Smile for me, Richard Armitage. And: are you smiling all the way to the bank?

Richard Armitage, BBC Breakfast interview for Robin Hood, October 2007. Source: RichardArmitageNet.com

Thanks for that, Richard! You have no idea how I needed it.

***

So, I guess we now have an answer of sorts to the question of whether the money for The Hobbit will enable Mr. Armitage to sit back and not take the next thing that comes along, at least in a financial sense — article from the Sunday Times courtesy of RichardArmitageNet.com states that Armitage received $2 million for Captain America and The Hobbit. Even with the extremely high tax rates in the UK that should mean he doesn’t end up in the poorhouse; however, that figure seems to me like he is being drastically underpaid. It depends a bit on whether that total is for three movies or just two, but if he’s going to have worked over two years (fall of 2010 for Captain America and apparently some work in 2013 on the end of the Hobbit project, even if he could squeeze something else into the end of 2012) that doesn’t seem like much money to me. Curiously, the article mentions that sum as if it’s a lot, says this generation of British actors in Hollywood are on “fast-forward” (I wonder if Armitage thinks that — I don’t think his fans do), and says that this remuneration proves that people are not still hiring British actors (he and the actors from Strike Back who went to the U.S. for work afterwards, who are characterized as “respectable television actors”) because they are cheap. OK, maybe they’re not making scale for their work on these films, like Keira Knightley did on Pirates of the Caribbean; however, from my American perspective, $2 million for three films would be awfully cheap. Not in absolute terms (I’d have to work over 20 years at my current salary to gross USD 1M), but still. That still seems awfully little to me, especially when you consider how much time they take to make.

Of course, ceterum censeo, I’m sure it’s not primarily about the money for him, but about the work and the challenge. Still, that doesn’t mean he shouldn’t be appropriate compensated for his efforts, as what he does is also work, and he has to live from what he earns. For me, of course, the main thing is that he’s happy with the whole deal.

~ by Servetus on March 7, 2012.

69 Responses to “Smile for me, Richard Armitage. And: are you smiling all the way to the bank?”

  1. I interpreted that it was 2million each movie. I may be wrong. Also, is it possible that he will make money from the profits of the movie? I read that keanu reeves made his money from the profits of the Matrix and not from the actually salary he received from it. I wonder if RA has that written into his contract. I think the Hobbit will bring in loads of money worldwide and that may be where he actually profits some.

    Like

    • Chris Evans only got 300K USD in salary, so I can’t imagine that Armitage would have gotten more than that, as he’s no more well known and had a much smaller role. I read that Tommy Lee Jones got an amazing amount — but that was set up as percentage of gross. I think you can get that if you are a star — don’t know if you can get that if you are Richard Armitage.

      Like

      • CE got so little for the first movie because he was offered a deal of potentially nine(?) movies. I think the later will be much better paid. The young actors from Harry Potter and Twilight earn sum between ten and twenty million for the latest instalments, as much as the A list stars get. I don’t think RA got much for CA and I have no idea if it will be 2 million per year or in total for all three films. But for someone like RA and the other it is all about the chanche to get a big breakthrough. If they could, they would probably even pay for such an opportunity.

        Like

        • Maybe. There’s a fairly specific subtext to this post that I didn’t air above, but it’s essentially my personal position that there are certain kinds of sacrifices people make to get opportunities that turn out in the end not to have been worth it. I work in a profession where people are always being told that they should be happy just to have the chance, and while that’s true, it’s also true that what they do is work and should be appropriately compensated.

          Like

    • I think it more likely that he managed a percentage deal for Hobbit — he plays a bigger role in that. I’m sure, though, that some expert will weigh in on this soon. I can always rely on someone telling me stuff i don’t know here 🙂

      Like

  2. Oh so that really is not a lot of money when you consider it is for 2 movies (3 if you count the 2nd Hobbit)and a whole year of filming the Hobbit. He certainly deserves more. I wonder if the publicity and getting his name out in the US is where it pays off.

    Like

    • the LOTR cast also got bonuses afterwards — I remember reading this at some point. Because the profits were so extreme from the venture, the studio or somebody decided to pay them additional money.

      Like

  3. I interpreted it as $2 million for all three. I don’t think he would be paid the same for ten minutes in CA as he would for a lead role and a lot more screentime in the two Hobbit movies. I agree with serv. All up, it sounds like they’re getting him cheap, so hopefully his contract does allow for a percentage of the profits.

