- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
1
Posted on 7/30/21 at 9:45 am to Ace Midnight
quote:
It ignores the fact that she is still a working actress who is used to 8-figure salary for films
I would imagine that ScarJo and her people know that the clock is likely ticking on her career. She's at the age where Hollywood tends to lose interest in an actress (remember how rapidly Meg Ryan faded away after being Hollywood royalty?) and if you have to cast a red head in your action/comedy than Karen Gillan is right there, younger, and frankly better at comedy.
So why not sue? She is likely on her way out the door when it comes to being a movie superstar. Get your cash on the way out and stick it to the Mouse as a matter of principle. If she was 30 and in her movie making prime I'd keep all of this on the down low but she can afford to be middle aged and crazy at 40.
Posted on 7/30/21 at 9:57 am to Bard
quote:
Well, there's reality and there's "creative accounting".
Right. When the studio can assess 'Studio Charges' to films, and there is no way to determine what the studio charge is they can never make a profit. It is always convenient that the fees assessed on productions by studios are always enough to keep even the most profitable productions of all time in the red.
Return of the Jedi, Titanic, Transformers, Harry Potter, are all losers per the studios.
Now the studios book income on them and pay taxes, but net profit participants never see a dime, unless they sue. Then the studio will settle out of court to avoid their books being scrutinized.
This post was edited on 7/30/21 at 10:04 am
Posted on 7/30/21 at 10:40 am to BlackAdam
quote:
After Scarlett Johansson’s lawsuit against Disney, Emma Stone is said to be weighing her options about pursuing legal action over ‘CRUELLA’.
(via: screenrant)
Posted on 7/30/21 at 11:23 am to RLDSC FAN
Disney and all the Hollywood studios better back peddle quick b/c it looks like they are all about to get about to get wrecked.
Posted on 7/30/21 at 11:28 am to BlackAdam
quote:
Return of the Jedi, Titanic, Transformers, Harry Potter, are all losers per the studios.
To this day WB alleges that Batman (89) never made a profit. This, despite a 10:1 box office to budget ratio and 100s of marketing tie-ins licensed out to various toy makers, cereal companies, etc.
Though, to be fair, Jack Nicholson’s pay was something like $10 million plus 25% of the gross box office (before expenses), so maybe it was a loss?
Posted on 7/30/21 at 11:44 am to Arksulli
Meg Ryan declined because she had a very specific niche which was "cutesy romantic comedies". That has a shelf life due to looks and perceived age, as she started making them in the mid-80s with When Harry Met Sally and kept doing so into the 2000s.
ScarJo has more range than Ryan.
ScarJo has more range than Ryan.
Posted on 7/30/21 at 11:47 am to QJenk
quote:
Well, if Feige had any potential plans of bringing her back through multiverse craziness.
Hell, I don't know if he'll be employed by Disney after 2022.
quote:
Those just officially got thrown in the trash.
When you're right, you're right.
Posted on 7/30/21 at 12:18 pm to Ace Midnight
quote:
“Good for her,” said one Hollywood talent agent. “A lot of other actors are cheering for Scarlett and rooting her on. She has a lot of power and that makes this a visible conversation that puts Disney on the spot. By doing all of this in public, she might be able to change the rulebook.”
Salary disputes between top talent and studios are becoming more commonplace in the streaming era. Agents erupted when Warner Bros. sent its entire 2021 slate to HBO Max, opting to release movies like “Dune” and “Godzilla Vs. Kong” on the streaming platform at the same time they hit theaters. They claimed that the move prevented their clients from realizing their full back-end potential, because those payouts were tied to box office performance. Warner Bros. quickly worked to make things right, paying out over $250 million in backend deals to the likes of Will Smith (“King Richard”), Denzel Washington (“The Little Things”), and Gal Gadot (“Wonder Woman 1984”).
But most of the haggling took place behind closed doors. Johansson’s case is the first to break into open view, rather than being settled quietly, either through negotiation or arbitration. It appears to be emboldening other stars, with industry insiders telling Variety that several Disney actors are considering their own legal challenges. That could create a cascade effect, one that could prove costly to Disney if they have to cut talent in on a bigger piece of the overall pie.
“Something has gone wrong,” said one industry veteran. “I just find it absolutely stunning and amazing that they didn’t resolve this short of her suing. Disney does not want to get in a fight with Scarlett Johansson.”
Variety article
Posted on 7/30/21 at 12:36 pm to BlackAdam
quote:
Right. When the studio can assess 'Studio Charges' to films, and there is no way to determine what the studio charge is they can never make a profit. It is always convenient that the fees assessed on productions by studios are always enough to keep even the most profitable productions of all time in the red.
Essentially what the studios do is set up companies for each film. One company produces the film. They typically have the deals with the actors/creatives. Another company is the distributor. So if the production make 10 times the production and advertising budget at the box office, the distributor can charge a fee that is enough to make the the movie show a loss. Al the money goes back to the studio but the company that has the deal with the creatives can show a balance sheet in the red. It's a giant shell game.
Here is a link to an article that includes a balance sheet from Harry Potter and The Order of the Phoenix. It's 10 years old, but it still works the same.
Medium Article on Hollywood Accounting
Posted on 7/30/21 at 12:42 pm to Ace Midnight
quote:
It ignores the fact that she is still a working actress who is used to 8-figure salary for films. Studios will always factor in how problematic an actor is before signing them on to a project. Litigation is just as big a lodestone as being unprofessional or substance abuse, IMHO.
