Tom Cruise’s ex-publicist dishes on being dumped before the couch jump

Tom Cruise

These are some new movie stills from Tom Cruise’s upcoming alien-invasion popcorn flick, Edge of Tomorrow, which is a lame (and vague) title change from what it used to be called, All You Need is Kill. The Twitter hashtag for this movie is #LiveDieRepeat, which tells you everything you need to know about this movie. Tom plays a soldier who keeps dying in battle only to wake up and relive the same day over and over again. Basically it’s Groundhog Day with a heaping dose of explosive Cruise craziness tempered only by a badass-looking Emily Blunt. The opening moments of this trailer features Tom telling the truth about his own life: “What I am about to tell you sounds crazy … ” Hahaha. Here’s the trailer:

It looks better than Oblivion, which isn’t saying much. Honestly I’d look forward to seeing the battle scenes, but it sounds like the whole movie is one big repeat with slight tweaks at the end. Who wants to see Tom Cruise make the same “Tom Cruise” face in the same setting several times in a row? Someone will watch it.

Now time for a trip down memory lane with Xenu. The Dec. 20 issue of Hollywood Reporter contains a super-long interview with Pat Kingsley, who is Tom’s former high-powered publicist. She kept the crazy under wraps for over a decade, which is quite a feat. Kingsley and Tom worked together throughout much of the 1990s, and Tom let her go in 2004 (more about that at the end of this post). Then he entered his PR era of doom from which he has never recovered. Pat has been retired for years. She’s now 81 and clearly doesn’t give a f— who she upsets, so she’s dishing on some former clients, including our favorite lift lover. Here’s what she said about Tom:

“I met with [Tom Cruise] on the set of [1992’s] A Few Good Men, and he grilled me in his trailer,” she says. “It was fabulous! ‘What do you think about this? How important do you think Japan is? And how important do you think TV is opposed to print?’ I was quite taken with him. And then he called me and said, ‘Let’s start tomorrow.'”

Over the next few years, they became so close “we could almost finish each other’s sentence. We never really had a disagreement about direction or any particular interview. The trust became pretty complete on both sides.”

They would talk every day, often at 11 p.m. “We talked constantly. He was an insomniac. I liked the fact that he was so much fun. And he was so thoughtful. He remembered birthdays, my daughter’s birthday. He came to her wedding; she was registered somewhere for the china, and he bought out everything. They’ve got things they haven’t even opened yet, and they’ve been together 15 years!”

Once, she remembers, “He took me up in this little airplane he had in Santa Monica. It was a two-seater, one in front and one in back. You could pick it up with your hands, practically. I went to the airport, and they said, ‘Tom’s flying around, he’ll land soon.’ So he lands the plane, and out comes Barry Diller — ‘I’ve got to get me one of these.’ Then it was my turn. You had to put all these straps on. I said, ‘Which one’s the parachute?’ They said, ‘It doesn’t matter.’ We took off and started going to Malibu. I said, ‘Tom, I don’t want to wave at anybody, I just want to fly straight.’ He said, ‘Well, there’s Jeffrey Katzenberg.’ I said, ‘I don’t care!’ It was scary, I’m telling you. He said, ‘Next time, I’ll take you over to Catalina for lunch.’ But I never wanted to get in that plane again.”

The end of their relationship in many ways meant the end of Kingsley’s run at the top. She realized it was coming: The late-night chats had dried up, and she wasn’t traveling with Cruise as much as before. “I’d had so much control over everything,” she observes. “I think he wanted to be more personally involved in all those decisions. He felt, ‘Look, it’s been 14 years. I think it’s time I tried something different.’ And I certainly had no quarrel with that. It was his life, his career. It was not working. I was not having the rapport. I felt a kind of pulling back, and I knew it was going to happen.”

Cruise’s Scientology played a role, but only toward the end. Before that, there had been just one serious conflict with reps for the religious organization, “but it was taken care of very early in the game,” says Kingsley. “I felt that they were involved in a story that I was doing on Tom, and I said: ‘It’s not your story, it’s Tom’s. You have to step aside.’ And they did.”

