|
|
Post by Skaathar on Oct 13, 2018 0:52:37 GMT
Not really. According to Google, these are the salaries of the male MCU actors for their first solo movies: RDJ (Ironman) - $500k Hemsworth (Thor) - $150k Evans (CATFA) - $1 million Cumberbatch (Dr. Strange) - $4 million Boseman (Black Panther) - $3 million Paul Rudd (Antman) - $300k So you see, Scarjo is actually getting paid way way more than her male costars for their respective first solo movies. Now you might say this was in part due to different years for movies being made as well as different marketability of each actor. So for a better comparison, let's take a look at how much each person was paid for their role in Infinity War: Evans - $8 million Hemsworth - $12 million Boseman - $2-3 million Ruffalo - $5-6 million Cumberbatch - $5 million Brolin - $5-6 million Pratt - $5 million Holland - $3 million RDJ - $50 million Scarjo - $20 million You'll see with these numbers that Scarjo actually got paid a lot more than her male costars in IW despite having a very minor role in the movie. She had the 2nd biggest salary behind RDJ but RDJ also had the 3rd highest screentime (18 mins) whereas Scarjo only had 5 minutes. According to The HR article, Evans and Hemsworth both earned $15 M for their roles in Infinity War. Comparing the salaries earned by each of the actors for their first solo entries in the franchise is baseless for a number of reasons; Each actor's track record outside of the MCU The time difference between each film The franchise's notoriety/earnings at the time the film was made Using CW and Ragnarok salaries for Evans and Hemsworth just proves my point further. You're basically saying it took them 3 successful solo movies to achieve the salart Scarjo is receiving for her very first one. Again, there's nothing wrong with that, but it's definitely incorrect to say that she's getting paid similar wages to her male counterparts. All you need to do is look at their IW salaries to know that's incorrect, as both Thor and Cap had way bigger roles in IW than BW. Also, here's the article I was using for IW salaries: www.mensxp.com/entertainment/hollywood/44590-here-s-how-much-each-actor-earned-for-lsquo-avengers-infinity-war-rsquo.htmlWhich lists a smaller salary for both Evans and Hemsworth. |
|
|
|
Post by Lord Death Man on Oct 13, 2018 1:25:15 GMT
According to The HR article, Evans and Hemsworth both earned $15 M for their roles in Infinity War. Comparing the salaries earned by each of the actors for their first solo entries in the franchise is baseless for a number of reasons; Each actor's track record outside of the MCU The time difference between each film The franchise's notoriety/earnings at the time the film was made Using CW and Ragnarok salaries for Evans and Hemsworth just proves my point further. You're basically saying it took them 3 successful solo movies to achieve the salart Scarjo is receiving for her very first one. Again, there's nothing wrong with that, but it's definitely incorrect to say that she's getting paid similar wages to her male counterparts. All you need to do is look at their IW salaries to know that's incorrect, as both Thor and Cap had way bigger roles in IW than BW. Also, here's the article I was using for IW salaries: www.mensxp.com/entertainment/hollywood/44590-here-s-how-much-each-actor-earned-for-lsquo-avengers-infinity-war-rsquo.htmlWhich lists a smaller salary for both Evans and Hemsworth. Everything you're saying would be right if Hollywood compensation worked based on some history of previous pay. It doesn't. Lead actors are paid primarily on the basis of how many movie-goers they can attract to theaters during the first two weeks of a movie's opening. By compensating Scarlett at the same level as Hemsworth and Evans (according to HR), what Marvel Studios is saying is, we believe that relative to the film's budget, Johansen can attract as many viewers as Evans or Hemsworth could. |
|
|
|
Post by lenlenlen1 on Oct 13, 2018 4:09:41 GMT
Scarjo is getting paid $15 million for Black Widow. GOOD!
|
|
|
|
Post by dazz on Oct 13, 2018 11:45:31 GMT
Anyone find it odd how she's going to have made more for 5 minutes in IW in which she is completely superfluous to the plot than she will for her own film, compared to the Chris's who each made less for their parts in IW than they did for their solo flicks.
I would say I think contracts have a lot to do with this though, as a BW film will be the 8th time she's playing the character which I think by SAG stipulations means she has to get bumps for each film so long as the role is comparable in size to previous appearances.
