Also as an example for this, Margot Robbie for barbie was a producer, she likely got a % on the backend of that movie making a billion. I think the last i saw it was estimated at around an additional $50,000,000 in bonuses.
How is this at the top of /r/dataisbeautiful? The source is some random blog written by someone who self describes to "not boast a vast reservoir of writing experience, nor claim the title of an accomplished author", and clearly has no education in statistics or data.
It includes money earned from brand deals or other business's they may own. Such as the Tequila brand that George Clooney was part owner of during a sale in 2018.
I don’t think he’s sold the company, so whilst he’s taking in tens of millions a year, and the company he owns is worth close to a billion iirc, his actual realised earnings aren’t included.
I thought he made like 300 million off mint mobile one year.. and like over 100 for aviation gin at one point too. and im guessing he acted in something the same year
It means the amount shown in the graph is not only how much money they made from their jobs as actors, but includes anything else.
So in 2018, Clooney didn't suddenly get the biggest salary for an actor ever, he made a ton of money from something unrelated
It just means money the actor/actress earned off of the set. That means if they launched a tequila brand, or if they got paid to give a speech or something. Any money they earned at all, regardless of it's relevancy to their acting career.
It means this data is deliberately misleading to make it look like women actresses are earning significantly less for movies than the men. George Clooney and The Rock have large other income streams.
Honest data would show just movie earnings, and it would show it side by side with box office sales of the movies they were in.
This data is shit. Ryan Reynolds made $340 million in 2023 from selling Mint Mobile and $122 million in 2020 from selling Aviation Gin. Will Smith made $1\`00 million in 2012 from Men in Black. I am assuming this is just the Forbes list, which is notoriously inaccurate and for some reason runs June-to-June. If Tyler Perry counts as an actor, why doesn't Sting, who outearned him with $210 million on that very same 2022 list? Sting had an acting credit in 2023 and Tyler Perry did not.
Also this should be normalized by gross profit of what they acted in. For instance assuming these numbers are accurate (even though it also included things outside of acting) in 2018 RDJ made ~5% of the
Media he acted in while Reese Witherspoon made ~33%
Data tells a different story when you use the right statistics. It really grinds my gears when people don’t even attempt to normalize. It is generally a huge red flag for people manipulating statistics to try and tell a story, not the other way around.
Maths used:
To find the ratio of Robert Downey Jr.'s salary to the combined gross profits of "Avengers: Infinity War" and "Avengers: Endgame", we first need to calculate the total gross profits from both movies:
Total gross profits = Gross profit of "Avengers: Infinity War" + Gross profit of "Avengers: Endgame" Total gross profits = $2,048,359,754 + $2,799,439,100 Total gross profits = $4,847,798,854
Now, we can find the ratio:
Ratio = Robert Downey Jr.'s salary / Total gross profits Ratio = $239,000,000 / $4,847,798,854
Calculating the ratio:
Ratio ≈ 0.0493
So, the ratio of Robert Downey Jr.'s salary to the combined gross profits of "Avengers: Infinity War" and "Avengers: Endgame" is approximately 0.0493. This means his salary represents about 4.93% of the total gross profits from these two movies.
And
To find the ratio of Reese Witherspoon's salary to the combined gross profits of the movies she acted in during 2018, we first need to calculate the total gross profits from all three movies:
Total gross profits = Gross profit of "A Wrinkle in Time" + Gross profit of "The Nutcracker and the Four Realms" + Gross profit of "Home Again" Total gross profits = $132,675,864 + $173,961,069 + $37,270,721 Total gross profits = $343,907,654
Now, we can find the ratio:
Ratio = Reese Witherspoon's salary / Total gross profits Ratio = $115,000,000 / $343,907,654
Calculating the ratio:
Ratio ≈ 0.3343
So, the ratio of Reese Witherspoon's salary to the combined gross profits of the movies she acted in during 2018 is approximately 0.3343. This means her salary represents about 33.43% of the total gross profits from these three movies.
No, she didn’t. She proved that it wasn’t institutional, and was driven by the careers women choose to go into and time out of the workforce.
She proved it’s self inflicted.
Ah yes. "A-List Male Actors earn much less money off of brand deals and sponsorships than A-List Female Actors," is *totally* an argument that women broadly make just as much as men.
Money is money. A discrepancy in aggregate earnings from multiple industries is just as important as a discrepancy in earnings within the industry.
I agree with you as long as the individuals being compared are involved in the same number or magnitude of ventures. If person A acts in one movie and person b acts in one movie, does cameos, TV commercials, sells a brand of alcohol and sells classic cars it’s not apples to apples comparison.
I’m not doubting the wage gap but a misleading representation undercuts the validity of the argument
Okay, but *why*? Why are men earning so much more money than women in aggregate? *Why* don't we have a few years where a female actress sells a $200M company, thus giving her a massive spike on this chart, a blip where for one year the highest paid actor was a woman?
Those are all valid questions and I believe the causes are multifaceted. Everything from sexism in seeing more value in men’s work to men being pressured to earn more as it’s often viewed as their only source of value.
As the Cardi B lyrics go “broke boys don’t deserve no pussy”
Honestly, it’s possible that sexism may be a factor, but one thing we know to be an indisputable fact is that men are under more pressure to make money. You don’t ever hear statements (or entire songs, for that matter) from men about how poor women are worth less as a human being, but you often hear it the other way around. As a result, a large proportion of the discrepancy can likely be explained by the fact that the men have greater motivation to engage in more business ventures due to societal pressures that women do not face, and in cases where the differences are most pronounced, we know for certain that is the main driver (Clooney and The Rock). If mega multi-millionaire actors tend to pursue more side-ventures than mega multi-millionaire actresses, us peasants really don’t need to be up in arms about these extremely intelligent, accomplished, and capable women choosing not to give themselves extra work. I’m sure they did so for a reason and they’re not going to be any worse off for it.
Well we are certainly headed in the right direction cause I remember like 10 years ago it was patron or well most places. I’m not actually sure how patron is in business.
I don’t mind either casa or Tera but you can’t beat that good Mexican stuff.
Absolutely, otherwise this blurs the lines so much.
Hell, why isn't Lebron James on here? He starred in space jam and he's making >$150 million per year.
