Is Tom Cruise in ‘slow motion career meltdown’ following ‘The Mummy’?

'The Mummy' New York Premiere - Arrivals

This weekend’s big release was The Mummy, starring Tom Cruise and Annabelle Wallis, with Sofia Boutella playing the Scary Girl Mummy. As predicted, the film did not do well critically or domestically. The Mummy sat at 17% on Rotten Tomatoes throughout the weekend, with reviewers falling all over themselves to make bad puns about “burying” Tom Cruise, or raising the dead. Universal always knew that they could sell this sh-t overseas, but hopefully the studio is doing a double-take about just how badly The Mummy did in North America.

One of Hollywood’s most iconic monsters was no match for an Amazonian princess-turned-superhero at the North America box office over the weekend. Universal’s The Mummy, starring Tom Cruise, opened to a withering $32.2 million domestically from 4,035 theaters, a dismal start for summer event film that launches Universal’s new Dark Universe of interconnected monster movies. The movie fared far better overseas with a winning $141.8 million from 63 markets, Cruise’s best international opening.

In the U.S., The Mummy was relegated to second place behind Warner Bros.’ box-office sensation Wonder Woman, which fell a scant 45 percent in its second weekend to $57.2 million from 4,165 theaters. That’s one of the lowest drops ever for a superhero tentpole. Generally speaking, a superhero film can fall 60 percent.

The Mummy, costing $125 million to make after rebates, is a rough start for Universal’s monsters-themed Dark Universe. Plagued by withering reviews and a B- CinemaScore from audiences, The Mummy opened behind any of the openings for the Mummy films starring Brendan Fraser, as well as for spin-off The Scorpion King. Unlike those movies, the reboot decided to fashion itself as an action pic set in modern times.

The big wild card is the international box office, where Cruise still enjoys major star status. Universal notes that the movie’s global debut of $174 million is also a best for the actor. All told, it opened No. 1 in 46 markets. China led with $52.2 million.

[From The Hollywood Reporter]

“…Costing $125 million to make after rebates”?? Those must be some very special rebates because Deadline suggested that Universal actually spent something close to $300 million, all told, on The Mummy. If you’re putting $300 million into something – a movie starring Tom Cruise, in 2017 – and you only make $32 million domestically, it’s time to reassess your strategy. Box office analysts were already low-balling the domestic box office, saying that conservative estimates would have The Mummy opening with around $40 million. And this was supposed to be the opening salvo in what Universal hoped would be a “Monsters Universe.”

Variety also did an interesting analysis of what they called Tom Cruise’s “slow motion career meltdown,” meaning that he keeps trying to do these franchises and few people are even interested in them, and he’s getting progressively worse in every effort.

'The Mummy' New York Premiere - Arrivals

Photos courtesy of WENN.

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

149 Responses to “Is Tom Cruise in ‘slow motion career meltdown’ following ‘The Mummy’?”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Josephine says:

    It’s too bad for his two females co-stars, who looked good in the previews. Sofia Boutella has been in quite a few movies lately, though, so hopefully this won’t affect her career much.

    • Radley says:

      I saw this and actually Tom Cruise was the best thing about the movie. He does know action. I guess I shouldn’t be ageist and say he’s getting old for this kinda thing.

      Annabelle Wallis actually sucked. Her performance was so wooden I wondered if she had too much botox or something. Her face did eventually move though. LOL

      Sofia Boutella was ok. There was a lot of villainess preening that seemed a little awkward. I blame the director.

      The movie was just ok. The Mummy remake with Brendan Fraser was a lot more fun. This film had all the elements, hero, love interest, sidekick, super villain and even Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. It kinda felt like the director couldn’t be bothered to make all these elements sing. Cruise did his thing. He’s highly competent. I don’t let my feelings about Scientology cloud my opinion of his performance.

      They set up a sequel (with Cruise) at the end and I assume since Dark Universe is underway it’s gonna happen. They really need better scripts and directors going forward.

      • third ginger says:

        I’m 64. You are not ageist; you are truthful. As I say below, I think he is ridiculous because he won’t let go of a persona he created 25 years ago.

      • FLORC says:

        Saw it. The directing did seem bad for everyone, but tom. And yea, he does action well. Like, he does well when out of breath, using stunt doubles, special effects, and not really speaking.

        It made me rewatch the 1st mummy movie, though and that was fun.

      • Zondie says:

        Annabelle Wallis looked so odd that it distracted me. I don’t intend to be mean, but there was something very weird about her face. Sophie Boutella looked more normal, despite having two pupils and tattoos all over!

      • Bethy says:

        Actually I hold Cruise’s Scientology views against him, so I won’t be seeing this movie. When his movies start to bomb and he can’t afford his cult dues anymore, maybe he’ll wake up and realize how Co$ separates families – including his own. Besides the fact, I’d rather see Wonder Woman again. 🙄

      • Josephine says:

        Aw, too bad they stunk. Sorry to hear that. I agree about Cruise – he almost always delivers a good performance and is capable of great performances.

