I love Cruise, no matter what they say about him.

Now here's another reaon for me to dislike Pitt, should he decided to sign up for this but I doubt if he will sign up for it. And youre right Rich, if it ain't Cruise involved in the M:I series, it's not Mission Impossible at all.

Paramount should grow up.

Both Tom Cruise and Brad Pitt are extremely talented actors and perhaps you may say that Pitt has proven to be more talented than Cruise.

However, when it comes to MI series then there is no room for any other than Tom. Even though I think he has been behaving like a jackass lately, I do know that he gives his best to produce sharp action scenes to entertain us. I, the viewer, have to respect this. I am not saying that Pitt wouldn't be good on this role, but after Tom performance in the last one that included lots of character, emotion, drama and action, I don't want see anyone else. A simple example, I cannot be convinced that Pitt would run as fast as Tom did on the streets, giving it all I mean.

Cheers,
Stam

I'm not sure that Tom vs. Brad is even the real point here.

Don't we think that maybe these huge blockbusters are failing at least in part due to the wildly explosive chasm that's been created between the movies' budgets and the audiences' willingness to pay their money to see them? And isn't that partially due to the ginormous pricetags being claimed by former A-list actors?

Look at what's been happening to Jim Carrey - he was celebrated as Cinema's Golden Blockbuster Boy with a salary to match. Now he's had two projects canceled (that we know of) and he's shopping for a new agency.

So I really question the logic of Paramount ditching Cruise because MI:3 underperformed, but then supposedly hiring Pitt at an estimated $37 million. That's just idiotic and irresponsible moviemaking, regardless of who's jumping on the sofa.

Excuse me, but can you say that again Stamoz, Pitt is more talented than Tom Cruise? How? Did we see the same movies?

Tom Cruise is Ethan Hunt. And Ethan Hunt is Mission: Impossible. If you remove either of them two components, you don't have Mission: Impossible.

As much as I think Brad Pitt would suit a similar role, it just wouldn't be M:i.

Personally, I'd take Brad Pitt over Tom Cruise in the majority of movies, but I'm afraid Mission: Impossible is Cruise's series.

Burbanked, you are right, salaries are just stupendously daft at the moment, but that isn't the issue for M:I:IV. Both Pitt and Cruise would demand huge salaries, and to get a such a strong actor to play such a role would mean paying at the higher end of their pay grade. With Pitt, M:I just isn't M:I.

However, I do agree that the inflated salaries are a huge problem with big movies not making profits, even mid level movies.

Carrey though has a different problem, as I said in another post, he's not getting his movies rebuffed because of his pay, after all he was signed up to both movies before they were turned around. No there's something else going on there, but all in all I think it's a reflection of his acting career and his poor choice to focus on the comedy time and time again.

I am amazed at how Tom Cruise´s acting abilities are underrated and Brad Pitt´s so overrated instead. Even in The Fight Club, Edward Norton stole the entire show. In 12 Monkeys, Bruce Willis was 20 times better than Pitt.

Name me one role in Pitt´s career, one alone, than can stand aside with Born in 4th of July, Collateral, Magnolia, or Rain Man. The antipaty towards the person can´t make anyone lose the objectivity: I dislike Russell Crowe and Colin Farrell´s attitudes, but they are a pair of formidable actors.

Much better than Mr. Smith-Pitt, who can´t do a single scene without a total eyebrow juncture (expressing his frown), or overreacting like a lunatic ("Hectooooooorrrrr"!!!!)

And Paramount is doing stupidities in the same line as Tom Cruise, but even with worse results. They have killed a good franchise, and they are on the good line to kill MORE good ones. What they done to Star Trek is outrageus. I suggest a copu d´etat to remove the moron Summer Redstone from his chair, as what happened in Disney with Michael Eisner.

Richard,
You're right on that Carrey's movies haven't fallen apart expressly because of his salary, but I really think that, behind the scenes, there are Hollywood power players who are waking up to the idea - or really should be - that paying a superstar a huge amount of money no longer guarantees that audiences will turn out for the movie. With Carrey's last few movies tanking, you've got to at least wonder if someone took a look at the books for his next film and thought, "Hm...this doesn't seem like such a good idea anymore...can we get out of this somehow?"

And you're also right that whoever they'd get for M:I:whatever will likely be a big star with a big paycheck. I just think that maybe a trend is coming where studios will start putting their feet down. Regardless of tabloid headlines, I don't think a place like Paramount kicks a star like Cruise to the curb without it being about 1) too much investment and 2) not enough return.

The salary bubble has to burst at some point, doesn't it?

I actually think that the Cruise break up was more than just money or returns.

Yes though, what you're saying is right, salaries are out of order nowadays and need to be addressed. They are, by far, taking the greatest part of a budget in movies with big talent.

However none of us are going to sort it. What it needs is for Hollywood to turn their eye to the next tier down of talent, or even the next after that. This will bring down salaries.

Perhaps this is behind the moves with Carrey and Cruise, and if it is then it better be a blanket move and not someone going through the huge stars alphabetically either! I'd expect to see Pitt, Clooney, etc all to start to suffer the same fate.

Good news for Bruce Willis if they're going alphabetically.

Simone, I am sorry but according to my opinion of course, I can't recall seeing such an amazing performance from Tom like the Pitt's one from 12 monkeys. I mean that he played the nutter in such a superb way. What about Snatch?

Once again, I am not saying that Tom Cruise sucks, but even from been regarded as an action hero, he loses some of his value. I mean his perfomance is usually more 2-dimensional if you knwo what I mean. For shake's argument, can you tell me which is your Tom's favorite performance?

Mine was "Far and Away" among others.
Stam

Hey Stamoz, no need for apologies. I was merely asking. ;D

My fave Cruise moments were "Born on the 4th of July", "Jerry Maguire", "The Last Samurai" and "Collateral". I thought he was brilliant to act alongside Hoffman in "Rainman" and Nicholson in "A Few Good Men". Have you seen the two together in "Interview with the Vampire"?

Peter, gypsy and I were laughing hysterically at your post as we were just talking about the same thing after reading this article of Richard. ;D