How though she got such a higher bump than them for IW is insane though, outside of Lucy SJ hasn't had a massive hit movie in years outside of voice work which generally don't seem to count, where as they both have the Cap & Thor films atleast, and Hemsworth has Huntsman plus both are more important to the movie, though Cap not by that much really, so it's odd how SJ somehow got more for 5 minutes than she or they got or will get for full solo films.
|
|
|
|
Post by Hauntedknight87 on Oct 13, 2018 12:33:30 GMT
Anyone find it odd how she's going to have made more for 5 minutes in IW in which she is completely superfluous to the plot than she will for her own film, compared to the Chris's who each made less for their parts in IW than they did for their solo flicks. I would say I think contracts have a lot to do with this though, as a BW film will be the 8th time she's playing the character which I think by SAG stipulations means she has to get bumps for each film so long as the role is comparable in size to previous appearances. How though she got such a higher bump than them for IW is insane though, outside of Lucy SJ hasn't had a massive hit movie in years outside of voice work which generally don't seem to count, where as they both have the Cap & Thor films atleast, and Hemsworth has Huntsman plus both are more important to the movie, though Cap not by that much really, so it's odd how SJ somehow got more for 5 minutes than she or they got or will get for full solo films. Maybe she has a good agent? |
|
|
|
Post by dazz on Oct 13, 2018 13:44:55 GMT
Not if she's getting $5m less for her own feature film than she got for being a glorified extra in the same franchise.
|
|
|
|
Post by Skaathar on Oct 13, 2018 14:32:42 GMT
Using CW and Ragnarok salaries for Evans and Hemsworth just proves my point further. You're basically saying it took them 3 successful solo movies to achieve the salart Scarjo is receiving for her very first one. Again, there's nothing wrong with that, but it's definitely incorrect to say that she's getting paid similar wages to her male counterparts. All you need to do is look at their IW salaries to know that's incorrect, as both Thor and Cap had way bigger roles in IW than BW. Also, here's the article I was using for IW salaries: www.mensxp.com/entertainment/hollywood/44590-here-s-how-much-each-actor-earned-for-lsquo-avengers-infinity-war-rsquo.htmlWhich lists a smaller salary for both Evans and Hemsworth. Everything you're saying would be right if Hollywood compensation worked based on some history of previous pay. It doesn't. Lead actors are paid primarily on the basis of how many movie-goers they can attract to theaters during the first two weeks of a movie's opening. By compensating Scarlett at the same level as Hemsworth and Evans (according to HR), what Marvel Studios is saying is, we believe that relative to the film's budget, Johansen can attract as many viewers as Evans or Hemsworth could. I think we're getting sidetracked here. I'm not really interested in why she's getting paid that much, I'm simply replying to your comment that she's getting paid no more than her male co-stars, as I believe that's a completely incorrect statement. All you need to do is look at how much she got paid in IW to know that she got a far bigger paycheck than anyone else in that movie save RDJ, and all for playing a very minor role that has a total of 5 minutes of screentime. As for your comment about her "attracting" many viewers, that would only make sense if Scarjo is actually marketable. But I don't recall any lead film of hers that grossed as much as movies like CATWS, Thor Ragnarok or Black Panther. No, this probably boils down to her (and her manager/agent) simply being very good negotiators. And you know what? That's great. Good for her to milk that much cash. But to assert that she's simply getting paid no more than her male-costars is a very misleading assumption as no male MCU actor has ever gotten close to a $15 million paycheck for their first solo movie. |
|
|
|
Post by Skaathar on Oct 13, 2018 14:34:00 GMT
Anyone find it odd how she's going to have made more for 5 minutes in IW in which she is completely superfluous to the plot than she will for her own film, compared to the Chris's who each made less for their parts in IW than they did for their solo flicks. I would say I think contracts have a lot to do with this though, as a BW film will be the 8th time she's playing the character which I think by SAG stipulations means she has to get bumps for each film so long as the role is comparable in size to previous appearances. How though she got such a higher bump than them for IW is insane though, outside of Lucy SJ hasn't had a massive hit movie in years outside of voice work which generally don't seem to count, where as they both have the Cap & Thor films atleast, and Hemsworth has Huntsman plus both are more important to the movie, though Cap not by that much really, so it's odd how SJ somehow got more for 5 minutes than she or they got or will get for full solo films. Maybe she has a good agent? It might have more to do with IW being a bigger movie with a bigger budget. |
|
