Poll of the Day > disney is being sued. by scarlett johanson.

(+) Yeah! (+)

Black Widow isn't done fighting yet. Scarlett Johansson, who reprised her role as Natasha Romanoff in the latest Marvel Cinematic Universe film, has filed a lawsuit against Disney, alleging that the company releasing the movie on the Disney+ streaming service at the same time it did so theatrically was a breach of her contract.
The news comes from The Wall Street Journal, which reports that Johansson's contract not only guaranteed an exclusive theatrical release for the film but that its performance on the big screen would ultimately determine the actress's salary. Of course, Black Widow was originally scheduled to hit theaters in 2020 but was ultimately delayed due to the COVID-19 pandemic.
When a new release date was set, it was announced that the film would hit theaters and Disney+ Premier Access on July 9. According to the suit, "Disney intentionally induced Marvel's breach of the agreement, without justification, in order to prevent Ms. Johansson from realizing the full benefit of her bargain with Marvel."
Per the suit, Johansson's team attempted to renegotiate her contract after the decision to debut the film on Disney+ was made, but Disney and Marvel were not responsive. However, in a copy of the lawsuit, obtained by Deadline, Marvel's chief counsel is quoted as previously saying, "We totally understand that Scarlett's willingness to do the film and her whole deal is based on the premise that the film would be widely theatrically released like our other pictures. We understand that should the plan change, we would need to discuss this with you and come to an understanding as the deal is based on a series of (very large) box office bonuses." According to WSJ, the decision to not renegotiate could end up costing the actress over $50 million.

---

Disney should sue her for alienating fans prior to its release and costing them money.

Boo fucking hoo, she already got $15 million up front. She's claiming she could've potentially made a total of $65 million off of this one role? GTFO. Can't believe I'm siding w/ Disney on something, but damn is that ridiculous.

helIy posted...

"The company releasing the movie on the Disney+ streaming service at the same time it did so theatrically was a breach of her contract."

"Johansson's contract not only guaranteed an exclusive theatrical release for the film but that its performance on the big screen would ultimately determine the actress's salary."

"Johansson's team attempted to renegotiate her contract after the decision to debut the film on Disney+ was made, but Disney and Marvel were not responsive."

Fair, next. Fuck 'em.
---

Did they really think they could get away with that?

---

She isn't exactly trying to steal from the poor here so good luck to her. It would set a bad precedent for this to be allowed to slide. Especially with these mega corps that think they can get away with anything already.

---

My bet is Disney counter-sues for breach of contract in failing to promote the material.

Whether that was part of her legal strategy to push for the theatrical release or just because of the pregnancy, idk, but Disney won't take it lying down. It will be interesting to see how it effects their business relationship going forward.

Unless the court accepts the pandemic as an act of god defence, I think she will win her case.

---

streamofthesky posted...

Boo fucking hoo, she already got $15 million up front. She's claiming she could've potentially made a total of $65 million off of this one role? GTFO. Can't believe I'm siding w/ Disney on something, but damn is that ridiculous.

It's a straight up breach of contract. Whatever she made up front was part of the deal they already agreed to. The can't just change the rules afterward because they feel like she's got enough.

---

helIy posted...

Per the suit, Johansson's team attempted to renegotiate her contract after the decision to debut the film on Disney+ was made, but Disney and Marvel were not responsive.

This bit seems pretty damning. Maybe they assume they can settle for less than they'd have had to pay her.

---

keyblader1985 posted...

It's a straight up breach of contract. Whatever she made up front was part of the deal they already agreed to. The can't just change the rules afterward because they feel like she's got enough.

Unforeseen circumstances are a thing and I would expect the lockdown/pandemic is not something anyone could have really seen coming.

While I can why the individual could be in the right, I also see potential setback on the larger legal scale.

---

Nichtcrawler X posted...

Unforeseen circumstances are a thing and I would expect the lockdown/pandemic is not something anyone could have really seen coming.

I'd be sympathetic to this point, if not for this:
helIy posted...

