Viacom Property Takes Light Poke At Tom Cruise

242

mark

08/30/06 12:34PM

Filed to: Tom Cruise

Displeased that the too-crazy, too-expensive actor whose services he no longer required was able to so quickly arrange alternative, amusement park-based funding for his future moviemaking endeavors, enraged, superannuated Viacom potentate Sumner Redstone commanded the finest minds in his corporate empire to retaliate against Tom Cruise by lightly satirizing the star in a basic cable television promo. Later today, Cruise producing partner Paula Wagner is expected to protect her meal ticket by releasing a statement claiming that "Tom has never heard of Spike TV, and is too busy to be bothered with this nonsense, as we are about to announce an exciting partnership with the Legoland California people."

Previously: Anonymous Insiders Scoff At Cruise's Amusement Park Money [Defamer]

The following replies are approved. To see additional replies that are pending approval, click Show Pending. Warning: These may contain graphic material.

fredjohnson2 mark 08/31/06 11:47PM

Did Paramount dump Tom Cruise or did Tom Cruise dump Paramount?

Well why don't we look at the numbers and see if we can't figure out who dumped whom.

Tom Cruise has made studios several billion dollars over the course of his career, so let's just go over the last few years and see what we can figure out from this:

Tom's Recent Movies:

1999 - Eyes Wide Shut - $162 mil. for Warner Bros.

1999- Magnolia - $48.5 mil. for NL

2000 - Mission: Impossible II - $546 mil. for Paramount

2001 - Vanilla Sky - $282 mil. for Paramount

2002- Minority Report - $358 mil. for Fox

2003- The Last Samurai - $457 mil. for Warner Bros.

2004- Collateral - $218 mil. for DW

2005- War of the Worlds - $592 mil. for Paramount

2006- Mission: Impossible III - $395 mil. for Paramount

OK, now follow this closely because this is important. In the last couple years, which supposedly is when Cruise's career took a nose-dive and ol' man Redstone says Paramount is hurting as a result. Well let's just look at the figures shall we:

This is a list of Parmounts highest grossing films during the supposedly self-destructive Cruise era:

Paramount's Highest Grossing Films of 2005:

1. War of the Worlds - $592 mil

2. The Longest Yard - $190 mil.

3. Sahara - $119 mil.

4. Four Brothers - $92 mil.

5. Coach Carter - $77 mil.

Parmount's Highest Grossing Films of 2006:

1. Mission: Impossible III - $395 mil.

2. Failure to Launch - $128 mil.

3. Nacho Libre - $88 mil.

4. World Trade Center - $56 mil.

5. Last Holiday - $43 mil.

One last statistic. In the world, several thousand movies are created by studios every year. So how well did Tom's Mission: Impossible III do up against the WORLD competition? Well let's look at the WORLD's highest grossing movies of 2006.

Highest 2006 "WORLDWIDE" Grosses:

1. Pirates of the Caribbean

2. The Divinci Code

3. Ice Age: The Meltdown

4. X-Men: The Last Stand

5. Cars

6. MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE III

Not bad huh. This is just theater ticket sales. This doesn't even include DVD sales and rentals. So who dumped who again?

Judging by the statistics, I'd say that ol' man Redstone has got to be a little bit p.o.'d by Cruise/Wagner Productions cutting business ties.

People say nasty things and tend to lie a bit when they are upset wouldn't you agree Redstone?

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/yearly/chart/?…

So what's the real story of Viacom's discontent with Tom Cruise. Well here's a brief summary of what happened:

Tom Cruise attacks the drug pushers, (psychiatrists), the drug suppliers, (drug companies) and the drug advertisers, (media conglomerates/main stream media).

As a result he becomes public enemy #1 to these bastards because they fear the influence he has all over the planet. This story is just more attacks on him by this drug cartel. Let's take a look at some facts:

Based on the statistics above, obviously Paramount did not fire Cruise/Wagner Productions for underachieving. Cruise/Wagner Productions left Paramount and was brokering this deal with First and Goal for awhile now. Another very important fact is that Viacom, Paramount's parent company, makes half of its revenue from drug company advertisements. This dollar amount is much more than Tom Cruise would ever bring in for them.

The mainstream media is relying on individuals to not read past the headlines. They're relying on individuals to not do any research for themselves. This story is also ol' man Redstone's senility acting up.

I challenge the media to actually go out and do a little research on this and tell the real story of what's really going on. Why is Tom Cruise, day after day barraged with insults and lied about in the press with wild abandon? Is it because his behavior is so completely reckless and what he speaks of is so completely off-base? Or is it really that he spoke the truth and might have hurt an industry that relies on the public's ignorance in order to survive?