He makes a good point though. Hollywood has the power to make a superstar celebrity actors or not. If they make one a superstar celebrity actor then they have to pay them like one. That means 20 million and up per movie. But if they don’t have to do that then why do it? So instead they get a person who they can pay five or 10 million. Let them do two or three or four or five movies and then get another person. Makes sense.
And I didn’t take him as dissing those other actors. I took him as using their situations to prove his point. These guys are really hot and then you don’t see them in movies or not as often and that’s on the big powerhouse movie studios who choose not to cast them because they’re getting to the point they’re going to have to be paid 20,000,000+ and who wants to do that if you don’t have to? What I’m saying is if they’re so hot why don’t you consistently see them? And it’s the studios who are manipulating who they put in movies to pay less to the lead role.
But I was also wonder whether the increase in movie tickets is really an increase in profits? Because I feel like, and this is purely an adult, that the number of people actually going to the movie theaters has decreased drastically. So even though the ticket prize may have increased, the decline in people going to movies Makes that increase not result in an increase in profit.
