Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(CBR)   Kevin Feige sides with Scarlett Johansson   (cbr.com) divider line
    More: Followup, Marvel Entertainment, Iron Man 2, Marvel Studios, Marvel Comics, Black Widow, Scarlett Johansson, Avi Arad, The Incredible Hulk  
•       •       •

1560 clicks; posted to Fandom » on 30 Jul 2021 at 1:50 PM (12 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

 
2021-07-30 3:17:41 PM  
28 votes:

mjbok: I know Disney, but I find it really hard to find sympathy for someone that was supposed to get an ADDITIONAL 50 million dollars for a couple months work.


It has nothing to do with sympathy.  Disney promised her they'd renegotiate her terms.  Then they didn't.  She's not victimizing them by asking them to honor their promise.

And it also makes me wonder if the zillions of "shaddap ya greedy wrench" type posts on the net would be quite as insistent if she was a dude.
 
2021-07-30 2:03:49 PM  
23 votes:
"Then, when things got ugly, the movie began to fail and Johansson's team threatened to litigate, he wanted Disney to fix things with her."

The movie didn't farking fail.  Disney made boatloads off of it, which makes it a success (also it was good).  Many people still aren't ready to go to a theater.
 
2021-07-30 2:58:23 PM  
14 votes:
I don't follow the logic on this. I watched it opening night, at home. There was exactly 0% chance I was going to see it in the theater, and I'm not the only person who feels that way. I can't see the movie having had a better opening week if it had only been in theaters. A lot of us just would have waited for it to drop on streaming before we saw it.

Black Widow's main problem was... they gave her a solo movie years too late -  AFTER they already killed the character. I only mildly wanted to see it, it's my wife who was excited for it. I ended up liking it overall (flawed, but still quite good IMHO), but it really came out a couple years too late.
 
2021-07-30 3:20:29 PM  
13 votes:

Kris_Romm: mjbok: I know Disney, but I find it really hard to find sympathy for someone that was supposed to get an ADDITIONAL 50 million dollars for a couple months work.

It has nothing to do with sympathy.  Disney promised her they'd renegotiate her terms.  Then they didn't.  She's not victimizing them by asking them to honor their promise.

And it also makes me wonder if the zillions of "shaddap ya greedy wrench" type posts on the net would be quite as insistent if she was a dude.


Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2021-07-30 3:44:51 PM  
12 votes:
It's pretty cut and dried.

Did they breach their contract? It sure sounds like it. If so, you need to pay her.

They could have avoided this by renegotiating, but instead probably figured she would not have the courage to go after them. I would not be surprised if they get away with this 99% of the time without even going to court. Whether she can afford to go up against Disney lawyers in the long term is somewhat moot. This will be really bad PR and they should settle fast.
 
2021-07-30 2:21:47 PM  
12 votes:
I paid more than twice what I would have paid to watching Black Widow at home as opposed watching it at the theater

She should be making more money because I watched the Disney plus first release, not less
 
2021-07-30 2:28:04 PM  
11 votes:

zepillin: I paid more than twice what I would have paid to watching Black Widow at home as opposed watching it at the theater

She should be making more money because I watched the Disney plus first release, not less


Everyone should be ordering movies.  Gathering up with people is still farking stupid unless you must.  Movie ain't no must.
 
2021-07-30 2:13:13 PM  
11 votes:

LL316: "Then, when things got ugly, the movie began to fail and Johansson's team threatened to litigate, he wanted Disney to fix things with her."

The movie didn't farking fail.  Disney made boatloads off of it, which makes it a success (also it was good).  Many people still aren't ready to go to a theater.


Shooting budget: $200M
Profitability multiplier 2.5X
Worldwide gross required for profitability: $500M

Current worldwide gross: $319M
Proceeds for Disney Premiere: $60-$100M (estimated)
TOTAL GROSS (to date): $359M-$419M

While these figures may increase, Disney absolutely has not "made boatloads" off of it.
 
2021-07-30 5:49:48 PM  
10 votes:
Gonna go with ScarJo on this one. You say you're going to do a theatrical release only and she's due for a cut of those profits then you do a simultaneous digital release (presumably with no cut for her, since it wasn't expected), you breached contract.
 
