Quote

If you do a film with a studio, agents step in, they start saying, 'My actor has to get this amount of money', and it becomes about deals.

Work is good when people are responsible, and in low-budget movies a lot of the actors don't want to be there. They're there to build a resume.

You know, when you choose to make your living as an actor, it's all fine and good to look at it as some kind of artistic endeavor. At its best, it is that. But the fact is, most of the actors out there don't earn $3 million a picture and can't afford to take two years off between films and look for the right thing. Most of us are tradesmen.

There is a vast difference in the pay package of every actor. Actors are also exploited at various levels, but when we are established, we get paid fairly well. But at times, if an actor asks for a hike, he/she may even get boycotted.

We've gotten to a point where it costs so much money to make a movie that directors and filmmakers feel they have to make sure that everybody gets it. And that's an unfortunate development, I think, in a lot of narratives floating around in the film industry.

Actors are sellers, and I figured out a long time ago that if you wanted to work a lot, you had to be on the buying side.

I don't like it when people ask actors to work for free - on the fringe - as if it's some kind of virtue. That annoys me - actors should be paid well.

A lot of talented actors still have to pay their bills.

How much do you have to pay someone to be in a George Clooney/Alexander Payne film? Nothing! Because everyone in the world wants to be a part of it. Therefore you pay nothing. And that continues until you become something they need... I'm not that kind of actor. I'm blue collar and very replaceable.

I know actors who have had to turn down good roles because they just don't pay enough. It's hard.