August 25, 2006
He Stole My Headline
Dan Henninger has a superb column today on l'affaire Cruise:
Depending on where you're standing, August has not been a good month.If you're Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, it has not been a good month. If you were feeling worn down by a world overstocked with Islamic bombers, the news out of unmerry olde England did not make for a good month. And if you are a Boston Red Sox fan and have just witnessed a statistically improbable five-game sweep at home by your mortal enemy, it has assuredly not been a good month.
Then, of a sudden, the clouds parted and delivered unto us, courtesy of a scoop on this paper's front page, Paramount's Sumner Redstone firing Tom Cruise. It doesn't get any better than this, and this deserves some elaboration.
Now if we could just get rid of the Dixie Chicks...
Posted by jk at August 25, 2006 5:46 PM
Glad to see Paramount come to their senses and get rid of that anti-Catholic, cult-mongering loser.
I like how the spin is now "You're fired!....You can't fire me, I quit!"
BTW - Sox,..I feel their pain! :(
Posted by: TrekMedic251 at August 25, 2006 10:52 PMDespite all of Cruise's failings he has a valid point regarding anti-psychotic drugs: A huge proportion of people that have psychological problems have them because of unrealistic and inconsistent beliefs. No amount of pharmaceuticals will correct this. They only sedate the confused mind.
I'm not saying that Cruise's beliefs are any more realistic or consistent, however.
Posted by: johngalt at August 26, 2006 11:39 AM..and yet nobody rushes to defend the Dixie Chicks.
Your point is taken, jg. And on a scale of Hollywood moon-battery, I find his refusal to respect Oprah's couch pretty benign.
We argued on these pages that the real infraction was Cruise’s threatening the Comedy Channel to not air the South Park Scientology episode and Isaac Hayes's subsequent resignation.
For this, I will cheer his separation from Paramount. The principle of free speech. Oh, and that "War of the Worlds" movie sucked pretty bad as well.
Posted by: jk at August 26, 2006 4:40 PMAnecdotally, I heard on talk radio yesterday that Paramount grossed $6Bn from their partnership with Cruise's production company. If true, this must certainly be a money losing decision by Paramount. Could it be that principle has trumped the pocketbook?
Posted by: johngalt at August 27, 2006 12:07 PMI'd hope that you and would both hope not.
Nobody can questions Cruise's past value, but Redstone must make decisions based on future, and is betting that Cruise has cheesed off too many fans to exceed his salary demands for future projects.
Posted by: jk at August 27, 2006 7:41 PMDespite all of Cruise's failings he has a valid point regarding anti-psychotic drugs: A huge proportion of people that have psychological problems have them because of unrealistic and inconsistent beliefs. No amount of pharmaceuticals will correct this. They only sedate the confused mind.
I'm sorry, but I have to disagree, especially in light of Cruise's alternatives: vitamins and exercise!
I've been in the medical field for 25 years and I've seen consistent improvement in the way mental health issues have been handled.
People who take SSRIs like Zoloft and Lexapro are not sedated "zombies!"
Posted by: TrekMedic251 at August 27, 2006 10:09 PMFrom my original comment, "I'm not saying that Cruise's beliefs are any more realistic or consistent, however." That applies to his medical advice too.
My hatred of anti-depressants is a result of the case of my grandfather. The local small-town, hot shot young M.D. prescribed Xanax for garden variety feelings of despair that can afflict a man of 80 some years. His energy and ambition were reduced from already low levels, and he passed within a year or so. (This is mostly the recollection of a twenty something with no direct knowledge of what had been going on.) At the family gathering after his funeral, that same hot shot M.D. appeared on the scene and said to my grandmother, "I'm here if you need anything." Remember this is an M.D., not a pastor. You KNOW what he meant by "anything."
The one consolation we have is that this pill pushing threat to public safety died himself within a couple years. Word is he was using too.
So when it comes to Tom Cruise criticizing Brooke Shields for taking anti-depressants, I'm going to agree with Cruise. Earth to Brooke: Get a life.
Posted by: johngalt at August 29, 2006 6:26 PMEarth to everyone, get a consistent, rational philosophy. A happy life will naturally follow.
Posted by: dagny at August 29, 2006 7:33 PMjk to Dagny: do you believe that their is zero physical clinical depression, which can be alleviated with pharmaceuticals?
I’d wager they're 100 times over-prescribed (doctors keep offering them to my wife and me) but I still believe there are many cases where it is more appropriate than a copy of "Dianetics."
Posted by: jk at August 30, 2006 10:36 AMTo answer your question, No I do not believe appropriate use of anti-depressive drugs is zero.
However, you state that Dr’s keep offering them to you. Sort of like the heroin dealer on the corner and for many of the same reasons. I believe the current over-prescription craze is more part of the problem than the solution. Also, I am not completely without experience in the area. I was on such drugs and even hospitalized once (ever been in a mental hospital? those people are crazy) in my suicidal teenage years.
I am a big fan of modern medicine and pharmaceuticals. I have been through 2 knee surgeries and childbirth with the help of epidural anesthetics.
However, I believe that far too many people these days are looking for someone else to solve their problems be it with a medication or a government program and those that prescribe the medications are contributing to the problem. Don’t get me started on medications for kids with, “ADHD.”
I am also not promoting Cruise’s ideas. His religion is as irrational as the rest.
Posted by: dagny at August 30, 2006 3:26 PMMethinks we agree on this one.
Posted by: jk at August 30, 2006 4:12 PM | What do you think? [11]