-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Tom cruise saw and loved The Flash says " this is the type of movie we need now "
- Thread starter Ehoavash
- Start date
I don't believe in this argument, because I'm constantly giving money to awful people as part of capitalism on a daily basis. Some I know about, some I don't.
There are also hundreds of people who aren't ezra, who worked on the movie and are probably hoping it succeeds for the sake of their own careers, and I think those people also matter.
It's kind of crazy how positive the early impressions/word of mouth have been for this movie. If only the lead wasn't an awful person. Sigh
Last edited:
Congratulations, you've discovered the impact of celebrity culture on the public. If you think you can point to a single movie full of hundreds or thousands of crew members whose names most people will never know or remember, and that there aren't a handful of varying types of assholes in the bunch? Be my guest.
But someone with Ezra Miller's profile lends them far more power, their continued status grants them far more protections and privileges which they've repeatedly abused, and the success benefits them profoundly more than someone taking a random job.
Guess what - they filmed this thing years ago. Most of these people have moved on and done several jobs since, and have gotten paid along the way. They're not standing waiting by their mailbox for that cheque to finally arrive. Your galaxy-brain take to justify your purchasing decisions is not as revelatory as you think.
Yeah it sure is something to see. Apparently a lot of people are cool with just looking past everything they did because there is some good word about a movie coming out.
"But... Batman, though! As long I post 'Fuck Ezra' I can still watch it guilt-free, right?"
- A disturbing amount of people
I'm not trying to justify my purchasing decisions. I don't need to. I'm not tying my morality to my consumption of media or art.
They probably don't have a % backend, being a first time lead of a picture like this, and even if they did it wouldn't be a good deal and would likely never pay a dime unless it does some incredible business. Ezra is not going to have a deal that just gives a straight % of revenue. You gotta be...Tom Cruise...to get a deal like that. Never mind these type of deals, given Ezra's behavior, probably have provisions that would allow them to strip that. I can name people that lost backend just for not showing up to a premiere.
So yeah residuals. But even if this film did a billion at the box office, you're talking like $30k over a decade. AND...residuals aren't paid against theatrical receipts, so actually they wouldn't make a dime off those revenues from residuals.
So if we do want to contextual watching this movie and how it contributes financially to Ezra Miller...probably close to nothing realistically. Whatever money Ezra is gonna make off this, they've already been paid.
Now those Top Gun tickets? That is money straight in Tom Cruise's pocket.
I'm not discovering anything, I'm trying to get clarification on what you believe, because I honestly don't understand why so many people are so concerned with these arbitrary lines of moral consumption that only apply under certain circumstances that usually involve social media.
Ezra has been the lead actor in many films, and has been acting since 2008. I don't see why they wouldn't give them residuals. They might not get a cut off the gross directly but getting a cut of the profit isn't uncommon.
Do you not understand the difference between those who have power over others like lead actors, directors, or producers (eg Harvey Weinstein) over an anonymous grip, gaffer or production assistant who worked on the film?
Just to push back on that a small bit, and the movie aside, this is basically just "there is no ethical consumption under capitalism". This is true in the sense that everyone is going to be giving money to something or someone who is shitty, but I do think we shouldn't let perfect be the enemy of good. Even if we can't be perfect, we can still try to make the best decisions we can when we can. This is easier with some things than with others - for example, if someone only has a WalMart in their town and they have the cheapest prices and they can't afford to or get to anywhere else, you can't really fault them for shopping there; when it comes to optional entertainment media, it's a bit different because it's on the opposite end of necessity. I think we have also probably all supported shitty people that we had no idea about at some point too, but there definitely is a difference between not knowing and knowing and deciding to do it anyways.
There is a separating art from the artist discussion that could be had as well, ultimately though to me it comes down to if you know you are offering some sort of support to a bad person or entity or whatever, but you want to do it because it makes you happy, just own that. Like people will make all these justifications when at the end of the day it's like, I get it, you want to see the movie or read the book or whatever because that is more important. People will have their judgments or whatever just like with anything else, we have to live with that regardless. It just bugs me when people aren't more honest about it (not saying you, just in general). I would have a hell of a lot more respect for that person than someone who specifically wants to support someone because it "triggers libs" or whatever dumb shit, at least it means there's some recognition that a person is supporting something they know to be problematic.
I can give a personal example, my wife's ring. I did not do any work to ensure it was ethically produced or anything, there is a possibility people were in terrible conditions so my wife could wear a diamond. And I knew that, I knew I could have looked for other options, and I didn't. And it's shitty, I should have put in just a bit more work, but I wanted her to have a nice ring (well, as nice as I could afford anyways which wasn't great). I did a bad thing and I feel shitty about it, but from that experience at least I took away to never do that again, I completely own I could have done better there and would not blame anyone for judging me.
Last edited:
I understand the power difference, do you understand where you'd draw the line on when you would or would not see a movie if someone on the chain of power did a bad thing?
I don't think the reason you do something matters, so I kind of disagree with you on your first point, but I'm totally willing to say that I'd have no problem personally with someone who wants to skip a movie because they think the net harm to society is too great. I just don't think the few cents from my movie ticket that go to Tom cruise or Ezra Miller are actually inflicting that net harm.
For the separating the art from the artist, I definitely own that. My consumption decisions are about my happiness and comfort in a world that is pretty fucking all around terrible. I don't see much utility on drawing random arbitrary lines around the moral judgement of others and whether or not that means they should be employable or able to create art or whatever.
To save some time I'm just gonna point to Van Exel's Ninjascooter's posts here RE: Cruise / The Flash:
www.resetera.com
It feels like we just go in circles with this topic. He sums it up really well with those 5 posts on that page IMO. Give em a read.
Edit, fixed the link
MISSION IMPOSSIBLE 7 first test screenings/reactions say another Cruise Missile is about to strike audiences/cinema yet again
Wow,it's like two threads at the same time and one side barely nteracts with the other
www.resetera.com
It feels like we just go in circles with this topic. He sums it up really well with those 5 posts on that page IMO. Give em a read.
Edit, fixed the link
Last edited:
To save some time I'm just gonna point toVan Exel'sNinjascooter's posts here RE: Cruise / The Flash:
MISSION IMPOSSIBLE 7 first test screenings/reactions say another Cruise Missile is about to strike audiences/cinema yet again
Wow,it's like two threads at the same time and one side barely nteracts with the other
It feels like we just go in circles with this topic. He sums it up really well with those 5 posts on that page IMO. Give em a read.
Ninjascooter laying down facts.
Anti vax is bad. Grooming is bad. Scientology is bad. All those things are true! And yet Flash could still become the greatest comic book movie!
I don't even think the posts are particularly profound, it's just someone cutting through the veil and pointing out the obvious.
That's fair, to me say one person was robbing a store because they were starving and another person was doing it just because they love stealing, to me there is a distinction there even if the outcome is ultimately the same.
It very well could, there are tons of individually and professionally great works of art done by or involving abhorrent people. If taken in a vacuum, they stand out. I think the issue lies in the praise and what that perpetuates, and I think it's something that is important to be cognizant of. Bear with me, I'm having a couple drinks, I might be rambling a bit but I am trying to be civil and genuine and make sense.
Take Top Gun 2 for example. I will not see the movie, but plenty of people have said it's fantastic. I would hope most can agree that while Tom Cruise is a shitty person, he is also good at the action movie thing. I have not seen a lot of cases of people praising the movie without also praising Tom Cruise, and what this does is reinforces that a terrible person will continue to financially benefit, and with all the praise he receives that kind of builds up this wall around him where it becomes harder and harder to dig into the bad things he's been involved with, because he becomes more and more beloved and gets more and more opportunities, he essentially just gets more powerful through being recognized for the good thing he does even though he's never been truly held to account for the bad.
I think of two different worlds. One is this world, where Tom Cruise is a top movie star, has all the accolades one could ever dream of. And then I think of a world where we did not get Top Gun 2 because people were rightfully really grossed out by Tom Cruise, and he was held accountable, and it would maybe even have a negative effect on Scientology as a whole. I don't know that the movie is that good or important to not have preferred the outcome of world two, trading a movie for potentially a huge blow to Scientology, giving victims some hope that people are taking it seriously. The only thing that is holding us back from that world is, well, people really wanna see a cool jet plane movie. To me, that is such a relatively small sacrifice. And maybe people think well I'm just one person, or like you said it's just a few cents, what does it matter, but these things start by the average person saying eh, I am not really cool with this dude, I wouldn't watch that movie.
