I would be willing to help her make another 'movie' if the mouse network drops herA lot of words here. 😑
Holy shit.
OT: Black Widow movie
- Thread starter NedFromYork
- Start date
Probably some force majeure clause that gives Disney wiggle room wrt Covid. I don't think it's a smart move by ScarJo; would be very difficult to predict how much more theaters would have made without the Disney+ streaming option. She's had a good record with Disney (Jungle Book, Black Widow/Marvel) and not sure I would jeopardize that over whatever amount this might be (and my guess is not quite as good as future earnings with Disney could be). Florence Pugh - you're up!
There is no such thing as bad publicity. You think any one who is her fan will side with Disney? No. And those who do side with Disney will forget all about this next time she shows up looking sexy.
Hard to sympathize with either. You have the muti billion $ corporation vs the actress who already has made more than she can spend and will still get paid $30 million from Black Widow.
There are literally thousands of posts on the front page of this board. And, your thread was about the movie whereas mine is not. It is about the lawsuit.Doesn't anyone check to see if already posted? Sheesh...(posted yesterday, by yours truly):
OT: Black Widow movie
Has anybody seen it? Thoughts? Seeing it tomorrow night.bwi.forums.rivals.com
Sorry for stepping on your toes. And sorry to step on the toes of the next person I double post on. It's going to happen. There is just far too much data to sort through and issues are often tangential so it is a value judgement as to what deserves a new thread and what does not. I've gotten yelled at for "hijacking threads" for doing that as well.
I mean, actors are disposable if they don't play ball. See: Johnny Depp who is no longer in any Disney movies.
There are literally thousands of posts on the front page of this board. And, your thread was about the movie whereas mine is not. It is about the lawsuit.
Sorry for stepping on your toes. And sorry to step on the toes of the next person I double post on. It's going to happen. There is just far too much data to sort through and issues are often tangential so it is a value judgement as to what deserves a new thread and what does not. I've gotten yelled at for "hijacking threads" for doing that as well.
That's what 'FC' is for - get hip.
+1. Not only that but she could end up on a "list" and not in the good way.
i agree. a good "actor" is simply one that played the PR game better and now has a "draw" reputation. But if you are Disney and making the next big-budget movie, are you going to cast ScarJoe or one of the other dozens of high-profile actors? I am always amazed seeing great acting by bit players in shows like Law and Order. Great acting isn't as rare as Hollywood would like you to think (edit).
I would also note that this movie had a good opening weekend but really fell off after. Is it a bad Movie or are Movie Theaters now dead? What rule did streaming have? Time will tell. But the notion of the "Hollywood Blockbuster", as we once knew it, is on life support. ScarJoe, Disney said, made over $20m. With the industry being fractured, hard to imagine a one-movie payday is going to drive that kind of income moving forward.
Yup. Again, Florence Pugh is on deck. Disney left room for ScarJo with what happened in Loki, but big contract dispute? Pugh is likely ready and willing to be in the next decade worth of Marvel films and be the richest actress in the world. Don't go after the House of Mouse; will not end well.
I haven't seen the movie and although I'm a Marvel fan really have no desire to. For me its a lot like the "Hawkeye" movie why?
They were semi-interesting 2ndary characters but thats it. JMO but they probably would have been better off going the Wanda Vision, Loki route.
I think this was a bit of payback for ScarJo; a reward for ten years worth of dedication as Black Widow. They screwed the pooch though by not doing it earlier and making it a part of the story leading up to Avengers. Few are interested in a 'backstory' for a dead character. No other Marvel character got this kind of treatment and I suspect ScarJo (or her lawyers) think she has the kind of weight to pull this off. She doesn't, even if she has a semi-valid claim. The list of one time 'can't miss' actors who f'd with the wrong people and never or rarely worked again is very long....Katherine Heigl, Sondra Locke, Rose McGowan, Thora Birch...etc. ScarJo is more popular than any of those ever became, but still - she's picking a fight with the biggest dog in Hollywood.
