Top Stories

Tom Cruise, Emily Blunt, & Charlize Theron Pose Together Like One Happy Family!

Tom Cruise, Emily Blunt, & Charlize Theron Pose Together Like One Happy Family!

Tom Cruise suits up while sitting next to his Edge of Tomorrow co-star Emily Blunt during an appearance on The Graham Norton Show on Friday (May 30) in London, England.

The 51-year-old actor and the 31-year-old English actress was joined on the couch by Charlize Theron and her A Million Ways to Die in the West co-star Seth McFarlane.

PHOTOS: Check out the latest pics of Tom Cruise

During the show, the four actors were spotted having some fun while doing different impressions with their voices. Watch the video below!


Tom Cruise & Emily Blunt – ‘Graham Norton Show’

FYI: Emily is wearing Dana Rebecca Designs bangles and Melissa Kaye Jewelry earrings.

Just Jared on Facebook
tom cruise emily blunt charlize theron pose like family 01
tom cruise emily blunt charlize theron pose like family 02
tom cruise emily blunt charlize theron pose like family 03
tom cruise emily blunt charlize theron pose like family 04

Photos: Dominic Lipinski/PA Wire
Posted to: Charlize Theron, Emily Blunt, Seth McFarlane, Tom Cruise

JJ Links Around The Web

Instagram
  • Swimmer Ryan Lochte reveals one of his worst dates - US Weekly
  • Get the latest on Dr. Dre's arrest - TMZ
  • Despite rumors, Eddie Murphy's daughter is not pregnant - Gossip Cop
  • The Vampire Diaries star Michael Trevino steps out for a good cause - Just Jared Jr
  • Are Blac Chyna and Kylie Jenner on good terms? - Radar
  • Blue Ivy is just as stylish as her mom Beyonce! - Lainey Gossip
  • This Narcos star confirms he's not coming back for another season of the show - The Hollywood Reporter
  • Pikes

    He spends a lot of time with his children, unlike Kim Kardashian.

  • Angelette

    Saw the whole show. It was an awesome all star cast and Chris Martin/cold play were on at the end and sat on the couch for a few minutes.
    Seth was funny as Kermit he read the speech from Taken in Kermit voice.
    Tom was good as usual. He and Emily seem to have got pretty close during filming.
    Seth just starting following Tom now on twitter since they filmed this.
    Maybe they had a good talk after or something. Interesting since Seth had made fun of him on family guy in the past but here they were both professional.

  • Alaia

    Why cut off Graham’s head and Seth altogether?

  • ForMe

    @Angelette: Everyone has made fun of Tom Cruise.

  • Ugonna Wosu

    Love these four

  • annie

    So glad that that crap Macfarlane/ Theron movie bombed at the B.O. and is getting awful reviews.

  • Keira

    Tom and Emily were great.
    EoT still holding strong with critic reviews (95% fresh).
    Looking forward to June 6th (IMAX)!

  • #6

    @annie: Why are you so glad? It’s actually getting mixed reviews. Some critics really like and some really don’t like it. Also we won’t actually know that it bombed at the box office until Monday. Everyone knew it would have a tough time going up against Maleficent

  • Free at last!

    Why is it? Tom and Connor look so much alike these days.

  • Janet93

    You misspelled Seth McFarlane.
    *MacFarlane

  • Ugonna Wosu

    @annie: it didn’t bomb at all, its still expected to make about $16 million by Monday, and it took only $40 million to make.

  • Ugonna Wosu

    @#6: exactly. Anyone who didn’t expect Maleficent to dominate is a moron.

  • Harvey Levinberg

    I bet Cruise is working behind the scenes to sign up Emily Blunt to Scientology. She seems to have the perfect personality to be brain washed. Didn’t she date that dreadful Karaoke singer at one time?

  • Keira

    @Harvey Levinberg:

    Not to worry, Cameron Diaz has done multiple films with Tom and considers him a friend and yet still hasn’t converted to Scientology.

    Also, Emily is married now and recently had a daughter, so bringing up person she may have dated seems irrelevant now.

    Keep on trolling.

  • Kimpossible Dream

    How true is it that Tom Cruise is gay?

  • Mikki

    Ask Cher she said he was one of the best lovers she ever had and we all know she had many to chose from.
    Seriously, there is no evidence of anything like that. Just internet gossip.
    Rumors of marrying beards without any proof is all silly.
    What does that say about Katie or Nicole to spend so many years that way? They would not do that.
    Katie got pregnant within 3 months of meeting him.
    If it was fake is one to believe within 3 months he convinced her to have a baby with someone the sperm of another man.
    People will believe rumors with no evidence just because they like to gossip and believe the worst about people.

