Don’t get me started on how financially bankrupt it is paying any three movie stars $60+ million for a single movie. This isn’t a sexist thing, I don’t care if it’s man, woman, animal, alien, whatever.
If you can guarantee somehow your film will make over $1 billion at the box office .. maybe in some ultra rare moment this might make sense. If you’re trying to set a Guinness Book record for the most spent on actor salaries? Again, maybe.
But if you want your streaming film to make money, it’s crazy.
Dwayne Johnson might be the #1 bankable male film star, but how does he make more $$ for a streaming platform movie than they are already making from monthly subscriber revenue?
Definitely a cool move that Dwayne Johnson fought to get Gal Gadot the same salary as Ryan Reynolds, which is north of $20 million. Meanwhile, Johnson is bringing home “a little more” cheddar, whatever that means.
Suddenly Gal Gadot is suddenly making tens of millions being an actress in high profile, bloated budget films, with possibly none of them earning back what they cost. Good for her getting the money, but will this make her tainted actor goods if/when her “star power” becomes challenged as part of the reasons the films didn’t make money. I guess she takes the money and runs? Her accountant better tell her to save and not spend too freely.
In fact, insider Daniel Richtman is now claiming that Johnson fought for Gadot to get the same pay packet as the two male leads, which seems like exactly the sort of thing that somebody with his reputation would do. It was already reported that Reynolds and Gadot would pick up about $20 million each for their troubles, while The Rock would score a little bit extra seeing as he’s also producing through his Seven Bucks banner, but either way, the trio of megastars are walking away from Red Notice with their bank balances positively bulging.Dwayne Johnson Reportedly Fought For Gal Gadot To Get Equal Pay On New Netflix Movie
Some readers might think I’ve got a problem with what people get paid. I don’t. Pay these actors whatever they can negotiate, more power to them and their agents. The problem is these paydays are limited and put too much pressure on a film to make upwards of a billion dollars to be profitable. There have been less than 50 movies in the entire history of cinema that have made that kind of money.
Instead, pay the actors points on financial performance. No single movie in today’s production landscape should be paying $60+ million in actor salaries. I mean, there are other people starring in the movie, so how much are they getting paid? My goodness, this one might be over $100 million in salaries, unless everybody else on the staff is getting minimum paydays.
What makes all of this worse is Red Notice is a Netflix movie. Is it going to have any other revenue for Netflix besides paid subscriber revenue? Are there licensing product dollars they can recoup somehow? This just sounds like a terrible financial move by Netflix, a company that continues to spend more than they make. That’s not a recipe for long term business survival.
Am I excited to see Red Notice? Sure. Do I care if it makes money? Yes. I mean, this is how Netflix justifies another monthly subscription increase. Look at big budget movies we’re brining on, we need more monthly revenue from you, dear subscriber (see: Will Netflix Price Itself Out Of The Streaming Market?). That’s you and I adding bricks to these actors extra mansions.
Will give it to Netflix that they are currently #1 in the streaming game, but things change in business. When and if theaters reopen, Netflix is not focused on theaters regaining any momentum, but I’d argue they will. In the meantime, however, they can keep spending money that they don’t have and guess who will be paying for this reckless corporate spending?
Look closely in the mirror, fellow Netflix subscribers.