2021-07-30 3:48:29 PM  
10 votes:

LordJiro: Kris_Romm: mjbok: I know Disney, but I find it really hard to find sympathy for someone that was supposed to get an ADDITIONAL 50 million dollars for a couple months work.

It has nothing to do with sympathy.  Disney promised her they'd renegotiate her terms.  Then they didn't.  She's not victimizing them by asking them to honor their promise.

This. It's part of a pattern of Disney screwing people out of their money; Johansson is just rich and famous enough to make a big enough deal about it that something MIGHT get done. A precedent needs to get set, and if it takes a money fight to do it, so be it.


Yes, it has nothing to do with "sympathy". That implies she's playing the victim rather than being a business person asking someone to honor an agreement.

It's the use of that terminology that's the problem. Would someone normally describe a lawsuit over a contract breach in terms of not having sympathy?  This is a case of "what's different here"?  What's different is that for some reason this is being projected as greedy whinging instead of as business.
 
2021-07-30 3:33:32 PM  
9 votes:

Kris_Romm: mjbok: I know Disney, but I find it really hard to find sympathy for someone that was supposed to get an ADDITIONAL 50 million dollars for a couple months work.

It has nothing to do with sympathy.  Disney promised her they'd renegotiate her terms.  Then they didn't.  She's not victimizing them by asking them to honor their promise.


This. It's part of a pattern of Disney screwing people out of their money; Johansson is just rich and famous enough to make a big enough deal about it that something MIGHT get done. A precedent needs to get set, and if it takes a money fight to do it, so be it.
 
2021-07-30 3:33:04 PM  
9 votes:

mjbok: Kris_Romm: And it also makes me wonder if the zillions of "shaddap ya greedy wrench" type posts on the net would be quite as insistent if she was a dude.

I didn't tell her to shutup, I said it was hard to garner sympathy.  Feel the same way about athletes making 20+ million a year saying they are modern day slaves.  Now you'll say it's a racial thing.  I don't think RDJ deserved 50+ million for Endgame.


I get what you're saying, it's a Morlocks vs Eloi thing.
Whoops, sorry, skipped ahead a few generations. Currently it's an "income inequality" thing.

ScarJo might be right, but it's still hard to be sympathetic - like when Metallica was flipping out about Napster. Like, "Oh yeah, they probably DO owe you another $20 million on to throw on top of your pile of many, many other millions - and I'd be willing to chat more with you about it but I'm going to be late for my second job, and if I get fired from that I can't afford FOOD for my children. But gosh, I sure hope you get to add another 12% to your net worth and buy some more yachts or something."
 
2021-07-30 2:56:59 PM  
9 votes:

WhippingBoi: Shooting budget: $200M
Profitability multiplier 2.5X
Worldwide gross required for profitability: $500M


Disney shouldnt spend 300 million on freaking PR to begin with thats just stupid
 
2021-07-30 2:20:21 PM  
8 votes:

WhippingBoi: While these figures may increase, Disney absolutely has not "made boatloads" off of it.


They absolutely have made boatloads.  They just haven't made enough to offset what they've spent.  I think the solution is obvious enough.

Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2021-07-30 3:58:27 PM  
7 votes:

WhippingBoi: The sad thing is that anyone hoping to see a Black Widow cameo (or more) in upcoming Disney movies can now kiss that dream goodbye.

[images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com image 299x445]


Anyone dreaming of seeing a Black Widow cameo after Endgame and Black Widow movies needs to fixate on different dreams.
 
2021-07-30 3:39:42 PM  
7 votes:

mjbok: Kris_Romm: And it also makes me wonder if the zillions of "shaddap ya greedy wrench" type posts on the net would be quite as insistent if she was a dude.

I didn't tell her to shutup, I said it was hard to garner sympathy.  Feel the same way about athletes making 20+ million a year saying they are modern day slaves.  Now you'll say it's a racial thing.  I don't think RDJ deserved 50+ million for Endgame.


A movie that made nearly $3 BILLION dollars, lead by the guy who's been a part of it for 10 years (in almost half the movies) and essentially kickstarted the entire thing successfully didn't deserve that?

When ROI reaches 10 figures, you've earned some extra pay.
 
