Home Poetry & Literature Film Music Art Everything Else  

News Archives

Home Page RSS Feed

The Legacy Of Tom Cruise



Permalink | Comments (12) | RSS

Somewhere past the road of fame and right around the final exit for immortality, the world got greedy and turned against Tom Cruise. How could people--and more specifically Viacom's Paramount Pictures--discriminate against a man that has done so much for money-hungry studio heads and Scientology?

Tom Cruise's original goal was to be a priest, he being a Franciscan seminary student and religious minded youth. When the possibility of super-stardom in Hollywood became an option, the talent scout had Tom Cruise at "Hello." A movie career might be just the worldwide avenue needed to deliver a message of peace and truth to a confused world looking for answers. That and the pay is not too shabby. Cruise set his sights on Hollywood and the rest really is cinematic history.

With only a handful of fair to good performances, Tom Cruise became the world's top box office star over a period of less than twenty years. His first film was 1981's Endless Love, in which he starred with a then 15 year old Brooke Shields and another freshman actor James Spader. Following that, he starred in Taps, The Outsiders, Losin' It and then 1983's star making Risky Business. As if he wasn't already building a large fan base of female fans, 1986's Top Gun and The Color Of Money helped to establish him as a true 80's sex symbol.

As a sex symbol for women, not for men. Just to make that clear, as Tom Cruise does not tolerate tabloids, websites and human beings in general who whisper conflicting rumors of his sexuality. (In case there's any doubt, just rest assured that Hollywood is an assemblage of straight, white Christians with largely conservative viewpoints)

By the late 80's Tom Cruise was progressing from popular movie star to cinematic icon. Rain Man and Born On The Fourth Of July were his Oscar bids (though only one scored a nomination) elevating his name as a man who made serious films--movies about something more than just materialism and rampant teenage sex. By the mid 90's he certainly didn't need to be dolled up in make up for Interview With A Vampire, or score another Oscar nomination for Jerry Maguire. His 15 million dollar paychecks, at the time the highest pay in Hollywood, spoke for themselves. By the late 90's he reached a pinnacle not only of his career, but even in his A list celebrity quest to contribute positive things to the world. He didn't have to wait until he was the age of Spielberg or Newman to start making a difference; he was a God of Hollywood and thought it time to start giving back to humanity.

But humanity never seems satisfied with the work of the Gods and starting in the new millennium, Cruise's off screen behavior was scrutinized by a demanding nation. In 2001, he lost many fans despite his kind act of setting Nicole Kidman free. Why did their marriage end? Could it be because he and Kidman worked with Stanley Kubrick on the notorious Eyes Wide Shut, the Guinness Book record holder for the longest shooting in movie history? You and your wife working with the late Kubrick probably feels more like twenty years in Hollywood. Tom Cruise then felt it prudent to remind his fans and doubters that he was divorcing Kidman to date other women--not men, despite what you hear in all those tabloids.

Tom then started dating Penelope Cruz, an admitted woman in Hollywood, and ended that relationship in record time. Speculation that suggests Cruise was concerned about the spelling of his last name being changed in the event of marriage is absurd and untrue.

Tom Cruise persevered and his great faith and work ethic helped him survive the difficult process of dating other people, and produced more high quality films like Vanilla Sky, Minority Report, The Last Samurai and Collateral.

Then Tom Cruise's legacy suffered a slight tumble, just as many other great show-business careers have been shaken, by appearing on the Oprah Winfrey Show. (In light of recent events movie stars should really start thinking of Oprah Winfrey's show as Jury Duty) Tom Cruise created a pop culture sensation and even a new slang expression, "Jumping The Couch", by screaming his love for Batman Begins girl Katie Holmes. Katie Holmes was perfect for the Tom Cruise of 1981's Endless Love. It was a dream come true and the perfect Hollywood love story: yes, a man dating a woman. Why more of his fans turned on him following his Oprah televised antics, is a mystery even more unsettling than the ending of Eyes Wide Shut.

