Lea Michele/Rachel Berry

[Advance35]

Grumble......I'll give you Jane and Matt, but for me, THAT is where I draw the line. lol

[Sara2009]

Different strokes for different folks. It just rubs me a bit wrong when someone says that ONE person carried an ensemble show. JMO

[Danielle87]

IMO, if Lea had left the show back in season one, it wouldn't have worked without the character of Rachel whereas if anyone else left, it would have been able to continue on just fine, so I'd agree that she definitely carried it back then.

 

Has nothing to do with the others not being talented, it's just the show was so Rachel heavy back then that if Lea wasn't awesome the show would have never took off the way it did, an impressive feat especially considering how the character of Rachel was so abrasive in those days.

[tom87]

I think it says something that even though she hasn't always had the most screen time even in season 1 people said it was the Rachel Berry show.   She obviously made an impact love her or hate her.

 

But yes no one can do it in  a vacuum but as far as character  goes she was the lynch-pin as Ian Brennon even said, I do not think the  show would have succeeded without her arc in that first 13. 

 

Personally I do think the show  and tour relayed on her heavily and she gets more resentment than appreciated now which I guess is another byproduct of her lead status on the show.  

Edited August 30, 2014 by tom87

[Advance35]

Personally I do think the show  and tour relayed on her heavily and she gets more resentment than appreciated now which I guess is another byproduct of her lead status on than show.

 

 

Yep.  Poor thing.   I didn't get it back than but wow.   Having to be put on Vocal Rest while carrying a concert to put more money in Fox's pocket.   I hope to god her management team made sure she's compensated.

[Sara2009]

Lea did 8 shows a week on Broadway, which is standard. I'm sure the " Glee" tour was no problem for her.

[Hana Chan]

Everyone worked their asses off on the Glee tour. It was a brutal schedule so my sympathy for Lea is no more than for the rest of the cast. She's a talented performer, but let's not make her a martyr. Glee has been extraordinarily good to Lea for a very, very long time.

[Sara2009]

If anything, the " Glee" tour was less brutal for Lea since she's been performing in shows most of her life. She was more used to it than the others.

[Advance35]

Utterly amazing.    One cannot even appreciate Ms Michele in a Lea Michele thread.    From my understanding she did a MAJORITY of the singing (live) for the first tour.   At the time Ms. Agron and Ms. Dorsey were not singing as much, so while not making her a Martyr, I appreciate what she did.    And Glee has made Ms. Michele earn EVERY supposed perk she's gotten.

 

If anything, the " Glee" tour was less brutal for Lea since she's been performing in shows most of her life. She was more used to it than the others.

 

 

Riiiiiiiiiiight.   I'm sure it was a game of candy land.   The "others" have commented about how much Lea did during the first tour and how impressed they were.

Edited August 30, 2014 by Advance35

[Hana Chan]

I've always found threads on boards (unless expressly stated) to be pro and con regarding the actors and the characters.

 

As far as the Glee tour goes, the entire cast worked incredibly hard. Lea has several prominent songs, but so did others. And Lea didn't do the dancing that Harry, Heather and even Chris did (his version of single ladies was a major hit at most performances). Regardless, it was a challenge for the entire cast, do perform so many shows and have such a heavy travel schedule to deal with. It wasn't easy on anyone. Lea would have had some experience with a heavy performance schedule that some of the others (who didn't grow up on Broadway) wouldn't have  and I would expect that someone with her experience would know how to maintain her voice when performing nightly. Any singer who is touring (and not depending on backing tracts) have to be able to maintain their voices.

 

As for Lea singing the majority of the songs, here's the set list for the 2011 tour.

 

1."Don't Stop Believin'" - Full cast: Lea Michele and Cory Monteith soloists
2."Dog Days Are Over" - Full cast: Jenna Ushkowitz and Amber Riley soloists
3."Sing" - Full cast: Lea Michele and Cory Monteith soloists
4."I'm a Slave 4 U" - Heather Morris
5."Fat Bottomed Girls" - Mark Salling
6."I Want to Hold Your Hand" - Chris Colfer
7."Ain't No Way" - Amber Riley
8."P.Y.T. (Pretty Young Thing)" - Harry Shum Jr., Kevin McHale
9."Born This Way" - Full cast: Chris Colfer, Jenna Ushkowitz, and Amber Riley soloists
10."Firework" - Lea Michele
11."Teenage Dream" - The Warblers
12."Silly Love Songs" - The Warblers
13."Raise Your Glass" - The Warblers
14."Happy Days Are Here Again / Get Happy" - Lea Michele and Chris Colfer
15."Lucky" - Dianna Agron and Chord Overstreet
16."River Deep – Mountain High" - Amber Riley and Naya Rivera
17."Don't Rain on My Parade" - Lea Michele (May 21-28 and June 16-18 only)
18."Jessie's Girl" - Cory Monteith
19."Valerie" - Naya Rivera
20."Loser Like Me" - Full cast: Lea Michele and Cory Monteith soloists

 

This means that Lea had one solo (except for the nights when she performed DROMP when she had 2), one duet and some solo parts on 3 songs. Hardly the majority of the show. This is not to belittle what Lea did do, but it was clear to me that they designed the set list in order to ensure that no one singer was overly strained by having to carry too much of the show.

