Black Widow | July 9 2021 | ScarJo secures the bag from Disney

[charlie Jatinder]

3 minutes ago, TalismanRing said:

All that would mean is that Drs and insurance payments would skyrocket.

 

Actors, like athletes, musicians and any entertainer are paid in accordance to the revenue they bring to producers, investors and studios.  If they can find one to pay less to bring in the same money they will.  I'm not going to cry because billionaires have to pay millionaires more money to make more money.

 

2 minutes ago, keysersoze123 said:

I would rather actors get their piece of the pie instead of greedy studio heads grabbing everything sitting in a comfortable office. Its no different from Lebron or Brady or Durant or Prescott or Ronaldo or Federer making more than doctors. These guys have equity while Doctors get paid. 

Yeah the whole process, the business need to get smaller. Movie tickets get slash by half may be in many parts of world.

[Legion Again]

15 minutes ago, TalismanRing said:

Regardless, her lawyers were suing for an additional $80m (insane) on top of her $20m pay so it's hardly an unequivocal win.

Just because they put 80 on some documents doesn’t mean they were actually hoping for 80 internally.    
 

Agreed that if it just ended up “we threw 20 on top of the existing 20” that’s more even, but if they mean “settled for a new 40 on top of existing pay” that’s probably more than she would have gotten without covid so I would definitely stand by the “unequivocal win” phrasing.

[keysersoze123]

19 minutes ago, charlie Jatinder said:

 

Yeah the whole process, the business need to get smaller. Movie tickets get slash by half may be in many parts of world.

I dont agree with you. Movie tickets should be as much expensive as people are willing to pay. Plus most of the studio revenue comes post theatrical run. Theatrical run is generally to build equity on the brand. That way you are asking for entire market to be cut. That might work in communist land(not sure its even happening in China) but not in open markets for sure. 

[Barnack]

18 minutes ago, keysersoze123 said:

 

I would rather actors get their piece of the pie instead of greedy studio heads grabbing everything sitting in a comfortable office. Its no different from Lebron or Brady or Durant or Prescott or Ronaldo or Federer making more than doctors. These guys have equity while Doctors get paid. 

It is true that it is not much different (if any different) than athlete.

 

With the premise that it is my very little understanding: 

 

1) It is rarely a case were they do have equity and this is not a case (i.e. Johansson could not have lost money if the movie would have lost money), unlike equity athlete tend to have revenue or profit share with none of the risk if it fail, that why even if they are a giant group of super rich people they very often decide to not get equity (or right out buy it), because that deal of get half the revenues with 0 of the risk is hard to beat. There is a strong never put of your own money in things stigma in Hollywood (Witherspoon did talk about it when she start putting her money in projects to make them happen).

 

2) That an assumption that the money would go to greedy studio head or that:

22 minutes ago, TalismanRing said:

billionaires have to pay millionaires more money to make more money.

 

I doubt billionaire pay millionaires here, sometime it is but here it is a public company Disney that do, which is not owned by billionaire but by everyone:

https://money.cnn.com/quote/shareholders/shareholders.html?symb=DIS&subView=institutional

 

500 idx fund and state farm, fidelity of the world or not special closed group of billionaires, but for a large part regular people pension fund, insurance and so on. Rich people financing a movie do happen, but that not always the case, specially Disney one.

 

32 minutes ago, charlie Jatinder said:

I wanna live in a world where big actors make less than top doctors. They are over paid af.

 

Just to be sure I understand you do you think that Lebron James in is prime was overpaid ?

 

 

[charlie Jatinder]

6 minutes ago, Barnack said:

Just to be sure I understand you do you think that Lebron James in is prime was overpaid ?

Don't know Lebron James other than name, but guessing how cricketers are overpaid in India, he would be overpaid as well.

[Barnack]

Just now, charlie Jatinder said:

Don't know Lebron James other than name, but guessing how cricketers are overpaid in India, he would be overpaid as well.

Because of the league maximum wage system he was arguably vastly underpaid:

https://visual.ly/community/Infographics/sports/lebron-james-most-underpaid-athlete-sports

 

Is franchise lost half the tv rating the moment he left, stopped going to the final every year, the ticket value dropped by 80%.

 

There a chance that New-York or Los Angeles would have agree to pay Lebron James nearly 100m a year if it was like soccer and more open, maybe less but significantly more than the 19 millions a year he signed in is prime. But that league maximum pay rules, made it maybe for a more healthy league, that had bigger intl reach that make Lebron a bigger global star and made him overall more money from Nike, movies and so on.

 

Should someone that make you sales tickets much higher price, reach the final every year not take a cut of that amount ?

 

P.S. There is no obvious link between actor compensation and ticket price, movie theater will obviously charge has much has they can to optimize revenues and do not pay for the movie they show usually, they give a share back.

 

[ThomasNicole]

Scarlett not only get her money for BW, she also will still produce and star the Tower Of Terror for them (and i bet she get additional 20M for this one).

 

She is the real winner here, how many times an actor started an lawsuit for money against a big studio and ended up getting the money? And her carreer doesn't even suffer because of that.