2021-07-30 4:06:14 PM  
6 votes:

Superjoe: It's pretty cut and dried.

Did they breach their contract? It sure sounds like it. If so, you need to pay her.

They could have avoided this by renegotiating, but instead probably figured she would not have the courage to go after them. I would not be surprised if they get away with this 99% of the time without even going to court. Whether she can afford to go up against Disney lawyers in the long term is somewhat moot. This will be really bad PR and they should settle fast.


And if same day streaming + theatrical releases keep happening this is probably just the first fight of many that actors are going to have with studios. So it's actually great that an actor is willing to set an early precedent with the biggest player in town.
 
2021-07-30 2:37:48 PM  
6 votes:
I know Disney, but I find it really hard to find sympathy for someone that was supposed to get an ADDITIONAL 50 million dollars for a couple months work.
 
2021-07-30 5:00:29 PM  
5 votes:

mjbok: I don't think RDJ deserved 50+ million for Endgame.


If RDJ wasn't in it, it would have lost more than $50mill.
 
2021-07-30 4:14:27 PM  
5 votes:

WhippingBoi: It's not just PR and marketing...  theatres need to be paid


Theaters pay Disney to show their movie.
 
2021-07-30 3:27:12 PM  
5 votes:

Kris_Romm: And it also makes me wonder if the zillions of "shaddap ya greedy wrench" type posts on the net would be quite as insistent if she was a dude.


I didn't tell her to shutup, I said it was hard to garner sympathy.  Feel the same way about athletes making 20+ million a year saying they are modern day slaves.  Now you'll say it's a racial thing.  I don't think RDJ deserved 50+ million for Endgame.
 
2021-07-30 4:21:10 PM  
4 votes:

Mad_Radhu: WhippingBoi: LL316: "Then, when things got ugly, the movie began to fail and Johansson's team threatened to litigate, he wanted Disney to fix things with her."

The movie didn't farking fail.  Disney made boatloads off of it, which makes it a success (also it was good).  Many people still aren't ready to go to a theater.

Shooting budget: $200M
Profitability multiplier 2.5X
Worldwide gross required for profitability: $500M

Current worldwide gross: $319M
Proceeds for Disney Premiere: $60-$100M (estimated)
TOTAL GROSS (to date): $359M-$419M

While these figures may increase, Disney absolutely has not "made boatloads" off of it.

You have to adjust the multiplier for the digital release since Disney keeps 100% of the revenue instead of splitting it with theaters. So $100 million of Disney+ Premiere Access sales is probably equal to $175 to $200 million in theater ticket sales, depending on what the theater's cut is.


Fun facts : disney probably makes 90%+ of the first two weeks from theaters and around 50-60% the following weeks. Apparently from all accounts, disney is quite the greedy biatch.
 
2021-07-30 7:49:36 PM  
3 votes:
If Scarlett doesn't win her lawsuit, how many of you are going to quit Disney+ in protest/support?
 
2021-07-31 11:07:33 AM  
2 votes:
As for Lars and Napster, Metallica is (was) a metal band. To act like a ligious asshole was a bad call. Ripley, bad call.
Meanwhile, when Use Your Illision 1&2 came out, Slash encouraged kids to get with a friend and each buy one, copy the other one and trade them.
 
2021-07-30 11:57:11 PM  
2 votes:
Birnone: Just out of speculation I think what happened is Disney ... gambled that the pandemic would be under control by then, rather than negotiate with her on a new deal ...

Disney has a huge legal department. They won't make this mistake going forward. Future contracts will surely have a "because Pandemic" clause and/or address other world-wide catastrophic consequences which lead to movie release delays and alternative arrangements.

(So, uh, for now, cough up the cash, Disney.)
 
2021-07-30 9:56:34 PM  
2 votes:

Discordulator: Quantumbunny: palelizard: Gonna go with ScarJo on this one. You say you're going to do a theatrical release only and she's due for a cut of those profits then you do a simultaneous digital release (presumably with no cut for her, since it wasn't expected), you breached contract.

Sure. Beach of contact probably happened. I do think she got at least a little hosed. How they rectify that is interesting because I think they should give a chunk of sub money and early access streaming money to ScarJo (and anyone else who has a similar contract on that movie).

