TIL that instead of taking their usual salaries for ”Twins”, Schwarzenegger and DeVito both agreed with the studio to take 20% of the film’s box office returns which resulted in them receiving the biggest paychecks of their film careers ( movie made $216 million worldwide)

Read more: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twins_(1988_film)

What do you think?

12 Points
Upvote Downvote


Leave a Reply
  1. That seems like a ridiculously high % to offer by the studio unless it was confident the movie would be a complete flop, in which case why even make it in the first place??

  2. I’m sure it often works out for studios to take a calculated or “smart” risk by making deals like this, but man do they sometimes get a stinker of a deal or just plain lose out on money they could have been making by taking a bigger cut of the overall returns.

    Wasn’t giving George Lucas the arrangement he got for Star Wars kind of a case of virtually giving money away to him because they wrongly thought it wouldn’t do that well and it seemed like a good way to keep him happy or short him without actually giving him that much money? Only it turned out they WERE giving him a lot of money basically?

  3. The 80s were weird when it came to going to the movies. I remember seeing ads for this movie. So I wanted to watch it. For whatever reason. I was 8 years old. So my mother dropped my sister and I off at the movie theater, sister was 10, and we got tickets and snacks and watched a movie that I really don’t remember anything about. And we did this for nearly every single big movie. Dropped off, picked up afterwards, didn’t matter what it was as long as it wasn’t rated R

  4. Reading that wiki reminded of their other movie, Junior. I forget how most of it goes but the main plot point is that Danny DeVito gets Arnold pregnant and then hijinks ensue

  5. I have never understood why all actors and studios don’t do this, if you give an actor part of the cut they will really perform and want the film to succeed and make a lot, all those actors who go around to circulate the film while it is theatres making the rounds would be far more motivated if they had a lager stake in the film.

  6. Being a comedy, it _really_ wasn’t expected to do as well as, say, Terminator or anything like that. Sure, they figured it would do _well_, because of both actors being pretty damn popular at the time, but it’s really one movie that did wind up being a genuine “surprise hit”. Especially given the “silly” premise.

  7. Isn’t a fairly routine practice in Hollywood to give someone a cut of the movie’s profits but then cook the books to say that the movie actually made a loss despite performance in the Box Office? I seem to recall that there were a number of authors who were “paid” in that manner for the rights to their creations.

Leave a Reply