Are movie stars getting paid too much? How else are they going to afford another diamond studded swimming pool and solid gold Humvee’s? (Thanks Al)
Seems that movie stars might start to see a pay cut if current trends indicate Hollywood’s change in attitude.
If an actor balks at the deal, the studios say they will move to another choice immediately. “They’re not fucking around,” says the talent representative. “They know exactly who that next person is. Sometimes they’ll tell you.”
But salaries are being slashed now in Hollywood and even bigger stars are not immune. “Why would anybody pay Julia Roberts $20 million to do Duplicity?” says one producer. “That won’t happen again.” Indeed, this source says Sony Pictures is ponying up $15 million for Roberts to do Eat, Pray, Love and probably already regrets having committed to pay that much.
With the economic downturn the studios are regrouping. They have canceled movies they felt were too borderline risk, and are taking a much more direct approach to negotiating salaries for actors. So some might lose the gig because they are asking too much.
I disagree. I think that Hollywood is just going to keep paying extraordinary amounts for actors, and there is no end in sight. I am sure that there are a lot of deals that go sour because they got too greedy without us even hearing about them. But if they willingly give them the money its because they figure there is a return to be had.
We heard that Rourke was offered a “lowball” $250,000 but that’s about 10 times what the average person above the poverty line makes in a year, so I don’t feel bad for the guy. That his agent supposedly negotiated up to over $400k is a really good job, and even better for Rourke’s pocket even after deductions. Waa waa. Take your money and enjoy it. Rourke isn’t the draw of the movie, but he helps add star power. Same with Scarlett. If they can get them to agree on a lower price, then the bean counters are happy.
But $20million for Julia Roberts? Don’t get me wrong, the lady is a very talented individual and a boxoffice draw for certain, but should they really have to fork out $20m to get her to be in a movie? Would Duplicity be any less of a film if they had someone else in the role? Quality actors name their price and the studios still line up.
A lot of people talk about “salary caps” for movie stars, like sports teams do. The flaw in that logic is that sports teams have the cap so they can’t BUY a better team. Makes everything more competitive and entertaining. If one team always won, people would lose interest. Would lose its edge. That’s not what happens in Hollywood.
I am not saying these stars should be paid an hourly wage and slug it out like everyone else. I understand their role in the film is critical and so much hinges on their performance. Pay them their due. Sometimes I think they get more than their due but its paid willingly.
And Hollywood has no trouble paying. The big studios are more than happy to back up the money truck to a star who they think is going to thicken THEIR wallets too. If putting a $20m actress in Duplcity changes the boxoffice from a $50m take to a $150m, then its invested wisely.
Are they worth that much money? Not always. In some cases it pays off. And the accomplished personalities know this and so do their agents.
The machine is part to blame. Its just easier to line up the agents and budget yourself a star that fits what you are trying to do.
Its all about returns.
Speak of the devil…. Fast and Furious just made a boatload of money squarely because the cast was back.
Not just Roberts, but other big stars that have a shit load of money should have to help bale the economy out, and give a descent amount to people like me who have lost their job, and no resort to robbing banks. Especially Trump…. his is coming, he better watch his money
You’re right Hazzy, how do they sleep at night with a shitload of money in the bank just sitting there knowing that there are millions of people starving to death? 3 dollars can feed a whole indian family for a week.
If I had that much money I’d be making kevler suits fighting crime or something, maybe even investing on medicine so they can find a cure for everything or investing on science so they could build a time machine and get trapped in predestination paradoxes
for trying to kill Hilter or Pat Boone.
Like Lennon said :
“Oh boy, when you’re dead, you don’t take nothing with you but your soul – think!”
I’d GLADLY take $400,000 for one fucking job. I could live off that for a LONG time. If some of these folks would start living beneath their means, they’d be perfectly fine. Seriously, have you SEEN some of their houses? Who the fuck needs that much space unless you’re the Octomom?
Right on mate. Jay Leno’s Bike garage alone could house all the citizens of Deleware.
I agree as well.
But you have to remember that actors are people too. They have to live like we do (or usually better). So it’s not surprising that somebody would ask a huge amount for a role that could take months to a year of their time. Plenty of opportunities could pass them by in that time. And on the flip side, who knows when such a person would have the opportunity to act & get paid again? And with the way reporters and the like hound actors these days, getting a second job might not be good for their image. And one of the reasons certain actors are cast is because they are in the public’s eye and good favor now (Mickey Rourke, Robert Downey Jr., Jackie Earle Haley, etc.). So it’s all about gettig enough money to pay the bills, pay the people you employ to get a job, and still have enough money to be able to wait for the next job.