[Sara2009]

These threads are for appreciation AND criticism.

And I NEVER said that the tours were like Candyland. My point was that handling that heavy load was probably easier for Lea than it was for others since she 's been performing for most of her life. It wasn't a slam against her.

[Advance35]

I believe the cast was especially thanking Lea for the 2010 Live Tour.   And if anything the reaction Lea gets on THESE boards makes me sympathize with her MORE.    Again prior to the end of last season I assumed Lea was just a vapid princess so I didn't really give her credit for much of anything, I've come to really appreciate what I think she brought to this franchise  BUT since it can clearly be displeasing to others to have Lea Michele given positive credit for anything I will refrain from doing so going forward.  

 

I see what that comment in the other thread with regards to Lea/Rachel resentment was about.   Whoa.

[Hana Chan]

Admittedly Lea did sing more during the 2010 tour, but not much more than Cory (since the majority of songs except for her two solos were duets with Cory or group numbers where she and Cory sang lead). Even so, the number of songs she sang were far fewer than any singer leading a band would sing while on tour (especially when you consider that they only toured during the summer when they weren't filming and singers with bands tour for months at a stretch).

[Sara2009]

There are several Lea fans on this forum. I haven't seen anyone discouraging giving her positive credit.

[dizzyizzy01]

Well to be fair, the poster was talking about the first tour. That set list is for the second tour which was much more balanced.

Lea definitely carried the first tour, but all the cast worked very hard. Lea, Amber, and Jenna carried the vocal load, with Lea most certainly taking on the bulk of the it.

I do agree the show wouldn't have succeeded without getting Rachel right, and Lea was a huge part of it. But it was still the everything coming together that made it a breakout hit back in the day.

 

Admittedly Lea did sing more during the 2010 tour, but not much more than Cory (since the majority of songs except for her two solos were duets with Cory or group numbers where she and Cory sang lead). Even so, the number of songs she sang were far fewer than any singer leading a band would sing while on tour (especially when you consider that they only toured during the summer when they weren't filming and singers with bands tour for months at a stretch).

 

 

 

Ok.  Now I really think you should give credit where it's due.  Cory and Lea may have performed in a similar number of songs, but clearly Lea carries the vocals on all of their duets, at least during season 1.  I don't think you can possibly claim Somebody to Love, Don't Stop Believing, Like a Prayer etc. rely even remotely as much on Cory than they do on Lea.  Lea's clearly carrying those songs.  I'm not saying she's the only reason they're popular or successful, but she is most definitely doing the bulk of the singing.  It's even more clear when you see those performances live.  Not to mention she had DROMP every night as well.

 

Also, comparing the glee cast to a touring band is an unfair comparison.  These folks were not conditioning themselves for a tour nor did they have the proper time to prepare.  They were also spending 10 months out of the year filming a very demanding television show that included scene work, choreography, recording sessions, etc..  Everything this cast put out the first 3 seasons was nothing short of unbelievable.  These kids were basically working 24/7 with only a couple of weeks off.  They all worked extremely hard; Lea, just by nature of being in more scenes, more songs, etc. had more to do.  I recall the first episode with Britney taking front and center, Heather Morris commented on how she didn't know how Lea did it and she wouldn't want to be her on a regular basis.  That it was basically way too much work.  

 

They got compensated for it, but I do think it was unfortunate that the show tanked when it did before the cast had a chance to truly renegotiate more favorable contracts.  However, I don't think any of these kids would have the same opportunities they have had the last couple of years without the success of Glee.

Edited August 30, 2014 by dizzyizzy01

[Advance35]

I do agree the show wouldn't have succeeded without getting Rachel right, and Lea was a huge part of it.

 

 

So I guess in when it comes to Glee, knowing when to engage and when to ignore is the key to happy posting.   A lesson I will not soon forget.  Sheesh.

 

Anyway, I'm hoping Lea can finagle Jesse St. James back to the show for a final 2 episodes and we see her riding off into the sunset with him bent on conquering fame once again.    That would be my idea of a happy Glee ending.   Hopefully no soliloquy about how much Glee has mean't to her and no tearful nonsense with Kurt.   Hopefully her interactions this season are with students, Sue, Blaine, Sam, Schue and Jesse.    The end.

