think the problem is the script. Most people say there was not much of a story outside the music. Which as many have noted is a niche thing. But the writing was terrible. And many noted that the Direction by Shankman was horrible too.

  13. Mia 4S says:

    No one cares about Cruise outside of action. Let’s be honest MI4 was a terrific movie and would have done well regardless (it was all about Renner and Pegg for me). His next few movies will tell the tale. He’ll be fine, but never as big as he was (not sure that will be enough for him?). At least this will probably kill that awful idea for a solo movie about his Tropic Thunder character! Hey Tom, RDJ got an Oscar nomination for that movie…then he moved on for God’s sake!

  14. Alexa says:

    Please Hollywood stop trying to make Julianne Hough happen, all her movies flop

  15. sallyreo says:

    I would not pay a $1.00 to see that old
    man!

  16. Jessica says:

    My husband and I saw it this weekend. I was suprised, it was a very entertaining movie! It had a good story line and I loved the music! I thought Tom Cruise did an excellent job, so did Russell. I think you should at least give it a chance!

  17. sarahtonin says:

    I’m glad it’s tanking. It looked like total crap, but the general public are into really awful films, (Avatar the best film ever? The f^ck?), so it was hard to say how it would go. I thought he was an odd choice for Stacee given that people are over him, so he can’t pull numbers like he used to. I figured CO$ paid for his bit, because that’s how he usually gets parts- by buying them.

    I do hope this is the end of Tommygirl and all his crap. He’s 50 and rich, time to fade away into obscurity and give up on the Oscar dream. There’s a good reason why he doesn’t get real awards – because the people who award them are the same ones who don’t give him work. I have never understood why people kept showing up to his films in droves when it’s the same nauseating, tosser character in every one of them, i.e. him. Doesn’t anyone else think he seems really insincere and comes across like he’s acting IRL too?

    • lisa says:

      I thought I was in a small minority of people that HATED Avatar. I thought it was visually nice, but there was not an interesting story to be found. ALL CGI. that was it.

      • Amelia says:

        I co-sign on the Avatar hate. I bought the DVD because I missed it in cinemas and literally fell asleep watching it. Just blue people running away from monsters and shagging, basically.

      • sarahtonin says:

        There’s a minority out there who don’t enjoy mindless Hollywood blockbusters, we’re few and far between though.

        Avatar looked great, I agree, but the storyline was just woeful. It seemed like they didn’t have to bother trying to write a decent script because no one would notice anyway once dazzled by the pretty pictures. They were right too, they didn’t need to. It was just eye candy for imbeciles, who don’t care that it totally ripped off a Disney film. Avatar was Pocahontas in space, a children’s story for idiot adults.

      • Mauibound says:

        Personally I thought avatar was dances with wolves in space. Visually apealling but that horse has already run!

      • sarahtonin says:

        I haven’t seen Dances With Wolves but I remember people saying it was like it. Maybe they should’ve called it Dances with Smurfs? Rips off Last Samurai too, btw and a whole heap of other ‘going native’ stories. James Cameron even admits it’s a ‘classic tale,’ ie told a million times before. Shame he doesn’t admit that it’s total crap but he makes a shitload of money and doesn’t have to try anymore so, f^ck it, why not coast out his last days on a no brainer?

        Btw, TV Tropes has a nice list of all the cinematic clichés and devices it uses… if you ever want to write an essay on how awful it is. http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Film/Avatar

      • Janet says:

        I put Avatar on my list of Crappy Movies You Can’t Stop Watching. The plot was terrible and the dialogue was so bad it was funny. But the visuals blew me out of my shoes. Just turn off the sound and enjoy it.

    • KardASSian Butt says:

      I can’t imagine Avatar without the 3D movie theater experience. I didn’t love or hate it. It was better than Titanic but to me anything is.

