The top (and worst) actors per dollar in 2009

In Hollywood it is often said that

you are only as good as your last film.

While still somewhat true, there are those that are worth the money they make on each film and then there are those that are not. Generally, the quality of the actor often matches the box office bucks they generate.

But every year the best and worst actors per dollar they bring to the box office is figured out. Still Hollywood doesn't always pay attention.

So here are the very worst actors that money can buy

Will Ferrell - he was great in Elf. Then he kept doing the same character in every subsequent film - most recently in the bomb Land of the Lost revisioning. At this point his films are just really long, and bad, Saturday Night live skits. Of course he keeps getting paid too well not to be stuck in the mud. He generated $3.29 for every dollar he made.

Ewan McGregor - was a decent Obi Wan. Too bad he hasn't used the force to read any of the scripts of the films he has done since. He brought in $3.75 per dollar to him.

Billy Bob Thornton - been a while since that name was attached to something anyone saw. It's also been a while since his movies brought in a profit. I guess the mojo of Angelina Jolie's blood has worn off. $4 per dollar he made.

Eddie Murphy - was a superstar when he was young. Now, if you are under 15 you probably still think he is great. But his box office numbers look like somebody's allowance. His $4.43 per dollar he earned almost pays for a DVD of Meet Dave.

Ice Cube - not really an actor, but getting there. He's still earning his chops but it seems that his rap fans won't stick around in theaters to watch the lessons. I can't say I blame them. He made $4.77 in the box office for what he got paid.

Tom Cruise - yep, believe it or not he is overpaid. Thank goodness he has his own studio. Of course if he keeps making films like Lions for Lambs he will earn a permanent place on the overpaid list. But MI:4 might help him out. $7.18 per dolloar he got overpaid.

Drew Barrymore - there had to be at least one girl on the list. Yes she is pretty, and seems like a nice person. But none of that seems to matter when she is in a film like Lucky You. Too bad producing a film is not counted otherwise she might have brought in more than $7.43

Leonardo DiCaprio - overpaid and overhyped. You don't have to agree but more do than don't. The proof is in the $7.52 he brought to the box office versus what he got.

Samuel L. Jackson - it hurts me to have him on this list. Still my personal like of the actor and some of his work does not prevent Snakes on a Plane and Soul Man from happening. He made $8.59 in box office for every dollar paid to him. Not good.

And the final top 10 overpaid actor is Jim Carrey. He just made it to the list, but with good reason. Either his movies are huge hits, like The Grinch, or they are bombs like Number 23. Considering how much he gets paid per film I'm sure Hollywood execs were hoping for better than $8.62 at the box office.

Ok, now that you have suffered the pain and if you are still with me, here are the best actors per dolloar. But again, don't assume quality with earnings.

Shai LeBeouf - proof that ability has little to do with anything. He was in all the right films and tops the list with $160 brought in for every dollar he earned. Expect this to go way down since there's only so many Transformer movies that can be made - I pray.

James McAvoy - Not familiar with the name? Well he filled theaters when WANTED came out - or was that because of the scene with a bare backed Jolie? Either way he brought studios $114 for every dollar they brought him.

Michael Cera - not one of the leading male actors in looks, but he brings home the bacon at the box office. Even with films like Year One, he still pulled off $102 per dollar he got paid. But can he do it 2 years in a row?

Daniel Radcliffe - is still riding high off of Harry Potter. That franchise alone put him almost at the top with $93 in the box office for what he earned. Considering he's almost all grown now, will he keep the young girls swooning in his roles after Hogwarts? Maybe.

Robert Downey Jr - Probably the best actor on the list. He is phenomenal when he is sober, and better than most when he isn't. Possibly the only actor to be stuck in a proverbial can and still out earn most any film where you can see the acting. He brought in $78 at the box office for every dollar, and would have done better if he didn't get roped into Tropic Thunder. Iron Man 2 and Sherlock Holmes can't come out fast enough.

