Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes

63 opinions for Tom Cruise Movie News - What’s Fact, What’s Fiction?

• jenna
  Jul 19, 2008 at 9:48 am

  who is moviehole……and if these rumors are untrue then why not have the producer of the film actually speak out in defense??? I dont buy it…we will have to wait and see as more reports come out

• Lauren
  Jul 19, 2008 at 1:18 pm

  Roger Friedman would say anything. That guy has it bad for Tom Cruise. He is so bitter that I feel sorry for him. Poor Roger, if he died today no one would even care. I guess he is trying to convince himself that Tom’s career is over. Didn’t he also say Will Smith committed career suicide being a friend of Tom Cruise? Yet Will’s movies have never been as successful as in recent years.

  I am not sure about a sequel to Top Gun but I would have liked the 28th amendment.

• Moe
  Jul 19, 2008 at 1:56 pm

  Tom’s celebrity status is only high because he is married to Katie Holmes. She is definitely more successful than him right now, but she is younger though.

• concerned mom
  Jul 19, 2008 at 2:36 pm

  Are you wishing someone DEAD Lauren?? I guess everyone and anyone is ‘fair game’ as long as Tom is protected… WOW. About the movies, don’t know what Tom will end up in next but I do think that no studio is going to give up such huge chunks of the ‘back end’ to any movie star-Tom included. I think he may have made more on MI III than the studio did because of the deal he had then.

• PuckHappy
  Jul 19, 2008 at 3:33 pm

  I don’t think Roger Friedman NEEDS to try and convince anyone about anything to do with tc’s movie career. tc is doing that all by himself.

  WotW, LFL and Valkyrie just to name a few not so hot movies. MI3 is so 2006. tc was NOT asked to do MI4. In fact the writer/producers have already that tc will NOT be asked to return if there is a MI4.

  AS for Will Smith, what has his latest movie done since it’s 6 day opening weekend?
  Let’s compare it to The Dark Knight this weekends 3 day opening.

• tyler
  Jul 19, 2008 at 3:47 pm

  Friedman’s article doesn’t ring true.

  But, boy did Cruise blow it with his furniture jumping. That, and the fact that he’s not aging like a Sean Connery or Harrison Ford.

• tyler
  Jul 19, 2008 at 3:51 pm

  Puck,
  Hancock has done about $180M in the U.S. and about $350M worldwide. It cost $150M or so to make, but it was heavily marketed and we don’t know how much it cost to market (maybe someone does).

• Jeli
  Jul 19, 2008 at 3:55 pm

  Roger Friedman is psychopathically obsessed with Tomkat. I remember reading one of his earlier articles about Tomkat at the Oscars and he said he reluctantly recieved a hug from one of them, he didn’t mention who. He keeps spewing out bullshit. He critiqued Valkyrie off of the trailer, without actually having seen the movie, which has not even been completed yet. Somebody asked him about that and he said, he only needs to see the trailer to know what the movie is like, justifying his reason for critiquing a movie off of only a trailer. I already was aware that Edwin A Salt is going through re-writes, and mentioned this on another site too. Roger Friedman is a lousy journalist who profits off the popularity of Tom Cruise to get his web articles major hits that is why he writes so many Cruise articles because they have gotten him unprecedented traffic to his articles.

• tyler
  Jul 19, 2008 at 4:11 pm

  Jeli,
  If you wouldn’t ride on your emotions, and would actually do a little research, you’d see that Friedman writes like that about a lot of actors. And, take a look at the NY Times or NY Daily News. They’re no kinder to Cruise, so it’s not just a Friedman issue. The media loves to write about Cruise because he has become so controversial.

• Annie
  Jul 19, 2008 at 5:00 pm

  i love any movie with TC in it, oh my god especially LAST SAMURAI every actor has their time in the sun, its Will Smiths turn now, that’s how it goes. Tyler i don’t understand what you mean by , he’s not aging the same as SC or HF, they are so old, compared to TC.

• PuckHappy
  Jul 19, 2008 at 5:38 pm

  Jeli, you say that RF has only “critiqued Valkyrie off of the trailer”. That is all that there is. tc is still trying to finish the filming of some very major scenes. So how can you so so critical of his review?
  EVERY hollywood journalists makes money off of ALL hollywood stars.
  The only reason for his web articles get so many hits is because there are a lot of real free thinkers that agree with what he writes!
  So therefore he earns every cent he makes!

