Tom Cruise is a real jerk

[Pamela-Marie]

In terms of money and working, she's fine. But let's look at the list of films shall we? Starting with the pity Oscar for The Hours (probably her best work since the divorce) and ending with The Stepford Wives. In between middling to passible performances including the snooze inducing Interpreter and her future silliness in Bewitched. She's been letting her acting chops go to waste and eventually, the high of pity projects will taper. She needs something as rich as To Die For to keep it up and I don't see it in her future. IMO, she'll soon be going the way of Ben Affleck if she's not careful ...

Kravitz isn't nutty???!!! Um, okay. But I was really talking about the fact that he too broke her heart by not being faithful. Nicole is so up for the swept of your feet high that she doesn't realize the crushing low she's in for later.

And when you say she's done better in the break up department? Do you mean publicly, professionally, or emotionally? The press made Nicole a victim and a saint (and Cruise's recent actions are cementing that) and a star overnight. Emotionally, I contend she's still a puddle and just as educated about love as a seventeen year old. She's yet to prove me wrong.

[Mann]

Her film choices?

She makes 15 million a movie...she won an Oscar...the Hollywood Foriegn Press has never stopped groveling at her feet...She seems to have sky rocketed into stardom after breaking up with cruise. yeah She's learned something there: Don't be the object of the most ludicrously retarded man in Hollywood's affections.

Also I think she learned NOT to get with the nut jobs and gays. I mean you might say Lenny Kravitz was a mistake...but at least the dude wasn't as nutty as this guy. Come on, Kravitz is harmless.

"Nicole may no longer be with Tom, but not by her own choice and she's still a fool"

She's done better in the break up department than others have.

[Pamela-Marie]

Katie at 26 is smarter than Nicole is now.

I don't think so, considering Katie's with the fool and Nicole's safely out of there.

I honestly beg to differ. Nicole is only out of there because she was thrown to the curb and she's learned no lessons of their relationship, mistakes she made, warning signs, or even that Tom did not treat her right (no matter how often her family tells her) and the evidence of this was her relationship with Kravitz. She doesn't realize what she wants, the high of the good years with Cruise is never forever. Nicole may no longer be with Tom, but not by her own choice and she's still a fool ... and that isn't even talking about her film choices.

[criddic3]

I am in no way implying that Mr. Cruise actually is a gay homosexual.

Umm, maybe I'm nitpicking here, but don't you sort of have to be gay to homosexual? Or are you referring to "happy" homosexuals?

[paperboy]

Katie at 26 is smarter than Nicole is now.

I don't think so, considering Katie's with the fool and Nicole's safely out of there.

[Pamela-Marie]

I'm not interested enough to actually do any research, but I am curious: is Katie Holmes also publicly making a fool of herself over her relationship with Cruise?

Not anymore than Kidman did, then again, Katie at 26 is smarter than Nicole is now.

I can't figure out Katie anymore. I've always known her to be part of a level-headed family, very smart, very grounded, and very shy. She makes the mature choice not to marry because she's not ready, Chris isn't the man for her, and because she's too young (oh and he's got a bit of drinking problem, but she was too classy to ever comment on that), and then within three weeks she's saying she's in love with a man she just met?! Okay, it's Cruise, I get it, most women find him intoxicating, sexy, charming, irresistable, etc. But number one, why is her family not freaked out (well they weren't in the beginning, but maybe they saw Access Hollywood and changed their minds)?! A family rooted so deeply in morals, principals, and the Catholic faith (that's the third one in a row for Cruise) I would think would not knowingly let their daughter be, well a publicity stunt (or beard) at worst or a mid-life crisis whirlwind romance at best. By now I would think they would have sat her down and she had to say, "chill out dad, we aren't really together, it was LeAnn's idea." But sorry, it just doesn't strike me as Katie. I can see Cruise picking her sure; a beautiful professed virgin in a big summer movie who his daughter watched on TV, perfect! But I never thought Holmes was dumb enough to by into this mess and I certainly didn't think she would go into a sham romance eyes wide open either.

Of course, I actually believe Cruise is over the moon over her. To me, that fits into his other "gone fishin'" actions more than a carefully planned publicity romance. If it were carefully planned, then he's an idiot! I think the poor girl sees he's genuinely crazy about her and won't realize until much later he's also genuinely crazy!

I don't think it will hurt her actually. When they break up, she'll be the new Nicole, miscarriage or not (hopefully her career upswing will include far better films and performances). And with Cruise acting so ridiculously, people are primed to cheer over Katie's freedom when he inevitably walks out on her. The only way it hurts her IMO is if he successfully makes her a pod person and they live happily ever after in a Jim and Tammy Faye existence.

I told a friend of mine about a year ago my only advice about dating Tom Cruise, call Nicole first!!! I'm telling you that despite how blind she still is about Cruise, just a rundown of their marriage will tell the real tale. If only Holmes had thought to do this.

Oh and Tom may keep avoiding telling about how he met Katie, but her father let that cat out of the bag a month ago on local news: he called about a "project" and asked her to dinner. End of story. Why Tom won't share that piece of info is beyond me, unless he thinks that will put fuel in the theory it is a sham.

[Penelope]

Tamara Ikenberg of the Louisville Courier-Journal has some fun comments about all this:

Bride of Scientologystein

Tom Cruise's fervor for Katie Holmes disturbs me on a very deep level, and not just because it seems so staged, or because he is significantly older and shorter than the "Dawson's Creek" darling.

This week, the perpetually grinning Scientology god appeared on "The Oprah Winfrey Show" in a strange mix of movie promotion for "War of the Worlds," amour advertisement and butt-kissing extravaganza. "You're gone," Winfrey said repeatedly to Cruise, referring to his ga-ga-over-Holmes behavior.

An overexcited Cruise tussled with Winfrey, spontaneously prostrated himself at the mention of Holmes' name and jumped on the couch, suggesting he'd had 27 cups of coffee and snorted nearly as many lines of coke prior to the show.

But that's impossible, because Scientology strongly denounces drugs. Cruise himself made a comment about that. In an interview, he talked about Brooke Shields, his co-star in 1981's "Endless Love." He criticized her use of the antidepressant Paxil for post-natal depression, stating that the right combo of vitamins would cure her ailment more effectively. Thanks for the input, Tom. Check in later when you're a woman.

But back to the O show. Nicole Kidman and dachshund-like Penelope Cruz must have been livid watching Cruise swoon over Holmes. He even had the audacity to mention Kidman, calling her "Nic" when Winfrey daringly asked how their joint custody was going.

At the show's end, Cruise called Holmes to join him onstage and ended up hunting for her backstage, eventually pushing the shy gal into the spotlight, as if to say: Behold the future virgin bride of Scientology! Together we will rule!

Scientology has to get its act together if it ever wants to challenge Kabbalah. Together, TomKat would be unstoppable, what with his creepy charisma and cash and her moon-faced innocence. Warning: The Cruise is host of this year's "MTV Movie Awards." When, oh when will this sick self-promotion stop?

Run, Joey, run!

[kaytodd]

I'm not interested enough to actually do any research, but I am curious: is Katie Holmes also publicly making a fool of herself over her relationship with Cruise?

[Damien]

From the New York Post:

EYES WIDE NUT

By KYLE SMITH


May 25, 2005 -- HE's leaping on couches! He's smooching for the cameras! He's swearing to Reader's Digest, "I love women"! He's . . . " . . . nutso!" says an A-list celeb publicist who can't believe the embarrassing display Tom Cruise has been putting on to hawk his little-believed romance with Katie Holmes. "The Oprah segment made me want to puke."

If Cruise is going to remain one of the biggest movie stars in the world instead of a laughingstock - remember, even Michael Jackson was on top once - he needs a quick infusion of p.r. advice, stat.

Cruise fired his longtime publicist Pat Kingsley, possibly the most feared and respected name in the business, last year only to replace her with his less experienced sister, Lee Anne DeVette, a fellow Scientologist.

Now he threatens to vaporize himself with his own p.r. death rays as he attacks planet Earth with media appearances to promote his movie "War of the Worlds."

In recent days he has:

‡ Jumped on Oprah's couch to scream, "I'm in love! I'm in love!" while throwing his hands in the air. "I can't be cool, I can't be laid-back. It's something that has happened, and I feel I want to celebrate it. I want to celebrate her." (Page Six reported that he stammered twice when Oprah asked how he met her, a charge his team denied).

‡ Trashed Brooke Shields, telling "Access Hollywood" she should have used vitamins instead of drugs to treat her postpartum depression.

‡ Told Reader's Digest that women "smell good. They look pretty. I love women. I do."

Professional publicists - contacted by The Post to offer their strategies on how they would save Cruise from himself - are shaking their heads at the display.

"Tom Cruise kissing Katie Holmes reminds me of Michael Jackson kissing Elvis' daughter," says Ronn Torossian, CEO of 5WPR, who has repped Lil' Kim and Ja Rule. "If he loves her, I would tell him to keep it away from the media. Tom Cruise is an A-list celebrity. I don't see how this will help the box office.