  • Mikki

    Not to mention if you believe everything you read online than every successful male actor is gay, married or not, they pretty much all get accused of being gay and married to beards.

  • rumor only

    @Kimpossible Dream:

    according to his former auditor, marty rathbun and tony ortega, the rumor is not true.

  • Helen

    @annie:
    Jolie’s film got soo much promotion so it was not surprising that AMW didn’t get the results they hoped. But i really liked AMW and it was so funny.

  • Helen

    Both Emilia and Charlize look great.

  • Maru

    Yep, both Theron and Blung look really lovely.
    Glad to see that Theron’s hair have grown so much longer. Longer hair suit her better imo.
    Blunt reminds me of Emilia Clarke in these photos.

  • Ugonna Wosu

    not to mention if he couldn’t drag his WIVES into the religion, I’d don’t see why he’d succeed with a mere CO-STAR.

  • http://comcast Joni

    Tom, such a phony with fake smile. There is nothing real about him.

  • AMERICA NO SHOWBIZ

    More faggy psycho little bwitith with the faggy psycho bwitith voices. Does this site get any culture news.

  • DECLARATION

    Americans don’t go across the ocean, so what are these little faggo britshit terrorists talking about. It better not be America!!!!!!!

  • Daily Show

    Cruise fans: Tom is on the Daily Show Thursday night.

  • EoT – Overseas Debut

    Playing in just 28 markets and with China, Russia, Mexico, France and Australia all to come next weekend, Edge Of Tomorrow posted $20M in its debut frame. It had No. 1s in parts of Asia including Indonesia with $2M on 286 screens for Cruise’s biggest opening of all time, and Taiwan with $1.9M on 152 screens. The movie that’s looking to be the sci-fi/action pic that offers another option during the World Cup, is expected to build. It’s gotten strong reviews and has good word of mouth. That’s especially notable in some key European territories. In the UK, its Saturday result jumped 33% over Friday. Warner estimates the film will end the frame there with $3.1M on 787 screens. Germany also grew from Friday to Saturday for an estimated weekend of $2.1M at 651 plays, and in Spain, the Saturday haul was up 69% over the day before.

    http://www.deadline.com/2014/06/international-box-office-maleficent-awakens-100m-overseas-bow-x-men-adds-95-6m-edge-of-tomorrow-cruises-to-20m-in-select-markets-a-million-ways-to-die-in-the-west-holsters-10/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

  • Daisy

    @27
    Did you see the hollywood reporter article?
    They hate Cruise so are giving another slant trying to paint it as bad so US market won’t see it.
    I think this movie will do awesome

  • EoT – Value of a Movie Star

    @Daisy:

    Domestic sales (for any movie) is not the same as it use to be.

    Yes, for franchises they still pull production cost, but to get those big numbers, 1/2 million or more, you need stars with international recognition and/or production companies with big budgets.

    Just a cursory look at boxofficemojo and any successful film or animation made most of its money from the overseas market.

    Therefore, Tom Cruise, without significant domestic support (which is unfortunate) will continue to do well and receive funding by big name production companies (e.g., Warner Bros., Paramount, Lionsgate, etc)

    Internationally, especially Asia, Tom Cruise is a respected actor and major movie star.

  • EoT – Value of a Movie Star

    @EoT – Value of a Movie Star:

    correction: 1/2 billion or more

  • Daisy

    I think Angie’s movie opened two days earlier so its not apples to apples yet.
    We have to see how the dust settles to really see.

  • EoT – Maleficent

    @Daisy:

    Yeah, but thanks to a great opening week Maleficent has almost made cost (est $165-185) with worldwide gross of $170,600 million.

    Even if Maleficent slows overseas, because its Disney and for kids, the Domestic sales will pick up where overseas stalls, especially with the World Cup starting mid-June.

    EoT isn’t tracking great domestically (Cruise does better overseas), so most likely EoT numbers will be the same as Oblivion, which also barely made cost (from international markets).

    Again unfortunate, since the move looks really good – story, action, comedy.

  • Daisy

    Maybe
    let’s see
    All talk on twitter and tumblr from fans that saw it say it’s awesome. Of course we know it’s still at 95@RT so it’s possible we might get a good surprise.

