Scarlett Johansson sues Disney over ‘Black Widow’ streaming release.

interesting - wouldn't this cause some butthurt with Disney?


But I guess it doesn't really matter since ScarJo was kinda done with Black Widow and moving on............

SJ is high profile so this story is getting attention. The fact is that most pre-Disney+ and HBO Max contracts are tied to box office numbers so producers, directors, and other behind-the-scenes talent would be screwed by direct-to-streaming releases and have probably lawyered up. Also, IIRC Patty Jenkins kicked up a fuss when Warner released WW84 on HBO Max so she and Gal Gadot received some fat cheques. ScarJo might be taking their lead.

In the current landscape, I have to believe that agents worth their salt would negotiate deals that would involve streaming revenue. I'm expecting this to mean that the streaming companies would have to release viewing numbers, at the very least to people who want a share of the profits from streaming.

I'm hoping that'll put an end to the secrecy about those numbers because theatrical box office has made financial performance a part of film discussion (for some of us, at least). This business with studios announcing streaming figures only when they're good is BS. I'm kind of amazed that shareholders don't demand the release of those figures so at least they know how well or poorly the company's properties are doing.

She's also a producer for this film. She has a lot of stake on this lawsuit. She was smart enough to wait until weeks after release to leak the news to the world about the lawsuit.

It seems pretty nuts that they would not figure this out with her before switching release strategies.
They must have had some sort of discussions - guess they lowballed her?

Frankly - everyone praises Disney/Marvel for their content, while ignoring the wide range of shady things the company has done to bolster their pockets.

shikotee wrote: ↑ It seems pretty nuts that they would not figure this out with her before switching release strategies.
They must have had some sort of discussions - guess they lowballed her?

Frankly - everyone praises Disney/Marvel for their content, while ignoring the wide range of shady things the company has done to bolster their pockets.

didn't AT&T do the same for all the their theatrical releases during covid and PO'ed the directors. Everbody wants a max return and nobody wanted to sit on debt. Welcome to the totality of covid scarlet. You made off better than most.

lead wrote: ↑ didn't AT&T do the same for all the their theatrical releases during covid and PO'ed the directors. Everbody wants a max return and nobody wanted to sit on debt. Welcome to the totality of covid scarlet. You made off better than most.

An opinion doesn't obsolve Disney from moving the goalposts of her contract without figuring things out prior to doing so. I'm with Scarlet. Disney has the deepest pockets that exist, and they needed to restructure her contract in advance. Had Disney stuck to the original deal, and followed the traditional release format, then I'd have no sympathy for SJ. She would not have made anywhere near what was expected pre-Covid, but it wouldn't be the contract that shifted (just post Covid market).

shikotee wrote: ↑ Disney has the deepest pockets that exist, and they needed to restructure her contract in advance.

That would have a snowball effect, though. If Disney had been willing to do that, then *everyone* with a traditional box office percentage contract would've wanted to renegotiate their deals. I have no idea how much compensating all the talent with those contracts would cost Disney, Paramount, Warner, etc. but I can't see it being a small figure.

I'm not saying that getting sued is preferable, but if cases like this actually make it to court, a conservative judge could rule in favour of the studio. That admittedly is taking a chance and would undoubtedly do some type of damage to the studio-talent relationship (more than what's already been done, that is), but we are talking about companies that went ahead and put theatrical releases onto streaming without consulting the production companies or giving any thought to restructuring deals to give them a slice of the streaming revenue.

PlainDealer wrote: ↑ That would have a snowball effect, though. If Disney had been willing to do that, then *everyone* with a traditional box office percentage contract would've wanted to renegotiate their deals. I have no idea how much compensating all the talent with those contracts would cost Disney, Paramount, Warner, etc. but I can't see it being a small figure.

I'm not saying that getting sued is preferable, but if cases like this actually make it to court, a conservative judge could rule in favour of the studio. That admittedly is taking a chance and would undoubtedly do some type of damage to the studio-talent relationship (more than what's already been done, that is), but we are talking about companies that went ahead and put theatrical releases onto streaming without consulting the production companies or giving any thought to restructuring deals to give them a slice of the streaming revenue.

