Like Uncle Bear, I have a bad feeling about this.
Tom Cruise has become the highest-earning actor in Hollywood history after signing a deal that could reportedly earn him $519 million for his role in War of the Worlds.
Rather than agree to a set fee for his part in the Steven Spielberg-directed epic, Cruise will earn 10 per cent of the film’s box office takings plus a share of profits from DVDs, video games and toys, according to IMDB.com.
Experts predict the film – based on HG Wells’ classic novel about a Martian attack – could make $2.6 billion at theatres alone, of which Cruise’s share would be nearly $260 million).
And, if he stars in the two planned sequels, Cruise’s earnings will double at least.
Sequels?
A Hollywood source says: “No expense will be spared. Spielberg wants to make it the film of the decade – the one that everyone talks about and rushes to see.”
Okay, now I really am scared.
Sequels… um… wow. I guess the aliens send a second wave with Robitussin and hand sanitizer?
“You thought the Martians were bad … get a load of their cousins from Jupiter!”
or
“Earth Strikes Back!”
or
“We thought they were hostile. We thought they were invading. But they were only trying to phone home. Now one man must find a way to save a dying planet full of glowing-fingered aliens …”
{shudders}
I wonder how this latest Hollywood effort will blame the Martian invasion on British imperialism, our disregard for nature or the industrial revolution? No wait, can’t be British imperialism because – inevitably – the film’s story will have to be set in the United States.
But of course. But since the Americans are the new imperialists, that fits just fine.
(I’ll confess that I have no problem with the US as the setting, since the last two versions of the film — the George Pal classic and the thinly-disguised ID4 — are both (largely) set there.)
Though — wouldn’t it be cool to do it in the actual original period setting, a la League of Extraordinary Gentlemen (whether or not you brought the League into it, as in vol. 2). Now that would be a movie to be intrigued by.
“Experts” are predicting it is going to make over $2 billion? And not a foot of footage has been shot yet?
Are these the same experts who predicted that the remake of Psycho would do well?
Well, to be fair, Spielberg and Cruise are usually pretty good bets. Certainly I wouldn’t bet against the movie making a ton of money.
It isn’t so much betting against SS and TC, it’s betting their film won’t nearly quadruple the biggest box office moneymaker ever (Titanic’s ~ 600 million). Even if that number is meant to be worldwide box office, it’s still considerably (~50%) more than any film has made before (Titanic’s total take is around 1.84 billion). It’s an example of the illnumeracy of the general public and the entertainment press that such numbers even get bandied about.
The idea that anyone can predict that something not even yet out of pre-production will out-perform all prior films, particularly when the main pair of names have worked together previously with profitable but hardly spectacular results (Minority Report with a US take of $132M, barely covering its $102M budget, but a worldwide take of $353.6M).
A lot of the predicted take looks to be based on toys. Good luck predicting the fad-habits of children.
Why so surprised about a sequel? It’s already been a TV series ! Or had you forgotten?
Actually, I enjoyed the TV series (at least the first season).
Somehow, though, I doubt that’s what they have in mind. And I also doubt they can beat the George Pal flick war machines for sheer coolness and alien menace.
Actually, I enjoyed the TV series (at least the first season).
Somehow, though, I doubt that’s what they have in mind. And I also doubt they can beat the George Pal flick war machines for sheer coolness and alien menace.