Click here for the review of Risky Business (1983)

Part of the "1980s" series.

This really brings back the memories. Today, it may seem hard to believe, but I remember how fresh and unique this movie was back in 1983. Everyone thought it would be a typical teen comedy, but it was full of surprises that most of us didn't see coming when the movie first came out.

There were a couple of interesting supporting performances in addition to the ones JB mentioned. The actors who played the parents were perfect in setting the tension of the plot. And Richard Masur as the Princeton recruiter did a lot with his limited screen time.

Despite his huge multi-million dollar grosses, I'm not sure that Tom Cruise ever played any role better than this (perhaps his performance playing against type in Collateral is the exception).

Probably because I wasn't around when Risky Business was released, I'll never understand why people love it so much. That being said, it's nice to see James not give the movie a ridiculously positive review. He hit the nail on the head, I think.

Maybe you all can help - since this review brings up the issue. How is Tom Cruise a movie star? His acting - though I know that's not a prerequisite for star status - is one dimensional. (Shout when happy, mad, sad, confused, excited...) He is not that good looking (or is he?). He's short. He's weird. He's media inept. This movie is a great example that it's always been the case that he is unable to show a realistic emotion.

I'm left with deal with the devil type thoughts here.

A lot of it is media-driven, and Cruise was definitely a heartthrob for teenage girls in the '80s. TOP GUN put him over the top - it made huge money and lifted him from the level of star to superstar. But the real reason is that almost all of his early movies made money - some of them substantial amounts of it.

I would also claim he's more of a lazy actor than a bad one. He seems perfectly capable of turning in suprisingly layered performances (MAGNOLIA comes to mind) but does not do it on a consistent basis.

Tom has worked with an incredible list of famous directors that would make any actor jealous.

I mean look at these names:

Stanley Kubrick
Martin Scrosese
Ridley Scott
Francis Ford Coppola
Brian De Palma
Oliver Stone
Steven Spielberg
Paul Thomas Anderson
Bryan Singer
Ron Howard
Sydney Pollack
Cameron Crowe
Barry Levinson
Edward Zwyck
Michael Mann
Robert Redford
Rob Reiner
Tony Scott
John Woo
J.J. Abrams

1. One of THE MOST OVERLOOKED FEATURES OF THIS MOVIE was the soundtrack. And I am NOT talking about "old time rock'n roll".... I am speaking about TANGERINE DREAM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! They single handedly created the electronic music scene before most anyone even thought of sophisticated 'computer-things' making a movie score. The entire exotic & erotic sex scenes on the train for instance were all by this brilliant group. Think about it. Without such a revolution in music, Tom Cruise would have been backed up by the usual teen sex 80's pop songs of the day seriously dating the movie.

2. I consider Risky Business as Part 2/3 of the generational reoccurance of this STYLE of movie. Think about the similarities James!
1960 = The Graduate
1980 = Risky Business
2000 = American Beauty
Watch the slow close ups, the 'coming of age' plot, and the 'haunting' surreal music sequences in EACH regarding the male lead.

I haven't seen MAGNOLIA in eight or nine years, but I've never forgotten the scene where Tom Cruise is crying at the bedside of his father (Jason Robards). When I saw it theatrically, there were a number of audible guffaws in the audience as Cruise breaks down. The bulk of his performance is compelling, but this one particular moment seems forced and rings hollow.

Cruise also cries unconvincingly in EYES WIDE SHUT. I think the only other time I've seen him cry in character is in BORN ON THE FOURTH OF JULY (after he hires the prostitute). It's been well over ten years since I've seen it, but I remember how the depth of his sadness is powerfully revealed.

I haven't watched this movie but i might after reading the reviews here. It's quite interesting.

Regards,
Regina

When di dhe work with BrYan Singer?

Valkyrie

I'll start by admitting that the problem may be me and not Cruise -given his success as a movie star vs mine as a, uh, being?-, but I think the man may just be the worst actor who ever appeared on screen, and I'm including porn in the "on screen" consideration.

Risky Business works beautifully at illustrating my stance.
I saw it in the late eighties, and it was my first Tom Cruise movie. In time, I' ve come to read many reviews prizing this as one of Cruise's best performances, even from people who criticize his every other role, but all I remember thinking when I first saw his face on screen was "Douchebag". It was an instant, knee-jerk reaction: "Douchebag" - instantly rendering any other consideration null. All I could see was a guy with a mammoth ego and an even bigger short guy syndrome, jumping in one place and shouting "Look at me, look at MEEEEEE!".

Everything else about the movie was interesting, or at least intriguing: the cinematography (way too artsy for an 80's teen flick), the tone (almost creepy at times), that blonde (oh, Rebecca), and what the hell is that music!? If Risky Business had no other merits -which it does- I'd be grateful to it for giving me Tangerine Dream.

Over the years since then, I have seen many other films with Cruise in them, and the only time I remember not getting heartburn from his mere sight was his admittedly brilliant against-type cameo in Tropical Thunder.

People with monumental egos thrive in the media, be it the movies, TV, or music.
People with attention-seeking disorders always find an audience, as the current success of reality TV clearly shows: sinking quality = escalating audience levels; and I think Cruise may be the single most telltale case of this phenomenon.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not making him responsible for The Invention Of Douchebaggery. Many other movie stars, current and past, have based their entire careers on the "Ain't I cute" premise.
Jack Nicholson comes to mind as probably the most successful advocate of this technique; he's never played any character other than Jack Nicholson Playing That Guy -okay, maybe in Schmidt-, but we all love to see Jack up there doing his thing, so what the hell, we buy the ticket.
Michael Caine is an insanely likable alum of the Playing Michael Caine School of Acting - same case here; we love the guy.
Mel Gibson almost pulled it off, all the way up to that scene in Braveheart when Angus Macfadyen betrays him and he Opens His Angelic Blue Eyes In Bewildered Agony, and loses me as an audience forevermore.
Richard Gere used to be a case of near-Cruise-ism until something happened around Shall We Dance and he started to actually act. Not that there's anything wrong with that.

My point is, there's nothing wrong with basing your entire performing career on your own, probably Grandma-fed, supposition that you must be the greatest thing ever.
Half the stars we love and follow wouldn't even exist if it wasn't for that. George Carlin even put it in those very words: Look at me, ain't I cute?. That's what kept him returning to the stage. There are many people in the movies who aren't especially talented, or who are talented at one thing only, but whom we love to see because they're charming, or funny, or just drop-dead gorgeous.
"Is Kat Dennings a talented actress?"
"Oh yeah, she was great in, in, that movie where she... wait, that one with the... who friggin' cares dude, have you seen her???!!!"

It only puzzles me that a man who elicits such visceral and well-documented (just google his name) hatred in such large numbers of people only by showing his face as Cruise does, has had the opportunity to even make a career at all.

So, there you have it.
Jus' my opinion.
No hard feelings, Tom.
COUGH!DoucheCOUGH!