      Me watching Avatar – running inner dialog “Gee… that is so purrrrty! OMG! I looooooove the blues and the pinks…. he used alllllll my favorite colors…. DAMMIT why are there PEOPLE HERE RUINING my eyegasm… OK here we go…. oooooh…. look at those bugs…. the tree of magical sex looks like something from the original Tinkerbell drawings when I was working with that group… oooohhh… nice giant teradachtyl thing…. ooooh… look at that landscape – it looks like my old fantasy landscape computer desktop pics from the 90s…. I loved that should look for a few and make a screen saver… Oh it’s over… the noble white man saves the savage from the ignoble whiteman again but at least it was preety – Aliens was not pretty… THE END”

      I never got the DVD/BD because the parts I liked would not be on it.

      That said – those are the only movies I pay to see these days. If it is a visual spectacle I will shell out, if it is a story/character driven piece I will wait for Netflix or Amazon prime digital rental.

  18. Jover says:

    Great comments all yes alexa nothing will beat spinal tap sad to say i bet today’s gen wouldn’t get that hilarious sendup; and kudos original bellaluna for the adam ant reference; the reviews i read panned it for cheesiness and maybe people don’t want to hear bad renditions of mediocre 80s songs; No Tears for fears, thompson twins, simple minds, U2 in the song list etc. but sister christian. come on. If i want real rock i’ll go to the 70s anyway. (Maybe Deep Purple for starters).

    • OriginalTiffany says:

      Don’t say that! Hubs was in Tears for Fears for 16 years! Awesome still, but don’t tour very much anymore. Roland is writing novels.

    • KardASSian Butt says:

      @Cameron – did you miss Britpop in the 90s? Blur and Oasis had a pretty big impact here. Bush was big but they are the English Creed so I kind of ignore them when it comes to impact even though I bought a couple of CDs. Coldplay was huge in the 2000s and Muse is the only newish band I can listen to. I think the Brits have done fine in the last 15 years.

      The only 80s bands I still love are U2 (pre preachy Bono), Depeche Mode, the Cure and Metallica – really those are it. The others – I will listen to pre-1985 hair metal, Adam Ant, Tears for Fears, etc for nostalgia’s sake but that is it. No late 80s hair metal except Dr. Feelgood.

      Oh and why doesn’t Aerosmith DIE already. I’ve been waiting since I was 10 years old maybe younger – when was Toys in the Attic? Their last decent album.

  19. Abby says:

    I saw it this weekend (lost the movie choice coin toss). It was soooo overacted by everyone and the story just fell flat. I don’t expect much from musicals. Mama Mia drives me nuts because I try and look for a good plot and there just isn’t one, but at least it’s good fun and the movie was well acted and beautiful. This movie is missing the fun. I just think some of these newer musicals which rely on popular music but are missing a story will never really translate well to the screen as you don’t have the same kind of audience involvement at a movie that you do in a theater environment.

  20. G says:

    I think they asked Cruise to distance himself. Wrong demographic for summer movie going. The youngsters do not care for this music. I’ll definately catch it on video, though.

  21. Brooke says:

    I loved the Broadway show and will definitely see the movie although I heard it was poorly directed. I don’t think there’s anything to fear – this movie will easily make its money back overseas, where they still love Tom Cruise and the USA of the 1980s.

  22. bea says:

    In the commercials they were running where I live, you see CZJ the MOST – which is super weird, bc she is wearing a business suit and singing.

    The whole thing seems very misguided.

  23. Liberty says:

    I would have seen it for Russell, who I have loved ever since his turn in Forgetting Sarah Marshall. I will avoid because it looks boring and like a tv movie rehash with tired old obvious 80s music and most of all because it stars a creepy little control freak who thinks he is alien Jesus and has turned a child into a surly confused brat with the gaze of a 40 year old barfly.

  24. OXA says:

    Also this weekend was Father’s Day which is really about kids and what kid would choose to see Tommy in chaps over a good cartoon.