• Galib
  Jul 19, 2008 at 5:52 pm

  Pucky Happy, I don’t agree with you. Roger Friedman made people believe he gave his opinion from actually having seen the movie, when he actually didn’t.

• Leenee
  Jul 19, 2008 at 8:00 pm

  Rumors, rumors… Yawn… Tom’s career over? Some people would say anything to get some attention and Tom, great actor (and person) that he is, just keeps on doing what he does and he does it superbly.

• jajorge
  Jul 20, 2008 at 12:00 am

  guess it’s true: what goes up must come down

• concerned mom
  Jul 20, 2008 at 1:04 am

  LOLOL Leenee. “Tom, great actor (and person) that he is, just keeps on doing what he does and he does it superbly.” Are you kidding??
  Don’t know if the guys career is over, but he IS 45 and the movie business is pretty cutthroat. Valkyrie is still a huge question mark on his career landscape. Hardy Men doesn’t look like it is going anywhere. He was asked if he wanted to PRODUCE not star in the new MI IV which he declined I guess. The only thing he has basically in the works at the moment is a bit part in Tropic Thunder. His last outing and you can crunch these numbers any which way you like, Lions for Lambs came up sort of short financially. Personally I would have thought that the ensemble of Tom, Robert Redford, and Meryl Streep could have carried that movie a little better than it did. Part of that movie’s problem in my view, may have been the fact that many moviegoers-including myself, are tired of Hollywood forcing a political agenda down our throats-and not necessarily that Tom was in it.
  His production company NEEDS a real blockbuster hit and so far nothing is even really on the books to film yet.

• looika
  Jul 20, 2008 at 2:54 am

  There’s a new sighting of Suri at JustJared. Recently Suri has been seen in dresses she has worn before. What happened, Katie runs out of ideas of what dress to buy for Suri? Still Suri is such a sweetie pie.

• Annie
  Jul 20, 2008 at 3:22 am

  hi Looika, thank you , i saw them they’re cute photos.

• Annie
  Jul 20, 2008 at 3:41 am

  I have an idea for a movie tom and katie should make together. younger people won’t know it but the older ones , will remembe it, its called Mcmillan and Wife, from the tv series . it was the best show, it was about a police commisioner Stuart Mcmillan and his younger wife Sally, who helped her husband solve his cases, there was the police sargeant who kept an eye on her, and the ir nosy ,but caring housekeeper, Mildred, it was such aclassy show, truly it would be the best movie

• Mike
  Jul 20, 2008 at 5:50 am

  OMG people, who cares what RF thinks!?!?! The very fact that he works at FAUX “NEWS” is enough to write him off as a hack!

• jenna
  Jul 20, 2008 at 7:11 am

  off topic, but we saw the Dark Knight yesterday evening and to say it was fantastic is an understatement!! That film was incredible, everyone did a wonderful job and Ledger was utterly amazing. His portrayal of the Joker was beyond perfect. What a talent he was! Now….I must say that I still do not have a clue as to why Katie would turn down this summer blockbuster, with all the great talent, and the huge paycheck, to do a less than average film called Mad Money. I will never buy her excuse that it was b/c she always wanted to work with Keaton.I firmly believe that there is more to it. My opinion is that TC was a strong influence in her turning down that reprisal role. One can only speculate, but I believe it was for the following reasons: 1) he did not want her working with Eckhart again as she did in Thx for Smoking” 2) he preferred to not be making so much $$$ on a blockbuster since she was significantly younger than him and new to their relationship. I do not feel he could handle her being so young and being in such a worldwide successful film. I believe his ego could not take it. I also believe that he was uncomfortable with her working with such a great looking cast of men….Bale, (hot) Eckhart, (hot)…not to mention all the huge names in that film. I feel it hurt his ego, and he wanted to keep her in a certain little box where only a certain type of success would be allowed to protect his ego. Broadway (sure) he will allow that b/c its a different venue. I feel very sad for Katie that she was not co-starring in that film…..she deserved that role. I just hope she has no regrets now that the Dark Knight is the talk of the town. How sad for her…..if she truly made this decision on her own then kudos to her but if she let her husband decide for her….then she needs a large dose of female empowerment.

• kelly
  Jul 20, 2008 at 8:04 am

  Tom Cruise could make even a bad movie successful by being in it, he has tons and tons of fans, and people that have such a problem with him appear to be jealous and really need to get a life.

  Oh and YES I agree he is an amazing person.

• Hana
  Jul 20, 2008 at 8:17 am

  Yes, DN is the talk of the town, but so was BB but was Katie for her portrayal or Rachel Dawes? Plus, her character is not in DN that long.