Per the suit, Johansson's team attempted to renegotiate her contract after the decision to debut the film on Disney+ was made, but Disney and Marvel were not responsive.

Yes, the pandemic threw a wrench into things, and the original contract couldn't have predicted that, but she tried to renegotiate the contract to account for those unforeseen issues, and they refused. That's 100% Disney in the wrong.

---

streamofthesky posted...

Disney should sue her for alienating fans prior to its release and costing them money.

What did she do?

---

not a fan of scar jo

boo hoo it can't hit theatres

---

ComradeSeraphim posted...

What did she do?

https://www.theguardian.com/film/2021/jun/17/scarlett-johansson-criticises- hypersexualisation-black-widow-iron-man-2

Having muscular shirtless dudes in literally every MCU movie and Captain America admiring his own ass is cool, but GOD FORBID that evil "male gaze" get to enjoy something.
Of course, she complains now that her character is killed off and she's done making money off the MCU. It was totally fine back when it launched her to mega stardom and allowed her to make shit loads of money.
I had wanted a Black Widow movie for years, thought she should have one of her own, ideally w/ Hawkeye tagging along. But after that? Boycotting it. A lot of people are. If the marketing budget was about equal to the production costs (the typical rule, and likely fair here since w/ the pandemic delay they had to advertise it twice), then it's barely made anything over its costs so far.

(she also misquoted what Stark said to make it sound worse)

---

adjl posted...

Yes, the pandemic threw a wrench into things, and the original contract couldn't have predicted that, but she tried to renegotiate the contract to account for those unforeseen issues, and they refused. That's 100% Disney in the wrong.

^this.

helIy posted...

According to WSJ, the decision to not renegotiate could end up costing the actress over $50 million.

But also wanna point out this^

Whether she got $15M up front or not, she'd have to be a moron to not at least try to recoup some of that lost revenue

---

She may not have been aware of every detail of the contract. Sometimes people trust their lawyers and those contracts can be entire novels in length.

---

streamofthesky posted...

https://www.theguardian.com/film/2021/jun/17/scarlett-johansson-criticises-hypersexualisation-black-widow-iron-man-2

Having muscular shirtless dudes in literally every MCU movie and Captain America admiring his own ass is cool, but GOD FORBID that evil "male gaze" get to enjoy something.

After reading that article, it sounds like you really failed English class, because your reading comprehension sucks. Based on that article, it sounds like she wasn't complaining that her character wore erotic revealing clothing, but rather she was complaining about the dialogue in the script in which other characters made sexual remarks towards or about her character. In short, she was complaining about the dialogue, not the visuals. People like you with dismissive attitudes towards sexism are why studios like Blizzard Entertainment are having the huge problems that they are. You demonize any woman who dares to point out problems, thereby creating a hostile environment in which sexism is allowed to continue and its victims have no recourse.

From the article:

Scarlett Johansson has spoken out against the sexualisation of Black Widow in Iron Man 2, the 2010 blockbuster in which her character first appeared in the Marvel Cinematic Universe series.
Speaking in a pool interview in the run-up to the release of the standalone Black Widow film, Johansson said: While [Iron Man 2] was really fun and had a lot of great moments in it, the character is so sexualised, you know? [She is] really talked about like shes a piece of something, like a possession or a thing or whatever like a piece of ass, really. And Tony even refers to her as something like that at one point I want some.

---

I thought a large part of Black Widow has always been that she was trained as a honey trap?

---

This is a laughably clear case of contract breach.

It's either unbelievably sloppy of arrogant that they pulled this shit.

---

Mead posted...

I want all future Mead posts delivered in this format

---

they are both rich

who literally gives a fuck

hundreds of millions of people are going to die from climate change

both "scarjo" and disney will be fine

---

All that being said though, I just can't imagine taking on Disney in court.

---

keyblader1985 posted...

All that being said though, I just can't imagine taking on Disney in court.

that makes me want to sue them myself

---

I thought Disney owned all the courts?

---

wolfy42 posted...

I thought Disney owned all the courts?

Warner Bros has owned basketball since the 90s

---

streamofthesky posted...