    Like

  4. I re-read the article and I think you are both right. Wow, that is really cheap.

    Like

    • The actors that played the hobbits in LOTR are rumoured to got paid two millions as well, ten years ago, but for three films (even if filming wasn’t much longer), so it seems realistic to me. In fact, I’m glad it isn’t less. Of course they got him cheap. I know it is not popular to say, but he is a nobody, a blank sheet. His name is not a drawing card and that is what matters, not his abilities. It may not be true that Orlando Bloom is paid one million for two minutes on screen, but in principle that is how it works.

      Like

      • You can be sure that Orlando Bloom certainly did not earn a huge sum of money when he first starred in the LOTR movies, as he was fresh out of drama school. As most of the cast in those movies were (relatively) unknown to most, bar Hugo Weaving and Cate Blanchet.

        Like

      • I think the people who get percentage deals tend to be bigger stars, too — but I don’t know that much about it.

        Like

  5. This American agrees with you, S–it seems awfully chintzy for all the work he has done and continues to do for these movies, particularly the two Hobbit films. He is one of the major players (in terms of screen time) in TH, or at least I hope he is.

    I know he’s not a materialistic kind of guy and he is thrilled to play this role, but I would like to see him adequately compensated for that fabulous talent and all the hard work and dedication he brings to the table. A percentage of the profits–oh, yes! Now that would be wonderful.

    I think it’s when I consider the huge salaries some “stars” who haven’t a fraction of his talent, charisma and professionalism earn that I get really ticked off. But I know it is early days yet for him to paid a “movie star” salary. I wonder how much Andrew Lincoln, David Harewood and Shelly Conn are making in their respective roles on US tv?

    Like

    • Andrew Lincoln is making a million dollars a year, and Shelley Conn $500,000. Waking Dead must be seen as more valuable than Terra Nova! I thought Shelley was in a lead role in TN, but maybe only half as big as Andrew’s!

      Like

      • Mezz, I thought of Shelly as one of the leads in TN, too, but maybe TPTB don’t. That’s a nice salary for Andrew. I was thinking that cable might pay less than network television (TWD is on AMC and TN on NBC) but the fact is original programming on cable is drawing more and more viewers, which means more advertisters seeking them out and more revenues coming in.

        Like

      • In TV, it’s all about ratings, what network you are on and how much advertisers are willing to pay that determine why some stars will get $500,000 and others $1million for a similar role on TV. Friends made huge advertising $ because it got huge ratings and that’s how its stars got $1mill an episode.

        Like

      • Women’s salaries for this kind of work are almost always less than men’s. There are scholarly studies on this topic, and the results are depressing.

        Like

    • I’m not getting angry about it because it is decidedly not about the talent an actor has and the effort he put into his work and the size of this role. It is all about becoming a name and getting himself into the right position. Compared to most of us (I assume) it is still a very handsome sum of money that will offer him some security and it is probably by far his best paid job to date. Brit TV pays much less than American TV. But it won’t make him so rich that he never has to worry about money again and from now on can do as he pleases.

      Like

      • Oh, considering I currently draw less than $200 a week in unemployment benefits, it sounds like a fantastic sum to me, don’t get me wrong. 😉

        And I am not angry; I think it’s more that I am eager to see him gain a measure of financial success / stability so that he doesn’t feel as if he has to accept roles he’d rather not do.

        I am sure he will continue to use his common sense in financial matters and make the most of his earnings, which, yes, have to be considerably more than he ever made with RH or Spooks.

        There is a good reason so many Brit actors end up working in the states and it looks like a dollar sign. Three actors from Strike Back ended up with roles in American series, Lucy Grifftihs has a regular role on the upcoming season of True Blood and there are so many others . . .

        British actors may have worked more cheaply than Americans, but the pay was likely still better than on most Brit projects. Not unlike illegal aliens coming here to work and take low-paying jobs. It’s still better than what they could earn back home.

        Now, all you Brits, honestly I don’t want to steal all your good actors. But it’s nice if we can borrow them now and again. 😉

        Like

      • For comparison, rumours are that David Tenant was offered one million pounds to do one more series of Doctor Who. It was considered an exceptional sum, but they wanted to keep their drawing card at any cost. Matt Smith apparently was offered one million pounds for FIVE series, 200.000 per year. Still a very desirable offer for a young actor but a bargain in comparison to DT. I think few British TV actor ear sums of several 100.000 pounds per year. With Spooks and SB RA probably was among the better paid. The first series of RH had a budget of eight million pounds and was advertised as “big budget”, so one can imagine how much or little the actors were paid.

        Like

      • well, if he were able to invest every cent of it, he could probably live modestly off the interest. $2 million would generate $75k USD a year in interest income even in a relatively conservative investment. But of course he doesn’t get to keep the whole $2 million.

        Like

  6. Actually, $2 million for a three film deal is not that bad for a supporting actor like Richard in Hollywood terms. We’ve been spoiled by outrages sums we hear headliners like Johnny Depp get for a movie and think that is standard, but it really isn’t, and the only way you get that kind of money is to prove, from previous work, that your name attached to a picture will boost its revenue by $hundreds of millions. Richard isn’t there yet. He has very little film work under his belt, and no blockbusters where he was the star or even a main supporting actor. But Hobbit will no doubt put him closer.

    I suspect the other dwarves are getting somewhere closer to $200,000-500,000 for the two films. Martin is probably getting a bit more than Richard since he is THE Hobbit in the film. And Ian is probably getting the most of all of them because he is “a name” in Hollywood.

    As for percentage of profits, I doubt Richard will get much, if any. Again, that is something “named” actors with proven track records can get. If they do give him a percentage it’s probably more along the 0.01% or less range.

    He probably gets some nice perks though. His own trailer, probably they are paying for his house in New Zealand, travel expenses, etc.

    Just the fact that he’s getting $millions now on any film deal is big for him. It means he’s rising in the ranks. 🙂

    Like

    • Mrs. E.B. Darcy, you’re right about how we’ve come to expect million dollar payments to “bankable” movie stars. For every one of those there are a hundred more at Richard’s level of renumeration, we just don’t get to hear of them. Your comment puts it into perspective.

      Like

      • I think my problem is when it comes to Richard, I am like the doting grandmother who thinks her grandchild is the most beautiful, brilliant and wonderful child ever and everyone else should think so, too, and act accordingly 😉 Yes, of course, it is true, obviously everyone couldn’t be paid on those huge scales because hardly any film would be able to make a profit if they did.

        Like

        • I know how you feel. 🙂 To see what some “stars” are paid has me in disbelief. The millions don’t always translate to a box office hit either.

          Like

    • Because of the constant news about the millions some A-list actors get, we do tend to lose sight of the fact that the vast majority of working actors do not go home with that amount. It’s only a select few who get to command $10-20 million per project.

      We also tend to confuse ‘bankable’ with ‘recognizable’, while for instance Julia Roberts may be a huge name, it does not mean she can guarantee success for a film.

      Like

    • if they’re paying his living expenses in NZ that makes it seem like more.

      Like

      • I actually see the compensation package as potentially more valuable than the cash, because the perks and expenses aren’t taxable (or at least shouldn’t be if his agent can do a worthwhile contract). From the medical cover to the laundry, from car and driver to decent trailer and housing, almost all of his expenses should be picked up bey the production company. Thus, even if he only sees a fifth of the cash, he’ll be okay — not rolling in it, but okay. And if he’s happy, what can I be but happy for him?

        Like

        • I think it depends a lot on the tax law in the applicable countries. Some of those things would not be tax exempt in the U.S.

          And yeah — as I said originally, the main thing is that he’s happy.

          Like

      • From what I remember, the LOTR cast said most things were taken care of for them, i.e. houses were rented and transportation etc. Ian McKellen has posted a pic or two of the homes of his (?) and Orlando from LOTR days when he was in NZ last year.

        Like

  7. I think TH will reak in a gazillion dollars and then some. So here is hoping that this makes RA bankable and he will have more $$$ attached to his name in the future. Not that money brings happiness but i do wish he has the opportunity to pick and choose the work he really wants to do and a marquee name is what may very well help him be at that level.

    Like

    • I think that’s the main reason I want to see him earn some big dollars–so he has the ability to be choosier down the road and to pursue the sorts of projects he really wants to do that may not offer big salaries.

      Paul McCartney once said something to the effect that the great thing about having plenty of money was the freedom it gave you. I would like Richard to experience that sort of freedom.

      Like

    • If bankability is based on whether an actor can lure people into the theater based on his presence in a film, then the best thing we could do for Richard is to go see The Hobbit a gazillion times. LOL

      Like

  8. The only definite take away point from that article is that Keira Knightley got royally screwed. I hope she fired her agent.

