Originally Posted by TheVileOne
Thank you, I feel the exact same way. Look how Vin Diesel's career suffered until he came back with F&F 4.
I mean, seriously, they spent over $250 million on Lone Ranger!
I mean is it any wonder why Hollywood is churning out these micro-budget found footage thingies like PARANORMAL ACTIVITY when they deliver tons of profit at virtually a fraction of the cost?
I think salaries and asking prices needed to be brought back to earth. I mean look at Tom Cruise, even he is hit and miss as of late.
This is all too true. Hollywood execs have been whining for years about spiraling salaries and budgets, yet they still pay people like Angelina Jolie $19 million to star in flops. (She and Depp combined made $39 million for The Tourist
Actors can't be faulted for asking for and taking these ridiculous salaries because it's the studios that agree to pay them. The execs were the ones who decided that Vin Diesel was worth $20 million after a couple of modestly successful films; Diesel just deposited the check and turned in his usual wooden performance. Kristen Stewart is bagging $12.5 million per film, though her post-Twihard earnings may plummet. As long as mediocre actors are getting paydays like those, budgets are going to keep skyrocketing.
There are other budget factors, of course. Like directors who insist on building full-scale railroad trains while their stars take $35 million off the top (Lone Ranger); films that go into production with bad scripts that require months of rewriting and reshoots (World War Z and MIB III); big budget entries from novice directors who have no idea how to film live-action set pieces (John Carter); and $200 million movies based on board games nobody plays anymore (Battle****). Studio execs (and Taylor Kitsch) were responsible for most of that nonsense. Even if they rein in the salaries, mistakes made in the executive suites will still lead to unnecessarily bloated budgets.