 

An A or B plot in every episode to carry her arc and call it a wrap at Episode 13.   That's what I'm hoping for.

[Hana Chan]

Oh, I would love to see Rachel interact with Sue. Because Sue will not sugarcoat just how completely Rachel fucked her own career every single time they came within 50 yards of one another. And take enormous pleasure in doing so.

 

I can easily see Rachel looking for sympathy from all the usual suspects who had been quick to offer support to her in the past, and find that it's not exactly forthcoming because it's Rachel's own fault that she's lost everything. It was Rachel's decision to quit NYADA in a manner so arrogant that Ms. Tibideaux wouldn't spit on her if Rachel was on fire (if Ms. Tibideaux would deign to spit on anyone). It was Rachel's choice to quit Funny Girl (after getting a very, very explicit warning about just what would happen if she fucked with te show again). Rachel had all the success she'd dreamed of right in her hands and she threw it all away because she couldn't control her ambitions. It's going to be interesting to see her being told just that right to her face.

[fakeempress]

All credit to Lea about her work ethic and commitment re the Glee tours. Obviously, everyone else who took part worked as hard, and people went to the tours not just for Rachel, but for the Glee club. By the time the first tour rolled out, people had latched on other characters and their actors beside Rachel/Lea and wanted to see them too.

 

Anyway, the "poor her, she busted her voice earning cash for Fox" comments here sound quite melodramatic. The 2010 tour workload would be akin to Lea having a starring role on a Broadway touring show, nothing out of the ordinary for that level of performer. We are talking about the only person in the kids' cast who's had a major starring role on Broadway, which she sustained day in and day out for 15 months I believe. I'd expect a professional with her experience on Broadway (I believe she started in productions at the age of 8) to have learned how to manage her voice.

Edited August 30, 2014 by fakeempress

[dizzyizzy01]

Anyway, the "poor her" comments here sound quite melodramatic. The 2010 tour workload would be akin to Lea having a starring role on a Broadway touring show, nothing out of the ordinary for that type of performer.

 

 

I don't think it's about poor Lea at all, but appreciating that she did the bulk of the work is ok.  She may have been the only feasible option with Matt opting out, but I don't think it's wrong to comment that Lea clearly carried the first tour.  Don't make her into some sort of martyr, but girl clearly worked very hard.

[fakeempress]

I don't think it's about poor Lea at all, but appreciating that she did the bulk of the work is ok.  She may have been the only feasible option with Matt opting out, but I don't think it's wrong to comment that Lea clearly carried the first tour.  Don't make her into some sort of martyr, but girl clearly worked very hard.

 

Appreciating the work she's done is more than OK. But it was about "poor her":

 

Lea carried this show in Season 1, poor girl had to be put on Vocal Rest because SHE had to insure the first Glee Tour was a success.    This girl deserves a medal.    While them making other characters top tier probably took some of the load off Lea, the show sure suffered as a result.

 

Poor thing.   I didn't get it back than but wow.   Having to be put on Vocal Rest while carrying a concert to put more money in Fox's pocket.

Edited August 30, 2014 by fakeempress

[dizzyizzy01]

Yes, it was about "poor her"

 

 

Well you're quoting someone else not me, but anyway.  Again, It's not about poor Lea at all, but appreciating the fact that she did carry a lot of the workload the first couple of seasons is a fair point.  It's expected given that she was the lead/star of the show, but the resentment people have towards her is quite over the top.  Rationalizing that the tour was no big deal for her given she's a seasoned Broadway performer is also dismissive of how much work both she and the other members of the cast put in.  Just because Lea had training and experience beforehand, doesn't mean she didn't work just as hard if not harder than anyone else.

[Advance35]

They got compensated for it, but I do think it was unfortunate that the show tanked when it did before the cast had a chance to truly renegotiate more favorable contracts.

 

 

From what I understand wasn't that a punchline, how underpaid Lea was, for a supposed Lead Actress that is.   Many other shows don't require the extra work that Glee does and their actresses make far more, I'm talking CW shows.

 

Far to late now though.   13 episodes and than all of this is a memory.

 

However, I don't think any of these kids would have the same opportunities they have had the last couple of years without the success of Glee.

 

 

I don't know if we'll see any of these performers after this nightmare ends.   Some have speculated that the whole lot will become "Hey It's that Guy/Girl" type actors, which I could actually see.   Though I've got my fingers crossed for Lea.

[fakeempress]

Well you're quoting someone else not me, but anyway.  Again, It's not about poor Lea at all, but appreciating the fact that she did carry a lot of the workload the first couple of seasons is a fair point.  It's expected given that she was the lead/star of the show, but the resentment people have towards her is quite over the top.  Rationalizing that the tour was no big deal for her given she's a seasoned Broadway performer is also dismissive of how much work both she and the other members of the cast put in.  Just because Lea had training and experience beforehand, doesn't mean she didn't work just as hard if not harder than anyone else.

 

Why shouldn't I be quoting someone else when it's their "poor her" comments that I meant and referred to? 

 

I don't see anyone rationalizing how it's no big deal at all for her. I also don't see anyone denying that she worked hard. Lea's experience is pertinent to expectations for her voice to withstand such workload, since it's no more than what she and all other Broadway performers at her level are familiar with and should be trained and prepared for. If you've got a starring role on a successful Bway show, that's the workload expected of you. I don't think this is so hard to get. 

 

 

From what I understand wasn't that a punchline, how underpaid Lea was, for a supposed Lead Actress that is.   Many other shows don't require the extra work that Glee does and their actresses make far more, I'm talking CW shows.

 

Far to late now though.   13 episodes and than all of this is a memory.

 

 

I don't know if we'll see any of these performers after this nightmare ends.   Some have speculated that the whole lot will become "Hey It's that Guy/Girl" type actors, which I could actually see.   Though I've got my fingers crossed for Lea.

 

You may want to check Dianna's, Matt's or Harry's pipeline on IMDB. Probably not all of the currently engaged cast will always be in steady demand, but I think it's a bit premature to generalize when they have not been able to accept projects freely due to their show commitment.  

 

Lea didn't have TV experience to negotiate a high starting fee when she got Glee. I don't know for what she subsequently renegotiated, but then she had the leverage to get a better deal after Glee became a success. And everyone got a lousy compensation deal on the tours and songs, she is not the exception, though her share of the work there is substantial for sure. 

Edited August 31, 2014 by fakeempress

[dizzyizzy01]

Why shouldn't I be quoting someone else when it's their "poor her" comments that I meant and referred to?

 

 

Well then you quoted me when I was saying it shouldn't be about poor her but about recognizing someone's hard work is a valid point.

 

I don't see anyone rationalizing how it's no big deal at all for her.

 

 

When one uses the phrase "nothing out of the ordinary for that level of performer" it comes across as dismissive.  It takes a lot of work to get to and maintain that level.  I think any performer capable of the grueling schedules that Broadway, touring productions and otherwise, and yes Glee should be admired for their hard work.  It's something that requires a significant amount of dedication and continued hard work.  

[camussie]

Both Cory and Lea had more to do in the first tour than the rest while the second tour was much more balanced.  On the flip side of that the first tour was 10 dates in the second half of May 2010 while the second tour was around 30 dates that ran from the second half of May 2011 through early July 2011, including some international dates.  Then production started for season 3 in mid July.  Basically from July 2010 through May 2012 the cast didn't get any time off, save for their winter holiday breaks.  Even before that they only got about 5 weeks off between the first tour and season 2 (June/earlyJuly 2010) while most television productions get closer to 2.5-3 months off between seasons.  

 

That doesn't even take into account the mall tours they did (a big one the summer after the spring series premiere and smaller ones after that) nor the meet and greets that accompanied the tours.  For example, for almost every US date during the second tour there was an accompanying AT&T store "meet and greet" that Cory and Naya usually headlined.  That is why all of those "kids" got a raw deal when it came to getting compensated for the tours and the song royalties, not just the ones who had to do more singing.

 

One rumor that came out of that was that early in season 2 the cast banded together and asked for a better deal, with Cory being the one out in front of that.  Even if that wasn't true I hope at some point their agents pushed Fox and RM hard for a better deal because those "kids" worked  their backsides off and deserved more than it seems they got.  

 

As far as Lea carrying the show in the first season, while she was one of the leads she wasn't the only one.  Both Cory and Matt were also leads and Jane's Sue Sylvester quickly became iconic.  I don't think the show could have succeeded without ANY of those players in season 1.   That certainly isn't to downplay the importance of Lea/Rachel to this show.  She is rightfully the female lead and one of the best singers on the show.  I just disagree that she alone was  the lynch-pin to the success of the show.  One of the lynch-pins certainly but not the only one.  

Edited August 31, 2014 by camussie

[fakeempress]

 

Well then you quoted me when I was saying it shouldn't be about poor her but about recognizing someone's hard work is a valid point.

 

The "poor her" comments came from another poster, and were subsequently debated. I clearly referred to them in my first post. When you said "It is not about poor her", I begged to differ because it was clearly about that for the OP. I hope we are clear on that now. 