Honestly I think Disney (and likely other studios) are using this as a bellwether case because they are looking at possibly losing the winter box office, too. It's a new world and the entire industry has to figure this out.
Posted on 7/30/21 at 12:43 pm to johnqpublic
Yeah it's purely done to manipulate "net profit". It doesn't actually avoid any taxes.
Posted on 7/30/21 at 1:09 pm to johnqpublic
There are still limits to Hollywood accounting.
A few specific cases come to mind.
Sigourney Weaver sued over Ghostbusters not showing a profit after the studio came to her to be in Ghostbusters 2. They settled out of court and it is believed she got a huge payoff up front for the sequel based off profits she was owed from the first that she was never paid.
Sahara, a major flop based on a Clive Cussler book, ended up going to court and being a major embarrassment for Disney considering that things like bribes to the local government were included in that documentation. They also ended up losing IIRC because they expected Hollywood accounting to be bad but the way that one was handled was a fricking disaster that wasn't defensible in court.
A few specific cases come to mind.
Sigourney Weaver sued over Ghostbusters not showing a profit after the studio came to her to be in Ghostbusters 2. They settled out of court and it is believed she got a huge payoff up front for the sequel based off profits she was owed from the first that she was never paid.
Sahara, a major flop based on a Clive Cussler book, ended up going to court and being a major embarrassment for Disney considering that things like bribes to the local government were included in that documentation. They also ended up losing IIRC because they expected Hollywood accounting to be bad but the way that one was handled was a fricking disaster that wasn't defensible in court.
Posted on 7/30/21 at 2:09 pm to RLDSC FAN
For all of my criticism of ScarJo in this thread, I do hope she gets paid.
Disney, generally, isn't an impressive company any longer. This is extra dumb on their part.
Disney, generally, isn't an impressive company any longer. This is extra dumb on their part.
Posted on 7/30/21 at 2:42 pm to Ace Midnight
Disney is about to frick around and kill their golden goose.
LINK
Starting to make sense now what ScarJo didn't sue Marvel directly and went after Disney instead. Seems like she has had Feige on her side in all of this the entire time.
If the major shareholders know what's good for themselves they are going to dump Bob Chapek's penny pinching arse and put Feige in charge of the whole damn company.
quote:
Marvel Studios Boss Kevin Feige Reportedly Furious at Disney Over Black Widow Release
The Hollywood Reporter editor Matthew Belloni breaks down the Black Widow lawsuit, and claims that Marvel Studios president Kevin Feige is also unhappy about the film's hybrid release, something that was previously teased in reports earlier this year.
"[Feige is] a company man, and not prone to corporate showdowns or shouting matches. But I’m told he’s angry and embarrassed," Belloni's newsletter reads in part. "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-t 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.)"
This comes after Disney released a statement on Thursday in response to Johansson's lawsuit, arguing that the ordeal is "especially sad and distressing" amid the current box office circumstances.
"There is no merit whatsoever to this filing," Disney's statement reads. "The lawsuit is especially sad and distressing in its callous disregard for the horrific and prolonged global effects of the Covid-19 pandemic. Disney has fully complied with Ms. Johansson’s contract and furthermore, the release of Black Widow on Disney+ with Premier Access has significantly enhanced her ability to earn additional compensation on top of the $20M she has received to date."
"Disney intentionally induced Marvel’s breach of the agreement, without justification, in order to prevent Ms. Johansson from realizing the full benefit of her bargain with Marvel," Johansson's legal team argued.
LINK
Starting to make sense now what ScarJo didn't sue Marvel directly and went after Disney instead. Seems like she has had Feige on her side in all of this the entire time.
If the major shareholders know what's good for themselves they are going to dump Bob Chapek's penny pinching arse and put Feige in charge of the whole damn company.
This post was edited on 7/30/21 at 2:44 pm
Posted on 7/30/21 at 2:52 pm to Dr RC
quote:
"The lawsuit is especially sad and distressing in its callous disregard for the horrific and prolonged global effects of the Covid-19 pandemic.
So, Covid is responsible for Disney breaking contracts? Theater chains didn't put a gun to their head and say "Put this day and date on D+ premium."
Posted on 7/30/21 at 4:00 pm to RLDSC FAN
quote:
“Something has gone wrong,” said one industry veteran. “I just find it absolutely stunning and amazing that they didn’t resolve this short of her suing. Disney does not want to get in a fight with Scarlett Johansson.”
Agree with this. Like surely Disney knew this was going to be a shite show.
Posted on 7/30/21 at 4:11 pm to hiltacular
I mean it's one of their biggest female stars who finally got her spotlight (and top billing payday) in a female-centric movie...and they think referencing Covid will avoid the most major-negative PR hits?
Posted on 7/30/21 at 4:23 pm to RLDSC FAN
I really hope this is Kathleen Kennedy’s fault.
Posted on 7/30/21 at 4:57 pm to teke184
quote:
horrific and prolonged global effects of the Covid-19 pandemic.
Wow! We get to breach a contract because our massive heartless corporation didn't make as much money as usual. Every person who died of covid19, lost their job, or had their world upended should support us. This is just pathetic. frick Disney.
Page 5 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News