Having muscular shirtless dudes in literally every MCU movie and Captain America admiring his own ass is cool, but GOD FORBID that evil "male gaze" get to enjoy something.

That said, boobs are in a lot of other stuff. I want more dick shots in movies and shit, though...

streamofthesky posted...

Of course, she complains now that her character is killed off and she's done making money off the MCU.

It's Marvel. She can easily come back...
---

LinkPizza posted...

It's Marvel. She can easily come back...

More like marvel is gonna come on her .....nvm...might get in trouble.

---

wolfy42 posted...

More like marvel is gonna come on her .....nvm...might get in trouble.

interesting choice of where to cut that off before you "get in trouble" lolol

---

I think the people saying she should cry about it sarcastically would probably do what she's doing if they were in her situation. I think in 2021 they'd also just say "So?"

So there's no real point in having a strong opinion when any defense of that opinion works. We're getting closer to The Idiocracy every day. And the people who realize it are the base cogs. The sad part is, I think they know it and could care less.

I don't know whether I should start handing out Brawndo or phone Terry Crews and start grooming him for the presidency.

get skinner to fight for her

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=knfuiXnxL1c
---

Straughan posted...

I think the people saying she should cry about it sarcastically would probably do what she's doing if they were in her situation. I think in 2021 they'd also just say "So?"

So there's no real point in having a strong opinion when any defense of that opinion works. We're getting closer to The Idiocracy every day. And the people who realize it are the base cogs. The sad part is, I think they know it and could care less.

I don't know whether I should start handing out Brawndo or phone Terry Crews and start grooming him for the presidency.

None of us can even imagine being a millionaire, let alone from one job. Why care about what we think we would do in her place?

---

wydrah posted...

None of us can even imagine being a millionaire, let alone from one job. Why care about what we think we would do in her place?

I think they are just saying people are hypocrites
---

streamofthesky posted...

https://www.theguardian.com/film/2021/jun/17/scarlett-johansson-criticises- hypersexualisation-black-widow-iron-man-2

Having muscular shirtless dudes in literally every MCU movie and Captain America admiring his own ass is cool, but GOD FORBID that evil "male gaze" get to enjoy something.
Of course, she complains now that her character is killed off and she's done making money off the MCU. It was totally fine back when it launched her to mega stardom and allowed her to make shit loads of money.
I had wanted a Black Widow movie for years, thought she should have one of her own, ideally w/ Hawkeye tagging along. But after that? Boycotting it. A lot of people are. If the marketing budget was about equal to the production costs (the typical rule, and likely fair here since w/ the pandemic delay they had to advertise it twice), then it's barely made anything over its costs so far.

(she also misquoted what Stark said to make it sound worse)

Imagine denying yourself something you were looking forward to because someone whose job is to pretend to not be themselves said something you disagree with when they were being themselves

Just seems silly

wydrah posted...

None of us can even imagine being a millionaire, let alone from one job. Why care about what we think we would do in her place?

Why care about why I care?

See? I can be Clevon too!
Hey, maybe fitting in won't be that hard after all!

I have a feeling a lot of these threads end up being hardline opinions with arguing that at the end of the day become the sum social crucible that sorts people into the "I hate you" or "I like you" basket.

In other words, ironically the actual subject matter being discussed becomes nothing more than a vehicle for Balkanization of the community here discussing it. So her feud has become ours and the liquid hate trickles down to all that speak of it.

I guess this is the one time where the "Who cares?" reply becomes a valuable utility of positive social change.

you said a whole bunch of dumb shit that you thought was smart shit but it wasn't smart shit it was dumb shit and it actually did not make any sense while also contradicting itself massively.

---

Yeah, what the fuck?

Just agree that multimillionaires don't have real problems and thus we should not dedicate our time, effort, and resources to caring about them lol

---

streamofthesky posted...

Boo f***ing hoo, she already got $15 million up front. She's claiming she could've potentially made a total of $65 million off of this one role? GTFO. Can't believe I'm siding w/ Disney on something, but damn is that ridiculous.

