I’ve had this story for a little while now but it seems most apt at the moment with the discussion over the pay deals of the Lost team.
From Cinematical, Cary Elwes has been complaining that he hasn’t received a fair share of the profits from Saw. It’s become so bad that he’s headed off to court to try and get his owed rewards and suing the Producers. Sounds like a typical moaning Hollywood actor doesn’t it? Well, listen to the figures. Elwes was paid $2,587.20, Saw cost $1.2million and made over $100million. Sounds terrible eh? Oh…hold on…he was given a bonus of over $50,000. Not so bad after all?
Elwes says he was told he’d “make more money [on Saw] than he had ever made before.” Since he’s not, he’s claiming breech of contract. Furthermore, the lawsuit claims he should be getting more money.
Tough life Elwes, signing a contract not knowing if something is going to be successful, then when it is being a bit miffed that you mishandled the negotiations. You could have negotiated for some form of percentage return.
Welcome to the real world, where if I do something utterly successful and money saving at work I get bog all back. I once saved my company £1.2million pounds, and I mean personally…did I see a reward? No. Did I sue them? No. I got on with the next job.
Is this another sign of over privileged actors complaining for no reason?
I’m sorry, why don’t you point us at your well regarded and read blog and perhaps we can see how a master does it.
“I can’t seem to find which of the two documents (a percentage salary or a fixed salary) he signed” – if you can’t find it how come you think you’ve “proven” something?
Figures are from source material.
Also if you could grasp the English language correctly you’d quite clearly see that the story is not a dig at Elwes but more that he’s lumbered in the boat he signed up to.
In anything in life you get a contract, you negotiate for the contract, you should ensure that you negotiate right first time because that’s what you sign up for. You can’t just decide half way through to change. The only reason I can see for this is if he was conned into signing a contract and nothing in the story states that.
The organisation I work for earned √Ǭ£7bn in profits last year, do you think I could go sue them and argue that I’m due more of that because of the work I did? No. I signed the contract, that’s what’s legally binding.
In the world of business, not two jobs are alike and they cannot be compared to each other. When you are a normal businessman who works IN a company, you are being paid to make money for someone else (your boss) and usually, that income is fixed.
In the media, I believe, that it’s even hard to be an actor, let alone even making it so far to be involved in a movie. It doesn’t take only a good job interview. It takes talent, luck, (maybe some money), the looks, and possibly many other things I’ve missed.
Many actors like Elwes are being abused for their talents. Directors/producers buy in these actors and not give them enough money, saying that the contract restrains them from being able to do so.
Everyone know how to calculate profits, right? It’s
Profit= total amount made – total amount it took
According to your “statistics,” you said Saw took 1.5 mil to make but it actually took 1.2
And they didn’t make $100 million out of this: They made $73,431,033 worldwide and about 55 mil in USA.
Anyway, an actor does not live on a fixed income (unless he/she is a world-known figure doing about 5 movies at a time), so it is righteous to speak out if he/she does not feel that they’ve taken a fair share of the profits.
I can’t seem to find which of the two documents (a percentage salary or a fixed salary) he signed, so I just proved that your blog was just an wasted attempt to downsize Elwes.
Well if you’d bothered to click through and do the research as I did you’ll see that the story originates from Yahoo and the inference is that this has come directly from the suit itself, which I believe are available from the Courts.
I think you’ll find all the figures there, so argue away with them all you like. Those are the figures.
“But I have many friends in the business and have gleaned great insight and have the balance to counterpoint your misguided interpretation.”
What exactly? You just rant and hurl insults without actually saying anything other than implying you can form a better opinion than the story here, and that’s without even selecting the source site and reading their article!
I particularly like it when you say…
“And your judgement point # 3 about deals outside of Hollywood is a farce.”
…I won’t discuss grammar here, but I love the way you belittle my comments and then come up with none of your own other than more belittling statements. It’s even funnier when you make rash assumptions about who I am and what I do in real life, assuming that I have no intelligence or knowledge of such deals.
Actually I do, and if we’re talking the amounts of money that Elwes was allegedly paid then I regularly authorise and create deals well over that amount. I indeed do have a strong understanding of the Law in contractual terms, so once again your assumptions are wrong.
This is what I hate about the Internet, people who leap on and decide to accuse, belittle, and insult others with nothing else to say. It’s the kind of behaviour that used to happen at school, where one child would put down the other to make himself feel better and rise in status with others.
Ah the joys of writing on the Internet.
Well, to you who is passing judgement.
I do not know why you would assume that Elwes and his agent would agree to a paltry ignorant deal in which he would get paid $3,000, then receive a bonus of $50,000 after, and that is it. He most likely gets $500,000 to $3mm per movie these days – disregarding back end accelerators. Any informed individual would expect that Elwes and their agent negotiated a back end percent share of gross box office receipts (industry norm). That is what most actors do in doing indie or riskier movies. There is a significant chance that there is a clause in their contract that reflects that, but you fail to even acknowledge its possibility. I mean, really, what is his agent’s cut at $53,000? A staggering $5,300!!! Why even bother to wast your time.
Sounds like the producers are dodging that committment. I lived in LA for a long time. I am not even in the business, nor a “commercial editor.” But I have many friends in the business and have gleaned great insight and have the balance to counterpoint your misguided interpretation.
Who are you kidding here? Is your information from a public resource, a Beverly Hills Court? Is it available on thesmokinggun.com? What is the actual infomation received from Cinematical?
Your 6 points that itemize Elwes deal is simple to the say the least. Rediculously moronic! And your judgement point # 3 about deals outside of Hollywood is a farce. Are you an attorney? Please..drop the pen and save us all from the know-it-all blogger! I would think you never visited Wall Street in your life where deals are stratospherically complex. Who are you writing to..high schoolers?
The negotiation circumstances are most likely, a bit more complex than your pedestrian interpretation! Do us a favor. Do some home work and enlighten yourself.
Seems to me that with only knowing the details presented here and at Cinematical, I would agree with Elwes. Seems hard to believe that an actor with Elwes background would agree to be in a movie for less than $3,000. You can say he is a terrible actor, but he isn’t some no-name. He has starred in several major motion pictures. He probably could have made more at McDonalds working the same length of time it took to file a movie.
I haven’t run my own business for 5 years, but I do know that you are required to bargain in good faith. I have no reason to assume that someone in Hollywood would bargain in good faith. So, maybe he wanted to screw the studio and they wanted to screw him. Looks like they won. I say good luck to Westley…
I’m afraid to tell you that this site is about opinion, and so are the stories. Rather than just posting straight factual news three days behind the stories that are broken on the Internet, we present breaking stories with out slant.
Why are we in a place to do that, because we can write and we are part of the audience. Not only that, it’s fair to say we’ve seen more movies than the average audience member.
John has been part of the industry, and I’ve also worked with a more commercial editing and production studio, so we know a little bit about it all.
However in this case you can look at the facts.
1. Actor signs deal
2. Actor completes movie
3. Actor receives publicly announced amount of pay
4. Movie is hugely successful
5. Actor receives publicly announced bonus
6. Actor publicly sues Producers for more money
It’s pretty clear at this point that he is unhappy with the money he received and wants more, it says so in the suit and the public announcement about it.
The judgements being made here are…
1. Man is unhappy with pay he himself signed on for
2. Man was not forward thinking enough to cover himself for the future in his business contract
3. In the business world outside Hollywood if you sign a contract you’re in and unless you are deceived at the time of signing, that’s what you’re entitled to
I know the last part very well since I ran my own business for five years.
I kinda think from there it’s pretty obvious why you can come to certain conclusions and how we could make them.
i love it when the writers at this blog take basic information, gossip about an argument between director and producers, dispute over pay, and turn it into a judgemental personal attack on the people involved. were you there? do you know the parties involved personally? are you omnipotent and all knowing? i’m not saying don’t add your own opinions but try to at least accept the fact that you don’t know shit about the situation, and theres no basis for you to pass judgement.
The bonus is the kicker. the 2587.00 salary is a joke but the bonus makes up for it. Now, saying that, I don’t know how much Elwes normall makes on a film(can’t be THAT much) and I don’t know if SAW was one of those deals where a name actor takes a pay cut to help out a smaller film. That is usually a sign of a good actor when they forgoe their pay to get a good indie film made. and Yes this does happen from time to time.
Just from what I have read, I agree with you guys. It sounds like Elwes had some informal personal promises that were never carried out. It would be really rotten and dirty if they tricked him out of money but “if it’s not on paper…it’s NO GOOD”