Its hard to see bigger screw ups with the casting than Tom Cruise as the title character. Cruise neither looks like nor physically resembles Reacher from the books nor is he that talented in playing multi-faced characters. Can anyone honestly think of a worst A-list casting choice for any movie within the last few years?
GMG Man
Must agree. I saw the movie before I knew about the books or Reacher. I'm a reluctant Cruise fan, the guy is a good actor. After seeing the movie I read the reviews charging 'miscasting'. So, I ordered the first three books, finished those and just got three more. Reacher is one of the few truly iconic fictional characters. They should have called the movie 'Jack Cruise'; Tom is no Jack Reacher. Just to be sure I watched it again. I was right. Good movie, but Tom is a foot too short and 80 pounds too light. I like Don Knotts, too, but he can't play James Bond. It's just wrong! Please Mr. Casting Director find the real Jack Reacher if there is to be another Reacher movie.
shareNonsense !!
No matter what you say about Tom Cruise, he really made Reacher his own and played the part to perfection. Case in point, I have a heavy duty Reacher fan in Calif. When the casting news came out, he was sending emails about Reacher would be portrayed as a "munchkin" and made endless jokes about the casting. BUT when he finally saw the film, he said he didn't even notice the size difference. Now that's because it's a movie and you are watching the action unfold. In a book, you are constantly being reminded of his size one way or another, but in the film,you just watched the story unfold and Reacher's size made no actual difference to the story itself.
Lee Child, who thinks highly enough of Cruise as Reacher that he actually appears in the film, has often said that Reacher's size was a metaphor for Reacher being unstoppable. Whether you believe that or not makes no difference. It's what the actual creator of the character thinks. And, in all honesty,he says that because he knows Cruise respects the character enough and his star power will make Reacher a very successful film franchise. Cruise is fine as Reacher and I look forward to the sequel now in pre-production.
"Be as wise as a serpent and as harmless as a dove"
Okay, you, your friend and Lee Child, that makes three. I have already said it was a good movie, just not a Jack Reacher movie. I am sure Child made millions from the movie rights and was happy to go with the flow... star power guy rather than take a chance with an unknown or a 'B' grade actor. It's a compromise at best and for good economic reasons. As for future 'Jack Cruise' movies, I'll watch 'em on Netflix, not in a theater. Like my old coach used to say, "A good big guy beats a good little guy every time." Meanwhile I'll continue to hope they find the real Reacher somewhere out there.
shareYou speak my mind. I don't like Cruise. I think most of his movies, while great, would be better with someone else playing his roles, but I have to hand it to him, his dedication really shows.
You're right, this was a big budget production and, though I believe there is an actor out there who could play Reacher like he was written, I can't think of any. And the feisty, little guy really did his best to carry the role of a cool, big guy.
As a Reacher book fan, I really wouldn't mind Cruise as much had the rest of the movie been done better, plot-wise. I woould have just thought of it as a "Reacher plot movie", not a "Reacher movie".
Fighting a religious war is like fighting over whose imaginary friend is better.
I agree with completely.
However, many of Tom Cruise's fanatical fans (bit redundant, I'm sorry) completely fail to appreciate the fact that fans of the books cannot seen this as a Jack Reacher film. It may be the best action movie ever made - I wrote that with a straight face - but its a generic action movie, not a movie about Reacher.
The irony here is that there was no 'big guy' who could play the part. Cruise nailed the role and was believable in the fight scenes. Being butt hurt over the fact you couldn't live out your fantasy whilst comical means sweet f-all to the people who make and enjoy these films .
If impersonating a Police Officer is an offence, shouldn't actors be imprisoned?
It's what the actual creator of the character thinks.
I think LEE CHILD had Adam Copeland ("Edge" on the WWE) in mind for the part. He's a closer description, I think, of Jack Reacher.
"What time is Recess?"
