WorstPreviews.com Logo Join the community [Login / Register]
Follow WorstPreviews.com on Twitter
What\ News Coming Soon In Theaters On DVD Trailer,Posters,Pictures,Wallpapers, Screensavers PeliBlog.com Trivia/Quizzes
News/Headlines
Trailer for "Midnight Special" Sci-Fi Film, with Michael Shannon and Joel Edgerton
Nov 23rd, 2015
Trailer for "Central Intelligence" Comedy, with Dwayne Johnson and Kevin Hart
Nov 23rd, 2015
Trailer for Melissa McCarthy's "The Boss" Comedy
Nov 23rd, 2015
Trailer for Juan Antonio Bayona's "A Monster Calls"
Nov 23rd, 2015
First Look at "Central Intelligence" Comedy, with Dwayne Johnson and Kevin Hart
Nov 19th, 2015
Trailer for "Zoolander 2" Arrives Online
Nov 19th, 2015
Official Trailer for "Now You See Me" Sequel
Nov 19th, 2015
Trailer for Chris Hemsworth's "The Huntsman: Winter's War"
Nov 19th, 2015
Trailer for Keanu Reeves' "Exposed" Thriller
Nov 19th, 2015
First Look at Chris Pine on "Wonder Woman" Set
Nov 16th, 2015
Ridley Scott Reveals Another Title for "Prometheus" Sequel
Nov 16th, 2015
Gerard Butler is a God in "Gods of Egypt" Posters
Nov 16th, 2015
First Look at Liam Neeson in Martin Scorsese's "Silence"
Nov 16th, 2015
New Trailer for "The Divergent Series: Allegiant"
Nov 16th, 2015
Trailer for "Moonwalkers" Comedy, with Ron Perlman and Rupert Grint
Nov 16th, 2015
Trailer for Charlie Kaufman's "Anomalisa" Stop-Motion Film
Nov 3rd, 2015
Poster for "Warcraft" Arrives Online, Trailer Coming on Friday
Nov 3rd, 2015
There's a Good Reason Why Luke Skywalker Isn't on "Star Wars: The Force Awakens" Poster
Nov 2nd, 2015
First Trailer for Sacha Baron Cohen's "The Brothers Grimsby" Comedy
Nov 2nd, 2015
"Spectre" Breaks Box Office Records Overseas
Nov 2nd, 2015
Final Trailer for Ron Howard's "In the Heart of the Sea," with Chris Hemsworth
Nov 2nd, 2015
New Photos From "Warcraft" Video Game Movie
Nov 2nd, 2015
Lots of New Photos From "Suicide Squad"
Oct 30th, 2015
Trailer for "Dirty Grandpa" Comedy, with Robert De Niro and Zac Efron
Oct 30th, 2015
Sandra Bullock to Star in Female Version of "Ocean's Eleven"
Oct 30th, 2015
Trailer for Jared Hess' "Don Verdean" Comedy, with Sam Rockwell
Oct 30th, 2015
"Indiana Jones" Producer Says Harrison Ford Will Not Be Recast
Oct 28th, 2015
Trailer for Adam Sandler's "The Ridiculous 6" Comedy
Oct 28th, 2015
"The Walking Dead" Fan Kills Friend Who Turned Into a Zombie
Oct 28th, 2015
Another "Monopoly" Movie in the Works
Oct 28th, 2015
"Jumanji" Remake Hires "Con Air" Writer
Oct 26th, 2015
Disney's "Tower of Terror" Park Ride Movie Moving Forward
Oct 26th, 2015
Johnny Depp and Edgar Wright Team for "Fortunately, the Milk"
Oct 26th, 2015
Previous News Stories Next News Stories

Tom Cruise's "Jack Reacher" Won't Get a Sequel

Posted: January 15th, 2013 by WorstPreviews.com Staff
Tom CruiseSubmit Comment
Back in 2011, Paramount Pictures announced that Tom Cruise will star in "Jack Reacher," based on the first book in a series by Lee Child. The character is described as being huge in the books, but the studio was hoping to launch a new franchise and it needed star-power. So Cruise was cast.

Unfortunately, the $60 million film grossed only $72.6 million domestically and $80.4 million internationally. That's $153 million in total, short of $250 million Paramount was expecting in order to greenlit a sequel.

Reaching $250 million will be almost impossible, but the film has yet to be released in Japan, China and Korea. While there's still a tiny chance that a miracle may happen, don't expect a "Jack Reacher" sequel.

Click here to read our "Jack Reacher" review.