Later, however, Cruise wanted to be more vocal about his beliefs. “I did have that conversation with Tom, about cooling it,” notes Kingsley, saying she told him: “‘You want to do a tour for Scientology? Do a tour for Scientology. But Warner Bros. is sponsoring this tour.’ That was for [2003’s] The Last Samurai. He didn’t say yes or no, except he did not discuss Scientology on that European tour.”

It was clear Cruise wanted to do things differently, and now it was just a question of whether he or Kingsley would end their work together. The rupture took place in March 2004; she has not seen him in private since. (Through a rep, Cruise declined comment.)

Regardless, says Kingsley, “Tom Cruise was a prince.”

[From Hollywood Reporter]

Notice that Kingsley says that Tom “was a prince.” Not that he “is a prince.” His reputation has certainly been worse for wear ever since he dumped Kingsley as his publicist in 2004. From there Tom leapt immediately onto the couch for the 2005 tour of crazy. I get the sense that Tom’s relationship with Kingsley went off the rails right as he got pulled back into the CO$. Tom wanted to proselytize, and Kingsley told him not to do so on the studio dime. So Tom fired her, hired his own sister as publicist, and proceeded to stick his finger into Matt Lauer’s face to promote War of the Worlds. And the rest … is pop culture history.

Tom Cruise

Tom Cruise

Poster & photos courtesy of Warner Bros

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

72 Responses to “Tom Cruise’s ex-publicist dishes on being dumped before the couch jump”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Kiddo says:

    She handled her statement with a great deal of decorum. He obviously lost a good rep.

    • Lindy79 says:

      I was just about to say that. There is a fondness in her words that is undeniable and she could have I’m sure thrown him under the bus but chose not to, which shows a great deal of class.

      • Eleonor says:

        I think she could have said TON of things about Tom Cruise Scientology and the divorce with Nicole Kidman, for example.

    • LadySlippers says:

      Kiddo and everyone else: too true. He also shows what a moron he is. She sounds like a priceless gem that should be treated accordingly.

    • Carolyn says:

      yes – Pat sounds like a smart lady who knows her stuff and cleverly kept him on the straight & narrow. Kudos to her.

      Tom could have kept his stellar career if he kept his mouth shut about Co$. He didn’t and as everyone else has said so many times, the rest is history.

      Tom why oh why did you fall for it? What did Mimi Rogers get you into? If he denounced Co$ and split from it, he would gain so much respect.

  2. Buckwild says:

    She gave us some of the good Tom years. She sounds like she is talking about an old lover though, from the tone and word choices. She wasn’t immune to the crazy charm, it seems. I feel like Kanye and Tom are well suited for each other…

    • Tulip Garden says:

      Ima stop you right there…Seriously, I can agree that they are both narcissists but Cruise has a much better ability to pull back when his career/reputation is suffering. Also, Kanye’s crap may be insane but at least it is his. Cruise’s crap is fed to him thru others. All in all, I’d rather be Kanye.

  3. Tulip Garden says:

    I’m not surprised by anything that she revealed. It confirms that without the CO$, Tom Cruise would be an incredibly decent human being. I’ve always suspected that and find it sad. That said, he is the one that sipped the Kool-Aid and decided that it was to his taste.
    Off topic, Emily Blunt is so pretty!

    • kibbles says:

      Despite being a religious fanatic, he has always come across as a professional on set and to the people who have worked for him. I usually read stories about his generosity and he threw a huge party to thank the cast and crew of Edge of Tomorrow. I haven’t heard of him ever being a diva. That said, his religious beliefs have done irreparable damage to his career and personal life. Scientology isn’t the only crazy religion. I’ve seen evangelical Christians who are at the core decent people but who love to proselytize and get under the skin of non-believers. If Cruise had been an evangelical Christian rather than an evangelical Scientologist who preached about his beliefs on television and in print, similar damage would have been done. His job is to be a movie star and he put his religious beliefs before his reputation and marriages. That is what did him in. It happens to normal people as well.

      • Tulip Garden says:

        I agree with everything that you said. I’ll note that Cruise is condemned by the general public on his religious beliefs but he is condemned by people who understand the C0$ on the PRACTICES of that organization and on his willingness to privately embrace the indefensible (disconnection) and at the very least ignore the illegal (too much sh*t to name: check out the underground bunker).

      • d says:

        this is a good point….

