By Karl K. Kitchen (1915)
Editor's Note: Next to the ages of actresses and the connubial state of matinee idols no matter is of such irritant and piquant perplexity to the fans as the favorite's salary. Genius seems to be measured by the weekly dollars in many intelligences, so up and up goes the (pressagentorial) fee, and the most fabulous sums are believed to be paid the creators of that drama which has no third dimension. There are of course great salaries paid to screen players- to a few screen players, but when you hear most of the big salary talk you are safe in using long division. The fact that a few get tremendous sums is in itself proof that the many do not. If they did, where would the money come from? Some of the latest announcements (from the companies themselves) state that Keystone has offered Weber & Fields $100,000 for the half year beginning in the autumn. Fox, they say, is paying William Farnum $75,000 a year; Billie Burke $40,000 for a few months work; and the Famous Players, to Marguerite Clark, $50,000.
Karl K. Kitchen, of the New York World, is not a metropolitan but a cosmopolitan newspaper man, who from Petrograd to Paducah is rated as one who is distinctly "in the know."
Some weeks before Charles Frohman sailed on his last voyage, he walked into the office of his brother, Daniel Frohman, at the moving picture studio of the Famous Players Film Company, on West 26th Street. C.F. had come to chat. Also he had come with a question in his mind.
"Dan," he said, "they are saying that you have an actress here to whom you pay $1,000 a week right through the year. Is that so?"
"Yes," said brother Dan, "we've got one here to whom we pay $2,000 a week, right through the year."
C.F. was impatient, yet half credulous.
"Look here, Dan," he said in a moment, "let's not lie to each other. You know I know something about the show business. Such a contract would ruin you."
Brother Dan liked the situation. He could be indulgent and triumphant.
"Well Charlie," he said and reached into a desk drawer, "these don't lie, do they?" He handed his brother a bunch of vouchers. "You'll notice that the weeks are consecutive," he finished.
C.F. ran rapidly through the canceled vouchers. They were weekly salary checks to Mary Pickford.
"Well, I'm glad that I'm not in the picture business," was his only comment.
Some weeks later Daniel Frohman was at his brother's office in the Empire Theater Building. The two men talked half business, half personalities, as was their wont.
"Still paving $2,000 salaries at your place," bantered C.F.
"Yes, Charlie. Why?"
"No particular reason. I just wanted to know if you were still in the business before I returned the compliment. Do you know how much Maude Adams made for me season before last?"
"No, I never heard."
"Give a guess."
Brother Dan reflected and then ventured that the tour had netted $75,000 or $80,000.
"You're way off, way off, Dan," exulted C. F. "My net profit on her tour that season was exactly $171,000."
"Now Charlie," said Dan, "I know something about the show business myself."
I'll soon convince you, Dan," said C.F.
"Come into this room."
"When we went into the next room," said Daniel Frohman as he recounted the story to the writer; "Charlie got out the books and showed me the weekly receipts, just as they had been entered right through the season. I never saw such figures.
Mary Pickford's salary is unique in the motion picture industry. Her earning capacity and tremendous following can only be compared with that of Maude Adams.
Every week was in the neighborhood of seventeen or eighteen thousand dollars. And there it was in black and white- one hundred and seventy-one thousand dollars."
This little incident was related to the writer by Daniel Frohman and it authenticates the oft printed stories that Miss Mary Pickford receives a weekly salary of $2,000 fifty-two weeks of the year. But Miss Pickford's salary is unique in the motion picture industry. Her earning capacity and tremendous following can only be compared with that of Maude Adams. For she is indeed the Maude Adams of the film.
Just as the salaries of actors and actresses in the "legitimate" are usually one-half or one-third of the amount stated by their managers or press agents, the salaries of film stars are only a fraction of what the public is told they receive. In fact, when it is announced that a film star receives a certain amount, the safe rule is to divide it by two and then subtract one-third of the quotient if you are anxious to arrive at the real salary of the player. The fault of exaggeration seems to be inherent in everything connected with the amusement business, and it is found in its most flagrant form when actors' salaries are discussed. What, then, are the real salaries paid to movie actors and actresses?
With the exception of Mary Pickford, Charlie Chaplin and possibly Marguerite Clarke, there is no film star in America who receives more than $750 a week as salary. Yet dozens of legitimate and vaudeville stars earn that amount in the aggregate. Recognized film favorites like Clara Kimball Young. Florence Lawrence, Blanche Sweet, Norma Phillips, Anita Stewart and Ruth Stonehouse receive from $200 to $500 a week. This is the weekly salary of Clara Kimball Young, who ranks second only to Mary Pickford in popularity. When it comes to male film stars, their salaries are considerably less. From $100 to $400 is the weekly salary for leading men like King Baggott, Francis X. Bushman, Arthur Johnson, Maurice Costello and Carlyle Blackwell.
Here are some specifically stated salaries, per week: J. Warren Kerrigan, $400; Earle Williams, $300; Mary Fuller, $500; Mabel Normand, $500 and Charlie Chaplin, $1,200.
"Legitimate" stars who take fliers in the movies- that is, who are engaged for a single picture- make the big salaries in the motion picture business at the present time.
But their salaries are exaggerated in the same way as those of the film stars.
As a general rule "legitimate" stars who go into the movies are not paid by the week, but by the picture. They frequently receive a stipulated sum for the picture whether it takes four, five six or even seven weeks to make it. Four or five weeks is the average length of time required to make "a feature film" and during that period the actors engaged for it may be required to give from two to ten hours daily.
The largest sum ever paid a legitimate actor or actress for making a picture was paid to Sarah Bernhardt. She received $30,000 from the Famous Players Film Co., for about six weeks' work. However, this was done largely for the sake of prestige. In fact, it was the opening wedge for the entrance of legitimate stars into the motion picture business. The moving picture makers knew that if Sarah Bernhardt posed for them no American actor or actress would refuse to do so on the ground that it was beneath their dignity.
Geraldine Farrar is receiving, I should say, a salary nearly, but not quite equal to Mme. Bernhardt's for her summer's work in California.
There are many prominent stars who have not yet acted for the movies, but almost without exception it is because the price they have put on their services has been too high for the film companies. On the other hand, so many legitimate actors have offered their services to the film companies that the latter are able to get well known players at practically their own figures.
Three famous actresses who received record breaking amounts for single pictures are Ethel Barrymore, Lillian Russell and Mrs. Fiske. Miss Barrymore received $12,500; Mrs. Fiske the same amount, and Miss Russell something less than $10.000 and a percentage of the profits. But $4,000 or less is the usual honorarium of a star of established reputation for a feature film requiring four, five or six weeks time. And not a few well-known stars are glad to accept $3.000 or even $2,000- if they are hard up.
When it is announced that a film star receives a certain amount the safe rule is to divide it by two and subtract a third of the quotient.
Some of the film companies engage legitimate actors by the week. The largest weekly salary was paid to Pauline Frederick. She received $2,000 a week and her expenses in Rome, while the Eternal City film was made. As it required nearly four weeks to make the picture, it will be seen that Miss Frederick received a record breaking compensation- quite as much as was paid to Lina Cavalieri for the Manon Lescaut film. Cavalieri was promised $20,000 but received only part of it.
Marie Dressler and May Irwin are two famous comedy women who have received big sums for appearing before the moving picture camera. Miss Dressler received $10,000 from the Keystone Film Co. for two pictures, and a contract calling for 50 per cent. of the net receipts from the income of the two films. However, the $10,000 was in the nature of advance to Miss Dressler, as it is to be deducted eventually from her share of the profits. It is not unlikely that Miss Dressler will make $50,000 from the two films during the coming year, if the contract is carried out. It is now being disputed in the courts. She spent fourteen weeks making the pictures- an unusually long time. Undoubtedly her contract calls for the largest percentage of profits ever given a star by a moving picture company. Within the last few weeks Miss Dressler has won an action against Keystone in which she demanded an accounting of all the receipts of Tillie's Punctured Romance.
