Hollywood has it's own terminology. One term they use is "bankable." A bankable actor is someone who when cast in a movie will ensure that movie makes a profit. I first heard of this some time ago. When I heard of it the word was that at the time the only bankable actor was Steve McQueen. Hollywood is more about money, believe it or not, than $cientology. That's probably why those who are part of Hollywood but not part of $cientology tolerate $cientology so well.
I was going to wait until after the weekend to check on how Rock of Ages
did on its opening weekend because they do include Sunday's box office receipts in the opening weekend amount. I will check that out but right now, on Saturday, June 16, 2012 Rock of Ages
, which had a budget of $75 million has box office receipts of approximately $5,350,000 according to Box Office Mojo. http://boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=rockofages.htm
That's a little bit more than a seven percent recoup of the movie's cost. In $cientology a 'stat' like that would bring the staff member(s) involved a condition of at least 'treason.'
All the producers and money people in Hollywood keep up with this stuff. They are going to look at the box office receipts for Rock of Ages
and think, 'This Tom Cruise is not bankable.' Even though this movie has an ensemble cast its producers have been featuring Tom Cruise as the main attraction in their trailers and other promotion, so he'll be the main one to get the negative attention associated with the poor monetary performance of the movie.
Keep in mind this is show BUSINESS
. Anyone involved in it never forgets that, or they do at their own peril.