TomKat: Hollywood Strikes Back?
Being someone who enjoys studying pop culture, I’ve learned one important fact: Monday morning quarterbacks have nothing on Monday morning box office “experts”. The jocks may have playbooks and stats and criticism of the referees, but it’s nothing when compared to the absolute joy and cattiness that some take when a movie and/or it’s star falls flat on his or her face.
Take today’s perfect example: Here are some of the headlines following the opening weekend of Bouncy Tom’s new movie, Mission: Impossible III.
AP: 'M:I3' Earnings Disappoint on 1st Weekend
Another AP: 'M:I3' Can't Accomplish Expected Earnings
Entertainment Weekly: Cruisenfreude: Did Tom really bomb?
EOnline: "M:I:III": Cruise Hits; TomKat Sinks?
Somewhere deep in the Hollywood Hills, I suspect that more than one group of execs is cracking open the Cristal to celebrate Ethan Hunt’s fizzle at the box office.
But did he really bomb? According to the “trusted” reliable news sources out there this AM, you’d think that Mission Impossible III opened at the box office this weekend and earned about $1.50. In reality, it actually did manage to sell $48 million worth of tickets. (Which sounds like a lot of cash to me. I know I’d be ecstatic if I made $48 million in three days -- and legally, at that!).
But does anyone care? Hollywood predicted MI: III would make $60 - $65 million this weekend, not a mere $48 mil. What could have possibly happened? I mean, this mega-movie opened in over 4,000 theaters in the U.S. alone. How could what should be a blockbuster end up declared “disappointing”?
He dances on couches, bitches at Brooke Shields, gets snarly with Matt Lauer, knocks up a girl (supposedly) half his age, professes his pseudo-religion at every opportunity, goes on every single talk show imaginable to turn his newborn child (supposedly) into a public spectacle, graces every magazine cover this side of Dog Fancy (which may be next – supposedly), and makes it his true “Mission” in life to annoy the shit out of the American public at every turn.
In return, we’re supposed to go drop $9 at the theater and watch more of him? Fuggeddaboutit. I can turn on any one of 99 channels and see TomKat any time of the day. Why would I want to pay for the “privilege”? I’ve seen enough of Mr. Cruise lately for free.
It’ll be interesting to see how this movie plays out over the next few weeks. Will it hang in there and win Tom his fans back, or will it tank into obscurity? As long as it means I can turn on the TV or radio or Internet and not have to see his mug smiling back at me ad nauseum, then I can live with it. Or without it.
Take today’s perfect example: Here are some of the headlines following the opening weekend of Bouncy Tom’s new movie, Mission: Impossible III.
AP: 'M:I3' Earnings Disappoint on 1st Weekend
Another AP: 'M:I3' Can't Accomplish Expected Earnings
Entertainment Weekly: Cruisenfreude: Did Tom really bomb?
EOnline: "M:I:III": Cruise Hits; TomKat Sinks?
Somewhere deep in the Hollywood Hills, I suspect that more than one group of execs is cracking open the Cristal to celebrate Ethan Hunt’s fizzle at the box office.
But did he really bomb? According to the “trusted” reliable news sources out there this AM, you’d think that Mission Impossible III opened at the box office this weekend and earned about $1.50. In reality, it actually did manage to sell $48 million worth of tickets. (Which sounds like a lot of cash to me. I know I’d be ecstatic if I made $48 million in three days -- and legally, at that!).
But does anyone care? Hollywood predicted MI: III would make $60 - $65 million this weekend, not a mere $48 mil. What could have possibly happened? I mean, this mega-movie opened in over 4,000 theaters in the U.S. alone. How could what should be a blockbuster end up declared “disappointing”?
He dances on couches, bitches at Brooke Shields, gets snarly with Matt Lauer, knocks up a girl (supposedly) half his age, professes his pseudo-religion at every opportunity, goes on every single talk show imaginable to turn his newborn child (supposedly) into a public spectacle, graces every magazine cover this side of Dog Fancy (which may be next – supposedly), and makes it his true “Mission” in life to annoy the shit out of the American public at every turn.
In return, we’re supposed to go drop $9 at the theater and watch more of him? Fuggeddaboutit. I can turn on any one of 99 channels and see TomKat any time of the day. Why would I want to pay for the “privilege”? I’ve seen enough of Mr. Cruise lately for free.
It’ll be interesting to see how this movie plays out over the next few weeks. Will it hang in there and win Tom his fans back, or will it tank into obscurity? As long as it means I can turn on the TV or radio or Internet and not have to see his mug smiling back at me ad nauseum, then I can live with it. Or without it.
posted by Tommy G at
11:19 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home