      • Tina says:

        How was Jake Johnson? I love him (but not enough to sit through The Mummy).

  2. marigold says:

    I think men like Tom Cruise movies though. I have several male friends who regularly go along to see his latest. I stopped watching him years ago.

    • nemera77 says:

      I was going to say this too. I was at some party and we were talking movies. Someone mentioned Tom and the vast majority of the guys said they liked a Tom Cruise movie. They don’t care what is said on gossip sites and what critics say. I don’t get why they hired Tom for this.

      • Carrie says:

        Interesting. Maybe that’s why they hired Tom for this…appealing to men now instead of women. I think Tom has possibly burnt most of his female fans with his antics.

      • Bridget says:

        And clearly these guys have been coming out in droves for him.

      • Bridget says:

        I also would like to point out, the Xenu stuff isn’t just ‘celebrity gossip’. It’s been the subject of a major HBO documentary. It’s been reported on by many news sources. Frankly, if Cruise were an athlete and this was reported in Sports Illustrated, it wouldn’t be considered gossip.

      • mayamae says:

        @Bridget – Exactly! Cruise is the public face of a cult that is known to violate human rights. That’s a fact.

    • Bridget says:

      There’s a significant difference between “I like some of his movies” and “i’m buying my ticket to see his latest right now”. Outside of Mission Impossibe, this is Cruise’s 2nd franchise misfire – Jack Reacher was terrible (Tom Cruise as a 6’6″ vigilante?) and now this. You don’t hire someone for Tom Cruise kind of salary hoping that people are going to want to catch his movies on Redbox when they come out. Opening weekends matter – the movie studio pockets a significantly higher percentage of the gross, so they need to open Big to offset costs.

      • Erinn says:

        This. My husband and his friends will occasionally go to Tom Cruise movies. But it’s not like “oh boy, Tom Cruise!” it’s more of “eh, what’s in this week? Over dramatic stunts and explosions? Sure!” For them a TC movie is more of a guarantee of an ‘alright’ popcorn flick that will keep their interest, despite any ridiculous plot holes.

        They ARE however wising up to how insane Co$ is – though it was largely talk about the guy who played Chef in South Park that got them into the whole thing – and TC is an easy target to mock.

      • Bridget says:

        Even taking Xenu out of the equation, the reality is that there are already so many movies marketed to men. It’s a crowded field.

      • minx says:

        Yes, exactly.

      • Magnoliarose says:

        So true. I don’t hear anyone clearing their schedule to see his movies. He hasn’t found his place and wants to hang on to his previous persona. He’s not a leading man anymore but doesn’t seem to understand this. From the moment he jumped on that couch and was exposed as a Scientologist to his weird marriage to Katie Holmes he lost something. Most people didn’t know much about the COS before so it wasn’t stuck to him but they do now and it isn’t sexy. During his marriage to Nicole Kidman he wasn’t as into the whole thing and he had a very tight team handling his career but once that protection was gone all his mystique went with it. Someone told me some dark stories about his role in the COS that would have turned me off even if I had been a fan.

      • Marianne says:

        To be fair though, I dont know anyone in this day and age that solely goes out to a movie based on whos in it. It seems like more people go because the trailer has sparked interest or there is good reviews or its part of series you already like.

  3. Lucy2 says:

    In the end it will probably break even or maybe even make a few bucks, thanks solely to the overseas market. But they were so little buzz about this movie here in the US, you just knew it was not going to do well.
    And I can’t work up an ounce of sympathy for Cruise.

    • Nanea says:

      It’s not doing well in this part of “overseas”.

      The reviews here in Germany (that I read) trashed the film, if they bothered to review it at all – as there were no press screenings before the release. Those that didn’t review just mentioned it came out, together with speculating how bad the movie must be if Universal was afraid of screening it. WW still was on # 1 here this past weekend.

      • detta says:

        Wonder Woman’s release date in Germany is June 15, i.e. this Thursday, so no, it was/is not No. 1 here. The Mummy did indeed come in only second though, because Pirates held on to the number one spot as far as I could see from last weekend’s figures (urgh). Hopefully WW will be at the top in a few days though!!

    • doofus says:

      agree lucy2, this movie had little buzz in the US, prob because they knew what a piece of crap it is.

      the other mummy movies worked because, while somewhat scary, they didn’t take themselves TOO seriously and had some good comic relief worked into the script and the action sequences. Cruise always takes himself SO SERIOUSLY (Tropic Thunder was a pleasantly surprising departure from his normal “I’m a serious action star” crap…but it apparently was a one-off).

      plus, there was also NO NEED for yet another mummy movie.

      as for Cruise’s “slow motion career meltdown”, I’d say it started with the Jack Reacher movies…and continued with his desperate-grab-for-a-hit MI series. and I also have zero sympathy for him. If he were to leave and denounce that cult he’s a part of, I’d probably become a fan again.

      • Marianne says:

        There’s no need for the “Dark Universe” in general. Other monsters like Dracula, Frankenstein, The Phantom of the Opera, the invisible Man etc have been overdone in movies, tv etc.