    The Hobbit is really expensive but the money doesn’t got to top dollar salaries for the actors – they’re spending the hundreds of millions in the size of the cast, crew and technology budget. If Richard is getting almost 2 million (he can’t have gotten that much for Capt. America) he’s not doing bad. I think I remember hearing that Sean Astin originally got $100000. No, okay, I googled it and it was $250,000. No one knew how well the movies were going to do. They got bonuses afterwards, plus they all get some participation in dvd sales. But the real pay off is in what kind of salary they will command after the movie, and the work they’ll have access to, plus the two years spent doing cutting edge (technologically speaking) work and having a blast. I think he’s doing pretty well 🙂

    Like

    • Keira Knightley is with the same agency as RA. 3000$ per week was a lot of money for a girl at an age others would still be at school and it worked out for her because she got her breakthrough and the money she is able to demand now from her POTC fame. And she earned 5 m for the third film. I’m not sure where the numbers for Sean Astin come from, I have read that they got 2m as well. Only proves that everything we are discussing are rumours. The actors that did play the hobbits in LOTR didn’t had brilliant careers after that, one of them ended up in Lost (though that was probably relatively nicely paid) , another is bankrupt now because he did spent it all on parties and cars. Though I suppose looking like a hobbit doesn’t particularly help to get other roles.

      Like

    • Thanks for the comment and welcome, Brennan.

      Like

  9. $2m may not put him up there with the big dogs, but being one of the recognisable faces of The Hobbit series is a huge investment in his career on both sides of the Pond. He’ll get the advantage of having been a major player in guaranteed massive films that will get his face and abilities seen by every casting director, film/tv/theatre/radio producer and director in the Anglophone world (and beyond), and audiences will want to see more – he’ll be a hero to a generation of kids and geeks who might not have seen his other work. There will be no avoiding knowing who he is.

    So he’ll have the doors blasted wide open. Given his leading man looks and experience in all media, he’ll be in great demand. $2m is not chickenfeed at the best of times, and when you consider the social capital he gets on top of it, he’s going to be – as we say on this set of small islands – quids in.

    As to the “extremely high” rates of tax in the UK, which currently pay for daft things like one of the best health care systems in the world, accessible to all, fear not: the richer he gets, the smaller proportion of his income he pays into the creation and maintenance of the nation’s social, educational, health, and physical infrastructure, just like in the US 🙂

    Seriously, he will be in a position to parlay this into anything he wants over the next couple of years after the first film comes out. If he’s canny, and his agent is worth their salt, he’ll be able to take on a range of projects that will either make him filthy rich, or at least make him financially comfy for a lifetime. If he can learn to make decisions from a place of equanimity, rather than the place of fear of poverty and unemployment he’s expressed in earlier interviews, he should be set; if he allows the fear to run him into taking on work that doesn’t serve his needs, the chance may be blown, so here’s hoping his agent and his experience in The Hobbit reins in that particular habit.

    Like

    • It occurs to me that some people will find it inflammatory – I know taxes are more of a political football in the US than here. Hm. OK, don’t want to bring party politics into the discussion, so please take it in the spirit in which it’s meant – a jocular way of explaining why UK taxes may be higher than US taxes, not meant to be divisive or kick off any argument. (Hope this is just me being paranoid. This is the internet, though, so just in case.)

      Like

      • Thanks, I’m exhausted, but even so, I don’t believe the original post deserved criticism on this point as the language I used was not critical of either taxes or high taxes. I was only asking myself how much of the money Armitage might get to keep, and part of deductions come from taxes, which are in fact a great deal higher in the UK than they are in the U.S. (There are other deductions as well, management fees, business expenses, etc.)

        I did not, however, write: “the evil extremely high taxes in the UK” or “the extremely high taxes in the UK that should be lowered so Richard Armitage can keep more of his earnings.” Nor did I write, “the extremely high taxes in the UK to which I am opposed on principle” or anything like that, so I am not sure why you would conclude that I was opposed to high taxes. Nor did I attribute any political attitude at all to any reader of this blog, nor to Richard Armitage.

        I was also a bit surprised by the comment because frankly, although I have very specific reasons for not writing about them explicitly in this venue, I think my politics are pretty clear from this blog, as is the fact that I have lived in Germany where the tax rates are also higher than in the U.S. and can be potentially be expected to understand why it is that taxes are high or low in any particular setting. In short, while taxes may be a political football, this post did not seek to make them one, nor does the language do that unintentionally.

        Like

        • Whoa! Holy miscommunication, Batman!

          It never occurred to me that you’d take it as a dig at you, or that I’d assume anything about your attitudes to taxes. I just dashed off what I thought was a clearly jokey comment while very tired, then got through a whole day, came back, re-read it, and thought, “Oh, hell. It’s the internet. Someone might mistakenly think I’m trying to kick off an argument, and I’ll be the unintentional igniter of a flame war. Here, let me make it clear that this is not my intention.”

