• Norgur@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    It’s an easy calculation: how many tickets will that star sell more than if they weren’t in the movie? Based on that you’ll get an amount of dollars you can pay out to that actor.

    • Rakn@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      28
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Which is likely true, but kinda weird to me. I do not have a tendency to select the movies I watch based on the actors. But I assume that isn’t true for most folks. I mean apparently.

      • Vlyn@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        19
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’d wager most people prefer movies with actors they know (and like). For example if Morgan Freeman is in a movie I’m already thinking there’s at least one decent actor in there, so the likelihood of me watching it goes up.

        And of course you know what you get usually. If Jim Carrey is in a movie, duh, you get slapstick humor most of the time. Samuel L. Jackson will probably play a cool guy and drop a few f-bombs. Chris Pratt? Probably an action movie with lighthearted humor. And so on.

        It’s not only about the actor, but each one has a kind of brand too. And if the actor is expensive the production quality is usually decent.

      • GunnarRunnar@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        1 year ago

        While I don’t think it’s as straight forward calculation as Norgur thinks, you’re forgetting that star power has marketing reach beyond just name recognition on a poster. People want to hear from them. They give interviews, promote at events and give status to the movie: It will be featured more in media which in itself means that more people will hear about it (even if they don’t choose the movie based on that name) which means they’re more likely to consider seeing it at a later date as they recognize it.

      • loobkoob@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        The “A-list actor” isn’t much of a thing nowadays - it’s all much more about franchises - but star power used to be a real box office draw. People would go to see a film just because it was the new Johnny Depp film, for instance, regardless of the genre/plot/style/quality.

        There aren’t many actors these days who have that kind of draw. Two that I can think of are Ryan Reynolds and Tom Cruise - both actors where you have a fairly good idea of what you’ll get from a film they’re in, even when you know nothing about it.

        Franchises have definitely taken over. People will go to the cinema to see a film because it’s a Marvel film, a Star Wars film, etc, regardless of who directed it, who it stars, and the quality of the film. Sequels and cinematic universes sell tickets in the way familiar faces used to.

        • toastyboy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          12
          ·
          1 year ago

          Definitely hasn’t gone away though, same concept for directors. Oppenheimer basically sold it’s tickets when it was announced just because it was Nolan, same thing for Tarrentino films

    • Anticorp
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Right. How many people saw the sequel without Carrey, and are any of those 12 people in this thread?