Current generalizations of the classical Einstein-Hilbert Lagrangian formulation of General Relativity are reviewed. Some alternative variational principles are known to reproduce Einstein's gravitational equations, and should therefore be regarded as equivalent descriptions of the same physical model, while other variational principles ("Scalar-tensor theories" and "Higher-derivative theories") are commonly presented as truly alternative physical theories. Such theories, however, are also known to admit a reformulation which is formally identical to General Relativity (with auxiliary fields). The physical significance of this change of variables has been questioned by several authors in recent years. Here, we investigate to which extent purely affine, metric-affine, scalar-tensor and purely metric theories can be regarded as physically equivalent to GR; we show that in general this depends on which metric tensorfield is assumed to represent the true physical space-time geometry. For purely metric theories where the Lagrangian is a nonlinear function f(R) of the curvature scalar, we present an argument based on the definition of the physical energy, which leads one to regard the rescaled metric (Einstein frame) as the true physical one. As a direct consequence, the physical content of such "alternative" models is reset to coincide with General Relativity, and the "Nonlinear Gravity Theories" become nothing but exotic reformulations of General Relativity in terms of unphysical variables.