Most bankable star...
#1
DVD Talk Limited Edition
Thread Starter
Most bankable star...
With stars' paychecks for movies reaching $20,000,000+ now, which stars are truely desrving of it? Which stars constantly put people in seats and have huge box office returns? It doesn't matter if you like them or not, if they are in a movie, it stands a pretty good chance of turning a profit just because their name is attatched to it. Each has had a couple low points but far outweighed by hits.
My list of most bankable stars:
Tom Hanks
Julia Roberts
Reese Witherspoon
Mel Gibson
Meg Ryan
Stephen Spielburg - probably the most bankable director
Some stars get big salaries because of one big hit but don't seem to star in more huge hits. Leo Decaprio is a good example of this. Because of Titanic, he gets $20M a movie. People said teenage girls boosted Titanic's BO because they saw it 10 times to see Leo. However, since then, 'Leo Decaprio' movies haven't done that well. Shouldn't the girls be seeing these movies 10 times?
Arnold Swartzanegger used to be very bankable but his recent movies haven't been huge hits...
My list of most bankable stars:
Tom Hanks
Julia Roberts
Reese Witherspoon
Mel Gibson
Meg Ryan
Stephen Spielburg - probably the most bankable director
Some stars get big salaries because of one big hit but don't seem to star in more huge hits. Leo Decaprio is a good example of this. Because of Titanic, he gets $20M a movie. People said teenage girls boosted Titanic's BO because they saw it 10 times to see Leo. However, since then, 'Leo Decaprio' movies haven't done that well. Shouldn't the girls be seeing these movies 10 times?
Arnold Swartzanegger used to be very bankable but his recent movies haven't been huge hits...
#4
DVD Talk God
Originally posted by Alien Redrum
Soddenberg is becoming a pretty bankable director.
Soddenberg is becoming a pretty bankable director.
#6
Moderator
Originally posted by Deftones
His last two films tanked. Full Frontal and Solaris were major box office disappointments.
His last two films tanked. Full Frontal and Solaris were major box office disappointments.
FWIW, I'd say Julia Roberts is pretty bankable, Full Frontal notwithstanding... :-)
Last edited by wendersfan; 12-31-02 at 03:31 PM.
#9
DVD Talk Gold Edition
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Montreal, Canada
Posts: 2,202
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Most bankable star...
[QUOTE]Originally posted by resinrats
[B]With stars' paychecks for movies reaching $20,000,000+ now, which stars are truely desrving of it? Which stars constantly put people in seats and have huge box office returns? It doesn't matter if you like them or not, if they are in a movie, it stands a pretty good chance of turning a profit just because their name is attatched to it. Each has had a couple low points but far outweighed by hits.
Stephen Spielburg - probably the most bankable director
FYI,
It's STEVEN SPIELBERG
[B]With stars' paychecks for movies reaching $20,000,000+ now, which stars are truely desrving of it? Which stars constantly put people in seats and have huge box office returns? It doesn't matter if you like them or not, if they are in a movie, it stands a pretty good chance of turning a profit just because their name is attatched to it. Each has had a couple low points but far outweighed by hits.
Stephen Spielburg - probably the most bankable director
FYI,
It's STEVEN SPIELBERG
#10
DVD Talk Gold Edition
I would say Tom Cruise except that he's alienating his popcorn audience by taking on riskier pictures of late.
I'd like to see Tom Hanks do a little something crazy for a change. Hell, I'm convinced that Joe and Josephine Six-Pack would go see him in anything.
I'd like to see Tom Hanks do a little something crazy for a change. Hell, I'm convinced that Joe and Josephine Six-Pack would go see him in anything.
#11
DVD Talk God
Originally posted by wendersfan
You might be right, but I don't think they were intended to do well at the box office.
You might be right, but I don't think they were intended to do well at the box office.
Making movies is like any other business. What is the # 1 goal? Make money, bottom line. Sure, the stars, the director may be making movies because of their love of creating or the their love of acting, but the studios make the movies to make money.
#12
DVD Talk Legend
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Sesame Street (the apt. next to Bob's)
Posts: 20,195
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes
on
6 Posts
Originally posted by Frank TJ Mackey
I would say Tom Cruise except that he's alienating his popcorn audience by taking on riskier pictures of late.
I'd like to see Tom Hanks do a little something crazy for a change. Hell, I'm convinced that Joe and Josephine Six-Pack would go see him in anything.