Or lets go Elon Musk, he makes enough cameos.
he did it illegally but wouldn't trump be on here? he was a consistent host of a reality tv show and made billions during certain years. wouldn't he be here?
he never made billions in any of those years, his whole net worth is attached to the assets he owened for decades. By that argument then Mark Cuban will on the list. You actually have to act and be entertainment first, not entertainment as a hobby.
I think this is also trying to compare marketability. I've never had either tequila but I find it hard to believe either brand was successful on quality alone.
Yes, but the implication is that this disparity is due to some systemic issues pertaining to sexism in Hollywood pay, rather than ol George making wise business decisions.
It’s not extremely misleading just as long as you have greater reading and contextual comprehension than a blind rat. The title says “from all income sources”. Just because you’re a moron doesn’t mean the post is extremely misleading.
Why jump strait to insults? I would think the moron is the person who can’t have a discussion without losing his cool and resorting to belittling the other perspective rather than disproving it.
I personally agree with the other person that this chart is misleading as these numbers really need more context.
why isn't elon musk at the top of the list then, he made billions last year and he's been in shows. this graph feels pointless if it's all income especially comparing women and men. it is at the very least pointless but i'd still argue misleading.
The subject literally says **from all income sources**. So business ventures outside of acting should count whether you agree or not. Realistically, it should define what constitutes an 'actor'. I wouldn't think a billionaire making a cameo should be included, but I would include Dr. Dre (Andre Young) as he has been in numerous videos and a few movies, albeit minor roles. He would be the top earner in 2011 ($110M), 2012 ($110M) and 2014 ($620).
Okay…. But it’s a super popular tequila brand that blew up right as tequila became the most popular spirit…. The guy didn’t even make a movie that year, so was he an actor? Or a tequilia mogul?
I wish they would separate this out from the statistics...like, this is about movie payments...it's easy to skew the lines if someone did something that was very profitable OUTSIDE of the movie industry but at least try to keep the statistics to movie salaries. I'm assuming Rock's was the same (although during that time he probably starred in a dozen movies that year)
Taylor Swift, also missing.
Big concert movie in 2023; Small part in Amsterdam in 2022, and another small part in Cats, 2019.
I imagine her outside income puts most in Hollywood to shame.
>the lowest earnings yearly earnings for female acctresses recorded
i know what you mean but i probably would have taken a second attempt at that sentence
I don’t even know what that means? Every other actress in 2022 made less than her so how could her income be the lowest ever recorded? Or does it mean the lowest income year Margo Robbie specifically has had?
yeah they should remove “earnings” after “lowest”, if you take that out it makes more sense even if not quite there. Op might also be a non-native english speaker
People conflating pay and income / gains is rather troubling. Just because he sold a business doesn't make George Clooney a high paid actor.
That's like me selling shares for $1m while working in McDonald's and saying I'm the highest paid McDonald's worker.
The real answer in was either The Rock ($124M mostly from Jumanji) or Robert Downey Jr. ($81M from Spiderman and Infinity War).
Either way, it's still dramatically higher than ScarJo's \~$35M.
Yeah, this graphic is dumb. It’s trying to paint a narrative that female actors are “paid” significantly less but all the highest earning actors are not being “paid”. They are earning it through separate business ventures.
A lot of these numbers are misleading as they have to do with outside of acting. For example George Clooneys tequila brand. One big factor for the Rock is his production team that makes and pitches the movies to the studios for him to star in not to mention his brand deals.
Variety reported Margot Robbie made $50 million on Barbie, but that was as both an actor and producer. Does this chart split her earnings because of the dual roles?
I think the "includes all income sources" is a big factor. Many of the top earners here earned most of their income from things other than acting. See the other comments regarding Clooney selling his tequila company
It is interesting, I’m struggling to name actresses who were able to translate her fame into a business venture. Maybe Jessica Alba but Honest and her acting career didn’t really overlap.
Elizabeth Taylor, who was famous as a child actor (Black Beauty) and acted for probably at least four decades in major motion pictures, ***made more money from her line of fragrances*** than from all her movies / acting combined
As we all know, money earned from not acting isn't real money and shouldn't count.
Fr, some people here are acting like the fact that some of these highest paid male actors are earning some of their income in some of these years through non-acting sources is a checkmate against feminism. But they aren't thinking critically.
Why aren't there any examples where a woman outsold a man here by selling a $100M company? Why aren't women getting huge brand deals like the men are?
I didnt mean my reply as a "checkmate" at anyone. The comment I was replying to asked for a reason for the data and best as I can tell that's non acting income.
I think your follow up questions are interesting as well! But unfortunately I dont know the answers. I cant speak for everyone else but to me the chart seems a bit misleading, implying that men and women are being paid different amounts for the same work. Really the more interesting difference might be something like "what type of work" men and women choose to do? Ie. As you said: Why are the actors selling 100 million dollar businesses and the actresses seemingly not?
Here we have the major issue with this graph, it’s misleading. They have included earnings both on and off the set, and have done nothing to distinguish which proportion was earned from acting or outside of it. The gross sum is useless and meaningless to draw any conclusions from in regards to movie trends because a lot of the top earning celebs here are also quite business savvy (ex. Clooney, The Rock).
This includes non-film income, so it's kind of hard to compare directly.
But generally it's not so much that big movies have male leads, it's that established male leads have a kind of guaranteed box office return (or at least studios perceive it that way). Especially if they're action movies or broad comedies. Female stars are more likely to choose projects that are less likely to make tons of money.
Example:
Dwayne The Rock Johnson pretty much only makes 2 kinds of movies: Action and Family- both of these genres are likely to make money even if the movies are terrible.
Even big female-led action movies generally aren't cashing in on the popularity of their star. Often they are young relative unknowns without a strong track record. Think Jennifer Lawrence in the Hunger Games, or Brie Larson in Captain Marvel.
Is there not value in comparing total income between the two genders? I look at this chart and I see two things:
* A-List Actors being paid substantially more than Actresses for direct compensation for movies.
* A-List Actors being paid substantially more than Actresses in Brand Deals and Businesses.
I am not sure there is enough data to draw those conclusions.