  “He did not want her working with Eckhart again as she did in Thx for Smoking.”
  LOL! Aaron Eckhart was not even a confirmed cast when Katie turned down the role.

  And in case you didn’t realize Katie worked with a hunk in Mad Money. :)
  Katie is old enough to make her own decisions and maybe with Mad Money not only did she got to work with Keaton but she may have wanted to expand her filmography and experience.

• tyler
  Jul 20, 2008 at 10:22 am

  I don’t believe that even the truest of fans believe she would have turned down the Batman role if she were on her own. NO WAY people. We all know Tom was there to “advise” her. He may not have made the final decision, but anyone who doesn’t believe he influenced her hasn’t been paying attention.

  I agree that she probably wanted to work with Keaton on Mad Money. She was a big fan of Annie Hall as well the movie’s director, and decided to followed her heart. Too bad she didn’t have a good agent to advise her, but I have a feeling Cruise trumps any and everything that doesn’t suit his agenda anyway.

• Charlotte Rose
  Jul 20, 2008 at 11:05 am

  Tom Cruise could make even a bad movie successful by being in it, he has tons and tons of fans, and people that have such a problem with him appear to be jealous and really need to get a life.

  —————————————

  What’s with all the anomosity for anyone who doesn’t share your opinion? Get a life? Jealous? That’s not nice! I’m not jealous of Tom in any way. I wouldn’t want his life for all the money in the world. And I would bet most of us here have a life. Saying that just creates hostility. Why would you do that toward people you don’t even know? Its not necessary to make personal attacks because people have a different opinion than you!

  How then, do you explain Lions for Lambs? Back in the old days, any movie Cruise did would have made a substantial amount of money in the box office no matter what the subject matter. Now, not so much!! Lions failed BADLY even with Cruise in it. His days of being the number 1 guy are over because the general public are sick of him and have seen what he’s really like with his appearance on The Today Show. When he sat there ranting he really damaged himself. His opinion is his opinion, but the way he put it across was ridiculous. “I know the history or psychiatry”?? Then there was that crazy Scientology video! I can’t even begin to talk about how off the wall that was! People see him as a religious zealot and that’s not good.

  I’m not saying he’ll never have another successful film, but his days of being a huge box office draw are done IMO. People just don’t feel the same way about him. I know I don’t. I was a hardcore fan for a million years. Now, not so much. LOL!

• jenna
  Jul 20, 2008 at 11:55 am

  good comments c rose and tyler……..

• Emilie
  Jul 20, 2008 at 12:07 pm

  I love the like the idea of Tom doing another Top Gun movie! The idea that Tom could be the older, wiser pilot and he is now a mentor to a younger, upstart pilot sounds like a great idea to me! Someone somewhere mentioned Shia Lebeowoof (?) as the young pilot. Shia is popular with the younger crowd and Tom is still a superb actor, no matter what his beliefs, and the two together would be able to make Top Gun 2 a super hit!

• kelly
  Jul 20, 2008 at 2:01 pm

  I was just lowering myself to conmoms level, I am sick of her. Sorry to offend you charlotte, didn’t mean to…

• Mary
  Jul 20, 2008 at 2:07 pm

  Tom Cruise had the worse PR of his entire career when M:I:3 was released, many said at the time that the movie would bomb, it didnot…………….It went on to gross close to $400 million worldwide with close to $135 million in the US. It was # 1 for two weeks and topped not only the DVD sales charts but it’s rental charts.
  One studio head said at the time that he would sell his soul for a $400 million take at the box office.

  As for LFL, if we look at other movies dealing with the war they all struggled at the boxoffice………Stop-Loss a brilliantly reviewed movie with Ryan Phillipe struggled to make it to $10 million. Rendition with media darlings Reese Witherspoon and Jake Gyllenhaal didn’t make it to $10 million.
  Redacted, another war movie was a complete bomb.

  Tom has had some of his movies that have done magnificently well both as an actor and as a producer and some which have not.
  Eyes Wide Shut for example only made $55 million dollars in the US and it had both him and Kidman in it.

  This is an interesting bit……………

  Salt Talks

  It’s looking like it might be prudent to back away — for the time being, at least — from today’s 7.19 report by Fox 411’s Roger Friedman that Tom Cruise won’t be doing that Edwin A. Salt movie with Philip Noyce, from a script by Kurt Wimmer. Freidman is saying Cruise has “apparently” bailed “because of money” and that Will Smith has now stepped into the role. Not so, says a well-placed source who’s focusing on the creative side.

  Freidman’s story more or less claims that the Salt producers haven’t offered Cruise his usual massive salary because they feel he isn’t the same box-office powerhouse he was five years ago…which of course he isn’t. But my guy says the Smith story is complete horseshit, and that Cruise’s issue isn’t the money (as far as he knows) but the Wimmer script, which has given Cruise concern because the Salt character is too much like Mission Impossible’s Ethan Hunt, whom Cruise has played three times.

  “Cruise is waiting for the new [Wimmer] draft which is coming out in the next couple of weeks,” I was told this morning. “He’s never been officially attached to the film…never said that he absolutely wants to do it. The main concern is about the character being too close to Hunt.

  “He’s always had this concern about repeating himself. Salt is a character working for the CIA, being extraordinary at disguise and athletic…there are a whole lot of similarities there. It’s possible that salary discussions may have taken place, but that’s not my area. All I know is,we’re waiting on a new script that will arrive in a week or two.”

  What’s the motive of the people feeding the Cruise-is-out story to Friedman? “Everybody wants to bring down Tom Cruise,” my source said. “Except everyone associated with Edwin A. Salt would like Tom to be in it.”

• PuckHappy
  Jul 20, 2008 at 2:10 pm

  Kelly, I am SO SHOCKED that you would admit that you are sick of Katie Holmes.
  And C-Mom likes Katie and Suri too. So to say you are “lowering” yourself to her level isn’t quite the wording that you should use.
  I think everyone here likes katie and since you are now sick of her, I’d say you are alone.
  I guess maybe if you just stop looking and all the rags, you won’t feel so overwhelmed be all the photo ops that tc is making her do right now.

• PuckHappy
  Jul 20, 2008 at 2:21 pm

  MI3 did close to $135 million in the US in the past four YEARS.
  Dark Knight did more then that in less then three days.

  If tc was really a HUGE box office draw, LFL would have been a success despite the subject matter.
  As much as he doesn’t want to admit it, he is SO yesterdays news. He is now just todays train wreak.

• tyler
  Jul 20, 2008 at 4:18 pm

  The fact that so many people want to bring him down does not bode well for this former A-lister.Think about it. Why would so many people want that?

  And, the stereotype problem is one I mentioned in an earlier post. Moviemakers want a sure thing, and that’s about all the faith they have in this guy right now. But, the smiles and accolades in Hollywood are meaningless anyway. They just use each other.

• Annie
  Jul 20, 2008 at 5:00 pm

  I still think katie turned down DK because she and TC would have been filming at the same time, he was in Germany ,don’t know where DK was made , somewhere in the US, i imagine i agree with Hanna as well, maybe katie wanted to do mad money, because as she said, she never played that sort of role before ,and was excited to star with DKeaten and the rest of the cast.

• PuckHappy
  Jul 20, 2008 at 5:38 pm

  She turned down DK because she had never that type of role before?

  I don’t think so. An actor does NOT turn down a MAJOR blockbuster to do a straight to dvd.
  Well, unless your bf tells you to.

• Mary
  Jul 20, 2008 at 6:06 pm

  What straight to DVD movie did Katie do in turning down TDK?

  Mad Money made just over $20 million at the US box office and that total is well in line with what Katie’s movie’s have made.
  The exceptions are Batman Begins ($205 million) Phone Booth ($46 million)
  Thank You For Smoking ($24 million)

  Rachel McAdams and Emily Blunt turned down the role of Rachel Dawes in TDK Before Maggie Gyllenhaal accepted it.

• Annie
  Jul 20, 2008 at 6:19 pm

  did’nt anybody like my movie idea for tom and katie, it would kill at the box office, i’m telling you it would.

• Lauren
  Jul 20, 2008 at 6:34 pm

  If Tom is yesterday’s news, why is Friedman labouringn to convince us? Why would Tyler, Concerned mom, Puck happy waste time every day including sundays to come here and convince us? Why would his devout critics start sites to convince us of such an obvious site?

  Why would articles about him and Katie get most hits on most sites? People outside the internet don’t give a damn about scientology and that is why Hancock has been successful despite Firedman’s efforts sabotage it.

  BTW he also said Will Smith’s career was over a couple of weeks ago because he is a friend of Tom and Hancock was going to tank. Surprise it was a hit.