          So, that worked well, then.

          Like

    • I’ve said it above, but will say it here again for what it’s worth: I understand the concept of taking a lower salary in order to gain an opportunity. In fact, I’ve done this myself repeatedly. However: what he does is *still* work. He wouldn’t do it for free.

      Like

  10. Is he smiling(I love his smile!) all the way to the bank? I don’t know but probably He no longer worries like 10 years ago.;)

    Like

  11. I wondered about box office profits, too. Probably not? The films are very expensive to make; there is a rather big cast (even if a couple of “stars” just make a flash appearence.) Still, the prestige, the exposure and the film-making experience will be worth it. Perhaps he has a smart financial advisor who can wangle an account in the Channel Islands. 😀 At this point, not even PJ knows hoe “bankable” Armitage will be, so $2m is a reasonable gamble for the production.

    (Now I’ll have to watch a wretched vampire series…:) good for Lucy, though)

    Like

    • I think if he bought a house in London in the pre-crash property market, he must have a good financial adviser. 🙂

      Like

  12. Yes $2 million sounds cheap, probably most for TH, since I can’t imagine any producer would agree that sum for basically 10 min in CA for an unknown actor.
    Most of the budget is set away for the CGI and marketing. Not to mention, they’re shooting in 3D, so that too inflates their budget. There is no way they could hire an ensemble cast consisting of A-list names. One must remember that LOTR was made with a bunch of unknowns as well, except for Hugo Weaving and Cate Blanchet. The entire trilogy was seen as a huge risk. It wasn’t until after that Orlando Bloom and Ian McKellen have become household names.

    Keira was screwed for the first 2 Pirate films, but that was also due to the fact the success of the first movie was a great big surprise to all. It was only meant to be a fun summer flick, it turned out to be a mega block buster. There were no concrete plans to make it into a franchise, unlike CA. This made it possible for all involved to renegotiate their contracts. Chris Evans seems to have been hired for a bargain, however I have no doubt his contract enables him to earn from the merchandise, as CA is part of The Avengers franchise and he’ll be tied to them for a while.

    And whether we like it or not, RA is still pretty much unknown to the masses. It won’t be millions he’ll earn from acting in TH, though he might get a certain % from the merchandise, he will get mega exposure in return. Both in the business as to the public, and the latter is what counts for future projects and producers.

    Like

    • I’m really hoping he has good mdse and dvd agreements in place. The profits on all the tchotchkes are huge.

      Like

  13. I also think he’s doing quite well all things considered. (Then again I may be one of the few that thinks he’s actually been successful as an actor). This is only his second major international film, his first starring role (and if you doubt he’s one of the stars, notice in the latest vid blog he’s in the same helicopter as Martin Freeman).

    I don’t think he’ll ever get over that “fear” of not having another job after finishing the last one no matter how much money he makes. I think that is a fear that’s forever with actors and they have good reasons to do so. He seems like a levelheaded person, and iI think in many ways it is a good thing for him as a person that great fame and riches didn’t come easily to him.

    I hate to bring Viggo Mortensen up again in discussing RA and The Hobbit, but I seem to recall that his pay per film skyrocketed after LOTR,and I don’t think he was paid as much as others for being Aragorn. I have no doubt the same will happen with RA – no doubt at all.

    Like

    • Good point about Viggo Mortensen. He was well known in parts of Europe and to the art house crowd for a long time, but The Hobbit turned him into a major bankable star for mainstream films. Another leading man type who came to major films in his maturity, and seems to have kept his feet on the ground. I believe Gene Hackman was well into his 30s before taking up acting. It seems like the people who did the long slog away from mainstream films or in other professions before coming to stardom in their 30s and 40s seem to have real professional longevity and more groundedness than those who achieve stardom young enough to be thrown by it.

      Like

      • I just recently saw Eastern Promises with Viggo and Naomi Watts and continue to be impressed by his growth as an actor, a very versatile and multi-talented performer who does indeed seem to be well grounded (remind you of anyone else you know?).

        I think achieving stardom after years of struggle often makes you more appreciative of what you’ve got and helps you keep things in a more proper perspective. I think it can truly be a blessing in disguise.

        Look at how many young stars burn out so quickly. Too much, too soon, too many temptaions and not enough will power or maturity to resist. Lindsay Lohan. So talented, a darling young girl and now–she looks older than her own mother. it’s sad.

