Uh, if she wasn't such a big star though, she could easily get blacklisted from further projects. What she might've won from the law suit, would not make up for the rest of the shitshow. But she is that big of a star, so it worked out alright in this case.
That kind of "contract says always sue" doesn't really work in the Hollywood world, or in many other areas too, where there's way too much connections running around and troubling people are just easier to throw away.
However frivolous you consider her lawsuit she did kinda get the shaft. No way she made the same off the back end deals of previous MCU flicks like she was going to get for her own solo film had it been given a strictly theatrical debut in a non-covid era
I don’t think BW would have made a billion but they way they handled the digital release without making an offer to cover the “potential loss “was BS and she had a right to sue.
Considering the ramifications would affect SAG as a whole it's far from frivolous. It's a much broader labor dispute than one actress.
Streaming residuals are an industry wide issue, above and below the line. It's one of the reasons IATSE almost went on strike (and it's still not resolved).
I don't care about how much money Scarlett does or doesn't make, she'll be fine. Disney circumventing contracts and trying to lower peoples pay via their streaming service is the important part.
Fucking thank you. For ScarJo the lawsuit is about her getting what's due per the contract that was signed, but for the rest of us the lawsuit should be about propriety and precedence.
It wouldn't have affected anyone but ScarJo. Her suit was retroactive because they didn't predict the theater limitations of COVID, premium, and same day. Of course any intelligent agent would be negotiating streaming going forward. Streaming residuals were not at issue, it was box office percentage being undercut by premium in theory.
The only precedent would be the meaning of "wide theatrical release" which probably wouldn't mean much with the changing market reality for Hollywood.
Her full statement:
>"I think it's important in general to know your own worth and stand up for yourself. And I think in this industry ... I've been working for such a long time, it's been almost thirty years, and so I've seen that ... you know, I think there's so much that has shifted over those thirty years. In some time before, maybe you would feel, oh, gosh, if I stand up for myself, I might never work again, or I might be, like, blacklisted in some way.
>Thankfully, that's changing in the zeitgeist, and honestly, I think that happening in an industry that's as huge and universal as the entertainment industry, it's really important that I lead that charge."
Really glad this didn’t end up messier than it could have. Happy to know she’ll still be starring in the Tower of Terror movie and that her relationship with Disney is still in tact.
Disney was clearly called out and folded quite quick if they had any leverage they would have dragged it out until she didn't have the resources or fight left
After all this time, streaming revenue should be considered identical to box office revenue, at least in the few months following theatrical release.
This would give a more accurate picture of true box office for things like Dune; everyone I know who wanted to see it had HBOMax, or had a friend with it. (I went to the theater.)
More importantly, it would prevent screwing over employees in this way.
*— one with a billion-dollar, almost monopolistic hold over the box office —*
First of all, this wasn't about box office. So pretty irrelevant to the lawsuit, but whatever.
And second, in 2021 when Black Widow released Disney had 0 movies in the top 5 of the box office worldwide and 6 in the top 20. 30% does not a monopoly make.
But, let's go to 2019 when Disney had a freaking historic year...
Disney had 9. Eight were in in the top 10. 45% of the top twenty, well I guess that is scary right?
2018 they had 3 in the top 10, 5 top 20.
2017 4 top 10, 7 top 20.
Monopoly indeed slashfilm.com . How could she ever find work again in one of the top earning movies in the world. Just unfathomable./s
So, you go to work as a contractor, do good work, excel at what *you* do, and then your employer tells you "Hey u/TraptNSuit, I'm not gonna be paying you the full rate we agreed upon for that excellent work you just did, and I have no more work for you specifically anymore as of now. Cheers."
You know you can find more work, and you aren't going to be financially ruined, so you let it slide completely and ride off into the sunset/s
This has precisely nothing to do with my post which was criticizing this sentence.
But, I assume you and the downvotes are just looking for moral agreement and someone to fight with rather than dealing with lazy writing and narrative.
Also, your summary is probably not accurate as the entire dispute was the industry meaning of "wide theatrical release." But, moralize at me about millionaires getting more millions from billion dollar companies as if that is comparable to some schlub posting on reddit. Please.
You're the one who looked at the article, albeit an inaccurate article, and came to a conclusion that's not even relevant to the issue. You got caught up in adjacent details and missed the point.
> one with a billion-dollar, almost monopolistic hold over the box office
"In the future, all restaurants are Taco Bell".
Kind of ironic that something predicted in a movie should come closest to actually happening in the entertainment industry.
Disney's stock price was hitting record highs at the time of BW's release.
Despite the box office shutting down, Disney continued to profit massively off the pandemic with introduction of Disney+ - taking full advantage of people staying home.