Define *everyone*.
That is to say, from all the contracts that are made between actors and studios, how many involve box office percentage?
My feeling - very small minority.

Anyone who had a percentage based contract based on box office receipts deserves renegotiation if the studio changes the process by which the film is released. In this case, the Disney+ platform most certainly had lots to gain by this moving of the goal posts. Good on SJ for challenging these jackals, who have previously used Star Wars movie releases as a means to strongarm their "terms" with Movie Theatres.

shikotee wrote: ↑ Define *everyone*.
That is to say, from all the contracts that are made between actors and studios, how many involve box office percentage?
My feeling - very small minority.

I doubt very much carpenters and caterers get a percentage of box office, but certainly anyone with the word 'producer' in their title would be looking at a cut of revenues from theatrical exhibition. Production companies, in fact, would be dependent on percentages to make money unless they sell their film outright (as is the case with pretty much any property Netflix acquires). If you start looking outside of acting circles, you're going to find enough people who expected to be paid from box office revenue that the studios would worry should they all start taking money from the streaming coffers.

shikotee wrote: ↑Anyone who had a percentage based contract based on box office receipts deserves renegotiation if the studio changes the process by which the film is released.

I think this idea is reasonable, but obviously, the studios don't agree. Studios screwing over talent, theatre owners, and other people who make them money is nothing new. This is just the latest rendition of the same old tune we're now hearing.

shikotee wrote: ↑In this case, the Disney+ platform most certainly had lots to gain by this moving of the goal posts. Good on SJ for challenging these jackals, who have previously used Star Wars movie releases as a means to strongarm their "terms" with Movie Theatres.

There certainly aren't many individuals with enough clout and resources to take on behemoths like Disney in a legal battle, so yes, it's nice to hear when someone attempts to hold the 500-ton gorilla accountable for their actions. It's unfortunate that the majority of people affected by the corporate shenanigans won't get any benefit from those court cases, though.

Not surprised if she is losing out on 50 million.

Hey spit balling here but wouldn’t actors and their agents be savvy enough to know by now that streaming services are a thing? Wouldn’t this come up in negotiations? I can’t imagine they didn’t mention this and scarlets and her team are still operating in fhe 2000s when thalestricsl releases had a 3-6 month window. Kind of makes me think Disney has their butt covered in their wording and scarlette and co. didn’t read through the fine print. Otherwise Disney is going to pay through the nose.

carmaster wrote: ↑ Not surprised if she is losing out on 50 million.

Does she command such a package? I would think that’s still on mostly brad Pitt tier. Damn that’s a lot of coin. If Disney is willing to give her 5o large maybe they didn’t have much faith in the movie hence her take would be far less.

Supercooled wrote: ↑ Does she command such a package? I would think that’s still on mostly brad Pitt tier. Damn that’s a lot of coin. If Disney is willing to give her 5o large maybe they didn’t have much faith in the movie hence her take would be far less.

She got an executive producer credit on Black Widow.
As an executive producer, Johansson would earn pay on the back-end (bonuses) on top of her $15 million salary for the movie.

from https://stylecaster.com/scarlett-johans ... ow-salary/

How much is Scarlett Johansson’s Black Widow salary?

So how much is Scarlett Johansson’s Black Widow salary? Well, in an interview with The Hollywood Reporter in 2019, Johansson confirmed that she was paid the same as her male-costars, Chris Evans and Chris Hemsworth, for Black Widow. So how much does she make? Well, according to THR, Evans and Hemsworth both made $15 million for their most recent solo Marvel movies: 2016’s Captain America: Civil War and 2017’s Thor Ragnarok. This means that Johansson made the same salary of $15 million for Black Widow.

