Mission Impossible Shake-Up

You know, I’m starting to feel a little sorry for Tom Cruise. Lately it seems as though we’re slowly watching the collapse of a superstar. It’s kind of depressing.

First Mission Impossbile III tanks at the box office, he gets fired from Paramount, and of course, there’s the whole Suri Cruise debacle.

Then this happens:

Brad Pitted Against Cruise in ‘M:I’ Shake-Up
By WENN Wednesday, September 20, 2006 [SOURCE]

HOLLYWOOD – Brad Pitt has been tipped to reverse the Mission: Impossible franchise’s struggling fortunes by replacing Tom Cruise in the fourth installment.

Cruise, who played agent Ethan Hunt in the action movies, was axed by Paramount Studios last month following Mission: Impossible III‘s poor box office takings and his “unacceptable conduct” off screen.

Now Fight Club star Pitt is being hailed as a potential savior, despite the fact he recently voiced his aversion to superstar roles, insisting, “Being a part of an ensemble is always more fun, you don’t have to carry the film.”

An industry insider tells Britain’s London Lite evening newspaper, “Mission: Impossible IV will not include Tom‘s character, agent Ethan Hunt.

They’re considering a brief mention, saying Hunt retired to live a safe life with his new wife.

They’re set on Brad taking over as a gutsy new head operative who puts together his own unique team of specialists.” Studios bosses will reportedly offer over $52 million for Pitt to star in the film, the single biggest wage ever paid to an actor for one film.

See, poor Tom Cruise. How will he ever survive?

Do Scientologists have a God? If so, Tom Cruise should really hit him up for some advice. (And I say him because no female would ever be the God of Scientology.)

Mission: Impossible‘s Box Office Blunder

Mission: Impossible III earned the top box office spot this weekend, grossing an estimated $48 million. So how is this a box office failure? Considering that M:I III was made for $135 million and was expected to earn over $60 million, the first summer blockbuster of the season was a box office miss.

This has caused critics and ordinary people like myself to ask the a very big question. Have the Adventures of TomKat caused the collapse of Hollywood’s biggest star?

Public persona has always played an important role in determining a movie’s success. In the late 1930’s Katharine Hepburn was labeled “box-office poison” which practically destroyed her career. For today’s Hollywood, public persona, often reflected through the lens of the paparazzi camera, has become many celebrities cushion or death sentence.  (Think Paris Hilton versus Tara Reid).

In Tom Cruise’s case it probably did not help that he shared his ridiculous theories about religion and psychiatry while throwing in carefully executed moments of PDA.

I think if his career has been affected by his behavior, then it’s his own fault. And maybe it just hasn’t occurred to critics and the media that their are some people who do not want to see a Tom Cruise movie, when all they have to do it open the latest issue of People.

That’s my opinion. Here’s an New York Times article discussing it. Feel free to weigh in.