Cruise, UA Betting the Farm on 'Valkyrie'

We always like to talk box office and what those numbers mean here at The Big Picture, not because a huge river of money means the movie is any good, but because it tells you a lot about the health of a studio at that particular moment, or the ability a movie star has to show up on marquees the following summer. In short, it's the business of the business.

Take Valkyrie, for example. You wouldn't automatically think that, in 2008 and 2009, a movie about a plot to assassinate Hitler would be a huge hit, even with Tom Cruise. Certainly, six years ago, this movie would have had a bigger competitive advantage. To begin with, Cruise was a more bankable star and he had alienated a huge chunk of his fan base, and secondly, there weren't a handful of other World War II movies in theaters at exactly the same time. According to several sources consulted by The New York Post, MGM/UA is dumping about twice as much into promotion of the film as a studio normally would a movie with its box office potential. The reason, the Post says, is because if the film is a hit, United Artists, the studio Cruise runs, will have more access to a half-billion-dollar fund set up as a film financing pool a couple of years ago. It works like this: If UA makes a movie for $20 million, that money comes out of the big fund. If the film makes $10 million in ticket sales, home video sales and rentals, and cable revenue, that's $10 million that the studio can never touch again. If that same film makes $30 million, then it has $10 million more it can spend on future productions.

Click to read more ...

More Cruise News: 'Valkyrie' Moved to December, Paula Wagner Leaves UA

For a guy whose career has been more notable for its instability than its steady stream of success over the past three years, there still aren't many stars who can grab a headline like Tom Cruise. Earlier this week, it was revealed that the spy movie he had long been linked to, Edwin A. Salt, was moving on without him. In his place: Angelina Jolie. Hard to knock that choice. After all, she is taller.

WENN reports what we presumed about all of this, specifically that Cruise is not a guaranteed box office draw anymore. Truthfully, he hasn't been a sure thing in nearly a decade. His only substantial hit since Jerry Maguire is War of the Worlds. By substantial, we mean something that unquestionably made a lot of money here in the U.S. So that's two movies in 12 years. We'll be generous and throw M:I 2 in that group, even though it was very, very expensive and didn't come close to the profit margin of the first one. Not surprisingly, a 46-year-old action star who hasn't performed like Will Smith and who has been a public relations nightmare might have problems keeping the momentum going. That includes a potential Mission: Impossible 4, which Cruise wants, but which Paramount, according to a source, would rather place in the hands of a younger, more affordable guy. At a recent meeting about the project, recounted in the New York Post, Cruise "had a tantrum and ran out of the meeting." Whether that last detail is true or not, the spirit of the story is hard to argue. Action movies these days, with few exceptions, don't need to be star-driven. At least not megastar-driven. And if he's not dropping his asking price, it's a tough scenario for any studio to buy into. But there's more bad news for Cruise: His longtime producing partner Paula Wagner is leaving her position as CEO of United Artists. Wagner and Cruise have been in charge of the studio for a little over a year, with very few positive results.

Click to read more ...