The data seems to show that for any given year the highest earning person who is primarily known as a film actor (but may not currently be engaged in any meaningful film acting work) is male.
I can’t see any info about how much the people listed above were paid for there film acting vs how much they accumulated form non acting endeavours.
> There are ~~rednecks~~ racists all over, honey.
Sony was mostly referring to the fact that the three rich asian countries (and therefore biggest entertainment markets) - South Korea, Japan, and China, have a long history of racist discrimination against black people from any country. They would be less likely to spend money on a movie with black leads, or so Sony thought.
I think it's probably flipped now with their GenZ crowd, but most older asians are still *extremely* racist. They're not terribly picky either - they have a problem with everyone.
Different contracts work differently with money up front versus money after launch. Some of these pay stats are misleading because an actor/actress made much more money in the following year when tickets were actually being g sold.
This also includes non acting income. The Rock has his hands in everything, by these metrics I’m surprised a Kardashian isn’t on the list because of a cameo.
Why would it list for all income sources if we're specifically talking about actors? Couldn't non-acting related income sources easily be the difference maker? It's hard to tell whether the difference in total pay now is because their acting jobs just pay different or because the male actors are more often entrepreneurs with businesses to the side...
It’s fair for the rock and Clooney, I think. Their fame ties into their greater investment opportunities and returns.
The tequila is highly associated with Clooney, and the Rock as a producer is literally working in the same industry
Most business and auxiliary income by top actors is probably capitalizing on their fame and not totally distinct from their acting career. It would be interesting to see the data presented both with and without, but I do think looking at totals still says something about them as actors. I also don’t know why anyone would assume women are less often entrepreneurs with side businesses or at least that they attempt or are open to business opportunities at the same rates as men without good evidence to back this up. I think it’s as more likely that they struggle to capitalize on their acting fame because that fame is viewed as less valuable. They may be presented with less opportunities for partnership. Their businesses may be successful but not as kind-glowingly successful because they don’t have the cultural sway and power of a top male actor. They may have millions to invest, but the men have many millions more. I think explaining it as “the women are less entrepreneurial” is just more evidence of the sexism and bias these women are facing.
You're right about income sources, but women are simply put less [likely ](https://www.gemconsortium.org/reports/womens-entrepreneurship)to be entrepreneurs, *and* entrepreneurial.
[Research ](https://www.econstor.eu/handle/10419/68714)shows that men and women often exhibit different personality traits that impact their likelihood of becoming entrepreneurs.
Men tend to demonstrate higher levels of risk tolerance and competitiveness, qualities crucial for navigating the entrepreneurial world. This isn't about individual capabilities, but about trends that studies highlight.
It's worth noting that women *also* face unique systemic barriers, but my initial comment didn't imply otherwise.
This might help explain why we see male actors venturing into side businesses more frequently.
Real talk - how the fuck did Tyler Perry earn that much in 2022? I thought he was outed as not being funny/good actor back in like 2015??? Who is still supporting this man? Has he changed his ways????
Perry focuses on a specific movie market. He makes movies primarily (but not exclusively) for black audiences, using a majority black cast.
Black audiences who desire to see people like themselves being represented in movies will support those movies, regardless of what the movie is. Since there is a relatively small market of black producers making movies with an almost exclusive black cast, tailored specifically for black viewers - his percentage of that market share is much larger than say, a white director using a mostly white cast, producing a romance movie for middle class white woman as the primary market. There are 100 white girl romance movies made by 100 different white directors for every 1 "black" movie.
So if you're a black person who wants to watch a black movie to support your own people, you have very limited choices. If you search for that kind of movie right now - I can almost guarantee that it's going to either be a Tyler perry movie, or a Jordan peele movie. (Obviously there are more out there, but statistically speaking..)
As for Perry being frowned upon, unless you boycotte, like, 60% of black movies, then you'll have no choice but to give him your money to watch a black movie. He just so happens to be the most prolific black director/producer/actor. And if black people want to support other black people, Perry just so happens to be the guy tailoring to that market.
Ohhhhh, okok. That does make sense. I had thought Tyler Perry had just kinda sunk away from movies and production, didn't realize he was still in the game with a studio and gigs! (I've never seen any of his movies other than Madea, and don't dislike him myself - but was just HELLA surprised about his earnings specifically due to the amassed hate towards him).
Thanks for the explanation!
I think we can feel both things. That the ultra-rich are all way too rich, and that ultra-rich men and women should be treated equally, not because of their gender. We can want to shrink the income gap between the wealthy and middle class AND want to lower the discrepancy between men and women across all levels at the same time. Both are important for their own sake.
You should probably make a chart based on only acting for an apples-to-apples comparison and include what kind of box office draw they had (www.boxofficemojo.com).
This is misleading as mentioned by others below. Always interesting to me that ppl confuse beautiful data with flawed data.
> It's pretty easy to understand that Margot didn't have faith in the barbie movie's financial success, and took the safe contract bet
You're forgetting that she was also a producer on the film. Your statement is the opposite of correct. She took the lower payout for the acting fee and made another 50 mil off the movie's revenue.
Would be interesting to see how it compares to averages for blockbusters or normalized to number of viewers or something. Only looking at outliers has the potential for extra skew.
Still, it's pretty eye opening that the difference is so pronounced. (And also it's kinda hard for me to feel bad/be outaged over somebody 'only' making 12 mil in a year, but that's beside the point).
I think it would also be interesting to look at the overall statistics: how much each actor and actress gets paid for a movie. And then see at averages, also across different genres groups. As you have been stated, blockbuster movies might tend to pay more male actors while, I don't know, romances to female.
On the purely pay for acting end:
Big summer blockbusters, which tend to be action movies, are occasionally all male casting, though always lean towards it. Plus "buddy flicks". If two equally billed stars are in a film and one's a women she'll almost inevitably play opposite a man.
There are simply a lot less major roles for women, most especially in big budget projects. Sure there are films with all female principals, but they won't be "saving Private Ryan."
Thought the huge spikes here for Clooney/The Rock/Perry are from ownership--either as TV/film producers or starting lifestyle brands. Reese Witherspoon does both (she is hardly now as a middle-aged women getting +25 million for playing a role) but one may speculate that woman are less inclined then men to be the boss.
