Steven Spielberg is, let's face it, one of the most creative guys on the planet, and he's been responsible for some of my most treasured memories at the local multiplex -- who didn't love watching Indiana Jones ride off into the sunset at the conclusion of Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade or viewing couch-jumping Tom Cruise race through a futuristic setting to prove his innocence in Minority Report? The guy is a genius; he also loves videogames. And Electronic Arts (NASDAQ: ERTS) has teamed up with him to develop entertainment software in a bid to differentiate its lineup from the competitive likes of Activision (NASDAQ: ATVI), THQ (NASDAQ: THQI) and Take-Two (NASDAQ: TTWO).

I just read the press release announcing the game he helped create for the Nintendo Wii. It's due out this summer, and it's called BOOM BLOX. I have to be honest and say that I'm not sure exactly what to expect. It has something to do with puzzle combinations, building block structures up and then knocking them down, crazy characters like monkeys who throw baseballs around for one reason or another, etc. Oh, and there are chickens and haunted places, and there are hundreds of levels. Sounds confusing?

I'm confused, but I'm sure if I do a little Googling, I can figure out what's up with this title. The Nintendo Wii is pretty hot right now, as if I had to tell you, and I think a game with the Spielberg brand may sell well for EA. Spielberg is due to deliver two more games for EA. There's no guarantee they'll move copies just because he's involved in their development, but EA having access to his intellectual artistry certainly can't hurt. The publisher will definitely have to do some savvy marketing to ensure that not-with-it folks like myself know exactly what to expect from this game -- the press release claims I'll be addicted, and who's to say I won't be?

Disclosure: Steven Mallas owns Activision and Take-Two, and is looking at a possible buy of Nintendo after this post. Believe it or not, he actually owns the E.T. game for the Atari 2600 (how old-school is that).

Viacom Inc. (NYSE:VIA) Chairman Sumner Redstone was recently bragging about his company's Paramount film studios to the press like a proud parent. It also underscores why he doesn't need Tom Cruise.

The company's "Dreamgirls" film has snagged eight Academy Awards nominations, "Babel" is nominated for "Best Picture" and "Norbit" now has the top spot at the box office. Plus, the studio has promising features such as "Transformers" and a new Indiana Jones film in the pipeline.

Redstone makes the point to the Hollywood Reporter that Hollywood continues to overpay "the talent." "Because it is not the talent that makes the movie, it is the script," he said. "'The play's the thing,' as someone once said. And if you have a great script, the talent rushes to appear in it and at not too heavy a price."

He's right of course and so was Shakespeare.

High-priced actors will appear in a low-budget film if they like the script. They will also appear in bad, big-budget films for a big pay check. Fans will only put up with their favorite stars appearing in bad movies for so long before that actor's brand is tarnished. That's why Redstone was smart to end Paramount's deal with Cruise.

Paramount's rebound will help Viacom's bottom line, particularly when these movies come out in DVDs.

Since he's interested in good scripts, I wonder if I should mail Redstone my coming-of-age comedy about an aspiring hip-hop star from the mean streets of Scarsdale. Does anybody have his email address?

The people have spoken! The results are in for the Best and Worst of 2006 and the big winners include Donald Trump (in two different categories), Paris Hilton (with more votes than any other nominee in any category), President Bush, YouTube (edging out Borat), and this past year's skyrocketing gasoline prices.

Donald Trump didn't need the recent brouhaha with Rosie O'Donnell in order to triumph as the Most Annoying Money Personality of the Year, garnering 44% of the votes in that category. He didn't stop there. His signature comb-over was a very clear favorite as Worst Signature Style, with a whopping 85% of the vote (nearly 69 thousand votes). Readers evidently did not love the 'doo.

ExxonMobil's Lee Raymond came out on top as the Most Overpaid CEO (some very lively debate about it in the comments) with 63% of that vote. Readers also voted "real estate bubble" as the Most Overused Buzzword of 2006 with 47% of the vote in that category, and Northwest Airlines's dumpster-diving tips for laid-off employees the Dumbest Moment in Business with 45% of votes.

This post is written as part of AOL Money & Finance's Best & Worst 2006. If you think that Tom Cruise makes too much money, cast your vote.

Long-considered one of the big guns in Hollywood, Golden Globe Award-winning actor and producer Tom Cruise is the only actor to have six consecutive $100 million plus blockbusters to his credit.