May Irwin received $7,000 from the Famous Players Film Co. for one picture. In addition she was given a contract calling for a royalty on the number of feet of film put into circulation above a certain figure.
James K. Hackett, who was one of the first of the stage's well known actors to appear before the camera, turned down a proposition to star with Pearl White in The New Exploits of Elaine on account of his intention of appearing in "Othello" and "Macbeth" next season, and his desire to spend the summer in getting ready. He told me he was offered $10,000 for the series.
Martha Hedman received $1,500 for a single picture, recently made at the Peerless studios, with some scenes taken at Highland Falls, N.Y.
J. Stuart Blackton told me that John Bunny was never paid more than $500 a week by the Vitagraph company. And Commodore Blackton ought to know.
Many actresses, less well-known than Miss Irwin, receive so much per day and expenses for making pictures in which they are featured. For instance, Miss Marguerite Leslie was paid $50 a day for a recent feature film.
There is a tendency among prominent legitimate actors and actresses to demand royalties based on the number of feet of film put out above a stipulated amount necessary to bring a profit to the film company, or a percentage of the net profits. Such arrangements, of course, greatly increase their earnings- if the pictures are successful. In addition, several legitimate actors and film stars have blocks of stock in the film companies for which they act. Consequently their net earnings exceed the salaries of some other equally competent players. But in nearly every instance the statement of their earnings is exaggerated.
The highest salary ever paid to a foreign dramatic actress to come to America to make a picture was the $1,000 weekly salary which was paid by William Fox to Betty Nansen, the famous Danish actress. When Miss Nansen arrived in New York, it was announced that $2,000 was her weekly salary. Thus it will be seen that she is receiving, less than half of the stated amount, for a big commission comes out of her weekly salary. Gaby Deslys received $15,000 for a single picture from the Famous Players Co., a film which was made in Paris. This is a record amount for a foreign player.
With the exception of Mary Pickford, Charlie Chaplin and possibly Marguerite Clarke, there is no film star in America who receives more than $750 a week as salary.
Of course many legitimate actors in addition to recognized stars are employed by companies making feature films. These players of more or less prominence- actors and actresses who appear the support of stars on Broadway- receive from $10 to $50 a day. The legitimate actor or actress receives more money than the film player, not because he or she is better qualified for the work. but because their names are supposed to give "class" to a film. Consequently film companies like the Famous Players and the Jesse Lasky Feature Play Company pay higher salaries than the companies which make general films.
As an example of the salaries paid to well-known "top-liners" the $500 a week to Annette Kellerman while the film called Neptune's Daughter was being made is significant. Miss Kellerman was given an interest in the film which later she disposed of for $12,000.
Such a well-known actor as George Fawcett received $2,400 to go to California to make one picture. Jane Cowl, Dustin Farnum, William Courtleigh, John Barrymore, Macklyn Arbuckle, and dozens of other legitimate players receive less than $4,000 for each feature film in which their appear. At the present time the tendency is toward cuts in salaries. And for a second picture a legitimate actor or actress receives much less than for a "first appearance."
The really big money that has been made and is being made in the motion picture industry- always aside from Mary Pickford's remarkable salary- is being made by the manufacturers and owners of big blocks of stock in film companies. J. Stuart Blackton, S. Lubin, W.N. Selig, Carl Laemmle, George Kleine and George K. Spoor are a few of the new crop of moving picture millionaires. As many more are on the road to future fortunes.
Among the technical directors who receive large salaries are David Wark Griffith, whose film The Birth of a Nation is earning large returns, Tom Ince, Mack Sennett and Edwin S. Porter of the Famous Players. Their earnings are very large, because in addition to their salaries they receive royalties on the films manufactured, or have large holdings in the companies.
Original article by Karl K. Kitchen, Photoplay Magazine, October 1915, pages 138-141.
© 1996, David Pierce, on editing and revisions (if any)
Return to the Silent Film Bookshelf Home Page