Was Gal Gadot Grossly Underpaid for Playing Wonder Woman?
Updated June 20, 12:55 p.m. PT: Since the news went viral earlier this week, there's been some heavy investigation into whether or not Henry Cavill literally made 46 times more than Gal Gadot for their respective first solo superhero movies. This factoid, my friends, is officially debunked.
According to Vanity Fair, an inside source says that it would have been "insane" for Cavill to have made that much for one picture because that's basically Johnny Depp-levels of money, meaning you'd have to factor in how long an actor's been working, their proven bankability and so forth to get that big a salary quote. While Vanity Fair was unable to verify what Cavill's actual salary for Man of Steel was, what we do know for sure is that Cavill did not make the alleged $14 million.
Vanity Fair goes on to impress that this whole bit of hoopla about Gadot's salary was originally believable because the Hollywood pay gap is so notorious; why not believe an actress is yet again getting the short end of the stick? But they continue to note that Gadot's $300,000-per-picture is basically the industry standard at this point.
Mystery solved? Crisis averted? For now, I guess so.
It's no secret that Wonder Woman is proving to be a massive box-office success. The numbers are still climbing, but Forbes estimates that Wonder Woman has made about $600 million since its opening weekend earlier in June and those box office receipts will most likely continue to climb. In light of this, curiosity about Wonder Woman lead Gal Gadot's salary has been revived, and it's come to light that her salary comes nowhere close to reflecting what would be appropriate with those box office receipts.
While it's been public knowledge since she first signed her contract with Warner Bros. Studios in 2014 for a three-picture film deal, the news that Gadot only made $300,000 for Wonder Woman can come as a bit of a shock. It's incredibly irksome to know that Gadot, who was a relative unknown when she first signed on to make three films as Wonder Woman for these DC Comics films, is locked into making such a low amount while the film she led is raking in the dough. While it cannot be confirmed precisely how much her superhero actor counterpart Henry Cavill (also a relative unknown when he signed his Warner Bros. contract) made (Refinery29 has quoted $14 million, but there's no hard evidence on this), his salary is being used as an example of the extreme wage gap between men and women working in Hollywood.
On Twitter, one user, Sarah, offered up the explanation that Gadot's $300,000-a-film salary is actually the industry standard, so there's no reason to pitch a fit. In fact, other famous actors currently playing superheroes made the same amount for their origin story films.
Sarah goes on to argue that if anything, Gadot has incredible leverage to bring to the table should she renegotiate her contract with Warner Bros. or decide to sign a new contract elsewhere.
Sarah's got a point, but I can't deny that it's galling as hell that we're even talking about the wage gap in 2017, especially when there are strong implications that Gadot is not being compensated appropriately. I mean, how does that even make any damn sense? While we may not know if her contract included bonuses for the Wonder Woman box office receipts or similar extra compensation, I think that she deserves a raise no matter what; she's definitely earned it.