  25. valleymiss says:

    Spoiler alerts ahead: I saw it yesterday and I enjoyed it! It was big dumb fun. :-) If that makes sense. Lol Tom Cruise was good (and I hate TC), Russell Brand was hilarious. Julianne Hough was fine (but her voice is suited to pop, not rock/metal), Diego Boneta had zero charisma. Malin Ackerman was cute. Mary J. Blige needed to just go away (sorry, not a fan. I would have rather they cast Queen Latifah in that role). Catherine Zeta-Jones was hilarious. My 1 beef, since I’m a huge fan of that era of music, is that they *should have* had Diego’s character sing “Oh Sherrie” (by Steve Perry, the singer of Journey) to Julianne Hough’s character, since her name was Sherrie! Duh! They gave that song a few notes, and then stopped it.

  26. kim says:

    From the moment they announced Tom Cruise, I knew I wouldn’t see it. So unappealing and as an aging rocker? In his dreams…ugh

  27. Diane says:

    As much as I LOVE Alec Baldwin, not even he could make me go see this movie.

  28. Adrien says:

    I didn’t know the box office success of this movie relies on Russell Brand. You can completely miss his parts in the trailers.
    Let’s wait for the international box office performance of this movie before we can call this a total pancake. People are suckers for 80s stuff. 75M is not that hard to break even.
    I’m saddened by Prometheus numbers. I’m also saddened that Madagascar 3 had a higher RT rating than Prometheus.

    • Jover says:

      Saw prometheus over the weekend with family very good and entertaining; the screenplay for rock of ages drew much of the critics ire; and original tif i’m not sure i get your comment i wasn’t criticizing Tears for Fears, the song list included too many overplayed 80s songs – hit me with your best shot, any way you want it,etc. – and left out a lot of good stuff like tears for fears.

      • OriginalTiffany says:

        Well, they were awfully huge back then, but not a good fit for this music. I don’t think I was offended, I don’t keep tabs:)

        TFF always put out great music. Loved them way before hubby joined the band. Amazing people too, very generous and kind.

        I loved those tours, staying at the W and eating and drinking all the fine food I could fit down. That was before the eating issues. Sob.

      • NYC_girl says:

        @Tiff – I remember when I was in high school we used to buy these imported British music mags around the corner from the school, and there was a piece on Curt Smith and his wife living in Bath, and how they had to either take out the windows or somehow alter their home to get a piano into it. I have no idea how I remember that.

  29. Bc says:

    That pic of julianne hough has bothered me since the first time I saw it. Wtf is she doing with her mouth?!

  30. Dusty says:

    Many reviews are pointing to the crappy screenwriting so let’s go back to my conspiracy theory that Jennifer and Justin skipped town because he know his awful writing once again poisoned a good story.

    • sullivan says:

      Sure, I’ll go there. If Cruise allegedly went to Iceland to distance himself from this bomb then it’s not a stretch to think that Thereoux & girlfriend were doing the same thing. Especially since TPB were promoting him as the screenwriter. Screenwriters aren’t usually used as a selling-point, are they?

      • Camille (The original) says:

        Not unless they are Oscar winning ones, which that guy is not. And if Iron Man 2 is an example of his work, I don’t think he ever will.

      • pwal says:

        This is why I rolled my eyes at the Details write-up. Sure, he talks about the satisfaction he gets from writing and how it’s a powerful position to hold and then, here comes this dookey.

        Yes, writers are allowed missteps, but it helps when the writers don’t take a pious tone when actors make choices based on the money and then he turns around and makes choices about writing/rewriting scripts based on the money. Damn straight… writers deserve credit for writing good stuff, but they have to actually write good stuff, not just fcuk HW’s favorite ditched ex-wife.

        And if there’s another attempt to convince the world that this plunker is entitled to a $20M salary — lick b@lls!!!

  31. garvels says:

    “is Tom Cruise to Blame”-Yep!

  32. Toni says:

    Brad Pitt would have been more appealing and believable as an aging rocker. Definitely would have brought in movie goers but he probably wouldn’t have accepted the role.

    • lisa says:

      I would see Brad in anything.. :)

      but I will give Tom props. He has been trying something new. And at this point in his career that is a good thing. We see so many men of that generation or older going back to what they have already done over and over. Will, Johnny, Bruce, Will F, so many that keeping doing the same roles. At least Tom tried something different.