LOL you think Hollywood is going to bankroll a movie with a pro wrestler in a movie over Tom Cruise? Never gonna happen and Adam Copeland would have sucked anyway. Tom Cruise is nothing like the character in the book but the movie is pretty good. People need to realize the reality of getting movies made in Hollywood. There was probably no A-list actor that fit the mold of Jack Reacher from the book so you either take the A-list star who wants to make the movie and tailor it around them and change from the book or you let it die in development and never see it get made. I actually had very low expectations for the movie because I didn't believe Cruise could play Reacher but I was surprised how much I enjoyed it.
shareLOL you think Hollywood is going to bankroll a movie with a pro wrestler in a movie over Tom Cruise?
Tom Cruise is nothing like the character in the book but the movie is pretty good
regardless of what anyone says Cruise nailed this movie...smashed it out of the park. owned the role. he is now Jack Reacher
shareregardless of what anyone says Cruise nailed this movie...smashed it out of the park. owned the role. he is now Jack Reacher
Over a ten film serie it would make loads of money… Much more than an ageing Cruise can get. Haven't you seen Cruise soon need doubles for taking the stairs instead of elevators?
The movie would have been the same with or without Cruise. The only difference is - his name sold more tickets. And, from what I saw on Haven, Copland is a pretty decent actor. You are right - no one would bankroll 60 mil for a movie with him, but he'd be pretty good for a TV series.
Fighting a religious war is like fighting over whose imaginary friend is better.
Money talks and Cruise funded it. His football and he decides who plays and who doesn't !
There's only one Kurt Russell.
I absolutely agree that this is one of the worst miscasts of all time. Not only is Tom Cruise a mediocre actor (at least since the early days of "Risky Business" but (being a huge fan of the Lee Child books, of which I've read all of them at least once if not twice), he is absolutely inappropriate as an actor for this role even if he was my favorite actor in the world (not even close) but how can a puny 5'8" actor play a tough, 6'6 230 pound character who looms larger than life and is aggressive, brutal, sensitive, and complex in many ways, which Cruise completely fails to capture. He lacks the depth and acting skills to play this character and physically he is so far off base it's laughable. Its sad, because I love these books and Jack Reacher so much that I hoped against all hope that Cruise would somehow reach inside himself and play the role of a lifetime to reboot his failing career, but his acting is as bad as usual, and completely unconvincing as the larger than life character Reacher, who is a foot taller and twice as heavy, and far too complex for such a one-sided actor as Cruise. How he got the role and how he still remains a box office hit is one of the great mysteries of cinema. I wanted SO BADLY for this to be a good movie, but the miscasting of Cruise as Reacher completely spoiled the movie for me. I would've cast an unknown giant who had the skills to play Reacher, but obviously Cruise decided that he wanted to play this totally inappropriate role and had the pull in Hollywood to get himself inserted into this film. An unknown talented actor could've killed this role and launched what could be a great series of films like the modern James Bond movies, but Cruise ruined this film and his acting was horrible. I pray they find another actor and block Cruise's Hollywood pull to cast an appropriate actor. Even Javier Bardem with his accent could've done a thousand times better. What a shame. If you haven't read the books then you really don't know Reacher as a character and can't really make an informed comment on the casting of Cruise as Reacher. I had to create a new list just for this movie out of my long, long list of lists on IMDB called "Disastrous Duds" because it was so bad. I gave it 6 stars (which is very low for me) just because I love the Lee Child books so much and out of respect for him. I may have to go back and change it to my first one star movie ever. Enuf said!!!
shareThe only thing which is laughable is your rather strange erotisization of Reacher's stature in the novels. From the bulk of reviews I've come across:
http://www.empireonline.com/reviews/reviewcomplete.asp?FID=137360
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/jack_reacher/
They don't really criticise Cruise's shorter stature and with his physique in the film you can't call him puny. The point of making Reacher that big in the books was to enlarge his character because you only have the words on the page to illustrate the character and bring him alive. On film it's different as you're using the visual medium.
The fact that people still go to see his films which you're a little touchy about is funny. Despite his strange personal choices, I respect his film choices and to be fair to him he has carved out a decent niche for himself with action/sci-fi films.
