comment #1

The Winchester says ...

The franchise is dead. Let it go. And British tabloids are not exactly the greatest source for news. There's more information in the Weekly World News.

comment #2

JoeGreenia says ...

Agreed on both counts. Entertainment news from London should be disregarded by default.

comment #3

Nicol D says ...

The Brad Pitt fascination continues to boggle me.

With the sole exception of Mr. and Mrs. Smith, which was helped by the tabloid aura of his love life, Pitt's biggest hits as a sole star (ie. not the Ocean's films) are tantamount to worse than Cruise's biggest flops.

More than any other major star working today, Pitt oozes a 'flake' persona.

He is no 'art' actor like a DeNiro, Depp or Pacino who can go back and forth between art and commerce type projects.

Pitt seems to be like many current movie stars who keep getting top salaries in big vehicles despite their performance, not because of.

A few posts down people were baffled by the appeal of Kevin Costner. Costner's resume, from the Untouchables to say the mid nineties, is more solid than any stretch Pitt has ever done. And unlike Pitt, he doesn't trade in on a male ditz/himbo persona.

Remember, the true star of Fight Club is Fincher, not Pitt.

comment #4

sprofessor says ...

No more Mission Impossibles. Please. Three is more than enough. And no one will care if Tom isn't in it.

I do think Pitt is a good actor and has picked some good roles in the past (Fight Club, 12 Monkeys, Interview with the Vampire) and I thought he came across as very intelligent and interesting on the Fight Club commentary. But his choice of bland star vehicle type roles lately has been disappointing.

Nicol D, I love Fincher and all but I think the real star of Fight Club was Chuck Palahniuk's book. Fincher will never find material of that quality again.

comment #5

Josh Massey says ...

Geez, why not? This franchise could keep going with either Cruise or another actor (though Cruise looks very unlikely, obviously). Of the three movies, two of them were quite entertaining. Just keep John Woo away from any future installments.

Pitt would be good,... but why would he do it?

comment #6

Dixon Steele says ...

Nicol D,

Pitt's popularity with studios shouldn't be boggling your mind.

The box office from his last two big movies alone, TROY & M&M SMITH, was $650 million.

And that's just FOREIGN only.

It's all about the foreign, which is increasingly outgrossing the domestic.

comment #7

nola says ...

I find Brad much more appealing to watch on screen than Tom. At least Brad seems human (and he's fine).

I agree with the earlier posts, let the franchise end.

comment #8

jbf81 says ...

Please Brad its my image of movie star!

Brad’s movies arent exactly Box Office hits because he chooses more risks films like seven, fight club, 12 monkeys, 7 years in Tibet.
He likes doing those small movies, unlike Tom Cruise that only works in big movies (good movies a have to admit)

But Brad is much more charming then Cruise !He work really hard to escape the pretty boy image and I think that Babel it’s a big proof of that

comment #9

Pwrgirl says ...

It isn't true, so why are we discussing it?

And if people want to compare Brad to Tom, BOTH have done exceptional work in the past. Tom hasn't only done big films. He did MAGNOLIA with little to no pay. He spent 2 years of his life making EYES WIDE SHUT with Stanley Kubrick. JERRY MAGUIRE was actually seen as a risk at the time he was filming it, since Crowe was still not that well established.

You can look back on both careers and see that both have a good eye for scripts.

Again...since this story is bogus, why is it making so much press? Gee, could it be that tabloid rumors these days are spread on the internet as fact? Hmmmm...

comment #10

Nicol D says ...

Dixon,

"The box office from his last two big movies alone, TROY & M&M SMITH, was $650 million."

But as I said, those are his 'only' hits with him as the sole male lead. Ocean's are Clooney and the group.

Cruise's bombs do in foreign what Pitt's hits do.

Obviously this rumour is false, but my point still stands...if Cruise's current grosses are evident of a guy on the skids, as so many are saying, then using the same standards, Pitt has never been off them.

Pitt's appeal has always been more about his tabloid life then the quality of his acting or films. He has never been the box office matinee idol he is always touted as.

An industry fave perhaps, but not as much with the public at large.

comment #11

Dixon Steele says ...

Nicol, you miss the point.

Studios (and other businesses, for that matter) don't care that much what happened 10 years ago, or even five years ago. They don't care that MEET JOE BLACK was a bore.

It's all about What Have You Done Lately?

And lately Pitt, via Troy and M&M Smith, is on fire.

And Tom Cruise has been acting very strangely in public (Oprah, the Brooke Shields thing) and his MI3 was a big disappointment, financially. He supposedly walked away with $80 million on that one, with the studio barely breaking even. And in Hollywood, that a Cardinal Sin.

Does some of Pitt's popularity have to do with the Jolie/Aniston stuff? Possibly. But so what?

I don't think there's one studio head TODAY that wouldn't rather be in business with Pitt than Cruise.

And if Cruise's next picture grosses $500 million, and Pitt's next few disappoints, their attitude will change. That's the way it is.

comment #12

Joel says ...

I'm glad Pitt won't be replacing Cruise, because I think Pitt has more interesting projects lined up already. I wouldn't mind seeing the MI series continue, though.

comment #13

Jean says ...

Please! Can't we all get along? There are greater evils in Hollywood...

...here's a worthier cause: let's band together to stop Adam Sandler from making any more films.

comment #14

Josh Massey says ...

Cruise can be as nutty as he wants. If he keeps making good films - and with very few exceptions, he does - I'll keep seeing them.