I assisted in the transfer for "Jack Reacher" and despite what you feel about Tom Cruise, the guy is professional. If anyone saw the movie, Robert Duvall is in the movie. And, let's be clear, this isn't the wheelhouse of someone who did "Tender Mercies." BUT, I'm always excited to see someone of his caliber in these movies. There was a night scene in the movie, where Duvall struggled to get the lines down. It was a long take. It went on and on until they ran out of film. Meanwhile, Cruise patiently and sweetly allowed him to keep going. Of course, some would say...Duvall is who he is, NO ONE tells Tom Hagen what to do. But, you've seen this type of abuse constantly. The blow out in front of Dustin Hoffman that David O'Russell had with Lily Tomlin for example.
Anyway, it got me thinking about a Sidney Lumet book called "Making Movies." In it, he recounts Marlon Brando's way of testing a director (which he doesn't recommend doing, for you actors out there). Basically he does two takes IDENTICAL. Then he changes one thing and waits to see which the director decides to print. If it's the take Brando wouldn't have chosen or didn't "give his all" he'd make the director's life miserable. Because he lost all faith in the director being able to see his performance. Again, not recommended when starting out. But Brando is Brando.
Despite the Scientology thing, Cruise is a gracious person. There have been stories of his intensity, but I have respect for someone who is whole-heartedly committed to a project. There was a story said about Cruise during "Jerry Maguire" by Artie Lange who was briskly spoken to by Cruise. I don't think it had anything to do with Artie being a minor character, but Cruise seems to respect the crew's time. If you take into account what this guy makes per minute, it's a no-brainer the guy is serious. Goofing off on set is money ticking away. A LOT of actors (like Brando) don't seem to give a shit. "Superman" (1977) people were walking on egg shells to protect the $4 million dollar behemoth. You work his way. And that's that.
As William Goldman concisely put it, I'm not sure what makes a star a star. Brando was a star. Tom Cruise is a star. They get people to see movies. The responsibility it seems to Cruise seems to touch a more fundamental humanist quality I know is dismissed through his beliefs (Scientology). I don't know much about it, so not sure what they train. But, for him to sacrifice some sanity and control is...I doubt anyone would trade lives. Maybe. All I can say is I wouldn't. Cruise's life is manufactured from all aspects. There was a questioned asked years ago about what makes someone like Cruise launch to that status versus, say...Emilio Estevez who's disappeared behind the camera. I think it's wanting it more. Cruise LOVES movies. I'm not sure Brando did. He'd rather (and proven later) live on an island away from humanity. There's got to be a Brando biopic somewhere down the line. Not sure Cruise benefits from one. He's so earnest for you to enjoy movies too. And not ball washing the guy, but I wish I had half his energy (despite the fact that he is years older than me). You HAVE to get into this business with that tenacity. He doesn't have the time to Tweet or update his status. He's busy making movies. Back to back. He keeps going. Name another person in the early 80's that can pull that weight (maybe Clint Eastwood, but he was never a teen heart throb). I'd say pretty amazing.
No comments:
Post a Comment