Keanu Reeves Got 1.3 Million Just For The Film Using His Name
Yes. It is true. Talk about windfall.
share[deleted]
MovieChat Forums > Keanu (2016) Discussion > Keanu Reeves Got 1.3 Million Just For Th...
He voiced the cat, as well.
shareI doubt this film's budget totaled 1.3 million.
It sure doesn't look like it, at least.
They should have spent more on a better script, including some competent comedy writers, as well as a decent director who would have insisted on better performances, timing/pacing, a more consistent tone, etc.
> Yes. It is true. Talk about windfall.
I'm too lazy to do the research, but I don't believe it. Reeves makes plenty of money elsewhere to bother demanding that much money for a role that could be offered to anybody moderately famous. I can see him doing it for free just for fun.
--
What Would Jesus Do For A Klondike Bar (WWJDFAKB)?
So does a movie named "Matthew" have to pay Matthew Mcconaughey for using his name? Keanu is a name. It can't be legally attributed to Keanu Reeves.
Make no provision for the flesh, to gratify its desires.
Yeah, I'm with you. I don't think there's any way a first name, on its own like that, could possibly be "copyrighted" or "trademarked" (or whatever), which is what the case would be if they had to pay to use that name. That would result in a bunch of random "Keanus" all over the world (assuming there are several) having a legit claim as well... and then every movie, show, song, album title, etc, that have some random name in them, would be fair game for people with that same name to go after, to try to get paid (and the way *beep* sue EVERYBODY these days, I'm sure they'd definitely be pursuing these cases, given the amount of money and notoriety that would be involved). That would be a clusterfck. If Keanu Reeves made money from this movie, which I'm assuming he did if he voiced the cat (even though it was only about 3 or 4 sentences), I'm pretty sure it was all BECAUSE of the fact he did a cameo, voicing the cat.
share