      • LAK says:

        I disagree with this accessment of entire Mummy ovre. The 2nd and 3rd versions of this franchise went high camp (2nd franchise in 1959) and comedy/ action (3rd franchise in 1999). Tom’s version which is the 4th franchise is trying for horror/ action.

        I dare you to watch the very first Mummy movie (1932) and not come away scared out of your wits. And all done with shadows and suggestions.

    • Valois says:

      More than a third of the international BO comes from China (and studios only get 20 – 25 %) and Transformers, which is massive in China, comes out next week. Which probably means that no one will care about that movie a week from now.

    • Alice says:

      It’s doing pretty bad in Brazil, I think due to the fact people here are loving Wonder Woman (and since movie tickets are quite expensive we have to make a choice, most people can’t watch 2 films so close to another. And everybody is going to see ww obviously)

    • sunnydaze says:

      Something interesting I noticed…Husband and I went to see Alien the other week and there was a long promo for the Mummy before the previews started. I kid you not, they were interviewing the whole cast about working with Tom Cruise. Everything was about how great he was, how in shape he was, what an incredible actor he was, etc. etc. etc. An entire promo about a movie – it had to have been at least 7 minutes long – that was solely focused on showcasing how adored he was by the cast and crew. It was really, really bizarre, and I couldn’t help but think it had nothing to do with promoting the movie and everything to do with promoting Cruise as this brilliant actor and person. It felt very disingenuous and creepy af.

      • Lady D says:

        I generally despise all commercials. I watch about 5 hours of TV a week and it’s mostly because of the commercials. That and there isn’t much that’s new on TV these days. It infuriates me to have to pay theatre prices to watch commercials. The drive-in has about 20 minutes of them, but you get two movies at a great price also.

    • Mrs.Krabapple says:

      I was listening to a critic pointing out how the studio inflates what a “hit” it is overseas. Its Cruise best showing only because they released it in all foreign markets on the same day, instead of the usual way movies appear in foreign markets. It played on 48,000 screens to make that $172 million. By comparison, movie in the US that make $170+ million do so on 1/12 the number of screens (for exams, Capt America Civil War made $179 million on 4,226 screens). So The Mummys world wide take was less than Capt America 3’s US take, even though it was on more than 10 times as many screens. Despite the studio’s desperate spin, this movie was a HUGE flop.

      • CdnMagician says:

        I don’t trust anything studios say about box office numbers, honestly. I think there’s quite a bit of manipulation, especially on superhero movies. Plus, it seems like every week there’s a movie breaking some record or other. Not buying it!

      • detta says:

        Movie studios might (probably) tell lies and half lies about costs and budget and success all the time – but they can’t fake box office numbers as such. The actual box office numbers are official numbers from theatres and they determine the income (taxable) for cinemas and what they have to pay the distributor/studio (also taxable). As a theatre you have ticket sales run through computers and all those figures – number of seats, money – are registered and reported officially. There are national organisations for theatres like for example NATO (National Association of Theatre Owners) in the US involved in all of this.

        That said, I would absolutely agree with you regarding not trusting movie studios and their tales, however, if there is one thing that they can’t just go and lie about easily it is in regard to box office figures, because other parties are involved and the inital income i.e. ticket sale is not generated by studios but theatres.

  4. Goats on the Roof says:

    It looked dumb AF but even if it didn’t, I don’t give money to Tom Cruise and the “Church” of Scientology.

  5. Aiobhan Targaryen says:

    Too early to tell. If the next Mission Impossible film does horribly, then maybe some of these articles will have some backbone to them. His film just got beat by a better film, it does not mean his career is in the decline.

    These studios never learn. Why would they waste $300 million dollars on something like this? Even the conservative $125 million is too much. Maybe this is dumb to think this, but if they set realistic budgets and said no to cgi in every shot and also worried more about the quality of the script, they would make more money. CGI can only go so far if the script sucks. People do notice if the script does not make any sense. We aren’t babies who are easily distracted by bright and shiny toys.

    • greenmonster says:

      Totally agree with the point of production costs. I can remember how everyone freaked out over Waterworld costing $175 million dollars in 1995. Back then it was basically unheard of to spend that much on a movie. Now that is probably an average budget.

    • LadyT says:

      Yes please! Tell me a good story. Develop some characters I feel something about. Focus more on this and way less on the CGI.

    • Magnoliarose says:

      Outside of Mission Impossible, he hasn’t had great box office in 10 years or so. He used to be a blockbuster guarantee but his movies are forgettable now. He used to mix up genres in between big action like Magnolia or Jerry Maguire that showed some range. He doesn’t even seem like the same actor anymore. Aging action stars usually have careers that peter out at this stage because they aren’t versatile actors and their core fan base has moved on or aged with them. Tom Cruise shouldn’t be here because he has the ability to do interesting things but he keeps pushing movies no one cares about. It is a bad sign when a film has to rely on international markets to break even.
      Studios often play creative games with figures to position a movie to look more successful. No way this was made for 125 million.