I can't believe you are either, the bigger picture is even in the era of box office results being public hollywood accounting screwed tons of creatives out of millions or possibly even billions of dollars. And these are people who can't afford million dollar lawyers. Streaming services are good for the end consumer, but very bad financially for any content producer that is a conglomerate like Disney since it allows them to keep their books closed and not fairly distribute proceeds from shows and movies. Even if you think Scarlett is overpaid, this will be good case law for people making far less who are getting screwed far more. Stop defending the Mouse, they aren't your friend and they're clearly responsible for the fuckery here.

she would be hotter if she were an actual redhead
---

Krazy_Kirby posted...

she would be hotter if she were an actual redhead

who gives a fuck whether you think she is hot

---

Mead posted...

who gives a fuck whether you think she is hot

I keep extensive notes. I'm on my 5th binder of what turns him on.

---

There is a lot of animal stuff tbh.

---

Straughan posted...

Why care about why I care?

See? I can be Clevon too!
Hey, maybe fitting in won't be that hard after all!

I have a feeling a lot of these threads end up being hardline opinions with arguing that at the end of the day become the sum social crucible that sorts people into the "I hate you" or "I like you" basket.

In other words, ironically the actual subject matter being discussed becomes nothing more than a vehicle for Balkanization of the community here discussing it. So her feud has become ours and the liquid hate trickles down to all that speak of it.

I guess this is the one time where the "Who cares?" reply becomes a valuable utility of positive social change.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hfYJsQAhl0&ab_channel=Bound4Earth

---

Mead posted...

who gives a fuck whether you think she is hot

Duckbear

---

Seriously. fuck disney.

Literally told her they're paying her in exposure.

---

I see what people are saying about her status. She's wealthy, and at her level of wealth she'll live a comfortable life with or without that money.

But wage theft is a very real and alarmingly common problem. Doesn't solely affect millionaires. One can relate to, or show concern for, the issue she's facing without worrying about the highly unlikely chance that her stolen wages will leave her poor and starving.

While the problem she's facing won't disrupt her life in the way that it would someone making minimum wage and struggling to keep a roof over their head, it's good to see her fighting for what she's owed and putting this issue in the news to shed more light on it.

An article about some shitty manager not paying out overtime to a handful of relative nobodies isn't going to get the attention this is. I would prefer the opposite to be true, but if this opens the door to getting people to discuss wage theft, then I'll take it.

Would be nice if she used this situation as an opportunity to act as a representative for those going through this who don't have the platform she does, who are battling wage theft without the resources she has to fight for themselves. But instead of dismissing those discussing this issue, or writing her off simply because she doesn't need the money, we should be focusing on how her situation connects with us, as opposed to how her wealth creates this disconnect.

At the end of the day, she's an employee fighting for money she's owed, from a company that is more than capable of affording to pay her.

---

Pay employees what they're worth!**

**Except celebrities and athletes.

Hypocrites.

---

jiffdiff posted...

Stop defending the Mouse, they aren't your friend and they're clearly responsible for the fuckery here.

That's the part I don't get. People not defending Scarlett position or even bashing her because she rich already, and supposedly greedy. But still shilling for greedy Disney. Yknow, the soulless mega corp whose resources make her look like a peasant. People should be payed what they're owed, it doesn't matter how rich they are already. I'll never understand corporate worship.


---

I'd sue for $1+legal expenses if I knew I was in the right... let alone $65million or whatevers

---

adjl posted...

I'd be sympathetic to this point, if not for this:

Yes, the pandemic threw a wrench into things, and the original contract couldn't have predicted that, but she tried to renegotiate the contract to account for those unforeseen issues, and they refused. That's 100% Disney in the wrong.

they aren't obligated to renegotiate. and the fact that they didn't will likely make them milions. they'll get a new star for new films, and scarlett is easily replaceable. They are asswipes who did it to screw her over, but may pay off in this case.

Lokarin posted...

I'd sue for $1+legal expenses if I knew I was in the right... let alone $65million or whatevers

so you'd lose thousands and thousands of dollars for the privilege of proving to someone else they were wrong in a dispute?