      But I saw an interview he did on Extra or some show, and he was a bit full of himself. Taking about his body and how fit he was. I didn’t like the posturing. But I guess he was working the role.

      I prefer actors doing different things. Tired of the sequels of years ago.

      • Tiffin says:

        The thing is though, he’s just like Bruce Willis and those others because it would appear it’s only his action movies people want to see. Now he’s just not believable in other roles, for example – romantic, comedy or musical.

  33. jwoolman says:

    Seems too soon to tell- Madagascar 3 came out at the same time and it’s the beginning of summer/dad’s day etc. Besides, there are other ways to see movies now. Lots of people wait for on demand cable, etc. for recent movies or just wait longer for the DVD or downloadable or (if really cheap like me) patiently wait for it to come on tv.

  34. The Original Mia says:

    For once, Tom probably isn’t to blame. I remember when Lions for Lambs came out. He was miscast & this was about the time he was in full-on crazy mode. He was to blame for that failure.

    This movie sounded stupid from the get go. Granted I’ve never seen the Broadway show, but it didn’t sound like it would translate well to the big screen. And that brings me to the scriptwriter…Justin Theroux. His name is in big bold type in the ads. He wrote this mess, therefore he shoulders the blame, along with the director.

    • gg says:

      I agree.

      The reason this movie was destined to fail is that historically, whenever anybody tries to make a rock and roll movie, it never works. The whole nature of rock and roll is exclusive to goobers in the movie business trying to replicate it to an acceptable format. Actors are not rockers and cannot portray same effectively. That goes double for lawyers and judges. They are just not the right material.

      • Jover says:

        Exactly gg of all genre’s rock is live loud vicsceral and must be experienced in person to get the full effect; it generally falls flat and comes off as affected when translated to the 2d movie screen. Robert plant never behaved like tc on stage; he didn’t have to.

      • gg says:

        The rock stars are always played way too over the top. They were a hell of a lot cooler than portrayed in movies like this, and very laid back. No try-hards ever made it big back in those days. Only now. True “rock star coolness” for lack of a better word, is LOW KEY. Not THIS CRAP.

        It’s about the same calibre as that awful Whitney Houston rock star movie. Totally not buyable.

  35. Kp says:

    What a coincidence… right after the film comes out Jen and Mr. Munster’s European photo ops end!

    Watch, Justin will now try to distance himself from this film. It has a bad script.

    Also Iron Man 2 had a bad script that Justin wrote! He is not that talented at all.

  36. Gene Parmesan says:

    As long as Julianne is with Ryan methinks she will be fine. Its how she got more exposure and these roles to be honest.

  37. Suzy (from Ontario, Canada) says:

    Just because you can doesn’t mean you should! Tom Cruise may be a good singer and do a good job in this role but just the idea of him playing a rock star…doesn’t work for me. He’s no Steve Tyler and I think taking this role just made him look narcissistic and desperate for be back at his peak instead of recognizing that he’s getting older and might want to look at roles that fit better. Just my opinion.

    I have zero desire to see this movie. Just has no appeal for me and I was in my twenties in the 1980s. For me, the 1970′s were more about rock (Led Zeppelin, Pink Floyd, Bowie, etc.) and the 1980′s were more about punk and new wave (I was in university in the early 80′s and that was all you heard).

    As for Russell Brand – I like him. I loved him in Forgetting Sarah Marshall and Get Him to the Greek. I think he comes across quite charming and fun in interviews. Julianne Hough…very pretty but ultimately kind of bland and boring. I think she would’ve been better off persuing her country singing career rather than movies. I think the whole (fake) relationship with Ryan Seacrest actually makes me think less of her, even though everyone seems to be in fake relationships in Hollywood these days. At least there is no children involved. I think anyone that brings a child into a fake relationship is really horrible.

  38. Lindy says:

    I went to see it yesterday. I was in middle school when all those songs and bands were big, and I admit that I had a total blast listening to the cheesy hair metal rock songs.

    I loathe TC and his nonsense, but I also have to admit that he kind of kicked ass as the I-take-myself-too-seriously rock legend. (Assuming he was playing it with tongue firmly planted in cheek. Which I think he was).

    The problem as I see it was that they didn’t promote it right at ALL! I mean, based on a couple trailers I’d seen, I had no clue whatsoever that this movie was basically the 80′s glam rock version of Mama Mia, or that it was a musical. I never could tell what the hell to make of it from the ads and trailers, and probably wouldn’t have seen it if a friend hadn’t dragged me.

    I’m glad I did–it was totally adorable and fun.

    • Jessica says:

      It took me by suprise too!! I thought it was very entertaining! :)

    • Boo says:

      I agree with you…they didn’t seem to know how to classify it (comedy? drama? this is the first I’ve heard of its Mama Mia-ness, though I did get that it was from a BW show I’ve barely heard of), so any potential audience wrote it off as a mess.

    • whatthehell456 says:

      I loved it too….I think the problem is that everyone seems to be picking apart this movie and dissecting it like it’s got some sort of “deep undertones” to it….It doesn’t!!!! It’s just cheesy rock n’ roll fun!

    • Lindy says:

      I have a friend who writes a brilliant pop culture blog, and apparently there is name for this genre:
      the jukebox musical

      Because it’s basically an excuse for performers to sing songs that many people already know and love while acting out a very bare-bones plot that will always end up with one or more happy couples.

      And yeah, I thought (based on advertising) that it was going to be soe kind of “rise and fall” story of an Axl Rose-style fading glam rock star.

      I do hope people give it a chance. I mean, look, don’t expect genius acting (though TC I must admit begrudgingly does pull it off). And don’t expect an elaborate plot or deep character development.

      But if you ever catch yourself singling aloud in the car when an old Whitesnake song comes on, or doing air guitar to Poison when no one else is around, then this movie will be fun.

  39. RobN says:

    The problem is subject matter. Having lived through the 80′s, I see no reason to live through it again. It was all pretty lame and embarrassing the first time around.

  40. Reece says:

    I saw it. It’s not awful. Kinda what I expected from Adam Shankman, Glee-ified 80′s music.
    They are comparing it to Mamma Mia and MM opened in late July, August with no competition. This is height of summer with tons of comp. Bad move on WB’s part imo.

  41. Hope says:

    You know what their problem was? Too much hype for too dang long. This movie has been shilled since it started shooting, and people are already bored with the concept. It doesn’t seem fun, or fresh. It seems like the bigger stars are in it for the paycheck, and it doesn’t have any charisma. I haven’t seen it, but from the trailers alone it just doesn’t seem like anything special. And yes, Tom is largely to blame.

    Had they gone full bore camp on this it would have worked. AND if they had kept it kinda clean, gotten the PG rating and marketed to the tweener Gleek fanbase. THEN it would have been a hit. What 20 or 30-something (the ages they were marketing to) wants to see Tom Cruise, of all people, rock out? You know what would have been awesome? Alec Baldwin as the washed up rock god. That I would pay $10 to go see.

    • RobN says:

      Totally agree. When you’re already tired of hearing about a movie before it’s even come out, that’s bad marketing. Throw in the fact that most people thought that Cruise was the central figure in the movie and now they’re bored and misinformed.

  42. skilo says:

    I love the 80′s I love most of the music, I like Russel Brand, but I won’t even watch Rock of Ages on video because I just can’t stand Tom Cruise.

  43. TXCinderella says:

    I probably won’t go see it. I’ll wait for it to go to DVD. TC just doesn’t do it for me. Despite the fact that he still looks good for his age, I think they should have picked someone younger.

  44. skuddles says:

    I suspect people are just too turned off Cruise now to bother watching his movies – or at least they don’t want to have to pay to see them.

  45. Lia says:

    Cruise’s ridiculous reliance on scientology has damaged his image as a man. He just appears weak-minded now, being unable to make decisions on his own without asking the cult first. They will, of course, make sure Tom stays dependent on them because they are surely dependent on his money…… I’m not going to pay to see Cruise in a movie knowing that even one cent of my money might end up in scientolgy’s pocket.

