BLACK WIDOW: THE MOVIE (TBD) 4 4

[Bosco685]

On 8/2/2021 at 7:27 PM, chezmtghut said:

Was she expecting Disney to write a blank check & ask "how much to make this go away"? Disney isn't owned by the powers that oversee it. They're catering to share holders that want to see returns on their investment. She publicly called out Disney & they're simply defending their image. It's not like her side of the story makes Disney sound anymore endearing than they made her out to be.

Write a blank check? Most probably not.

Revealing how much she was paid while implying she was dismissive of a pandemic like it did? That was probably the surprise. Especially with her years associated with Disney.

That was probably the shocker. Without even an, "Welcome to Disney, and remember it's a small world!"

Edited August 3, 2021 by Bosco685

[chezmtghut]

On 8/2/2021 at 8:23 PM, Bosco685 said:

Write a blank check? Most probably not.

Revealing how much she was paid while implying she was dismissive of a pandemic like it did? That was probably the surprise. Especially with her years associated with Disney.

That was probably the shocker. Without even an, "Welcome to Disney, and remember it's a small world!"

No doubt, but I'm sure many at Disney were just as shocked by her allegations for those exact same reasons.

[Bosco685]

On 8/2/2021 at 8:27 PM, chezmtghut said:

No doubt, but I'm sure many at Disney were just as shocked by her allegations for those exact same reasons.

Did she imply Disney dismissed the events of the pandemic and post how much profit it made off Black Widow?

[D84]

On 8/2/2021 at 7:30 PM, Bosco685 said:

Did she imply Disney dismissed the events of the pandemic and post how much profit it made off Black Widow?

What profits on Black Widow?

She could point out how much they have lost, but that wouldn't help her case.

[chezmtghut]

On 8/2/2021 at 8:30 PM, Bosco685 said:

Did she imply Disney dismissed the events of the pandemic and post how much profit it made off Black Widow?

She did argue that they made a bunch on Disney+ subscriptions though. How would the actual figures or bringing up the pandemic have helped her argument? The truth would sound more like Disney lost money or broke even releasing BW because of the pandemic but Disney+ got extra subscribers to stream it. Would that truth have made her lawsuit seem more or less credible? let's say for arguments sake that 10 million subscribed, do you think they should account for a 1 or multiple year subscription towards her final gross? If I bought a 10 film cinema pass to go & see BW for example, do you think the total cost should counts towards that one film? Maybe an argument can be made to add a monthly total, which may be another 50 - 80 million on 10 million subscribers. Even if you analyze every detail, I still think the total is under 500 million that BW brought in for Disney.

[D84]

343 million BO - 25% for movie theater take: 205 million

60 million D+ - 15% for Roku, etc: 51 million

Total income: 256 million

Production Budget: 200 million 

So unless the payed less than 56 million on 2 marketing campaigns, it's loosing money.

Of course they could be lying about the budget and that wouldn't surprise me.

[chezmtghut]

On 8/2/2021 at 9:15 PM, D84 said:

343 million BO - 25% for movie theater take: 205 million

60 million D+ - 15% for Roku, etc: 51 million

Total income: 256 million

Production Budget: 200 million 

So unless the payed less than 56 million on 2 marketing campaigns, it's loosing money.

Of course they could be lying about the budget and that wouldn't surprise me.

I thought theaters got 20% for the first 2 weeks & then it increases incrementally each week after that. Regardless, BW did worse than the majority of Marvel films.

[D84]

On 8/2/2021 at 8:26 PM, chezmtghut said:

I thought theaters got 20% for the first 2 weeks & then it increases incrementally each week after that. Regardless, BW did worse than the majority of Marvel films.

I averaged it, adding another 5% to account for differences in time frame adjustments, and what other countries theaters might take.

It's an educated guess and there could be a variance in either direction, but I'd say my estimate is ballpark. 

[paperheart]

On 8/2/2021 at 6:15 PM, D84 said:

343 million BO - 25% for movie theater take: 205 million

60 million D+ - 15% for Roku, etc: 51 million

Total income: 256 million

Production Budget: 200 million 

So unless the payed less than 56 million on 2 marketing campaigns, it's loosing money.

