most obscene b-way paycheck

[pants2]

Posted: 12/11/06 at 7:20pm

i have recently found out there is some HIGH paid actors on broadway, its almost sickening...

my tops are...
elphaba- $40,000
Glinda- $40,000
nathan lane minimum- $100,000
matthew b. minimum- $100,000

[Mr Roxy]

Posted: 12/11/06 at 7:21pm

Now one wonders why ticket prices are thru the roof

[MargoChanning]

Posted: 12/11/06 at 7:30pm

The WICKED leads are NOT making $40K per week -- not even close. Only stars with major mainstream followings (usually movie stars) have ever made close to that. The current leads are making significantly less than that.

Lane & Broderick were reputedly making $100K for their return engagement of the Producers and possibly for The Odd Couple (though that was never confirmed).

Stars like Glenn Close, Antonio Banderas, and Bernadette Peters have been rumored to make $40K or more, but again that's unconfirmed.

Honestly, only a small handful of performers have ever made more than $20,000 per week.

[Mother's Younger Brother]

Posted: 12/11/06 at 7:34pm

Please. I saw an article over a year ago that said the AVERAGE annual salary for a pit musician was $90,000.

Not bad for 3 hours a day, huh?

[SweetQintheLights]

Posted: 12/11/06 at 7:37pm

pants, are you talking weekly, monthly, yearly...?

[jrb_actor]

Posted: 12/11/06 at 7:38pm

obscene? what ushers get paid. They can not even begin to live on it.

[B3TA07]

Posted: 12/11/06 at 7:38pm

NO WONDER PEOPLE WERE BITCHING AND MOANING ABOUT SWEENEY TODD AND COMPANY.

[Neverandy]

Posted: 12/11/06 at 7:41pm

Come on! 40K a week? So they are making 2 mil a year?!? The show is doing great, but keep in mind it is in a huge house and it has a big cast. Where are you getting your numbers from?

Think about it!

[wexy]

Posted: 12/11/06 at 7:43pm

Its the entertainment dollar boys and girls. Nicole Kidman gets $17 million a movie. Andy Pettitte rejoined the Yankees for $16million.
They wouldn't pay them if they couldn't pay them.

Updated On: 12/11/06 at 07:43 PM

[MargoChanning]

Posted: 12/11/06 at 7:44pm

Well, that's fine for the small percentage of the musician's union that's employed for 52 weeks of the year, but they're the exception not the rule. Imagine being in the pit for THE TIMES THEY ARE A-CHANGIN or IN MY LIFE or LESTAT -- you make $1600/week for a few months and then you might be unemployed for the rest of the year. Same with the vast majority of Actor's Equity (who make a minimum $1500/week WHEN they're on Broadway, but less than half that off-Broadway and regionally). Most of the actors and musicians I've known over the years have had to work office jobs, temp or wait tables in between lucrative Broadway gigs to survive (and most spend far more time at those jobs than performing).

Yes, there have been a dozen or so big names that have made over $40,000 a week for starring in shows -- but that's a far cry from the reality for 99% of the profession who are lucky to make $40,000 from acting or music jobs in an entire year, let alone a week.

[Neverandy]

Posted: 12/11/06 at 7:45pm

That is all well and good, but I really would like to know what the source of this info is.

[Danielm]

Posted: 12/11/06 at 7:48pm

I truly doubt they are making that much a week. Who cares who is playing the parts in Wicked--the show is the star. This whole thing is silly, based on shaky information and should not be taken seriously.

[IdinaBellFoster]

Posted: 12/11/06 at 7:53pm

The only person in wicked to make any huge Amount is Idina Menzel in london. The offered her something like 30,000 a week. But yet again, it's only for 3 months.

[pants2]

Posted: 12/11/06 at 7:55pm

sweetq i'm talking weekly..... and margo i heard from that amount from the mouth of saycon sengbloh that they make that not to mention the show makes about 1.6 million a week,its definetly not unheard of

not to mention that it is a wellknown fact that idina makes $40k a week in london, i swear

[SweetQintheLights]

Posted: 12/11/06 at 8:01pm

Is it just me that thinks it's weird that an actor/actress would tell someone how much they make?

