Subscribe To You Won't Believe How Little Fifty Shades Of Grey Would Have Paid Charlie Hunnam Updates
I've already subscribed
Charlie Hunnam could have dropped out of Fifty Shades of Grey for any number of reasons, from the claimed reason of an "immersive TV schedule" to the terror of being that guy from the S&M movie for the rest of his life. But is it possible he was just being underpaid?
The Hollywood Reporter explores some of the various factors that went into Hunnam's departure from the project and notes almost in passing that he would have been paid $125,000 for the film. Now, granted, that's more than many of us make in a year. But it's also less than what Peter Dinklage makes for a single episode of Game of Thrones. It's three times less than what Andrew Garfield made for his first Spider-Man film. It's almost 1/20th less than what Robert Pattinson reportedly made for the first Twilight film, which is really insane given that Fifty Shades is a phenomenon based entirely off of Twilight's success-- meaning that Hunnam's movie is even more of a sure thing to make money.
The THR report doesn't actually say that it was salary concerns that sent Hunnam running, but conflicts over the script-- Hunnam is also a screenwriter, and submitted notes for Kelly Marcel's adaptation that were received well, but only led to him wanting more input. "That's Charlie, that's who he is," says one conveniently anonymous source. "He's particular." And though he was uncomfortable with the crazy attention that emerged when he was cast, it was apparently the conflicts with the creative team-- including director Sam Taylor-Johnson-- that eventually put Hunnam on the run.
The same names we heard the other day are still under consideration to star-- Alexander Skarsgard, plus newcomers Christian Cooke and Jamie Dornan. Of course, it's not too late to cast Christoph Waltz. After all, he's already made the case so well on television.