 

 

When one uses the phrase "nothing out of the ordinary for that level of performer" it comes across as dismissive.  It takes a lot of work to get to and maintain that level.  I think any performer capable of the grueling schedules that Broadway, touring productions and otherwise, and yes Glee should be admired for their hard work.  It's something that requires a significant amount of dedication and continued hard work.

 

"Nothing out of the ordinary" was re OP's call to give Lea a medal because she busted her voice for Fox. It was about the factual context of what's the expected level of work and vocal discipline for her level of Bway performer - which you confuse with a value statement. That work isn't normal for us (and isn't for Heather - but Heather's work as Beyonce's dancer isn't normal for Lea either) - but it's "normal" for those performers. In that context, to "poor her" and blame Fox for her voice problems sounds melodramatic to me - which was my point. Unless the case is that Fox forced her to sing against medical and vocal coach advice, which I'm not aware of.

 

As to being dismissive and not appreciating her work, I stated the contrary. 

Edited August 31, 2014 by fakeempress

[Cranberry]

I've always found threads on boards (unless expressly stated) to be pro and con regarding the actors and the characters.

 

These threads are for appreciation AND criticism.

 

This is accurate. We don't do "pro" and "anti" threads here; this thread is for all discussion relating to the actress and her Glee character. Debate is fine, but everyone must refrain from insulting their fellow posters.

[caracas1914]

They got compensated for it, but I do think it was unfortunate that the show tanked when it did before the cast had a chance to truly renegotiate more favorable contracts.

 

Well that and the fact that Ryan and company basically sacked or cut back more than half the young cast by the end of Season 3.  How could  Lea and company demand a lot  more money when their workload was reduced?

 

For being the stars of a show that lasted 6 seasons and made tons of money for FOX, on a relative scale Lea making 100 K per episode (and I'm guessing Chris and company making less) is underpaid.

[Hana Chan]

Again, I'm keeping in mind that this is Lea's first mainstream television job. She is not going to earn the say pay as someone who's had at least one successful series under their belts when starting. And while Glee did make a boatload of money early on (through ITunes sales, the tour and other merchandise), I have no doubt that profits have steeply declined in the past two years, so we could even make the argument that at 100 grand per episode that Lea is now being overpaid (given that the show is limping to it's final end).

 

Regardless, the Glee cast would not the first time that a cast didn't make as much money as they might have expected had it been known just how huge the show would become. I remember that when the original Star Wars film came out and became the biggest grossing film ever, a big deal was made over how the cast (who were mostly unknowns with limited film careers) didn't get paid nearly enough when you consider all the money made. But given that no one really expected a sci fi movie to become such a huge blockbuster, it's understandable. They negotiated better contracts for the next films.

 

I don't doubt that Lea (and some others in the cast) will command more money in their next projects, but I'll be blunt. 100 grand per episode and having my summers to myself to work on my own projects? I wouldn't exactly be complaining.

[caracas1914]

so we could even make the argument that at 100 grand per episode that Lea is now being overpaid (given that the show is limping to it's final end).

 

Actually no.  Relative to a prime time network show that lasted 6 seasons (we are not talking CW here) she's underpaid.  It has nothing to do with the status of the show now. The CEO of a major 500 company is going to get a certain compensation relative to his position.

 

100 grand per episode and having my summers to myself to work on my own projects? I wouldn't exactly be complaining.

 

 

 

I doubt that any of us would but IMO that is  sidestepping the issue: that relative to the industry she is probably underpaid. 

Edited August 31, 2014 by caracas1914

[Hana Chan]

Actually the ratings would be a big consideration in whether or not actors could demand higher pay. Other casts have gone on strike (or even quit) over pay disputes. If Glee was still a ratings and critical success, the actors would be in a much better position to demand higher paychecks.

 

And who are we comparing Lea to? Are we comparing her to actors like the cast of The Big Bang Theory, which is still a big rating success and regularly earns major awards? Or an actor like Ashton Kutcher who was hired for Three and a Half Men because he was already seen as a bankable actor that could draw viewers? Lea was a relative unknown to anyone outside of Broadway before Glee, so it's expected that she could not demand as much as those who've been in TV and films for years and have proven track records. Hell, Robin Williams, probably the most well known and bankable comedic actors "only" earned 165 grand for his last TV series. And while Lea did get some credible award nominations in the past, she hasn't earned any of the top industry awards or her work on Glee. So I'm not seeing the rationale that she's underpaid. We're comparing apples to oranges.

[caracas1914]

I doubt that the star of any other prime time major network show that is on it's 6th season is making "only" 100K per episode.  

 

Hell, Robin Williams, probably the most well known and bankable comedic actors "only" earned 165 grand for his last TV series.

 

 

Which if it had  lasted 6 seasons he would have been compensated anywhere IMO from 500 K to 1 million/episode.

