Overpaid Actors, Underpaid Athletes

This is likely going to piss some people off, but I don't really care. Anyway, as we approach the Fall Classic and are underway with football season, I figured that I would point out to all of you that I am one of the few people in the world that feels that A-list actors are overpaid, while A-list athletes are underpaid.

Now, this is by no means an all-encompassing statement, as I can probably spout of at least 20 baseball players that are highly overpaid (Alex Rodriguez... ahem) and a few football players that are, as well. I can also think of several Hollywood stars that are underpaid. However, I'm not here to argue individual exceptions (in fact, I rarely argue individual exceptions).

So, what the Hell am I blabbing about? Well, my Chargers just lost to the Ravens, 16-13 (thanks, Marty), so I don't really know, nor do I care.

Oh, wait... overpaid actors and underpaid athletes.

Okay... look at some of these so-called Hollywood superstar salaries. There is, not surprisingly, an elite club in Southern California called the "$20 million club." This club includes Tom Cruise ($25 million per film), Mel Gibson ($25 million for The Patriot, back when he acted), Julia Roberts ($20 million for Erin Brockovich), and the list goes on.

Now, these salaries would be completely justified would the presence of these particular paid actors actually increase a film gross by at least the amount of their salary. But, the fact is that they don't. In no industry but Hollywood would somebody pay more for a product that will return less. I don't have the time to go into this phenomenon here, but you can do the research yourself. It's practically common knowledge.

But what about sports stars? Well, let's look at the NFL, as their fiscal model is the one I'm most familiar with. The NFL is a $30 billion + industry. Under a system in which athletes are paid crap, that $30 billion would largely be split among 32 owners. That's a lot of wealth to be pocketed by so few people. Not only that, the owners don't win their games or even increase their teams' popularities... the players do all of that. Good players equals more wins equals more exposure equals more income. Paying that quarterback $7 million (or more) per year may very well be the reason that a particular team makes $7 million in revenue. And, it takes those multi-billions of dollars and splits it among 2000 players.

Does anybody see actors spreading their wealth with their cameramen, their sound techs, or even their makeup artists? Let me answer that for you: no.

I could totally rant and rave about this subject for hours... but I'm inebriated, irritated that the Chargers lost, and hoping that the Padres win... so maybe I will later.

Hollywood Stars and Hollywood Stars

I'm going to fill you in on some things that annoy the hell out of me. It's my blog, you're reading it, so I feel thoroughly entitled to do so.

Annoyance: how the press labels everyone who is famous, and is not an athlete, a "Hollywood star."

Okay, this is simply not the case. While I've always noticed this little purposeful faux pas, it really hit me when Lance Bass came out of the closet. All the trades, all the newspapers, and all the television magazines kept calling Mr. Bass and his "where's Tom Cruise" glory a "Hollywood star."

Let's set the record straight here: Lance Bass is a music star. He sings, he dances, he plays with his Mission: Impossible dolls. A music star does not a Hollywood star make. Hollywood, need I remind everyone, is the haven and heaven of FILM AND TELEVISION. Actors, directors, writers, etc. Not musicians. Yes, there's an Academy Award for "Best Original Song," but so what? Documentarians get Academy Awards, and they're hardly considered "Hollywood" in the public's eye.

I'm not going to harp on this, because I have more to complain about, but I implore the sensationalist press: please quit referring to everyone who happens to be a celebrity as a Hollywood star. Hollywood deserves its place among the lights, so let's leave it with some dignity, shall we?

Annoyance: Mel Gibson's vilification.

Dudes, the guy was drunk. And while several of you adhere to the philosophy that "people say (and do) what they mean" when they're drunk, this is simply not the case. I've seen one of my best friends try to kiss one of the ugliest women I've ever seen while drunk. Do I think for a second that he wanted to do this? No... but I'm sure that Jim Beam and Wild Turkey sure as hell did.

The man admitted a mistake, he's attempting (although not as strongly as he should be, I'll grant you) to make amends.

Oh, and I'm sick of hearing about all the crap of how "he's an actor, he can lie about it." I've worked with actors quite a bit, and anybody who has can tell you that there is a VERY THICK LINE between acting and lying. Actors are not necessarily good liars, despite the cliché, and vice versa. Take me for instance... I can be a great liar, but I can't act worth a damn.

Umm... forget that last thing I said, will you?

Annoyance: articles concerning Hollywood stars referring to said person as "the (insert film title here) star."

I read a lot of trades (this much should be obvious), and I am so sick and tired of reading about a person who everybody knows about being referred to as "the War of the Worlds star" or as "the Mean Girls star." Um... people who subscribe to the trades probably know who all of these people are, so we probably don't need to be reminded of said person's most recent or most popular film. I admit that this last annoyance isnt coming off as clearly as I'd like, but I'm still not in a proper writer's mood yet. To find out what I'm talking about, check out the IMDb's daily news sections and you'll soon be as annoyed as I am.