Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Taynted_Fayth

Upcoming Movies

Recommended Posts

Just now, The Unknown Poster said:

They're represented by the same people.

Wahlberg is well known as being a tough negotiator and a "pay me" type.  Which is totally his right.   And Williams immediately offering to work for free is her right.  What is a bit stinky here is the appearance that the agency representing both actors were more interested in protecting Wahlberg from negative backlash of getting paid when others donated their time rather then making sure Michelle got paid.

The right thing to do would have been to insist that both get paid and Michelle is free to donate her pay.  BUT...that would then lead to the public known Mark did not donate his time.

Its not a huge deal to me other then Ridley Scott gave interviews where he said they all donated their time for re-shoots (except the crew and Plummer since he was new to the role).  So it seems Mark was "protected".  Williams did a really nice thing of her own volition.  I dont think this is so much a pay disparity as an attempt to protect Mark from negative pub.

oh lol, I did not know that.. then ya, its odd they would have asked for Marky Mark to be paid and not Williams.. unless their cut from Mark's pay is higher and worth more of their time and effort... lol. 

 

ok this is back to a weird story line.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, SPuDS said:

oh lol, I did not know that.. then ya, its odd they would have asked for Marky Mark to be paid and not Williams.. unless their cut from Mark's pay is higher and worth more of their time and effort... lol. 

 

ok this is back to a weird story line.

Id think Williams was paid pretty handsomely for the role too.  She's an acclaimed actor.  I think it was Mark not wanting to donate his time.  And the narrative that "all the actors came together to quickly do these reshoots and donated their time to make sure we could do it successfully" is something the studio liked.  Mark did not.  His right to get paid.  But if they all kept that from Michelle and made her think they were all donating, thats not cool. 

Im biased because I LOVE Michelle Williams, BTW.  lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's another article on it.  I dont think its so much that THIS is a pay disparity (we'd need to know what both were paid for the entire role, assuming they were comparable rules - I believe Williams was the top billed actor but Im not sure).

http://www.cnn.com/2018/01/11/opinions/williams-wahlberg-pay-gap-opinion-alaimo/index.html

But it will trigger talk about the very real issue of pay disparity:

Quote

In 2017, as Hollywood's women bravely spoke out against sexual harassment, the pay gap between female and male actors did not seem to be closing. According to Forbes' list of top-paid actors, Wahlberg -- the highest-paid man in the biz -- made $42 million more than the top-paid actress, Emma Stone.

To achieve pay equity, women in Hollywood need to band together. Right now, it's hard for any one female actor to insist on being paid the same as her male co-stars. If she demands a big salary, she runs the risk of losing the role to a woman who will work for less.
But if all women in Hollywood signed a public pledge that they won't accept salaries that aren't equivalent to that of men at the same levels on the same productions, then filmmakers would be forced to pay women equitably. After all, almost every production has female characters.
 
Of course, another problem is ensuring that filmmakers are honest during such negotiations and don't later cut better backroom deals with male stars. For example, Scott told USA Today back in December that all the actors re-shooting "All the Money in the World" were working "for nothing." Now, it appears that wasn't true, or it subsequently changed.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Noeller said:

I love the Dundee trilogy....I'm concerned they're going to mock it and ruin it's legacy. I enjoy Danny McBride doing his thing, but I dunno about this....

Loved the first one, second one was half decent, never bothered with the third. McBride's age and name don't match with the son they had in the movies so sounds like another Roseanning.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am hoping it's like some early April Fool's thing, but I actually read a quote from Paul Hogan yesterday that said he's been looking at resurrecting the franchise for a new generation, and he's excited to introduce a new project. Apparently the deal is, the old man is lost somewhere in the outback, and he's got an illegitimate son in New York who is absolutely nothing like him, but is determined to come and save his dad.....the whole thing is beyond ridiculous. It sounds like "Your Highness" meets "Crocodile Dundee"...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this  

×