who will scarjo blame for BW not breaking 1b?
china?
Disney+?
the fanbois?
ScarJo doesn't seem the type. Also, the solo movies don't usually break 1b. A few have but most don't.
share
MovieChat Forums > Black Widow (2021) Discussion > who will scarjo blame for BW not breakin...
You should ask who Cate Shortland & Kevin Feige will blame, they are the director & producer.
But I think we all know the answer, the pandemic.
And it’s still a true one to blame the pandemic. People are still quite scared to go to the theaters.
shareF9 had a much better box office result, so clearly that is not the only reason.
shareMaybe but it’s a fair excuse to not blame someone specifically. and they avoid get cancelled or hatted. It’s a good villain the pandemic against many movie fails released these days.
Many directors can get away with it right now and still stand.
Why do you think she'll blame anyone for anything? The film is doing as well as can be expected for something released during a global pandemic, and simultaneously on a streaming platform. The film will probably make only half what it would have made had it been released during normal times, but the idea that anyone is going to start blaming others for that is silly.
shareNah, Scarlett wouldn’t do that.
sharelol i was right! she blames Disney https://variety.com/2021/film/news/scarlett-johansson-sues-disney-black-widow-1235030582/
cmon! i mean this thread was sort of a joke post but i was right on the money!
Disney respond https://twitter.com/THR/status/1420864523037290501
shareI hope she wins
shareShe tried to renegotiate her contract with the foresight that Black Widow would be released on Disney+ the same day as theaters (instead of in theaters first for a short time like her contract said), but Disney never responded. This is in them. If it was her who violated her contract, Disney wouldn't think twice about suing her.
share
I doubt, very much, that their contract anticipated simultaneous theater and Disney+ releases.
So Disney probably didn't violate the contract, technically, just acted in EXTREME bad faith using COVID as a justification.
She tried to renegotiate her contract with the foresight that Black Widow would be released on Disney+ the same day as theaters (instead of in theaters first for a short time like her contract said), but Disney never responded. This is in them
Disney wasn't required to renegotiate, but it was a total dick move to not even respond, as was releasing it simultaneously without her consent.
share
black widow was never going to make a billion, more likely 600-800 million and its made half of that - same as F9 would been a around 1.3 billion movie and its made half of that.
in terms of the suing Disney, it just shows Scarlett just wants a bigger greedier slice of the pie - its one rich person suing an even greedier richer corporation and both want a bigger slice of the fan's money.
DISNEY MOVED THE GOALPOST ON THIS ONE.
"In a lawsuit filed Thursday in Los Angeles Superior Court, attorneys for Johansson allege that the star’s contract was breached when the studio opted not to debut the film exclusively in theaters, a move they claim depressed ticket sales for the Avengers spinoff. Much of Johansson’s compensation was tied to the box office performance of “Black Widow” — if it hit certain benchmarks, bonuses would kick in."
I'm sure she would have gotten compensated from Disney from the streaming revenue instead of the cinema bonuses, but she's putting out a big media circus act is just her trying to get in a better negotiating position.
as i said its greed that has brought both side into this.
Oh, well, if you're "sure," then that settles that. No need to look at the contracts involved. Cool.
shareNo need to look at the fact the movie had been shelved for a year either then, will Scarlett compensate Disney for the year it was shelved?
shareWhy? Was SJ in charge of the release of the movie? Did she shelve the movie??
shareSo Scarlett is blaming disney because they released the movie in 2 formats at the same time during a pandemic which is understandable to gain the most profit back (which corporation wouldn't do that if they had the clout to do so) (whether right or not thats upto the public and a judge to decide).
Disney have lost money for the movie being on the shelf for a year.
Scarlett may have lost none or alot of money from an all out cinema release, but we may never know that because a cinema only release may not have made alot more then it currently has in the current climate - with movies making roughly half of the standard amount - i doubt there was a clause in there to say the movie can't be streamed at the same time in the contract at that time anyway.
So if scarlett is basing her argument on a contract that was signed in normal times probably sometime 2/3 years back and still expects a shot at the same recompense.
Then disney should expect the same recompense from her, afterall she did get a fee, and a cinema release which other films didn't even get a chance at.
If she wants all the profits then she may have to pay for the losses aswell.
But as i've said i doubt this will go all the way through as she no doubt knows she won't win but it will give her a negotiating position on the table to get some fee's from the streaming.
Are you fucking serious? What kind of logic is that?
shareany particular part that didn't make sense to you?
shareYes. All of it.
Disney actively breached a contract. They are in the fault. Even if they are not responsible for COVID and the situation they had the opportunity to re-negotiate and they didn’t. ScarJo did no such thing.
well if it wasn't stated in the contract that streaming isn't allowed then that's not breaching the contract is it?
How do we know Disney never re-negotiated? we only have one supposed side of the story as yet.
think of it this way, you pay for your internet with a supplier, they say you will get 10Mb download speed guaranteed everyday, but then a tornado happens and you lose your internet, they will get out to say act of god - in this climate of Covid there are get out clauses which are expected by companies like Disney and the stars themselves.
Yes, and based on the contract I will not pay the internet anymore.
We have one recorded side saying that they want to renegotiate.
AFAIK it was stated in the contract theatrical release only. Doesn’t matter if it was COVID or not, they could have waited for the streaming release 1-2 weeks after the theatrical.
And now you will tell me that it was impossible to wait 1 week to release it on streaming due to COVID? I hope you’re NOT that dense …
but could you have sued the company for not providing the internet?
so you have one sided version of the event as as yet?
As the public couldn't watch the movie as freely and widely as they would have likely pre-covid then the alternative is to release it in 2 formats to give them all a chance to see it as quick as possible without the fear of catching covid?
Could I sue the company? Sure, if the contract is written in such way and I would really want to sue a multi billions company for the 14$ that I lost… but usually internet contracts cover that kind of problems.
People can wait 2 weeks to see it on streaming if they were afraid of COVID. It’s not the end of the world.
The alternative is to have a theatrical only release and 2 weeks later on streaming. Doubtfully people would commit suicide for not seeing it first day.
that's what scarlett is doing because covid is pretty much an act of god, so even if there was a contract with theatre on release at the time, that way of life is gone and to say she has lost money from that then its a crying shame, so have others.
It's pretty much clear she's using this media blitz to get a better negotiating hand and she will settle it with Disney.
Why should someone have to wait 2 weeks to see a movie to make Scarlett is happy to get her bonus?
It's not the end of the world if Scarlett didn't get her bonus?
It’s not. But it’s her right as per contract. And it’s her right to sue for a contract breach. Easy.
Do you have a contract with Disney to receive the newest movies ASAP???
I guess you do since you are so desperate to defend them.
Why should anyone have to wait? Because it’s in the contract. Do I need to say it again? Before corona you had to wait 3 months+ to see it in on a streaming device.
as i said before streaming wasn't available in the current form at the time of contract, so you cant be breach of contract if it isn't in the contract?
the public had a right to watch movies safely worldwide in cinema, that choice has gone with covid, so multiple formats can be used to still provide that now.
I'm not defending disney, they are company there to make money of there investment whether right or wrong but you seem desperate to defend Scarlett.
People think Scarlett is doing this to bring Disney down or to right a wrong, wrong she's only doing this to make sure she gets more money - end off, i don;t blame her but people seem to think its some sort of david vs goliath, how surely they will be disappointed when Scarlett take 5-10% of streaming revenue and becomes friends with disney again.
"Before corona you had to wait 3 months+ to see it in on a streaming device"
exactly before covid you did - this is not the same world anymore.
I’m not defending ScarJo, in my opinion NO ACTOR should be paid at that kind of levels. Making tens of millions from a movie IS insane. But that’s a different story.
We are talking here about a breach of a contract and the consequences of that breach.
And you are defending Disney for no good reason. Do you have millions in Disney stocks or something?
Fair enough,
but what you seem to think is because Scarlett team said there was breach then there was a breach, there are grey areas and this is one of them, as pointed out many times there would have never been anything in there to say streaming is not allowed at the time and with the covid things are not what they were.
I'm not defending Disney and never said they were in the right or wrong, I'm pointing out Scarlett isn't the heroine people are making her out to be, in her so called 'suing' case against Disney.
That’s what the lawsuit is for: to determine if there was a breach.
And the tweet from Disney team was more inline with “whaaaa, she is mean to do that” as opposed to “there was no breach, we have respected the contract”.
Disney: ‘especially sad and distressing in its callous disregard for the horrific and prolonged global effects of the COVID-19 pandemic.’
Probably they will reach an agreement soon enough.
again, Scarlett team said there was breach then there was a breach, there are grey areas and this is one of them, as pointed out many times there would have never been anything in there to say streaming is not allowed at the time and with the covid things are not what they were.