"No one can deny that P. Diddy and Jennifer Lopez were helped tremendously [by their affair]. But they were both on their way up. Tom Cruise is a major actor. I'd tell him to be real, to be himself. He's a guy in his mid-40s. His young, sexy brand is going to go away in the next year, two years. Stay away from that Scientology stuff. How does talking about Brooke Shields drive people to the movie theater? And once you throw the first punch, you don't know what's going to happen."

Torossian also can't understand why he's doing so much so early: "War of the Worlds" doesn't debut until June 29. "I would have had him do Oprah June 27. He should be doing long leads now."

Cruise defines a new cliche about business: Keep your friends close, your enemies closer and your family far away.

"He needs to have a professional handle his business," says Torossian. "His sister shouldn't do his p.r. any more than his father should do his finances or his mother should be his attorney."

A different publicist, who reps some of the biggest names in the business, was even harsher on Cruise.

"He's become a joke," says the publicist who said the Oprah segment made him want to puke, but requested anonymity for obvious reasons.

"I've heard of over-the-top, but there's no top here. This is as phony as anything Hollywood could create, and he's probably gonna announce his engagement to Pamela Anderson next week. I get the Oprah audience - housewives in Nebraska - but it just smacks of phoniness. It cuts into his value on every level."

This publicist notes that Cruise's behavior might be less cringe-worthy if he were 17.

"I hate to be cynical but, past a certain age, you don't get that in love. I mean, jumping on couches? It seems like he's off his rocker. There's something meshuga here."

Citing Rock Hudson's 1955 marriage to a studio employee, the publicist says promoting romance for p.r. value "does not work. The press is much more cynical. He should disappear for a while. He's supposed to be promoting his movie but he's promoting the fact that he's in love."

Publicist Lizzie Grubman disagrees on this point: "People just want to see more and more of him," she says, counseling a full-on media blitz to promote the movie, though she thinks he should keep his personal life out of it.

Grubman, though, doesn't blame DeVette for his recent fiascoes.

"I don't think anyone is going to coach him," says Grubman. "He's clearly not taking p.r. advice from her. He's taking p.r. advice from himself."

So far, it isn't working: A People magazine poll showed 62 percent of its readers think the Cruise-Holmes affair is a stunt.

[Penelope]

I read on a gossip message board that Brooke (either herself or her publicist) responded to Cruise's insensitive comments on Inside Edition tonight (I work in the evening, so I missed it)--something to the effect of (and I'm quoting from the message board):

"She said his comments were irresponsible and dangerous. She also said that he should stick to fighting aliens in his new movie and leave women who suffer from postpartum depression to decide for themselves what options are best for them.

She had not heard about the comments because she's in London in a play. Her publicist was the one who told her what was going down."

I've always liked Brooke, maybe not the greatest actress (although far more beguiling, imho, that Tommy ever could be), but always a class act, poised and confident without being conceited; I admire her for openly discussing her depression--as a person who has dealt with severe depression in the past, I know talking about it isn't easy--but for a high-profile celebrity to talk about it, to share their experience with the public--if it can reach one person to seek assistance and help--man, that make her a hero to me.

[Pamela-Marie]

I know people with similar childhood bitterness against psychiatry, and certainly the drug thing is a serious issue. Hell, there are lots of problems with the field (just ask psychiatrists). But Tom's loathing seems to go too far...way over into, We must stop psychiatry and make everyone Scientologists.

See that's just it, he had valid points, it was very frustrating. He's completely right about SATs, psychiatrists that medicate too quickly, kids being medicated, anti-depressants being hard drugs to wean off of, and natural ways and therapies to deal with learning disabilities, behavior disorders, communication problems, and focus.

But one minute he makes valid points and then he veers off into claims that emotional and chemical imbalances are not scientifically proven (um, who told you that dearie?). Eventually, as he started reminding me of a cult leader, I began to get chills. I was particularly freaked out when he was saying he cared about everyone in the room (cue Poltergiest music) and when he said people come up to him and thank him. All of the sudden I got a Jim Jones feeling ... I didn't like it. Creepy!

There is a difference between championing natural ways to deal with certain levels of depression and then there is well, assimilation on the set of a film! Like I said, Preston as a former teacher created this debate with California teachers in a well reasoned, well mannered, and open way. Cruise acted like he was Hubbard's second coming. If you don't agree with him, apparently you are a "bigot". I really didn't like the way he threw that word around. By his own, inappropriate definition of the word, he's the bigot!

[kaytodd]

I have it on very good authority that Tom Cruise likes to be a bottom while standing on his head. Not that there's anything wrong with that.

I am in no way implying that Mr. Cruise actually is a gay homosexual.

Now, there's a conversation I would like to have been listening in on!

