Kristen Stewart. 22, named “the highest paid actress in Hollywood” by Forbes

I keep telling you, Hollywood is going to make Kristen Stewart out to be the next Angelina Jolie. Megan Fox’s attempts were a bust. Zoe Saldana was a non-starter. But Kristen has the staying power, and she incites controversy and fan flame-wars like no one else save Angelina. And now Kristen is even taking over one of Angelina’s old positions: that of “the highest-paid actress in Hollywood.” Forbes released their list of “Highest Paid Actresses” yesterday, and Kristen is positioned at the top – above such actresses as (in descending order): Cameron Diaz, Sandra Bullock, Angelina, Charlize Theron, Julia Roberts, Sarah Jessica Parker, Meryl Streep, Kristen Wiig, and Jennifer Aniston. Incidentally, Kristen is the only actress on the Top Ten who is under the age of 30. It’s a brand new Hollywood (except not really)!

Studios are notoriously stingy when it comes to paying young actors for the first film in a planned franchise. Forget about the $10 million they would have had to shell out to get a big name — an up-and-comer is lucky to get $800,000. That changes dramatically when it comes to the third and fourth films in a series. Suddenly, the star becomes indispensable and the studio has to pay up. That’s why Kristen Stewart has vaulted to the top of our annual list of the highest-paid actresses in Hollywood.

At this point, could anyone else play Bella Swan in Twilight? Probably not; if the studio tried to switch in another actress, fans would revolt. So for the last two Twilight films, Stewart has been able to demand an estimated $12.5 million per film, plus a share of the profits.

Her two co-stars, Robert Pattinson and Taylor Lautner, get paid the same, but Stewart earned more than them this year because of Snow White and the Huntsman. Stewart’s earnings between May 2011 and May 2012 totaled $34.5 million, helping her rank 43rd on our Celebrity 100 list. (The list measures a combination of money and fame.)

At 22, Stewart is the youngest woman on our list by 16 years. The next youngest is Kristen Wiig who is 38. Last year Stewart ranked 5th on our list of the Highest-Paid Actresses tied with Julia Roberts. This year Roberts ranked 6th.

Women are still paid less than men in the movie business. The 10 actresses who make up our list earned a total $200 million compared to the $361 million brought in by our top 10 men. To determine who the highest-paid actresses in Hollywood are, we considered upfront pay, profit participation, residuals, endorsements and advertising work. We talked to manager, agents, lawyers and other in-the-know folks to come up with our estimates. We did not deduct for things like agent fees or the expenses related to being a celebrity.

[Via Forbes]

Damn, that’s a lot of money per lip-bite and eye-roll! Still, I’m kind of surprised that Kristen’s flat-rate for the Breaking Dawn films was only $12.5 million – which is probably why she’s making so much more in the backend. Other stars might have asked for the money upfront, in a flat-out payment of $20 million or even $25 million for the sequels. But Kristen must have a really smart business manager to get a backend deal, because everyone knew after Twilight and New Moon that the franchise was only going to expand even further. Anyway… I’m kind of proud of Kristen. I’m glad that such a young woman is having such success in Hollywood, and that success hasn’t made her a total mess.

Photos courtesy of WENN.

Related stories

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

254 Responses to “Kristen Stewart. 22, named “the highest paid actress in Hollywood” by Forbes”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Maguita says:

    Remember when our parents used to shake their heads at those boys and girls we called superstars?

    I am shaking my head.

    However, in her defense, she was quite good in Adventureland and The Runaways. Even better in the Runaways actually.

    • Kaye says:

      She and Dakota Fanning were excellent in the Runaways.

    • someone says:

      I agree with you on Runaways, but I thought she was way too twitch lip-bitey in asventureland.. I understand some of it was because the personality of the character but I hardly saw a transformation. she seems to always play some degree of herself. but congrats anyways to her :)

    • Lise says:

      I can’t stand her but she was great in the Kerouac movie

    • Tiffany says:

      THIS is what we really should be shaking our heads at:
      “Women are still paid less than men in the movie business. The 10 actresses who make up our list earned a total $200 million compared to the $361 million brought in by our top 10 men.”

      • Maguita says:

        Ah, that damn unbreakable glass ceiling.

        However, do we have the age average of both top 10 genders? It makes a difference. Mostly actors would be offered roles with much younger, lower-paid actresses, more often.

        This would explain part of the salary dissonance. But I am convinced, it would not be enough though, but the percentage of discrepancy between genders might be lowered.

      • Tiffany says:

        Age does have something to do with it, but women get the short end of the stick so frequently that it doesn’t even out at all. Here are more stats from the Dec. 2011 Hollywood Reporter (stats are from the year 2009-2011)

        * Actresses aged 21-30 make 11% more than actors that age, but men 31-40 make 44% more, aged 41-50 they make 64% more, aged 51-60 they make 74% more than females.

        * More than 50% of movie tickets are sold to women (so we fund the industry).

        *Only 12% of tv shows were directed by women. Fewer than 20 of the 130 first-time episodic tv directors of 2009 & 2010 were women.

        *In movies directed by men, less than 1/3 of the characters were female. In movies directed by women, 47% of the characters were female.

        * When women write screenplays, 40% of characters are female. When all screenwriters are male, they have only 29% female characters. Female writers make about $14,000 less per screen play, and $10,000 less per television episode.

      • Maguita says:

        @Tiffany – Thank you for the numbers!

        Before getting to interpretation though, the age discrepancy I was talking about wouldn’t have evened out the numbers, but would have rather reduced it significantly. An average gender-colleague discrepancy is usually between 15 and 24%, depending on the industry. In your first findings, the divergence between the top 10 was 33%!

        On to the interpretation – See how women were really doing between 2009-11:

        * Actress salaries ages 21-30, 11% higher: That really surprised me. But then again, it is an industry that thrives on youth, and we often see much younger women paired with much older men.

        This also means that more than possibly, K. Stewart made much more than R. Pattinson. Which makes me happy.
        Because it tells me that the new generation is demanding more than equal pay, HIGHER pay. It reminded me of all those Ted C. blinds about young actresses being b*tchy, and making big salary demands. Good for them!

        * But then age bracket 31-40, men make 44% more: we know men between ages 31-40 are paired with much younger actresses on screen. And this means that the men 31-40, paired with the women 21-30, could making as much as 33% more. Assuming without the actual $$ though.

        However, there is another factor as well – Men start taking more producer credits than women. Meaning, taking bigger control over their career. Not many actresses have production companies, the exceptions are Witherspoon, Aniston, Roberts. But they are the ones getting a much higher pay bracket.

        Does that mean that men have an easier time getting their production companies off the ground and rolling? Do men have an easier time producing, and being credited for, making movies (Channing Tatum comes to mind), while women mostly rather get only actor credits, and are not that much into the process of getting a movie made?

        Maybe more women try to get their production companies off the ground without much success – because of gender oriented industry?

        Could be a combination of all.

        * The sh-ttiest of all. Actors between ages 41-50 they make 64% more, and ages 51-60 make 74% more: THIS BLOWS MY MIND. Are you telling me that the Merryl Streeps make LESS than the common Matthew McConaugheys???

        Of course, it may have to do again with production credits, but 64%-74% is mind-blowing. Yes, we’ve established the youth obsessed orientation, but does it also mean that older women are just grateful for getting a job after a certain age, that they accept much lower pay? And yes, much less interesting characters are written for older women, so they are actually being paid for secondary or tertiary roles in movies. Less paying roles, naturally.

        This discrepancy must have a bigger impact because of TV shows. How many times have you heard of a woman making as much money per episode as a man? We always hear of the Charlie Sheens, Kelsey Grammars, etc. making outrageous amounts per episode. The only women that come to mind, and help me here people if you’ve heard better, are the ladies from friends, where the whole cast stuck together and demanded equal pay, and the ladies from Desperate Housewives (Wysteria Lane, not reality TV). And yes, you do hear about those Real Housewives… But nothing that equals the Ashton Kutchers. For shame!

        Then again, this explains why women are not getting better high-paying TV roles:

        *Only 12% of tv shows were directed by women, women get $14,000 less per screenplay, and $10,00 less per episode: This always made me wonder… Do women in director, writer, screenplay, positions still go through the casting couch??? Just a weird thought.

        Outside of that regular TV realm, there is HBO. HBO has some amazing pool of actresses that they use for their series. Like Laura Dern in Enlightened, Julia Louis-Dreyfus in Veep, Emily Rossum for Shameless, the Khalese, Sookie (nothing though fantastic about her story lines lately), and the other ladies who regularly appear on many different HBO series.

        I would be absolutely fascinated in finding out about HBO’s actor/actress salary brackets. Is Bill being paid more than Sookie?? Is Eric?? What about the new cast of Girls??? And how many of those episodes are written, directed by women?

        Fingers tingling. Research mode is excited… I think Deadline would have some answers.

        As for more than 50% of movie tickets are sold to women, this means that we pay more than half of our share… Are men becoming lazy bums in the real world, and do not pay as much for their ladies as before? Or more women are going to the movies than men?

        Which doesn’t explain while male-oriented sh-tty movies, like the Expendables (how appropriate), are still being financed. The industry hadn’t caught on that it should be making movies to please its bigger customer.

        But then again, aren’t we used to working harder for much less ladies.

        Thank you again Tiffany for the numbers. I am enlightened!

      • Another Nina says:

        Thank you Maguita and Tiffany – it’s a fascinating research and commentary.
        Couple of comments:1) I don’t think that a 33 pct makes a math sense since 44 pct and 11 pct came from different underlying bases. 2) more or less every meaningful actress has a production company these days, including Charlize and camD. 3) correct me if I’m wrong, but becoming a producer in the movie might have a negative connotation for an actor – meaning you have to invest in your own mOvie because noone else will. Lautner comes up as an apt example. 4) not all writers and directors are stunning, so I would assume it’s not obligatory to pass casting couch but then who knows..