Apples and oranges indeed

Edited August 31, 2014 by caracas1914

[Hana Chan]

Glee is barely entering its sixth season. Rightly it should have been canceled after the disaster that was season five (and is only getting this abbreviated final season because of a contractual obligation - the fact that the show is only getting 13 eps to close out is very telling of just how low it has fallen). But that's not really the point here.

 

Kerry Washington is an award winning actress in a critical and ratings darling and is earning a lot less per episode than Lea. You have a lot of actors who are far better known than Lea and who have much longer records of work and who's shows are at least as successful as Glee (in longevity and rating) and are earning less than Lea is. Lea's salary is actually towards the higher end of average for tv actors in lead roles. Especially when you consider that this is her first television role. I can't compare her to someone who's been doing television for 20 years, or someone like Mariska Hargitay who has been carrying her show for 16 seasons.

[caracas1914]

You have a lot of actors who are far better known than Lea and who have much longer records of work and who's shows are at least as successful as Glee (in longevity and rating) and are earning less than Lea is.

Name One.

Yup, I didn't think so.

Edited August 31, 2014 by caracas1914

[fakeempress]

I couldn't find a link to the original article from TV Guide Magazine in 2013, but here is a random reblog I found on Google, that lists Lea, Matt and Jane at $80,000 per episode, which should be the highest among Glee actors (not counting guest stars like Paltrow). I am slightly surprised because I expected them to be at around $100,000. For comparison, in 2010 Jane was at $50,000 and Matt at $30,000 so Lea probably was at Matt's level. In 2011, Lea was said to be at $40,000 per.

 

I agree the Glee actors got a raw deal for the amount of work they put in over the years. The reality is that workload alone doesn't determine their fees. Jane who was the most recognizable name with a relatively impressive list of credits when Glee started, and then the only individual Emmy winner from the regular cast, gets the same money for arguably lot less work.  The kids all started from a low base, probably pretty close to the guaranteed SAG minimum, and with Glee viewership peaking in S2 and dwindling ever after while the cast was bloating, they were obviously not able to renegotiate for much higher. But this concerns only the per episode fees, I'm not sure that there is no other type of compensation included in their contracts. They can also get syndication fees since Glee hit the syndication milestone last season.

 

 

Kerry Washington is an award winning actress in a critical and ratings darling and is earning a lot less per episode than Lea.

 

Kerry is said to earn $150,000 per episode, nearly twice as much as Lea . Really, Lea is towards the bottom of the scale for a now well-known name 

Edited August 31, 2014 by fakeempress

[camussie]

We should take the comparisons to half hour 3 camera (in studio) sitcoms out of it because they are much cheaper to produce and generally do much better in syndication.  Same with long running procedurals because, while they too are expensive to produce (although still less than Glee, at least Glee of season 2) they also are cash cows when it comes to syndication.  Glee has been in syndication for one year and I can say in my market it went from airing 2 episodes at 7 central Saturday to 2 episodes at midnight Saturday.  And that was on a Fox owned station.  That tells me in my market, at least, the show isn't doing well in syndication.  My gut is my market isn't unique in that respect.

 

I think the best comparisons are what was Katie Holmes making at the end of Dawson's Creek?  That was rumored to be $175K.  Or how much were Blake Lively and Leighton Meister making at the end of Gossip Girls?  Those were rumored to be around $75K an episode.  

 

I also think when Lea and the rest of the cast of relative unknowns started out they were getting fairly compensated if the show was a standard drama.  Where they all got shafted was not getting a piece of the song sales or tour proceeds.  Of course they all re-negotiated for higher but it could be argued as the lead Lea should be being paid even more per episode.  

 

One interesting thing to note.  I was listening to a podcast where Aisha Tyler interviewed Jenna Ushkowitz and apparently in TV it is standard practice for actors to sign their contracts before their network test.   I assume that is standard practice so that a relative unknown doesn't get leverage right off the bat.

Edited August 31, 2014 by camussie

[Hana Chan]

Christina Hendricks was one of the female leads on Mad Men and earned 100 grand for the final season. Now I'll grant that she wasn't quite at the level that Lea was in regards to position, but she was a major female character in an ensemble cast. In a show that has garnered numerous Emmy awards during its run and was a major ratings and critical success (Hendricks herself was nominated for an Emmy five times which beats out Lea's award nominations for Glee). She also has an established film and tv career prior to Mad Men.

 

I cited Robin Williams earlier because while his TV show didn't air for long, he is an Oscar winning actor (as well as a multiple Oscar nominee) who has a long track record of being a very profitable and bankable actor. If there is an actor who should command a huge payday, Williams would have been at the top of the list but his pay per episode wasn't much more than Lea's.