But black, white, Chinese, African, Martian, Male, Female, or Other...I think people are biatching because an actor is asking for  more money, not because of sexism, racism, or anything else. (Arguably maybe elitism or anti-elitism specifically)

I don't personally feel like the whining, the tweets, the complaining from fans would be any different with any other MCU support character. Closest comparison might be with Jeremy Renner... Who isn't getting his own movie. But he is getting a show. Is it sexism Hawkeye gets a show not a movie?

I hate that everything is assumed to be an "ism" at this point.

The flip side of your argument is that Disney kept all that money.

If they are willing to fark a star out of that much money, they will do that to everyone.

This is holding an employer accountable to the contract they agreed to.

How would you like it if your employer farked around with your pay by changing things against the agreement you both signed?

Ignore the dollar amount. Ignore the emotional impact. Look at the facts.


Typos aside, I think I pretty clearly indicated my stance on them needing to rectify the breach of contract.

I think calculating the money might be tricky. That BS early access fee should basically count towards box office, but did people sub just to watch it? How many people? How big of a cut is fair of sub money?

Also, how many other people involved in that movie got hosed in similar contract issues? Any supporting actors? Directors, producers? Anyone else supposed to get a cut?

\Also very pro on courts taking a really deep look at Hollywood accounting and putting a stop to that shiat
 
2021-07-30 3:49:58 PM  
2 votes:

WhippingBoi: LL316: "Then, when things got ugly, the movie began to fail and Johansson's team threatened to litigate, he wanted Disney to fix things with her."

The movie didn't farking fail.  Disney made boatloads off of it, which makes it a success (also it was good).  Many people still aren't ready to go to a theater.

Shooting budget: $200M
Profitability multiplier 2.5X
Worldwide gross required for profitability: $500M

Current worldwide gross: $319M
Proceeds for Disney Premiere: $60-$100M (estimated)
TOTAL GROSS (to date): $359M-$419M

While these figures may increase, Disney absolutely has not "made boatloads" off of it.


You have to adjust the multiplier for the digital release since Disney keeps 100% of the revenue instead of splitting it with theaters. So $100 million of Disney+ Premiere Access sales is probably equal to $175 to $200 million in theater ticket sales, depending on what the theater's cut is.
 
2021-07-30 3:08:56 PM  
2 votes:
I saw it on Disney+ (for 4 people) so $30 was a good deal.

I would NOT have gone to the theater to see this.

So they made more off of me than they would have if it was only released theatrically.
 
2021-07-30 3:05:49 PM  
2 votes:

lolmao500: WhippingBoi: Shooting budget: $200M
Profitability multiplier 2.5X
Worldwide gross required for profitability: $500M

Disney shouldnt spend 300 million on freaking PR to begin with thats just stupid


It's not just PR and marketing... theatres need to be paid, distributors need to be paid, government censors need to be bribed paid and I imagine there's a whole host of other little costs that quickly add up. Not to mention the interest that accrues when a movie is delayed.
 
2021-07-31 11:55:39 PM  
1 vote:

Kris_Romm: mjbok: I know Disney, but I find it really hard to find sympathy for someone that was supposed to get an ADDITIONAL 50 million dollars for a couple months work.

It has nothing to do with sympathy.  Disney promised her they'd renegotiate her terms.  Then they didn't.  She's not victimizing them by asking them to honor their promise.

And it also makes me wonder if the zillions of "shaddap ya greedy wrench" type posts on the net would be quite as insistent if she was a dude.


I agree 100% the amount of money isn't the issue, the bad faith breach is. If this was RDJ, Evans, or Hemsworth the fans would all be behind them. Johansson deserves her money just as much as the "Big 3" do
 
2021-07-31 2:18:03 PM  
1 vote:

WhippingBoi: Kris_Romm: palelizard: Quantumbunny: Sure. Beach of contact probably happened. I do think she got at least a little hosed. How they rectify that is interesting because I think they should give a chunk of sub money and early access streaming money to ScarJo (and anyone else who has a similar contract on that movie).

