10 Actresses Worth Their Weight In Cash

Posted by Bethany Perryman (bethany@filmschoolrejects.com) on October 8, 2009

weightlist--header

This week, Forbes released a rather bitch-ily worded article naming the top ten actresses that provided the best return on investment (ROI) for studios. With studios (like the rest of us) stretched so thin for cash, it’s interesting that these actresses aren’t calculated at all by their quote (the amount they demand per movie) this year. Forbes’s formula differs this time around, and seemed pretty math-y. Also pretty fair. Put on your thinking caps or skip the next paragraph, ’cause here we go:

Forbes calculated 100 top actresses’ estimated earnings per film, including both upfront and back-end (heh.) pay. They matched that with each film’s budget (estimated budget, that is — interestingly enough, minus marketing costs), plus box-office-DVD-TV earnings to calculate an operating income. Then, they did this:

(Each actress’s income in last three films + Operating income of those three films) / actress’s total compensation = ROI

Interestingly enough, Forbes reports (and here’s where the bitchy part comes in): “One thing most of the actresses on this list have in common is that they did not carry the films on their own. In Hollywood, it’s still rare for a woman to be the main star. For the most part, women are co-stars or they appear in ensemble films like He’s Just Not That Into You”.

Nevertheless, the results are in:

1. Naomi Watts: For every $1 she is paid, her movie earns $44

weightlist-1

2. Jennifer Connelly: $41

weightlist-1

3. Rachel McAdams: $30

weightlist-1

4. Natalie Portman: $28

weightlist-1

5. Meryl Streep: $27

weightlist-1

6. Jennifer Aniston: $26

weightlist-1

7. Halle Berry: $23

weightlist-1

8. Cate Blanchett: $23

weightlist-1

9. Anne Hathaway: $23

weightlist-1

10. Hilary Swank: $23

weightlist-1

Editor’s Note: We realize that you might have noticed that our cropping of the pictures above is a little, er, off. This is intentional — it is also a work of satire, not meant to offend. If you need any further explanation of the concept of satire, please consult Google. If we’ve offended you, we’re sorry that you didn’t get the joke.


Read more articles by Bethany Perryman

Related Reading:

Your Ad Here

Comment Policy: No hate speech allowed. If you must argue, please debate intelligently. Comments containing selected keywords or outbound links will be put into moderation to help prevent spam. Film School Rejects reserves the right to delete comments and ban anyone who doesn't follow the rules. We also reserve the right to modify any curse words in your comments and make you look like an idiot. Thank You!

  • Interesting article. Not really news worthy but interesting to say the least.
  • Andy III
    A boob gallery? Really?! I expect that from some basement dwelling geek guy...but from a female?

    Stay classy FSR.
  • Cole_Abaius
    Knowing Bethany as I do, she either did that because she really loves boobs, as an over-the-top satirical point about what we view as the true value of women, or both.

    I'm guessing both.
  • That's a terribly sexist comment Andy.
  • Andy III
    It's certainly geekist, that's for sure.
  • Dude, it's a joke. I *LOVE* Meryl Streep!

    ...Seriously, though. Did you happen to read the Forbes article? I couldn't stand the tone. If you looked at the formula ("it's up there, guys."), you'll see that they didn't take into account quality of film, only box office numbers. Also, an intentional omission of marketing totals in their formula suggests that these are, in some ways, Hollywood's cheapest women. And ROI is a terrible (but obviously, at times necessary) means to choose an actor for your film.

    Anyway, it was meant as absolute satire. Obviously it was mis-presented, and that's my fault. If you think the FSR staff doesn't understand satire, then you've never seen our third grade school pictures.
  • Christopher_M
    You'd think Hillary would have changed her last name before entering Hollywood.. considering it's similar to a low-grade smut magazine company..lol
  • gingerliu
    I have cancelled my email subscription to your magazine. Any magazine that presents the top ten actresses with images of their breasts, is pretty lame. For a woman to write this article it is shameful. Is this how far professional woman have come? I can see why you are film school rejects. You should be ashamed of yourself.

    Networking the shame...

    Goodbye.
    Ginger Liu
    Journalist, Photographer, Publicist
  • We have a magazine?
  • Mmmmm, Rachel McAdams. I..uh...I'll be right back. *Runs to bathroom*
blog comments powered by Disqus