Go Back  DVD Talk Forum > Entertainment Discussions > Movie Talk
Reload this Page >

Last Samurai - Better without Tom Cruise?

Movie Talk A Discussion area for everything movie related including films In The Theaters

Last Samurai - Better without Tom Cruise?

Old 12-07-03, 04:18 PM
  #1  
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 688
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Last Samurai - Better without Tom Cruise?

I like Tom Cruise, and I liked this movie, I just couldnt help but feel he wasnt right for this film. At the end I mentioned something to my wife and she exclaimed that she was just about to say that.

I know the story revolves around the attempt to Westernize Japan, and obviously Cruise is a legitimate part of that story, but I would not have minded if the story had been all Japanese and dealt with the Westernization as simply the impetous for the Samurai to fight back. Not really even needing Cruises sharacter. It just seems Hollywood feels nobody will go see a movie with an entirely foreign cast, that audiences need an American face to get them in the theaters, and they may be right, but he still seemed stiff and out of place in this film. Why is it soo much of what Cruise does seems to fall into the category of vanity role?
Old 12-07-03, 04:38 PM
  #2  
DVD Talk Godfather
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: City of the lakers.. riots.. and drug dealing cops.. los(t) Angel(e)s. ca.
Posts: 54,199
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
What is the deal with all this tom cruise bashing? Since when has tom cruise been a Bad actor or a simple target for folks to piss on?

The story was in need of an american character in the whole westernization of japan. simple as that. you really can't westernize any place without a character from the west. It was great if you ask me. a certain Old meets the new much like his sword had inscribed.

Cruise did well. I don't think it's a matter of no one in america willing to watch an all foreign cast, as much as it needs those characters to show the change that the outside world brings.

I would beg to think that most folks are bashing on cruise now simply because it is the hip thing to do. I asked a couple of friends if they would like to see the film with me, a majority responded with "It looks cheesy because of cruise"..

What has he done that was cheesy? he was very manly in Magnolia. He was pimping it in risky business, he was in top gun for goodness sakes, a dope ass vampire in interview with... and so much more. So what is it with all this hatin' for no reason when it comes to cruise?
Old 12-07-03, 04:49 PM
  #3  
DVD Talk Hero
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Duluth, GA, USA
Posts: 37,797
Received 7 Likes on 7 Posts
I look at it this way: without Tom Cruise, this film probably never gets made, for that, I'm grateful for Mr. Cruise.
Old 12-07-03, 04:52 PM
  #4  
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 688
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Where did I piss on Tom Cruise?! I started off by saying that I LIKE TOM CRUISE! If you cant pay attention to what I say in my post, than don't respond. I simply said he felt very out of place and stiff in the film.

Jack, please actually read my post, and not just the topic headline.
Old 12-07-03, 05:01 PM
  #5  
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 3,220
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I thought he was perfect for the role...
Old 12-07-03, 05:04 PM
  #6  
DVD Talk Godfather
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: City of the lakers.. riots.. and drug dealing cops.. los(t) Angel(e)s. ca.
Posts: 54,199
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally posted by rushmore223
Where did I piss on Tom Cruise?! I started off by saying that I LIKE TOM CRUISE! If you cant pay attention to what I say in my post, than don't respond. I simply said he felt very out of place and stiff in the film.

Jack, please actually read my post, and not just the topic headline.
And if you can't take criticism then I would suggest not posting, forums will express views of the many that may or may not be the same as your own. Not to mention the often case where thread topics extend beyond what they originally were started to talk about adding new topics that relate to the central topic.

If you notice, I didn't point you as the target of the cruise pissing, but it was a carry over from the other last samurai thread in which folks were a little sketchy and worried about the film simply because it had cruise in it.

I responded to your topic in my response in a fair manner.
Old 12-07-03, 05:17 PM
  #7  
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 688
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
A Carry over? Well that makes it seem a bit out of context then doesnt it? Maybe if your gonna go on the offensive you should have kept that comment on that thread. Seems like most every time you bother to make a comment on a thread, it's to make a threadcrap.

If thats how you enjoy yourself, than far be it from me to stop you...have fun

Last edited by rushmore223; 12-07-03 at 05:23 PM.
Old 12-07-03, 05:22 PM
  #8  
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: California
Posts: 7,729
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
I'm not entirely sure if the movie would have been "better" without Tom Cruise, but I thought one of the reasons the movie was very appealing was the rebirth of a broken down Westerner in a Japanese culture. (And yes, I know that this type of thing has been done in other movies as well).

