Home Movies Tom Cruise: Looks Like “Edge of Tomorrow” Won’t Hit $100 Mil—It’s Been...

Aside from the “Mission Impossible’ movies, Tom Cruise has not had a $100 million movie since 2005. That’s nine years since Steven Spielberg’s  “War of the Worlds.”

Now, Warner Bros. has tried like crazy to get the very good  “Edge of  Tomorrow” across the finish line. But it doesn’t look like it;s going to happen. “Edge” is right now at $97 million. The Doug Liman directed sci fi thriller is still playing in 600 locations. But it’s also tapped out its audience. Last weekend “Edge” did around $1.2 million. Even if it managed to do another $750,000 this weekend, the goal is still far off.

Ouch! Can we just round it up and give it to Tom?

You can say this: he ‘s a grower if not a show-er. His resume of films has increased with each release starting with “Knight and Day,” then “Jack Reacher,” and “Oblivion.” (I’m not counting the miserable Rock of Ages.) But if it weren’t for “Mission Impossible” Cruise would have already self-destructed.

Warner Bros. can afford to just let “Edge” sit in theaters through Labor Day. But it would be a squeaker, and not cost effective. So close, yet so far….

 

11 replies to this post
  1. Isn’t this article misleading. I don’t see any where you mention this is just US box office numbers. According to boxoffice mojo the film has grossed $359,004,000 with US and international. Ouch implies that the film is a failure at the box office and that is far from the truth. Ouch to misleading reporting.

  2. You failed to mention that “Edge of Tomorrow” has earned a total of $360 million worldwide. Nor have you mentioned that “Jack Reacher” is getting a sequel, having cost only $60 million to make while earning over $210 million worldwide. You also forget to mention the “Top Gun” sequel.

    No wonder you work for Fox News.

  3. Edge has done $360 million worldwide (before PPV, DVD, Streaming) on a $178 million dollar budget. Most Cruise movies do very well as he’s an international star. I know the “Tom Cruise is done” narrative gets clicks but the studios keep making movies with him because he’s consistently profitable.

  4. If the movie didn’t have Tom in it, I’d probably have been more interested in actually seeing it in theaters instead of waiting to redbox/netflix it in a few months.

  5. What a ridiculous article indeed. To start with, as if there is an actor to bring at least the same numbers as Cruise. “Self destructed”? Say it to actors who made TV. For an original sci-fi to double it`s budget is great FYI.
    This article annoys me like a hell. Thank you. I wish you the same feeling.

What do you think?

Print This Post Print This Post