Actors take to the internet to show their residual checks, with some in the negative

submitted by [deleted] from (npr.org)

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]package 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Actors and actresses whine that they negotiated their contracts poorly and/or dramatically overvalue themselves

Remember these are just residuals; they still get paid more for a single episode/film than most people make in a year.

[–]Shatner_Ghost 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

Many actors you think are driving limos collect unemployment about half the year. There are a FEW that make a lot of money.

"Overvalue themselves" -- as opposed to what else in the films you watch? It's writing, acting, and sound -- then editing, cinematography and visuals. We can debate the order, but the people making most of the money are risking money -- not really the deciding factor in a great film.

[–]package 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Overvalue in the sense that they're complaining about low residual payouts despite being no-name actors in movies/shows that no one watches.

[–]Shatner_Ghost 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

You are just assuming that. If they have a SYSTEM for compensation -- then it's not taking money from shows that are not playing. Unlike ASCAP, that just ASSUMES you are playing one of their member's songs, and collects fees and who knows how much they take in or where it goes after that -- for the "excuse" of collecting fees on behalf of artists.

You see, when you are big rich corporation -- they just let you TAKE the money, but if you are not powerful, everyone assumes you don't deserve it. How messed up is that?