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.

Movie Preview: Land of the Lost

I was thinking about the upcoming movie Land of the Lost earlier today. I had been flipping channels and saw that Sci-Fi had a marathon of the episodes on. I watched a few, reminding me of my youth some time ago.

Now the thing is that the children’s television show used to appear in the 70’s on Saturday mornings. It’s campy, unrealistic, and done in stop animation – which looks bad compared to the effects of say Jurassic Park. That doesn’t even cover the bad make-up jobs on the Sleestac creatures that abound the show. But it was entertaining, and even moreso today.

Then I saw trailers for the Will Ferrell movie remake. The first thought I had was instantly ‘revisioning’. Those that follow my movie reviews know that this almost always means a crappy movie. When you add in the fact that this is a television show to movie conversion, well the odds of it being a crappy movie go up exponentially. Perhaps the only way you could be more sure this will be horrendous was if 2 or more rappers were in the film.



The trailers really don’t have any of the campy charm of the original show. From what I’ve seen it looks like it will be a running gag of how wrong, and stupid, Will Ferrell’s character can be. Add in a couple of bits of CGI, and there you go. To say I’m underwhelmed at this point is an understatement.

But this film will draw an audience. Not a big one by my bet, but it might just break-even. Which is a shame as that means Will Ferrell will likely continue on the path of mediocre films he has been doing for years now. He was funny in Elf. But by the time I saw Ricky Bobby, the joke was old. Now it’s as ancient as the dinosaurs are supposed to be.

Let me share a known secret about movies, specifically movie trailers. The editors of any film have one huge job when it comes to the movie trailers, which is to make the film look good. Any halfway decent editor can make the worst film look like a $100 million dollar blockbuster. They tend to grab the best 2 minutes of a film and cobble it together, so viewers will rush in expecting a far better film than they get 9 out of 10 times.

Look at some of the worst films you have ever seen, and check out the trailers of that film. In almost every case you will see a great (relative to the final product) movie trailer.

When I watch the trailer for Land of the Lost, I am immediately drawn to the fact that the writers almost definitely never saw the show. Not as kids or adults. I can also see that a huge chunk of the below the line costs of the film were spent on CGI animation. But what I don’t get are really funny jokes. Or any hint of a plotline beyond the one joke that is obvious (as stated above).

The film makes me think of the revisioning of Dukes of Hazzard and Lost in Space. Or perhaps Starsky & Hutch. Films that no sober person ever saw before, or even maybe after, they hit cable. And they hit cable fast, as the DVD sales sucked as well. They were bad films, remakes of far better television shows, and completely revisioned.

Of course Land of the Lost, and other shows of this ilk, are not targeting my dollars. They know that I remember the show. They know that I would see the trailer and think it was crap. Nope, they are targeting an audience of 25 and under. Because it’s all new to you. And since it’s new, the younger audience is not expecting better.

Hollywood has become a land of low expectations, and lower performances. Movie studios won’t spend the money on an original script – especially when they can revamp someone else’s idea. They slop together a half-thought out idea, and bang there is a movie. They will keep doing this too, until audiences stop paying to see this warmed up refuse.

I’m sure Will Ferrell got paid well for this film. Good for him, honestly. He didn’t have to work hard and got his money up front. I don’t blame him. But I will say that based on the trailer, the running joke, and the plot if you see this movie you will be wasting money.

Forbes best paid actors - my version

On a less important and trivial note, news came out today on the top paid actors in America. Now this list has nothing to do with talent per say. Several people on the list are horrible if you ask me. So even though they may have made money I want to present the list in the order of quality each actor on the list has, and I’ll throw in a movie I think that justifies my though.

Let me know if you agree.

• 1. Will Smith. Forbes had him at #1 and he deserves it. He made $80 million in the past 12 months and has a record-setting 8 consecutive films breaking $100 million to show for the salary. Sci-fi, drama, action, you name it and he can act his ass off. So much for those that argue that White audiences cannot connect with a leading actor that is of a different race. – See Ali, Hancock, Independence Day and so on to see what I mean.
  