    • LAK says:

      Sorry to remove those rose tinted spectacles. Tom Cruise has always been an a$$. Co$ just pandered to that. Sure he was professional, but that’s because NO ONE would dare cross Pat Kingsley and write anything she didn’t approve of.

      This particular article paints a somewhat nice picture of Pat and indeed Tom, but she’s a publicist, even if she’s retired. What is she going to say?

      During her ran, Pat Kingsley woman was the most feared person in Hollywood. If anyone did or said anything she didn’t want, she’d run them out of town AND get them fired from their jobs where ever those jobs were. scotch earth policy. And she didn’t give a damn how powerful they thought they were. As she herself says, it was always about control. Not just control of the celebrities, but control of any and all information AND outlets that highlighted her celebrities. from TV networks to publications. And she wasn’t above dirty tricks to do it. Tom’s perceived power fell away when he fired Pat. And frankly that was the worst career decision he ever made. Once she stepped away from him, THAT’s when people started writing articles about him. Here are 2:

      http://www.slate.com/articles/arts/culturebox/2004/04/cruise_control.html

      http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/film/7907015/How-Tom-Cruise-lost-his-mojo.html

      No one would have dared write an article like the 2nd one on Pat’s watch.

      The idea that Tom Cruise was so nice before co$ got him is a testament to Pat’s work. Tom might have jumped on the coach or been an idjit ot Matt Lauer on her watch, but it would never have made it to air. She’d have pulled the footage and made sure no one talked about it.

      Here is a different account about the real TOM after co$ from another retired publicist who worked with him frequently

      http://wildthymesbook.com/?p=232

      There have always been stories and first hand accounts about the real Tom. No one dared print them on Pat’s watch. And now, co$ is a very convenient scapegoat for what is coming out loud and clear.

      And BTW, he is now represented by 42West, a firm whose partners/founders trained under Pat Kingsley and who employ her tactics. That’s why his image has improved somewhat in recent years.

      And i can’t believe that i’ve just defended co$….eekkk!!! must go clease/fumigate/meditate and go back to thinking what an evil organisation co$ is.

  4. CaribbeanLaura says:

    Wow, the stories this woman must know. I really do think that her story about Tom came from a place of genuine admiration. Man Co$ is really sucky isn’t it.

  5. Zimmer says:

    What a sad waste of a good guy! Too bad he’s been spoiled for so many of us.

    • nico says:

      The same could be said about John Travolta. Everybody seems to like him but CoS just ruins him for me.

      • amilu says:

        I have to pipe in to say that I have never liked John Travolta! He’s always seemed like a creeper to me.

        But I do still like Tom Cruise, the actor, despite all of this. I even liked Oblivion for the most part, and I remember feeling a little sad that Tom Cruise, the couch jumper, had to get in the way of Tom Cruise, the actor. Since his surprisingly good turn in Interview with the Vampire, I developed a little soft spot for him.

  6. MrsBPitt says:

    This sounds like Tom’s behavior with everyone…when he loves you, he can’t do enough for you..and when its over…you don’t exist anymore…When is TC going to stop with these stupid movies…Go back to acting Tom…Magnolia, Rain Main, A Few Good Men, Born on the Fourth of July…Tommy used to be an actor, now he is in the same action movies over and over and over!

  7. Sam says:

    What this tells me is that CO$ basically operates the same way as an abusive partner would. Most of the big names in the church keep a tight circle around them, it seems like. Their managers, publicists, etc. are mostly church members. They seem to enjoy being isolated, which is counter-intuitive in a place like Hollywood, where connections mean a lot. And it seems like most of them see their careers suffer for it. Of course, Kirstie Alley would just have people believe that’s because there is a vast network of bigots out there who just hate them.

    I wonder why they can’t take the lead from other actors who don’t let their religion get in the way of their careers. There’s more than a handful of actors who are pretty religious, but it hasn’t impacted their careers. CO$’s whole basis seems predicated upon control and isolation.

    • Skye says:

      Because unlike most major religions, where the core values and ideals of one’s faith require a line to be drawn to avoid seeming crass or vulgar (it’s hard to trumpet “the meek shall inherit the earth” or “all life is suffering” when you’re ripping around in your Ferrari), Scientology is in perfect harmony with the material, superficial, endlessly self-promoting and self-enriching aspects of show business.

