or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Entertainment, Culture, and Sports › It's good to be Tom Cruise
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

It's good to be Tom Cruise - Page 12

post #166 of 231
A vaclav moment, you were having.
post #167 of 231
I had to do the same because I don't really follow America's cult of celebrity, and I still don't get it. What's the big deal? Tom Cruise said some mildly insensitive and mildly nutty things, fell in love (with a girl who is still closer to his age than the Hollywood norm), and made some pr. Why does this matter? He's played the pr well and I guess he's happy with his life. He doesn't seem to be a bad person (in fact, most people who know him seem to love him) and he's not untalented. So what, exactly, is the big deal here?
post #168 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nantucket Red
I had to look every bit of it up on Wikipedia to get the full lowdown and even get some vague concept of who Katie Holmes is.
she left Dawson for Pacey
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arethusa
Why does this matter? He's played the pr well and I guess he's happy with his life. He doesn't seem to be a bad person (in fact, most people who know him seem to love him) and he's not untalented. So what, exactly, is the big deal here?
i dont dislike him at all - actually generally quite like him other than that whole divorcing-an-Australian thing - but i think he has made for some very curious voyeurism lately
post #169 of 231
I listened to a film wonk on the radio this morning who said that MI-3's disappointing boxoffice so far has filmdom speculating that all of Tom's antics have turned his female fans against him. (So much for chicks digging "sensitive" men.)
post #170 of 231
Unable to elicit interest from mainstream publishers or medical professionals, Hubbard turned to the legendary science fiction editor John W. Campbell, who had for years published Hubbard's science fiction stories. Beginning in late 1949, Campbell publicized Dianetics in the pages of Astounding Science Fiction . The science fiction community was divided about the merits of Hubbard's claims. Campbell's star author Isaac Asimov criticised Dianetics' unscientific aspects, and veteran author Jack Williamson described Dianetics as "a lunatic revision of Freudian psychology" that "had the look of a wonderfully rewarding scam."

--- Now where did Tom do his 'RESEARCH'? Or am I just being Glib? I want to base my life on something that was first published in "Astounding Science Fiction"
post #171 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dakota rube
I listened to a film wonk on the radio this morning who said that MI-3's disappointing boxoffice so far has filmdom speculating that all of Tom's antics have turned his female fans against him. (So much for chicks digging "sensitive" men.)

---Cruise ripped on Brooke Shields is why. BS who talked openly and used proper medical care, and also tried to help other women; then Maverick goes on a idiotic RANT on TV because he has somehow become greater than the AMA and the law of psychology although I don't believe he has even finished an undergrad in basket weaving.
post #172 of 231
I'd like to nominate Soph for the "most prolific use of emoticons within one post" award.
post #173 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dakota rube
I'd like to nominate Soph for the "most prolific use of emoticons within one post" award.

--Xenu made me do it.
post #174 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arethusa
I had to do the same because I don't really follow America's cult of celebrity, and I still don't get it. What's the big deal? Tom Cruise said some mildly insensitive and mildly nutty things, fell in love (with a girl who is still closer to his age than the Hollywood norm), and made some pr.

Why does this matter?

He's played the pr well and I guess he's happy with his life. He doesn't seem to be a bad person (in fact, most people who know him seem to love him) and he's not untalented. So what, exactly, is the big deal here?

Lets see:

As Soph mentioned he is completely against Psychiatry, he is part of a cult of which has ideas based on nonsensical, non-logical theories, which were created by a man, who AT BEST was drugged up and not quite right in the head. He is also quite ignorant regarding the lives of others, expecting them to live in the same state of "˜mental stability' (not that TC is mentally stable, not at all, merely what he constitutes as mental stability), which is completely backed by his large fortune, i.e. the need of ever-day people to acquire money to survive, thus a major source of stress is completely avoided by him. It is very easy to avoid a lot of stress by living off that much money.

And yes, I understand that he made that money and worked for it, but we are talking about today, since we live today, not in the past.

Jon.
post #175 of 231
I caught some of the Brooke Shields/Tom Cruise thing (I'm not sure what it says that such frivolous crap is capable of making it into the news I read and listen to), and it really is disingenuous to characterize Shields as some sort of victim in this. Cruise was insensitive. Shields was an obnoxious, childish prick. As for scientology being a cult, well, it's a weird and artificial religion. I still don't see why they bother everyone so much. They're harmless. Muslims, Christians, Jews, and Hindis murder eachother every day. Scientologists just say weird shit and help people stop taking drugs. [edit] And my point about him playing the pr wasn't really about him having worked for his money, though I suppose he has. My point is that what you see of his behavior is very much a mix of managed pr and unchecked media distortion. What you see of celebrities is rarely much of who they are.
post #176 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arethusa
I caught some of the Brooke Shields/Tom Cruise thing (I'm not sure what it says that such frivolous crap is capable of making it into the news I read and listen to), and it really is disingenuous to characterize Shields as some sort of victim in this. Cruise was insensitive. Shields was an obnoxious, childish prick.

As for scientology being a cult, well, it's a weird and artificial religion. I still don't see why they bother everyone so much. They're harmless. Muslims, Christians, Jews, and Hindis murder eachother every day. Scientologists just say weird shit and help people stop taking drugs.

And take their money...don't forget that too. Also, I want to see what scientologists would do if they were a major "˜religion'. You think that they wouldn't kill, given an army?

Jon.
post #177 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by imageWIS
Lets see: As Soph mentioned he is completely against Psychiatry, he is part of a cult of which has ideas based on nonsensical, non-logical theories, which were created by a man, who AT BEST was drugged up and not quite right in the head. He is also quite ignorant regarding the lives of others, expecting them to live in the same state of "˜mental stability' (not that TC is mentally stable, not at all, merely what he constitutes as mental stability), which is completely backed by his large fortune, i.e. the need of ever-day people to acquire money to survive, thus a major source of stress is completely avoided by him. It is very easy to avoid a lot of stress by living off that much money. And yes, I understand that he made that money and worked for it, but we are talking about today, since we live today, not in the past. Jon.
http://today.reuters.com/news/NewsAr...lso_on_reuters he is a sock-puppet for scientology, and this is leading me to believe that hollywood is in fear of scientology's power.
post #178 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by imageWIS
And take their money...don't forget that too.
Yes, in striking contrast with every other major religion. And, yes, I really do have trouble seeing them as violent or dangerous.
post #179 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arethusa
I caught some of the Brooke Shields/Tom Cruise thing (I'm not sure what it says that such frivolous crap is capable of making it into the news I read and listen to), and it really is disingenuous to characterize Shields as some sort of victim in this. Cruise was insensitive. Shields was an obnoxious, childish prick. As for scientology being a cult, well, it's a weird and artificial religion. I still don't see why they bother everyone so much. They're harmless. Muslims, Christians, Jews, and Hindis murder eachother every day. Scientologists just say weird shit and help people stop taking drugs. [edit] And my point about him playing the pr wasn't really about him having worked for his money, though I suppose he has. My point is that what you see of his behavior is very much a mix of managed pr and unchecked media distortion. What you see of celebrities is rarely much of who they are.
Uh.. I think you need to read about what goes on in Scientology. You'll enjoy it.
post #180 of 231
Scientology is consistingly taking money.

Hubbard was rumored as quoted, "If you want to be rich, create your own religion"

They are not as harmless as you may think.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Entertainment, Culture, and Sports › It's good to be Tom Cruise