Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

Atomic Rooster · Mar 29, 2007, 06:39 PM

Believe it or not!

"Family of failed Hitler assassin unhappy with casting of Tom Cruise"

"Tom Cruise is set to play the role of the man who tried to kill Adolf Hitler, but the the descendants of the would-be assassin are saying "nein" to the casting MSNBC reports. United Artists, the studio that Cruise now heads, is said to be to be working on a film about von Stauffenberg, who in 1944 planted a bomb under a table in an effort to kill the Fuhrer. The Blast killed four members of his inner circle, but Hitler survived, and von Stauffenberg was executed. But the late officer's grandson says the family is concerned that the film will be used to promote Cruise's religion, Scientology. A rep for the studio didn't respond to requests for comments."

Forget his freaked out religion, but wouldn't you say this is the worst casting in history?? Cruise is only 5 feet tall and von Stauffenberg was tall, for one thing. But Tom Cruise?...Come on WTF!!!

I think Cruise is German or east Europeon though. Not many people realize Cruise isn't his real name.

I dunno, maybe he'll goose step in his underwear, I give up.

analogika · Mar 29, 2007, 07:03 PM

Originally Posted by Atomic Rooster

Believe it or not!

"Family of failed Hitler assassin unhappy with casting of Tom Cruise"

I really do wish there were a way for them to stop this.

Please.

design219 · Mar 29, 2007, 08:10 PM

[QUOTE=the family is concerned that the film will be used to promote Cruise's religion, Scientology"
[/QUOTE]

Has he promoted Scientology with other movies? If he has, I've missed it. And how would a movie about an assasination attempt on Hitler promote Scientology?

I don't know anything about Scientology, but I like a lot of Tom Cruise's movies. I really liked Vanilla Sky.

mac128k-1984 · Mar 29, 2007, 08:27 PM

If he does start using the movies (now that he's in control us or owns UA) as a platform, his carreer will take a nose dive. Heck, all of the negative publicity that was circulating around when the latest incarnation of mission impossible came out seemed to have an effect, the movie really didn't do as well as they had hoped.

analogika · Mar 29, 2007, 08:40 PM

Originally Posted by design219

Has he promoted Scientology with other movies? If he has, I've missed it. And how would a movie about an assasination attempt on Hitler promote Scientology?

I don't know anything about Scientology, but I like a lot of Tom Cruise's movies. I really liked Vanilla Sky.

You missed Battlefield Earth.

You also know nothing about Scientology.

design219 · Mar 29, 2007, 08:42 PM

Yeah, I missed battlefield earth. But I didn't think he was in that. And I said I know nothing about Scientology.

olePigeon · Mar 29, 2007, 08:49 PM

I would've casted Jeremy Irons.

analogika · Mar 29, 2007, 08:55 PM

Originally Posted by design219

Yeah, I missed battlefield earth. But I didn't think he was in that. And I said I know nothing about Scientology.

My bad. That was, of course, Travolta.

xi_hyperon · 10:38 PM

Tom Cruise is the William Shatner of our day (prone to over-acting), minus the ability of self-parody, and of course, he's actually nuts.

Mithras · Mar 29, 2007, 09:44 PM

I'm as anti-religion as the next guy, but I don't really get the family's beef. Object because you think he's a shetty actor, but his religion has nothing to do with it.

Atomic Rooster · Mar 29, 2007, 10:04 PM

Originally Posted by Mithras

I'm as anti-religion as the next guy, but I don't really get the family's beef. Object because you think he's a shetty actor, but his religion has nothing to do with it.

Well, when he goes around promoting his movies (which all actors do) he tends to turn into a freakazoid.

red rocket · Mar 30, 2007, 07:36 AM

Cruise films tend to make a lot of money. If I was making a film, and my main concern was box office success, I'd cast Tom Cruise in the lead, any day, whether he looks like the character, or not. The fact that some people hate him because he's a Scientologist guarantees additional publicity.

And you can't cast Jeremy Irons for anything. Doing that Lolita remake has killed his commercial prospects, unfortunately. Casting Jeremy Irons = guaranteed fail.

Doofy · Mar 30, 2007, 07:47 AM

Originally Posted by Atomic Rooster

Not many people realize Cruise isn't his real name.

Cruise is his real name, just not his surname.

--> Thomas Cruise Mapother IV <--

design219 · Mar 30, 2007, 07:57 AM

Thomas Cruise Mapother IV

Baaaaahahahahhahhahah!

Dakar² · Mar 30, 2007, 08:07 AM

I don't say this too often, but I just... don't... care.

I could understand why you would if you were German.

And screw whoever compared him to Shatner. Shatner is sane.

