MCUniverse: Into the Spider-Thread

[RumHam]

I think Johansson would have been fine without the MCU career wise.

I assume she made a lot for the last few movies but it's likely her original pearlmutter-era contract sucked. She, Renner, Ruffalo and Cheadle have until recently been supporting players and were probably viewed as replaceable under his reign.

[DMC]

52 minutes ago, RumHam said:

She, Renner, Ruffalo and Cheadle have until recently been supporting players and were probably viewed as replaceable under his reign.

Especially considering Cheadle himself was a replacement.

Anyway, I'm definitely on Johansson's side on this.  Unless she's flat out lying about having an agreement, she clearly has a case from what I've read and Disney will be forced to settle.

[Kalbear]

ScarJo in no way was particularly dependent on the MCU, and the clearest way to demonstrate that is that she didn't even get her own movie until her character died. She's been in a ton of movies for a long time and has been the lead in a ton. 

[DMC]

Andrew Yang has Johannson's back.  Disney is fucked now...

Randomly saw the tweet while googling and thought it was funny.  But it does remind me that Johannson endorsed (and even stumped for) Scott Stringer in the mayoral race and didn't retract after the sexual misconduct allegations came out.

[RumHam]

46 minutes ago, DMC said:

Especially considering Cheadle himself was a replacement.

Anyway, I'm definitely on Johansson's side on this.  Unless she's flat out lying about having an agreement, she clearly has a case from what I've read and Disney will be forced to settle.

Ruffalo too. It would be great if they brought back Howard and Norton variants of the characters as a gag in Doctor Strange or Loki season 2.

[DMC]

19 minutes ago, RumHam said:

Ruffalo too. It would be great if they brought back Howard and Norton variants of the characters as a gag in Doctor Strange or Loki season 2.

Hell in terms of Hulk go for the gusto and throw in Bana and Lou Ferrigno.  Ruffalo needs a new love interest too.  Liv Tyler or Jennifer Connelly?

[JGP]

1 hour ago, DMC said:

Anyway, I'm definitely on Johansson's side on this.  Unless she's flat out lying about having an agreement, she clearly has a case from what I've read and Disney will be forced to settle.

Mmn hmn. Don’t much care for ScarJo, she seems like a bit of an asshole, but a contract is a contract is a contract, and if the streaming wasn’t writ (or rewrit) into it it’s in breach. I agree she’ll get a decent portion. 
 

The public sue is kind of interesting, then I remember it’s ScarJo and don’t really care lol

[DMC]

5 hours ago, Deadlines? What Deadlines? said:

Did you not see that South Park documentary about the Jonas Brothers and how they were treated by the Mouse^(TM) ?

That ep has one my favorite lines...

 

[ithanos]

As a contrast to Scarlet Johansson suing Disney over Black Widow's release strategy. Emily Blunt, with husband John Krasinski, and Dwayne Johnson seem to have taken careful consideration of their movie deals in these changing times.

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-features/dwayne-johnson-emily-blunt-jungle-cruise-1234984896/#!
 

Quote

 

The two brought those disparate perspectives into their meetings with Disney about how to release Jungle Cruise, with the studio ultimately deciding on the hybrid release strategy due to the slow pace of vaccine rollouts globally.

Johnson says that after finishing Jungle Cruise, he and Blunt continued to consult with each other about how to handle production during the pandemic and how to manage their deals — which often have been linked to box office — amid the changing release strategies. “We’re all trying to figure it out,” Johnson says. “Emily and I have had this conversation about how one thing will impact another, these dollars are dollars now and then down the line. It’s an important conversation for us to have.”

 

Quote

...Paramount pushed the release date for A Quiet Place Part II five times. Blunt and Krasinski were adamant about preserving a theatrical release, even as Paramount sold off other big movies to streamers during the pandemic, including Coming 2 America and The Trial of the Chicago 7. Ultimately, Paramount released A Quiet Place Part II on May 28 in theaters, where it has grossed $285.6 million worldwide, before releasing it July 12 on Paramount+. Though the film had its theatrical release, its window was truncated from the pre-pandemic norm of 90 days, with far fewer than the remarkable 266 days the original film had spent in theaters, and Blunt and Krasinski sought to have their deals with Paramount restructured to accommodate for that difference. Asked how those talks had resolved, Blunt says: “We had a solely theatrical release. We were given a 45-day theatrical window. We got everything we wanted.”   

 

[sifth]

7 hours ago, Deadlines? What Deadlines? said:

Did you not see that South Park documentary about the Jonas Brothers and how they were treated by the Mouse^(TM) ?

Make the Mouse^(TM) squeal like a... mouse, I say. Drain him of all his precious bodily fluids. 

Also, if she signed a contract that guaranteed an exclusive theatrical release; and was willing to renegotiate in good faith; and Disney ignored her... She's got a legitimate grievance.  

Ya think?