But black, white, Chinese, African, Martian, Male, Female, or Other...I think people are biatching because an actor is asking for  more money, not because of sexism, racism, or anything else. (Arguably maybe elitism or anti-elitism specifically)

I don't personally feel like the whining, the tweets, the complaining from fans would be any different with any other MCU support character. Closest comparison might be with Jeremy Renner... Who isn't getting his own movie. But he is getting a show. Is it sexism Hawkeye gets a show not a movie?

I hate that everything is assumed to be an "ism" at this point.

I don't think there was a Bob Hoskins looking character with a badly chewed cigar at Disney who said "What's a dame gonna do about it? Release the streaming!" but I do think Disney probably wouldn't have pulled this on RDJ, Hemsworth, or Evans, and I'm open to the idea some of that is inherent sexism, just like how women tend to make less than men.

And while I can understand the lack of sympathy for an actor not getting an extra $50M (without agreeing with it), you know the Internet, and there's a non-zero portion of it whose outrage would be the other direction if Disney had done this to a guy who then demanded his due.

Yeah. I have a problem with that other poster simply picking on this as an out of control unfair "ism" accusation.

As you've implied, it's not ALL one thing or another.

It's not that male actors wouldn't ever get similar criticism.  It's that the volume of the complaints is louder and bigger because its a woman, who's things like "whiny" instead of things like "assertive".

She IS getting a decent amount of support.  But is bet if this had happene ...

Thank God that a poor, weak woman like Scarlett Jo has you in her corner to fight for her.


Oh bullfark.  Up yours.  It's the weakest kind of argumentation possible to throw out the "White Knight" accusations in the middle of an existing debate.  It's basically an admission that you don't have anything better thought out to say.
 
2021-07-31 1:26:26 PM  
1 vote:

Decorus: You go to College first thing you learn is Your purpose in a company is to maximize profit at the expense of all other concerns. Its a small wonder that people haven't figured out that means they will do everything in their power to rip off, screw over and destroy people for an extra penny of profit.


There is one thing that Disney has forgotten to do. If they're going to control the entire entertainment industry, they're going to have to go back to producing some R rated material.

Touchstone, Hollywood Pictures, and Miramax (the last of which produced all of the Tarantino and Kevin Smith films). Disney managed to do terribly offensive material, just under different names. They need to get back to that. Instead, quality material like The Punisher and Jessica Jones are on permanent hold.
 
2021-07-31 1:19:41 PM  
1 vote:

Mugato: It seems the more Disney acquires, the greedier they get. The ticket/merchandise/food prices fir their parks have gone through the roof recently.


You go to College first thing you learn is Your purpose in a company is to maximize profit at the expense of all other concerns. Its a small wonder that people haven't figured out that means they will do everything in their power to rip off, screw over and destroy people for an extra penny of profit. Companies aren't good. Executives don't have your best interests at heart its always about that extra penny of profit. Because its numbers on a balance sheet the actual cost to people isn't even a part of the equation.

Thats never going to change until we teach them not to do it.
 
2021-07-31 1:07:35 PM  
1 vote:

WhippingBoi: Kris_Romm: palelizard: Quantumbunny: Sure. Beach of contact probably happened. I do think she got at least a little hosed. How they rectify that is interesting because I think they should give a chunk of sub money and early access streaming money to ScarJo (and anyone else who has a similar contract on that movie).

But black, white, Chinese, African, Martian, Male, Female, or Other...I think people are biatching because an actor is asking for  more money, not because of sexism, racism, or anything else. (Arguably maybe elitism or anti-elitism specifically)

I don't personally feel like the whining, the tweets, the complaining from fans would be any different with any other MCU support character. Closest comparison might be with Jeremy Renner... Who isn't getting his own movie. But he is getting a show. Is it sexism Hawkeye gets a show not a movie?

I hate that everything is assumed to be an "ism" at this point.

I don't think there was a Bob Hoskins looking character with a badly chewed cigar at Disney who said "What's a dame gonna do about it? Release the streaming!" but I do think Disney probably wouldn't have pulled this on RDJ, Hemsworth, or Evans, and I'm open to the idea some of that is inherent sexism, just like how women tend to make less than men.

And while I can understand the lack of sympathy for an actor not getting an extra $50M (without agreeing with it), you know the Internet, and there's a non-zero portion of it whose outrage would be the other direction if Disney had done this to a guy who then demanded his due.

