In Defense of Tom Cruise

I know what Tom Cruise did to make people bash him on a regular basis. He's a Scientologist; he says things that he has no business talking about on national TV (the Matt Lauer episode); and he has come across as insincere, bordering on nuts (the couch jumping).

I get it. It makes it hard to distinguish between his personal life and his acting. But I just don't care about any of it. I don't care about his marriage, his religion, his kids, any of it. Because I don't go to the movies to witness the thrill of seeing an actor's personal life unfold before me. I go to the movies to sit back and to be entertained by a good movie.

So when a Tom Cruise film comes out, I want to see it because it is almost always going to be a good movie.

Here's why: effort. When I see a movie starring Mr. Cruise, I always get the impression that he has poured everything into the film's success. He just looks like he works hard. He acts as if he does not want us to waste our money, and that he believes we've put our faith in him, and so he's going to repay us by making a good movie. Do I sound like I'm bordering on nuts, too? Perhaps -- but I'm also right.

If Tom Cruise did not work so hard, he would be Timothy Hutton. No offense to Hutton, an excellent actor who won an Academy Award, is now starring on a good TV show, and who starred in Taps with Cruise. What do I mean by comparing Cruise to Hutton? I'll explain by making a sacrilegious comparison: I'm going to compare Cruise to Michael Jordan.

Here's the difference between Michael Jordan and, say, a guy like Reggie Miller. Reggie Miller was a great shooter who, more often that many, hit an amazing array of shots and proved to be an extremely clutch player. But he didn't do it every night. He didn't do it every game. And when you watched a game where Miller hit crazy shot after crazy shot, you said, "Why doesn't he do that every night?" If he did do it every night, he would have been Michael Jordan. But no one did what Jordan did -- Jordan was the guy who outworked everyone else, every game, and performed at the consistently highest level imaginable. Whatever an opponents work ethic was, Jordan just outworked him. Reggie Miller did the best he could do -- he just didn't have that extra gear that Jordan has.

Tom Cruise has that extra gear. He came up with some great actors, and they did some great movies at the beginning -- The Outsiders, the aforementioned Taps. But Cruise separated himself from the pack of Dillons and Huttons. He separated himself by choosing his roles wisely, from the start.

I can go back to the beginning -- to the great, All the Right Moves, which is just as good when viewed today, to the underrated Risky Business. Those movies came out around 25 years ago. Then came Top Gun, and then the more serious vehicles with other brilliant actors that brought him from box office star to serious actor: The Color of Money, (Paul Newman) Rain Man, (Dustin Hoffman) and Cocktail, (Bryan Brown). Okay, maybe the last one wasn't serious, but I enjoyed it as much as any of the others; actually, I enjoyed, and I have watched it, more than any other film Cruise has made.

There have been many other excellent ones along the way. The Firm, A Few Good Men, Jerry McGuire, The Last Samurai. There have been some clunkers, and it seems more of them have come lately. Minority Report, with Spielberg; Eyes Wide Shut, with Kubrick; War of the Worlds, again with Spielberg. Good efforts, but they didn't pan out.

Still, if you look at the overall track record, Tom Cruise is to films what (forgive the sports analogy again) Babe Ruth was to baseball -- the most likely to hit the next one out of the park.

Now, I have no idea if Valkyrie is going to be good, or the worst movie ever. I do know that many critics seem to be savaging Cruise for sport. You can almost hear them giggling as you write their reviews of his latest offerings. He's been bloodied, and now they seem to want him to die.

But I don't want Tom Cruise to stop taking risks, to stop making movies. Let me put it this way: when I hear that Bruce Springsteen is coming out with a new CD, I want it to be great. He's got the best record of any musician working today. Many music acts today are one hit wonders. Not Springsteen. He maintains his status as the best musician of his generation, because he's a poet, but also because he just seems to care so much about his music. Doesn't it sound that way when you hear him sing? I don't know much about Springsteen's private life, and I don't care. I listen to his songs, and I find them to be incredibly well conceived. When someone is so good at what they do, we should hope that they continue to do it.

Tom Cruise is one of those rare people -- someone who consistently gives a good product to an extremely fickle audience. I'm not saying he's a poet, but I am saying that he's great at his job, and that job is movie star. Actors tend not stay big stars for long these days (how often have we heard that someone is the "next Tom Cruise?," Colin Farrell? Jude Law?) and Cruise has managed to maintain star status for more than 25 years. That's saying something.

So when Tom Cruise makes a movie, count me as one of the people who believe it's going to be well worth seeing.

