In 1991, profits were down, star wattage was dimming and Hollywood was in a panic.

To a degree, they probably already are.

But then, weve been here before.

Furthermore, admissions in August and September 1991 were the worst theyd been since 1978.

Well come to that shortly.

Star power still just about ruled in 1991, and Hollywood was paying more than ever to acquire it.

There were not many exceptions to that particular rule.

He proved good value, though.

It not only hit big in the States, it travelled too.

It marked a box office peak for Arnold Schwarzenegger, that onlyTrue Lieshas really come close to matching since.

Expensive ones at that.

Julia Roberts was thus hired to star inDying Young.The result?

Al Pacino and Michelle Pfeiffer in the decentFrankie And Johnny?A surprising box office disappointment.

Bruce Willis inThe Last Boy Scout?

Harrison Ford inRegarding Henry?

All of them underperformed, with big above-the-line talent bills to pay.

Therewerehits, just not as many of them.

A sign of things to come: evenTerminator 2was technically an independent film.

for the first time in a generation, uncertain about star power.

Yet if you didnt have a star, you were still exposed.

So what went wrong?

1990, after all, had been a stellar year at the US box office.

Yet tellingly, the films that made the big money in that year werent the ones people were expecting.

The status quo was already under threat.

Enormous would be right.

Willis pocketed around $14m forThe Last Boy Scout).

But it wasnt just the spending.

Furthermore, non-US box office takings were tempered, and the American television networks were cutting costs.

Virtually all of the key, major revenue streams for a movie were being squeezed.

Even the modest, mid-range movies were coming back flat.

Interestingly, Premiere also asked the heads of the Hollywood studios what needed to change to turn things around.

As was Sony Pictures chief in 1991, Peter Guber.

Only now is he getting it.

Steven Spielbergs expensiveHook, laden with stars, was regarded as a disappointment.

By the timeHooksglobal take of $300m was finally accrued, most of that money was already accounted for.

That was supposed to beHooks job.

As it would happen, Steven Spielberg would go on to be part of the solution.

Whats interesting, then, is what Hollywood did next.

And theres a sense that some lessons at least had been learned.

Looking at the summer output in particular, crucially the films were much better.

Elsewhere, interestingly, star vehicles delivered, but generally off the back of good to excellent reviews.

More to the point: the star movies were notably better.

Each of them this time around was a studio film too.

Even the mid-range was improving and working.

Just two years before, that would have been unthinkable.

The Schwarzenegger phenomenon was nearing its end.

But then others things had changed.

Studios once gambled on stars for two reasons.

Firstly, they increased your chances of a hit.

Secondly, they gave you someone to blame if the film failed.

As the 90s progressed though, that wouldnt wash, and things gradually changed.

1999, Id argue, would ultimately prove pivotal, and we covered thathere.

But were the lessons really learned?

Well, Id argue not really.

If Arnie was available, people still stumped up (and to a degree, they still do).

But the mechanics werent radically altered.

Yet what saved Hollywood, and averted the problem, was DVD.

Then it moved onto worldwide box office.

If the cycle continues, well see you back here in 2047 for more of the same.

He argued that the rules never change.

They only appear to change.

And as Hollywood goes through the same cycle again, Simpson might just have a point there.

[This article was edited on 19th September 2014 to, er, correct my ropey maths Simon]