To put cold water on that situation, why did ScarJo file her lawsuit when the movie is still in theaters? Even Emma Stone's Cruella is still in theaters now. Emily Blunt is only rumored to do it, but Jungle Cruise just released. Dwayne Johnson will not file suit. His production company is also in business with Disney so he has 2 income sources for one movie.Regarding the ScarJo suit, I subscribe to an entertainment industry newsletter that nicely summed things up. As many have suggested, increases to the Disney+ subscriber base (and it's long-term revenue stream) drive Disney stock price higher than shorter-term theatrical box office results/revenue. And it's not a particularly surprising decision when you realize Chapek's compensation is tied to the company's performance on Wall Street. On the Black Widow day-and-date release announcement, Disney stock jumped 4%. Johansson apparently has a strong case, as she has documented assurance from Disney/Marvel that the film would have a "typical wide release... like their (Marvel) other pictures" and would receive very large back-end compensation tied to it's expected highly lucrative box office performance.
Not an insignificant factor: Kevin Feige is said to be angry and embarrassed by Disney's actions and behavior regarding this lawsuit. Unlike Disney, Warner Brothers proactively restructured the compensation packages of their onscreen talent to "make them whole" once they decided to employ a similar simultaneous multiple-platform film release strategy that would cannibalize theatrical box-office revenue. Word is that Emma Stone is considering legal action regarding the similar release strategy for Cruella, and that Dwayne Johnson and Emily Blunt will likely end up doing the same based on the expected diminished theatrical performance of Jungle Cruise. Given all the damage being done by Disney's highly-publicized actions to these extremely important/valuable assets and stakeholders, they (Disney) are expected to settle the suit rather quickly. Then again, we're talking about Chapek, so who knows?
No, settling suggests the case is so overwhelmingly against Disney. I'm not so sure. Disney can ask for summary dismissal on the fact that box office receipts are coming in. The movie is #3 in the box office after 4 weekends in theaters. That's not that bad. Unfortunately, the movie is likely a flop and not make back it's money so why does ScarJo deserve any money for a flop in a back end deal even if Disney+ Premiere receipts are included.
The case is not ripe.
What do courts mean by “ripeness” and “mootness”? | uslawessentials
uslawessentials.com
Last edited: