BLACK WIDOW: THE MOVIE (TBD) 4 4

[Bosco685]

On 8/1/2021 at 8:12 AM, fantastic_four said:

What I don't get is the $50 million she's asking for.  Seems high!

Unless we have direct access to the Black Widow agreement language, hard to say.

Remember. Endgame was her character's big sail-off. So for Disney to get her to come back to the table...

[D84]

I've been thinking about the multiverse. 

Does anyone think there's a reality where this movie was good?

[paperheart]

so it'll sneak past $180 million US, maybe $375 million WW (assuming China stays at $0)

[Larryw7]

Mata Hari must be put in her place.

[Xenosmilus]

On 8/1/2021 at 7:41 AM, Mecha_Fantastic said:

I've seen more than a few people squarely on Disney's side, shockingly. I don't know what they're thinking. 

There are rarely used "Act of God" clauses in most contracts that can void contracts.  A global pandemic qualifies here.  They delayed the movie over a year.  It's hard to argue that Disney didn't try and wait out the pandemic. Plus all the MCU movies are getting back logged. I think Disney probably should of paid her a little more but technically I don't think they had too. That being said I am not a lawyer so maybe I'm wrong...

 

Edit: My issue with her is that she want's to get paid as much as if there was no pandemic.  With a lot of people hurting financially because of the pandemic, and yes, even Disney (i.e. no park or cruise revenue coming in) it comes across to me as a little greedy on SJ part, but that's just my take. Disney+ is the only thing that has saved Disney through the pandemic.  If it wasn't for Disney+, Disney would have been in A LOT of trouble.

Edited August 1, 2021 by Xenosmilus

[fantastic_four]

On 8/1/2021 at 1:46 PM, Xenosmilus said:

My issue with her is that she want's to get paid as much as if there was no pandemic.

That isn't at all what she's saying, she's saying that Disney released it to Disney Plus at $30 a pop, and that revenue both isn't counting towards her contract incentives and is directly competing with the box office revenues.  If they had included those revenues along with the box office totals for her bonus I'm sure she would have been fine with it, but they chose not to.  To side with Disney on this you'd have to think that the actors doing revenue sharing don't deserve any release-related Disney Plus income, a perspective that may have some valid reasoning but one I haven't heard anyone argue yet.

And this isn't unique to her or this film--the studios are in this same boat with any stars in any blockbuster doing profit sharing, which is most of them these days.  As previously noted Warner Brothers has tried to make it right with their stars, but in this case Disney decided not to.

Edited August 1, 2021 by fantastic_four

[Xenosmilus]

On 8/1/2021 at 4:44 PM, fantastic_four said:

That isn't at all what she's saying, she's saying that Disney released it to Disney Plus at $30 a pop, and that revenue both isn't counting towards her contract incentives and is directly competing with the box office revenues.  If they had included those revenues along with the box office totals for her bonus I'm sure she would have been fine with it, but they chose not to.  To side with Disney on this you'd have to think that the actors doing revenue sharing don't deserve any release-related Disney Plus income, a perspective that may have some valid reasoning but one I haven't heard anyone argue yet.

And this isn't unique to her or this film--the studios are in this same boat with any stars in any blockbuster doing profit sharing, which is most of them these days.  As previously noted Warner Brothers has tried to make it right with their stars, but in this case Disney decided not to.

I admit I am biased and think all actors/actresses are over paid!What other occupations do contributors keep getting paid for their initial work!  I'm in the science field and any intellectual ideas that I add to the success of a product I am not compensated for. 

Edited August 1, 2021 by Xenosmilus

[Bosco685]

On 8/1/2021 at 4:53 PM, Xenosmilus said:

I admit I am biased and think all actors/actresses are over paid!What other occupations do contributors keep getting paid for their initial work!  I'm in the science field and any intellectual ideas that I add to the success of a product I am not compensated for. 

But the thing is should studios make the bulk of the money if the talent is the draw? It certainly should bring it much more as it takes on all the costs and risks. But if Disney had an agreement in advance to encourage Scarlett Johansson to do at least one more MCU picture and then due to the pandemic had to change the plan, you assume it would also adjust the agreement to account for this change.

[Bosco685]

 

[Xenosmilus]

On 8/1/2021 at 5:09 PM, Bosco685 said:

But the thing is should studios make the bulk of the money if the talent is the draw? It certainly should bring it much more as it takes on all the costs and risks. But if Disney had an agreement in advance to encourage Scarlett Johansson to do at least one more MCU picture and then due to the pandemic had to change the plan, you assume it would also adjust the agreement to account for this change.

