Think you're underpaid? Think the guy three cubicles down from you is overpaid? Well, take heart. Your pay scale cannot be as wonky and egregious as that of the Hollywood elite. Forbes magazine did some complex calculations based on some superstars' last three films (don't ask me to explain the equation; I'm a writer and therefore allergic to math). They found that some were paid appropriately based on their rate of return, and others were vastly overpaid. Now, I may not be good at math, but duh.

The high and low ends of the scale belonged to male stars. Matt Damon had the best pay-to-profit ratio; for every $1 he earned, his films grossed $29. The worst? Russell Crowe — for each $1 he made, his films made $5. Talk about your fuzzy math. Of course, I'm most interested to see how the female A-listers fared.

The worst earners weren't a shock, per se: Cameron Diaz ($1/$9), Nicole Kidman ($1/$8) and Jennifer Lopez ($1/$7). The artist formerly known as J-Lo has been cranking out stinker after stinker. Nicole's pale perfection has inspired similarly pallid box office, and that's not even counting the Golden Compass disappointment. But Cameron? That's a tad surprising, especially after all those Shrek triumphs.

Those in the middling earnings department included Sandra Bullock ($1/$13), Reese Witherspoon ($1/$13) and Renée Zellweger ($1/$14). I kind of thought they'd fare worse, so good for them.

And the most profitable female stars? Oooh, the tabloids are gonna love this. Angelina Jolie (at $15 profit for every $1 she earns) and Jennifer Aniston (at $17 profit for every $1 she earns). And just to ensure that Us Weekly editors will be salivating for weeks to come, Brad Pitt was the second most profitable on the list, just behind Matt at $1/$24. I can see the “Jen comes between Brad and Angie!” headlines now.