Hollywood is understandably nervous about the coming summer movie season, with several massively budgeted, iffy propositions set to establish their shepherds as either the prophetic sons of God they are, or banish them to the sixth rung of outcast-executive Hell with a bullshit production deal. With profits down, and major players advocating salary caps for stars, Entertainment Weekly thought it seemed like the right time to reexamine the asking prices of some the world's biggest movie stars:

Carrey, star of hits like "Bruce Almighty," had been a big beneficiary of the 1990s' salary run-up during which he saw his paycheck hit the $25 million mark.

However, his recent big-budget movies like "Fun with Dick and Jane" barely topped $100 million in domestic ticket sales, leaving his star tarnished, the magazine said.

Will Ferrell's $20 million also made the list of risky bets given recent box office disappointments and Eddie Murphy's $20 million was considered downright "too pricey."

But Tom Hanks' $25 million was thought to be "worth every penny" because he remains "one of the most bankable brand names in the world." Oscar nominee Jake Gyllenhaal, at $5 million to $7 million a picture, and Rachel McAdams at $3 million to $4 million, were bargains.

It's easy to use 20-20 hindsight in noting the folly of dissolving your corporate health insurance program in order to cover your star's astronomical salary. But let's face it: With a three word pitch like "Carrey. Leoni. Remake," what sane executive wouldn't sign a blank check to cover Carrey's Third-World-hunger-eradicating-sized salary, which seems a tiny price to pay in exchange for the actor's priceless, improvisational takes on the set of Dick and Jane?

• Star salaries coming down in Hollywood? [Reuters]
• Face Value [EW.com]
• Who Will Rock the Summer Box Office? [LAT]