website tracking
Search The Big Picture

« More Awful Video from 'Pink Panther 2' | Main | Trailer - Dennis Quaid Mystery 'The Horsemen' »
Wednesday
21Jan2009

Mickey Rourke Offered $250K for 'Iron Man 2'

DateWednesday, January 21, 2009 at 10:26AM
Even though Hollywood couldn't successfully claim that it is an industry in turmoil, the studios are looking in the distance, seeing this SAG dispute that has dragged on for months, and is claiming the poor economic climate is forcing lower actors salaries during their negotiations.

Variety insists, "Unless you’re Will Smith, Johnny Depp or a handful of others, nobody is earning their quote right now," adding that Nicolas Cage has been asked to take less for another National Treasure movie despite the enormous success of that series.

Comments on talent agency head, "There is no such thing as a quote anymore," referring to an actor's going rate. "You tell them your client’s quote; they smile and say, ‘Here is the offer.’ Even when you agree on a deal, it’s harder to get the trigger pulled, with more signoffs than in the past."

And the cry of low-balling extends itself to major league projects, like Marvel's Iron Man 2. It's somewhat embarrassing to see how the follow-up has conducted itself, getting into heated negotiations with Jon Favreau, dumping Terrence Howard in a very public way, and dealing with Samuel L. Jackson's deal to play Nick Fury in such a cheap way that the actor has taken himself out of future Marvel movies unless a better contract is offered.

But how about this: Remember a couple weeks ago when it was announced that Mickey Rourke and Sam Rockwell would play villains in Iron Man 2? Rourke has won the Golden Globe since, and he was certainly an Oscar favorite when his name was linked to the project. Marvel offered him $250,000 for the role.

We can debate how much actors get paid and how much athletes get paid, but the market has its demands in both cases. Should a baseball player make $20 million a year? I guess that depends on how much money he brings in and how many tickets he sells. The same goes for an actor. Is Mickey Rourke worth $250,000 to a movie that will make $500,000 or more worldwide? It's not as simple as that one equation; there are lots of incentives and points to be paid after the fact, but if you're telling me a movie with that high a profile and that kind of budget wants to hire an actor almost specifically because he's a hot property...and they refuse to pay him what he would have earned two years ago for the same role? Something doesn't jive there.

The Variety article approaches the point from many different perspectives, so give it a read. It's fascinating to see how these two sides haven't figured it out after all these years.

Share/Save/Bookmark
AuthorColin Boyd | | in , , , , | Print ArticlePrint Article | | Comment7 Comments |

Reader Comments (7)

At least 150K of that is going to more plastic surgery.

Wednesday, January 21, 2009 | Unregistered CommenterNattyb

Even if he just fixes what he screwed up, I think you're right.

Wednesday, January 21, 2009 | Registered CommenterColin Boyd

Did you forget three zeros?
What a sad time for business. At least the big whigs can bite the bullet. When the economy comes back, you know they'll just keep low balling everyone anyway.

Wednesday, January 21, 2009 | Unregistered CommenterJulian Francis

So Rourke accepted that amount, right? Because his name is already attached to the project...

Dude is just happy to be working again. If they get a few more former party boys on the set, it will be like a big rehab reunion!

Wednesday, January 21, 2009 | Unregistered CommenterWill

Actors accepting pay cuts is a nice gesture when the economy is as bad as it is.

But

Mickey Rourke is a natural actor and he could do bad ass in his sleep.

Not paying him more for a role in a film which has the sole purpose of making hundreds of millions is pathetic.

It'd be good to know who is running this project.

Thursday, January 22, 2009 | Unregistered CommenterLengthy Johnson

Is Marvel actually listen to Uwe Boll's advice on how to save Hollywood?

(i need to stop posting about Uwe Boll)

Friday, January 23, 2009 | Unregistered Commenterfaulty logic

The best way to save Hollywood is to throw Uwe, Eddie Murphy, and esp. Harvey Weinstein into Gitmo and LEAVE them there, even after it closes!

Saturday, January 24, 2009 | Unregistered CommenterRush Limbaugh's lumpy fat

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.

My response is on my own website »
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Post:
 
Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>