So call me jaded and call me biased: but Tom Cruise? Tom Cruise, Prince of Scientology? Tom Cruise, aged 50 and recently of wedded bliss to Katie Holmes fame?
The reason his presence in Jack Reacher is so utterly uninspiring is because Cruise’s all-purpose answer to his critics, doubters, ex-wives, and gay rumormongers is always the same: star in a formulaic action movie with a barebones plot and lots of slick CGI action scenes and hope that that’s enough to make people forget that he – in the not so recent past – acted like a lunatic on Oprah’s couch, dissed the “glib” scientific community, and then starred in the most forgettable movies of his entire career.
Jack Reacher of the movie’s title is obviously the character that Cruise plays. Apart from the fact that he seems to own only one shirt, there is nothing that distinguishes him from the dozens of other do-gooders he’s played in 90% of his movies. Reacher travels from town to town hunting baddies that law enforcement can’t or won’t bring to justice. When he finds himself in Pittsburgh, he takes down a sniper and then gets caught up with a hottie lawyer played by Rosamund Pike. The rest of the movie is about his terrible flirting skills and a bunch of middle aged guys playing Rambo with assault rifles.
It’s not that this is a bad movie per se. It’s just that it’s so resoundingly formulaic and so obviously just another product off the assembly line that is the Paramount Tom Cruise Movie Division that you have to wonder how much longer this shtick is going to play out. No one goes to Tom Cruise movies for the quality of acting. They go for the action thrills. But is anyone interested anymore? Something tells me the ‘yeses’ get fewer with each release.