Why Taraji P. Henson’s ‘Color Purple’ Controversy Fuels the ‘Pay to Play’ Actor Debate

It appears that the tides are turning. In a previous article, we broke down the pay model for actors and actresses in Hollywood, but in this piece, we’re going to break down the studio’s budget allocation model, plus the direction studios are headed in. Hollywood studios operate like corporations, not creative hobby shops, which means every film investment is made with a projected ROI in mind and every dollar should be allocated strategically. A film’s budget is divided into two major categories: Above-the-Line Costs (lead actors and actresses, director, producers, screenwriters, and sometimes showrunners for TV) and Below-the-Line Costs (crew, location rentals, costumes and props, set construction, travel, lodging, special effects, food service on set, insurance, and more).

Next you have production costs, which include editing, color grading, music licensing, scoring, and similar expenses. Then comes marketing and distribution. When a film is released in theaters, filmmakers rely on box office numbers to help recoup at least 50 percent of the budget spent on the film. International box office returns average around 40 percent on the high end. After that, studios earn from streaming and licensing revenue, TV rights, digital rentals and purchases, airline and hotel licensing, merchandising, product placement, and tax incentives.

Related articles: The Exposure Trap: How the Creative Industry Profits While Creators Go Broke

When a film flops at the box office, studios can often write off the loss, which means reducing their taxable income or offsetting profits from other films. Resentment is growing now as more and more studios take loss after loss because stars just aren’t as bankable as they once were. If an actor is paid upfront, the studio loses. If they are paid on the back end and take a percentage of the profits, the studio may end up with less than they invested. So, what’s the solution?

Producer Richard Osman from The Rest is Entertainment podcast shared a controversial take on their latest episode: “It seems to me now that actors are getting more from being in movies than the studios are getting from the actors being in their films. Like, Glen Powell gets more from being in Running Man than the movie company gets from Glen Powell. He suddenly has three months’ worth of publicity everywhere he wants to go, and we all know that you can monetize your own publicity and personal brand far more now than you used to. It feels to me now that actors should pay to play. It feels like, whoever you are—unless you’re a Timothée Chalamet—Glen Powell’s managers should say, ‘I’ll give you a million dollars to put him in Running Man because it keeps him in the conversation. It keeps him in the public eye for another three to four months. He can then monetize that.’”

Related articles: Inside Olandria Carthen’s Rise: Reality TV Fame, Brand Deals, and Fashion Success

How did we get here?

Production costs are rising and talent can show up, perform, cash their check, and go home. Meanwhile, the film studio is responsible for minor things such as food, parking, and transportation. Talent don’t even want to be responsible for buying their own meals on set, yet they can still show up, give a lackluster performance, and go home to a guaranteed check instead of a bill.

The remake of The Color Purple, starring Halle Bailey, Taraji P. Henson, Fantasia, and Danielle Brooks, raised many eyebrows during its press run, with Henson calling out studios for how little they pay seasoned talent. She has been vocal about this for quite some time. Even at the Woman Festival Summit last year, our Editor in Chief had the pleasure of meeting Henson.

During the panel conversation, Henson discussed the importance of knowing your worth and how difficult it is to navigate the industry, with pay being the focal point. At a press conference for The Color Purple, Henson mentioned having to drive herself to set and how unsafe she felt. Yet she showed up to work, did her job, and still walked away with a check. The studios, however, had to take a major financial loss on the film, which in turn has made it more difficult for African American writers and producers to get Black films made by major studios. Studios have been absorbing loss after loss, and the one thing they bank on is the stars of the film going out and doing good press.

Related articles: Hollywood’s Hidden Pay Gap: Why Actresses Still Earn Less for the Same Roles

According to sources, Henson is now blackballed from major studio productions.

“I think the shift that we’re seeing is from fatigue rather than discrimination or racial injustice. As a Black woman in media, I have had the pleasure of working with great talent and then I’ve had the displeasure of working with people I wish I never had to cut a check to. But it’s the sacrifice we make to keep ourselves in business and to have content we can eventually monetize, even if it doesn’t happen in the moment.

As a magazine publisher, we’ve had cover girls who promoted the publication and drove sales, as well as cover girls who never said a peep about their involvement, which netted us zero sales. In the end, we had to eat those costs. And while yes, some people are willing to pay to be on covers, it’s not something I’m willing to accept because I’ll know the truth, and nine times out of ten, the people willing to pay to play don’t deserve the cover. This in turn can devalue the brand,” says Lisa K. Stephenson, SSM Editor in Chief and author.

Related articles: Why Every Actor Needs a Contract Review Service Before Signing Anything

While this conversation is new and may never grow legs, it’s something to keep at the forefront of our minds as the media landscape continues to shift. How will this affect low-level working actors and actresses? Many in the comments of that video were appalled, with some saying, “Pay to work? You want us to pay you to go to work?” and another, “I’d never pay for a role. They bill us for our ambition enough as it is. That is where I’d draw the line.”

I think this raises a larger conversation around indie productions and the idea that many working talent won’t even pay for something as small as a sandwich on set or their background check, believing it’s a scam to require any financial contribution. But if those low-level expenses can’t even be covered, should we really be surprised when studios start leaning more toward a pay-to-play model? The ability to star in a film is an honor and is mutually beneficial for both parties, so maybe there should be some compromise. But who knows—we’re just going to have to wait and see.

by Riley Cook