      • Maguita says:

        Excellent @Nina!

        For 1) it was a huge assumption on my part, based primarily on the data at hand. That is why I’ve said at the end “Assuming without the actual $$ though”.

        2 & 3) Yes, a LOT of actresses start also their production companies, but you don’t hear about their success the same way you hear about the men’s. Better publicity team (Channing Tatum)? Or higher success and longevity for the men in production? As for the losses of being a producer, obviously, the gains are much more worth it. Simply because they are often based on GLOBAL revenue. And what does not necessarily work in the US, at times immensely succeeds in other markets. European or Asian (first such case I heard of was Keven Costner’s Waterworld).

        And finally, writing/directing: From what I know, writing for TV series is mostly unionized. Meaning, equal pay. Right?

        So, women are not good enough? Not enough Miss BossyPants? Or is that male-driven industry by-passing union regulations on the sly, and not hiring equally talented women, and/or giving them equal recognition and pay.

        As for movies, Hollywood prestigious awards should start setting up standards:

        Why not create male/female categories in writing and directing, same as in acting? Best Female Movie Director. Best Female Movie Script. It could definitely be a start in promoting girl-power, or at least, girl-equal opportunity, in the industry.

        What do you think?

  2. Diane says:

    I don’t get it.

    • Fue McCormick says:

      … +1

    • CTgirl says:

      Highest paid actress? Not really. More like highest paid snarling stoner with questionable hygiene and poor posture.

      • shaboo says:

        that’s incredibly harsh for no reason.I don’t see anything that suggests she has questionable hygiene

      • CTgirl says:

        @Shaboo, Really? KS admits to walking around with dirty hair, her hair frequently looks dirty on the red carpet (and who would style their hair to look dirty?), and everyone has seen her wearing those ratty tennis shoes without socks. Ratty tennis shoes + bare feet = funk

      • shaboo says:

        tennis shoes without socks = normal. I don’t think her hair looks dirty and if she’s admitted walking around with unwashed hair sometimes that’s normal too. Just sounds self deprecating to me.

    • A says:

      Could someone remind me why she’s a famous actress again?

      I just. Don’t. Get. It.

  3. normades says:

    Yup KStew is here for good.

    • Mia 4S says:

      Considering 90+% of that money is Twilight? The jury is still out. The key thing about the other women on the list is that they are high earners consistently without a franchise.

      • Kim says:

        ITA Emma Watson from Harry Potter was #1 too a couple years ago

      • Emma says:

        Articles like this forget that Emma Watson was #1 for 2 years when when she was 19 and 20 and is in the Guinness Book of World Records. It’s no big deal. When you have a franchise that’s how it goes and Emma Watson is much less a mess than Kristen Stewart. Real staying power will have to be achieved outside of a franchise.

      • normades says:

        Yes but SWATH will probably seal her as “bankable” and she is getting great reviews for On the Road.

        She is getting so many offers she won’t be dunzo for a lonnngggg time.

  4. Meggie says:

    I still haven’t made up my mind on her.
    It could be that she’s so polarizing for most people-they either love her or hate her and I’m taking my time forming an opinion or maybe it’s the fact that I’ve never made it through one of her movies without falling asleep so I don’t know how good of an actress she is/isn’t.
    Now as an insomnia healer she has my total support….

    • Amelia says:

      I suppose she could be Hollywood’s next big thing, simply because, like you said “she’s so polarising”. If you look at the threads on here about her, they nearly always get well over 100 comments. I wouldn’t say she’s the next Angelina since AJ established herself as a reputable actress in Girl Interrupted before she became a big tabloid/franchise thing with Lara Croft. We can only wait and see if Kristen does it the other way around.
      But they both definitely stir up a lot of controversy, AJ less so lately. Who knows. Kristen may very well be the paps go-to girl when it comes to controversy. I’ve seen several symptoms of foot-in-mouth disease when it comes to interviews. Remember the ‘weirdo, creative valley-girl who smokes pot’ one?

  5. Talie says:

    At Cannes, you could see a change in her, too. She seemed more confident and was really owning her status. It’s surprising someone as awkward as she was found this kind of success, but good for her. Whoever advises her has been wise.

    • Polica says:

      She was booed in Cannes but the media isn’t reporting on that since they are busy keeping her publicist happy.

      Without nepotism she would be working at Burger King. Her parents work in HW and her godparents are bigwigs at a film studio.

      • jess says:

        They only booed her because she wouldnt take a pic without the cast. She not the star of OTR anyway that would be rude. They also booed her at the Cosmopolis premiere too cause she wouldnt sign autographs. Its tacky to go to someone elses premiere and sign autographs as if it were all about you.

      • lisa says:

        No one is reporting it because it’s false. The whole cast was booed for not signing autographs (they were behind schedule). Only her haters keep reposting this on blogs hoping to convince people it’s true. She got great press out of Cannes due to her performance in On the Road.

        And I didn’t know that her parents, two crew members = power in Hollywood. That’s nonsense. Kristen got roles because directors and casting people like her. Way before Twilight happened. People need to drop this excuse.

      • tania says:

        That particular conspiracy theory is really irrational – the thought the media wouldn’t “report” on Kristen being completely dejected at Cannes for being sulky is a joke. Her media image is that of sullen crankiness. Of course they’d report on that.

      • lola says:

        Polica–nepotism is hardly helpful in Hollywood when your dad is a stage manager and your mom is a script advisor. lol Those are super low on the totem pole in terms of relevance and influence. In fact they are not even on the totem pole – unless she like wanted to be George Lopez’s gopher or something.

      • vic says:

        Living well truly is the best revenge.

  6. Alexis says:

    Let’s be honest. Forbes and all these lists are a joke.

  7. RocketMerry says:

    She looks really good in those last pictures, her make up was flawless!

    As for the Jolie comparison… well, Angie wasn’t much of an actress when she started either, and look where she is now. I say Kris can do it.

    • maemay says:

      Angie actually was pretty good, starring in acclaimed movies such as Gia and the story about that Wallace guy that was shot.

  8. says:

    And if they did a list of “most talented actresses”, KStew would be nowhere on it.

    • Maria_Spain says:

      When i read this , I was like WHY??????
      she has the same face in every fckng movie!!!

      • tania says:

        is that really that unique though-doing the same schtick in most movies? I mean, Emma Stone, as loveable as she is, plays the same girl essentially in every movie too. Her particular schtick is just more likeable. I think Kristen Stewart needs to work on her acting for sure, but she’s not exactly alone in this department for her peer group.

      • Johanna says:

        Yes! Your comment definitely needed to be said. I adore Emma Stone but I too think she plays the same role in each film she’s in. They both need to fully develop their acting chops. Emma has a chance but this chick… Who knows?

      • EmmaStoneWannabe says:

        @ Tania – Just curious if you thought Emma was the “same” in ‘The Help’ and ‘Easy A?’ I found there to be no similar “schtick” between those two characters in particular.

  9. Cathy says:

    I like the dress she’s wearing, but the length could be a wee bit shorter, maybe knee length.

  10. NeNe says:

    WTF!!!! Something is seriously wrong. Kristen, as the highestest paid actress?!? I find that hard to believe. Then again, who knew those low life Jersey Shore a-holes made as much money as they did. I just don’t get it. Things that make you go hmmmmmmmmmm

    • Agnes says:

      Seriously. It’s upsetting. Normal people can’t find jobs, and these people make insane amounts of money for consistently sucking.

      • lisa says:

        The studio has made billions off the Twilight franchise. Why shouldn’t its stars be paid their share? She doesn’t get much money from other roles (she even took a big paycut to do OTR because they had a small budget). Franchise stars get paid big because the movies generate a lot of money.

      • moonriver says:

        I think that the point is the usefulness of these people (Jersey shore Guidos and vacuous billion dollar franchises) compared to the usefulness in society of individuals that are unable to find work. Kristen Stewart and Jersey shore do nothing positive for my life. doctors, teachers, maintenance men, plumbers, electricians, cashiers, the guy picking up trash at the park. these are people helpful to me. real people that make society function. and they can’t find jobs. it sucks. sure, if she works, she deserves her cut. but her work does so little good in the grand scheme of things, imho, that her exorbitant pay is unwarranted. the world wouldn’t cease to exist without her, twilight , and movie stars/basketball players, etc.

      • Henry says:

        @ moonriver: ITA!!

  11. sup says:

    why? is it her groundbreaking acting talent? or her incredibly good looks? or her most charming personality? still think they could have found a better actress who possessed many or all of the above qualities! and i’m sure another actress would have been far more grateful for what she got

    • Ming says:

      Objection your Honour – assumption !

      • sup says:

        oh you know most actors are struggling and nobody else would have whined, moaned and acted childishly, bratty, and idiotically as much as she did. remember how stupid she looked when she gave the press the finger? it’s like, don’t love the job, then quit it. she could afford to. many child actors or celeb kids have changed their careers. got successful at school and stayed away from hollywood. she could stop being a celeb if she wanted but that’s not what she wants. she’s secretly very happy about being famous, she just thinks acting reluctant about it would make her look like a hipster and therefore deep and a creative artist. that’s what she thinks anyway.

      • lola says:

        Wow, you can read her mind and motivations, sup? You’re a regular Edward Cullen! lol

      • kingkayski says:


      • sup says:

        …and here come the twathards, in support of their ice queen. yawn.

      • lola says:

        sup-you spend more time on kristen threads than twathards, what does that make you definition wise? I mean, you just wrote a half novel about her intentions and motivations, it’s hilarious you try to act like you’re in a position to judge a fan demo that seems to include you in some way.