I’m guessing most of their fee, aside from paying their own people (management,publicist) goes to some of their own production companies that most actors/actresses have. I’m always hearing about them shooting and trying to get a pet project of their friends off at the same time. Then again, can 20 mill be going over the edge. A lot of Hollywood and most of the posts in this chat room are quick to be cut and run with the money. This is why alot of actors we become familiar with we don’t see in movies more often.
I agree Rodney.
I think they should be given a smaller salary and given a percentage of the PROFIT of the film. If you made a good movie that made money then you make money. It’s just smart business.
this is great .. i love this site …
I agree Rodney. Its all about concept now. Todays movie going public pays the see the concept. They don’t really care about the star power nearly as much as a decade ago. Does anyone think anyone cares who the stars of Transformers are? not really, they just want to see the giant robots.
chuck
I assure you that I am woth every penny.
twenty million for just one actor? too much. there are a lot of people who could take that twenty million and put out one hell of a damn good film, with no name actors. of course, no one will really go to see it, since it has no one they want to see in it, but…there you go.
just give me the money and we’ll call it square.
This is one of those issues I have never been bothered by. Actors negotiate these deals, and like you say Rodney, it’s paid willingly. Nobody is doing anything underhanded to get this pay. Also I’m not in any way effected by it. It’s not like a bank CEO earning millions, while I have to wait on the phone for half an hour to speak to someone. Like Jeremy has also pointed out, if a movie rakes in $100mil, and the lead actor gets paid $5mil instead of $20mil, that just goes to the execs. Mer personally, I don’t see any difference as a consumer regardless of how much each person is paid.
It’s all about supply and demand. Actors only have so much time, and their presence will help make a film better and/or more popular (in theory). You don’t pay x-amount, you don’t get that A-list actor. Someone else will get them in their film instead. So it’s a question of value, and return on investment.
While actors don’t save the world, the value of entertainment shouldn’t be ignored. People spend billions each year the entertainment industry, it helps keep people happy. If an actor has the ability to draw millions of dollars, then they’ve earned a good percentage of that.
Wow! Duplicity has made only 25 mill. I thought it was pretty good, but that’s my opinion. I don’t know how the hell she got 20 mill for that. She was have Chris Tucker’s agent. Seriously, the whole salary thing just depends on which actor/actress is in the movie. The studios have to be smart too. They should have realized that Julia Roberts just carry a movie anymore. If the actor can bring in audiences then the actors are justified. For example I think Tobey Maguire is justified for getting paid that kind of money for the next Spider-man films. I really can’t imagine anyone else in that role. Even though the third one didn’t live up to the past two, it still made like 800 mill worldwide. The same can be said about Johnny Depp and POTC as the second one made a billion worldwide. You can’t argue with those numbers.
In a perfect world the highest paid actor would only be paid ten million (if they’re lucky) and the rest of the moolah would go into production.
It’s hard for me to imagine doing anything that warrants a king’s ransom of 10 million. One thing is for certain, I’d retire. Read comic books all morning, catch a movie or two in the afternoon, then settle down with my wife in the evening…so she can tell me what working life is like. ;-)
50% to tax leaves you $5mil.
10% to agent leaves you $4mil.
10% (for those that have a manager) leaves you $3.
3% to publicist leaves you $2.7
Living in an LA will run you $1mil easy (for something semi-decent) leaving you $1.7
Not a bad investment! You’ve taken home less than 20% of what you earned!
You forgot: Wife divorces you, she takes half.
1.7 million is till a very livable wage. I still wouldn’t have to work for several years. lol
Maybe they should do the points system more. The actor gets % of the gross if the film does well after accepting a set fee. Then they would really see if they are a box office draw or not.
I fully assumed that this was an April Fool’s article posted a couple of days too late. Oh well.
Eh, don’t really care. Even if they paid the actors less one of two things will happen. That extra money not spent on the actors will still be used in other ways in regard to the movie production, or it will be considered a penny saved and the studio makes even more money for the studio execs. If the money is going to be used somewhere, it may as well go to the actors rather than the execs.