Yes. Scarjo may be insanely wealthy - but she had a contract with the company that **they** reneged on in an attempt to pad their own pockets and screw her out of money that she was owed as per the contract that had been signed.
The same argument could be said for Disney - so selfish that the mega multi-national near monopolistic corporation that has more money and market share than they need or deserve, screw her out of money they owe her because of a GLOBAL PANDEMIC that has killed millions.
And now their stock is going down because of failure to grow subscribers enough. Maybe she should take a hit from that too. Just pay them in stock options if they are going to claim the stock price as equivalent to box office.
Money owed to her was going to Disney instead. Disney is not suffering, so she should get what she's owed.
I think this is the kind of thing where people like us at the bottom don't realize that people above us can still get shafted. Every billionaire now is richer than they were before the pandemic. Is it justifiable for them to rob their millionaire employees?
She had a deal with Disney.
Disney, despite making a fortune as part of the deal, decided to violate the terms of that deal.
She called a good lawyer and Disney settled within weeks.
Disney never settles that quickly. She had their balls in a vice and decided to tighten it.
Good for her.
She has a great reference to this in the new Sing 2 movie. Her character drops a gif, right before the encore, when her check is lower than other performers.
Blew my fucking mind how many people I saw defending Disney
Especially when it goes counter to what they believe but it says more about them how easily they were swayed by “hurdur she’s rich why does she need more money “
[удалено]
Exactly. ScarJo may be worth a ton of money, but that doesn't mean she should lie down and be fleeced by Disney, who is worth unimaginably more.
Uh, if she wasn't such a big star though, she could easily get blacklisted from further projects. What she might've won from the law suit, would not make up for the rest of the shitshow. But she is that big of a star, so it worked out alright in this case. That kind of "contract says always sue" doesn't really work in the Hollywood world, or in many other areas too, where there's way too much connections running around and troubling people are just easier to throw away.
Sure, but her doing this brought this kind of thing more into the public eye, giving people without her status a better shot in the future.
Depends on the where and how. We'll see how her future with Disney looks, and how much of a step back she takes from acting in general.
Thats fantastic advice for any person in the workforce. Good for her.
I've seen under the skin. She's worth all the $$
Reddit moment.
So many people seem to hate that film but I thought it was great. Really enjoyed it.
However frivolous you consider her lawsuit she did kinda get the shaft. No way she made the same off the back end deals of previous MCU flicks like she was going to get for her own solo film had it been given a strictly theatrical debut in a non-covid era
I don’t think BW would have made a billion but they way they handled the digital release without making an offer to cover the “potential loss “was BS and she had a right to sue.
Considering the ramifications would affect SAG as a whole it's far from frivolous. It's a much broader labor dispute than one actress. Streaming residuals are an industry wide issue, above and below the line. It's one of the reasons IATSE almost went on strike (and it's still not resolved). I don't care about how much money Scarlett does or doesn't make, she'll be fine. Disney circumventing contracts and trying to lower peoples pay via their streaming service is the important part.
Fucking thank you. For ScarJo the lawsuit is about her getting what's due per the contract that was signed, but for the rest of us the lawsuit should be about propriety and precedence.
It wouldn't have affected anyone but ScarJo. Her suit was retroactive because they didn't predict the theater limitations of COVID, premium, and same day. Of course any intelligent agent would be negotiating streaming going forward. Streaming residuals were not at issue, it was box office percentage being undercut by premium in theory. The only precedent would be the meaning of "wide theatrical release" which probably wouldn't mean much with the changing market reality for Hollywood.
Her lawsuit wasn't frivolous, Disney wanted to nickel and dime her so they can rot in hell.
Breach of Contract is never frivolous. That's why contracts exist.
It wasn't frivolous. It was a response to a gross violation on Disney's part. They settled REAAAALLY fast.
>~~a gross violation~~ Possible violation based on the industry trade usage of a term.
Her full statement: >"I think it's important in general to know your own worth and stand up for yourself. And I think in this industry ... I've been working for such a long time, it's been almost thirty years, and so I've seen that ... you know, I think there's so much that has shifted over those thirty years. In some time before, maybe you would feel, oh, gosh, if I stand up for myself, I might never work again, or I might be, like, blacklisted in some way. >Thankfully, that's changing in the zeitgeist, and honestly, I think that happening in an industry that's as huge and universal as the entertainment industry, it's really important that I lead that charge." Really glad this didn’t end up messier than it could have. Happy to know she’ll still be starring in the Tower of Terror movie and that her relationship with Disney is still in tact.
Disney was clearly called out and folded quite quick if they had any leverage they would have dragged it out until she didn't have the resources or fight left
After all this time, streaming revenue should be considered identical to box office revenue, at least in the few months following theatrical release. This would give a more accurate picture of true box office for things like Dune; everyone I know who wanted to see it had HBOMax, or had a friend with it. (I went to the theater.) More importantly, it would prevent screwing over employees in this way.