So if there were no Westerner in the movie, it would not have necessarily been better or worse, it would have been a different movie altogether, IMO.
Old 12-07-03, 05:24 PM
  #9  
DVD Talk Special Edition
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,899
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally posted by Patman
I look at it this way: without Tom Cruise, this film probably never gets made, for that, I'm grateful for Mr. Cruise.
Old 12-07-03, 05:27 PM
  #10  
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 688
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
True Nemesis, I simply brought up the changing of the story to not include an American because I doubted the movie would have been made without a recognizable american face. I don't actually mind the character being the center of the story, I just felt Cruise seemed out of place, even though I have admired much of his work in the past. Especially Minority Report. He just seemed to lose interest in the film halfway through. I still quite liked the movie, don't feel it should be inundated with oscars or anything, but I enjoyed it.
Old 12-07-03, 05:30 PM
  #11  
DVD Talk Godfather
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: City of the lakers.. riots.. and drug dealing cops.. los(t) Angel(e)s. ca.
Posts: 54,199
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally posted by rushmore223
A Carry over? Well that makes it seem a bit out of context then doesnt it? Maybe if your gonna go on the offensive you should have kept that comment on that thread. Seems like most every time you bother to make a comment on a thread, it's to make a threadcrap.

If thats how you enjoy yourself, than far be it from me to stop you...have fun
Yes, because all I ever respond with is a thread crap.. listen, it was on topic because this is a "would it work better without cruise". I brought in my views and also added a question, why all the cruise bashing as of late? it was even more so a "carry over" from out side the forum. Something I have noticed, as I pointed out, outside of the forum. So in bringing it to a live discussion, one in which the topic of cruise presence making it better or worse is what I would consider fair game.

Now the thread title in itself leaves a big opening for what might be considered thread crapping because you are going to be asking for two different views. If the person does indeed share the belief that it could have been better without cruise and why? or if the film was good as it was, and why?. If I take the view that you are not on, I'm on the opposing view and of course anything I say might be considered a sort of thread crap to you because you are on the other end.

Now if I came in the thread and simply said "this discussion is worse then the "who would win in a fight? Cruise or any legendary actor" then perhaps I can see how you see my response as a thread crap, but when I'm responding to your thread as well as adding new discussion to it by posing a new question then I don't see how you can consider it a threadcrap besides the fact that I do not share your point of view on the said matter.

Last edited by Jackskeleton; 12-07-03 at 05:32 PM.
Old 12-07-03, 05:46 PM
  #12  
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 688
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Ugh... Wish I never posted this.

Simply posed a question and a viewpoint. Looked forward to who agreed or dis-agreed, but not to be accussed of something I did not do. (which it certainly seemed to me you were doing, even though you clarified in a later post.)

seems like you had a major axe to grind.

Last edited by rushmore223; 12-07-03 at 05:49 PM.
Old 12-07-03, 05:47 PM
  #13  
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 688
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Maybe this thread title should be changed to JackSkelton Vs. Rushmore223
Old 12-07-03, 05:48 PM
  #14  
DVD Talk Gold Edition
 
Drop's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Edison, NJ
Posts: 2,041
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
This question puzzles me. I can't even imagine this film without Cruise. I think he did an awesome job and really was his character. Not once did I think, "Hey that's Tom Cruise up there, he sticks out too much" or "He is wrong for the role" or "Why is there a westerner in this foreign film?". I think he really worked, his look in the film and how he acted fit in very perfectly, he was the antithesis(or is that foil?) of Katsumoto. In other words, he and his character were vital to the story.

Patman also has the right idea about Cruise not being in it, there is no way it would've got made.

rushmore223, i believe your problem lies with the story not with Cruise. Therefor this thread might be better titled: "Last Samurai - Better without the character Nathan Algren?". Which I would not agree with.
Old 12-07-03, 05:50 PM
  #15  
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: "Sitting on a beach, earning 20%"
Posts: 6,154
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
American actors can't play period films. They should have gotten an English actor, even if he played American. The English are better at period films, American's always look awkward.