[Damien]

From the Wall Street Journal:

Oh, the Civility!

By ROBERT J. HUGHES
May 27, 2005

This week on television, Goldie Hawn enacted a zany childhood scene on "The Ellen DeGeneres Show" and Tom Cruise was so jumpy and energized on "Oprah" that you wondered about his mental health. Both actors flogged new projects -- Ms. Hawn, a memoir; Mr. Cruise, a sci-fi movie -- and both made long, choreographed and generally uninteresting appearances.

Farther down the dial, in the wee small hours of the morning, William Holden had a movie to plug too. But the actor, despite being dead for nearly a quarter century, managed to outshine today's stars. He was the mystery guest on a 1956 rerun of "What's My Line?" -- the charming conversational game show from decades ago that is a 3:30 a.m. staple on the GSN cable and satellite network. During his appearance, Mr. Holden mentioned his then-new and now-forgotten movie, "Toward the Unknown," only after the panelists guessed his identity. He spoke for maybe a minute. And unlike today's typically self-infatuated talk-show guest, he came across as charming, modest and mercifully laconic.


"What's My Line?" -- a Sunday night fixture on CBS from 1950 to 1967 -- is a bracing antidote to today's dispiriting talk-a-thons, humiliating reality shows and hostile cable-news programs. And with VCRs, TiVo and other time-shifting contraptions available to modern TV watchers, the show's retro charms are available to a much wider swath of viewers than its minuscule ratings would suggest.

And what a treat "What's My Line?" is: low-key but sophisticated, decorous yet not stuffy, and a real window onto another era. "What's My Line?" was unscripted, and it was broadcast live. Its panelists refer to current affairs in passing, and its guests were a veritable who's who of the arts high and low, from Frank Lloyd Wright to Liberace.

But what strikes you first is the civility. In this age of confrontational television, "What's My Line?" lets us breathe a little easier. Even if it's all in the past.

The show is simplicity itself: A panel of four tries to guess the occupation, or line, of a guest. When there's a mystery guest, the panelists are blindfolded and try to figure out the guest's identity. The panelists ask questions that require a yes or no answer, and try to deduce from the responses what the person does, or who he or she is. That's it. But that may explain its appeal. There's no competition, no backstabbing, no one-upmanship. It's as if we viewers were asked to join in a casual after-dinner party game at the home of urbane hosts.

No small part of the show's appeal lay in its engaging panel. For much of its run, the "What's My Line?" crew included the charming Arlene Francis, who was a theatrical performer and popular radio host; Bennett Cerf, the dapper founder of Random House, the publishing concern; and Dorothy Kilgallen, who had a radio show with her husband and was also a gossip columnist -- and who, perhaps because of that calling's lowlier status, seemed to have more of an edge to her personality than her colleagues. From 1954 to 1956, radio comedian Fred Allen was the fourth panelist; following his death, that spot was filled with guests ranging from Steve Allen to a young Phil Rizzuto and a pre-"Odd Couple" Tony Randall.

At the start of each show, the panelists introduced each other, in a rather courtly and decidedly old-fashioned way that helps maintain the illusion we're privy to a charming salon. Sometimes, when Mr. Cerf and the show's moderator, newsman John Charles Daly, made some reference to their homes in Westchester, N.Y., I would have an image of a suburban John Cheever world (minus the despair, perhaps), or when Ms. Francis mentioned a book that Mr. Cerf had published recently I'd get a sense of what America was reading at the time.

These panelists helped make viewers feel they, too, were part of a Manhattan elite. They were clearly well-read, conversant with the arts and on top of current events. On one show, Mr. Cerf correctly guessed that the mystery guest was a Suez Canal pilot, during the time of that Middle East crisis, because he was aware of talks in New York related to it. One show even had as a mystery guest the judge who had recently performed the wedding service for Marilyn Monroe and Arthur Miller.

Since I began watching "WML?" I've pored over my copy of Mr. Cerf's memoir, "At Random," for anecdotes about the show and his life, scoped Lee Israel's 1979 biography of Dorothy Kilgallen, and searched for Arlene Francis's memoir (she actually wrote a book about being charming, too). "What's My Line?" also sent me looking into the Suez affair and the 1956 presidential election, not to mention the movies, TV shows and plays that guests mention during their brief appearances. I have to believe that the panelists' contemporary viewers had their curiosity piqued in much the same way. And given that the network primetime audience back then was huge by today's standards, "What's My Line?" was truly educational TV with none of the pretense we now associate with the term.