  46. rumbleseat says:

    The reason it bombed is the reason most big-budget craptaculars bomb: It sucked.

    Yup, Tom Cruise gave the most substantial performance in that movie, and it wasn’t entertaining or convincing. He also was on screen for like 5% of the movie, so so much for all the Tom fans when word gets out.

    Then you have Julianne Hough, who is showing herself more and more to be a self-involved twit with the range of a Barbie doll. She sang every freakin song in this annoyingly fake high- pitched little girl voice which I suppose she thinks makes her sound adorable and sweet. Actually it makes her sound like Whitegirl Kardashian.

    The best things about this movie were Russell Brandt’s 15 minutes and the overall cuteness of JH’s love interest. Do NOT waste your time and money seeing this movie.

  47. tmnt says:

    Last picture of Cruise looks like he’s, well… a mic in one hand and a weird cheek bulge? I don’t know. You decide.

  48. Bette says:

    I will probably see it, but just for Russell. I can’t believe that industry article tried to blame the flop on Russell — he’s hardly the star (although he probably should be) and it’s not being marketed around him! And furthermore, most of the reviews I’ve read have said that he’s one of the highlights. He’s probably the only one in the film who comes across even remotely believable as a rocker (although I know Tom Cruise has gotten some decent reviews for his performance too).

    What I’m not liking about this movie, from what I’ve heard/seen so far, is that it seems so toothless and tame. The draw of this music in the 80s was how sleazy and decadent it was. I was a teenager in the 80s and for a certain period of time, I loved some (but not all) of these bands. The good ones had a bit of edge … like Guns N’ Roses for example. It’s easy to lump it all together as just ‘campy 80s hair bands’ now, but if you lived through it then, you know that being into metal (even hair metal when it first came out) WAS kind of a fringe thing, when everyone else was listening to Madonna and Michael Jackson and Bruce Springsteen.

    So anyway, my point is, even as a person who liked metal back in the day, including some hair metal, this film doesn’t really appeal to me because it doesn’t seem authentic and it seems like a Disney version of that time period. Who wants to see squeaky-clean Julianne Hough and Diego Boneta crooning songs that were originally meant to be rebellious? There’s nothing rebellious about this movie, if the commercials and reviews and clips I’ve seen are to be believed. As I said, the only one who seems to fit the spirit of rock at all is Russell Brand.

  49. Flora says:

    I watched this film last week and I must admit that Cruise is the best thing in it until he starts singing. Paul Giamatti is great as always but he’s underused.

    Julianne and Diego don’t convince for 1 second. Russel Brand is doing his same old shtick and it’s simply not funny anymore. Catherine Zeta-Jones is overacting like you wouldn’t believe and Mary J Blige can’t act at all.

    Save your money and watch an episode of Glee instead. Just as horrible, but it’s free on tv.

  50. Memphis says:

    The movie didn’t seem to me like it would appeal to a large demographic anyway. I mean, I’m a rock loving child of the 80′s so I will be seeing it because I will “get it” and can remember the time…. but my teenage son…yeah, not so much.

    I don’t think you can really blame Tom for the failure. I think it’s more the type of movie made than his appearance in it.

  51. nicaw says:

    Even though this is an assemble cast movie, Tom Cruise is the biggest name. With that I find it surprising that he did not (or would not) do any promotion of the movie.

    I grew up on the 80s and maybe the producers didn’t realize that the music with the musical on Broadway has probably run it’s course. Doesn’t bode well for the musical tour of the Broadway production. Or does it?

  52. normades says:

    The movie didn’t try hard enough to bring in a younger demographic. Diego “who”? Juliane does not have a following either. They should have put some real stars in the “young” roles. Justin and Selena? It sounds crappy anyway, might as well reached out to the tweeners.

  53. Camille (The original) says:

    Considering that ROA looked really, really, really bad this news doesn’t surprise me, at all.
    I thought it looked like it was just as much the script/writings fault as it was the bad acting. Terrible.

    And hopefully this will put the final nail in the coffin for Julianne Hough and her hoped for movie career. The girl has NO charisma. She should stick to that DWTS crap.

