Just because you star in a blockbuster doesn’t mean you’ll get paid like a big time movie star. At least, that is what Dakota Johnson and Jamie Dornan are experiencing when it comes to the sequel to the 2015 blockbuster 50 Shades of Grey. The movie has made over $500 million with just a $40 million budget, which means the studio has made over $450 million on the film so far. That number will only grow.
The sequel to 50 Shades is already planned and has the name 50 Shades Darker already in place. However, there are some who don’t want Dakota Johnson or Jamie Dornan to get a raise despite the success of the first film and obvious potential of the sequel. While the Hollywood Reporter claims that both Dakota and Jamie want a seven-figure raise, that is unlikely to happen if a certain producer has his way.
Dana Brunetti, who produced the movie with Michael De Luca and novelist E. L. James, doesn’t seem to want to do it. He makes a compelling argument regarding his decision.
“Look, when I was starting out and had to cut my teeth and build my résumé to get in, I had to basically work for free on a lot of things. I still take reductions in my fees for the opportunities to do certain things. We got slack on ‘Captain Phillips’ about how much Barkhad [Abdi] and those guys got paid. Look at Jonah Hill in ‘Wolf of Wall Street.’ It was great for his career. So I’m not going to cry for anybody who wants to be in this business just because a thing they were involved in did very well and they didn’t get paid [a lot]. That’s not the deal that you made. If it was, I’d have more than a couple Ferraris because all the money my films have made is f—ing insane. You’ve got to start somewhere.”
The problem is that each of the people involved in the films mentioned knew it was a one-off film. Plus, new actors do deserve to get paid less the stars. However, the stars of both films he mentioned, Tom Hanks and Leonardo DiCaprio, each were given a good deal money-wise for their role. However, when a sequel is in place, you no longer have “new actors.” Rather, they are established.
Brunetti and the studio itself ideally do not want to fork over the cash. A insider told E! Online about the deal involving Dakota Johnson and Jamie Dornan, but claimed it ideally should open up.
“It was a very basic franchise starter deal. Look at ‘Twilight’ and ‘Hunger Games,’ and that’s where it is heading.”
Clearly, after the success of the first movie, one would imagine that the movie’s next film would end up doing just as well, if not even better. So why not pay the stars what they are worth when they made a blockbuster film? Could Dakota Johnson and Jamie Dornan hold out for a better deal similar to a first round draft pick in the NFL? Chances are that this very well could happen. Both are needed, and it would be a bad move to recast. But what does a movie company do when the stars do not want to work for the money they are given? They usually end up paying up, regardless of what they want to do.
Looking at the film, sure, it was a chance to take when making it. Plus casting two people who many aren’t aware of yet helped, as it allowed for the film to be even better, and it created a lower budget. However, in doing this, they created stars in Dakota Johnson and Jamie Dornan. That said, you have to realize that once stars are made, they’ll want star money. Regardless of what is wanted, we’re not going to see Dakota or Jamie accept the same pay they did in the last. Why would they?
[IMG Credit: m.jokowi.com, lifesitenews.com]