<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Vince Vaughn is the Actor that Offers the Best Value for Your Money</title>
	<atom:link href="https://filmjunk.com/2008/07/24/vince-vaughn-is-the-actor-that-offers-the-best-value-for-your-money/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://filmjunk.com/2008/07/24/vince-vaughn-is-the-actor-that-offers-the-best-value-for-your-money/</link>
	<description>The World&#039;s Longest-Running Movie Podcast</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 24 Sep 2021 10:03:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=4.1.33</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Andrew James</title>
		<link>https://filmjunk.com/2008/07/24/vince-vaughn-is-the-actor-that-offers-the-best-value-for-your-money/comment-page-1/#comment-434991</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Andrew James]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 Jul 2008 20:29:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.filmjunk.com/?p=7869#comment-434991</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I&#039;m surprised Tobey Maguire didn&#039;t request an obscene amount of money for Spidey 3.  Although maybe he did and it didn&#039;t skew the number at all because of how much frakkin money that movie made.

I agree with Kurt on one hand: the list is a bit hard to quantify and maybe a ludicrous and ultimately pointless.  But I still think it&#039;s kinda interesting and worth mulling over for curiosity sake.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m surprised Tobey Maguire didn&#8217;t request an obscene amount of money for Spidey 3.  Although maybe he did and it didn&#8217;t skew the number at all because of how much frakkin money that movie made.</p>
<p>I agree with Kurt on one hand: the list is a bit hard to quantify and maybe a ludicrous and ultimately pointless.  But I still think it&#8217;s kinda interesting and worth mulling over for curiosity sake.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rick</title>
		<link>https://filmjunk.com/2008/07/24/vince-vaughn-is-the-actor-that-offers-the-best-value-for-your-money/comment-page-1/#comment-434890</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Rick]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 Jul 2008 16:18:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.filmjunk.com/?p=7869#comment-434890</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Wasn&#039;t this already done about 4 or 5 months ago? (Matt Damon was #1 on that occasion. Meh.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Wasn&#8217;t this already done about 4 or 5 months ago? (Matt Damon was #1 on that occasion. Meh.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kurt</title>
		<link>https://filmjunk.com/2008/07/24/vince-vaughn-is-the-actor-that-offers-the-best-value-for-your-money/comment-page-1/#comment-434879</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Kurt]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 Jul 2008 15:52:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.filmjunk.com/?p=7869#comment-434879</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[To be honest, it doesn&#039;t interest me that much, but this particular chart is ludicrous enough to make me come out of the woodworks and comment (or pass along more thought-out commentary over at MovieCityNews).]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>To be honest, it doesn&#8217;t interest me that much, but this particular chart is ludicrous enough to make me come out of the woodworks and comment (or pass along more thought-out commentary over at MovieCityNews).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kurt</title>
		<link>https://filmjunk.com/2008/07/24/vince-vaughn-is-the-actor-that-offers-the-best-value-for-your-money/comment-page-1/#comment-434874</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Kurt]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 Jul 2008 15:43:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.filmjunk.com/?p=7869#comment-434874</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[People come to the certain movies for a lot of different things.  In todays high-concept multiplex world, the &quot;Star System&quot; is far from the only factor (actually, the more I think about that, the more I think, same as it ever was).

There is still a whole risk element to things, and not enough rational statistics to turn something as fickle as entertainment &amp; pop-culture into something predictably quantifiable.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>People come to the certain movies for a lot of different things.  In todays high-concept multiplex world, the &#8220;Star System&#8221; is far from the only factor (actually, the more I think about that, the more I think, same as it ever was).</p>
<p>There is still a whole risk element to things, and not enough rational statistics to turn something as fickle as entertainment &amp; pop-culture into something predictably quantifiable.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sean</title>
		<link>https://filmjunk.com/2008/07/24/vince-vaughn-is-the-actor-that-offers-the-best-value-for-your-money/comment-page-1/#comment-434867</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Sean]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 Jul 2008 15:31:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.filmjunk.com/?p=7869#comment-434867</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[They do seem to be randomly picking and choosing which movies they included in their calculations, but I guess the thing that should make us most suspicious is the fact that there are no unknowns or independent films on the list. Surely something like Juno (budget: $7.5 million, worldwide gross: $229 million) offered a MUCH bigger return than The Break-Up.

Still, it&#039;s an interesting idea for analysis, even if there&#039;s no good way to measure it.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>They do seem to be randomly picking and choosing which movies they included in their calculations, but I guess the thing that should make us most suspicious is the fact that there are no unknowns or independent films on the list. Surely something like Juno (budget: $7.5 million, worldwide gross: $229 million) offered a MUCH bigger return than The Break-Up.</p>
<p>Still, it&#8217;s an interesting idea for analysis, even if there&#8217;s no good way to measure it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kurt</title>
		<link>https://filmjunk.com/2008/07/24/vince-vaughn-is-the-actor-that-offers-the-best-value-for-your-money/comment-page-1/#comment-434865</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Kurt]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 Jul 2008 15:18:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.filmjunk.com/?p=7869#comment-434865</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Most arbitrary $$$ comparison ever.  Their selection criteria and other factors (including back-end Gross points, etc.) make this whole exercise kinda ludicrous.

More detailed take-down of this &#039;research&#039; here:

http://www.mcnblogs.com/thehotblog/archives/2008/07/hot_button_forb.html]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Most arbitrary $$$ comparison ever.  Their selection criteria and other factors (including back-end Gross points, etc.) make this whole exercise kinda ludicrous.</p>
<p>More detailed take-down of this &#8216;research&#8217; here:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.mcnblogs.com/thehotblog/archives/2008/07/hot_button_forb.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.mcnblogs.com/thehotblog/archives/2008/07/hot_button_forb.html</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>