  • Marco

    @annie:

    I don’t think that Seth sinks with his AMW. The results of this film were really good and considering how much media attention Maleficent and Jolie got, then it was not suprising that Maleficent was the first. And to be honest I though that the Maleficent gets more money than that. So imo the Maleficent sinks…

  • To EoT

    How much to they pay you to troll this site defending Cruise? Or perhaps you’re one of those ridiculously rabid Cruise fanatics who think he’s the second coming. Either way, the fact of the matter is that the film will live or die on its merits – NOT because you spend your life defending him.

    Another fact is that so far, in limited release across the pond, the film is UNDERPERFORMING. Why do you think that is?? The reviews are very, very good so why isn’t it doing well? Simple. Alot of people don’t care for Cruise anymore. His last several films have underperformed here in the US because MANY people are aware of the terrible crap he supports and funds with scientology and they make their displeasure known by NOT going to the movie. Cruise’s movies tend to do well in NON ENGLISH SPEAKING COUNTRIES where less is known about the crimes of scientology. They underperform in the US, the UK and Australia….and now that seems to be spreading to other parts of Europe as sceintology continues to make the news.

    Lets face it…Cruise supports and funds an organization that is dangerous and damaging. That’s not bigotry. I don’t give a flying crap what they believe. I care about the laws they break and the lives they ruin. And please dont give me that crap that other religions have done the same. The facts of the matter is that by its doctrine scientology supports criminal behavior. That’s not cool. I don’t care who you are….if an organization breaks the law, even if they call themselves a religion, ITS NOT OK. Scientology breaks the law. Its morally disgusting as well and Cruise gives them millions so they can keep hiring lawyers. Its sick.

  • Not EOT

    I am not EoT but I see you have a lot of assumption in your post.
    Even the critics (the real ones that write for Newspapers and such not internet blog comment sections) even say that it is not accurate to assume that just because a movie does not do well that it is due to his religion. They make a point of saying it’s not fair or accurate to say that each time he is up to bat some suggest it’s a test to see if that is the case.
    You also contradict yourself. You admonish EOT to say that he/she isn’t going to make a difference in posting because the movie will live or die on it’s own merit. Then you go on to say it won’t make it just because people don’t want to see Cruise despite that it’s a great movie with great reviews.
    I actually agree with your first point that it will make it on it’s own just like the rest of his movies and many of those after 2005. I think it might have been EOT who pointed out last week on this blog that Cruise has 21 movies all having made over 200million and I am not sure if there is another actor who has done that and remained making great movies for over 30 years.(I read it a few places and I think it was here first)
    Reacher and Oblivion didn’t bomb by any means even if they did make more overseas. MI4 was a huge hit all over. Check the stats of most of your favorite actors/actresses and I am sure Cruise comes in pretty high on any list in terms of successes both foreign and domestic- even currently not just pre- 2005.
    As far as the real numbers it is far to early to call it and it was a limited release and up against the Disney movie in some places.
    We won’t know how it is really going to do worldwide for a week at least.
    Here is an article talking about how it’s common now for movies to have to depend on overseas to boosts the numbers. Notice some big names in there even Brad Pitt and this is just some from 2013 but it is very common.Pacific Rim would not have been the biggest grossing film if not for foreign viewers.
    http://www.businessinsider.com/movies-with-most-overseas-revenue-share-2014-2?op=1

  • EoT – Box Office Gross

    @To EoT:

    Tom Cruise religion isn’t the issue with the Domestic gross for his films.

    Rock of Ages, for as bad as some say it was, still made a 1/2 of production cost (domestic) and less that 1/4 of prod cost in the international market.

    Yes it didn’t make cost or profit, but for someone with so much baggage (Scientology) and negative reviews for the film to even get close is surprising.

    Then you come to Jack Reacher, it made $80 million Domestic for a production cost of $60, that’s a Domestic audience that were rabidly anti-Cruise for Jack Reacher because he didn’t fit the description of him in the books. Yet, it still made $80 million domestically.

    Take a look at some of Johnny Depps, Brad Pitt , George Clooney, and even Matt Damon (Elysium) that didn’t make production cost on a few of their films with just Domestic revenues.

    And there is Oblivion, which many are comparing it to for the Sci-Fi aspect and cost (big budge), but even though it made only 3/4 (appr) the cost in Domestic revenues ($89 million), again with the negative baggage that everyone claims hinders his success at the box office, it doesn’t look so bad.

    The Domestic numbers for Cruise films are only highlighted when its against a big budget film (MI, Oblivion) but for smaller (less the $100 million) he still does well Domestically.

