ROTTEN TOMATOES: Tom Cruise Signs Up for Bryan Singer's WWII Thriller

Tom Cruise Signs Up for Bryan Singer's WWII Thriller

by Scott Weinberg | March 22, 2007

Summary

Bryan Singer will get his as-yet-untitled World War II thriller in front of camera early this summer, and he'll have at least one (very) heavy hitter sitting on his bench: Tom Cruise has just signed on to play the lead role. Back to Article

(1-30 of 30 posts) | Reply

privatepilesleftnipple writes:
on Mar 22 2007 03:40 AM

moderator threatened to ban me if i did.............

(Reply to this)

mojodaddy writes:
on Mar 22 2007 05:35 AM

The usual suspects was the only film of Singer's that I really liked. That and X2 I think. I don't really have high hopes for this one, but it might be decent.

(Reply to this)

frogleg writes:
on Mar 22 2007 06:10 AM

Sounds cool to me.

(Reply to this)

Xhrix writes:
on Mar 22 2007 06:53 AM

what pvt pliles tit is thinking...totally

(Reply to this)

Mikeal420 writes:
on Mar 22 2007 07:59 AM

this sounds like a promising idea to me, I just hope Cruise fits the role. He's one of my favorite actors, but when it comes to period pieces, his look and personality often do not match the timeframe(look at "Far and Away" and "The Last Samurai). For some reason, he is perfectly suited for films that take place in the future- he just has that ultra-modern look. Kevin Kostner, if nothing else, definitly has the look and feel for period films.

**Note**--I liked "The Last Samurai", just didn't think Cruise fit the role.

(Reply to this)

arpeggio191 writes:
on Mar 22 2007 08:18 AM

so funny story. i read this and told a guy i work with the basics of the post. his exact question was "oh man, is Cruise playing Hitler?? Please tell me he is!"

hahahaha

(Reply to this)

stevegilpin writes:
on Mar 22 2007 08:20 AM

[b]Too bad about Singer....[/b]
His movies tend to be weak.....with the exception of The Usual Suspects (which I watched recently and am still in love with), I think he is only a competent filmmaker. I thought Superman Returns was really bad. With Tom Cruise in the lead role, you never know.....he's so hit-or-miss. I'll wait until I see a preview to decide if it's worth checking out.
The most significant part of this, I believe, is the involvement of Christopher McQuarrie, who wrote The Usual Suspects. I think that was a huge part of that film's lasting success.

(Reply to this)

arendr writes:
on Mar 22 2007 08:43 AM

singer has failed to impress me since The Usual Suspects, so i'm not holding out too much hope. i'm interested in anything WW2 though. cruise has honestly only impressed me in a couple roles (collateral, mostly).

the main thing to fear is tom cruise dragging the premiere down with his antics.

(can scientologists use morphine???)

(Reply to this)

8599061 writes:
on Mar 22 2007 09:19 AM

[b]Cruise is a bore.[/b]
He is a bore in his movies and a bore in interviews ::cough cough:: probably why he jumps on couches ::cough::

And so he get a new movie role. How can he not when he is in charge of project at the studio he is signed with.

(Reply to this)

narcissusbleh writes:
on Mar 22 2007 09:34 AM

It says that the filmmakers talked him into it, doofus.

There's huge potential there, since McQuarrie is involved. I wouldn't say any of Bryan Singer's films are outright bad, anyway.

(Reply to this)

Mikeal420 writes:
on Mar 22 2007 09:35 AM

[b]What's with all the Cruise/Singer Bashing?[/b]
First off, whenever a director makes a brilliant cult classic (I.E. The Usual Suspects) then goes on to make commercial projects, they are always bashed this way. Never mind X-Men one and two were entertaining films that would of sucked big time if not for having a talented director like Singer.

Next, people bash Cruise because of hs personality, which isn't that eccentric to begin with (I know eccentric people and Cruise is only eccentric enough to make him a good actor) Name one movie in which he has truly given a bad performance(Im sure ur biased opinions will be able to name of few though) Seeing films like "Born on the 4th of July", "Magnolia", "Interview With the Vampire", and many more I have no doubt he is a talented director.

(and note that earlier I criticized him in period films, not because of his ability to act, but only because I think his look is better suited to modern films)

(Reply to this)

criddic writes:
on Mar 22 2007 10:27 AM

[b]Tom Cruise Signs Up for Bryan Singer's WWII Thrill[/b]
Cruise is a good actor, but does not have as wide a range as he seems to believe he does. I applaud him for taking roles that challenge his abilities (like in The Last Samurai or Interview with the Vampire), and sometimes he delivers a superb performance (see Born on the 4th of July or Minority Report). He is a three-time Oscar-nominated actor (for Born on the 4th of July in '89, Jerry Maguire in '96, and Magnolia- in supp.- in '99). I would have nommed him for "July," A Few Good Men in '92 and Interview w/the Vampire (in supp.) in '94.

He seems well-suited to action pictures, but sometimes offers un-even performances in serious dramas like Eyes Wide Shut in '99 or appears in downright silly movies like Cocktail in 88, or bad movies like Legend in '86. I wil say he's grown as an actor, although perhaps not as an adult (his couch-jumping antics and his somewhat loony interviews reveal a childish attitude), and I have no doubt he will make some more good movies. Maybe this Singer collaboration will be one of them.

(Reply to this)

Shatter24 writes:
on Mar 22 2007 10:32 AM

[b]Agree regarding Singer and Cruise[/b]
Singer is a brilliant director. His vision of his films and his ability to get the right shots in front of the camera, is brilliant. Good writing ability too. The only thing that has shaken my faith in Singer is Superman Returns, and basically I think the problem was he was too in love with the project, he had no perspective, and made an overly long, somewhat poorly cast, anti-climactic love piece. But Usual Suspects, Apt Pupil, X-Men 1 & 2, are all brilliant films, and should not be forgotten.

Cruise has gotten a little weird. But he's still a decent actor, with an interesting persona that helps sell his films (or used to).

(Reply to this)

jeanpaul writes:
on Mar 22 2007 10:49 AM

[b]A WW2 thriller with "THE GRINNING GUY".[/b]
OK...
OK...
Wait. This needs to sink in.

A World War 2 epic film, about the horrendeous war... with a guy running around and grinning and showing the WHOLE RANGE OF HIS TEETH, all over Europe, the whole time!!

Ok. Wait. It's still not sinking in...

(Reply to this)

jeanpaul writes:
on Mar 22 2007 11:05 AM

[b]IN ONE SCENE... TOM CRUISE[/b]
In one key scene in Brian Singer's WWII epic, starring TOM CRUISE--- TOM CRUISE's character come face to face with a GIGANTIC GERMAN TANK!!!

Oh, my!! What will happen?! This is too much tension!!!

But then, just when all was considered lost... TOM CRUISE takes out the chewing gum from his mouth--- crushes it in his hand into a ball--- connecting the positive and negetive wiring inside the chewing-gum--- sticks it on the German TANK--- and runs as the TANK explodes in slow motion!!!

Tom Cruise's character is actually ETHAN HUNT--- sent back this time, using a time machine to WWII period to save supermodel Elle Mcphearson--- his girlfriend!!

Ha!! UP YOURS, Paramount Pictures!! You havent seen the last of Tom Cruise!!

With King Regards,
Tom Cruise.

(Reply to this)

unbreakable_samurai writes:
on Mar 22 2007 11:22 AM

I think it sounds damn good and will eagerly look foreward to it's release. Cruise and Singer both are great and should do very well together.

(Reply to this)

Circe Prankster writes:
on Mar 22 2007 12:12 PM

In reply to this comment (#859043)
[b]Agree completely with Shatter24[/b]
"The only thing that has shaken my faith in Singer is Superman Returns, and basically I think the problem was he was too in love with the project, he had no perspective, and made an overly long, somewhat poorly cast, anti-climactic love piece. But Usual Suspects, Apt Pupil, X-Men 1 & 2, are all brilliant films, and should not be forgotten."

That was exactly my feeling about Superman Returns, which is why I'm not at all interested in the sequel currently being discussed in another thread. (I think the director being too in love with the project was the problem with Peter Jackson's "King Kong" too.) However, I adore Usual Suspects and Apt Pupil, so I'm very excited about this movie. It shouldn't be billed as an "inbetween" movie Singer's squeezing in before doing another, more lucrative (but potentially a lot blander) Superman epic. The action scenes in his first Superman didn't counterbalance the pseudo-retro schlock.

As for Cruise, I've always thought he was a little creepy, but I don't mind watching him when he's playing an interesting character in a good movie (I really liked Collateral). He's not a bad actor, but (in my opinion) his personality defects prevent him from carrying an iffy project which someone else might be able to pull off from sheer charisma.