Javier Bardem - don't know his name? Well like Cera you went to see him, over and over again. To the tune of making $73 at the box office for what he was paid. Maybe you'll remember his name next time since he will likely get a lot more films.

Ryan Reynolds - I'm glad he made the list. He's just a funny guy, that can do action at least as well as anyone on this list. And who didn't want to see him in X-Men Origins: Wolverine after watching the movie trailer (too bad the film was a waste of time). Expect higher numbers than the $61 in the box office for his pay once Green Lantern and Deadpool hit screens in 20011-12.

Christian Bale - he terminated the competition as a Dark Knight. The franchises have been good to him and to the box office of Hollywood. $55 for his every dollar. And more sequels are coming.

Aaron Eckhart - he doesn't make big bucks himself, but compared to what his movies bring in... Suffice to say that even with PC Hollywood he made smoking interesting again. $45 to the box office for ever dollar getting him on-screen.

Dennis Quaid is the old man of the list. He brought in $43 for every wrinkled dollar he earned. Lucky for him The Day After Tomorrow was not part of the calculations.

Well that's the lists. Love it or hate it, there you are. I'm glad Forbes made the list because figuring it all out just takes too long.

Mission Impossible 4 - more explosions, more Tom Cruise close-ups

Well the news is out. Tom Cruise will be doing yet another Mission Impossible movie. But I wonder if we really care.

Given that Tom Cruise makes money every time he shows up on a screen. It’s actually very hard to think of a movie with Cruise, in the past decade or so, that was not a blockbuster. Of course that does not mean they were great films. Just greatly packaged.

But specifically when we think of the Mission Impossible films, we are reminded that this is the revisioned idea of the series that spawned the big screen adaptation. There is almost no connection between the television series and the movies.


Because Cruise knows how to market to the youth, men and women.

The Mission Impossible films are lots of flash, explosions, a couple of cool stunts, and massive amounts of close-ups of Tom Cruise removing a face mask while inevitably running.



Occasionally we get a glimpse of a team, something dropped hard in the early minutes of the first film. Why pay extra money for a cast of celebrities when you can just show Cruise smiling again? I mean it’s not like the youth market expects a “remake” to have anything to do with its original source.

So I expect that the next Mission Impossible film will include generous amounts of the following:

• Big explosions
  
• A chase on a motorcycle, and cars
  
• Tons of shooting with automatic pistols and assault rifles
  
• A bunch of tech gadgets every guy would love to have
  
• At least a dozen nameless bad guys that will be killed off seconds after being seen
  

• Location shooting in at least 3 major cities (probably European)
  
• At least one major stunt involving Cruise doing something that the insurance companies will hate (likely in the first 5 minutes of the film or the last 10)
  

• Oh, at least 2 very slender and somewhat exotic women. Probably 1 of them will be topless or allude to nakedness and/or sex. It is a Summer movie you know.
  

Beyond these essential items, a very loose plot will be formed. It will mandate that Cruise don and remove a mask in a big close-up, invariably running at the time. We will be able to notice that Luther (Ving Rhames) and some actor that no one really knows or cares about (beyond his mom, family, friends and landlord) will be in a few scenes to allude to team actions – all executed primarily by Cruise. And I expect that Cruise’s character (Ethan Hunt) will either be divorced and bitter, or really upset after having a major blowout with his on-screen wife (from the 3rd film) – which is bad news for the first bad guy he finds.

We might get Laurence Fishburne back for a return as the boss. Possible a quick scene or too of comedian Simon Pegg in a return role.

So will I go to see this film? Probably.

I already know that these films are light on anything but action. They are virtually forgettable, but provide a great distraction for a couple of hours. In fact I don’t consider this Mission Impossible, but Mission Explode Lots Of Stuff. Which can work after a long day of work in the real world.

So plan ahead that at least one day in 2011 will be spent at the theater. Just don’t expect it to be memorable.