Source: THR


Bookmark and Share
You must be registered to post comments. Login or Register.
Displaying 37 comment(s) Profanity: Turn On
Rambo writes:
on January 15th, 2013 at 7:16:19 AM

he was the wrong guy for the role...
pornfly writes:
on January 15th, 2013 at 7:27:17 AM

"haha!",said an alien
trailertrash writes:
on January 15th, 2013 at 7:36:15 AM

Shame, It was a bloody good movie ....
Wallace writes:
on January 15th, 2013 at 7:40:33 AM

Not sure of that. It will ultimately gross about 90 mil domestically and 120 mil in international sales. Compared to a 60 mil budget (100 mil combined budget including advertisement) and modest reviews, a sequel is still a possibility.
biniwoo writes:
on January 15th, 2013 at 7:42:20 AM

250 million?? C'mon! f*cking greedy studios! It's already grossed more than twice its budget.

McQueen writes:
on January 15th, 2013 at 7:43:44 AM

Unless the aliens helps him to grow up to 6'5" as initally written then anything is possible.
cress writes:
on January 15th, 2013 at 7:43:49 AM

Cruise would have been better suited for "Jack Offer".
Cannon writes:
on January 15th, 2013 at 8:43:28 AM


That's too bad, considering the fact that Jack Reacher was the best straightforward thinking-man's action film of 2012, is better than any of the Bourne films (especially Legacy) and served as the near perfect American counterpart to the James Bond films.

And, yeah, as mentioned, the thing has already doubled its budget. Hey Paramount, f*ck off.

Tanman32123 writes:
on January 15th, 2013 at 9:27:41 AM

I kinda liked this film, I'd watch a sequel
biniwoo writes:
on January 15th, 2013 at 9:34:12 AM

@cress

LOL. Or "John (Travolta) Pitcher".

trailertrash writes:
on January 15th, 2013 at 9:38:21 AM

Not one Quote from anyone at Paramount saying that there won't be a Jack Reacher sequel because of it's Box Office performance (so far)

What a bull sh*t story even for WP !!
McQueen writes:
on January 15th, 2013 at 9:44:26 AM

@Alex or whoever wrote this article

I remember you said many times that in order for a film to be profitable, it has make the double of its budget which seems to be the case by now and knowing the Blu Ray/Dvd isn't included yet it still leaves a solid margin ahead to it so I don't see why WB wants to have an extra $100 mil just to be happy for another sequel? Either the article is incomplete or WB was severly ripped off by the new alien hunter aka Tom Cruise.
Power Ranger writes:
on January 15th, 2013 at 10:18:04 AM

@ Rambo:
I agree. Its hard to take Tom Cruise serious anymore. He doesn't seem "tough". Plus the first trailer and some of the others did nothing new to sell the movie as original or even interesting.

Maybe its ok though. Guess I'll Netflix it.
vincere01 writes:
on January 15th, 2013 at 11:18:51 AM

Asian markets are gangbusters for tommy boy. I'm willing to bet a sequel makes it around in a few years. I'm not worried and I doubt cuise is either. Just a ploy by studios to get a better deal on terms for sequel
IRONDAN writes:
on January 15th, 2013 at 11:22:29 AM

if this movie has not come out in China or Japan it still has a lot of money coming its way. Isnt Cruise the biggest star in those markets? Im sure this will make another 80 mill easy
Wallace writes:
on January 15th, 2013 at 1:17:19 PM

@McQ:

In order to become profitable, a movie has to gross about double its combined budget, which, for this film is, according to boxoffice.com, about 93 mil. and includes distribution and adds as well as the production costs.

Why? Because the producers only get about 55 % of the boxoffice revenue (60 % domestic, about 50 % international).

In addition to this combined budget, some actors (usually including Tom Cruise), get back end percentages (e.g. 10 or 15 percent of the worldwide gross).

What does this mean for Jack Reacher? It has to gross north of 200 mil worldwide to be an attractive sequel option.
Ranger writes:
on January 15th, 2013 at 1:21:11 PM

But Tom will appear again in

'Jack-off Reach-around'

co-starring Travolta.
McQueen writes:
on January 15th, 2013 at 1:56:02 PM

@Wallace

Thanks to your enlightenment I get to understand more about this thread & the system of show business.

Cheers mate,
jdl107 writes:
on January 15th, 2013 at 2:40:51 PM

"Tom Cruise's "Jack Reacher" Won't Get a Sequel"

So there's the title.

But, then the articles ends with:

"While there's still a tiny chance that a miracle may happen, don't expect a "Jack Reacher" sequel."

This misleading sh*t, Alex, is being done on purpose, isn't it? Has to be. You can't be this incompetent.
minkowski writes:
on January 15th, 2013 at 2:47:55 PM

Looks like the first film came up a little short.
Wallace writes:
on January 15th, 2013 at 2:53:36 PM

@ jdl107:

exactly what I thought.
SACdaddy writes:
on January 15th, 2013 at 2:58:08 PM

Too bad, all I hear is that Jack Reacher is a very good movie. I just don't think followers of the books went to see it because Cruise was physically miscast. People that never read the book generally love the film and Cruise's performance. Oh well, what's one miss in a lifetime of hits.Oblivion will put Tom back on top in no time.
minkowski writes:
on January 15th, 2013 at 3:10:32 PM

@Wallace: double the DOMESTIC budget. That part is important I think. International is, or was a few decades ago, icing on the cake, to use a clichè.

Jack Reacher cost ~60 mil, but took in only ~73mil at home, hence no sequel.
minkowski writes:
on January 15th, 2013 at 3:12:40 PM

"Too bad, all I hear is that Jack Reacher is a very good movie. I just don't think followers of the books went to see it because Cruise was physically miscast."

Nah. People didn't go see it because they didn't want to go see it because there was better offerings.

I'm a huge Jack Reacher fan. I've read all the books, but even I didn't see it because it is, for me, a DVD watch. has nothing to do with Cruise, an actor I greatly enjoy watching. Thus I'd assume most other Reacher fans felt roughly the same. Doubt they stayed home just because Tom's ten inches too short.
Wallace writes:
on January 15th, 2013 at 4:22:10 PM

@ minkowski:

double the domestic gross used to be true. However, recent studio decisions seem to go in a different direction.

Just take X-Men First Class (budget about 160 mil, domestic gross less than 150 mil, although a very good critical response, which Reacher didnt have) as an example.

Other illustrations include MIB 3 (medium reviews, smaller domestic gross than budget, sequel already confirmed) or Expendables 3 (a working project, even though the domestic gross didnt reach the first one).

And as you know better than most, Fox is pursuing a sequel to Prometheus even though the domestic gross is less (126 mil) than its production budget (about 130 mil).

All these sequel projects seem to indicate that international numbers are getting more and more important.
minkowski writes:
on January 15th, 2013 at 4:50:21 PM

@There's no hard and fast rule these days, that's true, but the rule as it once was was double the domestic budget, which, even then, wasn't always true.

Nowadays, the rule is there is no rule. It's up to each studio and to each franchise itself to determine whether a film gets a sequel, who's in charge, what director, whether the source material is worth it, and far along into the franchise they are at that point.

Say Harry Potter x-1 was profitable, but Harry Potter x wasn't. You're so many into the franchise you can't stop now, so they would greenlight Harry Potter x+1 and see what happens. Maybe Harry Potter x's failure was a fluke, maybe not.

In the case of Prometheus, they made a decision. Aliens is a fairly solid franchise, Scott's a top-billing director and the film didn't do that poorly. Besides, it's still a fairly exploitable franchise, and FOX probably has to rely on anchor franchises to stay afloat. Thus, it's either milk another FOX franchise, or reboot the Alien series further.

Also, international grosses are increasingly important, but not enough to supplant the old domestic rule.




Long story short, sequel greenlights are now frequently determined by more than the one input (domestic gross), but the old rule still holds true more often than not, probably.

Reacher just didn't make enough money at home to send the studios the message there's enough interest worth spending more money on a second film. Same thing for The A-Team. Same thing with Narnia.
Wallace writes:
on January 15th, 2013 at 5:00:14 PM

I can live with that.
birnam writes:
on January 15th, 2013 at 5:25:17 PM

I love how they're talking about it like it's a flop when it's only been out for 4 weeks, and it will easily gross over 200m world wide and might even reach 220. Yes it's a flop, but movies like Argo and moneyball that gross less on similar budgets are successful.
struck21 writes:
on January 15th, 2013 at 6:29:44 PM

There was nothing special about this movie. As Rambo already said, he was the wrong guy for the role. It was Tom Cruise smirking in a Bourne movie.
Chris_G writes:
on January 15th, 2013 at 7:25:39 PM

Damn, the movie has just been out a few weeks. It's less than $100 million away and has some major markets left to open in, not to mention that it's still playing in plenty of markets. This is jumping the gun. Like the time when this website reported that Life of Pi "bombed" after a $22 million opening because it had a $120 million budget. The film has now made over $450 million worldwide and is a huge hit.
Herbert Butterfield writes:
on January 15th, 2013 at 7:27:31 PM

oh well. i saw it and enjoyed it... but not so much that it breaks my heart that there (most likely) won't be a sequel.

so who's the next literary anti-hero to jump into the movies? who was it a while back who suggested that repairman jack be brought to the big screen? mink? rambo?

anyway, yeah, i'd love to see a film version of "the tomb" (not to be confused with the stallone/schwarzenegger novel that's coming out in the near future). to my knowledge, the only f. paul wilson novel that has been adapted into a movie is "the keep"... NOT a repairman jack story per se, although it features rasalom, whom jack has encountered a couple of times in the jack books.

anyway, michael mann directed "the keep" before he really hit it big. it's probably to much to hope for that mann would be interested in tackling another wilson novel, especially after "the keep" bombed, but hey, i can dream.
minkowski writes:
on January 15th, 2013 at 7:56:52 PM

@Herb: I'm the one who's been plugging Repairman Jack. He was pretty awesome until he got caught up in that Otherness stuff with Glaeken.

