The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.
© Copyright 2021 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without permission.Scarlett Johansson sues Disney over ‘Black Widow’ release
By LINDSEY BAHR and ANDREW DALTON LOS ANGELES©2024 GPlusMedia Inc.
Video promotion
25 Comments
Login to comment
OssanAmerica
She herself may not even care. But her shark attorneys smell blood in the water.
ShinkansenCaboose
Plus the millions lost from very high quality torrents available.
Pacific Saury
That's not the point. The point is she had a contract. Disney broke the contract.
Anyway, your question could be posed towards Disney, could it not? Disney, are you not rich enough?
theFu
Breach of contract is serious. Disney knows better and obviously thought they could push her around.
All her "people", who get 10-15% of her earnings, are probably the ones pushing the lawsuit. The Avengers series is played out, so her getting out of future, related, projects through a lawsuit could be something she wanted too.
She needs more "mom" and professional women roles at this point in her career. Less killing.
GdTokyo
She had a contract which Disney willfully breached. I think she has a good case.
Samit Basu
@Jonathan Prin
Black Widow was Scarlett's retirement cash out, since she is unlikely to land a role as high paying as her Black Widow role.
Based on reports, Scarlett had a $20 million upfront fee + 5% box office gross royalty, meaning she was expecting a total pay out of $70 million, but her 5% box office gross royalty will end up less than $20 million based on current box office numbers.
bass4funk
I agree, as rich as she is it’s not about the money, you cannot break a signed contract and it seems like more and more of these corporations are breaking them with impunity and thinking that they have takeout give them a ride to renege on any signed agreement as a wish and screwing the artist in the end, because they’re thinking about their bottom end. Disney used to be a wholesome company that was built on family values and that put family and happiness above all else especially when the park was designed to be a get away from the every day license struggle and now it has morphed into an ugly and greedy corporate monstrosity that is a geared towards identity politics and political wokeness. The company destroys everything in its path. And good on Scarlett for taking these people on. If Walt Disney were alive today, he would be appalled by what has happened to his company.
tobolski
In my opinion, what we are seeing is an attempt to set legal precedent over what is regarded as revenue when participants are given points as compensation. The industry is in a period of transition regarding how films are distributed and there are many contracts that were signed that will be effected by this transition. It is not about greed as much as it is about a change in how contracts have been constructed in the past and how they will be constructed and interpreted in the future.
Jim
Lots of lawyers commenting on this thread…lol ! Not a single one of you have actually seen the contract yet you think she has a case against Disney. There are lots of fine prints and clauses in contracts which are not clearly interpreted and this might have provided Disney with loopholes to exploit. Either way, by having a legal battle with Disney she has basically ended her career! Used to love her in her prime though!
snowymountainhell
This is BIGGER negative news against Disney, (buried at 4am) than the non-identity politics, promotional piece shilling for Disney ‘on top’ of the Entertainment section today!
stormcrow
She’ll survive, but she’s fighting for principle. Still, it is Disney studios and it’s notorious for its stinginess, so she must’ve been aware of this.
Nongaco
All contracts/agreementsare signed to be broken… see what Britain does with the Brexit agreement signed 7 months ago
isoducky
She could be using the suit to force a formal arbitration and settlement. Samit Basu’s take is pretty sound, and given the delays in the release of the movie and timing of the suit, one has to think of some type of quiet talks going down and some observations being taken on both sides.
As far as her future is concerned, she will be fine as she hasn’t done anything to embarrass Disney so she can’t really be blackballed without it looking like a “metoo” story. Can see her being funded through Tencent for the foreseeable future though.
Pacific Saury
Well, her Marvel character is dead, there's nowhere else to go with this last movie. Yes, they could revive her somehow in the multiverse, but no need.
But maybe she recognized this and is making a grab now while she can.
Jonathan Prin
No one noticed a global pandemy happening ?
Disney, as mentioned in a previous comment, had to adapt.
No one knows if going in theaters only would have made her cash in more.
It is called greed to look for more while you have been paid already millions and that for sure a new situation has arisen no one could have guessed.
Disney being a for profit company, it is necessarily greedy. And not a person.
Indeed shark lawyers at work, not her.
Concerned Citizen
@bass4funk
Well said.
starpunk
Even the best actors are in movies they disavow.
I think Disney will settle this one quietly. They got caught with their pants down.
Jonathan Prin
Not rich enough ?
Commodore Perry
JimToday 01:22 pm JST
You don't think she can go to another production company or whatever? Netflix?
isoduckyToday 03:22 pm JST
I didn't see any mention of an arbitration clause in her contract; is there? Regardless, arbitration and settlement are two separate mechanisms. Settlement is always an option before going to court (or before a court decision) and also before initiating arbitration though; bit arbitration is not a requirement for a settlement .
Hiro
Disney screwing someone over? Shocker i know. Who could have imagine that?
Trying to charge $30 plus a monthly subscription of $8 is just being greedy and shameless.