  6. Elsa says:

    Who asked for this?

    • Frances says:

      David Miscavige

      • atorontogal says:

        Exactly! Ole Tommy is just a cash cow for Scientology now. This is why he just makes movies and has no life! Paying to see one of his movies, is donating to COS.

      • Sojaschnitzel says:

        I for one am happy to see that this movie is tanking, because every dime going into scientology’s pockets makes these monsters more powerful. No thanks.

  7. V4Real says:

    WW is still doing well despite the second week big drop. It has already made over 435 mill worldwide.

    I will see the Mummy but not in the theaters. My next movie outings are WW for the third time and then Spiderman Homecoming.

    • Mia4s says:

      Wonder Woman had one of the best (if not the best, depending on actuals) domestic second weekend drops for a superhero movie ever. That’s stunning!! Hopefully international audiences will keep discovering the movie and stop lapping up whatever garbage is tossed their way just because it stars Tom Cruise or Vin Diesel.

  8. Anya says:

    Is Tom Cruise playing the mummy?

  9. Jegede says:

    I actually never associated Tom Cruise as an action star.

    My memories of him are in dramas like Jerry Maguire, A Few Good Men, Fourth of July, Magnolia, e.t.c. Hell, even Cocktail!

    I think Cruise sticking to these action franchise stakes is down to the ‘Mission Impossible’ effect.
    They are probably the kind of roles that are lucrative for him now.

    • Chaine says:

      I don’t feel as if he has the life experience to take on nuanced dramatic roles at this point. Let’s face it, he lives in a bubble of yes-man multi millionaire superstardom that is itself within a bubble of Scientology, where he is revered as some kind of demigod that can do no wrong. He would have no clue how to play the role of a regular guy his age dealing with any realistic life events, like say Matthew McConaughey or Christian Bale can do, nor does he have any sense of humor or timing such that he could play tragi-comedic roles like Steve Carrell or Will Ferrell can. This is a guy that would have no clue what is funny.

      • Carrie says:

        Given his earlier work, I think he could do drama (eg. Magnolia) now but I don’t think he wants or cares to do so. Action movies are an easy paycheque for him I think. No personality required. No drawing on emotions. No personal interviews.

        Come to think of it… it’s a long time since he’s done any personal interviews isn’t it? I can’t remember but it seems wayyyy long.

    • Amide says:

      Ah, Jerry Maguire. Back then, the guy I had the hugest crush on took me to that movie.❤💘💝

      • Bee says:

        He did have some good movies back in the day, but let’s face it, those days are over. He’s chasing an easy paycheck these days, not good roles.

    • cherrypie says:

      Not interested in seeing Tom Cruise play the same roles over and again either…Mission Impossible, Jack Reacher, the Mummy and the list goes on…… As for the Dark Universe thing, dont know who came up with the idea but the whole thing sounds dumb.

  10. Rice says:

    It’s really bad when this reboot opened lower than the 3rd mummy movies with Brendan Fraser and no Rachel Weisz because that sequel was absolute shite. Having said that, I enjoyed Mr. Scientology Lifts in Edge of Tomorrow.

  11. Mia4s says:

    That “his biggest worldwide opening ever!” is such a joke. It’s an illusion. His past openings would not have included China and the market overall is smaller. It’s really not that impressive, particularly if the international audience realizes it’s terrible in week 2. It won’t bomb internationally but this is a disastrous start for the “shared universe” (so stupid) and a blow to Cruise’s rep.

    For the first time I can remember the media is pointing out he’s a 54 year old trying to play roles meant for 30-something year olds, opposite love interests young enough to be his daughter. Your desperation is showing Mr. Xenu.

  12. Frances says:


  13. Dissa says:

    I actually liked it!

    • browniecakes says:

      I will see The Mummy in the theatre. I am in for Universal’s Dark Universe. I am looking forward to Luke Evans as Dracula. Javier Bardem as Frankenstein’s monster sounds good, I wonder who will be Frankenstein. Apparently Wallis is in all the movies.
      Another Dr. Jekyll movie is going to be coming out with Chris Evans as the lead that will compete with Universal’s – if both get made.

      • third ginger says:

        Have you read something recent in the trade papers on Luke Evans returning as DRACULA? My reading indicates that he is unlikely to be part of future movies. As I say below, I love Luke, but I do not think this is happening. There is a picture of all the monster actors together. No Luke.

  14. wheneight says:

    I sure hope it’s a career meltdown. I don’t get why he still has a career. The dude is just creepy AF and his top-level involvement with Scientology is even worse.

  15. boredblond says:

    If his career ended tomorrow, he would still have a longer more lucrative run than the majority of his contemporaries..I doubt he’s too concerned

    • Mia4s says:

      Normally for any actor with similar money/past success I’d agree, but not in Cruise’s case. He’s required to prop up his cult for one and they need a LOT of money. Plus he has no other identity than massive massive global worldwide totally huge (!!!!) star. He’s desperate to maintain that. You think he’d be fulfilled doing an incredibly meaningful but small off-Broadway play? I suppose he could go off and be an attentive and present father to his youngest chil….HAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Sorry, I still can’t say that with a straight face.

