|
|
Post by politicidal on Oct 1, 2021 1:01:43 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Skaathar on Oct 1, 2021 1:46:40 GMT
Well that circus is done. But I do admit I'm surprised that Disney actually settled and even seem like they'll be giving Scarjo even more movies.
|
|
|
|
Post by Lord Death Man on Oct 1, 2021 2:00:02 GMT
The notes in the respective statement from Johansson and Disney about working together on upcoming projects sound canned. Tower of Terror is likely the only solid deal they have going. I'm surprised Johansson settled. She was positioning herself as the vanguard of a wave of talent that would lobby for a more equitable cut of streaming - and stick it the mouse. At least that's how the media portrayed her. Now we know it was only ever about a bigger paycheck and nothing else. IATSE is on its own, I suppose.
As that famous poet, Marco from Tropoja would say, "Good Luck."
|
|
|
|
Post by darkpast on Oct 1, 2021 2:57:43 GMT
The notes in the respective statement from Johansson and Disney about working together on upcoming projects sound canned. Tower of Terror is likely the only solid deal they have going. I'm surprised Johansson settled. She was positioning herself as the vanguard of a wave of talent that would lobby for a more equitable cut of streaming - and stick it the mouse. At least that's how the media portrayed her. Now we know it was only ever about a bigger paycheck and nothing else. IATSE is on its own, I suppose. As that famous poet, Marco from Tropoja would say, "Good Luck." She may be indirectly working with Disney already if next Wes Anderson film is released by Searchlight
|
|
|
|
Post by Lord Death Man on Oct 1, 2021 3:53:13 GMT
The notes in the respective statement from Johansson and Disney about working together on upcoming projects sound canned. Tower of Terror is likely the only solid deal they have going. I'm surprised Johansson settled. She was positioning herself as the vanguard of a wave of talent that would lobby for a more equitable cut of streaming - and stick it the mouse. At least that's how the media portrayed her. Now we know it was only ever about a bigger paycheck and nothing else. IATSE is on its own, I suppose. As that famous poet, Marco from Tropoja would say, "Good Luck." She may be indirectly working with Disney already if next Wes Anderson film is released by Searchlight True. I’m sure they’ll keep her on for less expensive fair, but someone at Disney is likely looking for ways to trade or sunset her.
|
|
|
|
Post by darkpast on Oct 1, 2021 4:32:33 GMT
She may be indirectly working with Disney already if next Wes Anderson film is released by Searchlight True. I’m sure they’ll keep her on for less expensive fair, but someone at Disney is likely looking for ways to trade or sunset her. for sure , under New Bob , 20m+ paychecks may be a thing of the past
|
|
|
|
Post by Skaathar on Oct 1, 2021 5:38:50 GMT
The notes in the respective statement from Johansson and Disney about working together on upcoming projects sound canned. Tower of Terror is likely the only solid deal they have going. I'm surprised Johansson settled. She was positioning herself as the vanguard of a wave of talent that would lobby for a more equitable cut of streaming - and stick it the mouse. At least that's how the media portrayed her. Now we know it was only ever about a bigger paycheck and nothing else. IATSE is on its own, I suppose. As that famous poet, Marco from Tropoja would say, "Good Luck." I always felt like settling was Scarjo's goal since the beginning. I thought she must have known she had only a slim chance of actually winning the lawsuit, and so was more depending on putting enough pressure on Disney to get paid out a settlement. At least that's how I read the situation. It seemed more like a power move to get more money than it was righteous anger to see justice done. |
|
|
|
Post by Lord Death Man on Oct 1, 2021 14:43:55 GMT
The notes in the respective statement from Johansson and Disney about working together on upcoming projects sound canned. Tower of Terror is likely the only solid deal they have going. I'm surprised Johansson settled. She was positioning herself as the vanguard of a wave of talent that would lobby for a more equitable cut of streaming - and stick it the mouse. At least that's how the media portrayed her. Now we know it was only ever about a bigger paycheck and nothing else. IATSE is on its own, I suppose. As that famous poet, Marco from Tropoja would say, "Good Luck." I always felt like settling was Scarjo's goal since the beginning. I thought she must have known she had only a slim chance of actually winning the lawsuit, and so was more depending on putting enough pressure on Disney to get paid out a settlement. At least that's how I read the situation. It seemed more like a power move to get more money than it was righteous anger to see justice done. That is likely the most accurate read on the situation. The media briefly tried to portray her as a champion for more equitable profit sharing of streaming revenue for talent and craftspeople. YouTuber's are still trying to make it sound like this is a significant win for women. And I quote, "she is opening doors for lots of other people." This was a textbook profit-sharing negotiation that happens all the time in Hollywood behind closed doors. It advanced the cause of nothing and no one outside of Scarlett Johansson and Disney.
|
|
|
|
Post by poutinep on Oct 3, 2021 3:13:57 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Dirty Santa PaulsLaugh on Oct 3, 2021 3:17:39 GMT
The notes in the respective statement from Johansson and Disney about working together on upcoming projects sound canned. Tower of Terror is likely the only solid deal they have going. I'm surprised Johansson settled. She was positioning herself as the vanguard of a wave of talent that would lobby for a more equitable cut of streaming - and stick it the mouse. At least that's how the media portrayed her. Now we know it was only ever about a bigger paycheck and nothing else. IATSE is on its own, I suppose. As that famous poet, Marco from Tropoja would say, "Good Luck." I always felt like settling was Scarjo's goal since the beginning. I thought she must have known she had only a slim chance of actually winning the lawsuit, and so was more depending on putting enough pressure on Disney to get paid out a settlement. At least that's how I read the situation. It seemed more like a power move to get more money than it was righteous anger to see justice done.Yep. And with the stagehands threatening to go on strike over some real wage and working hours issues, her "I been done wrong with only 20 million dollars" worth of star treatment, sounded obtuse and crass.
|
|
|
|
Post by Skaathar on Oct 3, 2021 4:15:49 GMT
So 40 million on top of her already existing 20 million? Jeeze. Her movie was nowhere near good enough to have justified that kind of payday. Pretty good deal for her then.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dirty Santa PaulsLaugh on Oct 3, 2021 4:42:31 GMT
So 40 million on top of her already existing 20 million? Jeeze. Her movie was nowhere near good enough to have deserved that kind of payday. Pretty good deal for her. Any number of actresses could have done the part frankly.    They all have the same basic look. Same with Captain Marvel   Not a lot of choices in looks in Marvel leading female actors.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cat on Oct 3, 2021 14:00:12 GMT
So 40 million on top of her already existing 20 million? Jeeze. Her movie was nowhere near good enough to have deserved that kind of payday. Pretty good deal for her. Any number of actresses could have done the part frankly. They all have the same basic look. Same with Captain Marvel Not a lot of choices in looks in Marvel leading female actors. Any number of actresses could have done the part frankly.
That will always be true. If it were Jennifer Lawrence playing Black Widow and embroiled in a contract dispute with Disney, Johansson would right up there as a substitute.
One of only 3 outcomes were possible in this situation: Disney could settle, Disney could lose the suit (because it's about contracts, not motivations), or Johansson could drop the case.
I'm starting to think this isn't about bonuses and contracts at all.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dirty Santa PaulsLaugh on Oct 3, 2021 15:00:24 GMT
Any number of actresses could have done the part frankly. They all have the same basic look. Same with Captain Marvel Not a lot of choices in looks in Marvel leading female actors. Any number of actresses could have done the part frankly.
That will always be true. If it were Jennifer Lawrence playing Black Widow and embroiled in a contract dispute with Disney, Johansson would right up there as a substitute.
One of only 3 outcomes were possible in this situation: Disney could settle, Disney could lose the suit (because it's about contracts, not motivations), or Johansson could drop the case.
I'm starting to think this isn't about bonuses and contracts at all. To be fair, female superhero actors have a shorter shelf life than their male counterparts. At 36, ScarJo is aging out of the role. Sadly, the guys can continue into their fifties if they want. So, they should get all they can, while they can.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cat on Oct 3, 2021 15:26:39 GMT
Any number of actresses could have done the part frankly.
That will always be true. If it were Jennifer Lawrence playing Black Widow and embroiled in a contract dispute with Disney, Johansson would right up there as a substitute.
One of only 3 outcomes were possible in this situation: Disney could settle, Disney could lose the suit (because it's about contracts, not motivations), or Johansson could drop the case.
I'm starting to think this isn't about bonuses and contracts at all. To be fair, female superhero actors have a shorter shelf life than their male counterparts. At 36, ScarJo is aging out of the role. Sadly, the guys can continue into their fifties if they want. So, they should get all they can, while they can. My point is truer in the larger scheme of things.
Jodie Foster landed the role in Silence of the Lambs because Michelle Pfeiffer. We'll never know if Pfeiffer could have done a better job.
