• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Horrific miscasting of the week - Tom Cruise as Jack Reacher?

Lonemagpie

Writer
In Memoriam
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/one-shot-tom-cruise-090000289.html

Regardless of whether you love or hate Cruise, this is horrific miscasting - Reacher is a huge guy with a build like Schwarzenegger and a laconic straight-talking personality that's kind of halfway between a John Wayne character and a Clint Eastwood one. Cruise is totally wrong in both build and screen personality.

And it's a rubbish choice of first adaptation too - they should start with Killing Floor...
 
I think Cruise is more versatile than people give him credit for, but i've never heard of Jack Reacher, so I'll reserve judgment on that particular role. He has surprised me a few times though.
 
Well he was supposedly miscast as Lestat as well...

That said even though I've never read any of the books he doesn't sound like a good fit for the character!
 
I want to cry.

Reacher is one of my favourite crime lit characters, a man who makes James Bond seem like Alan Bennett. When I read the books, I always imagine him played by Adam Baldwin. I know Baldwin would never win the lead in a big franchise but someone like Alexander Skaarsgard might have been a decent sub (if they'd started off with that prequel, where Reacher is aged about 30).

Apparently Lee Child is happy enough about Cruise landing the role but in addition to being physically all wrong (why not go ahead and get Peter Dinklage as his brother, if they film the first book?!) he's all wrong personality wise. Reacher is deadpan, sarcastic, rough and ready and gruff. Cruise - who I do like - isn't.
 
I don't know, he was pretty impressive in Collateral Damage. Bottom line is he's a crowd pleaser. The backers wouldn't go for someone unknown.

Mel Gibson got an Oscar for Braveheart, despite the fact Willliam Wallace's claymore was the same height as Gibson. If that kind of real tragedy can take place, a fictional character doesn't stand a chance.
 
True enough. But the height difference somehow upset me more than the complete mauling of Scottish history.
 
^ The height thing is one thing and I accept that Cruise has handled action and fight scenes adroitly in the MI movies. But in terms of personality, I just don't see him as Reacher. Fair enough, in Collateral, Magnolia and Vampire he's successfully shed his Tom Cruise persona. But, if as you say, he's cast here for his crowd-pleasing, then I'd imagine that they want The Cruiser, not The Reacher.
 
That's the other thing - really a relative unknown would be a better fit, because as is, even if Cruise is on top form as in, say, Collateral Damage, we're going to be seeing Cruise not Reacher.
 
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/one-shot-tom-cruise-090000289.html

Regardless of whether you love or hate Cruise, this is horrific miscasting - Reacher is a huge guy with a build like Schwarzenegger and a laconic straight-talking personality that's kind of halfway between a John Wayne character and a Clint Eastwood one. Cruise is totally wrong in both build and screen personality.

And it's a rubbish choice of first adaptation too - they should start with Killing Floor...

It could be worse - it could be Ben Affleck.
 
^ At least he has the height and build. And The Town and Gone Baby Gone showed that he knows how to make a good adaptation from a crime novel.
 
I don't know, he was pretty impressive in Collateral Damage.

That's the other thing - really a relative unknown would be a better fit, because as is, even if Cruise is on top form as in, say, Collateral Damage, we're going to be seeing Cruise not Reacher.

Collateral_Damage_film.jpg
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top