      So far as I can tell, the major preoccupation of Scientology is the purification/perfection of the self… and this is not achieved through devotion and service to others or relinquishing of worldly attachments, but by a long, deeply self-involved, EXPENSIVE process, at the end of which you emerge happy and awesome and free of anyone bringing you down with their “suppressiveness.” There is no conflict between an industry that rewards and celebrates narcissism, and a “religion” that does the same.

      • LAK says:

        Amen!

        People like to think that TC was or is blinded or trapped by Co$ and fail to see that co$ simply panders to what is already there. He thinks he is King of the world, co$ agrees with him.

      • Skye says:

        I’m not sure how much IS already there, with Cruise. Someone else here used the phrase “vessel” and it reminded me of something I read a long time ago, written by someone who had observed TC closely for a while: that he behaved like a functioning sociopath, in that he closely observed others for social cues and taught himself to imitate correct/normal behavior. IF that person was right, and there is some sort of deep-seated personality disorder/pathology in him, it would explain why he would find the validation from COS so comforting, and feel threatened/enraged by any “outside” voices contradicting the ones telling him how NORMAL and RIGHT he is. I get the feeling he really wants to be a “good” person and tries hard to BE that person, but depends on his COS to fill him up from the inside and reassure him he really IS that person. If so, it’s sad that he’s dependent on people who are using him to their own advantage, and preventing him from obtaining REAL help.

      • megsie says:

        Skye, I think that’s an excellent analysis. By all accounts he was an extremely young insecure man. All bark, no bite. Sci gave him the confidence, false though it is, he desperately needed to successfully navigate the cut throat world of HW. Someone in the industry who worked on a few of Tom’s films (costumes) told me her impression of Tom was one of a man under a mild state of hypnosis. Very nice, perfectly charming, exceptionally hard working, thoroughly professional … but as if there wasn’t anyone there. Almost robotic. He’s been dismantled and rebuilt by the COS.

        So I suppose the question here is this: was Tom psychologically damaged to this extent pre Sci, or did Sci do the damage? Or did Sci smell a damaged soul, move in for the kill, and thereby make a bad situation irreparably worse?

      • d says:

        Skye, exactly what I think. And Megsie, that sounds right too. I think Tom was psychologically VULNERABLE before the CoS came along…and yes, that made easy pickings for them. And which causes him to remain vulnerable within their clutches. They have rebuilt him to be their man, made a bad situation worse (in terms of Cruise now never being able to be free of the CoS to be a free and independent thinker and to be secure in himself). I forgot about that article that someone mentioned earlier (from someone else who worked with him)…he really does seem like that cunning manipulative man who goes apepoop when things don’t go his way. how exhausting he must have been to live with.

  8. kibbles says:

    Why is Emily Blunt making such poor career choices? She should have taken Jennifer Lawrence’s career route after The Devil Wears Prada, and instead she’s been in a string of flops. She is too good for this type of sci-fi Groundhog’s Day film. Shouldn’t she be making films that will make her a strong contender for an Oscar? I guess it can happen down the road. She is still young, but she has wasted her prime years on a lot of bad films.

    • don't kill me i'm french says:

      Emily Blunt could be the new Sarah Connor or better the new Ripley in the movie

      about Tom Cruise,apparently she liked him much and she talks about him with many tenderness

    • lucy2 says:

      I imagine after doing small or indie movies for a while, the lure of a big budget paycheck, more exposure, and having a big, different film on her resume might have affected her choice.
      But I agree – as badass as she looks here, I think she’s really great in smaller, more character driven roles.

  9. Lark says:

    This was kind of fascinating. I remember reading in the past that they were very close, and she obviously handled his PR way better than his sister….As bizarre as Tom is, he does have a reputation for being very kind and nice to people on the set and everyday people….the problem is he’s a major part of an abusive religion. It’s a weird juxtaposition.

    I do wonder what would have happened if Scientology hadn’t sucked him in….He’s an underrated actor (Magnolia, Born on the Fourth of July, Jerry Maguire, Minority Report) and has been nominated for an Oscar a couple of times…….I’ve seen speculation that a big reason he does these constant stream of big budget action films is because the Sci-goons want the $$$$$ (pays more than the indies).