      • sup says:

        @lola wow your comments keep sounding dumber and dumber each time. i’ve written very few comments about her if ever. there are two posts on her today and i posted only one in each initially however in this one i had to reply to a lot of dumb objections from her peabrained minions. w/e if you don’t want me to post comments, stop replying to me and prompting me to do so, dumbass

      • kingkayski says:

        Which child actors change their careers,Macaulay Culkin and the rest of child actors who goes back and forth to rehab,they fade away,thats what happen to them.I’m not saying that won’t happen to Kristen,but she seems to have a good head on her shoulder at the age of 22 otherwise she wont be on top of Forbes highest paid actess.In all the jobs there’s always part that you don’t like,she happens to not like the intrusion of papz in her like too much,but thats the only part she don’t like otherwise she like to work 6 days/ 16 hrs a day of shooting.And who’s not gonna be happy if you’re so famous and on top of the game,you’d be crazy if you’re not happy about it,the rest of your complain is just the jealousy in you acting out.

      • sup says:

        @kingkayski As difficult as it was to decipher your grammatically unintelligible comment, I believe you have accused me of complaining because of jealousy. I have never given too much thought about whether or not there is anything worthy being envious of, seeing as she’s a joke for an actress. However now that you have mentioned it I wouldn’t mind having even a fraction of her finances. She sure doesn’t deserve it and I have worked in much harder jobs than her, and can barely make ends meet. This is just a passing thought of course, she’s not really subject of envy because there are far more rich people than kstew. And I can’t really waste my time envying every one of them. Which is of course once again leading to the irrelevancy of your comment, only dumb people with little imagination accuse critics of “ur juss being jelly!!1″ I criticized Lindsay Lohan far more than I have ever commented on kstew. Does that make me jealous of her? Idiot

      • ORLY says:

        Kingkayski – Not every child actor ‘fades’ into obscurity. Some actually choose to step away. Since you mentioned Culkin, The Daily Beast has a piece on him that’s a good read. You may want to check it out:

    • Diana says:

      Well, aren’t you a little ball of anger.

      I don’t think calling someone a ‘dumbass’ it’s necesary to get your poitn across. So you hate KS, you’re entitled to your opinion; don’t insult someone just because they’re expressing theirs.

      • sup says:

        I will call a spade a spade. Perhaps she shouldn’t post stupid comments if she doesn’t want to be called on them.

  12. Ming says:

    Thou shalt count to three and the Twi-Hards shalt explode.

    KStew is the Holy Hand Grenade of the internet.

    • Amelia says:

      If that’s a Worms reference then I’m going to start worshipping a false idol and build a shrine for you

      • Ming says:

        All Worms, all Monty Python and the Holy Grail.

        Both should not exist without “The Holy Hand Grenade of Antioch”.

    • sup says:

      funny how they have already exploded before your comment.

  13. Chicagogurl17 says:

    They have to base this on earning potential (i.e. yrs left in the biz)

  14. Nanz says:

    Amazing. That’s all I can muster. Amazing.

  15. Ailine says:

    Not surprising. She starred in blockbuster films where she played the lead role. Money isn’t a sign of merit, merely market demand. It remains to be seen if she has staying power.

  16. marie says:

    Her hair in those pics looks like the Bride of Frankenstein..

    The younger actresses need to get with her management, they’re really good at their job, cause there are far better actresses out there..

    And this is why she will not dog Twilight-she’s still got plenty of money coming to her from that craptastic series..

  17. mln76 says:

    Not a fan but I can’t begrudge her the check…Plus she’s smart to get backend deals…I also really hope she saves her cash because she’s no Jennifer Lawrence I doubt she’ll be on any of these lists in a decade.

    • jess says:

      Sorry but Jennifer is highly overrated. I watched a couple of her movies and she was awful. To be fair, I think all the young actresses out there are pretty bland. Emma, Jennifer, Kristen, they all play the same character in every movie.

      • Maria_Spain says:


      • tania says:

        I think Mia Wasikowska(sp?) can act circles around Jennifer Lawerence. JL was great in that bone whatever movie, but she’s been meh in the other movies I’ve seen too. I think most of the young actresses(Kristen Stewart, Emmat Watson, Emma Stone,Jen Law,etc), do not possess that special quality that made them standouts from the start like a young Kate Winslet or Leo D. did back in the day. They are all pretty flat.

      • mln76 says:

        We are all entitled to our opinions but Jennifer Lawrence already has an Oscar nomination and has already become the highest grossing Female Action star. She gets positive reviews and is bankable that puts her way, way ahead of Kristen and Mia etc.

      • candy_pop says:

        You’re right, Oscar nods are indicators of greater talent. When I see “Oscar Nomineee Jonah Hill” suddenly my respect level for him skyrockets and I must acknowledge that he must be a greater actor that a number of other actors who were never nominated for such a high honor.

      • mln76 says:

        WOW seems I hit a sore spot. I’m just saying-Jennifer is big time and has set a higher mark than K-Stew. Jennifer likely to hit permanent A-list by nature of her better reviews, and bigger box office. Just compare JL’s Oscar nommed film which was little known and low-budgetted and centered on her performance to Jonah Hill’s which was part of a sweep by a better known performer in a mainstream studio hit-whether some of you like her or not she is huge and only going to get bigger. I don’t think K-Stew is likely to disappear forever but I think she’s got limited range and it will be really tough for her to transition into more womanly roles (I know she’s trying but the reaction to most of her work is mixed) whereas Jennifer Lawrence is already doing varied projects and has name recognition.

      • jess says:

        You make no sense. Kristen doesn’t have name recognition? She doesn’t get good reviews? She has received praise for plenty of roles and she does varied projects.

      • mln76 says:

        Kristen DEFINITELY has name recognition but her reviews are mixed (meaning she’s gotten her fair share of glowing and awful reviews) and her non Twilight box office is mixed. On the other hand Jennifer will surely match Kristen in box office after HG is done but she’s already been Oscar nommed and gets amazing reviews across the board (yes it’s arbitrary but these things do matter to studios, directors, etc etc). In terms of industry analysis Jennifer > Kristen all day .

        I’m not a JLaw nut I’m just saying.

      • EmmaStoneWannabe says:

        @ mln76: I completely agree w you. JLaw is actual talent who is here to stay…past her franchise. Winter’s Bone is proof of that. And way past the leagues of both KStew and Jonah Hill.

    • Lilly says:

      i think there’s the disconnect. the comparisons between kristen stewart and jennifer lawrence are so offbase bc jl is trying to be a moviestar. she’s definetly here to play the game. she’ll pose provocatively slathered in oil for esquire to widen her fanbase and promote the “right image.” her approach is much more calculated. she wants to be popular. she wants awards. i think success is defined differently for ks. she names katherine keener as someone whose career she aspires to follow. and if twilight hadn’t turned into a phenomenon that made her an overexposed moviestar, i think she would be well on her way. but the franchise has made her career a lot more tumultuous. she was already getting praise and recognition for into the wild and already attached to on the road, so she would’ve obtained a very different level of fame that probably would have never reached the public, but remained within the industry, getting her solid, established roles, but little media frenzy.

      i think jl is hilarious, but what sours her a little for me is how freely she uses the twilight/hg comparisons to her convenience. like i read some quote from parade(?) that could’ve been handled more diplomatically. it’s a little early in the game to be dissing a peer who also helms a teen franchise. i know her whole thing is that she’s the sexy-redneck-tomboy-with-big-tits who’s unfiltered and outspoken, but it just seems juvenile.

      • kim says:

        She also likes to pee a lot. And talk about peeing a lot.

      • mln76 says:

        OH PUH-LEEZE K-Stew is just as calculated as Jennifer with half the talent (sorry to be blunt but it’s true) if she wanted to be Catherine Keener she wouldn’t have signed on to do the sequels and she wouldn’t have done Snow White etc etc….she turns people off because she plays the game while she doesn’t want to take responsibility for playing the game. And when she has the chance to prove herself in an indie she’s falls flat half the time because she quite frankly isn’t all that (hence the lukewarm reviews for her out of Cannes for On the Road).

      • Lilly says:

        @kim: so do i.

      • lisa says:

        Her reviews were not lukewarm they were pretty good. Considering its a small role she got a lot of attention for it.

        And are you sure you’re not a Jen nut? Could have had me fooled :)

        I don’t know why people make these comparisons. They are different actresses. If you feel so strongly that Jen is so much better than Kristen and her career will be so much bigger and better, well then let it play out and time will certainly tell all. Why be SO defensive about it?

      • Lilly says:

        @lisa: i was just about to ask! i’m dying to see the movie, but i don’t want any spoilers until i do. i think kristen is a lot more exciting outside of twilight, so i’m really looking foward to otr.

        i didn’t think my comment would elicit a puhleez. i didn’t mean to offend any jl fans. i’m not saying she’s sneaky or something for being calculated. she’s the type of actor ppl like for her saviness, but to even compare them is pretty null and void. they’re diff actors who will have very different careers.

      • mln76 says:

        It has nothing to do with JL but to believe that KS is some independent actress on the level of a Catherine Keener or even approaching a Catherine Keener….that will illicit an OH PULEEZE very easily….

  18. lisa says:

    Everything comes in phases. So time will tell. Right now she has her Twilight fanbase and they are very supportive. I think it will depend on what she does after the franchise ends. Not counting SWATH.. because her performance was not well received. But she gets credit for it’s success.

    I don’t see her as the next Angelina. Angie is on the list and she has not worked in front of the camera for 2 years. that is saying something. But like I said these things come and go. I think next year we will see Jennifer Lawrence in the top and Emma Stone after Spiderman. FORBES lists are not what they use to be.