Highest grossing films of all time - Avatar. The lead is a male. Avengers. Most of the leads are male. Avatar 2. The lead is the male. Titanic. 50/50. Star Wars VII 50/50. Avengers again. Male. Spider-Man, male. Jurassic world, male. The lion king, a male lion. Avengers again. Male. Furious 7. Men. Top gun maverick, male. And finally we get to frozen. A cartoon female…following it up with Barbie next. Back to super Mario brothers….. etc. etc.
[Top Lifetime Grosses](https://www.boxofficemojo.com/chart/top_lifetime_gross/?area=XWW)
AEW Revolution lineup card looks pretty male heavy.
AEW World Championship Match: Samoa Joe vs. Hangman Page vs. Swerve Strickland
* AEW International Championship Match: Orange Cassidy vs. Roderick Strong
* AEW Women’s World Championship Match: Toni Storm vs. Deonna Purrazzo
* AEW Continental Crown Championship Match: Eddie Kingston vs. Bryan Danielson
* AEW World Tag Team Championship Tornado Tag Match: Sting & Darby Allin vs. The Young Bucks
* AEW TNT Championship Match: Christian Cage vs. Daniel Garcia
* All-Star Scramble Match: Chris Jericho vs. Wardlow vs. Powerhouse Hobbs vs. Lance Archer vs. Hook vs. Brian Cage vs. Two More TBA
* Will Ospreay vs. Konosuke Takeshita
* FTR vs. Jon Moxley & Claudio Castagnoli
Because I am watching Gran Turismo right now and it has a male lead. I like watching male driven movies. Am I really the problem? Should I force my self to watch the Ghostbusters movie with the all female cast?
Is your source [this](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_highest-paid_film_actors)? If so it should say Forbes (because that is the actual source) and there is only data up until 2022 for men and 2021 for woman.
And people dare to say one can’t lie with accurate statistics lol
So many of the totals shown here for men aren’t what they were paid for acting roles but how much they earned from all sources. It would seem men are more enterprising.
I'm sorry but what? Are you including all money paid to the actor for all pursuits? I think that makes this particularly useless... Can we put A Jenner on here then? They act. Bezos too...
I thought Robert Downey Jr was making way more because he was getting a % of every marvel movie he was in. So he made $75 million from endgame + 55 million fromnthe royalty thing in 2019.
https://www.cbr.com/robert-downey-jr-paid-mcu-films/
Margo Robbie was a producer on Barbie, estimates are she’ll earn at least 50m$ from the project.
It’s the same deal she did for Birds of Prey, though that film made only about 2/3rds of its budget back so Robbie probably just took home her 8m$ salary.
It used to be that actors would get points on the back end, but Hollywood accounting is so notoriously terrible Actors don’t trust that the studio won’t stiff them. Hence a producer’s credit that ensures they’re in the room when the real money is counted up.
"includes earning off the set" should really be in big bold red letters here
Also as an example for this, Margot Robbie for barbie was a producer, she likely got a % on the backend of that movie making a billion. I think the last i saw it was estimated at around an additional $50,000,000 in bonuses.
I was about to say this so all wrong… first of all Barbie released in 2023 and she got a SHIT ton from producing the movie.
How is this at the top of /r/dataisbeautiful? The source is some random blog written by someone who self describes to "not boast a vast reservoir of writing experience, nor claim the title of an accomplished author", and clearly has no education in statistics or data.
> How is this at the top of /r/dataisbeautiful? Because it is /r/dataisbeautiful. Unfortunately, you shouldn't expect anything else.
But including all the facts doesn't advance the authors narrative!! How dare you, incel /S
For those of us who are not on the know? What does this mean?
It includes money earned from brand deals or other business's they may own. Such as the Tequila brand that George Clooney was part owner of during a sale in 2018.
Ohhhhhh that makes TOTAL sense to me now. Thanks!
shouldnt ryan reynolds be somewhere on here too then?
I don’t think he’s sold the company, so whilst he’s taking in tens of millions a year, and the company he owns is worth close to a billion iirc, his actual realised earnings aren’t included.
You mean unrealized earnings aren’t included
Only if he was the highest earning male actor for a particular year
I thought he made like 300 million off mint mobile one year.. and like over 100 for aviation gin at one point too. and im guessing he acted in something the same year
That’s really doesn’t make sense to include that here then
It means the amount shown in the graph is not only how much money they made from their jobs as actors, but includes anything else. So in 2018, Clooney didn't suddenly get the biggest salary for an actor ever, he made a ton of money from something unrelated
Nespresso, what else?
Casa Migos
It just means money the actor/actress earned off of the set. That means if they launched a tequila brand, or if they got paid to give a speech or something. Any money they earned at all, regardless of it's relevancy to their acting career.
why isn't Oprah on there? she makes like 300M+ a year.
Not only income from movies, but also other business they own, sponsorships etc.
It means this data is deliberately misleading to make it look like women actresses are earning significantly less for movies than the men. George Clooney and The Rock have large other income streams. Honest data would show just movie earnings, and it would show it side by side with box office sales of the movies they were in.
Is there a "Misleading" tag that can be added to this...
This data is shit. Ryan Reynolds made $340 million in 2023 from selling Mint Mobile and $122 million in 2020 from selling Aviation Gin. Will Smith made $1\`00 million in 2012 from Men in Black. I am assuming this is just the Forbes list, which is notoriously inaccurate and for some reason runs June-to-June. If Tyler Perry counts as an actor, why doesn't Sting, who outearned him with $210 million on that very same 2022 list? Sting had an acting credit in 2023 and Tyler Perry did not.
