FC NOW: The Fast Company Weblog
August 28, 2006
The Earning Power of Star Power
The New York Times today examined the effect of big-name movie stars on the box office success of their films. The question was inspired by Paramount Pictures’ decision last week to cut ties with that high-earning, bad publicity machine Tom Cruise.
The conventional wisdom is that putting Halle Berry or Brad Pitt in your movie will fuel additional ticket sales. Now, academics are disputing "Superstar economics"--the idea that some people are more talented, and deserve to be paid more because of their unique ability to bring in more money. Recent data shows that star power has a negligible monetary effect on film projects. Movies can exist without stars but, even in this tabloid era, stars need material.
But there aren’t just superstars of the screen; each profession has its own best and brightest. Do these superstars matter to their respective fields? In baseball, can one star player make a losing team profitable? Does Barry Bonds deserve his massive salary if fans spend millions more on souvenirs featuring his name than Randy Winn’s? In the business world, does the CEO deserve a multi-million dollar salary while some workers are paid hourly? Or do superstar CEOs deserve the same treatment that Cruise got?
Posted by Josie Swindler at August 28, 2006 4:03 PM | Category: entertainment |
7 Comments
ADVERTISEMENT
FC NOW MENU
NEWSLETTERS
FC NOW CATEGORIES
FC READS
the idea that some people are more talented, and deserve to be paid more because of their unique ability to bring in more money.
Let's test that theory. Now, if you find someone who cannot write and have them write a book, then find have someone with no sense of timing and climatic resolve re-write that book into a script, and have a director who has no understanding of what emotional content should be depicted in each scene, what would you get once you add an actor who has no emotional depth and can't act.
Tom Cruise did not command the high salary and perks because he was a talented actor, he commanded them because he brought in the audience which brought in the money to pay the salary and perks. Since he has not being bringing in the audiences lately, he was cut. Why wasn't he bringing in the audiences? His bad publicity. His talent has not changed, just his auduence has left him.
I believe what the author is driving at is a comparison between comprable skills or talents - a celebrity star compared to another average actor/player, etc. In this case, there is often NO difference in talent or skill--the celebrity is made by the media or marketing and fan recognition.
The business world may be somewhat similar--while there is no doubt that it can be easier to compare a CEO's work (or just experience level) to the intern in marketing, there may also be a bit of the star power there. When Vint Cerf was hired by Google, and Ray Ozzie was hired by Microsoft, these weren't just based on their incredible accomplishments--they were a press release in and of themselves because they are both so widely known, respected, and accomplished. They have been in the big "movies" and done well; now when they act, it gets reported on, whether it's big or not.
Who knows what Google's true mission in life is? Who knows whether Microsoft Live will ever provide a truly useful or revolutionary service?
Who knew the random 'stars' in "My Big Fat Greek Wedding" would produce such an ROI - or that Tom Cruise would tank so quickly? (His acting hasn't changed; just his off-screen reputation and performance.)
like it or not, the "stars" are what we make them. Like it or not, they have a certain aura about them they create on the screen. They take certain roles, create certain personas and in effect, become certain personalities. I.E. "John Wayne." He was not dumb, he knew it. He lived it.
Off-screen behavior, in contravention to the 'image,' if it ruins one's appeal, can only be assigned to one's stupid behavior. Get real, you know it, we do to.
David Caruso had a lot of largesse going with the male community when he left NYPD blue and blew it right out of the water, hitting his back yard in no time flat. He has yet to reclaim it.
No we don't make 'em!! Their PR Guru's, styiists, agents do...Really think Madonna can sing? How many hundreds of Tom's are there on the streets of West Hollywood, Studio City, Van Nyes...probrpbly 125 on any cool, sunny day, after noon. And Paris? If her last name were Jones or Smith she might(?) be seling Lancome at Macy's West, so long as they have calculating registers. Wanna talk sports icons or corporate tycoons...before they made front page news or after? Then WE pick up the ball...
Well put: "But there aren't just superstars of the screen; each profession has its own best and brightest."
- Steven Burda -
e-mail: steven.burda.mba @gmail.com
http://www.linkedin.com/in/burda
We liked Cruise better before he hit the talk shows. Anybody remember how bad Chevy Chase tanked on his talk show, or how bad it hurt him? Nobody does everything well. Cruise seems to have the happiness that escaped him until now. He may be in love for the first time with a child of his own and the woman that gave that to him. That is enough to make anybody a goof, espicially at his age when we thought for some dumb idea that we really knew him.As happy as he seems to be right now he likely could care less.Give him his time, he deserves it. When he's ready he'll get back to work, soon enough.