    • gift says:

      @lisa u are absolutely right angie hasn’t acted for 3years now and she is still on the top 5 richest! Wow that speaks volumes. Kstew cannot be the next jolie! She has a lot to learn!

  19. Jackie O says:

    34 million for being a mediocre actress in bad movies. and we wonder why the 99% camp out and protest in the streets.

    • Chatcat says:

      You got it right! To think that KStew and some of those athletes make that kind of money, and those who take care of children or the elderly live just above the poverty line says there is something seriously wrong with the human race.

      • Ming says:

        Every dishwasher and office job employee is free to make billions of money for themselves.

        If they never in their life achieve this goal, I would not simplify things to: The world ain’t fair and never saw my big talent !, because that sounds an awful lot like Squidward from SpongeBob.

      • Chatcat says:

        Ming…”Every dishwasher and office job employee is free to make billions of money for themselves.” Being a wee bit unrealistic now aren’t we? Sorry, I won’t subscribe to your life theory that KStew, for playing make believe for a living, is worth the money she gets. It is because society goes out and pays $11 a pop to watch the crap movies of teen vampires. I understand that is the reality of society, I just think it is inherently f*cked up.

      • Jackie O says:

        @Ming – congratulations. you have bought into the propaganda. the 1% depends on people like you.

      • Ming says:

        Well, you can demonstrate on the streets and call the rules of the market unfair or work hard to improve your life.

      • moonriver says:

        the odds are stacked against some people in our society. some will never have that chance to be a billionaire, and the fact that you think everyone can is both ridiculous and repugnant. how would our economy support an all-billionaire societal structure? it couldn’t. you’re also forgetting psychology: social modeling, conditioning, the effects of poverty. I’m going to be a kindergarten teacher. I will never make a billion dollars. but I will be more useful than Kristen Stewart or kobe Bryant. do I equate to a dish washer who never seized their billion dollar opportunity? some people just want a normal life. smdh.
        excuse all of the lowercase letters–my phone is being a beast.

      • Jo 'Mama' Besser says:

        Remember when Katrina hit and newly-homeless individuals had to set up camp on rooves to escape that waters and pray that someone would see them up there?

        Remember when Speculative Bitcher O’Reily opined that had these people gone to school they would’ve had the money means and opportunity to leave before the danger hit? Is he an oracle? Is he a sybil? Is he credible? Nope. He is, however, the type of privileged person who has decided that his own money makes him an expert on everyone else’s money and life history.

        Are the richest people in the world so wealthy because they’re inherently better and deserve it more than everyone else? Is everyone else lazy, unintelligent and unskilled and therefore expendable? I say ‘no’.

    • Elise says:

      This. And all she does is complain and moan about it. How about finding a terrific financial advisor, making some smart financial decisions and plans to set yourself up for life, and choosing to do something else? Wah wah.

    • Jackie O says:


    • bns says:

      She’s not even mediocre.

  20. Eve says:

    Damn, that’s a lot of money per lip-bite and eye-roll!

    Lip-bit, eye-roll and hair touching.

    Hey, I can do that too! And I’d ask much less for doing so — without complaining so much about my celebrity life…

    • Janet says:

      Hell if I would. If she gets $34 mil for rolling her eyes, I want $35 mil. I roll my eyes better than she does.

    • mayamae says:

      Eve don’t forget to mention your mad hand puppet skills. Don’t sell yourself short now.

      • Eve says:

        Yeah, I know…but I need to have the upper hand during negotiations and asking for less money almost always works 8) .

  21. Eleonor says:

    Kristen is faar from being controversial she only has that bitchy attitude, and people can’t stand her smirkin face. Plus: she is dating Robert Pattinson,and all the twi-hards hate her for this.
    No way she can be Angie. La Jolie was controversial because she was wild, goth, crazy,the blood around her neck!

  22. kingkayski says:

    Kristen may not be the Emma Stone or Jennifer Lawrence of the world when it comes to acting but shes got the looks ,attitude and popularity and above all head on her shoulders to keep up or stay on top of the game.

    • Smiley says:

      What popularity?
      Online votes from crazy Twihards don’t represent the majority of viewers.

      Jennifer and Emma are likable and have shown diverse work.
      Stewart should thank S.Meyer every day of her life.

      • kingkayski says:

        The answer is on the title of this post sweetie,i don’t see Emma or Jennifers name on the top ten list,maybe someday,maybe.

      • courtney says:

        And Kristen has not shown diverse work? Her resume is way more diverse than Emma Stone and Jennifer Lawrence. Seriously people need to get beyond their Twilight hate and actually look at Kristen’s career. Neither Emma or Jennifer could have pulled off some of Kristen’s roles. Emma is great at comedy and quirky characters. Jennifer’s character in THG and Winter’s bone was essentially the same thing. They’re both great but so is Kristen.

    • EmmaStoneWannabe says:

      Pshh are you trolling?? If not, hunnie, please lay off the Vamp infatuation for 5 seconds and reread your post without cracking the slightest smile..yeah those of us not drunk on the Twi koolaid are laughing at your ironic sense of humor.

  23. Polica says:

    The money is for the Twilight films, SWATH has only made 122 mill in the US but cost over 200 mill with the marketing.
    It needs to make close to 500 mill to be a hit.

    Her fans are loud bullies online but have no power in the real world. Lots of people refused to watch the film because of her.

    • aquarius64 says:

      The marketing was $200 million? I didn’t know it was that high. The production cost was $170 million alone. Let’s not forget distribution costs. SWATH is going to have to make Breaking Dawn 1 money (approx. $750 million) to see a profit.

    • Jenna says:

      Well, she certainly was one of the weaker points. Yikes.

    • nina says:

      No movie’s promotion is equal to the production of the movie. Your stats are way off. People already know her fanbase is rabid but small. This was realized years ago when her indie films made next to no money. Her fanbase is unique though cause it includes nonfan fans who seem to follow her to a alarming degree online, and like her super fans, diffuse propaganda efficiently .

  24. Jilliterate says:

    I love how Forbes acts like getting paid $800 000 is small potatoes. This is why we expect celebrities to be friendly to fans — because they get paid exorbitant amounts of money in a culture where $100 000 is considered to be plenty.

    Honestly, it’s not just the placement of KStew on this list that bothers me — it’s all of the women who are getting paid more than Meryl Streep. As much as we like to act like our culture is meritocratic, there’s your proof that it isn’t.

  25. Anne says:

    I have never seen Kristen’s vagina, or seen her stumbling out of a club drunk. Every SINGLE person who has worked with her practically pisses themselves with praise for her work ethic, and they all seem to like her, and say she’s quite sweet IRL. I have seen interviews of her before the whole Twilight blow up changed her life forever, and she seemed like such a normal giggly funny little girl. I imagine the attention and the fanaticism that surrounds her must be overwhelming. I think she’s handled it well, all things considered. She works hard, there’s no doubt about that, and she deserves a cut of the Twilight pie. It can’t all go to the suits and executives.

    • Crystal says:

      ‘I have never seen Kristen’s vagina, or seen her stumbling out of a club drunk.’

      I swear I will never understand these comments in relation to Kristen Stewart. Would seeing her stumbling out of clubs drunk (like most 22 year olds her age) make her a bad actress??
      I’ve seen Rihanna’s vagina and I’ve seen her drunk and she’s still one of the most popular and one of the highest paid singers in the world. Kristen Stewart posts are becoming too similar to Taylor Swift posts.

      • lola says:

        I think the point is that she is handling fame better than people give her credit for sometimes. She works hard, she stays out of the spotlight when she’s not promoting, and she avoids scandals beyond an occasional finger flipping. Her talent is up for debate, so is her staying power, but she’s hardly some out of control public figure either for the type of anger she brings out.

  26. aquarius64 says:

    The proof will be in the pudding when Twilight finally leave the theaters if Stewart can command that kind of a salary. The jury is still out about Snow White: it made back its production costs but it still hasn’t made back its advertising and distribution costs. One estimate has been SWATH needs to have a 500 million wordwide box office to break even. That’s a tough row to hoe for SWATH when Brave, the Amazing Spiderman and the Dark Knight come out.

    • Maria_Spain says:

      snow white is a scam, there is no way K.S could be more beautiful than Charlize on her bad days -_- .from that and on all the movie is a mess

    • Anne says:

      Where do you even get that number from? Hardly any movies make 500 million, let alone upstart fairytale films. The production cost 170 mil, and the marketing was tops 100… so they probably have to make upwards of 300-350 million to start turning profit. With DVD’s and rentals, they’ll do just fine. 500 million is a completely unrealistic number, and there’s no way Universal would have bet on ANY actress to pull in that kind of money. Kristen isn’t a magician…she can’t conjur numbers that are completely unreasonable.

      • aquarius64 says:

        No movie can make 500 million? Heard of “The Avengers”?

      • Emma says:

        @Anne, most studios only receive about 55 percent of box office receipts because theater chains receive the rest. Most films are not considered profitable until they make about 2 times or triple the budget. SWATH cost $170 million to produce and $100 million to market and that’s why many people think the movie needs $500 million to make a profit. It might get to that after DVD sales.

      • LAK says:

        @Anne – true. if only people were not blinded by the splashy numbers

    • wow says:

      She said “Hardly any movies make 500 million”. Read before you type. Most movies don’t make that.

    • Anne says:

      I couldn’t reply to your other post… Anyway. “Hardly any” is what I said. Not “no.” Yes, I’ve heard of The Avengers. Of course movies CAN make $500 million, but that isn’t the expectation for every movie that comes out.There are only a handful of movies that have hit that benchmark, and I will tell you that no one expected SWATH to do that. It made exactly what they projected it would. The opening weekend beat studio projections by over ten million actually. It did just fine, and they’re already talking sequel.