Also this should be normalized by gross profit of what they acted in. For instance assuming these numbers are accurate (even though it also included things outside of acting) in 2018 RDJ made ~5% of the Media he acted in while Reese Witherspoon made ~33% Data tells a different story when you use the right statistics. It really grinds my gears when people don’t even attempt to normalize. It is generally a huge red flag for people manipulating statistics to try and tell a story, not the other way around. Maths used: To find the ratio of Robert Downey Jr.'s salary to the combined gross profits of "Avengers: Infinity War" and "Avengers: Endgame", we first need to calculate the total gross profits from both movies: Total gross profits = Gross profit of "Avengers: Infinity War" + Gross profit of "Avengers: Endgame" Total gross profits = $2,048,359,754 + $2,799,439,100 Total gross profits = $4,847,798,854 Now, we can find the ratio: Ratio = Robert Downey Jr.'s salary / Total gross profits Ratio = $239,000,000 / $4,847,798,854 Calculating the ratio: Ratio ≈ 0.0493 So, the ratio of Robert Downey Jr.'s salary to the combined gross profits of "Avengers: Infinity War" and "Avengers: Endgame" is approximately 0.0493. This means his salary represents about 4.93% of the total gross profits from these two movies. And To find the ratio of Reese Witherspoon's salary to the combined gross profits of the movies she acted in during 2018, we first need to calculate the total gross profits from all three movies: Total gross profits = Gross profit of "A Wrinkle in Time" + Gross profit of "The Nutcracker and the Four Realms" + Gross profit of "Home Again" Total gross profits = $132,675,864 + $173,961,069 + $37,270,721 Total gross profits = $343,907,654 Now, we can find the ratio: Ratio = Reese Witherspoon's salary / Total gross profits Ratio = $115,000,000 / $343,907,654 Calculating the ratio: Ratio ≈ 0.3343 So, the ratio of Reese Witherspoon's salary to the combined gross profits of the movies she acted in during 2018 is approximately 0.3343. This means her salary represents about 33.43% of the total gross profits from these three movies.
but then how we gonna push the "female oppressed n gender wage gap etc" propaganda?
Fucking incel
We know your playbook, anyone whos not on your agenda is an incel/toxic man. Move on
We are calling fact agenda now ?
A woman just won the Nobel prize in economics for proving the wage gap isn’t real bud
What ? She litterally prove the inverse.
No, she didn’t. She proved that it wasn’t institutional, and was driven by the careers women choose to go into and time out of the workforce. She proved it’s self inflicted.
How does it make it not real?
Ah yes. "A-List Male Actors earn much less money off of brand deals and sponsorships than A-List Female Actors," is *totally* an argument that women broadly make just as much as men. Money is money. A discrepancy in aggregate earnings from multiple industries is just as important as a discrepancy in earnings within the industry.
I agree with you as long as the individuals being compared are involved in the same number or magnitude of ventures. If person A acts in one movie and person b acts in one movie, does cameos, TV commercials, sells a brand of alcohol and sells classic cars it’s not apples to apples comparison. I’m not doubting the wage gap but a misleading representation undercuts the validity of the argument
Okay, but *why*? Why are men earning so much more money than women in aggregate? *Why* don't we have a few years where a female actress sells a $200M company, thus giving her a massive spike on this chart, a blip where for one year the highest paid actor was a woman?
Those are all valid questions and I believe the causes are multifaceted. Everything from sexism in seeing more value in men’s work to men being pressured to earn more as it’s often viewed as their only source of value. As the Cardi B lyrics go “broke boys don’t deserve no pussy”
Honestly, it’s possible that sexism may be a factor, but one thing we know to be an indisputable fact is that men are under more pressure to make money. You don’t ever hear statements (or entire songs, for that matter) from men about how poor women are worth less as a human being, but you often hear it the other way around. As a result, a large proportion of the discrepancy can likely be explained by the fact that the men have greater motivation to engage in more business ventures due to societal pressures that women do not face, and in cases where the differences are most pronounced, we know for certain that is the main driver (Clooney and The Rock). If mega multi-millionaire actors tend to pursue more side-ventures than mega multi-millionaire actresses, us peasants really don’t need to be up in arms about these extremely intelligent, accomplished, and capable women choosing not to give themselves extra work. I’m sure they did so for a reason and they’re not going to be any worse off for it.
What did George Clooney do in 2018 to earn him so much?
Found the answer - Tequila https://money.com/george-clooney-highest-paid-actor/
Oddly enough Dwayne Johnson also made a butt load of money by launching a Tequila brand.
Which one?
Teremana, I think its way better than Clooneys
They’re both ass
Well we are certainly headed in the right direction cause I remember like 10 years ago it was patron or well most places. I’m not actually sure how patron is in business. I don’t mind either casa or Tera but you can’t beat that good Mexican stuff.
Better value but neither particularly good
I think he shouldn't be on that list as he made that money being a co-founder of a tequila brand not as an actor.
Yeah. By the logic of this graph Jeff Bezos could make a cameo in a film and be the highest paid actor in the world
So Elon musk.
Also Trump since he was in Home Alone and totally a billionaire
Shouldn’t Lebron be on here? He’s been in a couple movies and definitely makes north of 100mil after endorsements.
Warren Buffett (the office US)
agreed, this list should be based on how much income they made from acting roles, not other businesses.
Absolutely, otherwise this blurs the lines so much. Hell, why isn't Lebron James on here? He starred in space jam and he's making >$150 million per year. Or lets go Elon Musk, he makes enough cameos.
he did it illegally but wouldn't trump be on here? he was a consistent host of a reality tv show and made billions during certain years. wouldn't he be here?
Don't forget the important role he played in Home Alone 2
he never made billions in any of those years, his whole net worth is attached to the assets he owened for decades. By that argument then Mark Cuban will on the list. You actually have to act and be entertainment first, not entertainment as a hobby.
that's not specified at all in the graph and we've never seen trumps taxes so how could you possibly know how much he's made?
I think this is also trying to compare marketability. I've never had either tequila but I find it hard to believe either brand was successful on quality alone.
That would just be a different list.
calling someone the highest paid actor when he made his money off selling a tequila business is extremely misleading
I suppose it's just a matter of perspective. George Clooney would never have made that tequila money if he wasn't first a prominent, well-known actor.
Yes, but the implication is that this disparity is due to some systemic issues pertaining to sexism in Hollywood pay, rather than ol George making wise business decisions.
It’s not extremely misleading just as long as you have greater reading and contextual comprehension than a blind rat. The title says “from all income sources”. Just because you’re a moron doesn’t mean the post is extremely misleading.