However, if paying less for the actors meant less money spent on a movies budget which lead to cheaper movie tickets for the audience, then I wouldn’t mind it the actors getting paid a little less. I do not see this happening, though. The studio is just as into the money as the actors, and just because would have this extra income from not paying the actors as much, I am sure they would figure out a way to ensure the ticket prices remain the same. Greed does that.
So I say screw the studios, give the money to the actors, as we the audience we most likely not get to see any benefit from the it either way.
Wow, was that last sentence I wrote wretched. Let me restate that:
“So I say screw the studios, give the money to the actors. We, the audience, will most likely not get to see any benefit from the money that would be saved anyway.”
As a side not, at least we see some of the money some actors make getting used for charitable means. We won’t see that with the money saved by the studio.
Hollywood should come up with a formula to pay actors. For example:
Looks – 50K to 100K
Acting Ability – 100k to 1M
Relevant to Public – 1M to 5M
Last movie starred in was succesful – 5M to Will Smith
Who’s opinion matters on subjective values such as: looks. relevance to public, and acting ability? I think there’s already a formula in place, and it’s generally based on the “last movie starred in”, unless your name is: George Clooney, Brad Pitt, Tom Cruise, or you own the production company making the movie.
Public Polls
Julia Roberts has not have a viable box office hit as a Hollywood leading lady in ages, but I give her and her people credit for getting that $20 mil for her role in Duplicity (The movie has grossed a jaw-dropping 25 mil so far) when when she’s clearly past her prime.
So, yeah, I agree that an actor should only be pay 20 million plus when their presence in the film is going to substantially boost its box office take. Still, I dunno how I feel about Tobey Maguire getting 50 mil for Spiderman 4 and 5.
And yeah Im all in for this salary cap…Its not just me..everyone should be wondering whats up with this 30 million dollars for a movie shenanigans
Don’t hate da player, HATE THE GAME!!!
lol!
Great article
Ive gotten peopel tell me
“Well, it takes millions of dollars to make movies”
And I dont know how to answer to that….it also takes millions to make 1000000 cans of pepsi but they get paid millions, and the main workers dont get paid 20 mil
I hate extending this so far and taking it to another level but…it just troubles me seeing good actors (or even bad ones…like Keanu Reeves im sorry if I pick on the guy too much) getting so much money…
I love seeing Bill Gates being rich…I love seeing Obama being the president, the guy worked hard, he went to Harvard, I love Trump being rich…those are guys that help the circle of life, they donate money they help HARD WORKING PEOPLE that are less fortunate and they set an example of what we should be doing NOT to help poor people but to make this a better world. But im sorry…i cant stand watching Mickey Rourke bitching about 25 hundred grand to dress up like a comic book character…UGH
Someone told me earlier..”you like Obamas stimulus package because he gives to the poor and takes from the men that worked”
NO. Hes employing more people giving money to the big companies instead of the people so that the companies have more money AND THEN they can get employed and really earn money
Also hes giving out like 400% checks but thats okay because…hes employing a shitload of people
Im not saying that acting isnt a talent…its great, especially went actors use their talent and all the money they get to help others that CANT make a perfect Joker impression in front of a camera…but…20 million dollars?
Great article Rodney, we need more people talking about this because its really important
Although their agents do get some…I know…well okay so they get 16 million dollars..not 20..
Rodney, great article, but I don’t agree with some of the comments and think there are flaws in some of the reasoning giving. And Hazmat, I think there’s a lot of rhetoric about politics in your statement that doesn’t hold value in this thread. Let me explain.
First – one of the VERY FEW industries doing well in these fiscally hard times is the movie industry. Theatres are reporting numbers they haven’t seen in years, if not decades, and there really aren’t a lot of great flicks out (some good, but not a lot). This is because, bang for the buck, it’s still cheaper to go see a movie with the family, than it is to go to a ball/hockey game. Numbers are up, DRASTICALLY.
Second – The argument that this actor or that actor doesn’t “deserve” an amount of money is a touchy matter, primarily because a lot of times, we are going to see a movie because so and so IS in it and we’ve come to expect a certain amount of quality in the movies that star “so and so”. A person cannot argue that “these people aren’t worth it” if the production company thinks they are. To argue Keannu didn’t deserve to make a ton of money (I’m assuming you were referring to what he made in the Matrix films) is bogus. He didn’t ask for a high amount of money to star in the flick. He asked his salary be proportionate to the success of the flick. He wagered that the movie HE was a HUGE part of making would succeed, and he benefited from making the right choice. If it failed, he would’ve made a lot less. He did EXACTLY what Bill Gates does, and you mock one while praising the other???
