Page 28 of 44 FirstFirst ... 1824252627282930313238 ... LastLast
Results 406 to 420 of 653
  1. #406
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Posts
    1,299

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by green_garnish View Post
    Let's suppose I am worth $100 million. I go to a Wells Fargo ATM at the mall and withdraw $100, but it only gives me $50. The receipt says I got $100. I complain to Wells Fargo and they say "Pandemic! Mall transactions are down around the world'! This is disappointing and distressing! " I file suit.

    Is it the wrong time? If so, for what reason?
    I think this is a bad analogy, ScarJo lawsuit is about a contract dispute. Even if Disney did ripped her off, doesn’t mean it’s a contract violation, because sometimes people sign bad contracts. But it’s a PR game too and I’m not sure she is winning that either.
    Last edited by luprki; 08-02-2021 at 09:36 PM.

  2. #407

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by luprki View Post
    I think this is a bad analogy, ScarJo lawsuit is about a contract dispute. Even if Disney did ripped her off, doesn’t mean it’s a contract violation, because sometimes people sign bad contracts. But it’s a PR game too and I’m not sure she is winning that either.
    People sue over “bad contracts” all the time.

    I don’t know a success rate; probably hard to determine. If you think SarJo was involved with a “bad contract”, why wouldn’t you hope she’d win?

  3. #408
    CBR's Good Fairy Kieran_Frost's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Bristol, UK
    Posts
    8,499

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Coatl View Post
    Damn! so let me get this straight, so, She made a movie and was promised as part of her payment a part of the income from the teatrical release, but Disney just release the movie direct to streming breaking the contract, so they get their money AND screw SJ!

    And she is the one called "greed" and "selfish" for want the accorded and fair share of her income. Of course she wants her money, she alredy worked for it! They had an accord and is not justice break it (becuase they didn't want to loose money) and expect that she won't do anything to defend herself, would any one just shrug off like 50 millions? would anyone work hard for years with someone and when the project is finished, just accept not being pay the accorded becuase your partner didn't want to loose money and took most of the payment for himself?
    I 100% side with Scarlett. I'm just so disgusted with Disney right now. The House of Greed has reached a new low.
    "We are Shakespeare. We are Michelangelo. We are Tchaikovsky. We are Turing. We are Mercury. We are Wilde. We are Lincoln, Lorca, Leonardo da Vinci. We are Alexander the Great. We are Fredrick the Great. We are Rustin. We are Addams. We are Marsha! Marsha Marsha Marsha! We so generous, we DeGeneres. We are Ziggy Stardust hooked to the silver screen. Controversially we are Malcolm X. We are Plato. We are Aristotle. We are RuPaul, god dammit! And yes, we are Woolf."

  4. #409
    Incredible Member beatboks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    569

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kirby101 View Post
    I am sure there are people with Disney+ who decided to pay for BW and stream it (as some people here did) but I wonder how many people sign up for Disney+ so they get to pay the extra $30 to stream a new release? In other words does the $30 VOD get them more subscribers, or is it just something people already subscribed use. Would they unsubscribe without the occasional same day VOD?
    I'm sure that it and all the other movies they released on disney+ simultaneously to cinema gave them a lot of sign ups. Frankly I'd say that is why they did it. I mean think about it if you do something that cuts into box office receipts and don't get some other return from it why repeat it?. Both Disney and WB have released stuff early to their streaming sites during covid. It has to generate them a return to justify.

    The way I see it.
    1. Their contracts with talent remunerate based on box office returns heavily with less for streaming etc.
    2. The numbers re streaming are COMPLETELY under their control and rarely released (meaning they can cook the books anyway.
    3. Sign ups to streaming services generated by a movie wouldn't be a part of any figures even if those figures were open.

    End result they pay the talent less get returns that are more hidden and less cut into. Generate a larger market for the rest of their content (Saif market has more monthly subscription fees as well as potential hires of material.

    Johanson making this suite if she's successful could very well under mine them undercutting talent on many upcoming projects. She might cost herself work but in doing so protect the future incomes of many of her fellow actors/actresses. In anycase in this day and age there are many ways a celebrity can make money without making films etc. There's no such thing as bad press because any notoriety or fame can generate followers on social media platforms,YouTube, etc. Influencers can make a fortune.