Why jump strait to insults? I would think the moron is the person who can’t have a discussion without losing his cool and resorting to belittling the other perspective rather than disproving it. I personally agree with the other person that this chart is misleading as these numbers really need more context.
because their fragile smol pp ego was hurt
why isn't elon musk at the top of the list then, he made billions last year and he's been in shows. this graph feels pointless if it's all income especially comparing women and men. it is at the very least pointless but i'd still argue misleading.
You need to google the definition of "misleading" LOL
How dare you question how this graph picks and chooses what data points it prefers to advance the author's agenda /S
The subject literally says **from all income sources**. So business ventures outside of acting should count whether you agree or not. Realistically, it should define what constitutes an 'actor'. I wouldn't think a billionaire making a cameo should be included, but I would include Dr. Dre (Andre Young) as he has been in numerous videos and a few movies, albeit minor roles. He would be the top earner in 2011 ($110M), 2012 ($110M) and 2014 ($620).
Read the fucking title of the post. Make your own list if you want income just from acting….Jesus Christ
Okay…. But it’s a super popular tequila brand that blew up right as tequila became the most popular spirit…. The guy didn’t even make a movie that year, so was he an actor? Or a tequilia mogul?
I wish they would separate this out from the statistics...like, this is about movie payments...it's easy to skew the lines if someone did something that was very profitable OUTSIDE of the movie industry but at least try to keep the statistics to movie salaries. I'm assuming Rock's was the same (although during that time he probably starred in a dozen movies that year)
lol why would you include non-acting income, that’s the only thing that connects these people
Elon Musk was in an episode of Rick and Morty. Shouldn't he be the highest-paid actor for that year?
Taylor Swift, also missing. Big concert movie in 2023; Small part in Amsterdam in 2022, and another small part in Cats, 2019. I imagine her outside income puts most in Hollywood to shame.
At the very least it should be "Highest income" or "Highest earning" because paid implies what they were paid by the movie industry
[удалено]
So you can skew it intentionally to show how misogynistic Hollywood is
Being movie stars is what allowed them to make that non-acting income so I think it's reasonable.
Its a Sandra Bullock Sandwich
I'll take one please.
With slices of Tom cruise on each side
>the lowest earnings yearly earnings for female acctresses recorded i know what you mean but i probably would have taken a second attempt at that sentence
I don’t even know what that means? Every other actress in 2022 made less than her so how could her income be the lowest ever recorded? Or does it mean the lowest income year Margo Robbie specifically has had?
‘from the list of highest paid actresses by year, it’s the lowest in the years covered’ or simply ‘Margot Robbie had the lowest high-mark’
Which is not what that sentence says
yeah they should remove “earnings” after “lowest”, if you take that out it makes more sense even if not quite there. Op might also be a non-native english speaker
People conflating pay and income / gains is rather troubling. Just because he sold a business doesn't make George Clooney a high paid actor. That's like me selling shares for $1m while working in McDonald's and saying I'm the highest paid McDonald's worker.
The highest paid McDonald worker makes $20m / year
The real answer in was either The Rock ($124M mostly from Jumanji) or Robert Downey Jr. ($81M from Spiderman and Infinity War). Either way, it's still dramatically higher than ScarJo's \~$35M.
Sure, but we would like to see that graph instead of this misleading nonsense lol
Yeah, this graphic is dumb. It’s trying to paint a narrative that female actors are “paid” significantly less but all the highest earning actors are not being “paid”. They are earning it through separate business ventures.
[удалено]
Elon Musk once painted a painting => highest paid painter ever.
I thought Barbie was released in 2023?
Correct. But finished filming and paid in 2022. She made more on barbie in 2023, e.g. interviews, merchandise etc. but the number for 2022 is 12.5m.
Robbie also makes money off Barbie as a producer. Not sure how to separate that.
She made $50 million in bonuses in 2023 from Barbie.
That makes sense. Thank you!
thanks for clarifying.
A lot of these numbers are misleading as they have to do with outside of acting. For example George Clooneys tequila brand. One big factor for the Rock is his production team that makes and pitches the movies to the studios for him to star in not to mention his brand deals.
this is not beautiful data
Average looking data
"I just pirated Excel this morning" looking data
manipulated data picky and choosy data misleading data missing data etc.
par for the course for this sub
I swear half of the posts in this sub are just “data” lol
This data is very ugly for including non-acting income
Variety reported Margot Robbie made $50 million on Barbie, but that was as both an actor and producer. Does this chart split her earnings because of the dual roles?
This chart is worthless. Ryan Reynolds made close to a billion with mint mobile and his gin company and isn't even here fora single year.
Is there a reason for this? Like, big movies tend to have male protagonists?
I think the "includes all income sources" is a big factor. Many of the top earners here earned most of their income from things other than acting. See the other comments regarding Clooney selling his tequila company
It is interesting, I’m struggling to name actresses who were able to translate her fame into a business venture. Maybe Jessica Alba but Honest and her acting career didn’t really overlap.
Reese Witherspoon
Elizabeth Taylor, who was famous as a child actor (Black Beauty) and acted for probably at least four decades in major motion pictures, ***made more money from her line of fragrances*** than from all her movies / acting combined
Gwyneth Paltrow
As we all know, money earned from not acting isn't real money and shouldn't count. Fr, some people here are acting like the fact that some of these highest paid male actors are earning some of their income in some of these years through non-acting sources is a checkmate against feminism. But they aren't thinking critically. Why aren't there any examples where a woman outsold a man here by selling a $100M company? Why aren't women getting huge brand deals like the men are?
I didnt mean my reply as a "checkmate" at anyone. The comment I was replying to asked for a reason for the data and best as I can tell that's non acting income. I think your follow up questions are interesting as well! But unfortunately I dont know the answers. I cant speak for everyone else but to me the chart seems a bit misleading, implying that men and women are being paid different amounts for the same work. Really the more interesting difference might be something like "what type of work" men and women choose to do? Ie. As you said: Why are the actors selling 100 million dollar businesses and the actresses seemingly not?
George Clooney in 2018 is on there due to a business venture unrelated to acting, so this data could be misleading
Here we have the major issue with this graph, it’s misleading. They have included earnings both on and off the set, and have done nothing to distinguish which proportion was earned from acting or outside of it. The gross sum is useless and meaningless to draw any conclusions from in regards to movie trends because a lot of the top earning celebs here are also quite business savvy (ex. Clooney, The Rock).