Look at Daniel Day Lewis. He does a better job playing a period American in Last of the Mohicans, Age of Innocence, and Gangs of New York than all the authentic American actors in those pictures combined. They're just better at it those Brits.

Last edited by Pants; 12-07-03 at 05:53 PM.
Old 12-07-03, 05:52 PM
  #16  
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
 
Kal-El's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Fortress of Solitude
Posts: 7,992
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
I think Cruise nailed it. (And Taka too, after the movie of course)


Plus, the guy put how much time to make this? What was his last movie before this? You gotta respect the effort at least.
Old 12-07-03, 05:57 PM
  #17  
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 688
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Well, Maybe I didnt word it right. I at one point was bringing up the possibility of the story being told from a different vantage point. Like perhaps (cant remember his name) Algrens Samurai Abductor/friend. As an argument that , in order for this film to be made, needed a American in the starring role. But, with the story as it was...

...I felt Cruise was still stiff and out of place. Thought that maybe a different actor might be better suited, at least in my eyes, not sure who I would pick though.
Old 12-07-03, 06:03 PM
  #18  
DVD Talk Ultimate Edition
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 4,551
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I thought Tommy did a superb job in the role. But I can sympathize with some of the complaints against Tom Cruise, but I think it has nothing to do with him as an actor, but as a star. It really is something he can't do anything about, but the size of his celebrity makes it all the more difficult to sometimes lose yourself into Cruise as a character. but honestly, in Cruise's quality movies, which I can say are more plentiful than not, he really he quite able in making me do just that: believe him as that character. I think it's a testament to his acting ability that he is able to overcome such a hurdle so successfully (save for oh...mission impossible 2).
Old 12-07-03, 06:39 PM
  #19  
DVD Talk Godfather
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: City of the lakers.. riots.. and drug dealing cops.. los(t) Angel(e)s. ca.
Posts: 54,199
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally posted by rushmore223
Well, Maybe I didnt word it right. I at one point was bringing up the possibility of the story being told from a different vantage point. Like perhaps (cant remember his name) Algrens Samurai Abductor/friend. As an argument that , in order for this film to be made, needed a American in the starring role. But, with the story as it was...

...I felt Cruise was still stiff and out of place. Thought that maybe a different actor might be better suited, at least in my eyes, not sure who I would pick though.

Well I can understand that. May I ask who you might have considered more fit to play the role? I saw that cruise does carry himself a bit on a high horse, but that is the typical character he plays. it's what he comes accross, perhaps because he has been in so many "I'm higher then you" roles he has been in that has been inprinted in our minds.
Old 12-07-03, 06:46 PM
  #20  
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 688
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Thats my problem Jack, I am honestly not sure who I would put in this role. Sometimes a star carries too much baggage with him into a role. Ya know, too recognizable, I would like to think I can look past that. When I try to think of a different actor, my mind is too muddied from the films I have seen most recently, like I dont wanna give a response like Viggo Mortensen, just cause I know when I say that it is only because of all my LOTR watching.

I will say this, if it could only be made with Cruise, than I am glad it got made.
Old 12-07-03, 06:52 PM
  #21  
DVD Talk Hero
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Madison, WI ("77 square miles surrounded by reality")
Posts: 30,012
Received 3 Likes on 2 Posts
There was nothing wrong with Cruise. There was much wrong with the script in the final third of the movie.
Old 12-07-03, 06:54 PM
  #22  
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Berlin
Posts: 3,824
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I would have put Kevin Costner.He would have nailed it.
Old 12-07-03, 07:01 PM
  #23  
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: "Sitting on a beach, earning 20%"
Posts: 6,154
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally posted by Jackskeleton
May I ask who you might have considered more fit to play the role?
Daniel Day Lewis playing it as an American.
Old 12-08-03, 01:37 PM
  #24  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 479
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
got no problem with tom being in this movie, I'm always impressed by an actor's dedication to the role
and cruise always gives it a 110%

I thought the casting was perfect! especailly the japanese cast
I'm so glad they didn't use the typical bastardized Asian American actors that plays anything from chinese, korean, japanese, to philipino, not gonna mention names but u know who I'm talking about
Old 12-08-03, 03:42 PM
  #25  
DVD Talk Limited Edition
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 6,632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Mel Gibson


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.