Where she makes more than the Chrises, however, is with her executive producer credit, which makes her first Avenger to be an executive producer in a Marvel movie. As an executive producer, Johansson will earn pay on the back-end of Black Widow as well, which is likely why she sued Disney in July 2021 for allegedly suppressing box office sales by streaming Black Widow on Disney Plus. Still, regardless of what she earns in the back end, ScarJo’s producer credits means she makes more than the Chrises, who weren’t producers on their films, in the long run. ScarJo’s Black Widow salary also makes her the second highest-paid Marvel star after Robert Downey Jr., who made a reported $50 million for Avengers: Endgame.

Supercooled wrote: ↑ Hey spit balling here but wouldn’t actors and their agents be savvy enough to know by now that streaming services are a thing? Wouldn’t this come up in negotiations? I can’t imagine they didn’t mention this and scarlets and her team are still operating in fhe 2000s when thalestricsl releases had a 3-6 month window. Kind of makes me think Disney has their butt covered in their wording and scarlette and co. didn’t read through the fine print. Otherwise Disney is going to pay through the nose.

Marvel promised exclusive theatrical run before streaming. Disney did not renegotiate contract when deciding to do a hybrid release.

from https://www.cnbc.com/2021/07/29/disney- ... wsuit.html

According to the actress’ lawsuit, Johansson’s representatives had sought assurances that “Black Widow” would be released in theaters as far back as 2019. There were concerns that Disney executives might use the film to pad its new streaming service Disney+.

Marvel’s chief counsel, which stated “Black Widow” would be released like other films in the Marvel Cinematic Universe. Meaning, it would have a theatrical run before going to the home video market.

The filing alleges that once Johansson heard that “Black Widow” would be released on streaming and in theaters on the same day, she attempted to negotiate with Marvel. Disney and Marvel did not respond.

Dhanushan wrote: ↑ Marvel promised exclusive theatrical run before streaming. Disney did not renegotiate contract when deciding to do a hybrid release.

from https://www.cnbc.com/2021/07/29/disney- ... wsuit.html

According to the actress’ lawsuit, Johansson’s representatives had sought assurances that “Black Widow” would be released in theaters as far back as 2019. There were concerns that Disney executives might use the film to pad its new streaming service Disney+.

Marvel’s chief counsel, which stated “Black Widow” would be released like other films in the Marvel Cinematic Universe. Meaning, it would have a theatrical run before going to the home video market.

The filing alleges that once Johansson heard that “Black Widow” would be released on streaming and in theaters on the same day, she attempted to negotiate with Marvel. Disney and Marvel did not respond.

Appreciate the context. So in light of this it would seem Disney and Marvel who I would think are in bed together probably lowballed her reps with a figure that didn’t meet their expectation. This brings up another curiosity. Without RDJ would the franchise stand? Clearly iron man was she face of that franchise but a 35 million is a pretty big chasm in pay.

It’s my understanding that executive producers have some of their own skin in the game as well which affords them creative input. So I’m wondering how much she had put in to be given that control.

shikotee wrote: ↑Frankly - everyone praises Disney/Marvel for their content, while ignoring the wide range of shady things the company has done to bolster their pockets.

Not me. Apple, Disney, and Sony are the three companies that come to mind when it comes to consumer unfriendliness (hence, I preferred HD DVD to win ).

Dhanushan wrote: ↑ Marvel promised exclusive theatrical run before streaming. Disney did not renegotiate contract when deciding to do a hybrid release.

from https://www.cnbc.com/2021/07/29/disney- ... wsuit.html

According to the actress’ lawsuit, Johansson’s representatives had sought assurances that “Black Widow” would be released in theaters as far back as 2019. There were concerns that Disney executives might use the film to pad its new streaming service Disney+.

Marvel’s chief counsel, which stated “Black Widow” would be released like other films in the Marvel Cinematic Universe. Meaning, it would have a theatrical run before going to the home video market.

The filing alleges that once Johansson heard that “Black Widow” would be released on streaming and in theaters on the same day, she attempted to negotiate with Marvel. Disney and Marvel did not respond.

