• Entertainment
  • movies

Mark Wahlberg Was Reportedly Paid 1,500 Times More Than Michelle Williams for All the Money Reshoots

2 minute read

Ridley Scott and all of those involved with All the Money in the World have been praised for their swift and shocking move to recast and reshoot with Christopher Plummer only six weeks before the film’s release. Yet, a new report that Mark Wahlberg was paid 1500 times what Michelle Williams was for the reshoots has drawn widespread criticism for the leading man and the people behind the decision.

Following numerous sexual misconduct allegations against Kevin Spacey, who had already completed filming as J. Paul Getty, Scott cast the more age-appropriate Plummer and reconvened his cast and crew for just over a week of reshoots at a reported cost of $10 million. In previous interviews, the director contended that “everyone did it for nothing.”

But an alleged pay discrepancy between the film’s two stars, which was originally reported by The Washington Post in November, gained new attention Tuesday when USA Today revealed Wahlberg earned $1.5 million, while Williams, who earned a Golden Globe nomination for her performance, made less than $1,000.

A source close to the production says Sony, which distributed the film, was not involved in talent pay negotiations, and representatives for production company Imperative Entertainment, as well as those for Wahlberg and Williams, didn’t immediately respond to EW’s request for comment.

The report quickly went viral on social media, with celebrities slamming the “unacceptable” pay gap. Among those to weigh in were Amber Tamblyn, Judd Apatow, Mia Farrow, and Jessica Chastain.

“Please go see Michelle’s performance in All the Money in the World,” tweeted Chastain, Williams’ fellow Golden Globe nominee. “She’s a brilliant Oscar nominated, Golden Globe winning actress. She’s been in the industry for 20 yrs. She deserves more than 1% of her male costar’s salary.”

Read more reactions below.

This article originally appeared in Entertainment Weekly.

More Must-Reads from TIME

Contact us at letters@time.com