Comments

[thekell]

"Born on the 4th of July" should have won Tom Cruise the oscar. Oh yeah. Tom Cruise can act. It's just that the rest of the plebs in this world want to see Tom Cruise, the Movie Star. So we get Rain Man. A Few Good Men. Jerry McGuire. War of the Worlds. I love those films. And I also love plenty of non-trad cinema: independent narrative, foreign, documentary, and experimental art films. Blockbuster and Art can co-exist. Just like the two takes on Tom Cruise: the actor, and the movie star.

[gurugary]

I couldn't agree with your article more. Tom Cruise is a hard worker and has made an incredible number of fabulous movies, with more to come, I'm sure. It is so completely obvious that the "haters" out there want him dead purely because they disagree with his position on anti-depressants or they dislike Scientology. I don't believe that people at large dislike Tom Cruise, I don't believe that he will stop making movies or that people will stop seeing them. I for one, line up to see any Tom Cruise movie that comes out.

[rektruax]

Cruise is very easy on the eye's, and he makes a lot of people money with his name and pictures. He serves those purposes well. We're not talking about Ben Kingsley here. We're not talking about deep craft, or art. We're talking about a top player in a profiting business. Cruise is great at that.

[LovingHope]

One day Tom will win an Oscar. He is a very passionate, brilliant actor. Unfortunately, some people have taken a disliking of him, because of his beliefs. I'm looking forward to another Jerry McGuire performance. He was perfect in that movie. I admire his passion. He is such a classy person. And let's not forget "Born on the Fourth of July." I hate to read negative comments about him. So what if he jumped on the couch to say how much he loved Katie. That was romantic in my eyes. To be Katie....

[Bitsko]

You lost me at In Defense of Tom Cruis...

[rektruax]

Damned funny...

[jillsond]

Dude, you had me at "Hello", but lost me when you brought up Springstein. Come on! The best poet of his generation? Hardly.

Cruise can be an amazing actor. His best work is "Magnolia", in my opinion. An even greater actor than Cruise, Phillip Seymore Hoffman, was also brilliant in Magnolia. To call Hoffman the "Next Cruise" would cause some serious giggles in film-critic circles. There's simply no comparison. Hoffman out-acted Cruise, which was no easy feat, and the great, GREAT Jason Robards.

The problem with Cruise is his inability to separate his decent acting chops from reality. Yep, he has talent, but he's a pushy creep outside the movie world. If he has such strong opinions,like not medicating for depression, why not, say, network, write a book with experts, yada yada yada. Instead, Cruise uses his interviewers as a pulpit for 10 minute soundbites. His nonsense is so infuriatingly unfounded that even he seems frustrated and angry by what he's saying.

Thoughtful, effective people who are passionate about a cause don't behave like Cruise. They don't bully and ridicule their host or insult their viewers. They use reason and research and behave with compassion in order to educate. Cruise's body language and actions bespeak nothing more than plain old abusive behavior.

Now, Mr. Littman, I challenge you to compare Cruise to the timeless and classy actors Mr. Cruise will never aspire to on or off the screen. A few for thought: Newman and Hoffman?

[as1504]

Tom Cruise is one of the worst actors out there. His popularity was derived from his being a sex symbol and there is nothing wrong with that. The author is right when he says that Cruise is hard working. Everyone who has ever worked with him says that about him. But, he is simply incapable of subtlety, striking the right tone, and cannot avoid overacting in his "serious" roles. Cruise is desperate for the Oscar that will always elude him because his acting is not of that caliber.

The author makes a huge error in that he conflates box office receipts with talent. How much money did "Boys Don't Cry" make? I would venture to say it earned less money than the salary Cruise commands, but boy did Hillary Swank give a hell of a performance. Helen Miren stars in movies with much bigger budgets than "Boys Don't Cry," but that cost a hell of a lot less than "Minority Report" and earn even less, yet she gave such excellent performances that she was nominated twice in the Best Actress category in one year. Putting butts in seats does not equate good acting or performances worthy of praise, except at the bank.

[RedDogBear]

Right on. Lots of people seem to conflate making money with being a good actor. By the same logic Britney Spears is a great musician. You are so right about Cruise. I can't sit through his awful over acting. Its like he's hitting you over the head with a hammer "NOW I'M SERIOUS. NOW I'M SAAAAD. NOW I'M EXCITED!!!!!!" Compare that to real actors such as Steve Bucsemi (sp?) who can play all sorts of roles and give you real, subtle, layered, emotions.