Of course they could be lying about the budget and that wouldn't surprise me.

the D+ # you are using is first weekend only, through the second weekend based on Samba data the # was $109 million.  And no way is Disney getting 75% of the rake from theaters, 50-55% when you factor in int'l is much more reasonable. The P&A has to be $125 million at a minimum. Bottom line is roughly the same tho; $ loser before ancilliaries.

Edited August 3, 2021 by paperheart

[D84]

UPDATED with @paperheart info:

343 million BO - 45% for movie theater take: 188 million

109 million D+ - 15% for Roku, etc: 92 million

Total income: 280 million

Production Budget: 200 million 

So unless the paid less than 80 million on 2 marketing campaigns, it's losing money.

Of course they could be lying about the budget and that wouldn't surprise me.

Edited August 3, 2021 by D84
Spelling

[chezmtghut]

On 8/2/2021 at 9:46 PM, D84 said:

UPDATED with @paperheart info:

343 million BO - 45% for movie theater take: 188 million

109 million D+ - 15% for Roku, etc: 92 million

Total income: 280 million

Production Budget: 200 million 

So unless the payed less than 80 million on 2 marketing campaigns, it's loosing money.

Of course they could be lying about the budget and that wouldn't surprise me.

It didn't seem like Disney would need a 200 million budget for that film compared to other Marvel films.

[D84]

On 8/2/2021 at 8:55 PM, chezmtghut said:

It didn't seem like Disney would need a 200 million budget for that film compared to other Marvel films.

I don't know where to 200 million went, but it wasn't into the -script.

[Bosco685]

On 8/2/2021 at 9:08 PM, chezmtghut said:

She did argue that they made a bunch on Disney+ subscriptions though. How would the actual figures or bringing up the pandemic have helped her argument? The truth would sound more like Disney lost money or broke even releasing BW because of the pandemic but Disney+ got extra subscribers to stream it. Would that truth have made her lawsuit seem more or less credible? let's say for arguments sake that 10 million subscribed, do you think they should account for a 1 or multiple year subscription towards her final gross? If I bought a 10 film cinema pass to go & see BW for example, do you think the total cost should counts towards that one film? Maybe an argument can be made to add a monthly total, which may be another 50 - 80 million on 10 million subscribers. Even if you analyze every detail, I still think the total is under 500 million that BW brought in for Disney.

The film is far below the 2.8X-3.0X production budget necessary to say it broke even to account for all costs and revenue share agreements with theaters and talent.

But with lawsuit what was declared was Disney did not honor the agreed-upon contract with a hybrid release schedule. Not a personal attack on its brand by noting 'Disney makes enough money' or knocking its insensitivity to the pandemic.

I get it. You feel her claim is baseless. Meanwhile, from a brand image perspective Disney's response only hurt its case. Not helped it. And as was noted already Iger's leadership approach would have avoided this public fight. What was conveyed by Disney before Johansson's announcement triggered this to go public.

Very poorly handled talent relations.

[theCapraAegagrus]

On 8/2/2021 at 9:46 PM, D84 said:

UPDATED with @paperheart info:

343 million BO - 45% for movie theater take: 188 million

109 million D+ - 15% for Roku, etc: 92 million

Total income: 280 million

Production Budget: 200 million 

So unless they payed less than 80 million on 2 marketing campaigns, it's loosing money.

Of course they could be lying about the budget and that wouldn't surprise me.

I hate to do this to you, but:

*paid *losing

[media_junkie]

On 8/3/2021 at 4:11 AM, Bosco685 said:

But with lawsuit what was declared was Disney did not honor the agreed-upon contract with a hybrid release schedule. Not a personal attack on its brand by noting 'Disney makes enough money' or knocking its insensitivity to the pandemic.

I get it. You feel her claim is baseless. Meanwhile, from a brand image perspective Disney's response only hurt its case. Not helped it. And as was noted already Iger's leadership approach would have avoided this public fight. What was conveyed by Disney before Johansson's announcement triggered this to go public.

I'm in the camp of that I have to roll my eyes when someone with a net worth of $165 million who was paid $20 million for this movie is suing for another $ 5 to $10 million.  However, in saying that, she did have a contract.  If her contract said the movie would be in theaters for 45 days before hitting the secondary market, and if her contract said she would be paid additional money on the back end based upon how well it did in the theater for those 45 days, then yeah she has every right to sue.

I am not sure who dropped the ball at Disney on this, and went "scorched earth" on SJ by basically calling her greedy and unsympathetic to the problems Covid-19 has caused to the general public but wow!  I keep reading reports that both Feige and Iger are pissed/disappointed at Disney, and I'm not surprised because this is a PR nightmare.  

[TupennyConan]

This misguided movie  

[theCapraAegagrus]

We must all keep in mind that Disney is basically as dumb and greedy as Warner Bros.

The MCU 'lucked out' by having Marvel Studios and Kevin Feige as the middle man/men, where DC doesn't have that luxury. That's why you see so few of these mistakes on the Marvel end.

[Bosco685]

On 8/3/2021 at 8:27 AM, theCapraAegagrus said:

We must all keep in mind that Disney is basically as dumb and greedy as Warner Bros.

The MCU 'lucked out' by having Marvel Studios and Kevin Feige as the middle man/men, where DC doesn't have that luxury. That's why you see so few of these mistakes on the Marvel end.

When you consider the overall history, early on there were definite bumps in the road with box office results. But since Kevin Feige was committed to the road ahead, his leadership kept Marvel Studios from excessive adjustments like what took place with WB Studios.

Eye-opening: The Incredible Hulk was the biggest bomb early on at 1.8X production budget. And with Captain America: The First Avenger even this was just on the verge of break-even as at that time Disney/Marvel was still having to pay Paramount 8-9% revenue share of the overall box office results. And even with Iron Man 2 (3.1X) and Thor (3.0X) these were not the massive successes like Iron Man 1.

Paramount To End Relationship With Marvel In 2012: Disney Will Distribute 'Iron Man 3' and 'The Avengers'

In less capable and confident hands with those early results, this could have gone off the rails like other studios have unfortunately done.

[chezmtghut]

On 8/3/2021 at 4:11 AM, Bosco685 said:

The film is far below the 2.8X-3.0X production budget necessary to say it broke even to account for all costs and revenue share agreements with theaters and talent.

But with lawsuit what was declared was Disney did not honor the agreed-upon contract with a hybrid release schedule. Not a personal attack on its brand by noting 'Disney makes enough money' or knocking its insensitivity to the pandemic.

I get it. You feel her claim is baseless. Meanwhile, from a brand image perspective Disney's response only hurt its case. Not helped it. And as was noted already Iger's leadership approach would have avoided this public fight. What was conveyed by Disney before Johansson's announcement triggered this to go public.

Very poorly handled talent relations.

Her lawsuit could have simply claimed that Disney broke their contract by distributing the film via streaming simultaneously without adding that they brought in funds via Disney+ subscriptions & streaming fees. She made them sound greedy, hiding gross revenue to prevent her from getting her bonus, which I don't agree with. We haven't seen her contract, so I can't say if her lawsuit is completely baseless, but I simply don't agree that they're trying to hide revenue to avoid paying her bonus. I agree that there would have been a higher gross without streaming simultaneously, but I don't agree that it was done to increase Disney+ subscriptions & avoid paying her more money, which seems to be part of the claim. How would you have responded to that claim in Disney's position? I see you have no trouble mounting a harsh defense in these forums. Disney could have simply said that they complied with the contract that she signed, but felt like hitting back in response to her allegations. Should they not have brought up the pandemic when it's the very reason this is even an issue? Otherwise the film would have been out last year & streamed after several months in theaters.

[seanfingh]

There should have been plenty of time to negotiate language that would have encompassed the strange circumstances at play here. But it appears that the same old language trundled out for every movie was used and no one thought about how it was going to affect incentive based pay until it was too late. The question for me is were there some workout negotiations, and if so - who shut down negotiations? That would let me know who I think was trying to game the system.