I thoroughly recommend reading Matthew Belloni (late of The Hollywood Reporter, and now of a new venture called "Puck" that launches this week) who has an "invite only" newsletter. Anyone can get it :-) https://whatimhearing.news/matt-belloni
This whole thing is obviously a stake in the ground from big name actors. This might be specifically about Johansson, but it's also very much about CAA and the other big agencies. It seems pretty clear at this point that studios like Warners and Disney are more concerned with growing their streaming offerings than worrying too much about whether the next movie in their various franchises hits $1bn at the global box office. They're playing a long-game and at this point it's about growing subscriber bases even if it means a short term hit. In the longer term, I'm sure that they'll be looking for things to even out. But right now, they're getting rewarded by Wall St for those streaming subscriber numbers above all other things. So if Black Widow takes a bit less than it might have done, then so be it. At least from the studios' perspective. Add into this mix that the economics are different. I believe that of the reported box office of a movie's take, the studio might get something like 60-65% of that number, the cinema chain itself taking a big chunk. With digital distribution, the studio gets something more akin to 80%. So $30m at the streaming box office is the same as $40m at the physical box office to the studios' bottom lines. They can afford to take a bit less in the reported numbers and still make the same. If you're an actor who's deal is based off the box office take, then you're losing out. (That's before you account for losses from piracy, which is suddenly much more rampant given that perfect digital copies of movies are effectively available day and date with releases). The talent has all done deals under the old system, and we're in that in-between moment when new systems need to be put in place for the talent. In streaming for example, there isn't really even an accurate set of numbers to go off. Disney reports some numbers some of the time. Netflix is even more opaque. And companies like Nielsen are imperfect and in any case, only report US figures, while the movie business is a global one. This isn't about whether Johansson is being aptly rewarded for her work. Stars get star pay. That's how it works. Disney's response seems particularly ill judged to me - "salary-shaming" her to an extent. Would they have done the same with Robert Downey Jr who made vastly more? The agencies are definitely stepping up here, as they're going to need a system that more accurately reflects the situation going forward with a mixed physical/digital movie system in place. They probably need to do the same with talent rewards for streaming only operators like Netflix, who have the whip hand in having the platform, and the numbers. And it's worth noting that while Disney did hold this film back many months, it also did need to get it out because it does fit in with the wider MCU in setting up other characters for future TV/film offerings. Adam On Mon, Aug 2, 2021 at 6:19 AM 'David Bruggeman' via TVorNotTV < tvornottv@googlegroups.com> wrote: > While Marvel has replaced actors (Don Cheadle for Terence Howard most > notably), there has been a narrative crafted around Johannson's work with > Marvel that it was a slight that she/Black Widow hadn't had her own film. > If they hadn't come to terms on this particular film, I don't think it > would have been made, as it's structured in such a way that it's easily > removed from Marvel's various phases and timelines. > > David > > On Sunday, August 1, 2021, 9:51:24 PM PDT, Tom Wolper <twol...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > The studios responded by turning to franchise movies where the audience > identifies with the character and not the actor. If Disney can't come to an > agreement with Johannson they find a new Black Widow and after everybody > vents on social media they just move on. > > I think everybody knows Disney is screwing the talent by opening streaming > the same day while pretending the only revenue that counts comes from > theaters. Somebody with deep pockets has to draw a line in the sand so they > don't get away with it and make it standard. It seems Scarlett Johannson > decided to take that stand. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "TVorNotTV" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to tvornottv+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/208153526.1197795.1627881581075%40mail.yahoo.com > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/208153526.1197795.1627881581075%40mail.yahoo.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> > . > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TVorNotTV" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to tvornottv+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/CAD_sJGDSe4sJBp%2BcpO2g6fpQryw7GZWk17znXDqs-t%2Bfd_jsQQ%40mail.gmail.com.
