For superhero franchises just getting started, though, the process is usually simple: find a star on the rise, pay them relatively little, and then offer more if the franchise takes off. Hollywood contracts are notoriously complicated things-salaries are often sweetened by box office bonuses, bumps in pay for sequels, or even “points” on the total gross for megastars. As Vanity Fair explains, Hollywood salaries, especially for untested franchises and actors, are a bit of a quagmire: While I’m not inclined to disagree with the sentiment behind Duca’s tweet, as laid out above-and here, via in-depth Vanity Fair reporting-this just isn’t the case. The most compelling DC villain is the pay gap.
Gal Gadot made $300,000 for Wonder Woman as compared to Henry Cavill’s $14M for Man of Steel. This morning, popular Teen Vogue writer Lauren Duca renewed speculation when she tweeted (now deleted): This hasn’t stopped denizens of the Internet from repeating the numbers earned by the two actors as though they were equivalent situations. There’s no way Warner Bros./DC signed him to the first film for millions and millions of dollars before they saw heroic results. Before Man of Steel, Cavill was pretty much unknown to most of the world who hadn’t watched him in The Tudors (or I Capture the Castle, as a young strapping Cavill). Cavill’s reported haul from Man of Steel has not been confirmed, but if it’s anywhere near that amount, it’s the result of bonuses after a hefty box office, not his initial base salary.
While it’s perfectly natural to feel upset about this apparently glaring instance of Hollywood’s gender pay gap, all is not as it seems. A story quickly went viral that Gal Gadot was only paid $300k for Wonder Woman, whereas Henry Cavill received $14 million for Man of Steel.
0 kommentar(er)
