#actors bank on desirability to book gigs & a big part of that is ''how successful was your last project''

[princessnijireiki]

…so I can’t believe I’m having to make another post about this movie but um,

y'all DO know tom cruise (and by extension the church of scientology, seaorg, etc.) got paid already whether or not anyone goes to see “the mummy,” right?

and tbh if it flops in the box office, his net worth is likely to be unaffected, since he’s a “known” box office draw in the us + overseas. what’ll happen is nobody will hire sofia boutella as a leading star again in a project as high-budget as this one; and it may also negatively impact producers securing funds for the next universal horror reboots, at worst.

you’re ofc free to do what you want… I am by no means saying you have to sit through tom cruise if you hate him or that you should ONLY watch a horror movie for sake of the lead actress. her career getting a bump is a perk, but the feature is the movie itself, yk? and everybody has hard limits. and you are not compelled to spend your money on this, nor is universal entitled to it.

but like there’s a fundamental misunderstanding that seems to be going on here, among people who (justifiably) can’t stand tom cruise’s ass, about how show business economics works.

shit rolls downhill, and the lowest ranking visible targets take financial hits first. if crap like “jack reacher” couldn’t dent tom cruise’s income or hollywood bankability, I guarantee you that if “the mummy” flops, nobody is going to point to him successfully channelling “mission impossible,” yet again, for the last 20 years, as THE reason why things fell apart.

it sucks, and it’s not fair, and I know it really sounds like sort of “do it for the good of [x]!!!” pressure right now to say that. but that’s not my goal? just that that concept, once you’re talking about the damn near unstoppable force of white men’s money in hollywood, makes that an ineffective tactic, and, like, does also negatively impact others on its way down. so don’t like forego a ticket for an abstract sense of altruism or whatever, skip out because you genuinely don’t want to watch, ykwim? bc you literally cannot hurt tom cruise that way on this project.

(really, residuals from tv licensing/syndication have more of a direct impact for actors’ bank accounts. idk what kind of licensing deals go into merchandise, but in all honesty, that’s probably an up-front pay deal, too, or it would be far too expensive for studios to manage.)

tl;dr your money goes to the studio, and they decide— like they deliberately HAND-choose— whose fault it is & who to stiff when/if they don’t break even (or turn ENOUGH of a profit), and that involves a lot of behind the scenes people who aren’t on the posters, and the performers whose names don’t roll first in the credits… the people who are by & large considered temporary or replacable from the jump.

withholding your money with a goal to hurt people rarely personally affects the rich, and literally never hits them hardest OR first.