I have to say, whenever someone uses something as trivial as size to criticise someone makes me rather dubious of them. You either like to wank off over giraffes or your ex ran off with a garden gnome. Going back on-point though, there was no 'giant' who could play the role. You certainly didn't put forward any suggestions. The fight scenes were entertaining and brutal in places and I cerainly never questioned Cruise's depiction of the character. If burly, blue eyed and blonde haired men are your thing then I would suggest you stick to wrestling son.
If impersonating a Police Officer is an offence, shouldn't actors be imprisoned?
I would like to see Liev Schreiber as Jack Reacher
shareI have no idea about the books, thought this movie was going to be utter crap, and was blown away by how entertaining and riveting it was, primarily due to Cruise's easygoing, convincing performance. And he definitely hit all the right notes in the more subtle moments, especially involving that girl that came onto him in the bar and how he dealt with her throughout.
shareDont know about the books,but to me he did an ok job starring in this movie.
Kinda refreshing to see they went with a short not to bulky guy for the role.
Never read the novel, Cruise was fine. Go away Troll.
shareWhy is a person a troll because they compare a film to a book? I am actually curious to find out why you would say this.
shareBecause the Troll didn't "compare a film to a book". The Troll totally discounted an actor like Cruise, totally discounted the "film adaptation" process, and relegated the whole production to nothingness. That's a Troll.
shareCruise neither looks like nor physically resembles Reacher from the books
He doesn't have to look like the character from the books. That's why it's called, a "film adaptation".
As for OP's statement about Cruise's acting, he's right, almost all of his roles are the same.Bullsh!t.
Just nuances. All arrogant pricks - common trade among all Cruise characters.
Fighting a religious war is like fighting over whose imaginary friend is better.
Its hard to see bigger screw ups with the casting than Tom Cruise as the title character. Cruise neither looks like nor physically resembles Reacher from the books nor is he that talented in playing multi-faced characters. Can anyone honestly think of a worst A-list casting choice for any movie within the last few years?
This "valid point" is not supported by the foremost authority on the books, the Author. Therefore, the quibbles of a few disgruntled fans are easily dismissed, wouldn't you agree?
My comment, as well as this site, is based solely on the film adaptation not the book. If people whined about every film adaptation not being 100% faithful to a book, the list of films would include some of the greatest films ever made. The Troll's whining was petty. If you look at the overall film adaptation, it's another winner for Cruise.
And when someone discounts the abilities of the biggest movie star in the world, arguably the biggest movie star of all-time, well that Sir, is a Troll.
Here is a quote from Lee Child, which he wrote in an essay about Reacher, collected in a book called "Lineup," edited by Otto Penzler. I posted this a couple of months ago elsewhere:
In my fourth book, Running Blind, an FBI agent called Blake threatens to leak Reacher’s name to a violent psychopath called Petrosian.
Blake thinks it’s an effective motivator-and in real life and most books it would be. But Reacher just says: “Look at me, Blake. Get real. There’s maybe ten people on the planet I need to be scared of. Extremely unlikely this guy Petrosian happens to be one of them.”" Whilst this is not from this specific book, it is obviously a key to the character.
Here is another quote from the same source, in which Lee Child (you know, the author - the person who conceived the character) says:
"And he’s huge.
He’s six feet five inches tall, and around two hundred fifty pounds, all of it muscle. In Tripwire, after he’s been doing physical labor in the sun for a spell, he’s described as looking “like a condom stuffed with walnuts.” No one in his right mind would mess with him.
I had in mind the kind of intimidating physical presence that pro footballers have, relaxed, utterly sure of themselves, but in Reacher’s case with a barely visible hint of danger. (In fact, in One Shot, he admits to having played football for Army while at West Point, but that his career was limited to only one game. “Why?” someone asks. “Were you injured?” “No,” he replies. “I was too violent.”)"
Sounds to me as if the author saw the character as huge and physically intimidating, and that played a great deal into the features that made the Reacher character individual and interesting - I won't say unique, as there is nothing unique in the world of media. However, this character as played by Tom Cruise could not be physically intimidating on first sight. As I have already said, this might be the best movie ever made but a Reacher film it isn't. The character has lost his raison d'etre.
And when someone discounts the abilities of the biggest movie star in the world, arguably the biggest movie star of all-time, well that Sir, is a Troll.means that simply because you perceive someone to be a success by your standards, no criticism can be brooked. This is illogical and does not make a dissenting voice into a troll's. share
The first sentence in Gone With The Wind:"Scarlett was not beautiful." When David O'Selznick decided to make the film he knew that casting an average looking woman for the role was not gonna work - it's a movie! So he went with the tempestuous beauty, Vivien Leigh.
You like the books? Fine. Keep reading the books. I don't know how many times you want me to say it, but I'll say it again. It's a film adaptation! Which means they will go in any direction they please to fit the medium of film! And in this case, it worked, as the 218,000,000 box-office take will attest to.
means that simply because you perceive someone to be a success by your standards, no criticism can be brooked. This is illogical and does not make a dissenting voice into a troll's.My "standards"? Do you know what a movie star is? It's not a subjective analysis. To put it simply, a movie star is someone whose films puts more people in the seats than anyone else's. And Cruise, consistently, has done that better than anyone else. share
1.Gone with the Wind was published in 1936 and was a standalone book. The movie was released in 1939. The first Reacher book was published in 1997 and is now up to its nineteenth title. I think that it has, in today's world of cheaper books, public libraries and electronic sources, been able to reach just a few more people and establish a larger fan base of people who have actually read one about the character of Reacher, and not just heard about Scarlett O'Hara.
2. Much of the fame comes from David O Selznick's shrewd campaign for the search for the perfect Scarlett. That still resonates with people who have probably never even seen the original.
3. I'm sorry, but it is a subjective analysis. Yes, Cruise a successful star, but that does not mean he is suitable for every role that comes along. To refer back to Gone with the Wind, Spencer Tracy was arguably the biggest star in Hollywood. He had won the Academy Award for Best Actor the two previous years and is still considered by many to be the best screen actor ever. I'm sure he wasn't even considered for the role of Rhett Butler because he just wasn't suitable, and no amount of star power was going to change that, and I'm sure Tracy would have been the first to accept that.
4. Yes, it's a film adaptation of a book. I think you interpret adaptation much more freely than a lot of people do, myself obviously included. I know that many people agree with you and that's your privilege, even though, not having read any of the books, you must find it difficult to really compare.
However, my point is that does not make the original poster a troll because he/she does not agree with you. He/she has a valid point and should not be critised for it.
You tell him tezzab!
I would just like to add that, in the past 10 years (as mariposa states), Cruise has made some pretty dumb movies like Knight and Day, MI3 (worst in the series IMO), Rock of ages, which generated income solely on the fact that he was in them, no matter the quality. The fact that this movie made money doesn't testify to it's quality.
Fighting a religious war is like fighting over whose imaginary friend is better.
You can call those movies "dumb" if you like, but basically it's just your opinion, as they were all huge box-office hits; which, means somebody liked them. I mean no offense, but get over yourself.
shareYou keep proving my point - everything has an audience. But you should read some of the professional reviews, not just what random people say. The fact is - Cruise has become an instrument to salvage expensive projects no one wants. He brings the funding and the audience.
Fighting a religious war is like fighting over whose imaginary friend is better.
But you should read some of the professional reviews, not just what random people say.Rotten Tomatoes gave the film a respectable 61%. It made a nice profit at the box-office. What more could anyone want?
Cruise has become an instrument to salvage expensive projects no one wants. He brings the funding and the audience.The Jack Reacher novels have been quite profitable. Why would "no one want" them? share
tezzab
The "foremost authority" on the character changed his tune when he saw the opportunity of his book being used as the basis for a movie. Suddenly Reacher's size was just a metaphor. However, as you have no interest in the books you can discount the opinions of many of the people who have bought 60,000,000 copies of Reacher books over nearly 20 titles.
I am curious: by quoting Lee Child (or Jim Grant, as you alternatively refer to him - just as a matter of interest, does he ever use his real name in his writing? I've never seen it used in television or written interviews), how did I misapproptriate or, in other words, dishonestly use Lee Child's direct quote from an essay which he wrote. This is not a quote lifted from an article in which someone else quoted or paraphrased Child. I reiterate, it is an essay written by Child. If you bother to look, you will actually see the reference.