Now I know why she made me pay for dinner the other night. She usually buys.....Seems like this might be it for ScarJo and Disney…
Disney rejects Scarlett Johansson's complaint over 'Black Widow' streaming release — Reuters
Scarlett Johansson, star of the Marvel superhero movie \"Black Widow,\" sued the Walt Disney Co on Thursday, alleging that the company breached her contract when it offered the movie on streaming at the same time it played in theaters.apple.news
ScarJo's representatives tried to contact Disney to try to renegotiate the contract when Black Widow seemed destined for a dual release in theaters and on Disney+. All they heard was Jiminy Cricket.
what this will do is that hollyword actors and agents/lawyers are going to start re-writing contracts as basically the movie theater money is done and streaming money and long term residuals is where the money is. so the contracts will adapt accordingly.
+1. and I don't mean to steer this back towards football but IMO its one of the real question mark areas with regards to expansion and TV rights and where it goes from here.
Now back to this thread...
Actors simply don't have that kind of leverage anymore. The IP is the 'end game'; just ask Hemsworth and Hiddleston who were essentially nobodies before being cast as Thor and Loki. Johansson was fairly well known before Marvel, but mostly for indie flicks like 'Lost in Translation' and 'Ghost World'. Her replacement is already set - Florence Pugh. Maybe ScarJo thinks she doesn't have anything to lose since it's unlikely she'll do anymore Marvel movies, but Disney's reach is massive and influential. It's a bad strategy that could really, really backfire.
the secret is that good actors are really a dime a dozen. With the industry becoming more and more fractured, there isn't the need to have that "one guy/gal" star in your movie anymore. The real money is in the production, like the series "Yellowstone" that is making a ton and being used to jump start the Peacock Network. There are so many good series that I just don't have the time to watch them anymore.
Yeah, but they generally land on their feet. Unless Senator McCarthy is destroying them, it's not like they don't have options elsewhere.
I am not worried too much about Scarlett Johannsen not having a future in Hollywood.
Disney said she made north of $20m on the movie. I am not judging; fair is fair. But to your point, she isn't gong to have to worry about how to make her Kia Soul lease payment next month.
You see this all the time; why isn't someone like Natalie Zea or Joelle Carter, from Justified, bigger actresses? Johansson is very attractive for sure, but dime a dozen in Hollywood.
well, its a game. (as you know). on one hand, ScarJo sits on the top of a giant PR firm. she's got a big team of people crafting her image, photos, endorsements, sound, movies, modeling, etc. She is a corporation. On the other hand, her image is a tiny, pretty blond girl just trying to make it in the larger man's corporate world. I get it. They sit around thinking this shit up (did you see the Tiger Woods documentary where Nike came up with the "black man playing golf" persona when Tiger doesn't consider himself black? they just made it up).
Like it or not, the Kardashian's broke the code. They owned a media campaign, they just did it with social media and started with an obscure cable network. They parlayed that into a Billion+ corporation.
How much does ScarJe owe to Disney (both monetarily and PR)? How much does Disney owe ScarJo? It is a symbiotic relationship that has, apparently, run its course. She 36 now. history shows that age 40 is a career ender for female actors. She may be transitioning to production and wants to max out her earnings to fund a secondary career. But it would appear her future with Disney, the largest in the land, is now in the past.
Curious to see what she thinks her cut is and how she’ll prove Disney opting to simultaneously stream the film was done intentionally to limit her earnings. They already pushed the film’s release back over a year. They did simultaneous releases for Cruella, Mulan,and the upcoming Jungle Cruise. If she already made $20mm - I can’t see her getting too much more and few folks with sympathize with her plight.
And I like ScarJo and have been a fan since Ghost World.
To each his own so no judgements but I agree with you. This is just another in the formula of "shoot them up and add explosions" movies.
I lost it for these things because they are not anchored in any kind of reality so the plots become meaningless. I recall watching the second "mission impossible" movie where everytime you had the plot figured out, someone took off a high tech mask and it was someone else. I mean, what the hell? That is just way too easy and if you can do that, there is no reality any longer. it also bugs me to see a 110lb person beat up a 260 lb person in a way that simply defies any rule of physics. Or, someone gets hit by a baseball bat and simply shrugs it off.
I know its an "age" thing but I like dramatic movies with a good plot. Hitchcockian movies.
agreed and I have no idea. it will get settled at some point but the damage has been done. perhaps she feels she should have been consulted. Also, I know of a lot of stories where the star was to make a percentage of the "profit" only to find the prod company overinflated expenses to show little profit (which is a long-time tax avoidance scheme).