Movie news: April 1st 2009

Ok, in more serious news that you may not have noticed today I saw that Calvin Broadus, best known as Snoop Dogg, has joined the Nation of Islam and changed his name to Snoop Y. I would say I am shocked, but then again, its all Fo Shizzle My Nizzle, as he would say.

Also in the news today is the fact that The Hobbit will soon be in brought to fans across the world. But unlike what most have been lead to expect, Peter Jackson has been contracted to make the JRR Tolkein novel into a musical play. There is no news on who will play the vital role of Bilbo Baggins, but so far Paris Hilton has been confirmed to play Gollum. This may be the first role that I think Hilton is thin enough to make look good.

In yet more news that I just cannot fathom I have heard that Denzel Washington is in talks to take the role of Blondie in Spike Lee's remake of The Good The Bad and the Ugly. The Lee Van Kleef role is already confirmed as going to Benicio Del Toro, with the likely role of Tuco the Rat going to either Eddie Murphy or Martin Laurence. I suppose either of the 2 will have to gain weight or wear a fat suit for the role. Still I find it unsettling that the revisioned film, which I generally dislike, will be filmed in modern day Los Angeles with gangs substituted for the Civil War factions. So far Clint Eastwood has denied any comments.

Still I have to say that the Howard the Duck remake is the biggest news of the day. I am amazed that anyone would take on this idea. Stephen Speilberg may be a genius, but I continue to think this is beyond him. I remain against this remake, even as I have learned that several movie studios are jumping at the script. It has to be the fact that somehow Speilberg got Tom Cruise to say yes to play Howard. I never thought there was enough money in the world for that. But at least Cruise will not need an accent.

Given that today is All Fool's Day, I'm taking all this news with a pound of salt, at least. We can all only hope that tomorrow we will wake up and know that this has all been a big joke. Really a big joke.

Tom Cruise - Denzel Washington. Can it work?

If you could pick 2 of the biggest celebrities in Hollywood and put them into a movie, would anyone go see it? And I’m not talking about the paparazzi inspired Jennifer Lopez – Ben Affleck kind of pairing. I mean in the order of Tom Cruise and Denzel Washington.

As I provided in the example above, the answer depends deeply on who exactly is being called a star celebrity, their talent, and the movie they are in. If you want to have Hilary Duff, or Jessica Alba, or Shia LeBouf well you can’t really expect much even with material as good as The Maltese Falcon. They may be popular, especially with teens, but they just aren’t quality actors.

But quality is not enough either. Burt Reynolds and Clint Eastwood are both notable, exceptional actors. They both are legitimate mega-stars. But if you saw them in City Heat, well let’s say that I hope you watched it on broadcast television where it didn’t cost you more than time.

And sometimes it’s just so close but not there, like Russell Crowe and Denzel Washington in Virtuosity. Or Al Pacino and Keanu Reeves in Devil’s Advocate.

On the other hand, match up Robert DeNiro and Al Pacino (in Heat); Cary Grant and Tony Curtis (in Operation Petticoat); Steve McQueen, Yul Brynner, Robert Vaughn, Charles Bronson and James Coburn (The Magnificent Seven); Marlon Brando and the entire cast of the Godfather; Kathryn Hepburn and Spencer Tracy (Guess Who’s Coming To Dinner – also including Sidney Poitier) or Humphrey Bogart (The African Queen), and now with the proper script you have a movie. A big movie. A movie people want to pay to see, and will enjoy the experience.

So I come back to the question at hand. Is the pairing of 2 of the top A-list actors, with a decent script enough to have a blockbuster movie?

Well in 2010 we may well find out. Because that is the proposed release date for a spy-thriller, The Matarese Circle, featuring Tom Cruise and Denzel Washington. The deal is not final yet, and production has yet to start. But if this is the line up the next question has to be the script.

