 by Kim RuehlVideo Blogs
More Video
TV Shows
Navigation |
Julia Roberts, Jennifer Aniston and Naomi Watts bring in the box office bankForbes has released their ”Entertainment All-Stars Special Issue” in which they named Vince Vaughn the number one actor for bringing in money at the box office. Of course, Julia Roberts was right up there — at number three, in fact — bringing in just $25,000 less than number two, Tobey Maguire. (If only she’d been in one more movie in the last year!)
I pretty much figured Roberts and Jennifer Aniston would be included, but was surprised to see Naomi Watts cracking the number five slot. According to Forbes magazine’s complicated algebraic formula they use to quantify this top ten list, Watts raked in more dough than George Clooney, Matt Damon and Ben Stiller. Go on, girl!
Out of the 10 top grossing stars, those three gals were the only women to make the cut. That’s not incredibly surprising, since women generally make less than men in most professions. It wasn’t too long ago that Julia Roberts’ box office power was a huge story based on the sole fact that she was female. Of course, in a year when one of the biggest summer blockbusters was “surprise” hit Sex and the City, I’m wondering if the number of high-grossing women in Hollywood is on the rise.
What do you think? Are there any Hollywood ladies you think deserve a higher paycheck for the money they bring to the studios? Submitted by on July 25, 2008 - 9:00am. |
User loginRecent blog posts
Active TopicsNew forum topicsRecent comments
|
News, Reviews & Commentary on Lesbian and Bisexual women in Entertainment and the Media
Hmm...
I'm surprised Jennifer Aniston is on the list because she really hasn't had any good movies. Sadly. I'm happy to see that the women listed are classy and well-liked as opposed to the male celebrities. What happened to great movies by Tom Hanks, Kevin Costner...Hell, even Mel Gibson?
Speaking of, where was Will Smith on this list? (I don't think the right link is up and I can't find a full list online)
Ben Stiller, really? That man is not funny and obnoxious (and plays obnoxious characters). After being forced to watch Zoolander, I will never see another of his movies again. I even tried Night at the Museum and it was crap too.
The women's list looks pretty spot-on. I understand Nicole Kidman didn't make it because she hasn't had the best flim releases lately -- But I still love her. She just needs a good movie to get back on top.
_________
Capitalization is the difference between helping your Uncle Jack off a horse and helping your uncle jack off a horse.
Hollywood profit
I'm curious if Forbes calculated how profitable actors and actresses were for the studios (the link to the Forbes article didn't work-it took me back to AfterEllen).
If a male action star hero commands 25 million a picture, and the action pic cost $200 million to make and grossed $210 million at the box office, that's not a great profit.
But if an actress in a romantic comedy (which seems to be where the female lead roles are) commanded 10 million a picture, the movie cost 40 million to make, and the movie made $210 million, who's a better investment for a studio? Maybe if they look at it that way, women would command more respect from the studios.
Vince Vaughn??
Was Fred Claus really that big a hit?
I realize he was in Into the Wild, but wouldn't have thought he was the reason for its success.
Hmm.
It's about profit....
based on return per dollar paid
The list was created based on calculations of the average return a star provided from the last 3 movies they were in. This would be how much the films earned in ratio to how much the actor/actress was paid. Vince Vaughn films, for example, made on average $14.73 for each dollar he was paid.
Here is the link to the list
http://www.forbes.com/2008/07/22/star-salary-roi-biz-media-cz_dp_ph_0722payback.html
I think
But why?