I would say Tom Cruise except that he's alienating his popcorn audience by taking on riskier pictures of late.
I'd like to see Tom Hanks do a little something crazy for a change. Hell, I'm convinced that Joe and Josephine Six-Pack would go see him in anything.
Joe and Josephine Six-Pack?
Can you throw in any more elitist catchphrases? Really, it won't sound too snotty.
Honk!
#13
Moderator
Originally posted by Deftones
You don't think they were intended to do well at the box office?
Making movies is like any other business. What is the # 1 goal? Make money, bottom line. Sure, the stars, the director may be making movies because of their love of creating or the their love of acting, but the studios make the movies to make money.
You don't think they were intended to do well at the box office?
Making movies is like any other business. What is the # 1 goal? Make money, bottom line. Sure, the stars, the director may be making movies because of their love of creating or the their love of acting, but the studios make the movies to make money.
Solaris cost $47 million. So either it was a really expensive vanity project, or somebody somewhere thought it would turn a profit. It still might - who knows?
Last edited by wendersfan; 12-31-02 at 08:34 PM.
#14
DVD Talk Gold Edition
Originally posted by Charlie Goose
Popcorn audience?
Joe and Josephine Six-Pack?
Can you throw in any more elitist catchphrases? Really, it won't sound too snotty.
Honk!
Popcorn audience?
Joe and Josephine Six-Pack?
Can you throw in any more elitist catchphrases? Really, it won't sound too snotty.
Honk!
I apologize if I offended you or something.
#15
DVD Talk Ultimate Edition
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Grounded in reality. For the most part.
Posts: 4,806
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by Deftones
His last two films tanked. Full Frontal and Solaris were major box office disappointments.
His last two films tanked. Full Frontal and Solaris were major box office disappointments.
I'm not saying Sodenberg is as good as Spielberg, but I imagine he will get there.
#23
Moderator
I saw a breakdown one time that added up the take of all the films stars had been in and totaled them up. The stars with the best box office take were (seriously) Jeff Goldblum and Carrie Fisher.
#24
DVD Talk Special Edition
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Sacramento, CA
Posts: 1,065
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For a while there Adam Sandler was pure bank..
At least along the lines of making a film for less $$$ and turning a profit off. No make that a HUGE profit... Sure he is not up to the level of actor as some of the others on the list but still the cash flow based more or less just off his name to attached to a film is pretty high.
numbers all off imdb
Happy Gilmore - 1996
cost 10mil - takes 30mil plus
Wedding Singer 1998
80+ box office
WaterBoy 1998
cost 23m - take 160+ just in the usa (doh)
Big Daddy 1999
cost 32m - take 90
Little Nicky 2000
errr ok that tanked
Mr. Deeds 2001
cost 50 - take - 125usa - 35+ outside usa
as you can see that is a huge profit for just about any film with him attached to it and for the most part that is ALL those films had going for them in the first place. Granted he has branched out some more as of late so those might not make as much $$$ (punch drunk love)
Still, I would be willing to bet that if he returned to his normal fratboy like sort of film roots it would pull big profit and that is just off his name on attached to the film.
At least along the lines of making a film for less $$$ and turning a profit off. No make that a HUGE profit... Sure he is not up to the level of actor as some of the others on the list but still the cash flow based more or less just off his name to attached to a film is pretty high.
numbers all off imdb
Happy Gilmore - 1996
cost 10mil - takes 30mil plus
Wedding Singer 1998
80+ box office
WaterBoy 1998
cost 23m - take 160+ just in the usa (doh)
Big Daddy 1999
cost 32m - take 90
Little Nicky 2000
errr ok that tanked
Mr. Deeds 2001
cost 50 - take - 125usa - 35+ outside usa
as you can see that is a huge profit for just about any film with him attached to it and for the most part that is ALL those films had going for them in the first place. Granted he has branched out some more as of late so those might not make as much $$$ (punch drunk love)
Still, I would be willing to bet that if he returned to his normal fratboy like sort of film roots it would pull big profit and that is just off his name on attached to the film.
#25
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Michigan
Posts: 964
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It seems Tom Hanks can star in a movie about paint drying and it'll still make $100 million - and I'll probably be there, too... Pretty impressive for the star of Money Pit and Bonfire of the Vanities.