Naw what I was saying if the "Act of God" clause is legit then the contract is void technically and she doesn't have a case... Disney had to move forward with BW. As I said, I think Disney should have just coughed up the money and paid her. I think the optics for both Disney and SJ are not good personally, just my .  It was just bad timing for SJ.

Edited August 1, 2021 by Xenosmilus

[Bosco685]

On 8/1/2021 at 5:17 PM, Xenosmilus said:

Naw what I was saying if the "Act of God" clause is legit then the contract is void technically and she doesn't have a case... Disney had to move forward with BW. As I said, I think Disney should have just coughed up the money and paid her. I think the optics for both Disney and SJ are not good personally, just my .  It was just bad timing for SJ.

Agreed on that! This makes all look bad.

But Disney didn't help itself with that pandemic initial statement to belittle what Johansson called out. That only hurt Disney's image further with the agencies now joining Johansson. 

Women in Film, Los Angeles, ReFrame and Time’s Up have issued a joint statement calling Disney’s characterization of Scarlett Johansson a “gendered character attack.”

[Bosco685]

So by Day 24, theaters running F9 compared to Black Widow were making more money with the former for 10 straight days. That's nuts!

[D84]

On 8/1/2021 at 4:26 PM, Bosco685 said:

Agreed on that! This makes all look bad.

But Disney didn't help itself with that pandemic initial statement to belittle what Johansson called out. That only hurt Disney's image further with the agencies now joining Johansson. 

Women in Film, Los Angeles, ReFrame and Time’s Up have issued a joint statement calling Disney’s characterization of Scarlett Johansson a “gendered character attack.”

The same way Warner characterized Stallone for the "Demolition Man" lawsuit, but that doesn't fit their narrative. 

[Bosco685]

On 8/1/2021 at 5:36 PM, D84 said:

The same way Warner characterized Stallone for the "Demolition Man" lawsuit, but that doesn't fit their narrative. 

One is intentional dishonesty

Sylvester Stallone sues Warner Bros for 'dishonesty' over Demolition Man profits

The other just didn't even bother following up with the talent. Right?

[D84]

On 8/1/2021 at 4:41 PM, Bosco685 said:

One is intentional dishonesty

Sylvester Stallone sues Warner Bros for 'dishonesty' over Demolition Man profits

The other just didn't even bother following up with the talent. Right?

But both actors were characterized as money grubbing  by their perspective studios, but since this time it's a woman, it's called "gender bias."

Edited August 1, 2021 by D84

[Xenosmilus]

On 8/1/2021 at 5:53 PM, D84 said:

But both actors were characterized as money grabbing , but since this time it's a woman, it's called "gender bias."

So true.

[Bosco685]

On 8/1/2021 at 5:53 PM, D84 said:

But both actors were characterized as money grubbing  by their perspective studios, but since this time it's a woman, it's called "gender bias."

Maybe. But no matter what, even worse judgment for Disney in not thinking through how a female talent can lead to even more sensitivity. You know?

But at least Disney Country Lawyer agrees. 

[D84]

On 8/1/2021 at 5:11 PM, Bosco685 said:

Maybe. But no matter what, even worse judgment for Disney in not thinking through how a female talent can lead to even more sensitivity. You know?

Actually, I don't know. Please explain.

[Bosco685]

On 8/1/2021 at 6:29 PM, D84 said:

Actually, I don't know. Please explain.

I think you do. But sometimes it is good to remind ourselves as men.

If you think of the American society some of us live in, women were not equals for a very long time. Even with the right to vote that didn't come into play until August 26, 1920. So 144 years after the country declared its independence. And even then there is still things such as pay and role inequalities. Heck, society as a whole recognizes the 'rule of thumb' term came to be known as the allowance for the size of the stick you could beat your wife with before it became an issue. So as much as males assume they have treated women as equals over time, there is always that sensitivity how a statement can come across as conveying misogynist intent from a government or a corporation.

When a male-dominated corporation then delivers a message that can be twisted into an attack on a woman's character to make a point, this can play into a narrative of inequality. It would be crazy to even allow your PR messaging to open itself up to that perception during a tense legal situation. Which when Disney tried to imply Scarlett Johansson just wasn't being self-aware during a pandemic opened that door.

See the point?

Edited August 1, 2021 by Bosco685

[Bosco685]

Disney's leadership team today. Which unfortunately mirrors much of corporate America boards and senior executives on average.

It isn't until you go the next rung down that more females show up. With a corporate image like that, I would go out of my way to over-communicate how Disney values the experience and relationship of its entire talent. No matter the gender or race. And that all effort was made to plan agreements and releases in a fair and transparent way. DO NOT go into belittling the sensitivity of the talent to the world's plight.