tomthorne wrote:These sort of reactions so disappoint me. To immediately reach the conclusion that Tom Cruise is a raving queen and each of his wives has just been a minor actress looking for an easy leg up from the church! I'm with Tommy525. Why can't these sort of people just stick together like they did in the 50s
.
Actually, from a feminist point of view, it is horrible to think that someone with a modicum of talent -say Nicole Kidman, and yes, I believe Katie Holmes- would actually agree to stay in a loveless and sexless "marriage" for X amount of money and a push up her career. Which is pretty pathetic about Hollywood, being Hollywood already pathetic enough, that a woman would have to resort to that.
So when the press talks about "she did her five years and was gone", or "she finally saw the light about Scientology... ten years after being with the guy", the feminist in me has a strong stomach reaction... Whore or virgin, no way out...
And he, Ok, so he's weird and not nice. Whatever. Now, if you talk about Cruise's acting, well, yeah, that's no punches barred, let's tear each role to strips, and I'm OK. But in an era of TMZ, PerzHilton and twitter, what goes out is really revolting. And not in a good entertaining sense.
Meanwhile, as to gossip goes, I am far more interested in the Johnny Depp saga, and current love interest...

! I'm with Tommy525. Why can't these sort of people just stick together like they did in the 50s
.