  5. #410
    Astonishing Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    3,426

    Default

    Doesn't matter if she's worth 100 millions or a 100 bucks Disney needs to pay what they owe.

  6. #411
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Posts
    1,299

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bunch of Coconuts View Post
    People sue over “bad contracts” all the time.

    I don’t know a success rate; probably hard to determine. If you think SarJo was involved with a “bad contract”, why wouldn’t you hope she’d win?
    If she signed a bad contract, it’s totally her and her attorneys fault.

  7. #412
    Amazing Member
    Join Date
    May 2021
    Posts
    78

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Immortal Weapon View Post
    I never said never when it comes to stuff like this. Robin Williams had his issues with Disney when he voiced Genie in Aladdin. They managed to get him back for the final movie.
    Not to forget who knows who will be in charge after this esp. if more actors go to court over this.

  8. #413
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Posts
    1,299

    Default

    If Disney Plus offered the movie at no extra cost like HBOMax, I think she would have a strong case.

  9. #414
    Put a smile on that face Immortal Weapon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    Bronx, New York
    Posts
    13,941

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by luprki View Post
    If Disney Plus offered the movie at no extra cost like HBOMax, I think she would have a strong case.
    The fact there is a cost makes her case stronger. They could have easily offered her a percentage of the premier access revenue to make up for what she lost in box office

  10. #415
    Extraordinary Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    7,322

    Default

    RDJ got a base salary of 10mil for IM3 and a backend deal in all supposedly he made 50 mil. Scarjo got 20mil as a base this movie was never gonna do IM3 business. I doubt her deal was better than RDJ's so how much did she really lose? We'll never know. But it can't be worth all this.

  11. #416
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Posts
    1,299

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Immortal Weapon View Post
    The fact there is a cost makes her case stronger. They could have easily offered her a percentage of the premier access revenue to make up for what she lost in box office
    They didn’t have to, apparently her contract only covers theatrical releases. In this new world, I sure future backend deals will also cover digital releases.

  12. #417
    Astonishing Member Panic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    3,090

    Default

    Marvel's Chief counsel did apparently tell her:
    “We understand that should the plan change, we would need to discuss this with you and come to an understanding as the deal is based on a series of (very large) box office bonuses,”
    So they had told her that if something significant did change with the release they would adjust things accordingly. Which they didn't do. They obviously knew that they should, but when it came down to it they figured they'd risk this kind of ****storm and just hope Johansson would not make a fuss.

  13. #418
    The Kid 80sbaby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    2,939

    Default

    I, for one, am SHOCKED that Disney appears to actually be the greedy ones in all this.

  14. #419
    Silver Sentinel BeastieRunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    West Coast, USA
    Posts
    15,262

    Default

    Have you all ever followed the "Disney Must Pay" stuff going on with movie/TV writers, authors, comic book writers, and some of the smaller studios they absorbed? There's a whole hashtag even #disneymustpay ...

    They've been doing this for decades. They acquire properties or change media formats and screw people all the time and never pay them. They have it down to a legal science, if you will. They pay off the notable names and hope we forget the rest.

    They still play fast and loose with copyright. Disney still takes stuff from Marvel and never credits the creators (just the notable ones).

    I am amazed in this day and age that people still think they're a good company.

    I've noticed that some significant (as in non just YouTubers) reviewers are saying they will never review another Disney product again.

    I don't see Disney losing this since they've won the other hundreds of similar cases. Settle? Most likely.

    They’ve never released the contract to the public, so it is speculation at best. I would be pleasantly surprised if Disney screwed up to the point that ScarJo could win. I just don't expect it given the history.
    Last edited by BeastieRunner; 08-03-2021 at 12:52 PM.
    "Always listen to the crazy scientist with a weird van or armful of blueprints and diagrams." -- Vibranium

  15. #420
    Extraordinary Member Gaastra's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    8,324

    Default

    I, for one, am SHOCKED that Disney appears to actually be the greedy ones in all this.
    $7 for a soda, $11 for a burger, $30 for a t shirt at the parks and your shocked?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •