• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Inside ‘The Mummy’s’ Troubles: Tom Cruise Had Excessive Control

L

LordOfLore

Banned
Link.

There were few signs that a major blockbuster was about to premiere when “The Mummy” rolled into Manhattan last week. The marquee of the AMC Loews Lincoln Square Theatres had gone blank. The carpet was totally covered with black plastic. Security only let guests past barricades after quizzing them about what they were there to see, and everybody had to walk through two imposing metal detectors.

Inside the theater, Tom Cruise was jubilant, as he stood in front of the crowd. “Hey y’all,” said the 54-year-old actor. He introduced Alex Kurtzman, the film’s director, as well as the cast members, who stood quietly as Cruise delivered a 10-minute improvised speech. “Movies aren’t made by single people,” he said. “It’s a team effort.”

But in the case of “The Mummy,” one person–Cruise–had an excessive amount of control, according to several people interviewed. The reboot of “The Mummy” was supposed to be the start of a mega-franchise for Universal Pictures. But instead, it’s become a textbook case of a movie star run amok.

As Hollywood is playing the blame game on what went wrong on “The Mummy,” which had a measly domestic opening of just $32 million, many fingers are pointing to Cruise. In the same way that he commanded the stage at the film’s premiere, leaving his cast standing awkwardly by his side, several sources close to the production say that Cruise exerted nearly complete creative oversight on “The Mummy,” essentially wearing all the hats and dictating even the smallest decisions on the set. On stage, Cruise admitted his own perfectionist tendencies. “I don’t just make a movie. I give it everything I have and I expect it from everyone also.”

Universal, according to sources familiar with the matter, contractually guaranteed Cruise control of most aspects of the project, from script approval to post-production decisions. He also had a great deal of input on the film’s marketing and release strategy, these sources said, advocating for a June debut in a prime summer period.
Click to expand...

Much more at the link.
 
R

Rickelodeon

Member
yeahhhh what the second poster said, i saw this article earlier, this is a real dumb hitpiece to try and pin the blame on Cruise, even though the stuff they say in the article is quite the normal process espically for him, in particular has made for some great movies for him
 
V

Vectorman

Banned
He probably realized at some point what he got himself into and probably tried to fix it all by himself. Can't imagine how much more of a trainwreck this film would have looked like without him.
 
G

Gentleman Jack

Member
You'd think Cruise would have written himself into a more likeable protagonist if he was that much of a perfectionist. Or maybe he thought he did and the reviews are a bucket of cold water pointing out that his main character's behavior is that of an irredeemable asshole who gets an unearned "you've got a heart of gold" speech from a sidekick halfway through the movie and that's supposed to make it all better.
 
S

Sho_Nuff82

Member
Normally I'd be against this kind of grandstanding but...it's Tom Cruise. The man knows what the fuck he's doing 90% of the time in terms of making kick ass action movies. If it didn't work out it's because he finally put up a dud (Jack Reacher 2, Knight & Day, MI3), I'm sure it won't hurt him in the long run.
 
S

Sojgat

Member
That's standard for pretty much every Cruise movie, and the ones not directed by Alex Kurtzman mostly turn out fine.
 
N

NealMcCauley

Member
Cruise had no one who told him "No." The article sounds like Cruise only let Kurtzman direct because he knew how inexperienced he was.

Also, got a big laugh at the side banners advertising Remini's Scientology expose for awards consideration.
 
W

Wolfgunblood Garopa

Member
I saw an interview with the actress, I forget her name, that corroborates this. Apparently there was a kissing scene, and right when she showed up to do the scene he rudely just told her they weren't doing that scene even though it was in the script and she prepared for it.
 
C

Cmerrill

You don't need to be empathetic towards me.
Hard to blame Cruise with the quality of the content he usually puts out.

Edge of tomorrow was incredible.
 
F

Froli

Member
Yeah.. I don't believe this. As the others pointed out, he has a good track record

Like many times I mentioned in many threads regarding movies and tv shows, it's usually the script and the director/showrunner are the main culprit.
 
S

sirap

Member
See, the problem isn't Cruise. If anything, he was the highlight of the film.

No one wanted a Mummy reboot. I'm not even sure anyone wanted a Mummy sequel.
 
L

LordOfLore

Banned
Froli said:
Yeah.. I don't believe this. As the others pointed out, he has a good track record

Like many times I mentioned in many threads regarding movies and tv shows, it's usually the script and the director/showrunner are the main culprit.
Click to expand...

There were other ways that “The Mummy” was transformed from a scary summer popcorn movie into a standard-issue Tom Cruise vehicle. The actor personally commissioned two other writers along with McQuarrie to crank out a new script. Two of the film’s three credited screenwriters, McQuarrie and Dylan Kussman, an actor-writer who played small roles in “The Mummy” and “Jack Reacher,” were close allies of Cruise’s. The script envisioned Nick Morton as an earnest Tom Cruise archetype, who is laughably described as a “young man” at one point.

His writers beefed up his part. In the original script, Morton and the Mummy (played by Sofia Boutella) had nearly equal screen time. The writers also added a twist that saw Cruise’s character become possessed, to give him more of a dramatic arc. Even though Universal executives weren’t thrilled about the story — which feels disjointed and includes Russell Crowe as Dr. Jekyll — they went along with Cruise’s vision.
Click to expand...
.
 