As the new decade went on, Tom Cruise started to give more of his time, energy and wisdom--and again, starting alienating more of his fans. In 2005 Tom Cruise criticized his 80's co-star Brooke Shields for using antidepressants. He explained the basic truth that everybody knows and accepts: that there is no such thing as a chemical imbalance and that psychiatry is a form of pseudoscience (the medical equivalent of a fake diamond). Tom Cruise made a bold move by attacking the institution of psychiatry live on television and arguing with Matt Lauer. A less courageous man might have held his tongue, thinking about the people whose lives have been saved by medication and psychiatry. But Tom Cruise was not afraid. Nor did he worry about what other people thought of him.

He continued telling it like it is and fearlessly speaking the "truth" no matter the threat of facts. In Entertainment Weekly he commented that psychiatry is a Nazi science and that some medication even traces back to Adolph Hitler. All the while destroying the foundation of psychiatry, Cruise did his best to uplift the church of Scientology, of which allegedly he is a high ranking member. He took a stand for his beliefs and refused to allow the world to watch an episode of South Park called "Trapped In The Closet" that needlessly joked about rumors of his sexuality. (Rumors that have been repeatedly denied, since he dates women and is currently engaged to a woman) When push came to shove, Paramount backed down and the South Park episode was pulled for Tom Cruise's Comedy Central appearance. He also denied that he was the one responsible for the censorship, thus making the truth startlingly clear: Comedy Central pulled the South Park episode for no apparent reason since Tom Cruise really doesn't care if you believe he dates women.

Was all of this negative publicity responsible for the disappointing box office takes of War Of The Worlds and Mission Impossible 3? Was he deserving of his termination from Paramount and subsequent humiliation? Will Tom Cruise's career continue to downward spiral or will he bounce back? The latest news is that Cruise has found a new partner to finance his production company. "First and Goal" will finance his future film projects for a significantly less amount than Paramount was paying him--less than three million a year according to industry sources.

Tom Cruise is the modern day Job in many respects. He has truly hit rock bottom and has been persecuted for his beliefs even while staying true to his faith. Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes are now proud parents of a baby girl named Suri. They expect to get married sometime this year. Will marriage and family life slow down Tom Cruise's atomic mind or hinder his quest to teach Scientology to the world? Don't count him out yet.

If there's anything that the legacy of Tom Cruise has taught us, it's that he never gives up. And that he mutually ended his relationship with Paramount. And that he did not order the South Park episode to be removed. And that people in journalism and in the medical profession don't know the history of psychiatry. And that he dates women.

You complete us, Tom.