Yeah. I have a problem with that other poster simply picking on this as an out of control unfair "ism" accusation.

As you've implied, it's not ALL one thing or another.

It's not that male actors wouldn't ever get similar criticism.  It's that the volume of the complaints is louder and bigger because its a woman, who's things like "whiny" instead of things like "assertive".

She IS getting a decent amount of support.  But is bet if this had happene ...

Thank God that a poor, weak woman like Scarlett Jo has you in her corner to fight for her.


Go ahead, call him a White Knight. It's always hilarious.
 
2021-07-31 1:05:05 PM  
1 vote:

WilderKWight: Mugato: As for Lars and Napster, Metallica is (was) a metal band. To act like a ligious asshole was a bad call. Ripley, bad call.
Meanwhile, when Use Your Illision 1&2 came out, Slash encouraged kids to get with a friend and each buy one, copy the other one and trade them.

Courtney Love had it all pretty well figured back then...

https://www.salon.com/2000/06/14/love_​7/


Well then she should have stuck to being a hooker.
 
2021-07-31 11:11:46 AM  
1 vote:

browneye: Kris_Romm: mjbok: I know Disney, but I find it really hard to find sympathy for someone that was supposed to get an ADDITIONAL 50 million dollars for a couple months work.

It has nothing to do with sympathy.  Disney promised her they'd renegotiate her terms.  Then they didn't.  She's not victimizing them by asking them to honor their promise.

And it also makes me wonder if the zillions of "shaddap ya greedy wrench" type posts on the net would be quite as insistent if she was a dude.

[Fark user image image 500x281]


DING! DING!

Apparently they'll go to bat for Disney just keep women "in their place"
 
2021-07-31 6:29:56 AM  
1 vote:
I feel like this is pretty straightforward.

1. I watched Black widow on disney+. I was not going to go to a theater right now.
2. Scarlet J. should get a cut of what I paid to see the movie, just like she would have if I'd seen it in a theater.
3. Future movies and contracts should assume simultaneous releases because I don't know that I ever want to go back.
 
2021-07-31 1:49:28 AM  
1 vote:

browneye: palelizard: Quantumbunny: Sure. Beach of contact probably happened. I do think she got at least a little hosed. How they rectify that is interesting because I think they should give a chunk of sub money and early access streaming money to ScarJo (and anyone else who has a similar contract on that movie).

But black, white, Chinese, African, Martian, Male, Female, or Other...I think people are biatching because an actor is asking for  more money, not because of sexism, racism, or anything else. (Arguably maybe elitism or anti-elitism specifically)

I don't personally feel like the whining, the tweets, the complaining from fans would be any different with any other MCU support character. Closest comparison might be with Jeremy Renner... Who isn't getting his own movie. But he is getting a show. Is it sexism Hawkeye gets a show not a movie?

I hate that everything is assumed to be an "ism" at this point.

I don't think there was a Bob Hoskins looking character with a badly chewed cigar at Disney who said "What's a dame gonna do about it? Release the streaming!" but I do think Disney probably wouldn't have pulled this on RDJ, Hemsworth, or Evans, and I'm open to the idea some of that is inherent sexism, just like how women tend to make less than men.

And while I can understand the lack of sympathy for an actor not getting an extra $50M (without agreeing with it), you know the Internet, and there's a non-zero portion of it whose outrage would be the other direction if Disney had done this to a guy who then demanded his due.

And I think you're right about how they'll settle. It would be the smart play, just say "Oh, well, here's the same points on the net from streaming", only Hollywood has a history of screwing actors on profit. That's why you go for a portion of the gross, never the net.

I'll never forget hearing a few years ago that due to 20th Century Fox's infamous accounting practices, Star Wars, Episode IV -  A New Hope has never shown to have made a profit.

/Don't know if this is still the case.


That why Sir Alec Guinness made sure he got points on the gross.
 
2021-07-31 1:34:40 AM  
1 vote:

palelizard: Quantumbunny: Sure. Beach of contact probably happened. I do think she got at least a little hosed. How they rectify that is interesting because I think they should give a chunk of sub money and early access streaming money to ScarJo (and anyone else who has a similar contract on that movie).

