Jim Carrey was paid $7 million for the original Dumb and Dumber, while his co-star Jeff Daniels — who shared top billing! — made just $50,000. Carrey wasn’t a big star when Dumb and Dumber went into production in 1994 and the comedy’s total budget was just $16 million — so how did he walk away with...
Actors get paid based on their popularity, or said differently, you get paid shit if you are not known by millions. You can be the worst actor and get paid millions, while the best actor of the century gets paid minimum wage because noone knows about him.
It's a little more complicated than that. Carrey was negotiating for Dumb and Dumber when Ace Ventura hit the box office. By the time the negotiations ended, there wasn't much money left for other actors. But that one movie was really all that he was known for at the time. So it was still a huge risk for a potential flash in the pan.
Daniels wanted to expand his career into comedy, but the producers didn't want him since he wasn't known for comedy. He had done a lot of movies by that point though and was well known, just not for comedy. So they threw him a lowball number to get rid of him. He wasn't suppose to take it.
It was all just really wild timing on Carrey's part and priorities not focused on money on Daniels' part.
You're not missing much. I mean, it's a 20 year gap in their careers. There's a gag earlier in the film where Daniels visits Carrey in a nursing home because he's fallen into a coma for 20 years and then Carrey finally "wakes up" and says it was all a gag. It's almost like a nod to the Andy Kaufman conspiracy theory that he was faking his death as part of an elaborate real life bit.
Chatgpt is in no way shape or form a reliable source of information. The Information provided may be out of date, out of context, or even wildly wrong and you have no way to verify this unless you do the research yourself.
All our current parodies of actual AI are able to do is be very convincing that what they say is true. They don’t know if it’s true, nor are they able to figure that out. They don’t care either. They are just chatbots with bells and whistles.
Do not use them as sources of information, if anything have them give you an answer that you can then use as a starting point to verify their truthfulness.
Your last paragraph is definitely the approach to take, in the same way as using Wikipedia as a collator of primary sources. Github copilot has been pretty good at generating unit tests with full branch coverage, with few manual corrections needed. Since writing test cases typically takes me more than double the time than writing code itself, I'd say it's been pretty great. AI results are as good as the training data and contextual prompting you feed in.
As much as I am a ChatGPT fan, you cannot trust it when it comes down to factual data unless you're using a custom model with a specific knowledgebase.
Oh, interesting. Thank you for the info!
I was going with a general knowledge that the more well known actors get paid more because of their popularity. Seema this one was a different case.
An actor's popularity is dependent on if they have a major role in popular movies, a large social media presence, or things like that. Many people don't exactly care about quality in movies, or the actors ability to act.
There are some great actors we probably never heard of, because they are cast in minor roles, or in movies barely anyone knows about.