User Banned (2 Weeks): Misgendering; Armchair Diagnosis of Mental Health
I think Ezra Miller (in my mind) has clear psychological/ mental issues; the behaviour he exhibited is so strange and erratic after years of normalcy - and I do think they should be allowed to find a way to heal. Quite clearly a lot of it is drug fueled. But that is addiction and that's also something you need support to get over.
"Having recently gone through a time of intense crisis, I now understand that I am suffering complex mental health issues and have begun ongoing treatment,"
I'm surprised everyone is so quick to dunk on. Personally, everytime I read about him now - I'm like "poor Miller needs help" and I'm glad they are now. Clearly when they were in the midst of their psychotic break (imo) - they were spiralling and there wasn't a clear OFF switch.
"Having recently gone through a time of intense crisis, I now understand that I am suffering complex mental health issues and have begun ongoing treatment,"
I'm surprised everyone is so quick to dunk on. Personally, everytime I read about him now - I'm like "poor Miller needs help" and I'm glad they are now. Clearly when they were in the midst of their psychotic break (imo) - they were spiralling and there wasn't a clear OFF switch.
I also want Scientology to end, but I think it's major wishful thinking to believe that consumer boycotts can move needles in this way. They usually don't work at all and often backfire.
Like if they committed crimes, I hope they are held accountable and goes to jail or whatever. If they didn't and its just mental health issues, I hope they get help. I think justice shouldn't be only punitive, people need to be given the room to reform.
Last edited:
I just want a Flash movie that doesn't suck and to live in a just society. I am probably not getting either of those things in my lifetime, but I'm dreaming.
They/them btw. You need to edit your post. No dude or he or him.
you're so weirdly proud to find a reason to support an abuser that it's not worth saying much more.
have you even considered doing a match donation? literally anything besides defending supporting problematic people for your entertainment?
we really doing the "I feel bad for this person because of the drugs and mental health" when Ezra has years of grooming a child since they were around 11?
Well whatever, watch what you want or listen to what you want or play what you want y'all, it's not like anyboody here was ever going to stop you anyway.
Well whatever, watch what you want or listen to what you want or play what you want y'all, it's not like anyboody here was ever going to stop you anyway.
You would think it'd be fair to not want to watch the new Ezra Miller movie knowing what they've done, but I guess people have to twist themselves into pretzels and misguidedly judge others just to ultimately express a thought as basic as "I'm still not bothered enough to skip it." Like cool, go see the movie anyways- it had a Super Bowl ad and is going to be a fanservice palooza, so it's probably still going to do well even though people have good reason to avoid it. Just be honest with yourself and stop condescending towards those that are too uncomfortable with watching and supporting a movie that will have a violent abuser in the lead role.
Like, it's not realistically about boycotting anything in this situation. It's about being disgusted, based on what you know, and that's enough.
Like, it's not realistically about boycotting anything in this situation. It's about being disgusted, based on what you know, and that's enough.
Isn't this the answer to your own question?
If most people don't know about it, how would they care?
This feels like someone calling in a big favour from Cruise. Not that he can't want to see it and like it (or track down the filmmakers to tell them he did - that is absolutely in character), but it being a big story feels intentionally manufactured to get past some of the stink the film has surrounding it.
I get disliking Cruise, I do, but this take framing him as the reason the Dark Universe failed is very silly. The Dark Universe didn't fail because Tom Cruise wanted more control, it failed because it was a painfully bad idea that was helmed by people who had no idea what they were doing.
Sure, Cruise micromanaging the project can't have helped, but Universal still put Alex Kurtzman, a man who in his entire Hollywood career has worked on exactly one good movie (M:I3), in the leading role for their new universe. Like, Cruise or not, The Mummy would've likely been terrible anyway.
And then of course there is the fact that The Mummy already was the second try at the Dark Universe after Dracula Untold was a massive failure.
I get that you dislike Cruise and for some reason would like to paint him as the reason a huge multi-movie project failed, but honestly the Dark Universe was DOA (twice).
