I didn't know that asking for healthcare had a direct impact on $20M salaries for the top stars. SAG has no bearing on the top-billed stars asking for points on the gross.

There are plenty of other places where movies are being made, and guess what? They're being made there (Vancouver, Sydney, Twickenham, Bollywood).

I assure you, it's the monopoly on the distribution system that warrants the Union's behaviors, not the other way around. The Internet (and the compensation issues it's generating) is proof of that.

Back to the OP's dilemma/quandry/question; the question is not one really of content, but rather, examining the advertising effectiveness of that content. A lot of folks have already commented on this. . .

I read off of the blog "Confessions of an ACA-fan" (http://www.henryjenkins.org/), in one of the links off of there (sorry for the deep linking), that advertising in the 1960's and 1970's on TV had a 50%+ recall rate. That rate, for the same 15-30 seconds, is now down to 20%. However, this is an average. . .

. . . the scary thing are the anomalies. American Idol apparently has a 55%+ recall rate for it's advertising. Same with a few other shows. Regardless of any palpable "quality," you're going to keep those shows on.

Movies are the same way. If we have <random story> with <marketable star> by <big movie company>, there are practical assurances of returns before the screenplay is even finished.

Remember, we don't make movies or televisions shows because we want entertainment. We need entertainment to make shareholders happy.