Mark Wahlberg is the actor least profitable Hollywood | People and Celebrity

0
94


There are many who would like to appear in one of the famous lists of Forbesthat usually crowned the richest or the most influential in the world. But not all the classifications of the magazine are good, but tell that to the actor Mark Wahlberg, who has just crowned as the actor least profitable of 2017. But this time who will be happy about is Johnny Depp, who doesn’t even appear in the ranking after the last two year the lead.

Wahlberg was appointed last August as the highest paid actor, thanks to $ 68 million (57.6 million euros) that had won in the last 12 months, the highest salary of his career for his roles in big-budget films as Transformers: the last knight or Deepwater Horizon. But the fact that these films have not been a success at the box-office is what has made Wahlberg, 46, has now been appointed by Forbes as the actor least profitable of Hollywood. According to the magazine, for every dollar paid to the interpreter his films raised at the box office only 4,40 dollars. It is more, Day of patriotsthe film inspired by the bombing of the 2013 Boston marathon, has grossed less at the box office worldwide than the us $ 68 million (before tax), which pocketed the actor in 12 months.

Mark Wahlberg in a still from the movie 'Deepwater Horizon'.


Mark Wahlberg in a still from the movie ‘Deepwater Horizon’.

The other two films of Wahlberg premiered between 1 June 2016 and on the same day this year, a period in which the magazine conducts its accounts, nor have been at all profitable for the producers. For example, The Deepwater Horizon, which tells the story of the spill in the Gulf of Mexico in 2013, just came to collect at the box office the $ 110 million it cost to make the film.

The list of actors the least profitable Hollywood has a feature in common: they are all men, are great performers whose past successes guarantee them salaries of eight figures per movie, and that’s despite the fact that his most recent projects have not had the proceeds. Despite the publication examines both actors as well as actresses, they don’t get to get in on this ranking since their wages are still lower, so you will rarely get that fatal combination that has happened to Wahlberg to be at the same time the interpreter best paid and the least cost-effective.

Christian Bale and Charlotte Le Bon, in a frame of 'The Promise'.


Christian Bale and Charlotte Le Bon, in a frame of ‘The Promise’.

To make your accounts, the magazine compares the soils and the box office takings of the last three movies actors first performed before the 1st of June, which does not include animation films, tapes that have had roles small or that have been shown in less than 2,000 theaters. So after your calculations, Mark Wahlberg, follows in the list of most losses generated for the studies that we hired Christian Bale after the failure at the box office of your film The Promise on the Armenian genocide (which alone raised 11% of its $ 90 million budget making it one of the worst premieres of the year). He generates at the box office $ 6.70 for every one that the studio will pay.

The actor Channing Tatum, last August in Amsterdam.


The actor Channing Tatum, last August in Amsterdam.

Although your cache will not be as high as Wahlberg and Bale, Channing Tatum is the third actor less profitable Hollywood, since his films yielded at the box office and 7.60 for every dollar that he earned. He follows Denzel Washington (especially by the little international success Fences), and the top five closes Brad Pitt, who generated 11,50 dollars at the box office for every dollar he was paid on his last three films. The magazine stands out from the producer that their thriller Alliesa production that cost about $ 85 million, grossed in the box office world 119,5 million dollars.