 

We can go in circles around this for ages. The reason that most of the young cast didn't command the money that more established actors can in highly profitable shows is because most of them were unknowns when they were cast. That automatically reduces what they can demand in compensation compared to what other more established actors can. For many, Glee was their first TV role. I have no doubt that if Lea signs for another TV project after Glee that she can demand a great deal more, but in the entertainment business a new face just can't demand the  big bucks until they've proven themselves. Unfortunately for the Glee cast, by the time they proved that they were deserving of high pay (especially Lea, who was the female lead and Chris who earned some of the most important awards and nominations), Glee was already on a downward rating slide and they were already tied into their contracts. They could have gone on strike if they felt that their compensation was unfair in relation to the shows profits (other casts have done so), but Glee was already fading at that stage. Glee has been invaluable for Lea in exposing her to a wider audience who might never have heard of her otherwise and if she plays her cards right, can provide enough a boost to launch the kind of mainstream career she wants.

[caracas1914]

Christina Hendricks was one of the female leads on Mad Men and earned 100 grand for the final season.

Mad Men is not  a major prime time network show which across the board  generally pays more than cable shows.   Plus Christina is arguably the 3rd or 4th lead of that show.  Lea clearly is not.

 

I cited Robin Williams earlier because while his TV show didn't air for long, he is an Oscar winning actor (as well as a multiple Oscar nominee) who has a long track record of being a very profitable and bankable actor. If there is an actor who should command a huge payday, Williams would have been at the top of the list but his pay per episode wasn't much more than Lea's.

Robin Williams probably got the highest starting salary for any actor on a freshman, unproven first year  prime time Network TV show.  To compare the salary of a first year of series to that of someone in the 6th year of a series is beyond stretching.  Like I mentioned before,   if the tragic events of Robin's suicide and the cancellation of his show hadn't occurred, it's easy  to envision that by even  a fifth season Robin would have been making 5-10 times what Lea is making currently.

 

We can go in circles around this for ages.

Actually we are  not going around in circles.  The  premise is that Lea is underpaid relative to industry standards now for  being  the lead character/actor in a prime time network series in it's 6th season.    No examples have been supplied to refute that premise.

Edited August 31, 2014 by caracas1914

[fakeempress]

 

I cited Robin Williams earlier because while his TV show didn't air for long, he is an Oscar winning actor (as well as a multiple Oscar nominee) who has a long track record of being a very profitable and bankable actor. If there is an actor who should command a huge payday, Williams would have been at the top of the list but his pay per episode wasn't much more than Lea's.

 

As any actor, Robin Williams earned what he could negotiate for, which was over twice as much as Lea, and his show lasted only one season before it was cancelled. But why do we compare him to Lea when we should probably compare him to the half-hour comedy actors, where the $1M per episode fees happen to be - but he didn't get even close to that. I think we should compare Lea to the average or the typical range. There is a typical range between $100,000 and 350,000 where most leads of the major (and year-on-year renewed) TV shows fall in, if you look at the actual figures. Neither Lea nor anyone else from the regular cast had cracked that in 2013. Lea may have gotten a bit more since then but not much more than a prenegotiated annual bump. , 

Edited August 31, 2014 by fakeempress

[penpen]

Actually we are  not going around in circles.  The  premise is that Lea is underpaid relative to industry standards now for  being  the lead character/actor in a prime time network series in it's 6th season.    No examples have been supplied to refute that premise.

That's because it's an already cancelled show with what's likely a slashed to bare bones budget that'll be lucky to even air because the network was foolish enough to order two seasons at once. There's nothing to compare it to. Why would anybody pay her big bucks for this? The goodness of their heart? She's on her first tv contract. It's amazing this season is even happening after how the last one tanked. Nobody's getting giant raises to industry standards for successful six season shows here. It's a dead show limping along to the bitter end. I just hope it doesn't destroy anybody's career along the way. There's porn less embarrassing than the latest spoilers sound.

[caracas1914]

It's a dead show limping along to the bitter end.

 

Nobody denies that.   However FOX claimed that FRINGE lost money for them the last few years and apparently Joshua Jackson made over 100 K per episode.

 

I'm not arguing any of them deserve more for their actual work on Glee (fuck, teachers and plumbers should get paid more) I'm saying Lea is on the lower end of the spectrum as far as pay goes.  That's all. 

[Hana Chan]

Joshua Jackson also had a long TV and film career before he was cast in Fringe. That's really what it boils down to. This is Lea's first job in this field. There is no business in the world that is going to pay a brand new face at the same level as another person who'd been in the field for years. It just doesn't happen. It doesn't matter how profitable Glee was (and let's be honest, it hasn't been all that successful since season 3 ended). Lea wasn't even coming to Glee as an internationally known stage or film star. 99% of Glee's audience never heard of Lea before Glee and her pay reflected that fact. No one knew if Glee would be successful (or as successful as it was), or if Lea would be successful in the part. Again, her contract was in line with the cautious expectations that you would expect from a studio towards a new actress.

