Can the "rich-get-richer" phenomenon backfire?

The "rich-get-richer" phenomenon can be widely observed in the movie business. All it takes is one hit film to put an actor or actress on the radar of other directors, who are looking to cast roles in new movies. Having well-known actors and actresses in a film can often play a key role in that movie's success. Once an actor gains a popular fan base from one film, directors recognize that person's popularity and try to capitalize on it. This gives way to a "rich-get-richer" scenario for both the director and actor involved.

One such actress that this happened to was Dakota Fanning. In 2001, Dakota Fanning starred in the movie I Am Sam, which initiated her breakthrough as a child star. She later played roles in notable films such as Man on Fire, War of the Worlds, Charlotte's Web, The Secret Life of Bees, and The Twilight Saga. I Am Sam seriously allowed Dakota's career to skyrocket and she has experienced great success since then. I wonder though, whether or not this "rich-get-richer" phenomenon can backfire on movie stars?

Take, for instance, actor Adam Sandler. He began his filmography career playing roles in big hit movies such as Happy Madison, Happy Gilmore, The Wedding Singer, The Water Boy, Big Daddy, and Mr. Deeds. Sandler quickly became a very popular actor and was in high demand to star in new movies. Some of the new movies Sandler agreed to star in such as Spanglish, Click, and You Don't Mess with the Zohan, however, did not receive as much praise as prior films. If Adam Sandler continues to play roles in not-so-popular movies, I believe that less and less people will feel enticed to go see his work. In essence, I think the "rich-get-richer" phenomenon can backfire on an actor when he/she becomes greedy about starring in every movie regardless of the film's potential to become popular or not.