Okay, it’s time for a currency check. Last week, Nicolas Cage revealed that he doesn’t have two nickels to rub together because of things like buying islands, haunted mansions and dinosaur skulls (What does one do with a dinosaur skull? Put it on the coffee table?). This week John Cusack is in 2012, and stinker movie you could smell coming from a mile off. Have these two guys finally run out of the unlimited cache that movie audiences have seemed to want to cut them?
Personally, I’ve always been of the opinion that Nic Cage doesn’t have two brain cells to rub together. And as of last week, most entertainment writers seemed to be moving en masse towards a “Cage is a ridiculous douchebag” assessment. Please do. Mi bandwagon es su bandwagon. Been riding this baby since Peggy Sue got married. And whatever cultural coin he earned from Leaving Las Vegas (none with me, by the way, overrated piece of macho fantasia claptrap) should have been cashed long ago. But regardless. If it’s his fiscal irresponsibility that opens America’s eyes, so be it. Maybe it will stop Ghost Rider 2: Hell on Wheels.
Then there’s John Cusack. What to make of him? He doesn’t seem to be an idiot; longstanding friendship with Jeremy Piven notwithstanding. He can act. He’s handsome enough to attract, yet doughy enough to not intimidate. He was Lloyd freaking Dobbler for crissakes (though Better Off Dead is my preferred seminal work). And yet . . . if we’re all honest, we all look at movie trailers with him in it and think “It might not suck.” But the fact that he’s been in so movies that just barely miss suckitude by virtue of his presence kind of indicates that there’s going to be a whole lot of suckage going on around him. Do you really want to drop $9.50 on that? He’s the king of popcorn movies with intellectual pretensions, and the flaccid semi-art house tearjerker. Enough already.
Sad to see the mighty fall. In their own way, they both used to own their own particular part of the field. And give them credit for a good ride. 20+ years is gold watch territory by Hollywood standards. Hopefully Cusack was a little smarter with his money.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
Agree with you on both guys.
This is a little off-topic from your post but apparently Jim Carrey has said something to the effect that capitalism is bringing down this country---said by he who was the first to earn $20 million a movie. Too bad Hollywood doesn't pay in direct proportion to actual acting talent.
I think Jim C deserved every cent of that paycheck - look at his box office takes.
As to Nick Cage and his money trubles - BAD manaement. He is not paid to think or do math (thank goodness!) but I bet HE pai a boatload of dough to someone to do it for him, he should sue.
I honestly don't know why all Hollywood contracts aren't "back end". See how much money the movie makes, then pay. At least a part of the deal. More likely people would be bringing their A game [cough] Will Ferrel. And if they had to take their money on net instead of gross, I doubt you'd see too many $500 million budgets. James Cameron, I'm looking at you. That much money spent on a movie is just kind of sickmaking. Sorry. I'm collecting food for the office food drive. And when you see how much food $20 can buy, it makes half a billion look a lot different.
Hollywood accounting is suchthat there never is anything net - works magically that way. If yo agent can't get you a piece of it gross or front money, you are screwed.
Agreed that $500 million on CGI and wooden acting is disgusting - hope at least the crew is well-fed.
I'm sure the fuzzy accounting has done more to screw the movie industry in the long run than movie piracy ever did.
Half a BILLION dollars. Guh-ross.
Post a Comment