To the editor: Movie critic Amy Nicholson proclaims, referring to Tom Cruise: “He’s the very best actor of his technology nonetheless hiding in plain sight” (“Tom Cruise is the best movie star of his generation — so why can’t he win an Oscar?,” Oct. 6). I’m wondering if she’s being hyperbolic, or if she’s unfamiliar with nice appearing and nice expertise.
Cruise is a film star, and film stars are normally not synonymous with nice appearing. Does she really suppose that Cruise is a greater actor than Gary Oldman or Daniel Day-Lewis, two actors of his technology? They epitomize greatness in appearing expertise, whereas Cruise is extra consultant of notability as a film star than of greatness in appearing.
Cruise’s celeb however, there’s a particular distinction between greatness and notability.
Giuseppe Mirelli, Los Angeles
