(continued)

Add to all of the above the simple fact that I would rather rent a DVD and watch it than pay three times as much to sit in a theater among a bunch of rude people. If i like he film I can buy the DVD or wait until it hits the bargain bin. In any case, I have paid a lot less and put up with a lot less. I am also looking for performances, not "star quality." I would rather see Phillip Seymour Hoffman in any of his roles than Brad Pitt any day. Hoffman is an actor. Pitt isn't, or, at least, he has forgotten how to be one.

Well, it wasn't just one suspect in this case, it was a conspiracy. CGI, film-critic geekdom (don't forget the failed-artist haters who flame every movie on their blog for not being existential enough), and the sheer abundance of both movies and A-listers have devalued the prestige of movie stardom. Indeed, the cult of celebrity and tabloid journalism were also there, as you can't glamorize someone when every sordid detail of their life comes out, often fueled by the stars' own egos and the notion that they can do no wrong (see Spears, Lohan, and others). And technology, the Internet and cable TV have given us many more entertainment options so going to the movies is no longer a given--particularly now that production costs have gotten so huge they need absolutely insane turnout to break even.

Also of note is that a lot of movies just aren't entertaining anymore. In the golden age of cinema, that's all that mattered--good characters, fun plot, you had a winner. Seems now the screenwriters are more interested in being 'relevant' and making sure the movies have some deep psychological meaning or something, but many just come off preachy or boring.

Typical Hollywood arrogance. Blame everyone but themselves.
All these flops listed in this article have 1 thing in common. They SUCKED. They would've sucked with ANYONE in the title role.
The internet doesn't kill movies. It allows people to be smart consumers. If a movie has gone through several re-writes, directors, producers etc...chances are its going to be a disjoined jumble or garbage. If im going to spend $10 + another 10-15 for a drink and popcorn to see a movie, you'd better be damn sure the movie you are going to see is going to be worth the money and the 4 hours of time.

If anyone's tabulating data for an essay, here are my views. Part of why I stopped going to the theaters is because, in my last year in college, I was living off of student loans to pay rent for my apartment, eat, put gas in my car, and so on. I really wanted to see "300", "Black Snake Moan", "Hannibal Rising", and "The Mist" in theaters. I didn't because I had to ask myself the question: "Do I want to see a movie? Or do I want to eat my one meal of the day?". The economy takes its toll on many.
Now, because I'd go so long without seeing a movie, I got into the habit of not seeing movies. So getting off my butt to see one took a lot more will power.
Finally, I think we need to enjoy this change in the film industry. We've been complaining for so long about how formulaic and crappy movies are each year. Now it seems like the familiar crutches of Hollywood aren't working anymore. So now we have to pay attention to the actual content of the film. By the way, has anyone forgotten that the motion picture, film, or movie, is at its basic level, a story with a plot, setting, and characters?

Good points but wrong conclusions ( except Will Farrell not an A lister in the new world) because terms author is using apply to yesterdays numbers. The new definiton of an A list movie star is one who can consistenly double the movies take overseas. Make no mistake, the US is still the worlds biggest market and one of, if not the only places where a Hollywood movie can make a profit by just hitting it there. But the people on this list ( except Farell) can all without exception at least double if not get 70% more from the worldwide movie market. So while Troy only did $133,333,000.00 domestically on a budget of $175,000,000.00 because of Brad Pitt ( and a story of historical interest) it did $364,000,000.00 Foreign for a grand total of $497,400,000.00 (roughly) if you go to the new A list actors you will find that they can consitenly deliver double your money or more on every film they are in. (Good or Bad)
So while salarys may come down a bit for actors or deals may be structured differently an A list actor will continue to be an A list actor because the opportunity to double your investment by simply adding a name is worth too much to pass up and is simly good businesses sense.