 

Glee was Lea's chance to prove that she could be a marketable TV actor and she accomplished that rather successful. So next time around, now that she's a known quantity to a TV audience, she'll command more money. But for her first show? It just was never going to happen.

[Pink ranger]

Glee is also a huge ensemble show which has had 24 series regulars come and go. You can't compare the casts salaries to those shows that have only about 5 principle characters that carry their series for the duration of its run.

[caracas1914]

Again, her contract was in line with the cautious expectations that you would expect from a studio towards a new actress.

 

 

Translation:  You still  can't still come up with a single  example of a  lead actor of a prime time network TV show in it's 6th season making less than Lea Michelle reportedly makes on Glee.

 

Glee is also a huge ensemble show which has had 24 series regulars come and go

 

Most of which were jettisoned by season 5.

Edited August 31, 2014 by caracas1914

[Hana Chan]

There is no other lead actress in a TV series that doesn't have a long list of TV/Film credits on their CV to compare Lea to. She is in a rather unique situation so you cannot compare what she is earning to someone who's been doing TV or film for years. You keep trying to compare what a new actress who has never worked in TV before to those who've got real track records and it doesn't work. A new doctor hired at a hospital just out of medical school is not going to earn the same as someone hired who's got a 20 year career behind him, even if that doctor just graduated from Harvard.

 

This was Lea's first acting job outside of Broadway. No one knew if it would work. So she was not going to be paid the same as someone who's CV they could look at and make a more qualified assessment. Thinking that she is going to earn the same as someone like Sandra Oh, who had a long line of TV and film projects before she got signed to Grey's Anatomy or Amy Poehler who did years of film and TV before getting signed to Parks and Recreation is pointless because she doesn't have the same experience background that they do. It doesn't matter in the end that Lea was "the lead". She was an inexperienced actress (as far as TV goes) in her first part. So she's not going to pull in the same amount of money, even six seasons in. Show me another actress in a lead role in her first TV acting job earning more than Lea and then we'll have something to talk about. Otherwise this is comparing apples to oranges.

Edited August 31, 2014 by Hana Chan

[Pink ranger]

There isn't a comparable show that has had as large a cast and that have seen shifts in its hierarchy over the years as Glee as . While I don't know the exact figures I think that Darren is about Leas equal now in terms of song allocation/screen time for example . Lea isn't like Zooey Deschanel who is THE central lead of new girl.

[caracas1914]

You have a lot of actors who are far better known than Lea and who have much longer records of work and who's shows are at least as successful as Glee (in longevity and rating) and are earning less than Lea is.

 

Still haven't shown one example yet, it is that simple.

 

 

Show me another actress in a lead role in her first TV acting job earning more than Lea and then we'll have something to talk about.

 

Check first statement.  Compare with second.  Changing the parameters.

Edited August 31, 2014 by caracas1914

[tom87]

Translation:  You still  can't still come up with a single  example of a  lead actor of a prime time network TV show in it's 6th season making less than Lea Michelle reportedly makes on Glee.

 

I can think of someone who is in the 6th year of a tv show, had no real tv experience before this thier first main tv role and makes the same as Lea and is more a lead in name then screen time or work load.    Matthew Morrison.

 

Lea isn't like Zooey Deschanel who is THE central lead of new girl.

 

But it is the Rachel Berry Show don't you know :)  . 

 

Being factious.

[fakeempress]

 

I can think of someone who is in the 6th year of a tv show, had no real tv experience before this thier first main tv role and makes the same as Lea and is more a lead in name then screen time or work load.    Matthew Morrison.

Matt's billing as the lead actor on Glee matters a lot here. The billing and the per episode rate don't match 1:1 to screentime and workload, although generally leads get the bulk of exposure. So I'd say the basic comparison of them being new to primetime network TV, getting billed as leads and earning the same rate makes sense. 

 

Since Fringe was brought up, Anna Torv who is comparable to Lea in that she was totally new to US network TV and billed as lead actress, earned less than JJ (not sure if that differential was kept till the end but was true for around 2010). She was also at less than Kirk Acevedo before he got exited from the show. Of course, as Hana Chan said, JJ had much more credits and name recognition (as Jane on Glee) than Torv so he got a better deal than her to start with. It's not one factor (e.g. workload) that determines what the actor gets paid.  

Edited August 31, 2014 by fakeempress

[Pink ranger]

Heck You could argue that Jacob Artist and Melissa Benioist where lead actors in s4 in terms of screen time.