Click to Skip Ad
Closing in...

Women Out Earn The Men In Forbes List Of Hollywood's Best Actors For The Buck Led By Emma Stone

by Kevin Jagernauth
January 3, 2014 10:07 AM
  • |

While Hollywood's current formula is focused on the lucrative model of making sequels and reboots, the always difficult to decipher question is figuring who will lead these valuable properties. While the industry continues to present more complex, interesting leading opportunities to men (particularly when it comes to blockbusters), it might be time to change their thinking.

Forbes has dropped their list of Best Actors For The Buck and the top four slots are dominated by women, who make up half of the total list. Yep, according to their stats, Emma Stone, Mila Kunis, Jennifer Lawrence and Natalie Portman offer the best return on investment for the moviemakers, even if the number crunching doesn't quite add up.

The financial make came up with the figures by averaging box office returns the the actor's last three films, including DVD sales data and then running it against their salary. But let's face it, no one is viewing Taylor Lautner as a bankable investment, he was just lucky enough to be in the "Twilight" movies and have a bit role in "Grown Ups 2." But as a loose window into smart choices and savvy casting that has paid off, it's interesting stuff.

Check the top ten below. The figure beside each name refers the return per dollar spent on salary.

Hollywood's Best Actors For The Buck
1. Emma Stone $80.70
2. Mila Kunis $68.70
3. Jennifer Lawrence $68.60
4. Natalie Portman $31.30
5. Dwayne Johnson $31.10
6. Daniel Craig $25.60
7. Russell Crowe $25.60
8. Kristen Stewart $25
9. Robert Pattinson $23.50
10. Taylor Lautner $21.40

Free Indie Movies and Documentaries    


  • KB | January 26, 2014 11:41 PMReply

    Oh please. Twilight did not profit more when Taylor got the "heaviest" screen time. New Moon was the worst. I went to sleep trying to watch Taylor horrible acting. He is a bore. If his next movie does not do good, then he is finish.

  • Jessie | January 18, 2014 4:03 PMReply

    Abduction, Taylor's "bomb" in 2011, had $82M wordwide sales with a $35M budget. Stop picking on the guy.

  • Caro | January 17, 2014 3:13 AMReply

    I love Taylor Lautner and I think he was amazing as Jacob Black! He was wonderful as both fun loving friend Jake and tortured would be lover Jacob! I also thought he and Kristen Stewart had better chemistry than she and Pattinson did! I think Taylor just needs the right role to shine! I'd love to see he and Kristen make another film together...maybe a remake of or something similar to "The Sure Thing". I think that would be a hit!

  • movieloverusa | January 6, 2014 8:53 AMReply

    agree that lautner made the twilight franchise blow up... run the stats off boxoffice mojo for each film... two highest grossing flicks in that series were the ones where t. lautner had the heaviest screen time...coincidence, not!

  • Cross | January 6, 2014 4:11 AMReply

    Doesn't this list essentially shows that women are underpaid?

  • Noah | January 4, 2014 3:32 AMReply

    c`mon,bro.incorrectly blame Lautner for the failures, and that he will not have success in the one knows how things will pit each of them.
    he is the youngest of them, he is still ahead.
    i mean,Lautner is definitly hardworking guy & not afraid of difficulties, and he is in good shape,tho.

  • Nicole | January 3, 2014 1:15 PMReply

    This totally makes since because there are more women in america than there are men, so women are going to be on the top of the list because fellow women want to see films with women as the leads. When is Hollywood going to realize this and stop just catering to men?

  • caro | January 3, 2014 11:07 AMReply

    wait! Emma Stone was in a movie this year???
    were Crowe and Craig the leads of what movie ???
    in what movie was Mila Kunis the lead???

    the one who are understandable are The Rock and Lawrence! Portman is "the girl" in THOR 2

  • ruth | January 3, 2014 10:46 AMReply

    *he was just lucky enough to be in the "Twilight" *Robert Pattinson and Kristen Stewart too,dude.

  • J | January 4, 2014 3:01 AM

    Eh, Kristen Stewart was in a ton of indies before twilight and while I don't care for Pattinson he's landing some decent roles. they definitely have way more of a future than Lautner

  • lol | January 3, 2014 5:19 PM

    Really?They made those movies.they were able to make a blockbuster from almost indie budget(first Twilight has $37 mln budget) movie and turn it into worldwide phenomenon.

  • CB | January 3, 2014 10:11 AMReply

    Too bad Emma Stone has no talent.

  • @LOL | January 4, 2014 2:11 AM

    so what?
    if not Jacob, not that damn triangle, you would not have seen the billions in profits.

  • - | January 3, 2014 10:46 AM

    "She hasn't been in any very important, high-brow indie pictures, therefore she's worthless. HMPH!"
    She pretty clearly has talent, you shrub. Go watch Easy A, Crazy Stupid Love and The Help. She's not the best actress of her age range (Lawrence probably is), but she's pretty easily one of them.

Email Updates