      • Emma says:

        “but that isn’t the expectation for every movie that comes out.”

        @Anne: Movies that cost $170 million with massive marketing budgets during summer blockbuster season are expected to make that.

    • A says:

      That’s an incorrect number as the 50 percent thing is only partly true. I had several film studies classes and have a family member who works in the industry. The 50 percent thing is something a lot of people toss out, even blogs, incorrectly. I believe Vulture wrote that once, and about three different blogs jumped on them for using that outdated information. Every studio negotiates different rates with the theaters. On average, a theater takes in 10 to 20 percent of a film’s gross over the first few weeks. After x amount of time, the theater gets more and more money until it’s 50 percent and then sometimes even 70 or 80 percent. It’s why theaters keep films like The Avengers and The Hunger Games for months on end, because those films make the most money. It’s why theaters stop with low grossing films after a few weeks, because the theater will only make about 10 percent of a small amount and it’s not worth keeping it around to make 50 percent of an even smaller amount.

      Hefty advertising is often half of the budget. So if Snow White was $170 mil, the advertising was probably $80 mil. I just googled, and the film has made $250 mil worldwide so far. So it made back it’s budget and it’s advertising. It needs to make about another $50 to $60 mil to cover it’s theater costs…So it needs to make about $320 mil to break even. I read somewhere that they predicted the film would end up making about $380 mil because of the foreign box office. Apparently, it just opened in some of the mid level foreign markets. When you add in DVD rights, etc., the film will turn a modest profit. Sadly, Hollywood is one of the few places where $50 plus mil is considered a small profit.

      Then again, I’m sure 70 percent of you will just disregard this because it’s more fun to hate on KStew.

      • mln76 says:

        On that point I remember many years ago (probably a dozen or more) watching a 60 minute segment about movie profits. The point of it was that the studios have a big advantage in pretending that even their biggest hits aren’t profitable if they call it profitable they’d have to hand out more money in taxes and backend deals….Still most movies make money INCLUDING this one.

      • LAK says:

        @A – that is true but also to add that studio films are generally not that profitable. $20M-$50M isn’t that great a profit when you have spent $250M

        In an ideal situation, you want the example of 4 WEDDINGS AND A FUNERAL which cost approx $4M and made approx $250M worldwide.

      • A says:

        @LAK. I 100 percent agree. I was just pointing out to the people who were saying it was a bomb, etc. It’s a small profit, even though 50 million sounds like a lot. Bad Teacher did much better in comparison. It cost 20 mil and made over 200 mil worldwide. It’s why I’m puzzled as to everyone bitching about Cameron and Kristen. It comes down to cold hard numbers on this list, not talent. That said, when you have Men in Black making less money on the opening weekend despite being 3D, having Will Smith, opening in more theaters, and the benefit of the Men in Black franchise…Snow White tends to look better. Especially when you consider that Universal had a few huge flops before Snow White. Snow White made a small profit, but in a summer where most of the films have underperformed (even films with a more marketable plot), it’s getting credit for not flopping.

  27. truthSF says:

    Am I missing something? How is Kristen Wiig the next youngest on the list at 38, when both Angelina and Charlize are younger then her at 37. Maybe theres some Benjamin Button Sh*t going on that I don’t know about.

  28. TheOriginalKitten says:

    Yeah she’s a mediocre actress but Hollywood is full of them and they all make a boatload of cash. Ce la vie. It’s the Twi-hards that have made her a millionaire many times over. Perhaps we should shit on them instead of her. Out of curiosity, how many of the people who are complaining about her bloated salary have seen the Twilight films? Cuz if you have, congrats-you’ve helped to make her a millionaire.

    On a side note-I love that pic of her with her hand on her hip. She looks like she’s having fun, instead of her usual uncomfortable posture.

    • Ming says:


      Without a crowd, no cash.

      You don’t have to coerce people to spent money on you ?

      You have mass appeal ?

      You are a star and most definitely filthy rich.

    • Crystal says:

      Making fun of twihards is like breathing. It’s too easy. The jokes just write themselves tbh.

      I do agree that most people who complain probably camped out to watch it at midnight. I know too many people who hate twilight with a passion (as they should because it’s garbage) but have paid to see every one. Just admit that you like it and move on. I’d never pay to see something I hate and I’m proud to say that this cast has none of my money. I would never feel right knowing Alpaca Lautner, Mouthbreather Stewart and Footface Pattinson are rich because of me. Watch it for free if you must but don’t spend $10 on a ticket, and extra $15 on a popcorn/drink combo then complain that a talentless actress is making money. That’s your fault boo.

  29. Skinnybetch says:

    I like that she’s honest about her flaws and eccentricities. Angelina was the same way back in the day. Kristen always looks so depressed, though. I can’t tell if she’s sad or just a very serious person.

  30. poppy says:

    I really like Kristen.
    Stardom is part talent and part conversation. Though many would say her talent is questionable, she definitely gets the people talking. She’s like a mixture of Katherine Hepburn, Winona Ryder, and Angie Jolie.

    Right now she’s Angie pre baby and Brad.

    • kennedy says:

      No no no… Angie pre-baby and Brad had an OSCAR. K Stew has 100000 MTV Movie Awards but dem ain’t Oscars! As grating as Angie can be at times, her talent is much more visible than K Stew could ever dream and hope for. I’m not even a fierce K Stew hater, but girl cannot act nor has the personality to really sell a brand, which is the polar opposite of Angie. Rob is no Brad. The only similarity is that Twilight may be equally shitty as the Lara Croft franchise.

      What’s really sad is that MERYL freakin Streep and Charlize Theron, inarguably the most talented actresses of their respective generations, are below a lip-biter and Cameron shitty-movie-aholic Diaz.

      • poppy says:

        Oscar’s are not the end all be all when it comes to talent.

        There are many talented mainstream actors who have never been nominated for an oscar.

        And Angie pre maddox was mocked and shunned for not playing the starlet part. Which is the same issue with Kristen.

      • mln76 says:

        There really is no comparing the Jolie and K-Stew. When Angie broke she did so because she did 2 groundbreaking roles in a row (Gia and Girl Interrupted). In one movie she stole the show from Winona Ryder who was at the time a huge star. On the heels of that she was given a franchise because the studios recognized she has ‘it’. …On top of that she wasn’t just ‘not a starlet’ but she was completely out there and shocking as all f–k whereas K-Stew as likable as she is mostly plays the game and is pretty bland aside from a random curse word.
        People try to recreate the Angie thing but they can’t call me a loonie but if it weren’t true her name wouldn’t have been brought up in the first place.

    • Crystal says:

      This comment is sarcasm. It has to be.

  31. nina says:

    meh, Kristen’s not as talented as her greatest fans swear, and she’s not as talentless as her detractors say either. She’s young, she showed great potential in her teen years, and twilight’s sorta made that potential more iffy. Give her a couple years-I don’t see her doing big budget movies really, but having steady work for a long time to come.

  32. sonya says:

    People act like she’s commanding all this money per movie. No. She made all that money based on a successful franchise where the studios are making a heck of a lot more. She deserves her cut. She won’t be on this list next year or the one after. She’s set for life and from what I can tell she doesn’t go around splurging money. She will be good and now she can go back to making smaller movies (her next one, Cali, looks to be another indie).

  33. kingkayski says:

    With all the hoopla that surrounds Kristen after Twilight catapulted her to stardom ,she never succumbed to the pressure of hollywood to stay skinny and blondie.Shes a picture of health,sun kiss color agrees with her,no bones sticking out anywhere.Shes still the same nervous , awkward and shy girl that she was since she became famous.If she stay this way she’ll always get my vote.

    • Lara says:

      Well she’s naturally skinny but point taken. I also love that she never wears push ups bras even though she’s small-busted. She doesn’t seem vain at all. I like that about her.

      • kingkayski says:

        She could have lived Kardashian style,with all the brand name clothes and expensive customized cars,but no,shes happy with her torn shirts, old snickers,same knapsacks and old hoodie.I tell you, this girl will never ever be poor in her life ,she live so simply.

  34. Bee says:

    I think the saddest thing about this list is that KStew makes nearly 3 times more than Meryl Streep.

    • Laura says:

      Yes poor Meryl Streep. She’s probably made tons more money than Kristen in her entire career. This list is just based on last year alone. Meryl is not always going to be getting big paychecks each year. Her being lower on the list doesn’t indicate she’s somehow less valuable or bankable than the others. It’s just pure numbers based on 1 year.

  35. lucy says:

    Actress or script memorizer?

  36. Yay says:

    Hello fact checking! She got 25 mil. for two BD movies, 12.5 per movie!

  37. Michele says:

    The haters can mock her acting and insult every aspect of her life but the bottom line remains…she’s still the highest paid actress in Hollywood at the moment. She has been working steady in the film industry since she was a kid! Some of her movies make tons of money, some don’t. I like her because she’s not a film snob. She loves her indie films but has no problem doing big budget studio films as long as she likes the script and character. She has never said that she is against working on big studio films so I will never understand why some insist she is a sell-out for doing Universal’s Snow White. She has said numerous times that she is drawn to troubled characters facing extraordinary circumstances. She also picks projects to work with certain directors that she admires. I think she has made some very interesting and wise career choices. I applaud her knowledgeable team for helping to guide her in the right direction, professionally.

    She’s No 1 on this list so she is definitely doing something right! And next year some other actress will grace the top spot. C’est la vie!

    • another nina says:

      “She’s No 1 on this list so she is definitely doing something right!”

      Right, by the same logic, since McDonald’s is the richest restaurant chain – their food is superior and their contribution to the society is invaluable. (While in reality, it was a wise business decision of investing in real estate at an early stage, and has nothing to do with the food, i.e. their core product.)
      As such, being #1 on that list does not equate Stew being a good actress.