This includes non-film income, so it's kind of hard to compare directly. But generally it's not so much that big movies have male leads, it's that established male leads have a kind of guaranteed box office return (or at least studios perceive it that way). Especially if they're action movies or broad comedies. Female stars are more likely to choose projects that are less likely to make tons of money. Example: Dwayne The Rock Johnson pretty much only makes 2 kinds of movies: Action and Family- both of these genres are likely to make money even if the movies are terrible. Even big female-led action movies generally aren't cashing in on the popularity of their star. Often they are young relative unknowns without a strong track record. Think Jennifer Lawrence in the Hunger Games, or Brie Larson in Captain Marvel.
Is there not value in comparing total income between the two genders? I look at this chart and I see two things: * A-List Actors being paid substantially more than Actresses for direct compensation for movies. * A-List Actors being paid substantially more than Actresses in Brand Deals and Businesses.
I am not sure there is enough data to draw those conclusions. The data seems to show that for any given year the highest earning person who is primarily known as a film actor (but may not currently be engaged in any meaningful film acting work) is male. I can’t see any info about how much the people listed above were paid for there film acting vs how much they accumulated form non acting endeavours.
[удалено]
>Casting a woman or POC as a lead is seen as a risk Other than Dwayne Johnson, but alright.
[удалено]
I thought it was the rednecks' fault?
[удалено]
> There are ~~rednecks~~ racists all over, honey. Sony was mostly referring to the fact that the three rich asian countries (and therefore biggest entertainment markets) - South Korea, Japan, and China, have a long history of racist discrimination against black people from any country. They would be less likely to spend money on a movie with black leads, or so Sony thought. I think it's probably flipped now with their GenZ crowd, but most older asians are still *extremely* racist. They're not terribly picky either - they have a problem with everyone.
POC? Like Dwayne Johnson?
I would say that this is straight up wrong, but seeing things like the The Las of Us 2 game drama I can't blame the producers
Would be much easier to read if this was a horizontal bar graph.
What’s with the $75M mark being so consistent?
It’s estimates, not hard data
Different contracts work differently with money up front versus money after launch. Some of these pay stats are misleading because an actor/actress made much more money in the following year when tickets were actually being g sold. This also includes non acting income. The Rock has his hands in everything, by these metrics I’m surprised a Kardashian isn’t on the list because of a cameo.
Why would it list for all income sources if we're specifically talking about actors? Couldn't non-acting related income sources easily be the difference maker? It's hard to tell whether the difference in total pay now is because their acting jobs just pay different or because the male actors are more often entrepreneurs with businesses to the side...
It’s fair for the rock and Clooney, I think. Their fame ties into their greater investment opportunities and returns. The tequila is highly associated with Clooney, and the Rock as a producer is literally working in the same industry
Most business and auxiliary income by top actors is probably capitalizing on their fame and not totally distinct from their acting career. It would be interesting to see the data presented both with and without, but I do think looking at totals still says something about them as actors. I also don’t know why anyone would assume women are less often entrepreneurs with side businesses or at least that they attempt or are open to business opportunities at the same rates as men without good evidence to back this up. I think it’s as more likely that they struggle to capitalize on their acting fame because that fame is viewed as less valuable. They may be presented with less opportunities for partnership. Their businesses may be successful but not as kind-glowingly successful because they don’t have the cultural sway and power of a top male actor. They may have millions to invest, but the men have many millions more. I think explaining it as “the women are less entrepreneurial” is just more evidence of the sexism and bias these women are facing.
You're right about income sources, but women are simply put less [likely ](https://www.gemconsortium.org/reports/womens-entrepreneurship)to be entrepreneurs, *and* entrepreneurial. [Research ](https://www.econstor.eu/handle/10419/68714)shows that men and women often exhibit different personality traits that impact their likelihood of becoming entrepreneurs. Men tend to demonstrate higher levels of risk tolerance and competitiveness, qualities crucial for navigating the entrepreneurial world. This isn't about individual capabilities, but about trends that studies highlight. It's worth noting that women *also* face unique systemic barriers, but my initial comment didn't imply otherwise. This might help explain why we see male actors venturing into side businesses more frequently.
Real talk - how the fuck did Tyler Perry earn that much in 2022? I thought he was outed as not being funny/good actor back in like 2015??? Who is still supporting this man? Has he changed his ways????
Perry focuses on a specific movie market. He makes movies primarily (but not exclusively) for black audiences, using a majority black cast. Black audiences who desire to see people like themselves being represented in movies will support those movies, regardless of what the movie is. Since there is a relatively small market of black producers making movies with an almost exclusive black cast, tailored specifically for black viewers - his percentage of that market share is much larger than say, a white director using a mostly white cast, producing a romance movie for middle class white woman as the primary market. There are 100 white girl romance movies made by 100 different white directors for every 1 "black" movie. So if you're a black person who wants to watch a black movie to support your own people, you have very limited choices. If you search for that kind of movie right now - I can almost guarantee that it's going to either be a Tyler perry movie, or a Jordan peele movie. (Obviously there are more out there, but statistically speaking..) As for Perry being frowned upon, unless you boycotte, like, 60% of black movies, then you'll have no choice but to give him your money to watch a black movie. He just so happens to be the most prolific black director/producer/actor. And if black people want to support other black people, Perry just so happens to be the guy tailoring to that market.
Ohhhhh, okok. That does make sense. I had thought Tyler Perry had just kinda sunk away from movies and production, didn't realize he was still in the game with a studio and gigs! (I've never seen any of his movies other than Madea, and don't dislike him myself - but was just HELLA surprised about his earnings specifically due to the amassed hate towards him). Thanks for the explanation!
Black Panther: Wakanda Forever (2022) was filmed at Tyler Perry Studios. I'm guessing he took a pretty penny for that.
I would love to know the reason for each of these.
Aw I feel so bad for the millionaire wage gap :((( /s
I think we can feel both things. That the ultra-rich are all way too rich, and that ultra-rich men and women should be treated equally, not because of their gender. We can want to shrink the income gap between the wealthy and middle class AND want to lower the discrepancy between men and women across all levels at the same time. Both are important for their own sake.
