• spankysalmon@fedinsfw.app
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    3 days ago

    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?

    • MimicJar@lemmy.worldM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      3 days ago

      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.