Person Man · Mar 30, 2007, 08:27 AM

Originally Posted by design219

And I said I know nothing about Scientology.

You need lessons, boy!

design219 · Mar 30, 2007, 10:05 AM

Originally Posted by Person Man

You need lessons, boy!

Thanks for the link. I'll look at it, just for a point of reference, but I really don't care for religions and mythologies in general. I think it is sad that such organizations can control so much of so many peoples lives.

And how do you know I'm a boy?

Dakar² · Mar 30, 2007, 10:07 AM

Originally Posted by design219

And how do you know I'm a boy?

No pubes.

analogika · Mar 30, 2007, 10:08 AM

Scientology is not a religion.

That they actually claim religion status - and have received it in some places - is a very good reason to take a good look at them.

design219 · Mar 30, 2007, 10:12 AM

Tax breaks I'll bet.

Doofy · Mar 30, 2007, 10:15 AM

Originally Posted by analogika

Scientology is not a religion.

From what I can tell, they're on a par with Buddhism. Which isn't a religion either.

design219 · Mar 30, 2007, 10:19 AM

Wiki (I know, not the best source) calls Buddhism a "non-theistic religion."

Doofy · Mar 30, 2007, 10:29 AM

Originally Posted by design219

Wiki (I know, not the best source) calls Buddhism a "non-theistic religion."

Since religion generally has to include some kind of deity (even if it's only Prince Phil), Buddhism is more correctly defined as a philosophy.

Jawbone54 · Mar 30, 2007, 10:47 AM

Originally Posted by Mithras

I'm as anti-religion as the next guy, but I don't really get the family's beef. Object because you think he's a shetty actor, but his religion has nothing to do with it.

While publicizing upcoming movies, Cruise tends to go on Scientology tangents. This is what the family's upset about. He'll take the focus off of the story and place it back on Scientology, which he seems to do with every movie that comes out. For instance, he might go on Letterman to talk about the movie, but halfway through start talking about Scientology and how ADD doesn't exist.

I think Spielberg got really upset about this during War of the Worlds.

analogika · Mar 30, 2007, 10:56 AM

Originally Posted by Doofy

From what I can tell, they're on a par with Buddhism. Which isn't a religion either.

Buddhism, however, is not a corporation whose only interests are money and power.

Doofy · Mar 30, 2007, 11:05 AM

Originally Posted by analogika

Buddhism, however, is not a corporation whose only interests are money and power.

This be a truth.

TETENAL · Mar 30, 2007, 12:25 PM

Von Stauffenberg is a historic figure, so his family can not prevent anyone from making a movie about him.

Paco500 · Mar 30, 2007, 02:42 PM

Originally Posted by Doofy

Since religion generally has to include some kind of deity (even if it's only Prince Phil), Buddhism is more correctly defined as a philosophy.

Why does a religion have to include some kind of deity? Add to that, many strains of Buddhism include "divine" or elevated beings. Methinks you are nitpicking for the sake of it.

design219 · Mar 30, 2007, 02:55 PM

Originally Posted by Paco500

Why does a religion have to include some kind of deity? Add to that, many strains of Buddhism include "divine" or elevated beings. Methinks you are nitpicking for the sake of it.

Tormented by Buddhist as a child?

Doofy · Mar 30, 2007, 03:28 PM

Originally Posted by Paco500

Why does a religion have to include some kind of deity?

Because there being a deity involved is pretty much the definition of "religion".

Monique · Mar 30, 2007, 04:20 PM

Tom Cruise is a very good actor and the grandson should take a pill. In what way the height of an actor has to do with talent.

OreoCookie · Mar 30, 2007, 05:03 PM

Originally Posted by Doofy

From what I can tell, they're on a par with Buddhism. Which isn't a religion either.

Buddhism has a history of several thousand years that has influenced the culture of an entire continent. Scientology is a fad started by some nutjob scifi author. See the difference?

Mithras · Mar 30, 2007, 05:06 PM

Originally Posted by Doofy

Because there being [strike]a deity[/strike] zero or more deities involved is pretty much the definition of "religion".

fixed that.

Atomic Rooster · 06:52 PM

Originally Posted by TETENAL

Von Stauffenberg is a historic figure, so his family can not prevent anyone from making a movie about him.

I think they just want someone less Hollywood and freakish to play the German hero.

As far as I know a religion must have a supernatural ghost/ghosts in there somewhere. But definitions evolve and change. Just look at 'gay'. "Don we now our gay apparel" has a whole different outlook on the Christmas carol.

Doofy · Mar 30, 2007, 06:54 PM

Originally Posted by OreoCookie

Buddhism has a history of several thousand years that has influenced the culture of an entire continent. Scientology is a fad started by some nutjob scifi author. See the difference?

