An article by Brooks Barnes in today's NY Times:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/21/movies/21stars.html?ref=global-homeThe lead-in says,
"A-list movie stars have long been measured by their ability to fill theaters on opening weekend. But never have so many failed to deliver, resulting in some rare soul-searching by motion picture studios about why the old formula isn¹t working ? and a great deal of anxiety among stars (and agents) about the potential vaporization of their $20 million paychecks." ...
Later in the article, after listing all the films that crashed and burned this summer, the writer says, "Some of these may simply have not been very good, but an A-list star is supposed to overcome that."
Um...
Another choice tidbit:
"Talent agents argue that stars are not to blame, faulting script concepts that fail to translate to the screen, poor release dates, awkward marketing or ill-advised efforts by popular actors to stretch in new directions."
So, here's the summary: When a film opens big, does big business and wins awards, it's all about the star. When it fails it's all about script concepts that fail to translate to the screen, leaving stars unable to overcome the inherent badness of the script concept or execution.
All of this time, and
Nobody still knows as much
As They ever did.
Alan Brooks
A with an Underwood
Put the Capra touch
on this.
MWSM FAQ:
http://www.panix.com/~mwsm/faq.htmlFiltering Trolls:
http://www.panix.com/~mwsm/trolls.html