my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Community   » Film-Yak   » Paramount Dumps Cruise (Page 2)

This topic comprises 3 pages: 1  2  3

Author Topic: Paramount Dumps Cruise Chris Hipp Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1462 From: Mesquite, Tx (east of Dallas) Registered: Jul 2003 posted 08-24-2006 04:07 AM                     I haven't seen all of his movies, but I have seen all of the ones for the last 15 years and not one did I dislike. I will allow the rest of you to have an opinion, but just know that you are all wrong. Particularly Phil, War of the Worlds was great. I can't wait until Tom Cruise does a movie with Will Ferrell.  |  IP: Logged Brad Miller Administrator Posts: 17775 From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall) Registered: May 99 posted 08-24-2006 04:10 AM                     You claim to like all of these crappy movies, yet you didn't love Snakes on a Plane???  |  IP: Logged Louis Bornwasser Film God Posts: 4441 From: prospect ky usa Registered: Mar 2005 posted 08-24-2006 08:13 AM                        This is about money & power, not religion. Louis  |  IP: Logged Barry Floyd Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1079 From: Lebanon, Tennessee, USA Registered: Mar 2000 posted 08-24-2006 08:46 AM                        quote: Chris Hipp I can't wait until Tom Cruise does a movie with Will Ferrell. It could be a Cole Trickle / Ricky Bobby reunion... TALLADEGA THUNDER !!  |  IP: Logged Bill Gabel Film God Posts: 3873 From: Technicolor / Postworks NY, USA Registered: Jan 2002 posted 08-24-2006 12:48 PM                     quote: Louis Bornwasser This is about money & power, not religion. And that's what its all about now. A lot of projects from A-List talent has been cutback or put into turnaround because of cost. The day that those A-List talent demands may be almost over. This trend has been coming for a long time and Paramount dumped Cruise is the first big showing of the cost issue. For many of you see Tom Cruise as a big money maker at your theatres the seats mostly full. Well Paramount/Viacom has many stockholders also to answer too. For why the company is spending millions of dollars more on these projects. For those who just have read what the media has reported should also know that the behind the gates of the studio is a whole different world. I've worked behind those very gates on that lot. And both men (Sumner and Tom) are very smart people in business. I've shown movies to both men for screenings. Look at MI:3, stands to make $400 million at the box office, Tom's cut in profits is around $80 million. After the rest of the profit and bill paying is done. Paramount's cut is not going tobe that big. Today Cruise and company said that wanted out because Paramount's deal was too low $2 millions a year plus a special fund. The old deal was $10 million dollars which covered his production companies overhead on the lot plus getting projects. So today they reported they will set-up a new independent operation to make movies with a new fund of $100 million dollars of someone elses money. Good Luck to the both of them.  |  IP: Logged Mike Blakesley Film God Posts: 12767 From: Forsyth, Montana Registered: Jun 99 posted 08-24-2006 12:53 PM                        I think I would like to become a hugely famous actor just so I could rock the world by saying, "You know what? I have decided that I'm only going to ask $2 million per film. I don't need the money - my house is big enough, I have enough cars and I think all the other people helping make the movie deserve a raise. So I'll just take $2 mil, on the condition that nobody else on the movie makes any more than that either. Oh and by the way, the theatrical rental for this movie will be 40% for the entire run. The theatres deserve some more money too. The studio can make up the loss from what they're saving on me." Probably wouldn't work, but I can dream I guess.  |  IP: Logged Chris Hipp Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1462 From: Mesquite, Tx (east of Dallas) Registered: Jul 2003 posted 08-24-2006 01:25 PM                     Brad, I didn't hate snakes, I just dont think it was the greatest movie ever and let's face it, without the hype neither would anyone else. It is the kind of movie I would want to watch one night bored at home, not pay $8 to go see, as if I would ever pay to see a movie.  |  IP: Logged David Favel Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 764 From: Ashburton, New Zealand Registered: Feb 2002 posted 08-27-2006 08:55 PM                     Actually, I think Tom was an Actor in Collateral, as opposed to a movie star.  |  IP: Logged Dominic Espinosa Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1172 From: California, U.S.A. Registered: Jan 2004 posted 08-29-2006 02:29 AM                     Cruise production biz finds new backers By GARY GENTILE, AP Business WriterMon Aug 28, 8:14 PM ET Tom Cruise's production company, which broke ties with Paramount Pictures last week in an unusually public dispute, has signed a two-year financing deal with an investment partnership headed by Washington Redskins owner Daniel Snyder. The deal between Cruise/Wagner Productions and First & Goal LLC covers overhead and development, which will allow Cruise and producing partner Paula Wagner to run their company and make deals to produce films, some conceivably starring Cruise. Financial terms were not disclosed for the pact, which has an option to renew for a longer term. Cruise/Wagner still must find someone to finance production of those films and a company to distribute them. Previously, Paramount had the first right to finance and distribute Cruise/Wagner films. In exchange, Paramount paid the producers as much as $10 million per year for salaries, expenses and discretionary spending. Paramount had offered a much lower amount to renew the deal, closer to $2 million annually, before talks broke off. First & Goal was set up specifically to invest in Cruise/Wagner. Snyder also heads an investment partnership that controls amusement park operator Six Flags Inc., among other companies. Former ESPN executive Mark Shapiro, who heads Six Flags, will oversee the investment in Cruise/Wagner, the companies said Monday. "This gives us the opportunity to work with all the studios and broadens our base," Wagner said Monday. Long-simmering tensions between Cruise/Wagner and Paramount Pictures erupted last week with a public spanking of Cruise by Sumner Redstone, chairman of Paramount parent Viacom Inc. Redstone broke ties with Cruise through an interview in the Wall Street Journal, saying the actor's public behavior, including jumping up and down on Oprah Winfrey's couch, and his aggressive defense of Scientology, alienated moviegoers and cost Paramount money at the box office. Redstone claimed Cruise's antics cost Paramount between $100 million and $150 million in ticket sales for the actor's latest film, "Mission: Impossible III." Wagner slammed Redstone last week, calling his comments "surprising" and unbusinesslike. She said last week it was their decision not to renew their 14-year partnership with Paramount, choosing instead to follow a long-standing desire to make smaller, character-driven films on their own. On Monday, Shapiro brushed off any discussion of Cruise's behavior or Redstone's comments, preferring to focus on Cruise's proven box-office appeal. "We're entrepreneurs and we like exploring new opportunities that present an excellent chance for success and innovation," Shapiro said. Shapiro and Wagner emphasized that Cruise's last two films for Paramount, "War of the Worlds," and "Mission: Impossible III," grossed about $1 billion worldwide combined. "We believe that Cruise and Wagner are a terrific investment," Shapiro said. "The track record speaks for itself." The deal was brokered by talent agency CAA, which represents Cruise. Discussions with First & Goal began earlier this month, the companies said. Last week, Wagner said her company had secured financing from two hedge funds to produce films. She declined to comment on those arrangements Monday. Monday's deal does continues to allow Cruise to star in films produced or distributed by any studio, the same terms he had under his deal with Paramount. AP Article on Yahoo!  |  IP: Logged Joe Redifer You need a beating today Posts: 12859 From: Denver, Colorado Registered: May 99 posted 08-29-2006 12:48 PM                        I had a dream last night and Tom Cruise was in it without my permission. He wanted me to fix his Xbox, so I played his electric guitar instead. The end. Damn bastard. I wish I was Paramount so I could dump him, too!  |  IP: Logged Mike Blakesley Film God Posts: 12767 From: Forsyth, Montana Registered: Jun 99 posted 08-29-2006 03:11 PM                        Jeez, for once Redifer and I agree on something.  |  IP: Logged Steve Scott Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1300 From: Minneapolis, MN Registered: Sep 2000 posted 08-29-2006 03:28 PM                     Big deal... Now the theme parks in questionable status of receiving a Cruise-themed ride are owned by six flags, not paramount. Or maybe they already got bought by six flags out & it's no real big change.  |  IP: Logged Joe Redifer You need a beating today Posts: 12859 From: Denver, Colorado Registered: May 99 posted 08-29-2006 04:22 PM                        Six Flags isn't doing great financially. They are looking to close a whole mess o' parks.  |  IP: Logged Bill Gabel Film God Posts: 3873 From: Technicolor / Postworks NY, USA Registered: Jan 2002 posted 11-02-2006 03:41 PM                     Tom Cruise and his partner Paula Wagner are set to restart the formerly defuncted United Artists division of MGM. Paula will be the new CEO of the company.  |  IP: Logged Bobby Henderson "Ask me about Trajan." Posts: 10973 From: Lawton, OK, USA Registered: Apr 2001 posted 11-02-2006 08:40 PM                     Aw shit. UA they say? I can just see it now. Tom Cruise as James Bond 007 in The Scientologist Who Converted Me. (disclaimer to money grubbing attorney's hired at the behest of angry rich Scientologist actors, I posted this message out of my 1st amendment constitutional right of free speech...so be invited to eat my shorts.)  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 3 pages: 1  2  3

Printer-friendly view of this topic

Hop To: Select a Forum: Category: Operations -------------------- Digital Cinema Forum Film Handlers' Forum Large Format Forum Ground Level Feature Info, Trailer Attachments & REAL Credit Offsets Category: Community -------------------- Film-Yak Film Handlers' Movie Reviews The Afterlife Bob Maar's Joke-A-Thon Category: Classified -------------------- Equipment and Supplies Wanted/For Sale Help Wanted/Seeking Employment Category: System -------------------- Software Beta Testing Forum

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.