|
Post by Cyno on Jul 30, 2021 14:09:27 GMT -5
I told you the name that will ruin all the good will over these years and potentially drive Fiege out is ...CHAPEK. I tried to inform yall because they have to get rid of him now or else. This isn’t a selective company mandate. Hell, this isn’t even the first company that tried royalty dodging this past year. CBS Viacom did it to Dave Chappelle, the aforementioned Warner Bros example with Legendary Pictures, Disney did it with the Star Wars writers. And don’t get me started on corporate tax dodging, which is a whole can of worms. This is a corporation doing ways to not pay people the money they should which might as well be The American Way if so many other countries with major corporations didn’t copy. Yeah, Iger was still CEO when these contracts were negotiated and not re-negotiated and is still Executive Chairman. The transition from Iger to Chapek was supposed to start last year but was delayed because of the pandemic.
Chapek will be an easy scapegoat in the future, but Iger's as much responsible for this particular mess.
|
|
|
Post by Alice Syndrome on Jul 30, 2021 19:59:04 GMT -5
I believe I also saw something about Emma Stone considering a similar lawsuit for Cruella. Disney needs to settle this quickly because Rocky could be coming soon. SAG-AFTRA is about to go on the warpath
|
|
|
Post by Mighty Attack Tribble on Jul 30, 2021 22:43:23 GMT -5
Are the floodgates about to open?
|
|
Feyrhausen
Hank Scorpio
Posts: 6,228
Member is Online
|
Post by Feyrhausen on Jul 31, 2021 9:52:08 GMT -5
I read in an article on AvClub that Disney did pay Scarlett her cut on the Disney Plus money. And the crux of her lawsuit is that the movie being on Plus resulted in lower ticket sales. This seems dumb to me. I dont think many people who bought it on Plus would have gone to the theatre to see it. I know I am not stepping in a theater for a long time.
So if they are paying her cut on the Plus buys then I would think she is making more on a dual release then just a theatre only release. Either way though it was never going to be what she was used to from before.
|
|
|
Post by eJm on Jul 31, 2021 10:31:42 GMT -5
I read in an article on AvClub that Disney did pay Scarlett her cut on the Disney Plus money. And the crux of her lawsuit is that the movie being on Plus resulted in lower ticket sales. This seems dumb to me. I dont think many people who bought it on Plus would have gone to the theatre to see it. I know I am not stepping in a theater for a long time. So if they are paying her cut on the Plus buys then I would think she is making more on a dual release then just a theatre only release. Either way though it was never going to be what she was used to from before. I mean, regardless of whether people were going to go and see it or not, it sort of did cut into ticket sales. There’s no way it wouldn’t. And on that front, these are the same companies that squawk all day about how piracy is ruining things when you can look at Disney’s movie grosses in 2019 to show that they mostly shouldn’t give a shit.
|
|
Feyrhausen
Hank Scorpio
Posts: 6,228
Member is Online
|
Post by Feyrhausen on Jul 31, 2021 10:40:37 GMT -5
I read in an article on AvClub that Disney did pay Scarlett her cut on the Disney Plus money. And the crux of her lawsuit is that the movie being on Plus resulted in lower ticket sales. This seems dumb to me. I dont think many people who bought it on Plus would have gone to the theatre to see it. I know I am not stepping in a theater for a long time. So if they are paying her cut on the Plus buys then I would think she is making more on a dual release then just a theatre only release. Either way though it was never going to be what she was used to from before. I mean, regardless of whether people were going to go and see it or not, it sort of did cut into ticket sales. There’s no way it wouldn’t. And on that front, these are the same companies that squawk all day about how piracy is ruining things when you can look at Disney’s movie grosses in 2019 to show that they mostly shouldn’t give a shit. But if they are paying her for the Plus sales then that should have mostly made up for the lost ticket sales. In some cases she may have made more money. Either way it should have evened out. Now Plus did lead to increased piracy but I would think the pandemic would have done the same.