His acting career began when he was sidelined from the high-school wrestling team by an injury and he auditioned for and won a role in the school production of Guys and Dolls. He became a star after dancing in his underwear in the 1983 film Risky Business, for which he reportedly earned a measly $75,000. After 1986's Top Gun put Cruise in the six-figure salary range, he earned his first Razzie Award nomination for 1988's Cocktail. Critically acclaimed Rain Man, Days of Thunder, and A Few Good Men followed. In 1996 he starred in and produced Mission Impossible, the first in the blockbuster franchise, and earned an Academy Award nomination for his role in Jerry Maguire. Later blockbusters include Minority Report, The Last Samurai, and War of the Worlds (which reportedly earned him $70 million plus a percentage of the profits, as well as more Razzie nominations).

But in recent years his personal life has begun to attract more attention than his film roles, notably Cruise's very public advocacy of Scientology and anti-psychiatry statements, coupled with the tabloid speculation about his romantic relationships. In May 2005, during an interview on the Oprah Winfrey Show, Cruise unexpectedly leaped onto the couch to profess his love for Katie Holmes, an incident that was voted #1 of 2005's Most Surprising Television Moments on a countdown on E!. Economic damage due to Cruise's controversial public behavior and views was cited as one reason for the end of the 14-year relationship between Cruise's production company and Paramount Pictures.

Market observers are always looking for a top. It is that one moment, that one symbolic act, that one windfall beyond belief or act of such stupidity that tells folks that things have gotten as crazy as they are going to get. And it's all downhill from here.

It's the day when irrational exuberance gets drunk on hubris. And a terrible hangover follows.

Well, I have seen the top, and it happened this week.

Was it the announcement that Wall Streeters were going to get $30 billion in bonuses in their Christmas stockings this year? Nope.

Was it the Hertz IPO, you ask, where investors fleeced Ford Motor company (NYSE:F) and made $2 billion in about thirty minutes? No sirree.

Was it Google Inc.(NASDAQ:GOOG) buying YouTube, Inc. for about $10 million dollars per day that the company existed ? Nyet.

Was it the announcement of more than $50 BILLION DOLLARS of deals in one day, which occurred on Monday ? Wrong again!

Paramount Picture's recent decision to cut loose Tom Cruise may be just the opening salvo in an upcoming battle between Hollywood studios and high-priced, high maintenance celebs. While overall movie receipt totals for this summer were up, the increase was driven by higher ticket prices, not increased attendance. Moviegoers are increasingly likely to be videoviewers instead. More than 1 million viewers have downloaded the video clip of a young man mixing Diet Coke with a mint and spewing the resulting concoction out of his mouth. Even more odd, 400,000 viewers have downloaded a clip of rabbits munching on vegetation.

Memo to viewers: GET LIVES! Seeing this image on the wall, AOL's strategy to become a premier video viewing destination begins to make a great deal of sense.

Movie production costs continue to skyrocket, with no assurance that money spent on production will be recouped at the theatres. By contrast, the number of no or low-cost video and video clips grows exponentially every week. As well, hundreds of hours of TV programming and thousands of movie titles are added to an increasing number of video-on-demand channels. With its recent purchase of GameDaily, Userplane and Truevo, AOL Video is moving to capture audience eyeballs. AOL also concluded a deal to distribute movie titles from 20th Century Fox, Sony Pictures Home Entertainment, Universal Pictures and Warner Brothers Home Entertainment Group.

Currently, AOL's business model allows viewers to access some ad-supported TV programming on demand free of charge. AOL plans to charge $9.99-$19.99 per movie download. For this fee, howwver, viewers will NOT own the movie. Purchasers may not burn the movie onto a DVD, though the movie may be played repeatedly over a period of days on several different Windows-supported devices. It remains to be seen whether consumers wil pay this fee for short-term ownership only.

Warner Bros.' summer blockbuster Poseidon opened last weekend to a less than spectacular reception. The ticket sales of the $160 million film indicated that the venture was a sinking ship, a capsized boat and a Titanic disappointment (all puns intended).

Based on Warner Bros. estimates, Poseidon spent the weekend at position number two in box office sales with $20.3 million dollars versus the number one -- Mission: Impossible III, which brought in $24.5 million. The remake of the 1972 film, The Poseidon Adventure, which is based on a Paul Gallico novel, Poseidon, was directed by a veteran of boat movies, Wolfgang Petersen -- the guy who directed the movie Das Boot and The Perfect Storm.

I'm sure that, as we speak, the brains over at Warner Bros. are scratching their heads over this one. Completely baffled by the unimpressive ticket sales, they are probably desperate for an explanation.

Well, call me crazy, but I have to think that the MI 3 success probably had a lot to do with Tom Cruise's recent feats of crazy. Had Kurt Russell put in a comparable amount of tabloid time, Brooke Shields insults, and Oprah couch-jumping, Poseidon might have enjoyed a better opening weekend.