The problem is that her people seems to want Disney to bear all the fall out from covid. That movie isn’t going to gross anything close to what it would have without the pandemic. Disney is a profit-taking behemoth. No way they release this on Disney+ from the outset unless forced to do so.
Expecting Disney to eat all the downside while she gets every cent originally hoped is poor form.
I'm going to sound like a complete hypocrite saying this, especially since I said how much I liked Loki and the Marvel Movies in general. But I feel the same way about the introduction of "time" travel. It just seems to me its such an easy way out after you painted your self into a corner.To each his own so no judgements but I agree with you. This is just another in the formula of "shoot them up and add explosions" movies.
I lost it for these things because they are not anchored in any kind of reality so the plots become meaningless. I recall watching the second "mission impossible" movie where everytime you had the plot figured out, someone took off a high tech mask and it was someone else. I mean, what the hell? That is just way too easy and if you can do that, there is no reality any longer. it also bugs me to see a 110lb person beat up a 260 lb person in a way that simply defies any rule of physics. Or, someone gets hit by a baseball bat and simply shrugs it off.
I know its an "age" thing but I like dramatic movies with a good plot. Hitchcockian movies.
In the mean time I can't wait to see Dr. Strange in the Multiverse of Madnes.🤷♂️
😂🤣😂
1. ScarJo is looking to settle with Disney out of court, that is what all these lawsuits are about.
2. ScarJo knows she is done with Disney based on this move and obviously calculated that she doesn't care.
3. Unless she did something really stupid from a financial management standpoint, she has plenty of money to live a life of luxury the rest of her life that 99.9999% of this board could only dream of.
4. I think movie theaters are pretty much toast, in 10 years a movie theatre is going to be akin to an old Blockbuster video store. Everything will be streamed as the likes of Amazon, Netflix, Paramount, Disney, Peacock, HBO, etc....basically are going to make films such that people want to subscribe to their service and then pay that adder to watch it akin to pay per view MMA matches.
2. ScarJo knows she is done with Disney based on this move and obviously calculated that she doesn't care.
3. Unless she did something really stupid from a financial management standpoint, she has plenty of money to live a life of luxury the rest of her life that 99.9999% of this board could only dream of.
4. I think movie theaters are pretty much toast, in 10 years a movie theatre is going to be akin to an old Blockbuster video store. Everything will be streamed as the likes of Amazon, Netflix, Paramount, Disney, Peacock, HBO, etc....basically are going to make films such that people want to subscribe to their service and then pay that adder to watch it akin to pay per view MMA matches.
+1. On the Theaters. They've opened back up around me but I see very few cars when I drive by. Although, IMO, there really isn't much out right now that I'm interested in seeing. So that might be an issue as well and since everything in Hollywood was shut down for a while it will probably be awhile until we start seeing some new stuff. Maybe we'll finally get to see that new/now old Bond Movie.
Yeah, but it’s Marvel canon. Not like it was invented to give Disney free reign to retcon mistakes or anything. I believe Ant Man is up next, right?
No I wasn't singling out Marvel or Disney as its been done many, many times before.
I think Ant Man is the next up. Ant Man and Thor Ragnarok are my 2 favorites.
it’s absolutely to each their own and I don’t begrudge anyone what they are interested in. But I’ll point out that the Marvel movies in particular are really character driven over the action. I mean of course there’s lots of action sequences for those that want that, but they mainly focus on the characters and their interactions and development. There is plenty of humor and they don’t take themselves seriously.
I think that’s the secret of their massive popularity in that they have a bit for everyone even those who don’t care for run of the mill blow em up action movies. It’s not like every super hero movie that comes out is successful and other studios have not been as successful in consistently emulating the success of the MCU
Next MCU movies? Shang-Chi and then Eternals this year (plus Sony releasing Spider Man: Far from Home).
Juicy new article from the AV Club - says ScarJo missed out on a potential $50mm in bonuses. Marvel producer in chief Kevin Feige not happy with Disney…
apple.news
Kevin Feige reportedly "angry" about Scarlett Johansson situation — The A.V. Club
There’s probably no film producer on the planet with more power and influence than Kevin Feige. As the mastermind behind the Marvel Cinematic Universe, Feige has become one of the industry’s sole movie producers—not a writer, not a director, but a producer—with brand name appeal, a potency he’s...
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
Podcast Jerquaden Guilford Decommits + Top Targets To Replace Him
- Latest: NittanyNation51
-