|
|
|
Post by eJm on Jul 31, 2021 10:46:10 GMT -5
I mean, regardless of whether people were going to go and see it or not, it sort of did cut into ticket sales. There’s no way it wouldn’t. And on that front, these are the same companies that squawk all day about how piracy is ruining things when you can look at Disney’s movie grosses in 2019 to show that they mostly shouldn’t give a shit. But if they are paying her for the Plus sales then that should have mostly made up for the lost ticket sales. In some cases she may have made more money. Either way it should have evened out. Now Plus did lead to increased piracy but I would think the pandemic would have done the same. I mean, from the numbers we first saw, and as successful as it was on +, it wasn’t exactly matching to the box office exactly if it was at cinemas so we have no real proof either way, which is part of the issue here. And it’s also not the first time studios would have messed around with numbers to make it more benefit them in some ways. Unless people still think the first Star Wars movie still hasn’t turned a profit.
|
|
|
Post by A Platypus Rave on Jul 31, 2021 14:08:50 GMT -5
I read in an article on AvClub that Disney did pay Scarlett her cut on the Disney Plus money. And the crux of her lawsuit is that the movie being on Plus resulted in lower ticket sales. This seems dumb to me. I dont think many people who bought it on Plus would have gone to the theatre to see it. I know I am not stepping in a theater for a long time. So if they are paying her cut on the Plus buys then I would think she is making more on a dual release then just a theatre only release. Either way though it was never going to be what she was used to from before. I mean, regardless of whether people were going to go and see it or not, it sort of did cut into ticket sales. There’s no way it wouldn’t. And on that front, these are the same companies that squawk all day about how piracy is ruining things when you can look at Disney’s movie grosses in 2019 to show that they mostly shouldn’t give a shit. again I paid like 1/3 of what I would have had I gone to the theater to see it with my brother and father... and Disney got like all of the money instead of half of it...
|
|
|
Post by eJm on Jul 31, 2021 14:12:24 GMT -5
I mean, regardless of whether people were going to go and see it or not, it sort of did cut into ticket sales. There’s no way it wouldn’t. And on that front, these are the same companies that squawk all day about how piracy is ruining things when you can look at Disney’s movie grosses in 2019 to show that they mostly shouldn’t give a shit. again I paid like 1/3 of what I would have had I gone to the theater to see it with my brother and father... and Disney got like all of the money instead of half of it... Exactly, part of that cut would have gone to the theatre and others but if you use Disney+, Disney gets all of that without having to divide that up. And even if you paid her for it appearing on Disney+, that other income is less than it was before.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 31, 2021 21:39:18 GMT -5
Maybe it's because I grew up without shit, but hearing these insanely rich actors pissing and moaning about shit like this makes me never want to give them a dime of my money again. Is that a shitty attitude to have? Maybe, but I can't help but feel that way. It's not like Scarlett Johansen and Emma Stone aren't going to miss a f***ing meal or struggle to afford groceries because their movies went to streaming.
|
|
|
Post by Mighty Attack Tribble on Jul 31, 2021 21:49:56 GMT -5
Maybe it's because I grew up without shit, but hearing these insanely rich actors pissing and moaning about shit like this makes me never want to give them a dime of my money again. Is that a shitty attitude to have? Maybe, but I can't help but feel that way. It's not like Scarlett Johansen and Emma Stone aren't going to miss a f***ing meal or struggle to afford groceries because their movies went to streaming. I mean, sure, it's hard to have sympathy for multimillionaires having a few less million coming in, but it doesn't mean they haven't been legitimately wronged either. Regardless of how much you earn, if you do a job with the legally binding agreement that you will be paid a certain amount and then the company you're billing finds a way to weasel out of paying you half you'd be pissed too.
