bigger names + bigger pay = smaller budget?

[Severina Amadenna Salem-Snape]

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Mandy" <ExSlytherin at a...> wrote:
> 
> Sassy Snape : 
> > Does anybody else think the movies are becoming more of a bigger-
> > acting-names-must-be-seen-to-be-cool sort of thing. 
> > I loved that Quirrel and Tom Riddle were not played by big names 
> > (sorry, taking this from a North American perspective)and some of 
> the other characters were peppered with some interesting character 
> > actors. I know they had some other big names for the unknown 
youths 
> > to play off of, but now the kids are names, so do we really need 
a 
> > big name to add to the production?
> > Now with bigger names for key characters (Gary Oldman, Ralph 
> Finnes, Julie Christie, Dawn French, Miranda Richardson) comes 
bigger 
> > paycheques and less of the budget for the actual film. And these 
> > actors may be in the position to ask for more money for future 
> films. (Madam Hooch thought she should get more and she wasn't 
> exactly huge in NA or had a big part)
> 
> 
> Mandy here:
> 
> The situation with Zoë Wanamaker as Madam Hooch was unfortunate.  
> While I have no idea what actually happened I've heard it was to do 
> with the fact that for the first movie the actors were all paid the 
> basic wage for a film actors in the UK.  They were all asked to 
sign 
> on to do the CoS before PS/SS was released and did so at the same 
or 
> similar rate of pay.  When PS/SS proved to be such a success some 
of 
> the actors asked for more money to reflect the amount grossed by 
the 
> film makers, Warner Bros.  You make ask why didn't they think of 
that 
> before they signed on for CoS? Unfortunately the film industry 
takes 
> advantage of actors whenever they can as the producers are in the 
> power position.  Contracts are often drawn up and signed, only to 
be 
> re-negotiated later after the first film is deemed a success.  The 
> producers do this to protect their end, leaving it up to the weaker 
> actor to fight for more money.  It is why Equity exists and in fact 
> Equity had to step in and fight for Dan Radcliff as he was paid 
> something like 200,000 pounds for the first movie and Warner Bros., 
> signed him of for CoS for the same amount (or a little more)!  This 
> was clearly wrong as he is the films star, his salary should have 
> increased with the sucess of the first film.  And indeed Equity re-
> negotiated his salary for CoS to reflect his new position.  His new 
> wage was in the region of 2 million.  Zoë Wanamaker was an 
> unfortunate scapegoat for the whole affair.
> 
>  You don't have to worry about the budget, GoF is going to be the 
> most expensive movie ever made.  It has a budget of 350 million or 
> something crazy.  And Warner Bros can afford it, with both PS/SS 
and 
> CoS grossing over a billion each worldwide, and PoA well on it's 
way 
> down the same road.  The Potter franchise is a cash cow and will 
> continue to be one unless there is a flop.
> 
> Warner Bros., can afford to and are willing to pay whatever they 
want 
> for their names actors.  What is interesting is British actors do 
not 
> expect, and are not paid the same astronomical amounts as their 
> American counter parts, choosing to work for critical acclaim 
rather 
> than money.  And we know that there are no diva antics going on in 
> these films, which is more typical of American 'stars', as the 
> British stars appear to be happy to work in the smallest of roles 
> with very little airtime.  You can bet that if an American 'star' 
was 
> involved, they'd be demanding their role be increased to reflect 
> their 'star' status, I not saying the Americans are ungrateful, it 
is 
> just acceptable behavior in Hollywood.  
> 
> So while we don't know if the names are being paid astronomical 
> amounts (and they might be) we do know they are all very excited to 
> be involved in the saga.  They know they're part of history in the 
> making. The HP films are true ensemble pictures, which is rear 
these 
> days. There has never been a project with such a large ensemble of 
> well-respected and talented British thespians.  It has to be JKR's 
> dream cast!


Sassy here: I just worry that the financial end is causing a slight 
disloyalty to the production - for example - the Gryffindor boy who 
was given lines (like who is he - he wasn't in Harry's house from the 
start) is a way of telling the secondary characters/actors that they 
are easily replaced. 

If other non-existent characters are given lines, then the secondary 
actors (Seamus, Dean, etc) can be replaced with an interchangable 
actor. If you start mixing up faces and lines, but keep the trio, the 
fans will not be upset. I for one, was very upset that Gryffindor kid 
had lines more than once, and the Slytherin boy also received a 
considerable amount of air time. I don't mind adding background 
extras, but if the original kids are in the film , they deserve the 
lines. Don't get me wrong - I believe the talent deserves to be paid 
their worth (especially Daniel) but don't sacrifice the secondary lot 
for a name, who may also take something away from the character.

Another note - I find the Hollywoodism of the Disney films to be 
quite distracting - like name that actor - Brad Pitt, Catherine Zeta-
Jones, Demi Moore, Mel Gibson - sorry but for the most part I don't 
want to visualize the actor over the character. Put the money into 
the production and story development in the animated films.

Does anybody think eventually an animated version of the books will 
be made? (I pray the don't make it a Saturday morning cartoon)