    • third ginger says:

      I doubt “memories” matter to Cruise or any other actor. “You are only as good as your last role’ is one of the laws of show business. I have never been a fan, but he did make some good films. As others have said, his problem is his insistence on playing the cocky young guy at 54. Here in the US, other than MISSION IMPOSSIBLE, he is irrelevant to younger audiences.

      • Mia4s says:

        Exactly! He’s trying to play a “cocky young guy” at (almost) 55 years old. Not only that but opposite a love interest 22 years younger than him! She could have easily been his daughter in real life so trying to act like her “peer” just makes him look even more ridiculous.

        Even worse, the paparazzi caught a kiss from the next Mission Impossible (more run around and jump off stuff) between he and Vanessa Kirby, who is almost 25 years younger! Pathetic. Also, he should be the head of that spy organization by now, unless he really sucked at his job! 😏

    • minx says:

      I think he would be concerned because he has to constantly shovel money at CoS. They won’t be happy if the gravy train stops.

    • Magnoliarose says:

      That isn’t the nature of actors or musicians who have reached this level for so long. There is a healthy dose of ego and insecurity involved. Some actors decide to become character actors and pursue other interests but his life is being Tom Cruise superstar and Scientology cash cow.

  16. Melody says:

    Will the international market *please* make us stop seeing Cruise trailers? Lord knows we’re not seeing the movies…

  17. IlsaLund says:

    No one asked for this remake. Perhaps Cruise will be okay internationally, but domestically fatigue has set in.

    Hopefully, Universal will reexamine this crazy idea of creating a “Dark Universe” with monster/horror movie classics ( It doesn’t make any sense and I don’t know how they think they can improve upon the old classic black & white films. Something’s are best left alone.

    • browniecakes says:

      Universal wants a piece of the pie. Disney has Marvel and WB has DC Comics. Maybe The Mummy wasn’t the one to start with.

      • third ginger says:

        They tried starting with DRACULA UNTOLD, and it was a disaster. Sorry for Luke Evans,whom I love.

        Equal to Cruise’s obsession with staying young is Hollywood’s obsession with creating universes. The problem is a universe has to have stories and characters audiences want to see.

      • nemera34 says:

        Well that shows how much I know. I had no idea there had been a Dracula film. I’ll say I loved those OLD movies. Black/White; all of them. I will watch them when they come on. I don’t think that there was anything wrong with creating this Universe. Bringing back these movies. But you have to do it the right way. I haven’t seen the Mummy. But it just looked so different from what I remember.

  18. Tig says:

    I agree with earlier poster re the movie with Emily Blunt- didn’t see it in a theater, but may do that for the sequel.
    Tell me A Wallis isn’t the actress who played Princess Margaret in The Crown-read that somewhere. If yes, what happened to her?? She was gorgeous in that series. In the pics from these pressers, she just looks ragged and off. And I also loved The Mummy with Brendan Frazier and Rachel W- great pacing and humor.

    • Mia4s says:

      Nope, Princess Margaret was played by Vanessa Kirby. Wallis is famous for…well not much? She was in King Arthur a few weeks ago! Ouch! Time to regroup.

      • browniecakes says:

        Vanessa Kirby is going to be in the next Mission Impossible movie with Tom.

    • M.A.F. says:

      She was also in the Tudors (played Jane Seymour).

    • Lady D says:

      I loved the Mummy, too. Couldn’t decide who was better looking, Rachael or Brendan.

  19. Suzanne says:

    Tom looks worn out and puffy…age is catching up. Most men look better as they age…like Clooney….but Tom…not so much. He is likable when he’s on Fallen though…so it’s hard not to wish him the best in his career.

    • minx says:

      Fillers, maybe? I find everything about him repulsive.

      • Karen says:

        He goes to South America for extensive plastic surgery.

        I refuse to go to any of his movies since he donates it all to Scientology and mental abuse to his ex-wives Nicole and Kate.

    • third ginger says:

      Count this old lady in as saying he looks ridiculous with young, female co-stars.

    • cathy says:

      No one has aged worse than Johnny Depp who has signed on to play the Invisible Man which is part of this series. Who is going to go see that?

      • justme says:

        Well if he’s the Invisible Man at least you won’t need to see him! (Can’t improve on Claude Rains – no you can’t! He was an amazing actor who just kept playing great roles over and over – and had a long career!)

      • third ginger says:

        Claude Rains! What a wonderful actor. So glad you mentioned him. I love it when actors from the Golden Age get a mention on CB!!

      • justme says:

        @third ginger – and how can you film the Invisible Man (or The Bride of Frankenstein for that matter) without the great Una O’Connor! (SHREIK!!) 🙂

      • third ginger says:

        Oh, Lord. She played “terrified” and “suspicious” better than anyone. Also, my husband will never forgive the actress who gets the new Bride role. He adores Elsa!! It was almost our daughter’s name. We settled on another.