Disney didn't need to anything different as they know the mood of the public and putting out statements which put scarlett and her team as callous in this pandemic after she received the 20 million - any comms expert would do that, same as scarlett and her team putting out a blitz early but disney fired back and pretty much got the public thinking someone getting so much money is still asking for more by putting the public in harms way - that puts scarlett as the villain.
so what we have here is both sides trying to sway the public opinion, both trying to be greedy and both trying to get on the higher negotiating position when it comes to outside of the court negotiation.
Scarlett had her tantrum and disney hit back with there's and it will end up in out of court settlement.
LMAO...YOU TALK AND TALK...AND YET...YOU ARE WRONG...THE CONTRACT WAS WRITTEN WITH STREAMING/DISNEY+ IN MIND...THAT IS WHY BLACK WIDOW WAS DELAYED SO LONG AND NOT DROPPED ON STREAMING EARLIER...SAY,DURING THE PANDEMIC...IT WAS IN THE CONTRACT THAT THE FILM WOULD BE HELD AND RELEASED TO THEATERS EXCLUSIVELY FIRST....PERIOD...NO GRAY AREA.🙂
shareOh really,
you do know contracts aren't signed after the movie has been filmed don't you?
so 2/3 years back before the the movie was released which is the rough timeframe that the contract would have been signed they had a crystal ball to know there was going to a pandemic happening?
they would have streamed it earlier but disney were waiting for the pandemic to be over by now and they kept it going to give it a cinema release but in the end it didn;t so the public got a wide release on 2 formats.
MY BAD...I TYPED THAT SHIT ALL WRONG...THANKS WEED...ANYWAY...I HAVE ONE QUESTION...
YOU DECIDE TO MAKE A MOVIE,YOU GIVE AN ACTOR A CONTRACT THAT IS FULL OF PAY HINGING ON THE FILMS THEATRICAL PERFORMANCE,YOU ASSURE THE ACTOR THE FILM WILL PLAY IN THEATERS ONLY FIRST...YOU ALL SIGN AND MAKE THE MOVIE...THEN YOU RELEASE IT ON STREAMING SAME DAY ANYWAY...
SO I GUESS MY ONE QUESTION IS...WHY ARE YOU SUCKING ON THE MOUSE'S DICK SO HARD?🤔
maybe she should learn to read the thread before you ask another a question.
didn't your parent tell you if you don't have anything nice to say then don't say it but then again that involves learning and you aren't grownup enough for that yet.
She/he must line mouse dicks … nothing wrong with that but dicks should not be sucked in public …
shareso you lost the argument not just here but in another thread and now turn to insults.
maybe your intelligence is lacking alot.
Maybe your intelligence is lacking, a lot, if you cannot follow a thread and see who was I replying to. And why I replied like that.
I know, sometime is hard but you gotta try harder ...
And i didn't lose any argument, sometime I just stop arguing with people that cannot understand basic concepts.
as i said you tried and failed with your arguments but instead of coming back to me, after a while you thought you could jump into my conversation with someone else to "try" and insult me in a reply to them but that makes it even worse for yourself as you come off as really desperate to jump on bandwagon that sailed pass.
Poor little boy can't even come up with he's own insults and has to jump on someone else's to get attention.
I really feel sorry for you.
About losing arguments: whatever, you have no idea what that means. The fact that I stop answering your stupid "arguments" it's due to boredom and seeing you as a disney shill - I just see no reason why I would continue. Most likely i will stop after this comment as well since the convo leads no where.
Well, you cannot get sarcasm.
As I was saying: there's nothing wrong with sucking dicks, I don't see that as an insult - lots of people sucking dicks. Even if it's a mouse dick. It's your problem if you see it as an insult, not mine.
The problem is with doing it in public.
Again, not an insult. Just an observation (and btw it's even illegal to suck dick in public). The observation that I made before: that you are so desperate to defend the mouse, for some unclear reason.
And btw, read your post and see how many insults it contains :P
You got bored until you tried to worm your way back by jumping on someone else's bandwagon and got caught.
You tried your hardest to insult me within a sarcasm statement then sorry you should have no complaint in taking truth statements about your knowledge and age.
no need to reply back, bye.
Yes, because large corporations have a long history of giving money to employees beyond what the contract stipulates, just to be fair and kind. Silly Scarlett, she should have waited for Disney to send her an extra check.
shareNo, but they know when to give a little to make sure they don't pay alot - keeps everyone happy.
shareDisney from the looks of things.
sharelol
'Told em they should’ve made a #Drax movie but noooooo! '
https://twitter.com/DaveBautista/status/1421113544024760320