'Valkyrie' Update: No Cruise Photoshopping
Filed under: Drama, Thrillers, United Artists, Celebrities and Controversy, Tom Cruise, Movie Marketing, Images, War
Tom Cruise may be guilty of some odd public antics -- but he isn't guilty of photo fudging. Last week, we reported on Slate's little expose, where they examined a publicity photo released by United Artists. According to their graphic experts, the photo of Claus von Stauffenberg had been altered to better resemble Tom Cruise. However, Yahoo! Movies now says Slate has been forced to retract the story. It turns out they were comparing the wrong photos -- they used one from the AP, as opposed to the Getty photograph United Artists used. Unfortunately, Slate didn't search all available archives for the photo before making their assertion.
United Artists is understandably upset over the slanderous claim. "The picture United Artists used of Colonel Stauffenberg can be found all over the Internet," said Valkyrie co-writer and producer Chris McQuarrie. He added that it would be much easier to "alter Tom Cruise" than to doctor "every available picture of Claus von Stauffenberg."
Now, with all due respect, I politely disagree with McQuarrie that the photo used by United Artists is easy to find. When this story first broke, I did my own Google search out of curiosity. The most readily available photo of von Stauffenberg is the one accompanying this post. It is also the first image Getty produces when you search their archives. The only site that produced the same photo was Spartacus Educational, and even then I wasn't sure, as the UA version seemed so much cleaner.
Well, it was an intriguing mystery while it lasted. And I have to thank Slate and United Artists, as I learned quite a bit about von Stauffenberg in the process. I do have to tease the studio, though -- out of all the photos ever taken of Claus von Stauffenberg, they did chose the one most flattering to Cruise!
Peter Jackson Says Spielberg's 'Tintin' is Done Filming, but...
Interracial Harmony: 'Ninja Assassin' vs. 'Blind Side'
Spin-ematical: New on DVD for 11/24_thumbnail.jpg)
Exclusive 'Nine' Poster Premiere!
Exclusive: Title Track for 'The Road' Soundtrack
_thumbnail.jpg)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
6-25-2008 @ 2:22PM
Kevin said...
Thats just poor journalism. To hide behind the excuse that the photo in question was hard to find is pretty pathetic. Thats the whole point of investigating a story, is to follow all leads to a logical conclusion, not follow the first lead and then stop trying. Sounds like they knew people don't look cruise and they stumbled across something they were certain would be a big story and they ran with it before actually verifying it. Having said that, I'm not surprised at all thats what they did and it just reinforces my opinion that stories you read about on the internet are to be taken with a grain of salt.
Reply
6-25-2008 @ 4:04PM
Elisabeth said...
To be fair, I wasn't trying to defend Slate by saying the picture was difficult to find. They use Getty and AP regularly, and I am really surprised they didn't think to check both archives. As a big online magazine, you would just assume they had.
It is also kind of funny that, as per the article, UA doesn't remember where they obtained the photo, when Getty is the only place it appears.
But I thought it was worth mentioning that the photo *isn't* one that is readily available -- I probably did more research than Slate did, honestly. When I wrote the story up initially, I even included the caveat of "Who really knows if it is the exact photo UA used?" Slate's conclusion was hasty, ill-informed and regrettable -- but somewhat understandable given that no other photo of Claus von Stauffenberg really resembles Tom Cruise. But again, it doesn't really excuse their shoddy research.
I don't think that Internet stories are necessarily suspect -- and I don't say that just because that's where I write. Good research is essential in *all* writing, and the temptation to do a fast and dirty expose can overcome even the New York Times.
Everyone is too eager to be Woodward and Bernstein, even if the only person you are bringing down is Tom Cruise.
6-25-2008 @ 2:52PM
Moo said...
ummm, not just the internet anymore, my friend.
all media outlets are suspect. Either for sensationalism or just the fact that they are owned by large for-profit companies (like AOL...heh). Actually the internet may be the last source of semi-unbiased, accurate news on earth...depending on where you look.
Don't trust anyone over 30!!!!!
dammit, wait...i'm 31.
Don't trust anyone over 35!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Reply
6-25-2008 @ 2:58PM
Gina said...
I'm sure they're upset . . . all the way to the bank. It may not be 100 percent true that there's no such thing as bad publicity -- but it's about 99 percent true.
Reply
6-25-2008 @ 7:16PM
Kevin said...
Elisabeth, just to clarify, I definitely wasn't saying you did a poor job. My disdain is directed squarely at Slate who initially "broke" the story. And Moo, I wholeheartedly agree. My point is simply that the number of disreputable "news" sites on the internet are much easier to access than the many of the print sources. I may know that the Rockville Reporter is pretty biased and unfair, but unless you live in Rockville then you aren't grabbing a copy of it on your way to work. However, everyone has access to any website, so the number of people that can be influenced by shoddy online reporting is much greater. Unfortunately, the collective reputations of "reputable" news sources are all on the downside, so I guess I should have been clearer in saying that I don't trust anything that I don't hear out of the horses mouth itself.
Reply
6-25-2008 @ 7:26PM
Elisabeth said...
Aw, I knew you weren't. You're always a cool man in the comments! :D I just thought, perhaps, I seemed too apologetic of Slate and should clarify for everyone reading.
Every journalist should be required to take a class with my old American history professor. She made me doubt everything. Apparently, if you don't research where someone went to college, what political party they are, and what ice cream they liked growing up, you won't be able to accurately assess their perspective...hmmm....that might explain my trust issues.
6-25-2008 @ 7:50PM
Moo said...
fair enough, and I'm with you there...