      • justme says:

        @third ginger Sometimes when I am talking to younger people about film I am a bit discouraged when they say things like – “oh I can’t see that film, it’s in black and white” (or it’s silent). I assure them that their eyes will survive seeing a movie in b&w and if the silent is a good one, they will not even miss the absence of dialogue – in fact they may prefer it! So many years of film that folks miss for silly reasons like that. My now 20 year old daughter grew up on old movies and actually has introduced some of her friends to them. When they give older movies a chance, they are often pleasantly surprised.

      • third ginger says:

        Our 24 year old daughter grew up as a movie buff like us. Now we show her girlfriend classics like REBECCA. I sometimes teach a film class at the university where I work. Students always end up loving films like GASLIGHT and LEAVE HER TO HEAVEN. Last time our little girl was home, we watched SUNSET BLVD.

      • detta says:

        Big yes to educating young people about classic cinema! I don’t have kids and don’t regret that, but sometimes I think if I had had children, I would have loved to pass my passion for film (plus other arts) on to them. That must be a big joy. I adore Rebecca and Gaslight (both versions). These films have an incredible atmosphere that is so rare in today’s cinema. Regarding the second Gaslight; a couple of days ago I caught a 2015 documentary about Ingrid Bergman called “Jag är Ingrid” which I can highly recommend to anyone interested in film and Hollywood as well as in stories about interesting and strong women.

  20. TQB says:

    Because this looked so terrible, we rented the Fraiser/Wiesz Mummy this weekend. It’s even better than I remembered. Funny, exciting – a real good time movie, like Indiana Jones. It’s well-paced and damnit, every character is so damn charming. The Mummy himself is perfectly menacing. Even the faces in the sandstorms were less silly to me. In sum: Universal, if you wanted to do your Dark Universe, start with a different monster, set the tone and expectations so when you drop your new Mummy, people aren’t nostalgic for an 18 year old movie that still holds up.

    • Zondie says:

      The Fraser/Weisz Mummy was perfect! Setting it in the 1920ies added an exotic flavor and made it visually delightful.

      • nemera34 says:

        I loved that movie.. didn’t like the others that followed; but they did that movie right. Just fun and yes the characters were charming.

  21. Micki says:

    That’s not his first flop and perhaps not the last. He’ll be fine I think. I don’t believe that he’s in a meltdown over this.

    • BB says:

      If Cruise is bankrolling his own movies to get them made – and I suspect he is – this one’s gotta sting.

      • Micki says:

        I haven’t read anything supporting your theory. I however have read:
        I think that Cruise may not calculate so heavily with the US market but gambles a la Mark Wahlberg with his Big Wall on the asian one.

      • BB says:

        Cruise still owns a third of United Artists, which bankrolled his highest-grossing movie (M:I 2, as well as 1 and 3) and, incidentally, his recent lowest (Jack Reacher: Never Go Back).

        Cruise is an increasingly expensive risk for studios – even with big foreign numbers. His llatest JR movie actually lost money domestically. This not only complicated salary negotiations with Paramount for the upcoming M:I 47, but will likely spell the end of Cruise’s legendarily sweet “back end” profit deals.

        The Mummy makes it clear that Cruise is only a reliably bankable “action” star domestically if the vehicle is M:I. His highest action gross was 17 years ago. His lowest was just last year. That’s a very bad trend for a fading star, on the wrong side of 50, with all his eggs in the “action basket.”

        He won’t be shacking up in the poorhouse any time soon, but his “superstar” days here are over, and have been for a while. He do best to retreat a little, and make a few quiet indie films, maybe remind people he actually can act occasionally. But I don’t think his COS overlords will let him do that.

      • detta says:

        There was a time when it looked like he could have a varied career, looking at his roles in films like A Few Good Men or Magnolia where he managed to be more than just a successful and able action star. I agree the he actually has talent and these days it feels sort of wasted when you look at the material he chose over the years (not the money/fame aspect of it). But yeah, small and interesting acting projects were probably not what the COS had in mind as all they are about is money and power.

  22. Sage says:

    Now this movie was truly awful.

    By the time the sequel comes out, Tom will be 56. Universal messed up signing all these aging men to their franchises.

  23. browniecakes says:

    The HULK was awful and then Iron Man came out. Maybe this is like the first pancake for Universal, the throw away and then they get tastier.

    • third ginger says:

      Wrong actors for the Hulk. It’s true, when Marvel got its “real” Avengers together and found a great villain, they were in business. What you say is certainly possible, but if Cruise’s aging “star power” failed, how are Bardem and Crowe [both fine actors] going to do? Depp, to me, is the unknown quantity. I am stunned that people still want to see him as Jack Sparrow.

  24. newmansown says:

    I am not really Savvy on marketing and movie profits Etc. But I’m being told by several friends that are really big on movies that Wonder Woman should have put more effort into their International marketing and that International is where the money is these days. Apparently according to them the mummy actually beat out Wonder Woman in places such as China.