Third – I can see that people are upset and feel that no one is worth making $20mil on a movie, but these movies’ benefit from having BIG name draws. How else would you explain animated movies wanting to have big name actors voicing the parts (even video games, for that matter)? People want to know “such and such” is in something, otherwise they may not go. Personally, this is a pet-peeve of mine (the animated “popular” voices. I think it’s stupid) but it’s up to the person writing the cheque, right? Hopefully they’ve made a sound business decision.
Not sure I get your argument for the stimulus package, but we’ll leave that aside for now.
Anyways, like I said Rodney. Great article. I wish though, that people looked at things from both sides before forming an opinion. It seems that there’s a lot of “I don’t think they deserve it cuz it’s not me” sentiment. At least that’s how I perceive some of the comments.
Yeah youre right, its the people that love them, and tharts what troubles me, I think theres something wrong about that people turning their backs on other much more important people and obsessing over a movie star. I dont know, thats just me, im crazy.
And Bill Gates helped save thousands of lives so please dont compare him with Keanu Reeves.
I never said “Im mad because its not me making millions but actors instead” that would be hypocrisy, so dont put words in my mouth. I said that actors just dont deserve that type of money. Period. Its gross. Sorry. Thats how I think and feel. What the fuck do i need 20 MILLION DOLLARS FOR!? Theres NO WAY I could have 20 mill and not be scared to death of being killed…what..am i going to buy a fucking small country?
Im way too self conscious to be carrying around 20 mil while I know I have family in Transylvania with cancer and a sister in Spain struggling with a kid and no money. If I live alone then..I dont know..give to charity…Is it just me? I would feel guilty carrying around 50 million dollars all for myself
“Dude…youre carrying around 40 mil? why? what for? Do people know about this?…”
“Nah..Im going to go buy Nepal..Give them some beads..see what I get in return..”
I hate terrorism…and im all for torture (not to get info…for punishment) but i kinda see why all those countries hate us. Just look around you.
And no, I am not a commie.
Hazmat, my man, I never stated that you were one of the hypocratic ones. Please re-read that. And why would anyone be crazy enough to carry around $40 million???? Haven’t you heard of a bank? LOL
BTW, you do not know what Keannu does with his money as to say he’s not as giving a person as Mr. Gates? That is pretty ignorant unless you have first hand knowledge of what Mr. Reeves does with his money. You shouldn’t assume to know.
Anyways, some of your comments are made with thought, and in this day and age, I appreciate that. But then there’s the others that are somewhat emotional and project more of a “I don’t live that way, so why should others” thoughtset, and I don’t think that’s right. If it wasn’t for greed, a lot of things wouldn’t have been invented. Sometimes (re. “not always”) the fact that people want more is a good thing. It’s given us many great inventions, led to new thoughts and research, and driven us along in our “progress”. I’m guessing you don’t still ride along in a horse and buggy mobile? ;)
Oh well, I dont know anything about Keanu Reeves, I know what Gates does with his money but…I know nothing about Keanu Reeves…Why? What does he do with it? Im sure he hasnt done as many good deeds as Bill freaking Gates though
No, Its okay to have scientists and doctors and people who invented cancewr to be filthy rich, because they HELP. Im not saying that no one is supposed to be rich and everyone medium class…Im saying that some people dont deserve it.
I have nothing against disgustingly rich people, thats cool, because I KNOW they earned it by working, staying awake at school, i KNOW they did or are doing something to help, but to see an actor being rich kinda makes me want to punch a baby out of frustration. In fact the people I dont like are poor people, they had a chance and they decided to do nothing, theyre bums now because they turned their back on helping and getting a job to become productive citizens. BUT ACTORS are my ONE exeption! And athletes
Some of them, like Alonzo Mourning help out though and take advantage of the great gift they have to do something productive but most, dont really do much
I dont wanna seem like the guy that hates rich people, and loves poor people, you are were you are now depending of how much you decided to be productive (or really bad luck) so I really have no pitty for the homeless, they can still get a job and do something, but no, food stamps suffice i guess
But im just talking about Tobey Mcwire dropping out of high school and becoming a rich movie star