        Like

  14. To me, a 2 million paycheck, even for two years work, would be a dream come true. Especially if most living expenses were provided. Imagine earning that much money, and not having to pay for rent, food, etc. And the thought that it would increase your bankability in the future? Sounds like a win/win situation to me.

    I think one of the smartest things RA has done is voice work. Many people(at least here in the US) make quite a nice living doing nothing but voice work, especially commercials. I’m sure RA is accumulating a pretty good nest egg just from that alone, and he certainly can continue doing voice work should film work dry up (not that I ever anticipate that happening!)

    One thing I don’t understand – his paycheck for CA and TH are somehow tied together? Were the two films a package deal? I guess I always thought they were two separate projects. What’s the connection?

    Like

    • Cindy, I totally agree about the voice work. Look how many well-known and respected actors do narrations and commercials here and it can pay very well (and that includes Brit actors who have done work for US market).

      I am sure he could make a decent living with his voice alone (although I certainly hope he never retires completely from being in front of the camera!).

      Like

    • He could do voice-over for a popular animated movie. I also expect he might to voice overs for a Hobbit video game. But then, I’m sorry to be the spoilsport again, his CV regarding voicework isn’t impressive either. Others have done much more and stuff that is much more impressive. Like reading bestsellers, doing not just one radio play but frequently doing it, and narrating high profile nature documentaries. He isn’t the only one who has a nice voice and knows how to use it.

      Like

    • I hope that he’s happy with it. But I don’t think the utility from salary can be measured in absolute terms. A homeless person in Somalia would find my salary astronomical.

      I thought the article was incredibly poorly written (it obscured as much as it said), but I assume that there was no connection between CA and TH.

      Like

  15. What I’m about to say is off topic, but I have to say it anyway since we’re discussing RA working on The Hobbit. And many of you have probably already thought about this, but not me. This weekend I went to see my first 3-D movie. It was actually the Stars Wars movie RA is in although I didn’t get to see him which is a totally different subject. Anyway the technology totally blew me away. It was actually so great I forgot to watch for RA in the movie. But I did realize afterward that not only will I finally be able to see RA in a major movie in December, but I will see him in 3-D! Not sure if I can handle all that at once. Just saying.

    Like

    • How much was he paid to be an extra in Star Wars? Didn’t he once say something about 50 pound?

      Like

      • I’ve never heard what he was paid, but I thought the role was a little more than an extra. But even so, it makes it more remarkable that a guy who had such a small, insignificant role in a Stars Wars movie 10 years later has a major role in a major motion picture produced by a revered special affects director. RA must be feeling pretty ecstatic right about now…not to mention what’s ahead.

        Like

    • 3-D can be amazing if it’s done creatively. If not, it’s just a surcharge.

      Like

      • Good point about the 3D, Servetus. It seems like an add-on, more or less, to so many films these days, and as such, really doesn’t add to the experience (except in the adding to your ticket price). However, I suspect the 3D for the two Hobbit movies will be first-rate. Richard. In 3D and for more than ten minutes of the film. Yummm.

        Like

        • I actually felt like Armitage’s action sequence in CA was one of the few pieces of that film where they halfway exploited 3-D, but yeah, a whole film!!!!

          Like

  16. Faboamanto, I’m with you on the issue that RA has already been successful – slowly, dues paid. But then, I’m an admirer of working actors, whether they reach the Colin Firth pinnacle or not. As long as he has choices. At present, just because he hasn’t become a household name doesn’t degrade his ability or potential. Perhaps he won’t become a Hollywood-style leading man (i.e. great romantic star.) Just choices of roles that highlight the versatility and talent….

    Like

  17. I’m late to this party but I couldn’t agree more Fitzg. RA may not be well known but it’s clear he’s been slogging away quietly in the trenches honing his craft and paying his thespian dues. Slow and steady wins the race. In a way his slow and steady pace reminds me of actor Morgan Freeman who did not hit the floodlights until age 36 after years of toil, most prominently, and quite well I might add, on a children’s educational show. He’s now 75, I think. I am in awe of his talent and am left scratching my head sometimes when I see some lesser actors (I apologize in advance to any Tom Cruise, Will Smith, and John Travolta fans) who garner the huge salaries that they do! Duh! I’ll never get it, I think. Rock on RA!!

    Like

  18. […] In 2011, Richard Armitage begins filming The Hobbit — the biggest professional and monetary achievement of his career. He is rumored to receive $2 million total for The Hobbit and Captain America. […]

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

 
%d bloggers like this: