No, not at all. My point is that even if the film had starred an old and frumpy actor, then would have still needed to apply a bunch of makeup. The character being in makeup is part of the character.
Spoilers for Digger
Tom Cruise is playing a character named “Curtis Markson” in the film. That character is in a satirical stage play where he plays “Digger Rockwell”. The reveal that the film is actually a stage play is a surprise that occurs about 20 minutes into the film.
There are a number of hints in the first 20 minutes. For example the opening of the film has a “curtains rise” that in the moment feels like a stylistic choice. Another is an obviously robotic cat. Another is when we’re seeing characters move about the house and enter the scene the building layout doesn’t really make sense with characters playing with doorways. And finally the fact that Tom Cruise is heavily done up in makeup.
OK? That’s still only one of three points. Do you think it’s totally fine to pay a scientologist? Do you think it’s totally fine to give even more money to an extremely popular and wealthy star instead of literally anyone else capable of the job?
To your second point, I take no objection to your dislike of Tom Cruise or Scientology. It’s a horrid cult and fuck Scientology and Tom Cruise.
To your third point, someone else playing the role, looking purely at the acting performance, Cruise did an excellent job. However I don’t think it’s a performance only he could have done, so I agree someone else could have done an excellent job in the role. As an example early in production Leonardo DiCaprio was in consideration, he could also have taken on the role.
Now there is a secondary question, if the film would have been made without Tom Cruise’s involvement. He was involved in the film early in production and was a producer. It’s possible the film wouldn’t have been made without his involvement. I do think it is better that the film exist rather than not, but I won’t argue if you feel it’s better that it not exist.
Are you claiming there are no old and frumpy actors in Hollywood? Really?
The point is they wouldn’t have had to go as far and spend as much and gotten a better result. Both on and off screen.
No, not at all. My point is that even if the film had starred an old and frumpy actor, then would have still needed to apply a bunch of makeup. The character being in makeup is part of the character.
Spoilers for Digger
Tom Cruise is playing a character named “Curtis Markson” in the film. That character is in a satirical stage play where he plays “Digger Rockwell”. The reveal that the film is actually a stage play is a surprise that occurs about 20 minutes into the film.
There are a number of hints in the first 20 minutes. For example the opening of the film has a “curtains rise” that in the moment feels like a stylistic choice. Another is an obviously robotic cat. Another is when we’re seeing characters move about the house and enter the scene the building layout doesn’t really make sense with characters playing with doorways. And finally the fact that Tom Cruise is heavily done up in makeup.
OK? That’s still only one of three points. Do you think it’s totally fine to pay a scientologist? Do you think it’s totally fine to give even more money to an extremely popular and wealthy star instead of literally anyone else capable of the job?
That’s the only point I was arguing.
To your second point, I take no objection to your dislike of Tom Cruise or Scientology. It’s a horrid cult and fuck Scientology and Tom Cruise.
To your third point, someone else playing the role, looking purely at the acting performance, Cruise did an excellent job. However I don’t think it’s a performance only he could have done, so I agree someone else could have done an excellent job in the role. As an example early in production Leonardo DiCaprio was in consideration, he could also have taken on the role.
Now there is a secondary question, if the film would have been made without Tom Cruise’s involvement. He was involved in the film early in production and was a producer. It’s possible the film wouldn’t have been made without his involvement. I do think it is better that the film exist rather than not, but I won’t argue if you feel it’s better that it not exist.