  Still I am scratching my head why some people need to convince us everyday that Tom Cruise is yesterday’s news if he does that all by himself.

• Lauren
  Jul 20, 2008 at 6:38 pm

  Annie, I know your movie idea would be box office gold but my objection is that it is too tacky. I respect Katie’s reason not to do DK but I wished she had done it. Maggie is a good actress but she is no looker like Katie. Still it was a fantastic movie. I hope Katie does the third instalment if it odes not conflict with her schedule.

  Now the stories have changed that Tom forced her not to take the role. After Nolan confirmed she turned it down. Didn’t the same people insist that Katie was fired? Shouldn’t they be apologising for once again concocting stories against this family?

• Lauren
  Jul 20, 2008 at 6:39 pm

  Julie, that header picture of Tom is very HOT!

• concerned mom
  Jul 20, 2008 at 7:06 pm

  Annie, I loved McMillan and Wife but it might make a good tv movie not sure how it would translate to the big screen. And even in Tom’s hottest days, Far and Away did pretty bad and Eyes Wide Shut, well one for the history books there. I personally loved Far and Away-never saw Eyes Wide Shut- but it seems rare to me that ANY Hollywood couple can get just the right movie to do together. Joanne Woodward and Paul Newman and Richard Burton and Elizabeth Taylor and some other Hollywood royalty were pretty successful back in the day, but in today’s world-a couple can get over-exposed in a heartbeat.

• Annie
  Jul 20, 2008 at 9:32 pm

  thanks guys , better luck next time

• Annie
  Jul 21, 2008 at 3:10 am

  Maybe Tom and Katie can work together later in their careers but right now, things are too hot and the critics will have a field day. I would love to see them work together.

• Anne
  Jul 21, 2008 at 4:52 am

  I take this to mean that Friedman still has a crush on Tom and Tom is still not gay. LOL

  Friedman is getting rather pathetic. The way he likes to project his deep knowledge of the inner circles of hollywood. Name dropping at every opportunity and his fake enemity with Tom. He is quite delusional No better than Perez Hilton really.

• Hana
  Jul 21, 2008 at 5:47 am

  “The way he likes to project his deep knowledge of the inner circles of hollywood. Name dropping at every opportunity”
  ……..
  A few weeks ago I read an article Mr. Friedman wrote about Brangelina, and in that article he said that they told him that Angelina was having twin girls. Go figure!

• looika
  Jul 21, 2008 at 9:26 am

  Julie, where are you? There have been 2 sightings of Suri & Katie already, how come you haven’t updated the site? Are you out of town or something?

• Julie
  Jul 21, 2008 at 9:46 am

  No looika. I’m here. Just living life and enjoying my weekend. :D

• Julie
  Jul 21, 2008 at 9:49 am

  Lauren - yep, I love that picture too.

• jenna
  Jul 21, 2008 at 10:08 am

  Lauren: I agree Katie is a looker as you wrote….my husband made the same exact comment…..he was so disappointed saying that although Maggie is a great actress its hard to believe that she would play the beautiful love interest….Katie’s appearance is much softer than Maggie’s and thats just a sweeter way of saying that she is simply prettier.

• tyler
  Jul 21, 2008 at 11:21 am

  So, Jenna, your husband would have preferred Batman with arm candy rather than with a woman with a head on her shoulders?

• Jenna
  Jul 21, 2008 at 12:53 pm

  yes….arm candy all the way!!

• tyler
  Jul 21, 2008 at 1:12 pm

  Jenna, hear you ;-)

• Lauren
  Jul 21, 2008 at 3:47 pm

  Jenna, I see what you mean. Maggie is superb actress but no Katie when it comes to looks. It is sad that people are attacking her acting as forced, the Dawes role is not one for critical acclaim. I wish people would stop treating it as such. I missed Katie, I wish she was there. Fingers crossed she returns.

• concerned mom
  Jul 22, 2008 at 12:52 am

  Kelly thanks for the kind words. Please don’t put words in my mouth. I actually like Katie and Suri quite a bit-Tom? Not so much. The cult he brings everyone around him into-dangerous. Even his mom said in a Rolling Stone interview back in I think 2004, that She ‘thought she was happy and then she took that “Way to Happiness’ course. She came to visit and then suddenly left her husband and her whole life in Florida–just walked away from all her friends and her husband to join the ‘church’ and what-live with Tom forever??