[MargoChanning]

Posted: 12/11/06 at 8:03pm

Michael Riedel and The Times art section have published various stories on this topic over the years (using info from show producers), so it's not really a question that certain major names have gotten large salaries to do Broadway runs -- but the fact is that it's the exception and not the rule. It makes sense for Julia Roberts to be paid $35,000 per week to do THREE DAYS OF RAIN (which was reported and confirmed by several news sources) because her fame was such that the producers were able to sell out her entire 12 week run ($10 million+ worth of tickets) within less than 48 hours of them going on sale. Frankly, given the millions in profit the show made on her name, she should have made more.

It made sense for Lane and Broderick to get $50,000 (or even $100,000 -- both were rumored) a piece for their return engagement of the PRODUCERS -- Mel Brooks and the producers of the show made MILLIONS within hours of the tickets going on sale. But, this is a VERY rare thing and only a small handful of performers have such a level of popularity that translates into those kinds of sales. As their agents will tell you, if putting a certain performer's name above the title translates into millions in profit, then it's only fair that that performer gets to share the wealth (some stars have even had profit-sharing deals where they received a percentage of the profits over and beyond break even, giving them an incentive to do talk shows and use their fame to help sell tickets).

[pants2]

Posted: 12/11/06 at 8:19pm

julia got paid $35k??? i thought she only got the equity minimum? but ur statement makes more sense

[Broadwayboy2631]

Posted: 12/11/06 at 8:24pm

"julia got paid $35k??? i thought she only got the equity minimum? but ur statement makes more sense"
I wouldn't be shocked if she got more!

[orangeskittles]

Posted: 12/11/06 at 8:32pm

Idina is being paid in pounds, not dollars, so the rumor is probably worth more when converted in America.

[MargoChanning]

Posted: 12/11/06 at 8:49pm

Nathan Lane reportedly set the record for the highest salary for a performer in the history of the West End last year when he stepped in at the last minute to replace Richard Dreyfuss to open and do the first few months of the London run of THE PRODUCERS. According to published reports, he received a down payment of 100,000 pounds, a salary of 38,000 pounds per week plus a share of the box office. Given that the conversion rate is just under $2 for every pound, he made just shy of $1 million for a few months work.

[TechEverlasting]

Posted: 12/11/06 at 8:55pm

>... the AVERAGE annual salary for a >pit musician was $90,000.

>Not bad for 3 hours a day, huh?

3 hours a day, and countless years of training and practice.

Just where would you like the musicians who play for your beloved musicals to live? Should we just have high school students and hobbyists playing in the pits? $90,000 might seem like a lot if you're a college student or if you live in the Midwest, but that's just barely a middle class living wage in Manhattan, Long Island and Northern New Jersey.

As far as the "sickening, obscene" mega paychecks that top stars get, this isn't any different than star athletes who are able to negotiate to get a small portion of the revenues they generate. Nathan Lane and Matthew Broderick brought in a hell of a lot more money to the Producers than they got paid for that special return engagement.

If you want Broadway to attract the best and brightest, there has to be something for all of those up and coming stars to reach for.

[BrodyFosse123]

Posted: 12/11/06 at 10:16pm

Back in 1995-96 Glenn Close was reportedly making $48,000 a week in SUNSET BLVD. Judging by what she made for 3 months work in a film, she was heavily 'working for peanuts' on Broadway.

[jess20882]

Posted: 12/11/06 at 10:18pm

i know it's not necessarily on the same scale...but when i worked on 'a christmas carol' at madison square garden, we had 8 year old kids making $1800/week...and they were only on stage for maybe 20 minutes of each performance...AND they alternated actors in each role every week...

[allofmylife]

Posted: 12/11/06 at 10:33pm

Nathan Lane got that money because the producers were DESPERATE. The show had no lead, right before opening. They HAD to offer him a fortune. And good for him.

Friends of mine who have starred on Broadway from the film industry have mentioned another point. Frankly, no Hollywood agent wants to let a star go do Broadway because it's time they could be making movies for far more money. Julia Roberts has a huge vehicle of staff, agents, lawyers, etc. She may have funneled most of the $$ to them so she could have the time to try Broadway.

[Benzy92]

Posted: 12/11/06 at 10:47pm

Riedel and Variety both reported that Kristin and Idina were each getting 25,000 when Wicked first opened, and Idina getting a boost when she got the Tony.

Now, it is rumored that replacements such as Shoshana and Eden were getting 8,000 a week, NOT 40,000!