How much do the main leads of the top 2 shows in Broadway get?- Page 2

[WickedGeek28]

Posted: 2/24/06 at 1:18pm

Thanks for all of the info, Margo. I knew that they could never make that much, even despite of Tony awards. You're right, people go for the show, not the people. Hence the reason that if Glinda/Elphaba are out, there isn't a noticeable number of refunds and empty seats.

[ruprecht]

Posted: 2/24/06 at 3:30pm

Well Margo, there are most likely many a tourist walking around the Broadway district who would also stare at you blankly if you mentioned Menzel and Chenoweth. That outrageous rumour about the salaries for them in Wicked were most likely started by they themselves, or their agents. I sincerely doubt either of those two women will EVER make 50K a week. I'm also going to bet (and this is slightly off topic to this thread) that when the FHM numbers finally come in with Cheno on the cover, it will be one of their worst selling covers ever. No one knows who either of them are outside of this world. And please don't harp about Cheno's film & t.v. "career". Both have thus far proven to be less than able to fill movie seats.

[Pippin]

Posted: 3/1/06 at 12:58pm

the two witches in wicked each get 7,000 a week.

that's a fact.

[got-a-light]

Posted: 3/1/06 at 5:29pm

$7,000 def sounds right.

no way after being with "wicked" on and off since the begining did eden negotiate $2,500 a week. way too low! obviously the producers really like her and wanted her on broadway and were willing to pay.

[Yeah, um, no.]

Posted: 3/2/06 at 10:47am

Someone wrote: THe weekly salary is for weeks worked, not performances.

That's only true for scale performers; star salaries are often prorated for weeks with less than 8 performances.

Also, some leads have raises for a Tony nomination and/or win in their contracts.
Rules governing actor contracts on Broadway

[Benzy92]

Posted: 3/9/06 at 6:05pm

Actually MargoChanning, Michael Reidel posted that both Menzel AND Chenoweth each got 25,000 a week for wicked, this wasn't created by some rabid fan.

Also, it was stated somewhere that Shoshana got 8,000 a week for Wicked, which probably means that Megan is getting the same, with Espinosa the same or less since she is the 2nd replacement.

[MargoChanning]

Posted: 3/9/06 at 6:20pm

If I had a dollar for every time Riedel made a mistake or was just flat out WRONG, I'd be a wealthy man. While most theatre professionals enjoy reading him because he's funny and goofy, they know that almost every column is filled with inaccuracies (I could give DOZENS of examples -- including flat out lies about actors I know whom I'm was actually with during certain incidents he reported totally wrong) and they take what he says with a grain of salt. He's not a journalist -- he makes up stories to sell newspapers (and look who he works for).

Mmes. Menzel and Chenoweth were NOT making $25,000, according to some rather prominent inside production sources.

[FoscasBohemianDream]

Posted: 3/9/06 at 6:50pm

I'll raise Margo's comment and say if I had a nickel for every time Reidel's column was full of inaccuracies, I'd be a wealthy man. Michael Reidel works for the Post, he is one of the most unethical, unprofessional, and least reliable theatre columnists.
While Kristin Chenoweth went into Wicked with a great reputation (she was compared to Bernadette Peters in the reviews of "You're A Good Man Charlie Brown," she also had a Tony), the rumors of her getting paid $25K were completely inaccurate, she might have gotten paid a bit more than Menzel at first though. Obviously, Menzel got paid more money when she extended her contract (especially after having won the Tony) but even then I doubt she made anywhere near $20K. I do wonder if Joel Grey, George Hearn, and Ben Vereen got paid more.
I know for a fact that the actors of Rent are probably the principals that have the lowest salary compared to the leads of other Broadway shows.

[kas]

Posted: 3/9/06 at 7:34pm

i still think that equity pays like crap. sorry, but it;s true - cost of living in NYC (plus your sanity) = more than they pay.

sorry. i'm still bitter :)

[alli2]

Posted: 3/9/06 at 7:54pm

yeah getting $25k a week would mean she was making over $1million a year, and that sounds very high.

i know that actors get a raise (or bonus) when they recieve a Tony nod and then ANOTHER raise if they actually win.

[alterego]

Posted: 3/9/06 at 9:45pm

$25,000 sounds highly unlikely to me. So the show is grossing around a million a week, you take out $50,000 for the two leads who really aren't selling tickets to the general public, before you take out royalties, theatre rental, other cast, orchestra, crew costs etc. No I don't think so.

The FHM Chenoweth cover isn't being used in Australia as no one here knows who she is.

[bjivie2]

Posted: 3/9/06 at 9:59pm

Does anyone know who the highest paid Broadway actor of all time is? I had heard that Michael Crawford got paid record amounts for Dance of the Vampires, but I could imagine if Hugh Jackman has the record. Is Julia Roberts making buttloads for her show?

[MargoChanning]

Posted: 3/9/06 at 10:25pm

Reportedly, Lane, Broderick, Peters and Close all made $50,000+ plus a percentage of profits when the gross reached a certain level.

Crawford and Jackman were likely in the same ball park, though I don't recall seeing official confirmation of that.

Roberts is probably up there too.