But black, white, Chinese, African, Martian, Male, Female, or Other...I think people are biatching because an actor is asking for  more money, not because of sexism, racism, or anything else. (Arguably maybe elitism or anti-elitism specifically)

I don't personally feel like the whining, the tweets, the complaining from fans would be any different with any other MCU support character. Closest comparison might be with Jeremy Renner... Who isn't getting his own movie. But he is getting a show. Is it sexism Hawkeye gets a show not a movie?

I hate that everything is assumed to be an "ism" at this point.

I don't think there was a Bob Hoskins looking character with a badly chewed cigar at Disney who said "What's a dame gonna do about it? Release the streaming!" but I do think Disney probably wouldn't have pulled this on RDJ, Hemsworth, or Evans, and I'm open to the idea some of that is inherent sexism, just like how women tend to make less than men.

And while I can understand the lack of sympathy for an actor not getting an extra $50M (without agreeing with it), you know the Internet, and there's a non-zero portion of it whose outrage would be the other direction if Disney had done this to a guy who then demanded his due.


Yeah. I have a problem with that other poster simply picking on this as an out of control unfair "ism" accusation.

As you've implied, it's not ALL one thing or another.

It's not that male actors wouldn't ever get similar criticism.  It's that the volume of the complaints is louder and bigger because its a woman, who's things like "whiny" instead of things like "assertive".

She IS getting a decent amount of support.  But is bet if this had happened as recently as maybe 2 or 3 years ago, the narrative would have been much worse for her. She's reaping the benefits of there being a little more unity among people who have had time to internalize some lessons from MeToo.  But the moment Hannity or Carlson or some scumbag like that remembers they hate her more than they hate Disney, they may pile on and get the right on her butt.
 
2021-07-31 12:45:04 AM  
1 vote:

mongbiohazard: et a lot of the reason they had too was COVID. They'd originally planned to release it last year, but COVID put the kibosh on that. They'd already spent a whole bunch on marketing though. So when they did finally get a release date for it it was like a year later and then they needed to spend more money marketing it for the new release.


You know I went opening weekend in Los Angeles on a Friday night 6 people in the entire Imax Theater...
6 people. Pretty sure Covid is destroying the watch a movie in a large building for 2 hours with possible plague rats concept for most people. I went to see Jungle Cruise today there were 4 people in the entire Imax theater that holds 250 people... I'm not buying streaming is hurting our bottom line thought. The reality is going to a movie sucks right now its not fun and people aren't willing to spend 60 bucks to take the family there right now. If anything they will wait til its free. I mean they have already waited almost a year as it is whats a few more montths...
 
2021-07-30 11:34:32 PM  
1 vote:

mongbiohazard: I don't follow the logic on this. I watched it opening night, at home. There was exactly 0% chance I was going to see it in the theater, and I'm not the only person who feels that way. I can't see the movie having had a better opening week if it had only been in theaters. A lot of us just would have waited for it to drop on streaming before we saw it.

Black Widow's main problem was... they gave her a solo movie years too late -  AFTER they already killed the character. I only mildly wanted to see it, it's my wife who was excited for it. I ended up liking it overall (flawed, but still quite good IMHO), but it really came out a couple years too late.


I'm not a lawyer so I could be wrong but...

There are two things at play here. One, was Disney obligated to do a theatrical release only? If so, the fact that the pandemic will discourage people from going to the theater has nothing to do with Disney's legal obligation. They could simply wait until theaters are well attended then release the movie.

Two, if Disney was obligated to do a theatrical release, how much did the streaming release cost her? I expect that will be the biggest part of this fight. If Disney loses on the theatrical release aspect, I can see them arguing reasons why this movie was going to make low end MCU money anyway.

Just out of speculation I think what happened is Disney had a red line on the release date. Due to upcoming movies on their schedule, Black Widow needed to be released by a certain date at the latest. They gambled that the pandemic would be under control by then, rather than negotiate with her on a new deal allowing streaming too. They lost the gamble, things are still not back to normal. So they do the theater and streaming release with not deal in place to negate the theatrical release obligation. From her point of view she just wants the payout she contractually had coming, she doesn't care when the theatrical release happens. It could have in 2022 for all she cares, as long as she gets paid.
 
