Did Snobby "Sahara" Stars Sandbag Movie Budget?

46. What going on here Harvey,,,,,,,,,,,,There has been no new post since 3am this morning

Posted at 7:16PM on Apr 15th 2007 by Janice

47. They are losers both of them. I believe that onceactors start getting demanding like this they should be given the praverbial boot for good, I certainly wouldn't want to work with these spoilt, overpaid no talant hacks.

Posted at 7:02PM on Apr 15th 2007 by parisite hilton sux!

48. No wonder they need people around to make them look better, they are soooo freaki'n ugly otherwise EEEEWWWWEEEE!!!!!! Oh yeah in case anyone is interested TMZ have pulled two of my comments off this site just coz I was nagative about paris hilton, I urge everyone to put their best hate blogs about parisite up on the very next peice of crap TMZ post about this spoilt little slut and stick it to 'em. I don't understand WTF TMZ keep putting ONLY positive spins on the stuff they put up on her, My guess is she has them by the balls legality wise she is such a little whiner ho.

Posted at 7:08PM on Apr 15th 2007 by parisite hilton sux!

49. No wonder these stars stay so trim. Hell... if we all had a trainer, chef and six-figure stylist we would all be looking as good or better!
frankly, they do not look good enough for the amount of $$ spent on them.

Posted at 11:11PM on Apr 15th 2007 by Jessa

50. While I agree actors and actress are overpaid and most movies are not worth spending money on, these amounts are a small percentage of 130 million. Where did the rest go?

Posted at 7:04PM on Apr 16th 2007 by Princess

51. LOOKS LIKE THEY WASTED MONEY ON A DIALOGUE COACH FOR PENELOPE. YOU CAN HARDLY UNDERSTAND HER ANYWAY, AND YOU WOULD THINK THAT TRYING TO STAR IN ENGLISH SPEAKING MOVIES, SHE WOULD WORK A LITTLE HARDER ON HER ACCENT! AS FOR THE HAIRDRESSER, NO STYLIST IN THE WORLD IS WORTH THAT MUCH FOR A LITTLE HAIR SPRAY AND DYE! NO WONDER THEY DIDN'T MAKE ANY MONEY ON THE PICTURE. AS FOR MATTHEW, HE LOOKS LIKE HE COULD USE A GOOD SCRUBBY BATH AND A LOT OF DEODORANT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted at 8:32PM on Apr 15th 2007 by LULU

52. Here's a point that everyone fails to consider. This film was made by Paramount Pictures, a division of Sumner Redstone's Viacom Corp.. Viacom is heavily traded public corporation. Among the heavy investors are the pension funds of several major unrelated corporations.

Under the law of corporations, all executives must abide by core rules including both the business judgment rule and the general rule of fiduciary responsibility to those who own the company, primarily the share holders. Failing to safeguard the interests of the owners is punishable by law to the extent necessary to recover damages that should have been avoided by those at the top of the corporate food chain, since they purport to be the experts in the fields in which they work and collect an enormous paycheck for their expertise. Suits usually take the form of derivative shareholder claims, brought by a group of shareholders although a single share held by a single individual can be sufficient.

So the question is: Has the actions of the corporate officers here arisen to the point where they, and/or the corporation they serve, should be held liable for damages to the shareholders (e.g. the retired school teacher or auto worker living in a meager home in Bloomington, Indiana off the modest funds from her/his shrinking pension) as a result of their loose accounting/spending decision making in light of the failed performance/minimal margin of return for these types of film projects?

Typically, when challenged on these grounds executives (in all realms of business) claim shelter behind the business judgment rule by claiming that they appropriately made decisions based on their expertise in these matters. There is another legal concept that lends itself here however and it is a concept rooted in Latin - res ipsa loquitor, which means 'the thing speaks for itself.' Spend lavish amounts on unnecessary expenses.....movie then loses vast amounts of (other people's) money......I dunno....what do you think?

Posted at 8:52PM on Apr 15th 2007 by SJ

53. Yeah I just want to say that I matthew m. practices all this zen bs well Id like to just say that if you are going to be all zen you'd have to not be famous, not have any material possessions and so on.... i mean he is obviously not that, hes like most of everyone else in the fairytale world of hollywood shallow, and not that particularly interesting of a person... hope neither one of them lose their money.... if they did someone might have to tell them now they aren't worth a d@mn....

Posted at 4:22PM on Apr 16th 2007 by -ash

54. There are just too many "stars" out there in today's world. Just because somebody makes a movie doesn't necessarily make them a movie star. Years ago, actors/actresses had to earn the title by making more than one movie. Movie stars of the past were glamorous and sophisticated, had taste, and appreciated the public who paid their salaries. The younger stars of today have a lot to learn about sophistication, glamor, and just growing up.

Posted at 9:07PM on Apr 15th 2007 by Suzy

55. Her hair was nothing special in that movie. definitely not worth $100.000 +

Posted at 11:31PM on Apr 15th 2007 by No way

56. You want just the director and producers to get all the cash? Ha! I don't think so.

You GO to the movies to SEE the actors. Share the wealth. I think they should pay the actors MORE.

Posted at 11:51PM on Apr 15th 2007 by y'all are just jealous

57. Show Business? Any other business would surely fail if they relied on the business acumen of those counting the beans. This is just a symptom of the much larger problem in Hollywood-- sense of entitlement. It goes from the actors on the marquee all the way down to the PA's getting away with padding their expense reports. I have personally seen everyone getting away with this behavior. Shameless.

Posted at 12:22AM on Apr 16th 2007 by hammy

58. LOL.........#6

My thoughts exactly.

Posted at 12:30AM on Apr 16th 2007 by What? Are you kidding?

59. does tmz go on vacation on weekends or what? it seems like there are way less interesting stories on this site on saturdays and sundays. come on, isn't that when most celebs are out and about??? update already!

Posted at 12:46PM on Apr 16th 2007 by i.e.

60. What, no one got arrested today? Come on. This movie came out over 2 years ago.

Posted at 2:40AM on Apr 16th 2007 by angelbunny17