    • don't kill me i'm french says:

      +1

      he’s so good in MAGNOLIA

    • mia girl says:

      His performance in Magnolia was outstanding. I really loved that movie.

      • Beatrice says:

        Me, too. I was just mesmerized by his amazing performance in Magnolia. I kept thinking– this is Tom Cruise????

    • holly hobby says:

      The CO$ also didn’t want him in any controversial movies -which sometimes indies are. Miss Cabbage nearly went in his pants when Tommy was doing Interview with a Vampire. I read this in the Andrew Morton bio of Tommy. They didn’t like it and they blamed Nicole for Tommy going beyond his general comfortable roles.

    • LAK says:

      He is an a$$ with or without co$.

      http://wildthymesbook.com/?p=232

      And Pat Kingsley controlled his image absolutely and very well so that in the long term, AFTER she’s out of the picture, people still can’t believe that the BS from TC really is him and attribute it to co$ instead. Here is an article about her methods:

      http://www.slate.com/articles/arts/culturebox/2004/04/cruise_control.html

      extract:

      “”As a publicist, Pat Kingsley is best-known for saying, “No.” She was the first publicist to demand a cover story in exchange for an interview. She was the first to request—and often receive—approval over the writers and photographers assigned to cover her clients. She asked potential interviewers to submit lists of questions for preapproval. (Jodie Foster, for example, was not to be asked about John Hinckley Jr., and Kingsley pulled Calista Flockhart from a Today show interview when the show’s producers would not agree to forgo questions about her weight.) She demanded that writers and photographers on press junkets for Cruise’s movies, such as Far and Away and A Few Good Men, sign over the legal rights to their articles and images, so that PMK could control—or prohibit—the distribution of these words or photos in the future. If an editor or journalist perturbed her—by writing an article she felt was unflattering—she might refuse them future access to her entire clientele.””

      The point being that NO ONE would write anything that Pat didn’t approve of and that’s why you’ve never heard anything bad about Tom.

      Tom is now repped by 42West and has been for several years now. An agency founded by Pat’s former partners. Employing similar tactics and making TC seem normal, but for the co$.

  10. Luca26 says:

    She actually made him sound like a decent (if dense) guy much more so then I thought. If you read the full article at her behest he personally thanked every individual in her office and shook hands etc. I didn’t expect that. I still think he is a narcissist and in a despicable cult but I do believe he tried to be genuine.

    • holly hobby says:

      Yes because he didn’t have to do it. I read in other articles that he was a “yes sir, no ma’am” kind of guy = well mannered. HOwever it’s too bad he can’t rid of the Co$ stink.

      Tommy, anytime you dump those clowns, I’ll buy a ticket to see your movie.

  11. tila says:

    I never actually watched THAT oprah interview until after reading this post. My life is complete. Pure unadulterated cray.

  12. Nicole says:

    I think she just did him a HUGE solid… I like him more when she’s describing him than I’ve liked him since, hmmm, the 90s. That story about the wedding china! That’s a PR wet dream. And just in time for his new movie.

    Say what you want about Tom Cruise but he plays the Science Fiction Everyman like nobody else. I’ll bet it’s a good flick.

  13. Chris says:

    I was watching “A Few Good Men” the other night and thinking “What the hell happened to these two (Tom and Demi)? I think during that time they both were on the top of their game. Now look at them. It goes to show what fame and money can do to a person, when everyone is on the payroll and there’s no one to tell you that maybe you are going off the deep end.

  14. Boodiba says:

    I actually thought Oblivion was decent. Maybe because it was so panned, it was a lot better than I’d expected.

  15. Darlene says:

    Emily Blunt’s arms look amazing.

  16. Quinn says:

    As a therapist, I find Tom to be a fascinating character. He seems like an empty vessel that derives his personality outwardly: his roles, his relationships, his church. He seems like an asexual man, getting all of his pleasure from adoration from fans- I’m not sure there’s a “real” Tom Cruise.

    • ToodySezHey says:

      you may be onto something.

      I remember Christian Bale said his inspiration for his potrayal of Patrick Bateman, a self described empty vessel, the sociopath from American Psycho was based on watching Tom Cruise on late night tv. He said he was intrigued by the hyper animatedness crazyness of Tom, but yet at the same time his eyes looked empty and vacant.

      Kinda makes you wonder.