 

Obviously they asked 80M knowing Disney will offer way less and then they would reach a deal somewhat in the middle (which happened, she get +40M).

[Barnack]

12 hours ago, ThomasNicole said:

Scarlett not only get her money for BW, she also will still produce and star the Tower Of Terror for them (and i bet she get additional 20M for this one).

 

That was announced before Widow release (which I imagine made it more surprising to some that the battle went public).

 

12 hours ago, ThomasNicole said:

 And her carreer doesn't even suffer because of that.

Not sure how we can have a clue, but I doubt it will indeed (it is somewhat common and almost expected see how much Peter Jackson continued to work with people that he had just sued and so on)

 

12 hours ago, ThomasNicole said:

how many times an actor started an lawsuit for money against a big studio and ended up getting the money?

Big name for big case I would imagine it is rare that it ever end up in actual lawsuit (the Gerald Butler against a smaller entity is maybe more common), there a list of famous case:

https://www.lamag.com/culturefiles/scarlett-johansson-lawsuit-disney/

 

12 hours ago, ThomasNicole said:

Obviously they asked 80M knowing Disney will offer way less and then they would reach a deal somewhat in the middle (which happened, she get +40M).

Or she got 20M+ and they include the 20M in advance to say that she got +40M not sure will ever see any details.

Edited October 1, 2021 by Barnack

[Heroicpiglet]

It has to be this way. Disney lost the first PR move with their pandemic statement.

[WittyUsername]

The idea that ScarJo and Disney are apparently going to just bury the hatchet and continue working together after that nasty debacle is crazy to me. 

[Barnack]

8 minutes ago, WittyUsername said:

The idea that ScarJo and Disney are apparently going to just bury the hatchet and continue working together after that nasty debacle is crazy to me. 

It is a really big enterprise, her contract that was allegedly broken was with MVL East Coast Productions, LLC (“Marvel”), not sure it would involve many day to day with people that had issue with each others and the one that did not ignored the issue and their promise, not Disney.

[Ozymandias]

Well I'm glad this very public back and forth dispute between one of our obscenely wealthy betters and a $300 billion conglomerate was settled, crises averted. 

 

 

 

[Krissykins]

Congratulations Scar-Jo. 
 

there’s no way she wouldve settled for an amount she wasn’t happy with, after all this. Deadline are “hearing $40m”, so that would be $60m. 

Either way, Scar-Jo won and got what she wanted. Bravo. 

 

[Saul Goodman]

Queen ScarJo! She paved the way.

[RRA]

3 hours ago, TalismanRing said:

 

However, when all is said and done, the deal will run to more than $40 million, sources tell me.

 

Doesn't indicate if that already includes the $20m.  If so then she'd be getting her base +  5% of the gross + PA.    If not then her base + about 10% of the gross (which is a silly contract on Disney's part) & PA.    A % of the gross + PA was already being given.

 

Regardless, her lawyers were suing for an additional $80m (insane) on top of her $20m pay so it's hardly an unequivocal win.

Let’s remember basic negotiations: you want that one loaf of bread? You start out demanding the whole bakery then negotiate down from there.

[Valonqar]

8 hours ago, RRA said:

So she’s getting the money she basically would’ve gotten if Disney wasn’t being cheap/silly, but add a PR hiccup. 

 

anyway that settled, ScarJo showing up in a Secret Wars something wouldn’t surprise me tbh

 

It would surprise me. Rumor has it that one of reasons why Marvel let some of its biggest stars go  (too expensive being the other) is that they flat out refused to appear on shows. It's been a problem since Agents of SHIELD days. 

 

But anyway, good for Scarlett. Expected result so why Disney had to act like jerks with that "heartless ScarJo" statement that was universally panned is beyond me. They were in the wrong and they have so much money 40M is basically a tip for them.

[Legion Again]

3 minutes ago, Valonqar said:

 

It would surprise me. Rumor has it that one of reasons why Marvel let some of its biggest stars go  (too expensive being the other) is that they flat out refused to appear on shows. It's been a problem since Agents of SHIELD days. 

 

But anyway, good for Scarlett. Expected result so why Disney had to act like jerks with that "heartless ScarJo" statement that was universally panned is beyond me. They were in the wrong and they have so much money 40M is basically a tip for them.

I think you are confusing Secret invasion (a 2022 tv show with Captain marvel tie-ins) with Secret Wars (a rumored far off avengers 6/7/8/whatever multiverse battle nonsense kind of thing).

Edited October 1, 2021 by Legion of the Ten Crores

[Darth Lehnsherr]

I could see ScarJo maybe appearing in flashbacks if they decide to do a Yelena Belova standalone project (whether movie or Disney+ show idk). 

[Hatebox]

I guess a multi-millionaire actor beating a multi-billion dollar conglomerate still... kind of counts as David beating Goliath. 

[Valonqar]

39 minutes ago, Legion of the Ten Crores said:

I think you are confusing Secret invasion (a 2022 tv show with Captain marvel tie-ins) with Secret Wars (a rumored far off avengers 6/7/8/whatever multiverse battle nonsense kind of thing).

 

Ah yes, you are right. My bad.