Cruise/Wagner Cut a Deal
Filed under: Deals, Paramount, Celebrities and Controversy, DIY/Filmmaking, Tom Cruise, Politics
Following their brutal break-up with Paramount Pictures, Tom Cruise and his producing partner Paula Wagner have reportedly cut a deal with a group of investors that includes Washington Redskins (that's an NFL football team for you non-sports fans) owner, Daniel M. Snyder.
As part of the deal, the group will finance the overhead costs (ie: staff, office expenses) of Cruise and Wagner's production company -- to the tune of less than $3 million a year -- as well as help shell out the bucks for future projects. (Yes, that's less than Paramount was offering Cruise/Wagner to re-sign with them. Desperate, are we?) Oh, and about those "mysterious hedge funds" that were "supposedly" providing Cruise/Wager with upwards of $100 million? Well, no names have been released and Cruise's lawyer claims there was never a hedge fund deal in the first place. Man, this thing just keeps getting weirder and weirder, huh?












Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
8-28-2006 @ 9:43PM
David said...
Ugh, I hate Tome Cruise...
Reply
8-29-2006 @ 1:31AM
edgeoforever said...
Soooo...Is Tom going to play football now? And why not? He's got two legs, two arms. Can't be much worse than his acting.
Reply
8-29-2006 @ 3:40AM
BJinOKC said...
Everyone needs to be humbled in life and his time came late;he was way past due. I wonder what, if any, charities he may be philanthropic towards, besides the Church of Scientology. I feel people with that much money that continue to make more than they will ever be able to spend in their lifetime, should help the less fortunate. Else,I have no respect for them and will not support their career any longer. That is just one woman's opinion. That's a wrap~
Reply
8-29-2006 @ 4:59AM
Richard Brunton said...
Well there's far more to a contract than just money, who knows what Cruise was having to sign to with the Paramount deal? Perhaps it was to do a series of films he wasn't interested in doing? Perhaps it was tying him down for too long? Maybe he actually wanted to do some different films or production duties for a while? It's not as if he needs the cash!
I wouldn't say desperate until we hear more about what's actually going on with the deal and what new projects appear on the CruiseWagner slate.
Reply
8-29-2006 @ 9:25AM
Ordananza3 said...
As much as I dislike Tom Cruise right now, I find this thing a bit odd. First Cruise threatens to not promote M:I3 if that Emmy-winning South Park episode is re-aired, so Viacom does not rerun the show while MI3 is in theaters. Instead they wait until a few weeks ago to rerun the show, then suddenly, almost immediately afterward, Cruise is "dropped" by Paramount, owned by Viacom as well? I believe Cruise just made good on his promise to, in essence, have nothing to do with the company if the show re-aired. Yet, if he was the aggressive party, he would be looked at as the bad guy, a la Isaac Hayes, so he has to spin a story to make him be the victim so he can save whatever reputation he has left.
Reply
8-29-2006 @ 9:48AM
Brenda Lamb said...
Tom cruise is a over paid glory hog that isn't that good of a actor anyway. He has to get his own company to make movies because no one wants to put up with his attitude. He needs to wake up and realize that he cannot be rude and nasty to people and expect to get picked to make movies he is bad for the Film companies reputations.
Reply
8-29-2006 @ 4:30PM
Scott said...
BJinOKC - Calling the Church of $cientology a charity, IMHO, gives legitimate charities and religions everywhere a bad name.
Cruise's strange behavior over the past year got the best of him and even at his payscale the money will run out eventuall, especially with the leech of $cientology. One wonders if the church will dump him one he stops giving them cash and schilling for them.
Reply
8-29-2006 @ 4:33PM
BJinOKC said...
To Ordananza3,
Very interesting outlook, good thoughts! Only thing is, it was Sumner Redstone that terminated the contract and announced it publicly. I bet that Tommy-Boy's controlling antics was the last straw. I figure they let him have his way til MI:3 was promoted and out, then it was "bu-bye Mr. Cruise....now leave before a house falls on you!" the plot thickens...mmuuuuwwwwaaahhhhhh
Reply
8-29-2006 @ 10:42PM
BJinOKC said...
Scott,
I apologize. I didn't word that post correctly. In no way did I mean the Church of Scientology was a charitable organization. I guess I need to have a brush up lesson on sentence structure! Mea Culpa! Mea Culpa! Now, back to you...
Reply
8-30-2006 @ 11:31AM
Rob in NoVA said...
What about the Yahoo! CEO Terry Semel/Cruise deal? Or has this been combined with Snyder's interest?
Reply
8-30-2006 @ 4:20PM
richard said...
Although I like to see him squirm because of his self righteous and control freak attitude,I don't think Tom Cruise has anything to worry about. His stardom might have abeen tarnished a bit recently but don't forget he is still the biggest movie stars and box offie draws ever, as much as Ihate to admit it.
Reply
9-02-2006 @ 7:53AM
James Lightfield said...
Intersting, Cruise' last two movies (War of the World and MI-3) grossed nearly $1 Billion. Cruise will earn $70 million from MI-3(Paramount pockets receives only approx $20M). Cruise and his attorneys out negotiated Paramount. That's what's behind Paramount cancelling the contract.
What the gossip manufacutrers who slam Cruise overlook (intentionally or just through lack of scholarship) is that Cruise brought national so much national debate over the dangers of psych drugs that the FDA finally required Black Box Warning labels on psych drug packaging, and 400,000 fewer Ritalin prescriptions were filled.
Cruise has the cohones to go toe-to-toe with the multi-billion psych/drugs industries (www.cchr.org) that pay the media $2.6 billion a year to advertise the drug solution. Does anyone really expect honesty from the media?
Reply
10-26-2006 @ 1:00AM
mark said...
I hope that Tom makes a comeback, regardless of his personal beliefs he's one of the greatest actors of our age
Reply
10-29-2006 @ 10:13AM
Vickey Woosley said...
I think Tom Cruise is a wonderful actor. Unfortuntely being in the public so much he has to be a little careful about voicing his opinons. As far as jumping on the couch on Oprah's, I think he is a man deeply in love..... If dreams could come true, I would work with him on any film. I sincerely hope this deal with his new partners is a big success. Kudos to you Tom.............
Sincerely,
Vickey
Reply