Casting Catch

[Steve <bboy_mn@yahoo.com>]

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "susannahlm <susannahlm at y...>"
<susannahlm at y...> wrote:
> Steve wrote: I suspect all the big name actors
> >originally in the cast, started working cheap. They all assumed that
> >this was going to be a nice moderately sucessful kids movie. 
> 
> 
> Um. .  . Excuse me?
> 
> *Harry Potter?* When GOF came out, it had a bigger opening than any 
> other book in the history of publishing. Warner Brother's spent over 
> 100 million dollars doing SS/PS. Spielberg (sp.?) was in talks about 
> directing. Everyone at Warner's always assumed that this was going 
> to be a smash hit--that's the only reason they spent so much money 
> doing it. 
> 
> I think the problems with casting Dumbledore have more to do with 
> the fact that the producers have to unexpectedly *replace* an actor, 
> after the franchise has already been established; it must be harder 
> to re-cast than to cast. 
> 
> Derannimer

bboy_mn:
Certainly, no one expected the movie to flop. Warner knew it would be
successful, but you simply can't predict a smash hit. It was a kids
movie. No kids movie has ever come near the sale figures of a movie
like Titanic. So, I suspect they all assumed, worst case, that it
would be a modestly successful kids movie. Best case, it would be a
very successful kids movie. But kids movies are rarely MEGA-successes.
Even Chris Columbus (I believe) said he thought he was making a modest
kids movie. He thought it was going to be a fun easy task, and a nice
change of pace (paraphrasing). So while the primary actors got
acceptable salaries, I don't think they were up to the standards they
could have gotten for an adult themed movie. 

Now that it is a MEGA-success, I think all the NEW actors coming
aboard don't was standard salaries, they want a fair share. In other
words big bucks. Madam Hooch (Zoa Wanamaker ... is that right) quite
the movie because she said all the actors were underpaid, and she
thought Warner was ripping people off by low balling the salaries. So
the low salary thing, really isn't something I dreamed up. Unless,
Warner decides to cough up some serious cash, we won't be seeing her
again.

The Actor's Equity Union stepped in for Daniel Radcliffe and forced
Warner to pay him on a scale more consistent with the hit status of
the movie. I think they pushed his salary up from substantial 5
figures to low 7 figures. Since this was the Union, I'm guessing they
saw UK£2,000,000 as minimum wage under the circumstance. 

If the lead role had been Leonardo DeCaprio or Elijah Wood, you can
count on their salaries being US$10,000,000 to US$20,000,000. At his
peak, Leo was getting a standard US$21,000,000 per movie. 

For Daniel, a proven actor in a mega-hit movie franchise, he should be
getting US$5,000,000 to US$10,000,000 per movie. As it is, I believe
he's getting UK£2,000,000 which covers two movies.

New actors, which is what I was focusing on since we are talking about
current casting, smell the money and they want some. You think Ian
McKellan works cheap. I certainly think he, McKellan, commands a much
higher salary than Michael Gambon.

Just a few thoughts.

bboy_mn