I think I’m supposed to be outraged to find out that the star of the hit Netflix show, The Crown, Claire Foy, earned less money than her co-star, Matt Smith. As Queen Elizabeth, she had more screen time, was the main character, and totally and completely knocked her performance out of the park. She was, to put it mildly, amazing.
And if perchance, they were negotiating new contracts with Foy and Smith, I would expect that Foy would earn a boatload more than her prince. But they aren’t. Both are being replaced by older actors.
Why am I okay with Foy earning less? Well, because acting isn’t like accounting. Or HR. Or whatever job it is that you do. Part of the job of an actor is to bring in viewers. When you have a reputation, you’ll bring people in.
To keep reading, click here: Netflix Paid Queen Elizabeth Less than Prince Philip and I’m Okay with That
Excellent! This is especially true in those careers where there are enormously inflated salaries to begin with. The major actor may be paid 5 million and the female co-star is “offended” since she only made 3 million. We need to recognize that pay is for performance, and bringing in viewers or fans or, in industry, customers, or, in the final result income and profits, is the reason we pay a premium. A star performer makes more, whether they are male or female or taller or trans or straight because their value as a commodity it greater. We need to get over our lust for political correctness.
I was with you until you said Wahlberg had more star power than Williams. This might be true for certain movies, but I don’t know that its true for the genre that movie falls into. She’s got 4 Academy Award acting noms to Wahlberg’s 1. It’s like saying the Rock has more star power than Christoph Waltz. I mean, maybe if you’re making an action film, but probably not if you’re looking to hit the awards circuit. You have to wonder about the contract negotiating that’s happening on behalf of these actors by their talent agency. And the controversy comes from the fact that Wahlberg and Williams have the same one.
For Foy & Smith it makes absolute sense, she was the no name, and he was the one bringing in people with name recognition.
Yes, thank you! Just because Wahlberg has been in more blockbusters doesn’t mean he is the bigger star. I’ve seen far more Williams movies than Wahlberg movies. It’s all subjective.
Look, you can say Matt Smith deserved the bigger paycheck because he was a better known actor who’d bring in people.
However, Netflix is an American company producing shows for the American market. I’m sorry, if you don’t know who Dr. Who is or follow it you have no idea who Matt Smith is. By this logic John Lithgow should’ve been paid the most because at least American viewers will know him from Third Rock from the Sun, Shrek, Footloose and Dexter and his many, many awards.
Also if Smith was getting paid more to bring eyeballs & subscriptions to the table that would reflected in the promotional materials.
Also, if Smith were such a huge draw they’d build the series around him instead. They did that with Kevin Spacey and House of Cards.
As an English person I would say that Foy was more valuable – she had already done Upstairs Downstairs (i.e. appeals to a similar market). Yes Smith did Dr who, and I think there’s a decent overlap, there’s a young female market who fancies him. But not nessacarily worth much more (although we don’t know how much more he earnt.)
On another note I think this brings us round the Bechtel test. Women rarely get given the good roles – so they’re less recognised – so they earn less – repeat cycle.
That said, this I agree with Eivil HR Lady – it’s a blown up story, badly layed out.
Every one made such a big stink about this trying to be so politically correct. I put it down to the negotiation for the contract done by the agency for each actor (male or female). Like any job you need to set your parameters, especially with this field of work.
I am quite sure that this actress can negotiate a better paid position based on her performance in this production for a future project.
And, yet, even when studies correct for such factors as “star power,” women still are offered, are able to negotiate and actually receive substantially less than men for comparable work. Not every situation in which an actress makes less than an actor in a lesser role is the result of gender-based discrimination, but the prevalence of such discrimination certainly makes it a likely factor.