      • Crystal says:

        Look at you tryna drop logic in this post.
        *wipes a tear* You make me proud.

      • kris says:

        Reading comprehension!?! She is doing something right. No one’s saying this list is claiming she’s the best actress. Just the top earning of last year. So yes, she’s doing something right. Duh.

      • Michele says:

        This list is for the HIGHEST PAID actress. Kristen apparently made more money last year than any other Hollywood actress so she IS doing something right in that regard because she topped the list. This factual list is all about income, nothing more. Anyway, defining someone’s “talent” is subjective but citing a person’s income is a fact, which this list is doing.

      • another nina says:

        Alright Michelle, I give it to you, you are right – Stew is the highest paid talent-less “actress”.

    • Michele says:

      another nina:

      Why is it so hard to give credit where credit is due without the insults and snark?

      Kristen made more money last year than any other actress in Hollywood. Period.

      • Amelia says:

        Money does not positively correlate with talent. The Harry Potter trio are not especially talented acting wise but they get the job done. None of them are on a par with Saoirse Ronan, yet they make more money than her because they are part of the most successful film franchise of all time and were cast on their looks when they were 10/11. They couldn’t very well chuck them out halfway through, just like they couldn’t replace Kristen. There would be uproar within the fanbase. And so when the franchise snowballed, the actors popularity did likewise.
        Kristen was cast on her looks, work ethic and because she had a fairly steady body of work behind her which made her a safe choice. It was a lucky break, and her fame skyrocketed because of the franchise. The whole is greater than the sum of its parts. It is not her talent that determined her pay cheque, but the popularity of the franchise that stemmed from the presence of Robert Pattinson and co as well as a teen friendly concept.
        She did not do anything special, amazing or ‘right’ that led to her being listed as the highest paid actress. Tweeners latching onto the franchise did. They determined the popularity of the franchise because, come on, what 13/14 year old really looks in detail at a performance? When producers/distributors recognised Kristen’s popularity, they couldn’t very well let her go. Hence the rise in pay. She became a commodity to bring in the green. Pure and simple. It always comes down to money.
        And the girl’s got game. S’definintely impressive.

  38. Shelly says:

    And somewhere Lindsay Lohan is crying and throwing a tantrum right now.

    • Laura says:

      Lindsay COULD have had a career like Kristen’s, even better. Pathetic what she’s done to herself.

  39. Chordy says:

    Here’s the thing, Kristen Stewart is so good in everything she’s in – except Twilight. That is because Twilight is a ridiculous piece of tripe, and the only thing Bella Swan lacks more than personality is dignity. I was a huge fan of hers before Twilight, and I was pretty shocked when she signed on for the role. I actually watched the first movie as a result (and, yes, I read all the books. I’m a sucker for hype). She made Bella Swan ever so slightly more bearable for me, but Bella Swan is still horribly unbearable. She’s still a kid. I’m really looking forward to watching her career unfold. And the first person who calls me Kristen loses 20 internet points for the day.

  40. the original liv says:

    still haven’t seen twilight. the only thing i’ve seen her in was swath.

    anways, the article states that stewart is the youngest on the list, and that wiig is the second youngest, but angie is younger than wiig. and charlize is younger than angie. forbes needs to check their math.

  41. Dee Cee says:

    She is worth it.. suffering with the directions from people in charge; particularly, obedient to their tame it down direction in that movie.. now she’s busting loose in the finale..

  42. Ainsley says:

    I LOVE her eye makeup in the second picture. As for her acting, meh.

  43. another nina says:

    Well, I hope she will eventually share her millions with the society – be it in the form charity or smart investment in new technologies or producing interesting meaningful movies.
    I have no opinion about Angelina-the actress but I like that at a minimum she helped some African nations and that she takes care of three orphans on a daily basis.
    Accordingly, it annoys me that everybody’s favorite Johny Depp invests his half a bil (no, it’s not 300 mil) in real estate. And I’m disappointed that Pattz has not invested his mils into something worthy.

    • lisa says:

      That we know of. Rob doesn’t even have a publicist. If he did make a big donation, would it be public? He doesn’t seem like the type to advertise it. Plus he lies about where he lives. Says he still lives in hotels when he clearly has properties. He won’t tell us this stuff.

      • another nina says:

        ^ this is what I dislike about his stans (among other things) – why don’t you guys ever bother to read his interviews? During his round of interviews for Cosmopolis, they asked of his opinion about market and investments. He said, “to be honest”, he’s never invested into anything, etc.
        And he does not hide that he has a house in LA. Furthermore, he said that his family and friends fell in love with LA as well and want to move there.

      • lisa says:

        What? He’s never mentioned a house. And you take every word he says seriously? Rob is a real life troll. You probably also believe he actually has storage space in India or whatever country he said in that one interview. Rob fibs a LOT. I think he does it to keep certain things private.

      • another nina says:

        no lisa, I don’t believe that he has a storage in saudi arabia. rob plays differently with different types of media. he is b/s-ing all over night TV appearances and smaller mags but he is serious when talking to major newspapers such as guardian in the uk, etc. In the beginning, he tried to b/s guardian as well, got a horrible press that portrayed him as a dumb ass, and since then he has changed his approach. He does not have a publicist but he does get a lot of valuable advice.

      • lisa says:

        I’ve seen him BS both stupid mtv reporters and more respected publications. Please.

      • another nina says:

        yeah, when you’re seeing something that’s not there, lisa, it’s called hallucinations. I’m not a doctor, so I can’t be of any help for you.

    • Michele says:

      In all fairness, Angelina Jolie was hardly the orphan adopting, global humanitarian at Kristen’s present age of 22. For all we know, Kristen could be quietly helping various charities without the public’s knowledge. What I do know is that her fans recently raised awareness to a children’s charity Kristen supports by donating money in honor of Kristen’s birthday. I saw that on twitter. She also supports animal and wildlife organizations and helped out at a Los Angeles diabetes fundraiser a few years ago. So, it appears she is giving back to those less fortunate. Good for her!

    • Crystal says:

      Hi bb.
      How’ve you been homie ???
      Where’s ORLY, this post is boring without her. Too many stranger bitches in here.

      • another nina says:

        hey hon, it’s a usual sh.t here, and there isn’t better med against headache than reading michelle’s masterpieces ;)
        I miss ORLY, too!

      • ORLY says:

        Hi Darlings – I’m here, just lurking the last few KS posts. It’s all become so boring and predictable, you know?

    • lisa says:

      LOL. Ok I guess you had no further retort? You said he hasn’t invested his money into something worthy. I’m simply stating we don’t know. He may have or not. Or maybe he will in the future?

    • Janet says:

      Those “three orphans Angelina takes care of on a daily basis” are her CHILDREN, for Christ’s sake.

      s m d h

      • another nina says:

        And what’s your point? They were not orphans to begin with or she does not take care of them on a daily basis?

      • Janet says:

        The point is, why would you refer to someone’s children who were adopted years ago and are an integral part of their family as “orphans”?

      • another nina says:

        Mostly, to stress that adoption is a very hard work, and that I applaud her efforts. And unless you’ve either been adopted or adopted someone yourself (from an institution), I don’t think that you are ready to discuss this topic. Thanks.

      • Janet says:

        What are you talking about, adoption is very hard work? Are you referring to the adoptive process, which I know inside out because I worked in adoption for over 20 years, or parenting an adopted child? Parenting ANY child is hard work. You don’t make a distinction between raising an adopted child and a biological child, they are both your children. Ask my cousin, she has one of each. And God help anyone who referred to her adopted son as an “orphan”.

      • another nina says:

        I’m saying that you are facing very specific problems when you adopt a kid from an institution of the type that were in the countries of the former Soviet block. I’m saying that some kids have never been outside for the first 3 years of their life, they haven’t had a normal physical contact with a human being, aside from being tossed a bottle of milk now and then. I’m saying that it’s scary when a 2 y.o. shakes his bed trying to put himself to sleep. I’m saying that there are plenty of mentally intact kids that were put in the institution for kids with severe psychological disabilities, and that you have to peel it like an onion from the kid. I’m talking about severe adaptation period, rad and fas and that love does not miraculously appear once you get adoption papers. It’s a hard work for your soul, and you do parent your kids differently. You do forget that you did not give birth to this kid but there are plenty of very specific problems associated with adopted kids. So, unless you have been personally through this, it’s hard to appreciate it. I also don’t care too much about sensitive words on the gossip forum.

      • Janet says:

        It does make one wonder how much you care about them outside of a gossip forum. I’d imagine not a whole lot.

      • another nina says:

        I’d say you have a wild imagination ;)

    • Linda says:


    • Ann says:

      How do you know where Rob has or hasn’t invested his money? And how can you compare him to Johnny Depp? Johnny is pushing 50 – of course he’s going to have more investments and a more detailed plan on how he wants to allocate his finances. People in their 20′s rarely have this all figured out yet.

      • Potsy says:

        Yeah , I dunno all these comparasions with KS to someone like Angelina Jolie. Same with RP with Johnny Depp. Angelina and Johnny are both top actors/actresses in Hollywood. KS and Rp don’t even come close in terms of their success and talent.

      • another nina says:

        @ ann I mean before going on a rant, you should have probably read a thread…I explained there how do I know about Rob (his interview). I’m saying that I’m disappointed about Johny rather than using him as a positive example.

        What’s your point of marking this page with meaningless posts?

  44. LittleDeadGirl says:

    I’m gonna give her props for having a good manager. She is young and making a damn good change of chunk in Hollywood. She has been working since she was like 12 or 13 and not become a total mess in that environment and that couldn’t have been easy. I actually liked her in SWATH so I have some hope she will get better with age.

