Because the bulk of it is just clips of him in previous movies, going at least as far back as "Taps."
Cruise should have stuck with the original casting agent’s assessment of his potential. He’s a pretty boy. He’s not an action hero.
If you blink, you'll miss the clip of him as Lestat. It vanishes in a scroll-over. It bugs me that no one bothers to mention that "Born on the Fourth Of July" debunks "First Blood". Nobody spit on vets. There's no film of it happening, no still photos, no eyewitnesses, no confessed perpetrators, no nothing. That was a fairy tale made up by Nixon to piss off the Archie Bunker types. Vets were a prominent part of the peace movement. Why would hippies spit on potential allies? And yet Rambo gives his "they spit on me" speech, and everyone just rolled over and accepted it. And Rambo is more remembered than "Born on the Fourth Of July". That needed to be the big veteran's day movie, not fucking Rambo or some John Wayne slop.
Maybe Rambo kept trying to pick up cranky uninterested hippie chicks in bars and the spitting was unrelated.
Funny they only showed a few seconds of his best film, which was the only time he actually didn't play "Tom Cruise".
You know, it just occurred to me that the reason why his character's buried in make up could be that they're trying to hide his new face. I've noticed that while he's not been as extreme in the plastic surgery as Mikey Rourke or Axl Rose, he's had some work done and is starting to look weird because of it. Wonder if he had some radical shit done, and they're using this to slowly roll it out to the public?
you shouldn't speak on topics on which you are INCREDIBLY ignorant. There may not be videos of people spitting on war vets AND THEY WEREN'T HIPPIES. IT WAS THE ASSHOLES FOLLOWING TRUMP NOW ACTING ALL BIG AND BAD. I was there. I know it happened. I know who did what.
