Actors cast in franchise roles frequently sign for several films at once, before the first has been released. The structure serves the studio's need for certainty, and the terms reflect who holds leverage at signing.
The deal is signed at the moment of least leverage
A performer being considered for a large role is usually not yet a name that guarantees an audience, which is often why they were chosen.
Studios negotiate at that point deliberately, because the same actor after a successful release would command a substantially different figure.
The multi-picture commitment therefore locks in a price set before the film exists, and the gap between that price and later market value can be considerable.
Availability is the real object
Franchise films are scheduled years ahead, and a lead who is unavailable can delay a production or force an expensive recasting.
Option agreements reserve blocks of time in advance, giving the studio first claim on a performer's calendar for specified windows.
That certainty is worth a great deal when release dates have been announced and marketing has already been committed.
Options run one way
These agreements are usually options held by the studio rather than mutual commitments, meaning the studio may call on the actor but is not obliged to.
A performer is bound for the full run while the production can decline to continue at any point without penalty.
The asymmetry is the standard structure, and it is the main reason the eventual pay for later films can look low against a film's performance.
Renegotiation happens, but from a fixed position
Actors whose films succeed frequently seek improved terms, and studios often concede something rather than risk a public dispute.
The negotiation still starts from the signed agreement, so the improvement is a revision of an existing deal rather than a fresh one at current market rates.
Backend participation, producer credits and support for other projects are common forms of compensation, because they cost less than raising the headline fee.
The trade for the actor is a career, not a fee
A franchise role provides sustained visibility that is difficult to obtain any other way, and that visibility raises what an actor can command everywhere else.
Against that, several years are committed to one character, and other work has to fit into the gaps the schedule leaves.
Performers weigh those effects differently, which is why some sign long agreements readily and others limit themselves to as few films as the studio will accept.