    Yes Tom Cruise is still big in the international market so since we are supposedly all about the globalization I’m guessing he’s already on to making his next movie and not looking back.

    I personally haven’t seen a Tom Cruise movie in years as I just will not give Scientology a penny of my money.

  25. QQ says:

    I feel for Sofia Boutella but I’m delighted that as a Country, we said NO to this Latest Geriaction Offering!

    on that Note, I didn’t even want to watch Wonder woman ( cause the leads truly are made of Beige and Oatmeal as far as I’m concerned) But my gf and the Therapist made me promise to go do it… and JUST THE GP of sticking it to Claymation Belly Science God Over here propulsed me to go

    MY.F*CKING. GOD.. I pretty much Bawled nonstop, I am not a super emotional person at all, but Seeing this movie, what it accomplished, what it featured, the themes?? Me and my gf ended rapturously voice noting each other in the car weepy as F*ck, texted all the girls to watch.. we couldn’t even sleep breaking this down, everything about it was truly perfect

    • third ginger says:

      So glad you enjoyed it. I burst into tears when Hippolyta said to Diana, “The world of men does not deserve you.” That’s pretty much what I feel about my petite but Amazonian daughter.

      • QQ says:

        A MESSAGE AND A MINISTRATION!, A Word To Any Woman watching!, There were Black Women as the fiercest Amazons, without question/explanation/or disruption to the movie, That ALONE made me burst out crying It really did, we existed, we looked regal, Diana just handled every fight and every damned fighting scene it just seized me, Like .. My God We Adult women my age, have never even seen such a thing. so self assured, so well done just … I can’t believe this took so long to get done so well.

    • Bethy says:

      I bawled during the No Man’s Land scene. My 11 y.o. was looking at me weird and all I kept thinking was that as a little girl all I wanted to see in the movies was a strong female character like Diana (and Princess Leia). It took over 40 years, but Hollywood finally got it right with WW.

      • The New Classic says:

        I wanted to go see Wonder Woman, in that way of planning to see it to support the movie but never actually getting around to seeing it. But now after reading your convo on here and seeing Qq’s endorsement I am most definitely going to take myself out on a date to go see it tomorrow!

    • jugil1 says:

      Ok QQ, your review has convinced me to see Wonder Woman. I’m hoping I have a similar experience to yours. Thanks for the insight!

    • QQ says:

      oh For Sure, Guys if you go lemme know how you like, I straight up lost my sh*t on twitter immediately after.. ( after I was done VN my girls, alerting my sister, Telling my Guy friend, I was just stuck in my car weepy taking it in with my friends!)

  26. BB says:

    Another big, loud, deeply stupid “action” film shoved down moviegoers’ throats so studios can rake in that foreign box office.

    And yet another lesson that everything old is NOT new again, which applies to the film AND to Cruise.

    Makes me shudder to contemplate that Top Gun reboot they keep threatening to make.

    • doofus says:

      no “threatening” about it, it’s on.

      and I agree with your reaction.

      shuddering is the least of what I’m doing.

  27. tracking says:

    I remember a time when he cared about the quality of his movies and was committed to his craft. Now he just seems like an aging caricature, who only cares about churning out big-budget crap movies to support Zenu. Glad at least domestically he has little support.

  28. D says:

    He’s a Scientologist and I’m an SP why would I ever give him my money lol #TeamLeah

  29. Ana says:

    It’s curious what happened with The Mummy, really, because it did bad in the US and so good internationally. I think Tom Cruise is really a bigger international star than an American star. The US dislikes him for all his antics, but he’s loved in Latin America and Asia. So I don’t think his career is in “meltdown”, I’m sure the next Mission Impossible will be another hit, and so will be the planned Top Gun sequel if it ever happens. I think The Mummy’s problem wasn’t him, but the fact that the script was terrible and it could never decide if it was a horror movie or an action film.

    I do wish Cruise went back to some serious dramas like he did in the 90s, he definitely shone in those.

    • nemera34 says:

      It needs to be said that sometimes people think the U.S market is the only market. The International market is more important to me. Mainly because the U. S viewer allows so much personal stuff cloud their views. Worrying too much about actor’s personal lives. But it seems the International market just likes seeing the actor on screen. Tom will be fine. And it would be interesting to see him doing something different. But I don’t see that happening. This is where he feels at home.

      • Mrs.Krabapple says:

        I posted earlier, but I’ll try it again here, since you are defending this movie’s based on world-wide box office. The world numbers are NOT very impressive. The only reason it’s Cruise’s best worldwide opening is because it’s the only one of his movies to open in ALL markets on the same day. Most movie don’t do that, and their foreign openings are spread out over many months.

        Also, to get to that $174 million world-wide number, it opened on a whopping 48,000 screens! By comparison, Captain America 3 opened in the US on only 4,200 screens — less than 1/0th the number of screens! — and still made $179 million, beating the Mummy’s world-wide number.

