Originally Posted by InnocentBystander
that was my point....
hits = appeal
hits dont = quality, necessarily
tom cruise is more about hits than quality...
And my point is that no one rakes in big dough on artsy movies, so how is that whole line of argument even relevant?
What does it matter if he is more about hits? He's proven plenty of times that he's a good actor and the fact is that there is a very limited number of leading men that can consistently carry blockbuster movies. He's one of very few and that has to count for something, in addition to his quality work. Is it suddenly wrong that he's raking in the dough? His big hits are hardly bad movies...