Comments
What a snide, vicious, nasty article.
Posted by: Greg Robbins | September 1, 2006 03:42 AM
It is so nice to read something sane these days that you only read lies around that people believe without questioning. That is brainwashing at its best! And it's the media carrying out the operation orchestrated by somebody behind. Probably the multi-billion dollar psychiatric drug industry that Tom bravely exposed last year. They won't forgive him for that. But he sure did save a few lives our brave Crusader as sales of those dangerous mind hurting anti-depressants decreased a 20% last year. I admire this man more than ever.
Posted by: Joxe | September 1, 2006 05:37 AM
what a biased fawning.
Posted by: soos | September 1, 2006 01:26 PM
As Greg said, nasty article. As far as I can see Tom Cruise likes to help people and is genuinely friendly and very successful.
Posted by: Deborah Gale | September 1, 2006 06:31 PM
Not nearly vicious enough... Who isn't sick and tired of Tom Cruise and his disturbing shenanigans?
Posted by: jon | September 2, 2006 01:44 PM
Tom Cruise is "Mrs. Pattycake." His religious leader said this about him: "When somebody enrols, consider he or she has joined up for the duration of the universe - never permit an �open-minded� approach... If they enrolled, they�re aboard, and if they�re aboard they�re here on the same terms as the rest of us - win or die in the attempt. Never let them be half minded about being Scientologists... When Mrs. Pattycake comes to us to be taught, turn that wandering doubt in her eye into a fixed, dedicated glare� The proper instruction attitude is, �We'd rather have you dead than incapable.�" - L. Ron Hubbard, KEEPING SCIENTOLOGY WORKING, 7 February 1965, reissued 27 August 1980
Posted by: Pattycake man | September 3, 2006 02:09 PM
Quite a balanced and fair report of Tom's career and recent controversies. Can anyone with a straight face say that it is OK to give children addictive, mind altering drugs which have been linked to suicide and violence? That Tom had the balls to say this directly shows his integrity. The media's subsequent attacks have to do with the drug companies insitence that they do so, since the drug companies represent major advertising $. Just follow the money and It's easy to see. Roger Harrison
Posted by: Roger Harrison | September 4, 2006 03:06 AM
Although sarcastic, this article chronicles that actual career and reasoning for the demise of Tom Cruise. Comments here would suggest that majority believes in Cruise. But, box office's don't lie. Cruise's beliefs have hurt himself and others enormously. The one part this article left out was that he divorces Kidman because she refused to convert. That's a finatical man who is as dangerous as terrorists to the peace and stability of society.
Posted by: RK Winters | September 5, 2006 05:13 PM
TOM CRUISE ? The truth behind One year ago three things happened that -seriously- changed the world: Tom Cruise jumped on the couch at Oprah's, in happiness, declaring his love for Katie. He made some comments about a well known actress for promoting dangerous mind altering psychiatric drugs in her book. And he exposed publicly the covert multibillion dollar fraud that psychiatrists and the pharmaceuticals have built in a controversial TV interview. Ever since, the media and the blogs have been filled with lies, lies and more lies about Tom and his very words have been twisted once and again to convey things he never said. I want to illustrate how insane this whole thing has become: Lie #1 - His romance with Katie had just been made up in order to promote his movie War of the Worlds. This one needs no comment at all. As if he, the biggest star in the world, needed that. Lie #2 - Tom and Katie are splitting. This actually keeps being published once and again, so it has been a recurrent lie. Lie #3 - Katie wasn't really pregnant but she was faking it all. Lie #4 - Katie was not going to be allowed to make any noise at all at the delivery. The true silent birth is about everybody around the mother keeping as quiet as possible, so that the birth can take place in a quiet, calm environment. It's that simple. All the rest were just more invented lies. Lie #5 - He was going to eat placenta. He made a joke that was really funny on a TV interview about eating placenta and the day after the media all over the world were reporting that he was seriously going to eat placenta when it was very clearly a joke he made on a TV interview. It's very obvious here that somebody intendedly twisted what really happened and spread it around throught one of those agencies that supply news to the media intenationally. The intention is also very obvious. They wanted to make Tom look like a a fool. They wanted to create the perception that he is nuts. Who? Why? We will get to that later. Lie #6 - Tom was awarded an Ernie Award in Australia for having done some sexist comments. It was later discovered that he had never made such comments. Somebody else invented them!!! But nobody apologized. Lie #7 - After the birth Tom and Katie were hiding Suri not only from the public from their very friends. Will Smith, Jada Pinkett Smith, Leah Remini, Penelope Cruz and others explained how they had met Suri. Lie #8 - Suri didn't exist. Have you seen the beautiful family pictures published in Vanity Fair? Lie #9 - Katie's family didn't get along with Tom and they were having real trouble and upsets between the families. Vanity Fair editor Jane Sarkin spent 5 days last summer with the whole family at Tom's house in Telluride and she says they were all getting along great. Katie's parents and siblings were there. Tom's mother, sister and