Yes, this is where the mess started, the movie's release was held back due to covid. I can appreciate Disney just wanting this movie out, especially as holding it back interferes with other movies (and now Disney+ shows) from progressing forward or ruining the timeline.
But it sounds like Disney pulled a fast one by releasing it to theaters, then quickly dumping it onto streaming platforms. I'm sure that in their lawyerly opinions, they held up their end of the bargain. The question is now a timeline thing, as in did they make it a theater exclusive for a long enough time?

Theater operators should want in on this action too. Disney really screws them over with their release rules and prices, and the Black Widow release definitely cost them a lot of revenue. I agree with a previous sentiment that they should start releasing streaming sales figures, really shine a light on the total revenue flow going on. But that's becoming a reality of large corporations.

Marvel Studios President Kevin Feige is reportedly furious about the situation

from https://gamersgrade.com/kevin-feige-rep ... -standoff/

The latest What I’m Hearing… newsletter from former The Hollywood Reporter editor Matthew Belloni notes, in part:

“[Feige is] a company man, and not prone to corporate showdowns or shouting matches. But I’m told he’s angry and embarrassed. He lobbied Disney against the day-and-date plan for Black Widow, preferring the big screen exclusivity and not wanting to upset his talent. And then when the sh** hit the fan, the movie started tanking, and Johansson’s team threatened litigation, he wanted Disney to make this right with her. (Disney declined to comment on Feige.)”

BernardRyder wrote: ↑ Yes, this is where the mess started, the movie's release was held back due to covid. I can appreciate Disney just wanting this movie out, especially as holding it back interferes with other movies (and now Disney+ shows) from progressing forward or ruining the timeline.
But it sounds like Disney pulled a fast one by releasing it to theaters, then quickly dumping it onto streaming platforms. I'm sure that in their lawyerly opinions, they held up their end of the bargain. The question is now a timeline thing, as in did they make it a theater exclusive for a long enough time?

Theater operators should want in on this action too. Disney really screws them over with their release rules and prices, and the Black Widow release definitely cost them a lot of revenue. I agree with a previous sentiment that they should start releasing streaming sales figures, really shine a light on the total revenue flow going on. But that's becoming a reality of large corporations.

There was no delay in releasing this movie on their streaming service Disney+, it was a simultaneous release.

from https://deadline.com/2021/07/scarlett-j ... 234802440/

Black Widow, according to TorrentFreak, has been the No. 1 pirated movie since its opening on July 9. Disney attempted to herald the pic’s opening weekend revenue, saying it made a combined global theatrical and Disney+ Premier PVOD take of $218M ($60M worldwide PVOD plus $158M global box office debut). Disney plans to trumpet similar PVOD and theatrical stats this coming weekend for its Dwayne Johnson-Emily Blunt movie Jungle Cruise, which also is available on Disney+ Premier for $29.99. However, Black Widow dropped 68% in its second weekend, the worst ever for a Disney/Marvel movie, indicating that piracy and PVOD had cannibalized the title. The results prompted the National Association of Theatre Owners to slam Disney publicly for crushing the window. Black Widow will be lucky to make $350M at the worldwide box office, a far cry from the $700M that Universal’s traditional theatrical-windowed global release F9 is set to do. Marvel movies have had a streak of clearing $1 billion at the global box office in recent years.

Disney announced further crushing of windows this week, with Black Widow getting a 33-day theatrical window (with Disney+ Premier) before the pic’s August 10 arrival digital platforms, followed by a DVD and Blu-Ray release on September 14 and the Johansson title being completely available for free to Disney+ subscribers on October 6.

NATO: Black Widow‘s Hybrid Release “Shows Theatrical Exclusivity Is the Way Forward”

Black Widow: Scarlett Johansson Isn’t The Only One Pissed At Disney; Kevin Feige Is Reportedly ‘Angry & Embarrassed’ Over Hybrid Release Too

Marvel’s Black Widow Is Reportedly Most-Pirated Movie of the Pandemic Era