• 2. Johnny Depp. Another great actor, capable of a range that equals anyone else on this list. He may prefer esoteric roles like What’s Eating Gilbert Grape, but when he wants to go mainstream it’s like a day in Tortuga. Forbes had him in 2nd and I would say it’s as close as his $72 million makes it look. – See any Pirates of the Caribbean.
  
• 3. Bruce Willis. Here Forbes goes by the numbers and I go by quality. Of the remaining actors and actresses he tops the list. He is the everyman that gets the job done with style. He may be the oldest and only made $41 million for Die Hard 4 (which made $380 million) but he most importantly delivers entertainment. – See Hudson Hawk, 5th Element, or any Die Hard film
  
• 4. Nicolas Cage. While you wouldn’t imagine that he was paid $38 million from movies like Next and Ghost Rider, he still can get it right more often than not. He is another of the versatile entertainers on this list. – See National Treasure
  
• 5. Mike Meyers. He is still coasting of the success of Shrek and Austin Powers. And he needs to considering his turn as the Cat in the Hat (thankfully Dr. Seuss was dead before the movie was made). Still Shrek is funny, though not worth the $55 million that he made. – See Austin Powers, or the first Shrek
  
• 6. Eddie Murphy. I would put him higher as he has more lasting power than most on the list, and he has enough talent to do nearly every role in a movie. But his last couple of films were not that good – Norbit and now Meet Dave. Yet as an entertainer he can wow the audience with roles like Dreamgirls (he was robbed of the Oscar plain and simple). His $55 million is like paying a couple of actors each, and it would have got him over his Shrek co-star but his overly family friendly films don’t work above the age of 11. – See Dreamgirls and be amazed.
  
• 7. Keira Knightley. The first lady on the list. She only makes it one step above her Forbes ranking in terms of cash, but she is miles ahead of the next closest female entertainer. She’s sexy, smart, and can do a bit of action – yet none of it over the top. For $32 million I think she is getting underpaid. –See Star Wars episodes 1,2,3
  
• 8. Adam Sandler. While his low-brow comedies are a hit or miss proposition he is more than where he started from. He has grown to do quality serious roles like in Reign Over Me (with a good dose of help from Don Cheadle – massively underpaid) which helps us all forget films like Little Nicky. My guess, his career will grow, and his pay of $30 million, if he stays away from dumb comedy like The Gong Show (yes I know it’s a television program). - See Spanglish.
  
• 9. Leonardo Di Caprio. Basically I put him here because I dislike the rest of the actors even less. I don’t find him all that good and I wouldn’t pay the price of admission to see any film he starred in as sole lead. But he made $45 million so some Hollywood exec must think he is worth it, though some exec greenlighted Soul Plane too. – see something he is in. I wouldn’t know.
  
• 10. Will Ferrell. I liked Elf. Moments in Ricky Bobby (or whatever it was called) were funny, though most of it was exactly what most of America tends to think of when they think of NASCAR. Sadly though he has been paid $31 million to keep playing the same sort of character found in both those movies, over and over again. Semi-Pro didn’t do well because of this, Stepbrothers probably will fare the same. He needs to change or the entertainment career will be like his work on Saturday Night Live, a flat bomb. – See Elf.
  
• 11. Cameron Diaz. She only precedes the next guy because she is a lady and I thought I’d be nice. I don’t find her funny, attractive or talented. Seriously she is ugly and needs to gain weight. I believe the only funny film she was in was Something About Mary (and luckily it was an almost good film for Ben Stiller too) and any other work she has done is too vapid to remember. The $50 million she was paid needs to seriously be spent on other actresses. – See the revisioned remake of Charlie’s Angels, you’ll go to sleep but it’s better than the next guy’s films.
  