    On a side note I hope some of the others in this franchise like Lautner save their money cause I don’t see them having much staying power. Lutzy is soooo out of here.

  45. Rhiley says:

    I am more surprised at how much Cameron Diaz still makes. No wonder Goopy poop has been spotted going out to eat with Cammy. Goopy wants whatever it is that Cammy’s got.

  46. Crystal says:

    See this right here gives me hope that I can be an actress and make loads of money. I can blink and bite my lip too. I need to work on my mouthbreathing though.
    I’m happy she’s making all of this money. Maybe now she can leave the Michael Cera school of acting and get some proper acting lessons. What will she do when her draw full of lower lips runs out.
    Saoirse Ronan will act circles around her, set fire to those circles and blow it out with her skills.

    Charlize Theron is a queen. BOW. She deserves double for all of the overacting she had to do in SWATH to make up for the underacting from Kristen and Chris.

    Meryl Streep is flawless. Only person that saves this list from being a flop.

    Where the F*ck is Cameron Diaz getting that money from???

    Kristen Wiig is a surprising addition to this list. Well done.

    • kris says:

      What an original comment! Nevermind the fact that I haven’t seen this girl bite her lip in this series since the first Twilight. Let’s keep beating a dead horse.

      • Crystal says:

        She bites her lips in every single Twilight and I’ll throw in ‘Adventurland’ too. You’d have to take your head out of her ass to notice it. Be gone.

      • another nina says:

        Problems with vision, kris? You’d better take care of them soon… Stew is consistently and very proudly bites lips in every Twilight movie.

    • Diana says:

      @Crystal @another nina I agree with you, she bites her lips in every single one of the twilight movies, but have you read those books? freaking Bella swan bites her lips every two secons! as for the lip biting in other movies, now that I can’t account for.

    • Ann says:

      Well, get on it then! Given that it’s so easy, go out there and get it, girl! Maybe then you can tutor the thousands of actresses that have been toiling for years without making it big, on how easy it is.

      • Crystal says:

        LOL. You mad ??
        Nah, I’m black and would never make it in Hollywood with minimal talent; blinking, mumbling and mouthbreathing in every movie. That’s for white girls/guys only. Heck, we can’t even make it in Hollywood with loads of talent (angela basset is stuck doing Tyler Perry movies). Maybe Kristen should be the one giving classes on how easy it is. Her, Channing Tatum and Taylor Kitsch would be great tutors for bland, basic bitches with minmal talent. If they can do it we all can…

  47. Liberated says:

    Oh, please! Angelina Jolie hasn’t been in a movie for the past two years. And, Charlize Theron stole the Snow White movie from this very dull screen presence.

  48. Hanna says:

    Bitch please… Once this Twilight shit has faded she’ll be gone. Better save all that cash, girl.

  49. Lucy2 says:

    Not surprised, given that she had 3 big films this year that the studios shelled out for. That’s basically all this list is.
    Surprised by some of the others still getting big bucks.

  50. samira677 says:

    People are over reacting.She’s not the highest paid actress. All of Kristen’s money came from Twilight. Accept for Snow White she doesn’t have any successful movies.

  51. Bored suburbanhousewife says:

    Kristen puzzles me. I think she is a perfectly adequate actress and my feelings toward her as a public figure are neutral. But I just don’t understand. If I were a beautiful 22 year old internationally famous actress, the highest paid by a mile AND in a long term relationship with a famously beautiful actor who is the object of millions of adoring women and who apparently fell madly in love with me the moment he saw me, I would be extremely hard pressed not to have a shit eating grin on my face all the time! I would marvel at my amazing good fortune in a world of suffering and inexplicable bad fortune and kvell constantly about how lucky I am, how much I love and appreciate the people who believed in me, supported me, gave me breaks when I was nothing. WTF is WRONG with her? Why is she so miserable? Does she need Lithium or what?
    Keep thinking about Jodie Foster interview about KS, the Panic Room, and KS current stardom–JF said KS would have been the last child actor she would have expected to have pursued this path.

    • sara.g. says:

      Honestly I don’t see it. She doesn’t seem miserable to me. She doesn’t say she’s miserable either. Why are people so fixated on whether she looks happy? Especially when there are tons of people fake smiling their way through life who can’t sleep at night.

      • Michele says:

        Yes, I don’t see it either. Like Robert recently said, the publications and blogs will use the one unsmiling picture of Kristen out of many smiling ones for their story to paint her as unhappy and miserable. That one unsmiling picture fits their “miserable” agenda.

    • randand00 says:

      @Bored… I started to type a comment, but you’d taken the words right out of my mouth. Seriously, I could not have said it better.

      Lighten up Kristen – life’s not so bad, and neither is your bank account!

    • James says:

      She does look like she smells fart all the time, you gotta admit.

  52. anne says:

    No matter what character she is playing, she is always the same. You can count on the same breathy kind of laugh. She’s not worth it. Go away please.

  53. loremipsum says:

    She huffs and puffs and blows that house down with her acting! I fail to see how anyone can truly say she can act, every movie she plays herself. Twilight, Adventureland, the Runaways, and SWATH.

  54. funny says:

    Just saw KS movie in Snowhite, she plays really BAD compared to Chris Hemsworth & Charlize Theron who are playing really good. I wonder why the producers are using KS for their movies. She’s not a good actress at all compare to Charlize Theron.

  55. skilo says:

    Fantastic. The worst actress in Hollywood is now the highest paid. Great.

    • Crystal says:

      Girl. No. She’s not good but I wouldn’t say she’s the worst. I’m sure there are many young actresses that are worse than her…

  56. Rachel says:

    No, God, she’s so undeserving. She just always seems so bored all of the time, no matter what role she’s in. No charisma.

  57. EmmaStoneWannabe says:

    Just want to say this is the most entertaining thread of comments posted here in a long time. For such a boring actress and person, she sure does get people all riled up. Almost as vicious as the Angie vs. Jen threads lol

    …grabbing popcorn…

  58. sallyreo says:

    I see her like a normal person. She is
    who she is, if you don’t like her, does
    it matter to her, hell no. She does not know us, so who cares what we think.

    As far as being a bad actress, you don’t earn that kind of money for being a bad actress. Someone out there thinks she is doing her job just fine.

    Pattison likes who she is and that’s all that matters. Her face lights up
    when they are close together. I wish her the best. IMO, people don’t like
    her because she is “herself”. She is not pretentious.

  59. maemay says:

    At least back in the day you had to have charisma if anything else.

  60. Nicolette says:

    Why so much hatred for her? Here we have a girl who shows up for work, loves what she does for a living, isn’t strung out on drugs, doesn’t get DUI’s while crashing the hell out of cars, isn’t flashing her nether regions to the paparazzi, doesn’t act like a slut, and doesn’t act like the world should kiss her ass because she’s an actress. I don’t see the problem. I love her, and I think she’s a refreshing change from the bimbo’s that dominate Hollywood these days. Looking forward to seeing her films for years to come. :)

    • finnicksgirl says:

      +1. She seems like a sweet girl to me and harmless. Also kudos to her for not joining twitter or any other social network and feel the need to rant and rave about her life in a way that makes me want to gag (rihanna, miley cyrus looking at you!)

    • Crystal says:

      ‘doesn’t act like a slut’… what does a slut act like ??? I swear kristen stewart and taylor swift posts always bring out the slut shamers. The only way to compliment her is to compare her to the trainwrecks in hollywood who have DUI’s ??

      ‘refreshing change’…she’s a white, thin girl in hollywood. Aint nothing refreshing about that. How is she different from Blake Lively and Emma Watson ??? She’s not gonna get a pat on the back for ‘showing up to work and loving what she does’. If that’s the case my barista at Starbucks should make $34 million. (actually forget that, she always flirts with my husband)

      • Nicolette says:

        What on earth does her race have to do with this? And if you need to know what a slut acts like, just look up most of the celebutards in today’s Hollywood. Why shouldn’t she be complimented on not being just another DUI train wreck, when they have become the “norm”? And yes, showing up for work is an accomplishment in La La Land, just reference LiLo to make my point. There’s something wrong with her not acting like just another spoiled, self entitled moron to you I guess.

      • A says:

        I hate slut shaming. It’s all just shitty rumors about Blake Lively, because a lot of bloggers think she can’t act and therefore she must have fked her way to the top. What is good is subjective. I saw Blake in a shitty indie called Hick, and thought she was excellent.

        That said, I will call out Emma Watson because there is some evidence that she basically uses her sexuality in negative ways to get ahead. I don’t give a shit about Rihanna walking around naked, posing naked, or having multiple guys. Rihanna owns her sexuality. She does what she likes and she doesn’t make any bones about it and try to hide it. However, google Emma Watson Harvey Weinstein, and a few photos will pop up. Very few websites covered it, probably because Harvey is so powerful. He was photographed grabbing on to her back coming out of a nightclub, then piling into a limo with Emma and a few other girls. He also gave out an over the top statement about how great he thinks Emma Watson is. There is also the fact that Emma Watson basically gave an upskirt shot the day of her 18th birthday to the paps. It all seemed pretty suspiciously timed, especially when you consider the girl was wearing nude underwear if I remember correctly so a lot of blogs were running with the headline that Emma was naked the next day. To me, that’s just not cool. It’s not slutty, but it’s gross. However, Emma is the virginal little angel and Rihanna’s the big bad slut for most people. Skin color is the major difference between the two.

      • Crystal says:

        What does her race have to do with it?? Awww bb. So naive.
        Who are the black, asian, latino, naitve american actresses in Hollywood??
        You think a black actress could be as big as Kristen with minimal skills and a stank attitude to boot ??? Don’t make me laugh. Her race has everything to do with it. Same with Megan Fox, Emma Watson, Blake Lively and all the other shitty actresses. They’re white so they’ll have jobs no matter how bad they are. Let me not even get too deep into this. You won’t get it. You probably believe in ‘reverse racism’ too.