        So, yeah, if the Mummy made that $174 million solely in the US on 4,000 screens, that would have been impressive. But on 48,000 screens?! That’s a flop.

      • third ginger says:

        Thanks, Mrs. K. As I often say, I like gossip and opinion, but I love show business facts.

      • Ana says:

        I don’t think it’s fair to compare The Mummy, an “original” film, with a established franchise like Captain America. While it’s true that this is Tom Cruise’s best international opening because it was released in more markets at once, I think the end result of how much money it will end up making won’t be too different from what it would have been if released in separate dates. It just helped soften the blow a little of its poor debut in the US, which is still the main market and that’s why it’s not enough that it did alright in the rest of the world. I’d still consider the movie a flop, even if it managed to cover its budget, because it didn’t meet expectations.

        What I do take a bit of an issue, though, is how some media (as this post shows) have analyzed this as a “Tom Cruise failure” and how it shows his career is in meltdown. I think a better, truer analysis should be about the Hollywood obsession with creating franchises just for the sake of it. Unlike the international market, where it’s very important who the star of the film is, the American audiences no longer go to see a movie because of its stars, and it haven’t done so in a while. Universal was somehow pulling it through, even when Kong: Skull Island and Godzilla where mediocre movies, and now they’ve stumbled on their weird attempt at the “Dark Universe”. Hopefully this will make studios put bigger effort in producing better scripts, which is the reason why Marvel succeeded with its formerly unknown superheroes.

      • jwoolman says:

        Also going to movies isn’t as common in the US as it used to be be. They’re too expensive and there are so many other options. I think movie-going is still very popular in a lot of other countries.

  30. tracking says:

    He would look infinitely better if he went the silver fox route, but he’s so vain, hard to see that happening. He seems so empty and lacking in substance on screen. Just a cheesy smile and not much else.

  31. OTHER RENEE says:

    I agree with Bethy upstream! I will not see a Tom Cruise movie due to his Scientology position. Too many lives destroyed or at the very least, damaged. Too many families torn apart while he lines the coffers of this ridiculous organization. No thanks.

  32. NotSoSocialButterfly says:

    I think Tommy overdid the filler. He’s looking rather chipmunk cheeked to me.

  33. AnotherDirtyMartini says:

    The only way I’ll watch a TC movie these days is for free. I’m not going to the theater, not paying to rent or stream it, not buying the blu_ray…all because of Scientology. That organization is horrible, and I refuse to give it any of my money. Eff them. And I’m saying this as a former TC fan.

  34. N. says:

    Scientology Tom is so dead behind the eyes, he makes my skin crawl. No way in hell will I ever support his movies! Also, I’d much rather see the Brendan Fraser version again, that was actually fun and entertaining.

    • hannah89 says:

      after watching Going Clear (AN AMAZING FILM) I’ll never see another movie with him again. He is complicit in the suffering of so many. He may be a dedicated actor but he is a crappy human being.

  35. Bee says:

    Seems like all this movie has achieved is to get people to dig to the bottom of their DVD collection in order to re-watch the “old” Brendan Fraser version. It didn’t need a remake, let alone one with Tom Cruise, it still holds it’s own.

  36. kibbles says:

    If Universal wants to make more Mummy films, create one with a good enough script that could possibly entice Weisz back into her role, and invest in getting Brendan Fraser back in shape to lead the film. There would have been people out there wiling to spend money just to see Fraser buff and back in action again after a long hiatus.

    The Mummy should have been released later this month after Wonder Woman cools off. There was no way this film could have beat Wonder Woman at the box office. Poor timing for the release of another action film.

    • Mrs.Krabapple says:

      But Transformers comes out later this month. Because The Mummy was banking on Tom Cruise not being as repulsive to foreign audiences as he is to Americans, they couldn’t risk competing against Transformers in China. It turns out they can’t compete against Wonder Woman either, but maybe they THOUGHT they had a better chance than against Transformers.

  37. Blackbetty says:

    It always annoys me greatly that no interviewer will ask Tom about being part of CoS. No one seems to have the guts these days.

  38. Blackbetty says:

    It always annoys me greatly that no interviewer will ask Tom about being part of CoS. No one seems to have the guts these days.

  39. freewhitebaby says:

    First off, I refuse to watch Tom Cruise due to his Scientologist connections. But more importantly, I don’t want to see guys my age doing action flicks. I know how ridiculous it is. Guys that age should be, to quote an old saying, working smart, not hard. Tom Cruise should be in charge of all the crime fighters, action heroes, or whatever this mess is supposed to be. He should outwit them with brains, not beat them up. But truthfully, I don’t think Tom is that smart in real life so maybe he would have trouble with that kind of role. Either way, I won’t be watching him.

  40. DahliaDee says:

    We can but hope.

  41. hey-ya says:

    ….I seen it…absolutely the worst…90% of the female leads lines consisted of Nick Nick Nick…so depressing…why is it set in England…doesnt even look good…