• 12. Ben Stiller. He came from a comedy family. He’s been in films with huge talents. He was paid $40 million. Yet this guy cannot stop playing the same insipid character in every movie. I will say this for him; he has mastered the art of doing the same thing badly and getting paid well for it. – See The Royal Tenenbaums, not because he is in it but because everyone else in the film is great.
  
• 13. Last and least of all the entertainers on Forbes list of the best paid (and some of the most overpaid in my opinion) is the #3 woman on their list, Jennifer Aniston. Simply put she needs to eat some food and stick with unrealistic television sitcoms. – See Friends because you won’t have to focus on her and it’s slightly better than the Charlie’s Angels remake.
  

Since no list should go to 13 I will add one more I think deserves to be on the list – Denzel Washington. If he is not the highest paid actor per film he should be. He is quality and can act against anyone on this list and make them all look good via osmosis (yes even Aniston and Stiller).

So that is my take on Forbes. How would you rank them? Who would be your 14th entertainer on the list?

The joys of Will Ferrell, Ping Pong and the Police - 1.5.2007.1

With the new year started I’ve decided to add a few different thing to the posts for the site. One thing that I will be adding is specifically due to the up-coming Presidential elections. For those that have visited my Vass site this is not new news but I am planning to write letters to the Presidential candidates, hopefully all of them, addressing concerns and asking specific questions on their platforms. My letters to these individuals will be posted unaltered, and when I receive a response it will be posted unaltered as well. At this time I have sent a letter to Senator Clinton, and Mr. John Edwards. Neither at this time have responded. I will try to mention the status of the letters going out, and any responses received on this blog once a week, but definitely at least once a month. The leadership of this nation is our choice, this is an opportunity to learn what we are choosing.

A separate item I plan to add on a weekly basis is a bit of a calendar. I hope to highlight various dates of note to Black Americans, and Latino Americans. This includes birthdays of famous individuals, ground-breaking firsts, and other items.

In this week:
Emancipation Proclamation issued by President Lincoln
The first African American child is born in America in 1624. His name is William Tucker.
Congressional Black Caucus formed in 1974
The fountain pen is patented by William B. Purvis in 1890

Looking at other things happening in the last couple of days, there was good news for Mr. Will Ferrell and his family. Mr. Ferrell is now the father of his second child, a boy born just two days short of the new year. Congratulations and cheer to Mr. Ferrell and his family on this wonderful addition. I wish him the best.

In hopeful news there is a rumor that the band, the Police, will perform together again. It’s been some 2 decades since the band performed a tour and many have hoped to get a chance to see such a performance. While some of my readers may be unfamiliar with this band I believe they may be familiar with the lead singer and sometime actor Sting. For those that are unaware Sting did not start off as a solo artist. Actually they were not even a band at first, they were English teachers at a British school as I recall. (Yes Sting is British as are the other members of the band.)

It wasn’t until after the band had several chart topping hit albums that Sting went off to try his hand at a solo record. This lead to a very successful career. But there was never any reason why the band could not have continued. Unlike other break-up stories there were no frictions that would cause the band to end, as happened with the Beatles as an example. So a final performance tour would be a coup for fans who never got to see them together one last time. Keep your fingers crossed.

In the arena of the unusual there is news of a new challenge for Ping Pong players. If you thought you could take on Forrest Gump this is the next level for you. It’s called TriPong and the game is played with 3 players on a modified table. This is no joke, the game has been picked up and should be available for the next holiday season.

Perhaps it’s because I’m a city boy, but is there a real demand for ping pong? I mean I’ve never known anyone with a table, and only saw people playing the game at college. Call me sheltered but I never knew it was that popular. I suppose if you do have a table, this is a must have. I can definitely see how it could be good to give all the kids something to do besides playing a computer game. So if you are worried about your kids eye-hand coordination your wish has been answered. Except if you live in the city, I think.

This is what I think, what do you think?