  17. Maggie says:

    I really like Tom Cruise as an actor. And he seems to genuinely love his children and be involved in their lives. At least it appears so in photos.

  18. lucy2 says:

    She really did manage him when, and when he fired her (probably at the urging of CO$ wanting more control of him) everything just went off the rails. She did a great job for him, it’s a shame he didn’t stick with her – I think he needs someone level headed and not brainwashed adding some guidance to his life.
    The wedding china story – it seems like classic Tom Cruise as we now know him. Attending the wedding and buying a really nice gift is lovely. Buying out the whole registry is just too much. He doesn’t seem to have any boundaries and everything has to be maximized.

    Side note – how many alien/sci fi movies is he going to do???? Is that all the studios want from him? Because as others have said, he did do some decent dramas back in the day.

    • CC says:

      He’s typecast now, likely by both his choices and the studios’ offers. Until there’s a movie of his in that genre that fails miserably, that is. Sure, Rock of Ages did bomb, but it wasn’t his usual thing or genre, so, everyone dismisses it.

    • Decloo says:

      I think Tom is pretty reviled by the general population. The audience for most of these actions flicks is probably teenagers who don’t care what Tom the Man represents. I seriously doubt he can carry a mainstream movie anymore.

  19. holly hobby says:

    I think I read in one of those books, his bio, Janet Reitmann or another Sci book that it was pretty much a fact that CO$ made him fire Kingsley because she was quashing all his talk about his religion. Too bad he can’t think for himself. He wouldn’t be in the pickle he is in now if he listened to Pat Kingsley!

  20. megsie says:

    I can’t express how happy I am to see Kingsley finally speak about Tom. Yes, he’s a nut case now. His movies have taken a turn for the worse. He’s insufferable, egomaniacal, lost to reality. But there was a genuinely good man there once upon a time, and COS destroyed him. That’s a terrible shame. Did he drink the kool aid willingly? He did. Those bastards found a vulnerable young man, new to HW and the media’s glare, the victim of an abusive father, and (it’s been said) the victim of sexual abuse within the Catholic Church he once loved. COS took advantage and manipulated him. Free Tom!

    • Decloo says:

      And so many thanks to Tom’s first wife Mimi Rogers who hooked him up with the church in the first place. I hope she gets some kind of Grand Poobah status for reeling in the chosen one.

      • megsie says:

        She won’t. Mimi and her family were “squirrels.” They practiced Sci outside the Church, refused to pay dues, etc. Once Tom was reeled in by Miscavage’s false father figure routine, Mimi got the boot.

    • LAK says:

      I’m posting this article here once again. Tom wasn’t some victim blah, blah. Co$ simply pandered to what was already there. He is an a$$ with or without co$.

      http://wildthymesbook.com/?p=232

      His new reps have done a stellar job in presenting him as a decent man, but for the co$. Take away the co$, and proably TC can be saved. Amazing what the public will believe.

      • megsie says:

        I see your point, LAX, I do. And I am familiar with Sally’s book. I disagree that Tom was an irredeemable ass before Sci recruited him. He was a troubled young man … and with very good reason to be! Tom was at an age (early/mid 20s) when those with especially difficult childhoods must come to terms with their history and the damage done. That process was interrupted by Sci. In my book, troubled does not an asshole make. One example: Tom’s early homophobia is well known. That, and his much mused on sexual identity issues, are classic responses to early sexual abuse. Doesn’t make it ok, does make it understandable. The sex abuse story btw was known long ago, before Sci dug their claws in. It was in no way a Sci pr concocted sympathy bid.

        ‘Amazing what the public will believe.” Too true. Yet in the same breath we’re considering Sally’s unverified gossipy stories designed to sell books. Indeed, the sort of story that might be related about any number of HW celebrities.

        Can Tom be saved? I don’t know. More than likely not. I suspect you might be underestimating the psychological damages Sci is capable of inflicting.

      • megsie says:

        Oh! LAK. Apologies. I guess I have LA on the brain today. 😀

      • LAK says:

        megsie: i have LAX on the brain too. 🙂 thinking of spending Christmas in LA.

        i posted sally’s book because she’s one of the few insiders willing to go on the record. One who was higher up the food chain. That’s rare. I’ve been working in media all my life, so i’ve heard and been personally privy to many things with regards many celebrities. Good and bad. The TC stories are pretty consistent over the years. i should clarify that my view of TC or any other celebrities isn’t based on personal knowledge of earlier struggles, rather of how people say they are treated by them in the course of working with/for them. As an example, i once had a boss who insisted that one of the other assistants come in every day to be yelled at in the most derogatory manner possible, and the assistant justified this daily abuse by saying the boss needed to let off steam……The boss is a beloved public figure who has loads of people give public statements about what a swell person they are.

        And that’s why i am constantly amazed at what the public will believe. It truly amazes me how a little tweak here or there can alter public perception to extent where prior behaviour is forgotten or explained away. Part of my employment history included a detoured through the hall of PR so i see what the tricks are and sometimes they are so simple as to be insulting to the public, and yet…..they believe.

        Speaking of beliefs, can TC be saved from co$? i sincerely doubt it. He strikes me as a true believer. The sort that would probably die for his faith if so required.

      • megsie says:

        I’m headed back to LA for the holidays, as well. 🙂

        Oh, I hear you on the stupid celebrity tricks. Tom is no different there and I didn’t intend to imply so. I also don’t think he was worse (stressing WAS) than the average mega star. That’s just the game. All things considered he was average if not better than. The thing with Tom imo, and someone above mentioned the same, is that he loves like a King. When you are in the court’s favor, he is attentive, warm, encouraging. Fall out of favor and your head is on the block. Tom can be cold as ice. He will literally self hypnotize you out of his life and mind. Plenty in HW can tell that tale.

        I’ve no doubt you’ve heard some stupendous tales. A view from the other side of the mirror is a real eye opener, isn’t it? I didn’t work in the industry, my husband did. An attorney. Reframing, revisionist history … yeah , it’s the work of the devil. So much shoved down the memory hole. The disconnect between ‘product’ and ‘brand’ and the individual selling it is so vast, so unbridgeable a gap, the individual is soon starved out. HW zombies. I think the public believes so easily because in an information vacuum, gossip is all there is. There’s rarely a counter point.

        “I suspect you might be underestimating the psychological damages Sci is capable of inflicting. ” Pardon me for this. I reread it and it sounds condescending. I lost two good friends to that damn church. One escaped, but she’s never been the same. The other left behind a husband and two children. Terrible situation. Both had personal issues – one alcohol, the other an abusive parent – that left them particularly vulnerable. Cults attack the weak. We all make Xenu jokes, myself included, but COS is serious business.

        “He strikes me as a true believer. The sort that would probably die for his faith if so required” Absolutely. To my eye, here’s the difference between Tom and Miscavige: David is a con man. Tom believes. God help him, he really does. And I suppose that’s why I remain essentially sympathetic.

        Have a great holiday, LAK … and mind the zombies 😉

      • d b says:

        Ooops Never mind

    • Guesswho says:

      “and (it’s been said) the victim of sexual abuse within the Catholic Church he once loved”.
      It’s been said?! you can say that like that. You have to give a source, it’s serious allegation.

  21. Kiddo says:

    @LAK Interesting insider info. Thanks for that. It sounds so old school Hollywood, controlling the image so tightly. Maybe one day you should write a book.

  22. Moi says:

    I don’t know, I mean can’t he just be Tom Cruise, the actor to us? I know that he’s the one that put himself out there when he started up with Katie Holmes and all of the co$ mess, but it irritates me that we can’t just enjoy his performances anymore. I blame social media and Tom. His personal life should be none of our damn business. But again, he’s to blame for that as well, not just the media.

  23. Blackbetty says:

    I dont get it, why didn’t his old publicist throw him under the Bus? After all he did drop her. Was expecting this to be more juicy.

  24. Baskingshark says:

    Oh dear, Tom’s FACE in the freeze-frame image for that trailer. Tom, you are TOO DAMN OLD to be playing this part. You are old enough to be playing this character’s dad. STOP IT.

    I find it incredibly telling about the different ways in which Hollywood still treats male and female actors as they age that back in 1996, Tom Cruise played action-man Ethan Hunt in Mission: Impossible opposite Emmanuelle Beart. Last year, Beart was ripped to shreds for daring to age and have plastic surgery. Cruise is still playing Ethan Hunt.