• c
  Jul 22, 2008 at 9:03 am

  Lauren,

  I find your comment regarding this Roger–if he died, no one would care–distasteful. I’m sure someone care–his mother, father, family and friends. If some stranger said this about you just because he/she disagrees with your feeling about a movie star, I bet you would stomp your feet and cry ‘you don’t know me; I have family and friends whom love me very much…’Roger is entitled to his opinion about Tom’s acting and career as any one else.

  I hope you’ll not say the same thing about me for saying that I find Katie bland in look and her acting poor. She was terrible in Batman. If a role is to be won by look only, the actress better be gorgeous. Alas, gorgeous doesn’t come to my mind when I look at Katie, even in her best days pre-Cruise. And I do hope that you spare me too for my opinion on Tom’s look and acting. I have never found him attractive. I watched Topgun because of Dennis Quaid, Rainman due to Hoffman, Color of Money for Newman. I could not finish MI. The original series is much more interesting in story line and with better acting. He was not believable (to me) as a soldier in Born on 4th. His was and is not a look of soldier. All in all, Tom’s acting skill was and is on par with his current wife’s. His success was result of careful cultivation of public image much in the fashion Will Smith and his manager choosing the most lucrative path in script choices after TWWW. Tom’s grand opening day is fading, if not over.

  It’s a natural course on every’s career and life, not just Tom. So please don’t take this too personally.

• Mary
  Jul 22, 2008 at 9:43 am

  Mr. Friedman writes without any accountability. He puts stories out there via his internet column and faces no consequences. Neither does he retract when those stories are proven false.
  His internet column unlike most have no area to comment.

  TC has been in the movie business for over twenty-five years, those years marked with great reviews on his performances, dedication and his professionalism.
  Many want to rewrite history when it comes to the impact of Tc’s career but fortunately no matter how much one may try, the proof is in the quality of the work and the stated reviews and opinions of the time.
  That fortunately can never be erased.

• concerned mom
  Jul 22, 2008 at 9:59 am

  Interesting Mary, that he has never won an Oscar or Golden Globe having been in the biz so very long..and made a truckload of movies.

• Mary
  Jul 22, 2008 at 12:46 pm

  Concerned Mom: Tom has been nominated for an Academy Award three times.

  2000 - Magnolia

  1997 - Jerry Maguire

  1990 - Born On The Fourth Of July

  He won the Golden Globe for all of those performances.

• Kelly
  Jul 22, 2008 at 2:57 pm

  cm: yawn! Tom was robbed of an oscar and he has everything to be proud of.

  Puck: I did not mean Katie, clearly conmom saw I meant good old her the cm herself, she drives me nuts with all of her TC bashing! Why is she here so much?

  Putting a man down for being nominated for an Oscar…shame on you!

  …and leave mary alone, I like her! :)

• Hana
  Jul 22, 2008 at 3:04 pm

  “Nominated for 3 Oscars. Another 33 wins (including 3 Golden Globes) & 40 nominations.”

• Annie
  Jul 22, 2008 at 4:11 pm

  there’s another Annie.

• Hana
  Jul 22, 2008 at 4:18 pm

  I hate it when that happens. If people know the name they want to use is taken, they should just use another name or use “Annie 2″ instead of using the same name. But if someone is pretending to be the original “Annie”, the best way to find this out is to check for IP addresses of all bloggers and only Julie can do that.

• Anne
  Jul 22, 2008 at 4:50 pm

  Every one is entitled to their opinion, lies however are not opinion and Friedman tells too many lies for his own good. His bosses must be proud of him, that most of his stories are disputed and uncovered for the lies that they are. His life must be very miserable for him to be so negative all the time and attack the same person year after year even though Tom probably does not spare a wink for him, if he knows him that is.

  I find Katie very beautiful and Tom very handsome. They are lucky to find each other. I hope their marriage lasts for ages. I know it will.

• michelle
  Jul 22, 2008 at 9:29 pm

  This story originated from a Brittish tabloid and is being strongly denied by both Paramount and Tom’s people. According to Access Hollywood the story is false and it just is NOT happining.

• Tom Cruise Rep Says Top Gun Sequel Rumors are False
  Jul 23, 2008 at 1:44 pm

  […] other day I mentioned that there was a possibility of Tom Cruise reprising his role as Maverick in a Top Gun sequel. Well, it appears that those rumors were […]

Have an opinion? Leave a comment:

• Use this area to discover new blogs and content in the b5media network.
• Beauty & Style
• Business
• Entertainment
• Health & Wellness
• Lifestyles
• Music
• Sports
• Team Blogs
• Technology
• Travel & Culture