With most big-budget blockbusters now being adapted from existing properties, it seems as though the days when A-list stars were used to sell movies to general audiences are fast becoming obsolete. Instead, studios churn out sequels, remakes, reboots and re-imaginings based on recognizable brands in order to get people into the multiplex. Does this mean that actors are becoming increasingly less important when it comes to marketing studio tent-poles? Well, yes and no. Some of the biggest franchises in Hollywood are sold more on the strength of the characters or the brand rather than the actors who star in them; like Batman, Superman, Star Wars and Harry Potter. On the other side of the coin, there are franchises that are inextricably tied to their lead actors, so much so that it becomes impossible to envision a movie without them; imagine Iron Man without Robert Downey Jr., Pirates of the Caribbean without Johnny Depp or Indiana Jones without Harrison Ford and they suddenly become completely different prospects. Take Gareth Edwards' Godzilla as a recent example; the movie opened to over $93m domestically and in less than two weeks has grossed well over $300m worldwide, yet one of the biggest criticisms of the movie was Aaron Taylor-Johnson's one-dimensional and uninteresting central character. You'd be hard-pressed to guess he was the lead from the marketing, which centered more on Bryan Cranston and the titular monster. With that in mind, this article will take a look at ten actors that have delivered boring leading performances in blockbuster movies, some more than once. This isn't an attack on any of the actors on the list; many have proven themselves capable in a variety of movies in different genres. It's just that taking a starring role in a big-budget studio picture clearly isn't their forte. Do you agree with the choices in the article? Are any of these actors being harshly treated by their inclusion? Are there any other names that you would have included? As always, sign off in comments below.