The script is from the same mind that created the Bourne series of books, Robert Ludlum. So I think the question of how good it might me is no longer in doubt. Add to this the fact that the director of this proposed film is David Cronenberg known for his films The Dead Zone, The Fly, Crash, and Scanners. So that front should be solid as well.

If this film can capture the unique spark that was in say Collateral, then this film will top the charts. One might expect that this could become an Oscar contender. Mostly due to Washington. Especially if the issue of accents are removed as we all know that Tom Cruise can’t do one.

Either way, if this comes to fruition as it stands now, this will be a must see film. I am eagerly awaiting the early trailers.

How much for a Yahoo accolade?

I noticed something over the weekend. Yahoo had a little blurb on the top movie stars of 2008. It was an interesting photo selection for one big reason. Almost every one of the people they were touting had a flop in 2008.

The list starts with Gong Li. You may not recall her name. Then again you probably didn't recall Hannibal Rising, with good reason. The list moves on to Nicole Kidman. She has become synonymous with Hollywood failure, which the film Australia confirms yet again. But then the list loses all perspective. It goes into a tailspin of stupidity.

The next "actress" on the list is Paris Hilton. A woman so without talent she couldn't make sex look interesting to watch. Her claim to fame was the film the Hottie and the Nottie. The hottest thing about the film is akin to the apparent intelligence of Hilton - just not being there at all. Is the possibility she will inherit a major company really that important to Hollywood?

The list moves on to Jennifer Lopez. Who is lauded for giving birth to twins. Which does deserve notice. But not on a list of top movie performers. Even when some thought she had a movie career she was bad. And she hasn't gotten better.

To disguise the fact that there were so few good movies and to bolster the huge number of movie stars with flops the list then goes international with Aishwarya Rai. She is a top Bollywood actress. I've never seen her in a film and have no comment.

But the list jumps back to the ridiculous with Hillary Duff and her performance in the mega-flop War, Inc. I reviewed that movie and to summarize both her performance and the movie, disappointing and a waste of time.

The list goes on to name Mary Kate Olsen, The Wackness, Lindsey Lohan, Chapter 27, Jessica Alba, The Love Guru, right up to Angelina Jolie. Jolie is the only actress on the list with a film the average person can say they saw, and actually liked. She is the only woman on the list (perhaps excluding Rai) that had films that made real money. In effect only she and perhaps Rai deserve to be on a list of top movie stars. The rest need to be on the top of a pile of dung for their performances.

The list then turns to men. And the choices are only moderately better. The star is with Tom Cruise because of his appearance in the flop Tropic Thunder, but more likely the Valkyrie movie that has yet to show. Next we get Patrick Swayze - because he has pancreatic cancer. Like Lopez I have to wonder how that has anything to do with movies. It's sad, but it does not go to the top of a list of movies.

Then the list does another odd change of direction. They pick Denzel Washington, who did not have a film in 2008. But at least he was nominated for an award this year. That's closer to a reason to be on this list then most. The list then flies off with failures like Bankock Dangerous (remake) with Nicolas Cage, Orlando Bloom - also without a movie this year. At this point we finally get to someone who was in a movie that made money and most people saw (for the men).

Will Smith is 5th with Hancock and the upcoming Seven Pounds. And right above him on the list is Brad Pitt with a flop - Burn After Reading - and the nominated Benjamin Button arthouse film. Leonardo DiCaprio broke even as I recall with Body of Lies but took 3rd. Next is Johnny Depp who like Bloom and Washington didn't have a film, and like Washington was nominated. And of course 1st went to the dead guy Hollywood can't stop talking about - heath ledger.

This entire list is Bollocks. Of the entire group Aishwarya Rai, Angelina Jolie, Will Smith, and Heath Ledger deserve to be on it. Maybe an honorable mention to Brad Pitt and Tom Cruise. That's it.

I don't know what pipe the people at Yahoo are smoking, but it must be powerful. Either that, or there must be one hell of a kickback coming from advertising for Yahoo to tout this kind of rubbish as a top list of anything. Maybe if they named it the Top Movies Stars of 2008 - whose companies gave us a lot of money. Or is that too long.