  54. maria says:

    I think the movie flopped because the people it was supposed to appeal to (people who were teens in the 80s, like me) are sick to death of Mr. Arrogant Tom Cruise. And most of us can’t stand that Julianna chick either. Had they cast it better, we might have gone. I won’t see anything with Tom Cruise in it. Now Russell Brand can sing, is funny and is LIKABLE. They should have cast him as the lead. Then I would have paid money to see it.

  55. samira677 says:

    It’s way too easy to blame Tom or any actor for the failure of a movie. I think it’s more that nobody wanted to see the movie. It looked cheesy and not in a fun way like The Wedding Singer was.

    • Jordan says:

      I agree with you. I guess since the actors are the ones out in front, it’s easier to blame them than the writers and directors. Plus, everyone seems to want to blame TC and see his career go down after the “couch jumping incident”. Yeah, it was eye roll worthy, but honestly, if Chris Brown, Christian Bale, or Woody Allen (from the other post) still have careers, please tell me what was so horrific about couch jumping. Was it because it was Oprah’s couch and he didn’t take off his shoes?

  56. girlindisguise says:

    I graduated in the class of ’87 and while I did enjoy some hair band music, the fact that Tom Cruise is in this movie with a bunch of d-listers (sans Alec Baldwin) scared me off. I will rent it when it comes out on Netflix.

    I’m thinking of seeing the stage version instead although I heard it’s nothing but a big cheese sandwich.

    LOL at the older housewife comment. I’m 43, single and I feel as young as I did at 21.

  57. Ann Scott says:

    A fake Mormon Jennifer Aniston wanna bee and her wingnut costar Tom Scientology Cruise. Get out the vomit bucket.

  58. junegorilla says:

    Class of 83 here. I am skipping thise movie because Tom Cruise is a creepy gross douchebag. Alec Baldwin is overrated. Lame casting for certain. (Except for CZJ who I LOVE!)

    Also Glee has kind of worn me out on waxing nostalgic about eighties pop/rock music.

  59. PS says:

    As a teen of the 80s and lover of this exact music, I think the movie is failing because they marketed it all wrong. It seems as though in the last few weeks, they have highlighted Tom Cruise. That will keep me away from anything. Horrible casting choice – - aside from being crazier than a monkey on crack, Tom Cruise does not equal rock and roll god in any world.

    I think if they had marketed this movie as being more nostalgic about the 80s, the great music, the horrendous fashion, the Aqua Net, etc., and stressed that it was a fun, albeit cheesy, look back, it would have done well. It could have been escapist fun.

    Now, however, it’s all about Tom! Cruise! As! A! Rockstar!

    And I’m not interested.

  60. Marybel says:

    I definitely would have gone to see it if Tiny Tom had not been in it. I despise him and all his deceptions.

  61. Marybel says:

    Tiny Tom is CREEPY, pathetic, not aging gracefully.

  62. cari says:

    ahahahaa ahahaa ahahaaaaa…

    Flop of Ages….Tommygirl deserves it.

  63. justforkicks says:

    Hi Original Tiffany, I live in Oz, I gather you’ve been out this way before?

  64. Brianna says:

    I just don’t find Tom Cruise convincing when he’s outside his niche (action films). I think Johnny Depp could have pulled this role off. He just oozes natural coolness that a rockstar has and he actually is a musician.

  65. carrie says:

    I hope Hollywood will finally stop casting bland and annoying non-actresses just because they date/marry someone famous. JH may be a good beard for Gaycrest, but I wouldn’t pay to watch her. Same thing for gold-diggers like Brooklyn Decker and Paula Patton.

  66. leslilly says:

    I haven’t seen Rock of Ages, but if I do see it, it’s because of Tom Cruise AND the music. His role is so different for him that it interested me. Frankly, the rest of the movie, without him, looks dull. Although I’ll give props to Catherine Zeta-Jones too – she’s always fun to watch.

  67. It is ME!! says:

    The trailer for this looked TERRIBLE.

