Read an article that stated that Chris Lee was #1. Is that true? More than Richard Burton? I find that hard to believe.
If so, wonder how much Chris got for returning to a role he wanted to avoid?
Where did you read that? Sounds like total rubbish to me. He was a star indeed but there is no way his fee would have been more than the likes of Caine, Burton or Connery for instance. In 1967 Sean Connery was being paid probably twice as much as the production for 1 Hammer film.
shareConnery got 500k for Tball and 1.1 mill for DAF.....I doubt Lee got anything similar.
shareMuch as I like and admire Christopher Lee, he does talk a lot of crap, and I wouldn't be surprised if this claim actually came from him. I'm not suggesting anything bad about him -- maybe he just gets over-enthusiastic -- but he tends to spout hyperbole and make gratuitous sweeping claims that just can't be backed up by the facts. (Listen to his interviews and commentary on the collector's edition of The Wicker Man to hear what I mean.)
You might very well think that. I couldn't possibly comment.
Lee was undoubtedly paid more than anyone else in the cast but the idea that he was the highest paid actor in the UK in the 1960s is absurd as everyone else has pointed out.
A document in the Hammer collection in the BFI library shows that the total cost of DPoD and Rasputin combined (the films were shot back-to-back with most of the same cast singing one contract) was about £230k. That's everything for two films. Lee's share of that was probably £10-£15k at the most for both films which was a nice sum of money to be sure especially since many of the other actors would only be getting about £250-£300 per week or less. But a lot lot less than really big stars like Connery, Burton, Bogarde Laurence Harvey and Caine (after Ipcress File).