(Reply to this)

lrm8 writes:
on Mar 22 2007 12:19 PM

i wouldnt call apt pupil,, or either xmen "brilliant", but they are good movies.

singer does solid work, but he's not quite the genius that people make him out to be

(Reply to this)

Baccus83 writes:
on Mar 22 2007 02:02 PM

Oh my god, Singer makes one film that's a disappointment, and now everybody's turned on him. "The Usual Suspects" was fantastic! And I thought that "X2" and "Superman Returns" were both excellent entertainment. As far as Cruise goes, he's got something to prove now - and he's been making some riskier (and more exciting) choices. I have high hopes for this one.

(Reply to this)

8599061 writes:
on Mar 22 2007 02:37 PM

In reply to this comment (#859039)
[b]Oh Please...[/b]
They have to get him to do something. They are paying him a whole lot every year without even doing anything. That is how his contracts work.

No doubt they hope he will be a draw but I think he has lost that appeal.

(Reply to this)

alsanali writes:
on Mar 22 2007 04:28 PM

In reply to this comment (#859049)
Riskier choices like War of the Worlds and M:I-3?

(Reply to this)

killermonkey8822 writes:
on Mar 22 2007 06:21 PM

i hate tom cruise........ he's just not a very good actor.......... ever since i first saw him on screen my first opinion was "wow i hate that guy", sure he stars in some pretty good movies like mission impossible, rain man, the last samurai etc. but he does a poor acting job in those movies if you ask me.

(Reply to this)

unitedstatesofstupidity writes:
on Mar 22 2007 07:42 PM

[b]Tom Cruise isn't so bad[/b]
Why do people rip on him so bad? So what, he's a scientologist. Yes, scientologists are freakin nutty. But so what? Does that automatically make him a bad actor? No.

As an atheist, christians seem just as nutty to me as scientologists. And, any religious affliliation has nothing to do with how good of an actor you are. He's eccentric, big deal! Most of the movies he's been in have been good, so why give him so much grief over his private life..

(Reply to this)

Suck my.. writes:
on Mar 23 2007 08:14 AM

Apt pupil, brilliant???????

(Reply to this)

Xhrix writes:
on Mar 23 2007 08:53 AM

Ever since Tom Cruise starting using his 'celebrity' to promote his causes, I can't separate the man from his performances. Objectively I could, but movies are subjective, and he has yet to redeem himself in my eyes. He is entirely without self-deprecation, and I refuse to justify his ego with my $.

(Reply to this)

It. writes:
on Mar 25 2007 02:33 PM

[b]Cruise rocks[/b]
Cruise is a great actor.
i've watch minority report, and some people seems to think because there is action, he is not playing, or something
Wrong! it's a smart sc fi thriller, and Cruise is magnificient in it. You can easily feel the pain anger and grief in his act.
I adore him. (opposite of hate, hating sucks)

(Reply to this)

arcadefire325 writes:
on Mar 25 2007 06:19 PM

he was bad in minority report, war of the worlds, the mission impossible movies, eyes wide shut, and cocktails. there is no anger or grief, he is stiff. minority report was not smart and cruise sucked in it.

(Reply to this)

clamman27 writes:
on Mar 29 2007 01:06 AM

I wish Tom Cruise would just go away. The man is NOT worth 100mil per picture. Sorry, but frankly no one is. He should be ashamed of himself for making all that dough and doing not a damned thing to better the world but jump on couches and condemn other people for using medication. Him and Mel Gibson should be sent far away for 6 months like Antartica and see who's left alive at the end. That's the only way I'd care about either of those two wackos.

(Reply to this)

It. writes:
on Mar 29 2007 01:14 PM

In reply to this comment (#859057)
[b]idiot[/b]
I'm sorry for you.

(Reply to this)

kyrie2 writes:
on Apr 03 2007 04:17 PM

[b]an insult to Stauffenberg[/b]
Obviously none of you posters know anything about Hitler's assassin, the great and noble Claus von Stauffenberg. The idea of Tom Cruise taking on that role is an insult to Stauff's spirit and memory and to his surviving family as well (grandson Caspar doesn't want him to make the film). Cruise does not have the gravitas to play such a charismatic, intense, spiritual and mystical personality, which is what Stauff was. Go read a good biography of the young Count and you might learn something. And Claus was six foot three, while Cruise is five-foot-nothing - how is he going to pull that off?? Stauff was described in the literature as "strikingly handsome," "tall, slim, lively" and very charismatic, with a magnetic personality. Claus was also a real knockout in the looks department. Cruise is none of those. No wonder Stauff's children and grandchildren don't want him. As well, keep in mind that Germany is still struggling from the shadow of a cult - the Nazis - small wonder that they don't want an actor from another scary cult to play the heroic young Count. (Cruise is too old anyway. Stauffie was 36 when he was executed.)

(Reply to this)