A

Adam Sadler

Member
I mean pretty much what everyone is saying this is what you basically get when you hire Tom Cruise. I've always known him to be incredibly hands on with the movies he is lead actor in
 
F

Fury451

Banned
I'm pretty sure he's had a lot of control in the mission impossible and Jack reacher films, and those were good.

This I'm pretty sure was a passion project for him for a long time, so I think he would pull out all the stops to try to make it the best possible. Which indicates it probably would've been worse if he wasn't involved.

I wouldn't say that the movie was out right bad, just a bad script and an uneven hand behind the camera that delivered a pretty totally inconsistent mediocre and forgettable movie that wasted some decent ideas.

I really doubt that he was that responsible for the way it turned out.
 
L

Lima

Member
Wolfgunblood Garopa said:
I saw an interview with the actress, I forget her name, that corroborates this. Apparently there was a kissing scene, and right when she showed up to do the scene he rudely just told her they weren't doing that scene even though it was in the script and she prepared for it.
Click to expand...

He didn't wanna kiss Annabelle Wallis?
Cruise are you gay?
 
L

Loxley

Member
Cruise's input was apparently half the reason that Edge of Tomorrow turned out so well, so this is kind of surprising if it's true.
 
smoothj

smoothj

Member
I know he's wierd dude but damn I just can't hate on the cruise missle.

They looking for a scape goat. Maybe Tom saved the movie from being even worse.
 
D

Discotheque

Banned
Of course he transformed it more from horror into the usual generic "Cruise Missile" basura smh

Not that I had faith in kurtzman either. But I imagine the original concept prior to casting tom cruise was more interesting
 
R

Rookhelm

Member
I think the movie's biggest issue (without having seen it) is that they started this "Monster" extended universe with "The Mummy". We already had several "mummy" movies that only got worse as they went.

Even though this one has nothing to do with those others, I'm sure there's a fair amount of brand confusion, so to speak, where people just thought it was a continuation of the previous ones.

Maybe if they had started with Frankenstein or whatever others they have planned.
 
K

kopitarrulez_11

Member
Sho_Nuff82 said:
Normally I'd be against this kind of grandstanding but...it's Tom Cruise. The man knows what the fuck he's doing 90% of the time in terms of making kick ass action movies. If it didn't work out it's because he finally put up a dud (Jack Reacher 2, Knight & Day, MI3), I'm sure it won't hurt him in the long run.
Click to expand...
Dude MI3 is fantastic
 
N

number11

Member
Tom is great at action movies.. but why does The Mummy need to be an action movie? Kurtzman is a huge horror fan from interviews I've listened to, so I wonder if that was the original direction the film was heading.
 
D

Dash_Riprock

Member
Two of the film’s three credited screenwriters, McQuarrie and Dylan Kussman, an actor-writer who played small roles in “The Mummy” and “Jack Reacher,” were close allies of Cruise’s. The script envisioned Nick Morton as an earnest Tom Cruise archetype, who is laughably described as a “young man” at one point.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that sounds exactly like something Cruise would do. The man has a good track rcord, but everyone makes bad films. Cruise is not immune to this.
 
M

mr jones

Ethnicity is not a race!
....and he has duds, as well. Did you guys REALLY like Vanilla Sky? War of the Worlds? Knight & Day? Lion for Lambs? Hell, Mission Impossible 2?
 
G

Gentleman Jack

Member
Rookhelm said:
Maybe if they had started with Frankenstein or whatever others they have planned.
Click to expand...

It's possible they thought the Frankenstein waters were a little poisoned by 2014's attempt from Lionsgate.

But then they fucked up Dracula. Dracula.

So I don't know what they're thinking right now. It ain't good.

mr jones said:
....and he has duds, as well. Did you guys REALLY like Vanilla Sky? War of the Worlds? Knight & Day? Lion for Lambs? Hell, Mission Impossible 2?
Click to expand...

Rogue Nation was also kinda crap.
 
H

HyperZone<3

Member
Jack Reacher 2 was pretty naff though.

but that and the Mummy only make two crappy leading roles for him in the last decade, really.
 
K

kswiston

Member
From a box office perspective, if this film was destined to be trash either way, they are definitely making more overseas with Tom Cruise than they would have with a random lead. I don't know how much compensation Cruise is getting though. That would make a difference in whether the deal was worth it or not from Universal's perspective.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

  • Locked
Disney demanded edits on Inside Out 2 to make Riley appear "less gay"
40
3K
Doom85 replied
Nicolas Winding Refn returning to filmmaking with Tokyo-set movie
29
2K
Giallo Corsa replied
  • Locked
Tom Cruise backs out of being in Starfield after heated argument with Bethesda executives
31
5K
mdkirby replied
NYT: The Palace Coup at the Magic Kingdom (Iger vs. Chapek)
27
2K
Tertullian replied
Battle For Dragon Ball IP’s Rights Intensifies Following Akira Toriyama’s Passing
News
18
3K
near replied
Top Bottom