My guess for the highest ever? Billy Crystal. In addition to being the sole writer and star of 700 Sundays, he and his wife were the producers (along with Clear Channell). The show grossed over $1 million a week, so his weekly take must have been well in excess of $500,000 (possibly as high as $750,000+ depending on weekly costs and Clear Channel's cut).

Updated On: 3/9/06 at 10:25 PM

[secret-soul]

Posted: 3/10/06 at 7:52am

If you're looking for sick leave and all that info, it's in the Equity Rulebook which is posted online.

As for the comment about RENT being #1 or #2, they were refering to the amt of money they delegate to pay the actors with--the ensemble in RENT is payed higher than most ensembles--even though they're not bringing in much money and the actors aren't very good much of the time.

[alterego]

Posted: 3/10/06 at 8:18am

" even though they aren't bringing in much money and the actors aren't very good much of the time" Ouch!

I'm surprised that Peters would be in the $50,000 bracket being that she isn't that big a drawcard, especially to tourists from outside the U.S.

[flamingo]

Posted: 3/10/06 at 8:39am

Re: Peters being a "drawcard"--I'm sure there are others who can respond to this better than I. However, here is a portion of a column by that theater "expert" that I love to hate, Michael Riedel, dated April 27,1999, from the New York Post:


"Fast on his [Richard Chamberlin] heels is Bernadette Peters, the star of 'Annie Get Your Gun.'
According to investment papers on file at the New York state attorney general's office, Peters earns a base salary of $30,000 a week against a percentage of the box-office gross. The actress has agreed to stay with the show for a year.
By the end of her run, if the show is still going strong, she can rake in over $40,000 a week.

Are Chamberlain and Peters worth all that money?

Absolutely, theater producers say. Both are big draws. Chamberlain has reinvigorated the year-old 'Sound of Music,' and Peters helped 'Annie Get Your Gun' overcome mixed reviews.

'The rule on Broadway is, if they generate business, they're worth the price,'says John Hart, a veteran theater producer and an investor in 'Annie Get Your Gun.'

[MargoChanning]

Posted: 3/10/06 at 8:43am

And Peters made even more than that for GYPSY. She actually is one of the biggest stage draws that we have. She's very well known by tourists all over the country and after a career spanning some 40+ years has proven to be a solid box office draw.

[Lamc16]

Posted: 3/10/06 at 8:55am

It was reported that Kathleen Turner got 50k during her stint in The Graduate.

[BreeDaniel]

Posted: 3/10/06 at 10:17am

Absolute hogwash with regards to Menzel and Chenoweth and to rely on Reidel for truth is flat out funny. He's nothing more than a mean gossip columnist who's no more reliable than someone writing for the Enquirer. As for the FHM cover, it is in FACT, turning out to be one of their lowest selling cover. That should come as no surprise. I know it's really hard for most on this board to grasp but she is truly unknown outside of the theater community. It falls under the "what were they thinking" category. So much does nowadays.

[ruprecht]

Posted: 3/10/06 at 10:24am

Save your breath Bree. "They'll" never get it around here. Although, anyone can check the numbers for FHM. I wonder how they'll justify that.

[SamIAm]

Posted: 3/10/06 at 10:28am

The real joke about the rumors of outrageous broadway star salaries is that one person (like Riedel) reports it without any validity or research (not that anyone is going to come right out and TELL you anyway) and then other journalists pick it up and report it as if it were true.

When Lane and Broderick came back to the Producers for the second run, it was reported that they were each making $100,000 per week. In spite of public interviews with the Times and other papers where Lane and Broderick both denied this salary, it was (and is) merrily reported as truth.

When Lane went to London to do the Producers there, it was also reported as fact and was then applied to his run THERE.

Rather like the game 'telephone' us old curmudgeons played when we were in kindergarten.

The fact is that you most people wouldn't want someone asking THEM about their salary. It is their business and as long as they are selling tickets and paying the bills for the producers, the performer probably deserves what they get.

And by the way, when a basketball player or football player makes millions per year and loses games no one blinks...when a CEO is paid millions per year and his/her company is hemorrhaging money, no one takes the salary away.

We live in a weird, mercenary world, folks.

[Thesbijean]

Posted: 3/10/06 at 1:51pm

The most Chenoweth and Menzel got was $10,000 a week, and I have heard from sources that post Tony, Menzel did get a little more.

Currently, Espinosa gets roughly $6,500, Hilty roughly $6000.

[alterego]

Posted: 3/10/06 at 8:14pm

That's still a good salary in anyone's language.

[BroadwayBaby6]

Posted: 3/11/06 at 6:51pm

As much as leads on Broadway make, it's a lot less money that they could make while doing a sitcom, a TV series or a movie.

[jo]

Posted: 3/11/06 at 7:49pm

For well-known A-1 list movie actors (Julia, Denzel, Hugh, etc), you would have to reckon with their opportunity loss ( because they forego movie roles during that time) when they commit to a run on Broadway. Although I wouldn't be surprised if they got paid only a small fraction (on Broadway) of what they get paid for a movie role. I am not sure if that applies to Broadway stars like Nathan and Matthew, as they are not as highly-rated in the movie business for their box office draw.