As for the noncelebrity guests, they were all treated with consideration and respect. Of course, the show wasn't entirely representative of America's cultural diversity. But it did have a sizable number of women guests with interesting occupations, ranging from a sweet elderly woman who was the warden of a prison to a barrel-shaped blonde who managed a brewery. On two separate occasions, Japanese women, attired in kimonos, shattered stereotypes. One turned out to be a jazz pianist; the other, a pizza maker.

Apart from the interesting day-to-day occupations that "What's My Line?" so cheerfully explored, what remains fascinating are the show's more famous guests. How refreshing in our era of the tell-all to see Hollywood actors say merely a few words -- mainly "Yes" and "No" -- and a line or two about a current movie. Rather than subjecting viewers to tiresome anecdotes and desperate jokes, "What's My Line?" offers us a glimpse of glamour, allowing some of the mystery surrounding stardom to remain.

And what guest stars "What's My Line?" attracted! Since I've been watching, they have included Supreme Court Justice William Douglas, director George Stevens ("Shane," "Giant"), 1950s hostess and ambassador Perle Mesta, songwriters Rodgers and Hammerstein and Lerner and Loewe, the writer Herman Wouk and actress Claudette Colbert. Even newlyweds Debbie Reynolds and Eddie Fisher.

Watching Ms. Reynolds and Mr. Fisher in that moment of bliss, before husband dumped wife in favor of Elizabeth Taylor, captures some of the poignancy and the pleasure of viewing "What's My Line?" We may know what will happen, for better or worse, to these people caught on film a half-century ago. But at least we don't have to hear them talk about it.

Mr. Hughes is a Journal reporter in New York.

[Mister Tee]

Well, this has turned into an interesting thread, but I guess Tom keeps supplying material. His turn on Access Hollywood was almost as gripping as the Bolton cloture vote.

The idea that Cruise needs no publicity is a crock. He obviously remains a huge overseas star, but, ever since the split from Nicole, his US films have topped out not too far above $100 million -- which is less than a star in his pay-rate needs to generate. (Minority Report, with Spielberg and excellent reviews, only managed a mid-range opening weekend for a summer blockbuster) He and his advisers may have calculated the mass audience would respond more completely if they got to see happy-in-love Tom rather than marriage-wrecker Tom.

Because he sure seems to be pushing this Katie Holmes thing WAY past the norm. (Just compare it to the reticence of Pitt/Jolie) Hey, I can see being attracted to Holmes (not much of an actress, but a face to make me melt), but the excess here is extraordinary. And hearing that Holmes dreamed of marrying him as a kid...yuck. That strays into Liza territory -- all those guys who've married her thinking they'd get Judy.

I know people with similar childhood bitterness against psychiatry, and certainly the drug thing is a serious issue. Hell, there are lots of problems with the field (just ask psychiatrists). But Tom's loathing seems to go too far...way over into, We must stop psychiatry and make everyone Scientologists. Funny this comes the same day A-Rod talks about how therapy has saved him.

As far as I know, Travolta's been a Scientologist since the 80s; he just hasn't been as obstreperous as this (though Battlefield Earth extracted its pound of flesh from his career).

Criddic, do you really want us to dig up all the actors who've got multiple nominations and aren't exactly super-talented? I mean, Norma Shearer has 6, for god's sake, and I can barely stand to look at her, let alone listen to her.

[anonymous1980]

All I can say is: What if Tom Cruise converted into Christian science?

Cruise Launches War on Psychiatrists
Tom Cruise has declared a public war on psychiatrists because he fears the "pseudo-science" has led to a drug-fuelled crisis for today's children. The movie hunk was diagnosed as dyslexic when he was just seven, and doctors suggested he should take drugs to control his learning problems. Memories of that part of his childhood fuelled Cruise to seek alternative ways of overcoming his dyslexia - a problem that led him to the Church of Scientology's educational programs. Becoming a scientologist in 1984 made the actor look closely at the controversial religion's anti-psychiatry stance, and he has since become a firm believer that the science and the medicating of children is wrong. Speaking exclusively to US news show Access Hollywood as part of a week-long special about his scientology beliefs, the movie hunk declares, "I'm going right after psychiatry and these false labels and this pseudo-science. I was diagnosed as dyslexic; I had a lot of energy as a child. They wanted to put me on drugs... Never did; my mother said no, absolutely not, no way and I'm thankful. Had I been put on those drugs, I never would be here today... I never would have had the career that I'm having. Am I making people aware of it by discussing it openly and saying what a fraud psychiatry is? You bet I am. I feel a responsibility because I care..." The actor also maintains that poor results in education in America can be blamed on mind-altering drugs that are given to children. He adds, "SAT (exam) scores have gone right down the toilet. The parents are blaming the teachers, the teachers are blaming the parents and the psychs are putting everyone on drugs."