Further to the last homo-versatile Rupert Everett posting, and a commenter's point that Hugh Grant may work less but earns more because of his hetero-romantic image, I have found this British actors' earnings list for 2006 which rather confirms the point (Hugh's at joint No 5 - Rupert doesn't figure) ...
Ewan McGregor £10m
Liam Neeson £9m
Colin Farrell £8m
Orlando Bloom £8m
Sir Ian McKellen £8m
Hugh Grant £8m
Ralph Fiennes £7m
Daniel Radcliffe £6m
Clive Owen £6m
Anthony Hopkins £5m
Daily Mirror
However, because Rupes is a multi-tasker it's hard to tell what his annual income is just from one professional category - for instance, in 2005 he made £1m alone from a publishers' advance for his memoirs.
And by the way, I am intrigued to learn that he is writing a screenplay about Oscar Wilde's last days with a view to playing the playwright himself in a movie. I have always thought that there's a film in the Oscar-Bosie romance post-prison in Italy, though it seems Rupes is more interested in Oscar's final contest with his hotel room wallpaper.
16 comments:
Old Sir Ian McKellen is worth £8m just as Hugh Grant is, so this is obviously not a matter of sexual orientation. Stop fantasizing about that discrimination, people, will you? We are in 2007.
I didn't say it was, you twat. A commenter made the point and Rupert does earn a lot less - but for many reasons including his multi-tasking. I'd also add that he makes huge professional sacrifices - didn't he pass on theatrical opportunity to look after his dog in the US? The fool. He should have put down the pooch.
Oh, and here's Jodie Foster finally coming out after 15 years (non-news of the day) of cunt-cunting. Still, it is 2007, as you say.
The earnings list looks suspects anyway: no way is Daniel Radcliffe earning £6m per Potter. Nor has Liam Neeson made £9m.He gets 1-2m per feature.
The list is for 2006, no one has said Radcliffe earns £6m per Potter; that's a recent development. I don't know about Neeson.
I hadn't realised that British actors earn so much. Is it really true that old mummer McKellen is on £8m a year?
Has Jodie Foster 'come out'? I hadn't noticed.
Has Jodie Foster 'come out'? I hadn't noticed.
-> Source: Perez Hilton. Don't pay any attention, he's the queen of wishful thinking and manipulation of information.
Dear Rudy, I don't think the story originated from darling Perez - such a dear friend - but she herself thanked her female partner for her support so outed herself.
From The Times: "After guarding her private life fiercely for 15 years, Hollywood actress Jodie Foster has publicly acknowledged her lesbian partner.
"The Oscar-winning actress thanked 'my beautiful Cydney' after winning an award at the Women in Entertainment Power 100 breakfast in Los Angeles.
"She went on to praise Cydney Bernard, saying the film producer 'sticks with me through all the rotten and the bliss'.
"Despite more than a decade of speculation, questions over the paternity of her two sons and critics calling for her be 'out and proud', Foster has refused to discuss her sexuality."
You never know, Jodie may set a trend for closeted Hollywood stars to normalise their sexuality by disclosure. But I am fascinated by tribe of Gay Deniers - like they're doing someone a favour. I suppose it goes back to their childhood.
Dear Rudy, I don't think the story originated from darling Perez - such a dear friend - but she herself thanked her female partner for her support so outed herself.
-> Good for the tabs... and for her: she'll be left alone from now on.
From The Times:
-> Has the Times sunk so low as to care about those things? :-(
You never know, Jodie may set a trend for closeted Hollywood stars to normalise their sexuality by disclosure.
-> The problem is that there are gay rumors about every A-list actor nowadays. Do you seriously believe that Jake Gyllenhaal, for one, would 'come out' just to make you gay activists feel better?
-> But I am fascinated by tribe of Gay Deniers - like they're doing someone a favour.
No. They just find that 'outing' campaign ridiculous and counter-productive for the otherwise rightful gay cause. Perez Hilton et al are doing a very damaging job against themselves here.
News is news, Rudy. Perez seems uniformly hostile to celebrity except for Victoria Beckham who had the nous to go visit him in his cafe and charm him round. I suspect Jodie had better things to do.
While you are on the subject of "performing" I can report from personal experience that Rupert is a superb performer in the bedroom but tends to boot his conquests out very early in the morn. He favours steel cock rings, is well endowned and unusual for a Pom-cut !
No Serena doesn't get anything like 8m per picture - it's about 1M: I've no idea how the Mirror calculates these figures but it seems cumulative rather than per picture. Which would explain Radcliffe amassing 6m so far. On the other hand, Hughie has earned much more than 8m in his lifetime. And it doesn't seem to take into account profit points, which mean a slim fee but potentially big back spondoolicks.
So shall we just call it a useless made-up list and stop fretting?
No one's saying Serena gets £8m a pic - these are total earnings for 2006. However, the Mirror doesn't explain how it arrived at totals so for me they are very loose approximates given that most major stars are earning from many sources aside from the principal- TV, books, personal appearances, ads, etc.
But that doesn't explain Radcliffe - who earned £2m from Potter in 2006, max with no points, and did no other work except the no-budget December Boys; so that's 4m unaccounted for.
And in 2006 Serena did a support role in X Men, a cameo in Da Vinci Code and voicework for Flushed Away, Displaced and the Magic Roundabout. No WAY did he make 8m from these movies; he's just the posh guy from LOTR as far as US studios are concerned.
The list is just the Mirror having a punt at fees and getting it wrong. Don't follow their lead.
If anything the Mirror under-estimates earnings. Take this report from The Times for late 2005 on Radcliffe:
"Insiders in the British film industry say he [Radcliffe] has now signed a deal worth at least £8m to make Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix, the fifth film in the series, which is due for release in 2007.
"Records at Companies House show that Gilmore Jacobs, a firm set up five years ago by Radcliffe’s parents to manage him but whose ordinary share capital is 100% owned by Daniel, has earned £10m from the first three [Potter] films.
"The next set of accounts, due to be filed next spring, are likely to show another £5m in earnings."
I think there'd be mileage in teaming Hugh and Rupert up in a 'Persuader's' style - the straight-gay dichotomy, differing attitudes to acting and what seems to be their mutual antipathy would provide lots of energy.
An excellent idea. I also still like Rupes' gay 007 idea that he put about a few years ago - it would be great fun.
Post a Comment