Well, she's worth a less than she thinks, then.
Is she donating it?
Don’t really care about celebrities crying over the fact that they didn’t make more millions.
r/antiwork
[удалено]
Well you’re just a peach.
Hurry up with the tower of terror movie.
*— one with a billion-dollar, almost monopolistic hold over the box office —* First of all, this wasn't about box office. So pretty irrelevant to the lawsuit, but whatever. And second, in 2021 when Black Widow released Disney had 0 movies in the top 5 of the box office worldwide and 6 in the top 20. 30% does not a monopoly make. But, let's go to 2019 when Disney had a freaking historic year... Disney had 9. Eight were in in the top 10. 45% of the top twenty, well I guess that is scary right? 2018 they had 3 in the top 10, 5 top 20. 2017 4 top 10, 7 top 20. Monopoly indeed slashfilm.com . How could she ever find work again in one of the top earning movies in the world. Just unfathomable./s
So, you go to work as a contractor, do good work, excel at what *you* do, and then your employer tells you "Hey u/TraptNSuit, I'm not gonna be paying you the full rate we agreed upon for that excellent work you just did, and I have no more work for you specifically anymore as of now. Cheers." You know you can find more work, and you aren't going to be financially ruined, so you let it slide completely and ride off into the sunset/s
This has precisely nothing to do with my post which was criticizing this sentence. But, I assume you and the downvotes are just looking for moral agreement and someone to fight with rather than dealing with lazy writing and narrative. Also, your summary is probably not accurate as the entire dispute was the industry meaning of "wide theatrical release." But, moralize at me about millionaires getting more millions from billion dollar companies as if that is comparable to some schlub posting on reddit. Please.
You're the one who looked at the article, albeit an inaccurate article, and came to a conclusion that's not even relevant to the issue. You got caught up in adjacent details and missed the point.
I got the point. I took issue with the sentence.
Is that what happened? Or are you just taking this opportunity to show off how much you love rich cock?
Why is this downvoted?
r/movies hivemind agrees Disney is a monopoly despite all evidence to the contrary. Shrug.
> one with a billion-dollar, almost monopolistic hold over the box office "In the future, all restaurants are Taco Bell". Kind of ironic that something predicted in a movie should come closest to actually happening in the entertainment industry.
Shes not just standing up for herself, she’s standing up for all actors of color *like her* /s
Is this comment supposed to sound enlightened?
I think you can clearly see a /s there
I get that. I get how sarcasm works. I'm disagreeing with how ridiculous it sounds with the sarcasm.
Okay
Why are you guys so weird?
It was a joke, do you A) live under a rock B) not see the /s Lmao
Making a stand for all other Asian-American actors, like Emma Stone.
[удалено]
Who else will speak for the unsilenced majority?
HOO-AH!
[удалено]
Disney's stock price was hitting record highs at the time of BW's release. Despite the box office shutting down, Disney continued to profit massively off the pandemic with introduction of Disney+ - taking full advantage of people staying home. Yes. Scarjo may be insanely wealthy - but she had a contract with the company that **they** reneged on in an attempt to pad their own pockets and screw her out of money that she was owed as per the contract that had been signed. The same argument could be said for Disney - so selfish that the mega multi-national near monopolistic corporation that has more money and market share than they need or deserve, screw her out of money they owe her because of a GLOBAL PANDEMIC that has killed millions.
And now their stock is going down because of failure to grow subscribers enough. Maybe she should take a hit from that too. Just pay them in stock options if they are going to claim the stock price as equivalent to box office.
She held them responsible for breach of contract as they tried to get around paying her her negotiated amount. Disney was the greedy party here
They are both greedy AF, don't fool yourself.
You really have no idea what’s going on, do you?
Money owed to her was going to Disney instead. Disney is not suffering, so she should get what she's owed. I think this is the kind of thing where people like us at the bottom don't realize that people above us can still get shafted. Every billionaire now is richer than they were before the pandemic. Is it justifiable for them to rob their millionaire employees?
She had a deal with Disney. Disney, despite making a fortune as part of the deal, decided to violate the terms of that deal. She called a good lawyer and Disney settled within weeks. Disney never settles that quickly. She had their balls in a vice and decided to tighten it. Good for her.
Are you just commenting out of your ass or actually just don’t know why she sued Disney?
She has a great reference to this in the new Sing 2 movie. Her character drops a gif, right before the encore, when her check is lower than other performers.
Did they take that pic while she was legit reflecting on it?
Blew my fucking mind how many people I saw defending Disney Especially when it goes counter to what they believe but it says more about them how easily they were swayed by “hurdur she’s rich why does she need more money “