Tom Cuise is now in charge of United Artists. (1 Viewer)

[Mike Graham]

Regardless of how you feel about the quality of his acting or his films, Cruise and Wagner have been a major players for a long, long time now. MGM won't care about how many couches Cruise jumps on, as long as he and his team can bring in a profit they'll be happy.

 

[Patrick Sun]

Rain Man II!

 

[Nathan V]

I'm glad Cruise actively jumps behind small projects (Narc, Shattered Glass, JJ Abrams) that he feels are worthwhile. As far as bigger projects, he has impeccable business and artistic taste- look at the directors he chooses to work with (Scorsese Kubrick, Zwick, Crowe, Stone, Scott Bros, Mann, Spielberg, PT Anderson, Pollack, list goes on) and the BO he's able to get them. This will indeed be interesting.

Regards,
Nathan

 

[Allen Hirsch]

According to the Wall Street Journal, Wagner/Cruise were given 30% of UA without putting up any money themselves, and Cruise isn't committed to acting in any UA-backed films in return for that equity stake.

So what, exactly, did the shareholders give away 30% of the company for (when Wagner/Cruise still have their own prodcution company, backed by the owner of the Washington Redskins)??

It's not like Cruise's movie-picking skills so far have shown significant promise - everything he's independently produced (i.e., not starred in) thus far has been a box-office flop, as far as I can tell.

What the heck was UA thinking?

 

[dpippel]

Surely you meant jumps up and down on???

 

[GerardoHP]

I doubt he's going to be sitting behind a desk like Mr. Zanuck or Mr. Schary running a studio. This is more of a replacement deal for what he and his partner (the producing one) had at Paramount.

Who can blame him? He seems to be getting a very good deal at UA, plus UA comes with the illustrious history and we all know "illustrious" is something he need lots of right now.

 

[Nathan V]

Funniest thing I've heard all day

Regards,
Nathan

 

[Dick]

I just hope Cruise is truly dedicated to the promotion of independent films, and not just the ones he will be starring in. I hope this is not merely a means for Cruise to guarantee he maintains clout in Hollywood after his firing by Paramount. United Artists has a rich and glorious history and has been responsible for the release of countless socially and politically relevant movies and I'd be happier than hell if that tradition could now continue.

 

[Lew Crippen]

There are many artists of every stripe that have (IMO) screwy beliefs and who act in unconventional ways.

The iconic Chaplin for example married a 16-year old when he was 29 because he thought she was pregnant. Apparently liking that age, he married another 16-year old for the same reason when he was 35. Only a couple of incidents over his life.

I continue to enjoy his films, regardless of his peccadilloes and so long as he stays away from movies like Top Gun, I’ll enjoy Cruise as well—either as an actor or producer.

 

[David_Blackwell]

It's not Tom running UA. It's his production partner- Paula Wagner. I have no doubt tom will have lots of input into the running of UA. It will be interesting to see what films they develop and what tentpole films they produce.

 

[Yee-Ming]

What is the actual value of UA today, anyway? AFAIK its entire back catalog (in particular, that most valuable item, the Bond franchise) belongs to other studios now (Bond with MGM, and through them now Sony), and I don't think UA doesn't own any other hard assets either (back-lot, sound stages etc). It's really just a vehicle under which a movie might get made, with financial backing coming in from a parent studio or indepedent financiers (those private equity funds that Cruise/Wagner have lined up).

Hence, giving away 30% of the company probably didn't actually cost very much, if at all, but gives Cruise/Wagner a financial stake in the studio, split 70:30 with the original owners (MGM? now Sony?), which would make it easier to reduce Cruise/Wagner's upfront production bill and claim to gross points, since Cruise/Wagner would also be participating in the bottom line at the end of it all. Paramount's problem with MI3 wasn't that the movie didn't make money, it was that Cruise/Wagner were able to take such a large chunk of it upfront that little trickled back to Paramount. This makes more financial sense, in that Cruise/Wagner now will presumably bear a greater risk in event of failure, or only modest success, of any movie made. Of course, had MI3 been a hit of SW or LOTR proportions, Paramount would have earned far more proportionately than C/W did and this sort of deal would put more of that back-end into the hands of C/W if a future movie is really that big a hit.

 

[Inspector Hammer!]

Ya know, maybe it's because I watched all three films in The Omen series including the remake last week but i'm just jumping to conclusions and drawing parallels left and right here between the anti-Christ and Cruise.

I just hope that next time someone takes my picture it doesn't have a black line through my neck.

 

[Mary M S]

Who I am to argue with MGM spokesperson Jeff Pryor, that:
"We were looking for a strategic partner (for UA) and we've found a strategic partner and it just so happens that he's the biggest star in the world," I personally never think of Cruise as a mega-eternal-star alway remaining surprised when I see him touted as “one of the most powerful actors in Hollywood. ” Yet how can I argue with the amount of money he brought to Paramount in prior years. He would never have been on my list of possiblities for “pick the star you’d have dinner with’ if given a choice during a studio promotion.

I think equating Cruise/Wagner taking reins to the UA in its distributorship early days with Pickford and her partners has to end differently due to the modern division of shareholders. Large media outlets Sony and Comcast holding interests and with MGM seed financing this early startup, hard to think they will be able to remain hands off.

Regardless he is well known for “Top Gun” I do not think our military named the “cruise” missile after Tom, as Pickford had two cannons nicknamed “Little Sister” and an honorary title of “Colonel” bestowed via the US Navy.
Somehow I don’t see Cruise with the same kind of grit that Pickford held claim to as regards working in the industry, so it will be interesting to see what decisions he makes via his new UA partnership. Like so many roles he has played where the formula required the lead to follow an arc of ....Cocky...knockdown...show them all...I wonder what decisions Cruise will make post-press ‘knockdown’ with this new UA outlet.
It appears to me at this stage in Cruise's career much depends upon who 'handles' buffer between him and his public.

I had to laugh when I saw RA Rowland’s (president of METRO Pictures) comment regarding the newly formed Pickford/Douglas/Griffith UA entity being applied to today’s news.

So the Lunatics have taken charge of the asylum.