As for Tom Cruise as Reacher or Lee Child's recent self serving comments (last three/four years) about Cruise's suitability, I have said all I'm going to say. The subject has become tedious as everyone, including myself, seems to be set in his/her own mind.
In other words unfairly (not dishonestly as you assumed) mention his quote to suit what you said. You said it's lifted from an essay he wrote yet it's in a book written by someone else? Here's the quote:
Here is another quote from the same source, in which Lee Child (you know, the author - the person who conceived the character) says:
"And he’s huge.
He’s six feet five inches tall, and around two hundred fifty pounds, all of it muscle. In Tripwire, after he’s been doing physical labor in the sun for a spell, he’s described as looking “like a condom stuffed with walnuts.” No one in his right mind would mess with him.
I had in mind the kind of intimidating physical presence that pro footballers have, relaxed, utterly sure of themselves, but in Reacher’s case with a barely visible hint of danger. (In fact, in One Shot, he admits to having played football for Army while at West Point, but that his career was limited to only one game. “Why?” someone asks. “Were you injured?” “No,” he replies. “I was too violent.”)"
Sounds to me as if the author saw the character as huge and physically intimidating, and that played a great deal into the features that made the Reacher character individual and interesting - I won't say unique, as there is nothing unique in the world of media. However, this character as played by Tom Cruise could not be physically intimidating on first sight. As I have already said, this might be the best movie ever made but a Reacher film it isn't. The character has lost his raison d'etre.
The bit in question is highlighted in red, it appears to be someone else discussing Jack Reacher at that point - note "Sounds to me as if the author..". Lee Child has publicly said he fully endorses Cruise's portrayal of Jack Reacher as he recognises the difference in both the written and visual mediums. Ergo it renders the quote about Reacher's physicality meaningless in the context of a translation to film.
As for where/when and if he uses his real name, if you both to look you'd find out for yourself .
If impersonating a Police Officer is an offence, shouldn't actors be imprisoned?
I will repeat what I wrote earlier: "Here is a quote from Lee Child, which HE wrote in an essay about Reacher, collected in a book called "Lineup," edited by Otto Penzler." (Capital letters are mine.)
Do you understand what an editor actually does? Here, Lee Child actually wrote the essay and Otto Penzler edited the book, which included essays by many writers, including, amongst others, Michael Connelly, Robert Crais and Lincoln Child. They wrote the essays about their protagonists: Otto Penzler edited the collection.
The full title of the book is: "The Lineup: The World's Greatest Crime Writers Tell the Inside Story of Their Greatest Detectives" (2009) Edited by Otto Penzler. As you can see, the book was published in 2009, before Tom Cruise appeared on the Reacher scene. If you could be bothered to read it, you will find that Lee Child's remarks about Reacher (yes, his actual, personal writing) are contradictory to what he now writes or claims in interviews.
By the way, I made no assumptions.
I must apologise. I didn't read your post properly and I obviously didn't make myself clear enough for you.
The quote upon which you have commented in red, is actually my comment from an earlier post. The quotation marks should have indicated this to you - evidently, it wasn't clear enough. I was actually commenting on Lee Child's statements in "Lineup."
The bit in question (that) is highlighted in redis actually my discussion - I again apologise if the quotes aren't clear enough for you.
Ergo it renders the quote about Reacher's physicality meaningless in the context of a translation to film.
[deleted]
Here's what the author of the books had to say about Cruise:
The fact is Cruise is a great Jack Reacher. He really nails it.
The thing about Reacher is that it's not a question of being big, but thinking big. I could have told Tom he didn't need to pretend to be a big guy, but just had to be a big guy in his head.
Reacher is simply the toughest guy in the room. He's also quite still and centred.
But, Tom had already worked that all out. He's read all the books, and knows the character forwards and backwards. There's a certain amount of superstar nonsense that surrounds these people, but in person Tom's terrific - a very intelligent, hard working, serious actor.