And people wonder why the quality of movies is dropping faster than the average IQ of a high school graduate. When you can buy accolades who needs writing. It's just sad.

Upcoming movies for 2008 holiday season and 2009

Now that the election is over, and while we are still learning how our money is being spent in ways we never considered (thank you Paulson), the need for a distraction is eminent. This holiday season, as unemployment rises and stock market hopes fall, we all need to get away. Escaping to a vacation that we all can afford. A good movie.

The big question though is if Hollywood has anything to offer us. In recent years the obsession of Hollywood in electing a liberal a President as possible consumed the silver screen. Millions of dollars and huge amounts of time were wasted on political statements that were poorly written, and wouldn’t be worth watching if they were on broadcast television with American Idol and Dancing with the Stars on before and afterwards.

To put it bluntly, if you’ve seen more than 3 movies in a theater this year you wasted money and left thinking that you were once smarter than after the movie experience. But can Christmas bring us all what we have been wishing for, entertainment?

Well the answer is yes and no. There are a couple of movies that might compel you to leave the comfort of your own home. Of course these movies are surrounded by crap that you are probably seeing trailers for right now.

Let’s start with what may be worth your groceries for a day or 2.

Seven Pounds


Will Smith is on a roll (like he stopped). You watch this trailer and you get a couple of thoughts. Why is he doing this? What is the secret? Will this be uplifting? I don’t know the answers but I am very sure of the ability of this actor to make it worth the time for find out. This movie will make money, but more importantly it will entertain you. It will let you share an emotional response with everyone in the theater, and that’s why we see movies.

Transporter 3


Jason Statham tends to always deliver. He is the man of action films these days, and with good reason. His characters tend to be intelligent, the plots tend to make some kind of sense, and the action is not filled with CGI or stunt doubles. Generally the more sequels you have the worse the movies get, but the Transporter series has done well to date. This should easily be worth the price of admission, because he can drive!

Valkyrie


Tom Cruise has finally gotten this movie ready for theaters. I mentioned this earlier when this was planned for the summer. I’m looking forward to the film. But I must admit that with reflection, and seeing additional trailers I have one problem. Cruise. He seems to boyishly happy and young to be a Nazi Colonel that is going to try to kill Hitler. While it’s a true story, I would expect the look of the real schemers to be a tad bit grim. But I will see if all the brightness in the film hinders or benefits the plot.

My Name is Bruce


Ok, I admit I am a Bruce Campbell fan. I just love his movies (and television shows most don’t recall). He is funny. So this film sending up his celebrity and still focusing on what made him famous is spot on. The trailer got me chuckling. Will I see it, yep. Will it win an Oscar, nope. Will it be entertaining? More likely than not. Bruce Campbell may not be Will Smith (on many levels) but one thing they both do well is pick movies that they can excel in. Now where is that boomstick?

Underworld: Rise of the Lycans


I thought this movie had been made a while ago (like Vin Diesel’s Chronicles of Riddick – which supposedly has the 3rd film done years ago) so I’m not surprised it’s coming out. The first film was well worth the price of admission. The second not as much. But redemption seems at hand. This 3rd film is more of a prequel though. And a good thing too, because I really wanted to see more of the Lycan-Vampire war. Mythical creatures, medieval setting, swords, warfare on massive scale. Yep this should be good. And I like the lead actors too! Bonus.

Not Easily Broken


Morris Chestnut is definitely the go to guy in Black films. He has done very well in taking roles that are uplifting, and afrocentric. This is another of those films. I like this personally because, besides the quality acting and plot, it is an example that being African American does not mean being in a pigeonhole of stereotypes the media loves to display us as. This will actually be out in January 2009 (in time for the inauguration – how interesting), so thankfully it will give the Black community a choice besides seeing Notorious – which I do not recommend.