Several thousand years?

Doofy · Mar 30, 2007, 06:57 PM

Originally Posted by Mithras

fixed that.

religion |rɪˌlɪdʒ(ə)n|
noun
the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power

Buddhism is a philosophy. Period.

Aron Peterson · Mar 30, 2007, 07:07 PM

Originally Posted by Doofy

religion |rɪˌlɪdʒ(ə)n|
noun
the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power

Buddhism is a philosophy. Period.

South Asian Buddhism includes the main Hindu gods. Tibetan Buddhism includes Tibetan deities. Daoism includes Chinese and Japanese deities and saints. Shinto includes deities and spirits. Buddhism is a branch of religion that includes the faiths and religious cultures of over 2 billion people.

Atomic Rooster · Mar 30, 2007, 07:15 PM

Originally Posted by Doofy

religion |rɪˌlɪdʒ(ə)n|
noun
the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power

Buddhism is a philosophy. Period.

I tend to agree with you but it seems the definition has evolved somewhat.

American Heritage New Dictionary of Cultural Literacy, Third Edition -
Buddhism [(booh-diz-uhm, bood-iz-uhm)]

A reli-gion, founded by the Buddha, that emphasizes physical and spiritual discipline as a means of liberation from the physical world. The goal for the Buddhist is to attain nirvana, a state of complete peace in which one is free from the distractions of desire and self-consciousness. Buddhists are found in the greatest numbers in eastern Asia.

I guess you can't be spiritual without having a spirit.

OreoCookie · Mar 30, 2007, 07:29 PM

Originally Posted by Doofy

Several thousand years?

As in approximately two thousand five hundred years, yes.

The Sakyamuni, or the sage of the Sakyas, Sidhartha Guatama the Buddha, or `enlightened one', was born in Kapilavastu, around 563 BCE, into the Hill tribe of the Sakyas, who were centred east of Sravasti, capital of the Kosala region near the Himalayan foothills.

That makes Buddha older than Jesus, I guess

Gossamer · Mar 30, 2007, 07:38 PM

Why do the semantics matter? It is what it is. Call it what you want.

Atomic Rooster · Mar 30, 2007, 07:44 PM

Originally Posted by Gossamer

Why do the semantics matter? It is what it is. Call it what you want.

Cults.

design219 · Mar 30, 2007, 07:53 PM

Social controls.

Ado · Mar 30, 2007, 07:53 PM

Hollywood created WW2, so that it may have business for the next century making movies about this war.

I think movies that involve espionage are best told by english.

design219 · Mar 30, 2007, 07:54 PM

Originally Posted by Ado

Hollywood created WW2, so that it may have business for the next century making movies about this war.

I think movies that involve espionage are best told by english.

WTF?

Doofy · Mar 30, 2007, 07:55 PM

Originally Posted by OreoCookie

As in approximately two thousand five hundred years, yes.

That was the answer to your question, not a question for you to answer.

Dennis002 · Mar 31, 2007, 12:54 PM

Why are people so afraid of Scientology? I think it is **** (feaces), but to my knowledge far more catholic priests abused young children than members of scientology did.

Mithras · Mar 31, 2007, 01:36 PM

Well sure, but maybe not on a percentage basis.

analogika · Mar 31, 2007, 05:36 PM

Originally Posted by Dennis002

Why are people so afraid of Scientology? I think it is **** (feaces), but to my knowledge far more catholic priests abused young children than members of scientology did.

Catholicism does not operate under false pretenses, and their aims are neither corporate, nor in direct conflict with the very concept of a democratic, free society.

Scientology is, in many eyes, criminal organization which aims at complete control over as many people as possible, in order to make as much money as possible, and gain as much power as possible.

They have been known to use psychological terror tactics on their opponents, as well as smear propaganda of the basest kind, and apparently go to extremes to break their own people.

The links posted in this thread are well worth reading to get an idea of why Scientology might be of concern.

Dennis002 · Apr 1, 2007, 02:08 AM

Well, it could also be interesting to read some more about e.g. the role of the Vatican in worldwar II.. (or in covering up the sexual abuse of children wiorldwide in more recent years)

And perhaps it is arbitrary to judge by the criteria you mention, for me it is more troublesome that under apparently non-false pretenses e.g. the pope's policy not to allow the use of comdoms te prevent the spreading HIV in Africa is a disaster fot many.

But this is propably more suited for the political forum..

analogika · Apr 1, 2007, 05:59 AM

The Vatican's atrocities are well-documented, and - apart from their continued a role in assisted murder (for that is what preaching against the use of condoms in Africa is) - are pretty much historical issues.

The fact that people will innocently ask what is wrong with Scientology means there is a serious lack of awareness.