It was fun watching pull fixes and putting the villains into various clever binds, but I read Wilson got tired coming up with them so he just led everything into Nightworld and closed shop. Kind of sucks.

Anyway, Wilson has been working on getting The Tomb adapted to film, and he's had several false starts but nothing ever come of it, and his books really started slouching in sales towards the end, so you know the old adage, strike while the iron's hot and Wilson's iron hasn't been hot for a while.

And Wilson lividly hated what Mann did with The Keep, so he's been very slow to let anyone adapt anything of his. Best thing I think for him, then, would be to see if he can get a short piece adapted to film, like An Interlude At Diane Reade's, a RJ short story I read in Thriller, kind of like that Punisher short film we saw.
Herbert Butterfield writes:
on January 15th, 2013 at 8:17:08 PM

"Best thing I think for him, then, would be to see if he can get a short piece adapted to film, like An Interlude At Diane Reade's, a RJ short story I read in Thriller, kind of like that Punisher short film we saw."

i don't know, man, the last time that one of his short stories was adapted to film, "pelts" happened... with f*cking MEAT LOAF starring in it. and it was garbage... but then again, argento directed it, who specializes in gory euro-trash.

thanks for the info, though, i didn't know that wilson had worked AT ALL at trying to get "the tomb" adapted into a movie.

minkowski writes:
on January 15th, 2013 at 8:34:34 PM

@herb: Oh god, I forgot all about Pelts. That was like one of those Horror series movies that went to DVD. Can't recall the title. There's like twelve of them per series or something. God, no wonder Wilson is gun shy!

Thanks herb. Forgot all about that sh*t.

And maybe he should try an independent route. I've been thinking if I ever get a camera, a god one, I might take what I know about film-making and use Youtube to see if I can get some industry attention. Wilson could hire someone to do the same, but at his age, he might not care anymore.
GERARD KENNELLY 27 writes:
on January 17th, 2013 at 9:20:25 AM



cruise was too smug and clean for the role
the movie needed somebody like..
liam neeson or russell crowe
actors that makes you think
wow what a hard as nails bastard

cruise is too smooth and well groomed to play a character like Jack Reacher

how many drifters look like tom cruise ? ?

not many i guess
GERARD KENNELLY 27 writes:
on January 17th, 2013 at 9:27:48 AM

reasons i loved the movie...

werner herzog
jai courtney
the car chase
robert duvall
disturbing opening scene
the music when james barr was arrested

reasons i hated it...

cruise lacks that neeson/crowe presence
anti climactic ending
richard jenkins was wasted on screen
the violence was watered down
rosamund pike was wasted on screen
when james barr at the end
he makes cruise sound like a freedom fighter for f*ck sake :(
GERARD KENNELLY 27 writes:
on January 17th, 2013 at 9:30:04 AM




when james barr talks at the end
he makes cruise sound like a freedom fighter for f*ck sake :(


There's a Good Reason Why Luke Skywalker Isn't on "Star Wars: The Force Awakens" Poster

"The Walking Dead" Fan Kills Friend Who Turned Into a Zombie

"Indiana Jones" Producer Says Harrison Ford Will Not Be Recast

Ridley Scott Reveals Another Title for "Prometheus" Sequel

Johnny Depp and Edgar Wright Team for "Fortunately, the Milk"

"Spectre" Breaks Box Office Records Overseas

"Star Wars: The Force Awakens" Demolishes Pre-Sale Records

Paul Bettany Responds to Jason Statham's "Avengers" Insult

Daniel Craig Would Rather Commit Suicide Than Return as James Bond

Marvel Has Contingency Plans In Case It Regains Rights to Superheroes
Lace Wedding Dresses from ViViDress UK online shop, buy with confidence and cheap price.
WorstPreviews.com hosted by pair Networks WorstPreviews.com
Hosted by pair Networks
News Feeds | Box Office | Movie Reviews | Buzz: Top 100 | Popularity: Top 100
Poster Store | About Us | Advertising | Contact Us | Privacy Policy | Web Tools | Site Map
Copyright © 2009 WorstPreviews.com. All rights reserved