Samuel L Jackson landed the role in Pulp Fiction for 2 reasons: 1) Lawrence Fishburne turned down the role, and 2) Paul Calderon did such a good audition for the role that Jackson went back and did another one just to make sure he got the spot.
I said actresses because of the context but it's true of any role.
|
|
|
|
Post by Skaathar on Oct 3, 2021 17:15:50 GMT
Any number of actresses could have done the part frankly. They all have the same basic look. Same with Captain Marvel Not a lot of choices in looks in Marvel leading female actors. Any number of actresses could have done the part frankly.
That will always be true. If it were Jennifer Lawrence playing Black Widow and embroiled in a contract dispute with Disney, Johansson would right up there as a substitute.
One of only 3 outcomes were possible in this situation: Disney could settle, Disney could lose the suit (because it's about contracts, not motivations), or Johansson could drop the case.
I'm starting to think this isn't about bonuses and contracts at all. You forgot one other outcome: Scarjo could lose the suit. |
|
|
|
Post by Cat on Oct 3, 2021 17:51:39 GMT
Any number of actresses could have done the part frankly.
That will always be true. If it were Jennifer Lawrence playing Black Widow and embroiled in a contract dispute with Disney, Johansson would right up there as a substitute.
One of only 3 outcomes were possible in this situation: Disney could settle, Disney could lose the suit (because it's about contracts, not motivations), or Johansson could drop the case.
I'm starting to think this isn't about bonuses and contracts at all. You forgot one other outcome: Scarjo could lose the suit. My confidence never wavered Disney was legally in the wrong. That's the truth.
My take on our conversation is that social justice articles and Youtube videos created a wall I had to climb without being able to see. The closest thing I have to a window into how anybody feels about the case is you guys.
That's why it kind of hurts a little. Even if it were my opinion that Disney or Johansson acted out of self-preservation or greed, it's immaterial to the suit because greed and self-preservation aren't crimes. They're just hot takes.
|
|
|
|
Post by Lux on Oct 3, 2021 18:22:10 GMT
To be fair, female superhero actors have a shorter shelf life than their male counterparts. At 36, ScarJo is aging out of the role. Sadly, the guys can continue into their fifties if they want. So, they should get all they can, while they can. My point is truer in the larger scheme of things.
Jodie Foster landed the role in Silence of the Lambs because Michelle Pfeiffer. We'll never know if Pfeiffer could have done a better job.
Samuel L Jackson landed the role in Pulp Fiction for 2 reasons: 1) Lawrence Fishburne turned down the role, and 2) Paul Calderon did such a good audition for the role that Jackson went back and did another one just to make sure he got the spot.
I said actresses because of the context but it's true of any role.
What ifs, couldas, shouldas or maybes is a rather pointless use of one's time. |
|
|
|
Post by Cat on Oct 3, 2021 18:34:15 GMT
My point is truer in the larger scheme of things.
Jodie Foster landed the role in Silence of the Lambs because Michelle Pfeiffer. We'll never know if Pfeiffer could have done a better job.
Samuel L Jackson landed the role in Pulp Fiction for 2 reasons: 1) Lawrence Fishburne turned down the role, and 2) Paul Calderon did such a good audition for the role that Jackson went back and did another one just to make sure he got the spot.
I said actresses because of the context but it's true of any role.
What ifs, couldas, shouldas or maybes is a rather pointless use of one's time. Thank you for summarizing my point and repeating it back to me. You're absolutely right.
Could someone else have played Black Widow? Who cares, it's a done deal.
|
|
|
|
Post by Skaathar on Oct 3, 2021 18:36:46 GMT
You forgot one other outcome: Scarjo could lose the suit. My confidence never wavered Disney was legally in the wrong. That's the truth.
My take on our conversation is that social justice articles and Youtube videos created a wall I had to climb without being able to see. The closest thing I have to a window into how anybody feels about the case is you guys.
That's why it kind of hurts a little. Even if it were my opinion that Disney or Johansson acted out of self-preservation or greed, it's immaterial to the suit because greed and self-preservation aren't crimes. They're just hot takes.
I mean, I'm fairly confident in saying both sides had a point but that Disney was more in the right based on the contract. That still wouldn't stop me from saying there's a chance Disney could lose the suit. Which is why it's only fair to point out that another possible outcome was that Scarjo could also lose the suit. I wasn't trying to be combative. |
|