    And I saw MI4 for Simon Pegg.

  68. Carpe Diem says:

    If it came on TV, I’d turn the channel. I find Tommy Girl repulsive.

  69. Razure says:

    I was dragged to the movie by a female friend. We’re both over 50. The audience consisted of 20 people all in their 60′s and 70′s. We were laughing about this watching the seniors tap their toes and wiggle to the music. I heard about the bad reviews so I was hesitant about seeing it. It is very cheesy but I actually liked the two leads and thought they worked well together. Tom Cruise got on my nerves and I thought his performace was mediocre. It was annoyingly slow and you waited until he….pronounced….every….word… It’s the monkey he has as a pet which steals the movie. Too much singing,(the entire cast) over singing (Mary J Blige). The plot is simple and at times cliched (Hough becomes a stripper and her boyfriend gets stuck in a boy band, they fall in love…there’s a misunderstanding…they break up….their lives go down the tubes until the finale…BUT THEY ARE NOT THE PROBLEM WITH THIS MOVIE…the dancing is…ugh…it was just plain bad). Baldwin and Brand camp it up and some of the scenes are eye rolling. Zeta Jones over acts
    I’ve seen a lot worse. It’s not the diaster I thought it would be. It’s a cheesy fun time.

  70. tcuppp says:

    the movie didn’t flop because people aren’t interested in the 80′s, on the contrary most of my gf’s born in the 90s have a fascination with LA and the whole sunset strip scene of the 80s it was fantastic! Look at it today and it just filled with boring hookers and tweakers, but back in the 80s it was ELECTRIC! The movie flopped because it is ostensibly a “rock/metal” storyline filled with campy showtunes, sing alongs and jazz hands…that s**t doesnt appeal to rockers so they screwed themselves by marketing it as an 80s hard rock/ metal piece when it is really no more than a glorified episode of G*** (which Shankman has already worked on)

  71. midnightmoon says:

    @zelda-i can’t seem to get the reply button to work from your response. clearly that original comment, INTENDED to be ironic, hit a nerve. i then unintentionally offended you (and probably others. no, you’re absolutely right. us oldsters have to give up that OUR time was so special, but there is a whole lotta not knowing going on.

    every generation has special times, and every graduating high school senior thinks (well, whatever they think) that it was a super-duper special time.

    Cameron Crowe was THERE, yes, but he has specialized in bowdlerizing the things/times he ‘recreates’ and makes things schmaltzy and kind of cringe-worthy. Fast Times at Ridgemont High wasn’t bad, but it was in fact kinda idiotic. so, in my humble opinion, was that movie that George Lucas did about the 60s. many of these movies has a bit of a taste of how it was, but they are comedic and not really authentic feeling.

    almost famous was just dumb in so many ways.

    anyway, THIS OLD HOUSEWIFE, who idiotically took something personally that was supposed to be funny (i should LEARN! this is CELEBITCHY!) just wanted to share her own personal perspective. from BEING THERE in the 70s and 80s. right there, in the rock world.

    and, with that perspective, i saw a million miles away that rock of ages was gonna be a disaster movie, as in financial failure, and it’s sad to me, because if they did it with love & affection & silliness & HUMOR, it coulda been a good movie, instead of a drag.

    so, zelda, please forgive me for my unintended disrespect. carry on. LIVE!

    :)

  72. Libraesque says:

    tc doing action movies for another decade????? He’s almost FIFTY. If he can’t successfully branch out as the lead and start doing movies outside his normal action realm (and he CAN’T) that girl needs to leave the party. It’s just embarrassing!

  73. Roxy says:

    Of course, this movie flop in the box office because old fart housewives aren’t interested in the 80′s.
    They are interested in young blood ‘Twilight’ fantasy and now desperate for ’50 Shades of Grey’…pathetic. Yes, 30 is old.

  74. Franco says:

    LOVE LOVE LOVE and LOVED THE MOVIE!!!!

  75. JC says:

    Tom Crude’s incessant profanity and promotion of sexual immorality is not entertainment. An actor doesnt have to be vulgar to be good.