    Which would lead, in my opinion, to surmise that the majority of films that can have a big budget (again $100 million or more) and be successful (gross sales) are the Disney, Graphic novel/comic or YA sequel type film.

  • To EoT

    You’re argument that scientology doesn’t affect the BO is absurd. Of course it does!! Look at the adjusted gross of Tom’s films before he lost his mind in 2005, fired his publicist and decided to be an evangelist for a cult. His films did much, much better. Everything broke 100 mil. With the exception of MI4, which had a built in audience, most of his films (since 2005) have underperformed. That’s a fact. You can quote figures all you wish, but the fact is all those films would have done far better had Cruise kept his mouth shut and not made a fool of himself over scientology.

    The production budget for EOT is 178 million according to several sources including Variety and other respected publications. Thats without the marketing budget. Theater owners take somewhere around 50% of the ticket sales (its actually less in the US and more outside the US so we’ll settle at 50%). That means EOT needs to make somewhere around 400 million just to break even. Hate to break it to ya sweetness, but studios are not in business to break even. Personally, I dont think EOT is going to get 400 mil in the box office. Thats my opinion. He’s NOT the money maker he used to be and its my opinion that his devotion to a dangerous cult is one of the major reasons.

    By the way, I don’t care what other actors films did or didnt do. We’re talking about Tom Cruise, the guy who’s films USED TO make over 100 million in the US, even if the film was not so great. Now, even if the film is reviewed really well, they no longer make it to 100 million regularly.

    Face it sweetie, Cruise is damaged by his involvement with scientology whether you like it or not…..more so in the US and other English speaking countries. Scientology is under investigation everywhere and being sued left and right. Even the FBI and IRS are looking at them. He chose to align himself with a group of criminals and nuts, and he’s paying the price. Saying he isn’t is absurd.

  • Not EOT

    Your comment is what is absurd.
    Of course you don’t want to hear about other actors because you don’t want a level playing field.
    If the name of the game has changed it changed for everyone. Things are not the same for any actor.
    The article I posted speaks of this very thing but you want it to be just about him.
    Cruise stats are just as good if not better than any other actor out there.

  • Not EOT

    @EoT – Box Office Gross:
    My advise? Don’t reply to this person again. I can see by the replies they won’t look at facts and only want to argue.
    I will let them have the last word because you can see they are the type to argue for the sake of it.
    The facts of Cruise career speak for themselves. In the industry his career even current is consider amazing.
    This thread is old and very few would come upon it anyway so they can humor their self all day long as far as I am concerned.
    I expect them to reply with we are bowing out but for the record I have no desire to fight with someone who won’t look at facts.
    If anyone should come to the thread they will see the article that clearly stats the changing game.
    Good Night. Party On Haters. Have fun.

  • EoT – short and sweet

    @To EoT:

    I didn’t say that Cruise being a Scientologist doesn’t affect (at all) his films revenue I said it wasn’t the issue. (ie., problem, just a factor)

    If him being a Scientologist means he can’t make big budget films (more than $100 mil cost) and make a profit from domestic sales only – Oh well. He can still make films that gross $80-90 million Domestically, which is not small change and still relevant.

    International sales are becoming more and more significant and the end goal is to have a film/movie that sales (production company point of view). So, if the revenue is made mostly from international markets, I’m sure they will take it and continue banking his films.

    A drop from $100 million to $80-90 million? That’s all that being a Scientologist did to him in the last 9 yrs?

    Cruise is in his 50′s, making slightly less than $100 million domestically (only) was inevitable, but to have 1/10th drop and make it a significant factor and account it to Scientology, only? Fine, do that.

    But, I say that’s absurd.

  • EoT – too late

    @Not EOT:

    Thanks for the advice, but I replied too fast.

    It would be interesting though, as you pointed out, what other actors films consistently made $100 million domestically? if not, and their not a Scientologist, why?

    If it doesn’t matter, and its only because Cruise films used and don’t now, was it ever written in stone that forever (from 2005) until his death his films had to make $100 million domestically? and $80-90 million is such a fall, then why are production companies still giving him large budgets (Oblivion, EoT, next MI)? They like eating 50% cinema cost and no profit, or significant profit?

    That logic is what is absurd.

  • Emma

    It was one of the worst ever Graham Norton shows. Theron laughing just a little too hard, Seth m nursing a huge whiskey and not drinking it while Emily me me me with her faux yank accent – god awful

A Member of Townsquare Entertainment News | Advertise here