Question is: will a film work without Cruise? Only with a long hiatus.
And the next guy will have to do those stunts, too. Otherwise he won’t be up to snuff. Cruise spoilt this for any successor.
1 Like
Yeah, the MI films could work without Cruise (as the Bond films carried on after Connery) but you’re right that the new actor is going to have to do those stunts…
2 Likes
But it didn´t. Lazenby failed at the box office and they had to get Connery back really expensive. And you have the problem with the stunts where only Cruise could insist on making them because he´s also the producer and the biggest movie star left…you really think they would let f.e. Henry Cavill do a Halo jump or fly a helicopter even if he wanted too? The insurance companies would be more expensive than the film I guess.
I think we should just look forward to two MI films in 2021 and 2022.
After that, it will may indeed be a brave new world…
4 Likes
All I said was the MI films could carry on with a different actor. Do you not consider the 4 other actors and 18 movies that came after that period in Bond’s history as things having “carried on?”
So you’re saying Cruise can do his own stunts because he is the producer and the biggest movie star left, but another actor wouldn’t be allowed to do them because the insurance would be too high? Higher than insuring the producer and biggest movie star left?
1 Like
Except that Lazenby quit. EON didn’t fire him. They gave him a check for Diamonds Are Forever, but he turned it down on the (poor) advice of his agent. It was then that they went back to Connery with a million dollar offer (then a record) and a promise to finance three pictures of his choosing.
While OHMSS was a box office disappointment, it did make $94M ($291M in 2005 dollars), was profitable, and outgrossed Dr. No and From Russia with Love.
My question is: would there be any actor WILLING to do those crazy stunts himself?
You have to be like Cruise to want that.
1 Like
Jean Paul Belmondo is too old and Steve McQueen already 40 years death, so probably no one.
3 Likes
That is how I read it, and have believed it.
Cruise as Producer would have had direct access to the insurers to insure Cruise as Actor.
Any other actor coming into the lead role would likely not have Producer status and so will be treated, and insured, in the same way as any other actor for hire.
It could certainly be argued that should Cruise mess up as an actor, Cruise as lead producer has to deal with the full ramifications, whether it’s literally out of his own pocket, or having to go to explain to others why a stunt he messed up is costing the production.
Now we’re saying actors are only allowed to do stunts if they are a producer on the film? What am I missing here?
Again, I’m only saying the MI films can carry on with another actor other than Cruise. I never said they would look the same, just that they can absolutely carry on…
We might be getting into this too deeply. There will be supposition involved here.
I wasn’t saying actors are Only allowed to do stunts if this and that. I am saying it was more likely that it was allowed for Cruise because he was negotiating for his own insurance. Other actors wouldn’t necessarily have that right.
As for MI films carrying on with any other actor, I never said otherwise. I was only responding to the Cruise as Actor and Stuntman element.
1 Like
Who paid for the delay when Cruise broke his ankle?
I don’t believe there was a delay as such. Certainly the release date did not change as a result.
In interview, McQuarrie said that instead of continuing filming, they just flipped some of the editing period around to put that more into place first. That done, when Cruise was repaired and rebuilt, they went back to complete filming, and thence the remainder of the editing.
To be sure the insurance monies in this case would have gone to doctors and rehabilitation.
Not just that - they had to stop filming. Which means you have your whole crew of hundreds of people to stand by but also to pay. You have to readjust your whole shooting plan, get new permits, organize everything from security to catering. Lots of logistics to move around. For McQuarrie it was possible to start editing what they had filmed and therefore to not change the release date. But behind the scenes it will have been a lot of activity, including insurance dealings.
Ok, yup.
Would be interesting to know who was let go with no expectation of the MI unit being able to get the same crew, and who needed to be paid to hang around.
The argument would be, Cruise was allowed to do the stunts because, as lead producer, he’s the one who has to explain to paramount why they’re currently paying a crew to sit and wait, but in response to your question, I’ve no clue, point was it’s Cruise’s problem to fix from saying he’ll do it, to finding the money to fix the problem he just caused.
1 Like
Well, Cruise will have been the 300 pound gorilla in the room - so no executive would have dared to say: Hey, why do you do these stunts and then injure yourself? Are you insane?
They will have tumbled over themselves with get-well-cards, hoping desperately for not too many bills piling up, yearning for the big blockbuster Cruise can deliver.
2 Likes
And which he DID deliver with the biggest money earner in the franchise’s history.
2 Likes
Granted - but that’s a gamble that could still have backfired. Film business in general is a pretty volatile way of earning money. I’m sure no studio actually wants this kind of extra risk in their books if they can avoid it - though they of course like the positive publicity and cash in on it.
If Cruise had lost a limb or worse the story would have been a very different one. Imagine the headlines…