Latest rumor-mongering: Tom Cruise as Captain Pike?

[Roshi]

Two years ago, AAMOF, during the War of the Worlds/Batman Begins double promo :winkwink:.
Yep tempus fugit...

=> I spent years explaining to my mother that Star Trek was in NO WAY related to Scientology and/or a sect, and if this rumor turns out to be true, she'll think she was right all along. Le sigh indeed.

 

[ralph]

I would like to see Tom Hanks as Pike and Cruise as a villian.
Probably some bigger names actors will done cameos.

 

[Frontier]

If they put Tom Cruise in Trek, I'm done. Finito. Trek is dead. Abrams killed it. Berman will have been vindicated.

Tom Cruise is a cultist whacko. He has no place in Trek. It's spit in the face of Gene Roddenberry and the idealogy of Trek. We've never had such an outspoken moron before; don't start now.

 

[seigezunt]

really his scientology doesn't enter into it.

it's because he's an idiot.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

I like Tom Cruise. He's one of the hardest-working, most reliable actors in Hollywood, does good work, and puts butts in the seats.

He stands accused of being a Scientologist, insulting Matt Lauer, and being a flake on Oprah's show (which, pardon me, I thought was a basic requirement to be buddies with Oprah).

He doesn't get busted for drunk driving, molesting his costars, insulting Jews or gays or African Americans - Hell, he's never even said publicly that our President is an embarrassing idiot (for which I would have awarded him bonus points, actually).

Sumner Redstone announced in high dudgeon that Cruise was not welcome at his studio. Redstone will be dead soon and Cruise will continue to be an international star for decades to come.

The "Star Trek" producers will be very lucky indeed if they can land Cruise and one or two other actors that people will actually pay money to see for small parts in this flick.

 

[Franklin]

Eh, a cameo. What, maybe two minutes on screen? Even if one doesn't like Cruise, that's harmless enough if it happens. Isn't it? Isn't it?

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Franklin said:
Eh, a cameo. What, maybe two minutes on screen? Even if one doesn't like Cruise, that's harmless enough if it happens.

Exactly so, and it's worth it to the studio for the many tickets they'll sell that they otherwise wouldn't.

 

[Cary L. Brown]

I have no problem with any actor's person beliefs, provided that they don't attempt to force others to conform to their beliefs or go around acting as though their fame makes them "better" than the rest of humanity.

So, while I have no personal affection for Mr. Cruise, and no personal appreciation for his beliefs, I haven't seen a single example of him trying to tear down others, and I've seen a lot of people trying to tear him down.

Maybe I'm missing some super-secret cabalistic thing going on among Scientologists, but last time I checked, this was all voluntary. I think it's about the goofiest thing out there, but I'll defend to the very end the right of people to hold their own religious beliefs... until those beliefs start being implemented by force on other people, obviously.

I'm not the world'd biggest Tom Cruise fan, but I have no real problem with the guy, and I've enjoyed some of his performances.

My only issue with him being in this movie (unless he was unrecognizable) is that his presence would tend to overshadow the rest of the film. The movie already has one "big name" associated with it... that name being "Star Trek."

Unless he's the BEST POSSIBLE CHOICE for some role, I'd rather leave the "big names" out of the film entirely.

 

[Trek4Ever]

Oh YUCK!

 

[Aragorn]

Cary L. Brown said:
So, while I have no personal affection for Mr. Cruise, and no personal appreciation for his beliefs, I haven't seen a single example of him trying to tear down others, and I've seen a lot of people trying to tear him down.

But the progressive tolerant people of Trek BBS aren't being intolerant when they completely dismiss anyone who thinks or acts differently from them, especially when they start using their limited brain capacity to start speaking ON BEHALF of the Gene Roddenberry ideology as its No. 1 authority.

Of course, what's really funny is how John Travolta's Scientology is somehow completely different than Cruise's.

 

[Mr J]

Even if I didn't like Cruise (which isn't actually the case), I would be able to live with a small role like this in the interest of boosting the film's commercial appeal and making it more likely to be a success. It isn't going to change whether or not the script is good, and so I can live with it if it happens.

If Cruise were to play anyone in the movie then Pike would be a good fit IMO. I like him as an actor and obviously so does the mass-audience. This could work very well, if true.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Aragorn said:
But the progressive tolerant people of Trek BBS aren't being intolerant when they completely dismiss anyone who thinks or acts differently from them, especially when they start using their limited brain capacity to start speaking ON BEHALF of the Gene Roddenberry ideology as its No. 1 authority.

This isn't one of those gay-bashing things is it? Seems to be a conversation coming in from somewhere else...

 

[Woulfe]

Yes, Tom Hanks as Pike would be way way way better.

Yes, Tom Hanks is a die in the wool Star Trek fan

- W -
* This message brought to you by the keep Tom Cruise 1,000,000 light-years away from Star Trek club *

 

[Aragorn]

What gay-bashing thing? I'm simply pointing out the hypocrisy of the Cruise-bashing from all the supposed open and forward thinkers.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Aragorn said:
What gay-bashing thing? I'm simply pointing out the hypocrisy of the Cruise-bashing from all the supposed open and forward thinkers.

Ah, okay. It just sounded like the tail end of a conversation carrying over from someplace else, and I couldn't figure out what the supposedly tolerant people were supposedly being intolerant about this week. Carry on...

 

[Aragorn]

It's just been my experience that the people who flaunt their "open-mindedness" the most tend to be the most intolerant. Of course, that they need to flaunt it is telling in itself. But that really only applies to the people here who are suddenly going all Mr. Stinky Pants on us regarding the sacred cow of Trek.

Although if you want to bring up gay-bashing, in a way it does remind me of the so-called X-Men fans who were upset that a gay man had been cast as Magneto, especially when you consider what the overall theme of X-Men is about.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Well, then there are the folks who fart in elevators and yell "what happened to IDIC?" if you object...

 

[xortex]

I have to go one further. He's a childish idiot.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

An impressive observation from an anonymous poster on the Internet, to be sure.

 

[Aragorn]

Go easy on him. He's just a cadet. It'll only be a matter of time before he comes back with "He's an childish idiot because he's stupid."