        If, as a woman, you don’t see the problem with phrases like ‘slut’ then you’re a lost cause mate. She should be able to walk out with her labia spread open if she wants. It has nothing to do with her talent. And comparing her to Lindsay isn’t a compliment. The corn on my toe is better than Lindsay.


      • Crystal says:


        Your comment is everything and I love you. Change nothing on these milquetoast actresses but their skin colour and we’ll see how big they are then. Please. I fricking love you bb. So much truth in your posts.

  61. Mounir says:

    Love her. I am 22, I WISH I made that kind of money. What would I do with 12.5 millions dollars? Hmmm.. I sure wouldn’t be going to my job in 45 minutes.

  62. Janet says:

    Sorta OT: Just stopped by the Gossipcop website which has been overrun by Twihards in recent months, and cracked up at the spectacle of Pattinson fans and Stewart fans tearing each other limb from limb. You’d think they would be on the same side. I’ve never seen the fans of any other couple or supposed couple berating each other like that. What’s the problem? I totally don’t get it.

    • lisa says:

      Go to E online. I was looking at something and saw a post with over 800 comments. Was curious because the header was of jennifer/justin. So I was like what are people saying. Well I clicked and it was all about the Robert and Kristen. I mean hundreds and hundreds of comments on them. In a part of the posted article had something about Rob/Kristen and they were going insane back and forth. accusing Rob of all manner of things and Kristen too. I was just shocked.

      As a loon myself I appreciate that they are supportive and all, but I didn’t know that there were 3 camps.. her fans, his fan and both fans and they are fighting..

      SMH too.

    • Ann says:

      They do bring out the crazy, no doubt. I think it’s a big reason why they refuse to talk about their relationship. Too many psychos waiting to pounce.

  63. A says:

    Here’s the thing. Google OpEd in defense of Kristen Stewart, and a couple of recent articles from MovieFone and Daily Beast will pop up. All of them point out that The NY Times critics, The Hollywood Reporter, Rolling Stone, LA Times, NY Magazine, Roger Ebert, etc. are complimentary of Kristen’s acting. The NY Times critics (Dargis and Scott) have literally raved over her acting in her indies. When it comes down to it, The NY Times and Roger Ebert carry far more weight than say, a critic from Seattle, a blog, or a random commenter.

    That said, critics aren’t everything. However, having the “right” critics in KStew’s corner helps. It also helps, as I’ve read before, that she’s well liked in the industry. I’ve read that on Vulture, and about half of their writers can’t stand KStew. Sean Penn gave a quote to Vanity Fair about her, and Sean Penn is a grumpy gus who rarely agrees to give out nice quotes. Watch Charlize with Noomi and Charlize with Kristen. Charlize clearly favored Kristen. There are more examples.

    As much as people like to bash her acting, she received excellent reviews for the most part for her acting in On the Road. Even Kaiser noted that. Snow White was a modest hit. Breaking Dawn was a huge hit. Those are all major pluses that will help KStew along.

    Lastly, she’s polarizing as fuck but the people who keep up on celeb gossip are a small minority in the grand scheme of things. People Magazine sells 1 million copies a week on average, and there are over 300 million people in the United States. Blogs account for far less readers than People. The general moviegoer does not give a flying fuck what KStew says in interviews, because they don’t even read said interviews. The general public looks down on those who get DUI’s and those who date around (i.e. slut shame). KStew can’t be slut shamed, and she hasn’t had a DUI. So by the general public standards, she’s okay.

    Ha, there is my explanation of why KStew is a successful actress. I do not think she will be a top actress for ever, but I believe she will have a steady stream of indies in her future.

    • angie says:

      +5000! Great assessment. I too noticed Charlize’s interaction with Rapace was “off”.

  64. Patty foster says:

    Oh look orly and nina are posting on a kristen thread. Laughably predictable

  65. Prim says:

    Angelina’s inclusion is pure proof she’s 95% media hype. It’s disgusting. All because of Brad Pitt and tabloids.

    • lisa says:

      awwww well so glad her inclusion bothers you.

      Angie’s success is not because of Brad any more then his is because of her. Wow so a woman is nothing without the man. But hey deal with your hate. Won’t change a thing. And you should get use to this. Angie is not going anywhere.

      and once again the people like you I bet buy and read every single story tabloid or not about her. LOL

  66. Becca says:

    Wow, This is just wrong! It just proves that teen franchises are everything. I hope Jennifer Lawrence overtakes her. At least she can act.

  67. ToastedSkin says:

    aww she looks really cute, I love her eye makeup.
    good for her.

  68. Paulia says:

    oh you know most actors are struggling and nobody else would have whined, moaned and acted childishly, bratty, and idiotically as much as she did. remember how stupid she looked when she gave the press the finger? it’s like, don’t love the job, then quit it. she could afford to. many child actors or celeb kids have changed their careers. got successful at school and stayed away from hollywood. she could stop being a celeb if she wanted but that’s not what she wants. she’s secretly very happy about being famous, she just thinks acting reluctant about it would make her look like a hipster and therefore deep and a creative artist. that’s what she thinks

    Kirsten Stewert comes from nepotism, like many people in Hollywood. I have no problem with those who come from nepotism, but I really think she doesn’t have talent and is being shoved down everyone throats in a way. Many folks with no parents or relatives in the industry have a hard time getting any part. But hey look how it turned out for her. When Twi-crap is finished, will she stil come back on these list as the highest paid actress?

    • lisa says:

      Oh my, the delusions! Yeah Kristen got ahead because her dad is a tv stage manager! Stage managers hold ALL the power in Hollywood. It’s Hollywood’s best kept secret.

      Kristen haters give me life, I tell you. So funny.

      • Potsy says:

        Immature much? How is is automatically being a hater if this if a fact? LOL. How old are you like 12? Sure looks like it.

      • Paulia says:

        You are ignorant. Yes her father is a stage manager and her mother is a script advisor, however they both work in show business and know other people. It’s still nepotism. Your father doesn’t have to be Steven Speilberg in order to get you acting jobs. Kristen Stewert parents could have helped her get a good agent and helped her sign up with a powerful agency, which is partly why she is getting roles. Her agent/manager must be a powerful one to get someone like her good roles. Many people don’t like her acting and find her talentless, even some critics have called her out for her wooden acting. Like I said, I have no problem with nepotism, Angelina Jolie who is on the list comes from neptosim but she actaully knows how to act,and has gained respect as an actress. Not so much for Kristen Stewert, who has been around for about a decade or so and many people still think she hasn’t improved on her skills.

  69. carly says:

    predictable as always, good for her, why nobdy talks about how much money the studios have made with twilight, so why shouldn’t she get payed?? after all, her ass is on the line, she is the one that her life completely changed overnight, she is the one with haters left &right, and people who try to run every second of her life

    She has worked since she was a kid, people in the industry LOVE her, she has big supporters, she has a good work ethic, a good head on her shoulders, she is a nice, sweet person by most accounts, get that money baby!!!!

    At this point she can do whatever she wants, she’ll probably try to do both indies and big films, more power to her, SWATH didn’t bombed, it doing okay, so she does have life after twilight, she wants to direct movies, she likes to write scripts, she is the co-producer of her next film, she is going to be fine, so haters please get a life a let this 22 year old girl in peace

  70. Ann says:

    It is amusing how people get so revved up about the highest paid list. The fact is, with the way Hollywood works now, there will likely be a new #1 every year. It’s all about who was in the big blockbuster or two in the May – May timeframe. That’s all it is. And not the first film in the blockbuster – the 2nd or 3rd is where the money is at.

    I don’t think Kristen gives a hoot whether or not she lands on the list again. She’s made her money. She can pick and choose the projects she likes at this point.

    I have no problem with her on this list, she should get her fair share of Twilight with all the money its made. Why are people so catty about the women on the list? I don’t hear the same amount of freaking out over someone like, say, Adam Sandler and all the money he makes for putting out one shit film after another.

  71. Nathan says:

    All those people saying that her parents being stage managers or script advisors were not helpful and is not considered nepotism in Hollywood, well it is. Nepotism in Hollywood isn’t only having a famous parent who is an actor or director, it could also be the makeup artist, talent agent,stage manager, script writer, or even the camaraman. Basically anyone who has a parent within the particular industry. I mean yes good for K-Stew but she did have some help along the way. She had a connection within the industry, she didn’t come from nowhere.

  72. Feugal says:

    Well this article is about kristen stewert being the highest paid actress, not the most talented actress.

  73. elle greta says:

    I keep telling you, Hollywood is going to make Kristen Stewart out to be the next Angelina Jolie

    No, it won’t happen. Kristen Stewart is already known as the chick from Twilight who can’t act. I never heard so many people call Angelina an bad actress like how Kristen Stewart gets alot. I went to see the first Twlight movie with my friend and everyone in the theatre kept laughing at the parts when her character or Robert’s tried to be serious or get mad. At the end they all booed. Never has that happened when I go see a movie that stars AJ.

  74. chicago girl says:

    Why does she look so annoyed at events? It’s part of the job, and she’s certainly paid enough to suffer it. I’ve not watched a single movie of hers since Panic Room because I cannot stand her awful acting. I’ve read a couple interviews, and she comes off a a total moron.

    • Megan says:

      She was bad back then in 2001/2002 when the movie came out, and she is still bad in 2012. I saw SWATHM, horrible actress. Looked pathetic compared to Charlize Theron and Chris Hemsworth. The fight scene between her and Theron was funny to watch.