2021-07-30 11:26:58 PM  
1 vote:

palelizard: Quantumbunny: Sure. Beach of contact probably happened. I do think she got at least a little hosed. How they rectify that is interesting because I think they should give a chunk of sub money and early access streaming money to ScarJo (and anyone else who has a similar contract on that movie).

But black, white, Chinese, African, Martian, Male, Female, or Other...I think people are biatching because an actor is asking for  more money, not because of sexism, racism, or anything else. (Arguably maybe elitism or anti-elitism specifically)

I don't personally feel like the whining, the tweets, the complaining from fans would be any different with any other MCU support character. Closest comparison might be with Jeremy Renner... Who isn't getting his own movie. But he is getting a show. Is it sexism Hawkeye gets a show not a movie?

I hate that everything is assumed to be an "ism" at this point.

I don't think there was a Bob Hoskins looking character with a badly chewed cigar at Disney who said "What's a dame gonna do about it? Release the streaming!" but I do think Disney probably wouldn't have pulled this on RDJ, Hemsworth, or Evans, and I'm open to the idea some of that is inherent sexism, just like how women tend to make less than men.

And while I can understand the lack of sympathy for an actor not getting an extra $50M (without agreeing with it), you know the Internet, and there's a non-zero portion of it whose outrage would be the other direction if Disney had done this to a guy who then demanded his due.

And I think you're right about how they'll settle. It would be the smart play, just say "Oh, well, here's the same points on the net from streaming", only Hollywood has a history of screwing actors on profit. That's why you go for a portion of the gross, never the net.


I'll never forget hearing a few years ago that due to 20th Century Fox's infamous accounting practices, Star Wars, Episode IV -  A New Hope has never shown to have made a profit.

/Don't know if this is still the case.
 
2021-07-30 9:44:26 PM  
1 vote:
Screw the lot of them, I'll wait a few months and watch it at home when D+ doesn't stick a 30.00 price tag on it.
 
2021-07-30 7:45:06 PM  
1 vote:

Macfine: mjbok: I don't think RDJ deserved 50+ million for Endgame.

So who do you think that 50+ million should have gone to ?
Disney?


i don't care but maybe she meant one of these guys should get it
cdn.vox-cdn.comView Full Size
 
2021-07-30 4:08:14 PM  
1 vote:

lolmao500: WhippingBoi: Shooting budget: $200M
Profitability multiplier 2.5X
Worldwide gross required for profitability: $500M

Disney shouldnt spend 300 million on freaking PR to begin with thats just stupid


Disney *charges* 300 million for PR.  That's Hollywood accounting.  Then they get 300 million of PR for other Mouse properties (Marvel Universe, Magic Kingdom rides, licensed Mouse toys).  It is a scary Ouroboros of profit.

If you make a profit, you didn't charge enough for marketing and other "distribution services".
 
2021-07-30 3:36:48 PM  
1 vote:
The sad thing is that anyone hoping to see a Black Widow cameo (or more) in upcoming Disney movies can now kiss that dream goodbye.

images-na.ssl-images-amazon.comView Full Size
 
2021-07-30 3:32:17 PM  
1 vote:

Kris_Romm: mjbok: I know Disney, but I find it really hard to find sympathy for someone that was supposed to get an ADDITIONAL 50 million dollars for a couple months work.

It has nothing to do with sympathy.  Disney promised her they'd renegotiate her terms.  Then they didn't.  She's not victimizing them by asking them to honor their promise.

And it also makes me wonder if the zillions of "shaddap ya greedy wrench" type posts on the net would be quite as insistent if she was a dude.


A dude named Jeff Bezos?
 
2021-07-30 2:30:46 PM  
1 vote:

zepillin: I paid more than twice what I would have paid to watching Black Widow at home as opposed watching it at the theater

She should be making more money because I watched the Disney plus first release, not less


We paid to see it on 3D in the theater.  What we got was 2D with tepid popcorn and about 3X what it would have cost to see it from home without 20 minutes of ads for movies we won't see.

Next time we'll watch it on D+.  Unless the IMAX reopens.
 
Displayed 48 of 48 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking




On Twitter


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.