At 62, Tom Cruise remains one of Hollywood’s most relentless forces in the action genre. Known for his gravity-defying stunts and high-octane performances, Cruise seems to defy age and physics alike, continuing to headline blockbuster franchises like Mission: Impossible with the same energy he did decades ago. Whether he’s hanging from airplanes or sprinting across rooftops, Cruise has crafted an image that celebrates physicality, risk, and adrenaline.
However, not everyone on the internet is applauding the ongoing comparisons between Cruise and other aging actors—especially ones from a dramatically different cinematic lineage, such as the revered Sir Ian McKellen.
While fans of Cruise praise his commitment to doing his own stunts and maintaining a ripped physique well into his 60s, others argue that equating his action-based career with the artistic contributions of someone like Sir Ian McKellen is an apples-to-oranges situation. The conversation, which recently gained traction on social media platforms, centers around the notion that endurance and physical prowess should not be the only yardsticks for evaluating an actor’s contribution to cinema.
Sir Ian McKellen, now in his 80s, has spent decades crafting performances that resonate on an emotional and intellectual level. From Shakespearean theatre to modern fantasy epics like The Lord of the Rings and X-Men, McKellen’s legacy is defined by nuance, gravitas, and dramatic range rather than spectacle. Fans of the veteran British actor argue that his influence on acting as a craft is irreplaceable and should not be overshadowed by physical feats.
Some users took to platforms like X (formerly Twitter) and Reddit to voice their opinions. One comment read, “Tom Cruise jumping off cliffs at 62 is impressive. But Sir Ian McKellen commanding a stage with just a monologue is a different kind of greatness. Both are amazing—just not comparable.” Another post stated, “We really need to stop measuring acting careers with a stopwatch or a stunt reel. There’s more to film than running and fighting.”
Supporters of Cruise are quick to point out that his discipline and willingness to risk injury for the sake of entertainment is a rare quality in modern cinema. They argue that his dedication sets a high bar for actors, especially in a franchise-heavy industry where CGI and body doubles are the norm.
Critics, however, contend that such comparisons undermine the diverse nature of acting itself. “It’s not about who can still run at 62,” one film critic noted. “It’s about how actors evolve, how their roles mature, and how they contribute to storytelling as a whole.”
In the end, the debate is less about Cruise versus McKellen, and more about how audiences value different aspects of cinematic performance. While Cruise continues to captivate audiences with his daredevil energy, McKellen’s body of work offers a masterclass in emotional depth and character immersion.
Both men, in their own right, have pushed the boundaries of what aging actors can achieve—but in distinctly different lanes. The internet may be divided, but if there’s one thing everyone can agree on, it’s that greatness in film comes in many forms—and age is no barrier to either.