|
|
|
Post by A Platypus Rave on Jul 31, 2021 22:55:24 GMT -5
Maybe it's because I grew up without shit, but hearing these insanely rich actors pissing and moaning about shit like this makes me never want to give them a dime of my money again. Is that a shitty attitude to have? Maybe, but I can't help but feel that way. It's not like Scarlett Johansen and Emma Stone aren't going to miss a f***ing meal or struggle to afford groceries because their movies went to streaming. I mean, sure, it's hard to have sympathy for multimillionaires having a few less million coming in, but it doesn't mean they haven't been legitimately wronged either. Regardless of how much you earn, if you do a job with the legally binding agreement that you will be paid a certain amount and then the company you're billing finds a way to weasel out of paying you half you'd be pissed too. The alternative are the Multi-Billion dollar companies... so yeah the Multimillionaires are clearly in the right... and if the company is willing to do it to people that are considered A list... they are absolutely going to do it to the lesser actors or the rest of the people down the line in the production that might not be in as great a shape.
|
|
|
Post by Mighty Attack Tribble on Jul 31, 2021 23:56:01 GMT -5
I mean, sure, it's hard to have sympathy for multimillionaires having a few less million coming in, but it doesn't mean they haven't been legitimately wronged either. Regardless of how much you earn, if you do a job with the legally binding agreement that you will be paid a certain amount and then the company you're billing finds a way to weasel out of paying you half you'd be pissed too. The alternative are the Multi-Billion dollar companies... so yeah the Multimillionaires are clearly in the right... and if the company is willing to do it to people that are considered A list... they are absolutely going to do it to the lesser actors or the rest of the people down the line in the production that might not be in as great a shape. Exactly. ScarJo may not need the money, but she's owed, and to let Disney get away with it sets a bad precedent.
|
|
|
Post by eJm on Aug 1, 2021 0:11:55 GMT -5
I mean, sure, it's hard to have sympathy for multimillionaires having a few less million coming in, but it doesn't mean they haven't been legitimately wronged either. Regardless of how much you earn, if you do a job with the legally binding agreement that you will be paid a certain amount and then the company you're billing finds a way to weasel out of paying you half you'd be pissed too. The alternative are the Multi-Billion dollar companies... so yeah the Multimillionaires are clearly in the right... and if the company is willing to do it to people that are considered A list... they are absolutely going to do it to the lesser actors or the rest of the people down the line in the production that might not be in as great a shape. Exactly this. Again, this is a company that wanted to screw over a bunch of writers who were owed money for their contributions to the wider Star Wars universe and it isn’t like any of those people are multi-millionaires as far as I know. And it’s not like Disney can’t do it. They’re f***ing Disney. And if it wasn’t going to anyone who actually does the stuff, it was going to line the pockets of the board of directors who need the money less.
|
|
|
Post by Mighty Attack Tribble on Aug 1, 2021 1:23:48 GMT -5
Relevant:
If they'd stiffed Big Dave on what he earned, he would have been hurting.
|
|
|
Post by Cyno on Aug 1, 2021 1:33:20 GMT -5
The alternative are the Multi-Billion dollar companies... so yeah the Multimillionaires are clearly in the right... and if the company is willing to do it to people that are considered A list... they are absolutely going to do it to the lesser actors or the rest of the people down the line in the production that might not be in as great a shape. Exactly this. Again, this is a company that wanted to screw over a bunch of writers who were owed money for their contributions to the wider Star Wars universe and it isn’t like any of those people are multi-millionaires as far as I know. And it’s not like Disney can’t do it. They’re f***ing Disney. And if it wasn’t going to anyone who actually does the stuff, it was going to line the pockets of the board of directors who need the money less. Disney likely made in profit from last year what amounts to ScarJo's entire net worth.
Favoring the massive conglomerates worth billions upon billions of dollars that make these A-listers look like paupers by comparison isn't sticking up for the working class. If they're screwing the big names out of millions, you can bet they're screwing the "little people" that work for them, too.
|
|
|
Post by Non Banjoble Tokens on Aug 1, 2021 1:48:15 GMT -5
Why doesn't Disney just give the money to me? It could help fund my Frogman movie.
|
|
|
Post by The Thread Barbi on Aug 1, 2021 1:56:21 GMT -5
Does Nick Khan work for Disney as well?
|
|
|
Post by thechase on Aug 1, 2021 5:38:57 GMT -5
It answers the most important question...why is a job?
|
|
|
Post by eJm on Aug 1, 2021 6:06:23 GMT -5
|
|