098653200410564

Oh oh oh! I cant wait!!!




:shifty: Stopid STEED.

That's okay dowly, there are lots of other good websites out there to keep you entertained during this time of crysis. Although, some of them may involve goats, guinea pigs, or other barnyard animals.:cool:

Oh, I heard Keira wasn't into gamers anyway.

I'd go "hog wild" for dowly!
http://www.petsworld.co.uk/images/guinea-pig.jpg

I don't mind actors. Some of them are good, some of them are bad. They do make a valuable product though. But I really can't stand it when they use their media reach to try and advise people on world affairs. FFS sake, there's a reason you're an actor and not a foreign affairs specialist.

For laughs:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=i-2bh6ND84g

PD

Nothing changed in history here. In Rome, it was the gladiators though most of them were slaves, they were still highly regarded.

-S

I'll be terribly upset if Nicolas Cage goes on strike that means no good movies in the near future. :nope:

Beats me how the top actors/actresses can get up to 25million per movie :hmm: Who was that actor who died few years ago that said acting is the easiest profession theres nothing to it.

The most depressing thing about rates of pay for entertainers/sportsmen is that their employers, being good capitalists, are simply paying the 'going rate'. As with all companies, the employees are being paid the lowest that the bosses can get away with. Says some pretty damning things about priorities in our society, doesn't it?

I think one point is being missed here. As Clive pointed out, big names in all industries get what they demand, if the people paying for it think the big name will draw in big money. SAG isn't just about the big names. The ones demanding more are the rank-and-file, the extras and small-time character actors. The big names support them because they were once there, and also because they still belong to the union.

I'm not defending them - those extras make a lot more than I do. I'm just trying to give it a little perspective.

I guess the bad economy and high gaz prices are affecting there rich life style.:hmm: I guess they have to tighten there belts like the rest of us.:lol:

There is a reason why the internet, newspapers, computers and console games exist!:up:

So if there's nothing good to watch on the TV or in the cinema, you will find a good place to not only entertain but to educate ourselves! If one falls, we can fall back to another medium.:hmm:

So to heck with the lot of them!:nope:

I like a good movie, who doesn't? But what really gripes me about these Hollywood types is not the money they make. Look at how much is paid to athletes these days! What gripes me, is when they use their celebrity status to voice their opinions politically. When I hear the likes of Rosie (puke) O'Donnel vibrating her vocal chords in between cheeseburgers, I just go Bersek!!!:yep:

Strike = I'll have more time on my hands but not as much cash in my pocket :( Not all actors and movie peeps are gazillionaires. :)

well it is dependent on where the money is coming from.

Actors and sports figures have a customer base in people who pay their money to see the actor/sports figures doing their job. Advertisers will invest a lot of money based on the knowledge that even more people will watch sporting events as opposed to paying for a ticket.

This is lacking with medical researchers and teachers. Few citizens will pay money to watch a researcher research or a teacher teach. Who is willing to pay $50 to watch a cancer researcher conduct research for 2-3 hours? Any one? But we will stand in line to pay $50+ for a ticket to watch a football player do his job to 2-3 hours.

Who is willing to pay $15 to see a film of a grade school teacher lecture about nouns and verbs? Any one? But we are willing to spend $15 dollars to watch an actor appear in a film.

It is called discretionary spending. People will voluntarily spend money for such things as entertainment. Fewer people will voluntarily spend money for such things as cancer research. This does not make them bad people. It is how they choose to spend their money.

It is unreasonable to compare a person conducting cancer research to a Football player. Each is a professional in their own field. Each provides a service to society. The fact that one is "merely" entertainment, does not diminish their value to our society.

Should a cancer researcher receive more money? Sounds good, but where is the money going to come from? There simply aint no fanbase for medical researchers.

It is all about economics and markets. Movie acting and professional sports are profit making enterprises where teaching and medical research is not.

Not always fair, but that's the way I see it.

How do you feel when a "Hollywood type" voices an opinion that you agree with? Do you still object to them voicing their political opinions?

Mate, you can jump to the back of the line - behind yours truly!!!

I've even set up an agreement with the wife-to-be... if either keira knightley or anne hathaway ever try to take advantage of me, its not cheating:D

Screen actors guid?? I prefer what Team America refered to them as, Film actors guild!

Matt Damon!!!:doh: