Maybe it’s just me, but suppose for example, Kevin Costner made a real stinker of a movie, like I dunno, Waterworld. And let’s suppose that he was paid several million dollars up front for it, and promised a cut of the gross receipts. Now then, because Costner can’t act his way out of a mime’s invisible box, the movie bites it, and loses a lot of money. In addition the film crew is paid union scale wages, which are nowhere near what Costner’s salary and perks and total compensation are. And Costner’s salary comes from the pockets of people who are fooled into going to see this piece of junk. And he also gets compensated for the gross receipts on the movie, which cause it to lose more money. Now why does no one scream about that, yet they call for the heads of corporate CEO’s who do the exact same thing under different circumstances? (Now I know that Waterworld eventually made a profit due to foreign receipts and DVD sales, but this was just an example.)
Maybe it’s just me, but suppose for example, Kevin Costner made a real stinker of a movie, like I dunno, Waterworld. And let’s suppose that he was paid several million dollars up front for it, and promised a cut of the gross receipts. Now then, because Costner can’t act his way out of a mime’s invisible box, the movie bites it, and loses a lot of money. In addition the film crew is paid union scale wages, which are nowhere near what Costner’s salary and perks and total compensation are. And Costner’s salary comes from the pockets of people who are fooled into going to see this piece of junk. And he also gets compensated for the gross receipts on the movie, which cause it to lose more money. Now why does no one scream about that, yet they call for the heads of corporate CEO’s who do the exact same thing under different circumstances? (Now I know that Waterworld eventually made a profit due to foreign receipts and DVD sales, but this was just an example.)