[Boyisfresh]

Tom did jump on some couches, but the guy has been doing that since Risky Business and Jerry Maguire so whats new. Why front? Hey is a good actor and is built for entertaining. Why are we trying to follow him more then that? He does amazing movies. So help me help you by saying, If you don't like him then don't follow him or say how much you don't like him. Because all you are doing is building buzz for him.

[pilaarkila]

Tom has played in a lot of good movies. He also directed a lot of good Movies, The Last Samurai , Vanilla Sky , The Others (which was a great movie might I add).

[RedDogBear]

Cruise didn't direct any of those movies. He was executive producer (i.e. put up the $$) for The Others and acted (if you can call what he does acting, I would call it mugging or preening) in the other movies. I do agree that The Others was a good movie though. If only Tom could just stick to bank rolling movies with Nicole in them (without him). She can actually act.

[as1504]

Vanilla Sky was a Spanish movie, not an American. The original was directed by Alejandro Amenábar, starred Eduardo Noriega, Penélope Cruz, and Chete Lera. The two just makes Vanilla Sky and Cruise's performances worse than they are on their own.

[Ladyluv]

I agree Tom Cruise is a great actor. We as people just love to bash on celebrities. It is in our nature. Since Tom is a ICON, we will forever try to make that star fall out of the sky. Because that is what gossip news is all about. We love falling stars. Ain't that right people. We love to criticize even when there is no need to. Even after a person has been making millions for over 20 years in film. We purchase the tickets and then we gossip and criticize until that star falls.

Keep hanging in there Tom.

[DimariS]

Tom Cruise has acted in some great movies, usually with the collaboration of fantastic actors. I really do not care about his family, his "religion", his life, his furniture abuse or any of his other antics. The fact that he used his celebrity to make a mockery of a serious illness from which millions of Americans suffer is what angers me. Based upon his craft and his success he is certainly qualified to discuss his advice and experience in the field of acting. To continue to harp on a mental illness that brings misery to untold numbers of lives makes me and many others hold him in complete contempt along with his "religion" which has strongly impugned the profession of psychology and psychiatry. If I hadn't availed myself of that profession, I would have been dead long ago.

[pilaarkila]

I do not understand your argument. How did Tom use his celebrity status to make a mockery of mental illness? If you are talking about his debate with using drugs, he was not making a mockery of mental illness, he was against the way some doctors treat mental illness and addictions with prescription drugs. We are a world that things the answer to feeling better is in a pill. From dieting, to stress, to finding love, to sexual satisfaction. Then again your message was not clear to what really Tom Cruise was using his celebrity "power" against.

Tom Cruise is a actor. A decent one at that. That is all he is.

[66rock]

Sorry Mr Littman, Cruise HAD that extra gear, now, not so much.

Yes, he made some good movies and he Was a movie star, now, not so much.

Paul Newman, for example, was a movie star and remained a star because he had talent. Cruise, not so much. He should now stick to producing or else risk becoming more of a joke.

[FZliveson]

The paycheck an actor gets is directly proportional to the gross ticket sales (in theory at least)
Cruise is a rich man, so lotsa folk trundle out to watch him bat his pretty eyes, sneer and pretend
to be someone he is not. Some are convinced by his acting. I don't buy him as a good actor.
He is a decent performer, but he always has a look in his eye that he is ACTING and not BEING
the person he is portraying. Look at Christopher Walken or Anthony Hopkins or Tom Hanks or even jim Carey (sp?)...they portray believable people in movies. I don't give a flyer about Cruises religion, marriages or money. I just know when I see him on the screen, it feels counterfeit and staged, which is
precisely what it is.

[BigMike75]

I would agree that Tom Cruise doesn't deserve the roasting he's got now for the better part of 2-3 years. He does invite some of the scrutnity, the couch jumping episode on Oprah was one of the most bizarre things I saw, the scientology, the criticism of Brook Shields for post partum depression, were all things that didn't endear him to a lot of people. But over the course of his career I've enjoyed most of his movies, he's made some truly forgettable ones though. Jerry Macguire, Rain Man, Last Samurai, The Color of Money, are some of my favorites. And the last dance scene in Tropic Thunder is hilarious. I think what we don't see from Cruise is enough versatility and depth in the characters he plays, it just looks like Tom Cruise on camera time after time. Let's hope that now that's he's not the box office draw he once was, that he chooses some more challenging roles that actually force him to act.

[DirectProf]

Wow ... does this writer and me ever have vastly different opinions about the talent and worth of Mr. Tom Cruise. Wow ...