A longtime lawyer for Disney has slammed Scarlett Johansson‘s $50 million Black Widow lawsuit as a ‘highly orchestrated’ public relations stunt designed to get the company ‘to write a check.’
Daniel Petrocelli suggested in comments to Variety that Disney would not bow to ‘public pressure’ and said the actress demands compensation far beyond that of her contract with the studio.
‘It is obvious that this is a highly orchestrated PR campaign to achieve an outcome that is not obtainable in the lawsuit,’ Petrocelli said.
‘No amount of public pressure can change or obscure the explicit contractual commitments. The written contract is clear as a bell.’
Johansson, 36, filed her lawsuit in Los Angeles Superior Court last month, alleging that she lost out on more than $50 million as a result of the film being released on streaming service Disney+ at the same time as its debut in theaters.
The actress claimed she had been guaranteed that Black Widow would have an exclusive theatrical release, and that the bulk of her salary was based on the box office performance.
Disney lawyer Daniel Petrocelli, right, suggested in comments to Variety that the company would not bow to ‘public pressure’ and said Scarlett Johansson demands compensation far beyond that of her contract with the studio
Disney+ charges subscribers an additional $29.99 beyond the streaming service’s subscription fee to watch the film with Disney Premier Access, a pay-to-access model for individual titles not offered free on the platform.
Petrocelli claimed the Disney Premier Access actually helped raise Johansson’s contractual income because the studio’s share of that streaming revenue is factored in when calculating box-office revenue for the purposes of giving actors bonuses.
‘We treated Disney Premier Access like box office for the purposes of the bonus requirements in the contract. That only enhanced the economics for Ms. Johansson,’ Petrocelli told Variety.
The contract called for Black Widow to be released on a minimum of 1,500 screens, Petrocelli said. Disney released it on 9,000 screens in the U.S. and 30,000 globally.
The movie set a pandemic-era record bringing in $218 million worldwide over opening weekend earlier this month, including the streaming figures, plus $80 million domestic box office and $78 million internationally.
The film took in $60 million on Disney+ on the opening weekend alone, the company previously announced in its first breakdown of streaming figures for a movie.
However, the movie’s box-office performance dropped off sharply after the opening weekend, leading some analysts to question whether the Disney+ streaming release was taking a bite out of ticket sales.
Black Widow saw box office receipts plunge 67 percent after opening weekend, and ticket sales currently stand at $319 million globally, putting the film on track to become one of the lowest-grossing Marvel movies of all time.
Disney previously revealed in a statement to DailyMail.com that Johansson made $20 million from the film.
‘The lawsuit is especially sad and distressing in its callous disregard for the horrific and prolonged global effects of the COVID-19 pandemic,’ the company said.
‘Disney has fully complied with Ms. Johansson’s contract. Furthermore, the release of Black Widow on Disney+ with Premier Access has significantly enhanced her ability to earn additional compensation on top of the $20M she has received to date.’
Black Widow, starring Scarlett Johansson as the cat-suited superspy, was available online to Disney+ subscribers for an extra fee of $29.99
It was not immediately clear what Johansson’s additional compensation from streaming could be.
Still, Petrocelli defended Disney’s decision to release the film on Disney Premier Access – telling Variety that the company had to find ways to distribute the movie under conditions caused by the COVID-19 pandemic and still profit from the film.
‘You had an unexpected COVID crisis and the studio was trying to accommodate millions of fans who are nervous and not comfortable going inside theaters. All studios have had to adjust.’ Petrocelli said.
Petrocelli acknowledged that the film industry is transitioning, exacerbated by the pandemic, and predicted that future talent deals will ‘become much more specific about the requirements for any contingent compensation.’
‘There’s a sea change because of the advent of the internet and the ability to put things out online. This will take time to resolve,’ he added.
For now, Johansson’s contract reads that both parties agreed to handle disputes in arbitration rather than open court, Petrocelli told Variety.
Variety noted Johansson’s contract is with Marvel Studios LLC, a subsidiary company of Disney, but the lawsuit was filed against the latter on the legal grounds that Disney imposed its corporate priorities to support its streaming platform on Marvel.
SAG-AFTRA President Gabrielle Carteris criticized Disney in a statement on Friday.
Petrocelli’s comments come as SAG-AFTRA president Gabrielle Carteris criticized Disney in a statement on Friday.
‘Disney should be ashamed of themselves for resorting to tired tactics of gender-shaming and bullying,’ Carteris said.
‘Actors must be compensated for their work according to their contracts. Scarlett Johansson is shining a white-hot spotlight on the improper shifts in compensation that companies are attempting to slip by talent as distribution models change.’
Carteris added that nobody ‘should fall victim to surprise reductions in expected compensation.’
‘It is unreasonable and unjust. Disney and other content companies are doing very well and can certainly live up to their obligations to compensate the performers whose art and artistry are responsible for the corporation’s profits,’ she said.
Carteris added that the guild’s leadership is ‘deeply concerned by the gendered tone of Disney’s criticism of Ms. Johansson’ and claimed that she was a victim of ‘bias.’
‘Women are not ‘callous’ when they stand up and fight for fair pay – they are leaders and champions for economic justice,’ she said.
‘Women have been victimized by pay inequity for decades, and they have been further victimized by comments like those in Disney’s press statements.’
Could Scarlett spark a Hollywood uprising? Star’s lawsuit could inspire others whose films were released via streaming to launch their own battles
Scarlett Johansson’s lawsuit against Disney raises questions over whether other major stars could follow her lead and launch their own legal attacks over compensation after a year where the pandemic drove many studios to abandon traditional cinema releases.
The suit comes at a pivotal moment for the film industry, as more major studios experiment with releasing movies simultaneously online and in theaters.
In response to the pandemic, Warner Bros. decided to release its full slate of movies this year on HBO Max on the same day that they hit theaters.
Parent company AT&T, which owns both Warner Bros. and HBO, appears pleased with the formula and plans to extend it.
Last week, WarnerMedia chief Jason Kilar revealed that in 2022 Warner Bros. will be producing 10 films that will debut on HBO Max the same day they’re released.
Disney also moved toward simultaneous streaming release of movies due to the pandemic.
Multiple stars and directors have pushed back on the shift to streaming service releases because they cut into the much larger profits that come from traditional months-long exclusive theater runs.
Warner Bros. and WarnerMedia was forced to pay more than $200million to talent up front last year to compensate for filmmakers’ loss of traditional profit participation after it chose to release movies on HBO Max at no additional cost to consumers.
And in May it was reported that A Quiet Place II director John Krasinki and star Emily Blunt demanded more money from Paramount Pictures after its parent company ViacomCBS put the film on Paramount+ 45 after its theatrical release.