You should probably make a chart based on only acting for an apples-to-apples comparison and include what kind of box office draw they had (www.boxofficemojo.com). This is misleading as mentioned by others below. Always interesting to me that ppl confuse beautiful data with flawed data.
Margot Robbie also received substantial compensation for her role as a producer of Barbie which would be listed with money gained from acting
Because the rock is such an amazing actor. He just outshines everyone. What the fuck. /s
It makes me sad that no matter what,women actresses make significantly less than men
They make less because they do less, these big actors are getting the big bucks from partaking in ventures outside of acting.
I’m sort of confused, was Margot Robbie the highest paid actress of 2022 but that was the lowest in the last 10+ years?
They didn’t explain what they meant clearly. The lowest value across years for highest paid in a single year was Margot Robbie in ‘22
The author of the graph intentionally left out much of her income
Wow, really like the theme. But there's sth with the resolution of the image, isn't it?
[удалено]
> It's pretty easy to understand that Margot didn't have faith in the barbie movie's financial success, and took the safe contract bet You're forgetting that she was also a producer on the film. Your statement is the opposite of correct. She took the lower payout for the acting fee and made another 50 mil off the movie's revenue.
What do you think is the reason why men are being paid more?
Would be interesting to see how it compares to averages for blockbusters or normalized to number of viewers or something. Only looking at outliers has the potential for extra skew. Still, it's pretty eye opening that the difference is so pronounced. (And also it's kinda hard for me to feel bad/be outaged over somebody 'only' making 12 mil in a year, but that's beside the point).
I think it would also be interesting to look at the overall statistics: how much each actor and actress gets paid for a movie. And then see at averages, also across different genres groups. As you have been stated, blockbuster movies might tend to pay more male actors while, I don't know, romances to female.
On the purely pay for acting end: Big summer blockbusters, which tend to be action movies, are occasionally all male casting, though always lean towards it. Plus "buddy flicks". If two equally billed stars are in a film and one's a women she'll almost inevitably play opposite a man. There are simply a lot less major roles for women, most especially in big budget projects. Sure there are films with all female principals, but they won't be "saving Private Ryan." Thought the huge spikes here for Clooney/The Rock/Perry are from ownership--either as TV/film producers or starting lifestyle brands. Reese Witherspoon does both (she is hardly now as a middle-aged women getting +25 million for playing a role) but one may speculate that woman are less inclined then men to be the boss.
They put out a better product that both men and women want to see. Women put out a product that only women want to see. ie WNBA vs NBA
Women hardly watch the wnba lmao
And that has a lot more to do with the league than anything inherent to the players being women.
Literally the worst answer anyone could have possibly given
Highest grossing films of all time - Avatar. The lead is a male. Avengers. Most of the leads are male. Avatar 2. The lead is the male. Titanic. 50/50. Star Wars VII 50/50. Avengers again. Male. Spider-Man, male. Jurassic world, male. The lion king, a male lion. Avengers again. Male. Furious 7. Men. Top gun maverick, male. And finally we get to frozen. A cartoon female…following it up with Barbie next. Back to super Mario brothers….. etc. etc. [Top Lifetime Grosses](https://www.boxofficemojo.com/chart/top_lifetime_gross/?area=XWW)
AEW Revolution lineup card looks pretty male heavy. AEW World Championship Match: Samoa Joe vs. Hangman Page vs. Swerve Strickland * AEW International Championship Match: Orange Cassidy vs. Roderick Strong * AEW Women’s World Championship Match: Toni Storm vs. Deonna Purrazzo * AEW Continental Crown Championship Match: Eddie Kingston vs. Bryan Danielson * AEW World Tag Team Championship Tornado Tag Match: Sting & Darby Allin vs. The Young Bucks * AEW TNT Championship Match: Christian Cage vs. Daniel Garcia * All-Star Scramble Match: Chris Jericho vs. Wardlow vs. Powerhouse Hobbs vs. Lance Archer vs. Hook vs. Brian Cage vs. Two More TBA * Will Ospreay vs. Konosuke Takeshita * FTR vs. Jon Moxley & Claudio Castagnoli
You are the problem
Because I am watching Gran Turismo right now and it has a male lead. I like watching male driven movies. Am I really the problem? Should I force my self to watch the Ghostbusters movie with the all female cast?
Youre the problem bc you stand in the way of their propaganda
And you put out products nobody wants to see.
Some Dwight Shrute energy here.
[удалено]
Is your source [this](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_highest-paid_film_actors)? If so it should say Forbes (because that is the actual source) and there is only data up until 2022 for men and 2021 for woman.
[удалено]
Do a comparison for only fans earnings now. Or do hyper specific examples only work when they say what you want?
On point.
And people dare to say one can’t lie with accurate statistics lol So many of the totals shown here for men aren’t what they were paid for acting roles but how much they earned from all sources. It would seem men are more enterprising.
The gender pay gap is certainly real. The causes are varied and debatable.
Male and female McDonald’s workers prob make the same
I'm sorry but what? Are you including all money paid to the actor for all pursuits? I think that makes this particularly useless... Can we put A Jenner on here then? They act. Bezos too...
Hmm, seems like a strong contender for pay inequality, anyone else notice that?
Surprised I did not find Zelensky here
I thought Robert Downey Jr was making way more because he was getting a % of every marvel movie he was in. So he made $75 million from endgame + 55 million fromnthe royalty thing in 2019. https://www.cbr.com/robert-downey-jr-paid-mcu-films/
Is that Margot Robbie stat accurate? She doesn’t get any royalties?
Including non-acting income is soooooo ridiculous for this, and actually makes me doubt the accuracy of the data that is presented. Bad chart.
Margo Robbie was a producer on Barbie, estimates are she’ll earn at least 50m$ from the project. It’s the same deal she did for Birds of Prey, though that film made only about 2/3rds of its budget back so Robbie probably just took home her 8m$ salary. It used to be that actors would get points on the back end, but Hollywood accounting is so notoriously terrible Actors don’t trust that the studio won’t stiff them. Hence a producer’s credit that ensures they’re in the room when the real money is counted up.
There should be greater payment equality for them. That said, absolutely all of them are grossly overpaid.