Sorry, but I have a have a hard time feeling bad for the poor lady who only made 20 million dollars, when we're living in a world with people starving and losing their work, because of Covid. Not that you aren't wrong; that Disney is indeed scum, I just have a hard time supporting the rich, when all they really care about is getting richer, which very much is what Scarlett Johansoon is doing in this case.

[sifth]

6 hours ago, RumHam said:

I think Johansson would have been fine without the MCU career wise.

I assume she made a lot for the last few movies but it's likely her original pearlmutter-era contract sucked. She, Renner, Ruffalo and Cheadle have until recently been supporting players and were probably viewed as replaceable under his reign.

I remember reading somewhere that she was the highest paid actor/actress in Winter Solider. I'm not sure if this is true or not, but it was something I found interesting when I read it originally.

[DMC]

9 minutes ago, sifth said:

Sorry, but I have a have a hard time feeling bad for the poor lady who only made 20 million dollars, when we're living in a world with people starving and losing their work, because of Covid. Not that you aren't wrong; that Disney is indeed scum, I just have a hard time supporting the rich, when all they really care about is getting richer, which very much is what Scarlett Johansoon is doing in this case.

This is a common reaction to athletes whenever they complain about their contracts.  The way I've looked at is that practically, I'd much rather that money be in the hands of the athletes/actors than the owners/executives.  And ideally, I'd much rather the money be in the hands of the workers that actually put in the labor to produce the proceeds than the owners that financed it.

[sifth]

24 minutes ago, DMC said:

This is a common reaction to athletes whenever they complain about their contracts.  The way I've looked at is that practically, I'd much rather that money be in the hands of the athletes/actors than the owners/executives.  And ideally, I'd much rather the money be in the hands of the workers that actually put in the labor to produce the proceeds than the owners that financed it.

I on the other hand think actors, signers and athletes are already way over paid, for what they do. Sliders had an amazing episode, where people who contributed to science, agriculture and education, were worshiped and idealized, the way we do for actors, singers and athletes. I often wish we lived in that world, where people who actually contributed things of value to humanity were given celebrity status.

[DMC]

23 minutes ago, sifth said:

I often wish we lived in that world, where people who actually contributed things of value to humanity were given celebrity status.

Well sure if wishes were horses...

Unfortunately that's not the world we live in.

[sifth]

46 minutes ago, DMC said:

Well sure if wishes were horses...

Unfortunately that's not the world we live in.

Just my 2 cents on how I feel whenever someone making millions of dollars each year complains that they don’t make enough.

[Myrddin]

Regarding the ScarJo/Disney lawsuit, their statements are just opening positions, meant to be extreme, not their expected outcomes. They'll find a nice compromise, even while looking crass publicly.

[Deadlines? What Deadlines?]

3 hours ago, sifth said:

Sorry, but I have a have a hard time feeling bad for the poor lady who only made 20 million dollars, when we're living in a world with people starving and losing their work, because of Covid. Not that you aren't wrong; that Disney is indeed scum, I just have a hard time supporting the rich, when all they really care about is getting richer, which very much is what Scarlett Johansoon is doing in this case.

Yeah, funny how Disney included that "$20 million" number in their response. I wonder why they put that out there.

Not that you're wrong, but again this comes down to what the relevant parties were contracted for. 

[The Anti-Targ]

3 hours ago, sifth said:

I on the other hand think actors, signers and athletes are already way over paid, for what they do. Sliders had an amazing episode, where people who contributed to science, agriculture and education, were worshiped and idealized, the way we do for actors, singers and athletes. I often wish we lived in that world, where people who actually contributed things of value to humanity were given celebrity status.

I take issue with that somewhat. The implication is that artists contribute nothing and don't deserve recognition. I agree that there is an imbalance and that these careers are grossly overpaid, but they are not without value to humanity.

The good thing about social media and Youtube is that a lot more scientists are becoming somewhat famous, and earning additional money over an above their day jobs, but it's still nothing close to sports and entertainment. Better still, though would be that they earn much better incomes from their day jobs. Teacher though, the actual classroom teachers, horribly undervalued and underpaid.

[polishgenius]

The reason entertainers can earn millions in a way that other fields don't is that in the age of television and internet one entertainer can provide their thing to millions of people in one go whereas even the greatest doctor or farmer you've ever heard of has inherent limitations of audience, and therefore pay. That's never gonna change unless you want to start asking people to pay hundreds of pounds for a slice of bread (I suppose in the US you're already close to that with healthcare...)

That isn't inherently true of teaching, in some ways, which is why you're seeing scientists etc getting greater notice in, essentially, teaching roles over social media, but there are obviously limits on how many can break out that way and, since each de facto lesson is recorded either via text or video, it's obviously not a role with repeating returns like in-person, personalised, teaching etc.

[DMC]

I mean, the reasons entertainers are paid exorbitantly more than educators in a capitalist or even capitalist/socialist society are obvious.  Let's not pretend that's ever going to fundamentally change.