children were there too. They were just a big famiy. Lie #10 - Tom was just waiting to create enough media interest in order to be able to get more money than Brangelina for the pictures of his baby. Vanity Fair editor declares there was no money involved at all in the pictures. They paid zero for them. I could go on and on writing lies that have been invented and spread around for a whole year now but is it really necessary? I think the point has been made - no actor has ever been subject to such a wild, wide, evil and long lasting black PR attack campaign that I can remember. We are getting to the juicy part now. Why? Who is behind this all? Who could be interested in orchestrating such a long black PR operation in order to destroy Tom Cruise? And again, Why? In short, what is the truth behind it all? I saw Tom jumping on the couch at Oprah and I loved it. The public who attended the show also loved it. It was hilarious. Entertainment at its best. Was that a crime? Did he hurt somebody so bad by doing it that they now wanted to get this far to destroy him? It doesn't make sense. This is not it. Was the actress he critizised for promoting dangerous anti-depressants in her book so upset and so evil that she was now moving earth and hell in order to destroy him? This doesn't make sense either. This actress we all know since she was a kid is not like that. This is definitely not the truth behind. So what do we have left? The public exposure of the covert multibillion dollar fraud that psychiatry and the pharmaceuticals have built together by the brave Tom Cruise in a TV interview. He could just have sat back and enjoyed his fortune but he is concerned about one of the greatest catastrophies in the history of mankind and tried to do something about it in spite of risking it all. Besides other documented abuses and violations of the Human Rights, psychs are drugging millions of american children at schools for made up reasons. Many of them are not even 5 y.o. And also outside schools they are drugging children who are barely 1 y.o. This is huge! After Tom's exposure of the psych drug fraud last year the FDA ordered those anti-depresants to carry black labels warning citizens that they can cause suicide, violence, psychosis, mania, heart attacks and sudden death and sales of such anti-depressants fell a 20% - it seems like the psychs & the pharmaceuticals have not forgiven Tom for having cut their income which is higher than $76 billions a year a 20% down. That must have hurt. It's a hell of a lot of money! Just recently we all heard about the noisy split between Paramount (owned by Viacom) and Tom. Why was Cruise slamed by Viacom's head when he had made 1 billion for them in the last year just with his last two movies War of the Worlds and MI3? Well, the amount of money made by the movie industry is peanuts compared to the amount of money made by the pharmaceutical industry. In fact, it happens that William Gray, who is part of Viacom's board of directors, is also on the board of Pfizer (the largest pharmaceutical company by 2004 sales). And Ivan Seidenberg, who is also part of Viacom?s board of directors, is on the board of Wyeth (the 10th largest pharmaceutical company by 2004 sales). You are free to pull the string if you want to know the whole truth... you may be very surprised. By the way, it seems that Viacom's shares fell as much as a 10% after the whole thing... Psychiatry and the pharmaceuticals sure have the resources to create such a huge media wave in an attempt to destroy Tom Cruise, who is puting their risky business in danger just by unveiling the truth. If they were not doing anything wrong why sould they care about him and about what he said? If you don't prejudge and you care to investigate a little bit around on your own you can find very interesting data and evidence in webs such as www.cchr.org and others. I have also found very interesting books on the subject. Last but not least, there is an extremely interesting video around on the internet they sure don't want you to watch http://cchr.org/uploads/video/no_science.wmv.
Posted by: Joxe Arkaitz | September 9, 2006 10:16 PM
Hi Joxe WOW! You've done some research. Thanks for that beam of sunlight! Amazing how palatable the truth is! Go TC!!!!
Posted by: shawn | September 18, 2006 08:14 AM
TOM CRUISE ?? Please, please bring him back ! It's just so terrifying to hear that he might not be doing Mission Impossible IV. How could Paramount Pictures be so cruel? Couldn't they just give him a second chance ? Afterall, Mission Impossible won't be Mission Impossible without TOM !!!
Posted by: Lakmalie | September 22, 2006 03:52 AM
Tom Cruise has been targeted by the media because he is upsetting the immensely powerful US pharmaceutical industry. That industry is in the ongoing process of conditioning Americans to believe that every life difficulty is a clinically diagnosable illness for which a pharmaceutical product can be purchased and used to relieve the ill-effects of the problem. The economic model for the development, production, distribution and consumption is the one typical of most large American corporations. It's primary objective is to maximise profits rather than optimise public good by placing the burden of cost solely on the end-consumer either directly at the counter or through the medical insurance industry which regulates premiums in relation to claims and payouts. People who criticize the industry are ridiculed and those who criticize national health policies are accused of being "liberals" - as if that actually meant anything.
Posted by: Vanny | October 10, 2006 06:19 AM
Post a comment
Name:
*
Email Address:
*
Comments: