Scarlett Johansson Sues Disney Over Black Widow Release

[Spongeocto4]

Looks like not everyone was happy with Black Widow's Hybrid Release. Scarlett Johansson has just filed a lawsuit against Disney, just after 3 weeks the film's release. According to ScarJo, her contract stipulated that the movie would receive an "exclusive theatrical run" instead of the Hybrid release. And because of that stipulation, her salary for the film was factored by the box office run. Black Widow's Box Office significantly dropped after it's 2nd week release.

This makes me wonder if Kevin Feige knew about the stipulation. Feige allegedly fought for the Theatrical Marvel Releases for to be maintained. It's also bad PR for the company, as ScarJo is an in-demand A List Actress. This could send a red flag up for other Actors, who may have doubts against the company now.

[Captain Andy]

I'm more disgusted by Disney's response to the lawsuit. It's such a weak excuse, and deflects from their own wrongdoing.

Disney broke the contract. Scarlet's reps reached out in an effort to change / amend the contract, but Disney's legal team ignored their calls. It's irresponsible.

I'm happy Scarlet is standing up for her rights. Such decisions like this may reflect how Disney treats smaller talent agencies, and small creators, which is abhorrent to say the least.

[Spongeocto4]

I'm more disgusted by Disney's response to the lawsuit. It's such a weak excuse, and deflects from their own wrongdoing.

Disney broke the contract. Scarlet's reps reached out in an effort to change / amend the contract, but Disney's legal team ignored their calls. It's irresponsible.

I'm happy Scarlet is standing up for her rights. Such decisions like this may reflect how Disney treats smaller talent agencies, and small creators, which is abhorrent to say the least.

There are more d@mning facts that favor Johansson's corner.

-The fact that she should of made an extra $50 Million, which was about 2.5X of her base salary.
-The fact that the company was fine with giving Robert Downey Jr, 8% of Avengers Endgame's profit on top of his base salary. When added up, that's was a whopping $75 Million.
- And then we have this very d@mning anecdote, which raises one's eyebrow:

The suit also notes that annual bonuses for Disney Chairman Robert Iger and Chief Executive Bob Chapek are tied to the performance of Disney+ and cites that as further motivation for putting “Black Widow” on the service. Disney disclosed in its 2021 proxy that Messrs Iger and Chapek both received bonuses for the success of Disney+. “In short, the message to—and from— Disney’s top management was clear: increase Disney+ subscribers, never mind your contractual promises, and you will be rewarded,” the suit said.

Yikes...
Bob I. & Bob C. may have really messed up.

[Captain Andy]

There are more d@mning facts that favor Johansson's corner.

-The fact that she should of made an extra $50 Million, which was about 2.5X of her base salary.
-The fact that the company was fine with giving Robert Downey Jr, 8% of Avengers Endgame's profit on top of his base salary. When added up, that's was a whopping $75 Million.
- And then we have this very d@mning anecdote, which raises one's eyebrow:



Yikes...
Bob I. & Bob C. may have really messed up.

Totally selfish. Goodness.... I can't wrap my head around anyone who could defend Disney in this case.

They need to get it together before they ruin everything.

[Spongeocto4]

In the words of Ron Burgundy: "Boy, that escalated quickly...". Johansson's actions are already causing a ripple affect with Emma Stone and Emily Blunt.

In his newsletter What I'm Hearing..., former Hollywood Reporter editor Matthew Belloni reports that Stone is "said to be weighing her options," while Blunt is "likely watching the Jungle Cruise numbers closely this weekend." Blunt, Belloni reports, had already raised objections over Paramount releasing her film A Quiet Place Part II on streaming about 45 days after its theatrical debut, sooner than the pre-pandemic norm of around 90 days.

"The floodgates might be opening," Belloni writes

Stone recently was in Cruella ,which premiered both in theaters and Disney+ in May. Blunt's Jungle Cruise premiered in theaters and Disney+ today.

If Angelina Jolie enters the legal fray with her upcoming film, Eternals, then Chapek better get his resume ready for a last ditch effort at Target.

[jcruise86]

Here is a clear, brief segment about this:

https://www.cnn.com/videos/business/2021/07/30/scarlett-johansson-disney-lawsuit.cnnbusiness/video/playlists/stories-worth-watching/

[Spongeocto4]

Another bizarre development in this suit, The Wrap reports that Bob Iger was reportedly "mortified"of the Johansson's lawsuit. Guess who was allegedly behind it all along? A̶g̶a̶t̶h̶a̶ Chapek.

Zenia Mucha has refuted this report, but she has been described as a 'lackey of Iger' in the past. And Mucha might be covering for Iger.

[lemuth0922]

Other celebs are starting to "weigh in" so to speak... Duane Johnson posted on instagram a jab at the ScarJo suit and that JC was released for everyone to enjoy - either at the theatres or from home. It'll be interesting to see how this continues to play out.

[Mr Wiggins]

Another bizarre development in this suit, The Wrap reports that Bob Iger was reportedly "mortified"of the Johansson's lawsuit. Guess who was allegedly behind it all along? A̶g̶a̶t̶h̶a̶ Chapek.

A quote from the Wrap story:

“What do you expect?” asked a former Disney executive who called it an “irksome” rookie error. “Chapek and Iger are not spending time and comparing notes and working to mutual success, which is kind of what you look for in a succession plan. Talent is important. You should proactively say: ‘Let’s figure this out.’”

As TheWrap has previously reported, Chapek — who rose to CEO after running the theme parks division — has always been called out for one big hole in his résumé: no talent relationships. And this is where having Iger as executive chairman seemed absolutely critical. Having chosen Chapek after rejecting other veteran executives (Jay Rasulo, Tom Staggs, Kevin Mayer), the smooth-talking Iger could groom Chapek, supposedly, in this area of weakness.

Iger might also have warned Chapek off leaving this in the hands of his distribution chief Kareem Daniel, an engineer turned investment banker with a ton of power — and also zero experience managing talent.

“This signals that everything fell apart,” the first Disney insider said. “There are checks and balances in place to prevent things descending into lawsuits and insults… You have to blow by all the different restraint systems designed to keep everyone working together and playing nice. Scarlett’s team didn’t just go to the courthouse and sue.”



And from another Wrap article:

...The feeling that Disney’s last CEO Bob Iger would have handled this differently was all the more pronounced by Disney’s official response to the lawsuit, which called Johansson “callous” and disclosed her $20 million salary — suggesting she was being greedy in claiming $50 million in box office-based backend compensation in the suit. Johansson’s camp told TheWrap the actress was shocked by the tone. So were many others around Hollywood.

“Last time I checked, I was pretty sure that the senior team at Disney wouldn’t get a lot of purchase by accusing someone else of being greedy,” said one top executive in the industry, who called the response “ham-handed.”

Another pressure point is that Marvel chief Kevin Feige was reportedly angry and embarrassed at the way the company handled the dispute with a star who had done nine highly profitable films for its biggest franchise. Feige had lobbied against the streaming plan for day-and-date and was not heeded. The decision seems to have sat with Chapek’s right hand man, Kareem Daniel, chairman of Disney Media and Entertainment Distribution, another executive with little to no experience managing talent relationships.

“It seems that Chapek is putting a lot of his industry and talent relations in the hands of his distribution group, which has proven to be inexperienced in the traditional ways that things are to be done,” one entertainment executive told TheWrap. “That wouldn’t have happened under (former CEO Bob) Iger — he would have done it himself.”

“Disney’s approach under Iger would have been markedly different and would have had less initial brand carnage,” Eric Schiffer of The Patriarch Organization and chairman of Reputation Management Consultants said. Iger’s team “would have attempted to work behind the scenes and maintain a greater level of trust in the relationship,” he added.

Gene Del Vecchio, an adjunct professor of marketing at USC Marshall School of Business, agreed that this situation called for some of Iger’s signature diplomacy. “Bob Iger was named CEO in 2005 not only due to his business acumen, but for his mastery of developing and keeping relationships that he had honed for dozens of years working with temperamental, high-profile stars,” Del Vecchio told TheWrap. “Disney’s acquisition and management of Pixar, Marvel, and Lucas are testimony to his ability. Chapek’s previous experience with Disney Consumer Products, Parks and Resorts did not demand the same level of star-charged interaction.”

[Mr Wiggins]

SAG-AFTRA President: Disney Using “Gender-Shaming and Bullying” Tactics Over Scarlett Johansson Lawsuit

Hollywood Reporter
August 6, 2021

SAG-AFTRA President Gabrielle Carteris has some words for Disney about its handling of Scarlett Johansson’s Black Widow lawsuit.

“Disney should be ashamed of themselves for resorting to tired tactics of gender-shaming and bullying,” the leader of the performers’ union said in a statement released on Friday. “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.”

She added, “Nobody in any field of work 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.”

Johansson prompted a surge of news stories and debate when she filed a lawsuit in late July alleging that her Black Widow contract had been breached. After the company released the latest Marvel film simultaneously in theaters and on Disney+ Premier Access for an added $30, the film’s star contested in the lawsuit that she had been promised a wide theatrical release and that Disney had pursued a dual release for its own benefit.

In its initial statement on the suit, Disney retorted, “There is no merit whatsoever to this filing. The lawsuit is especially sad and distressing in its callous disregard for the horrific and prolonged global effects of the COVID-19 pandemic. Disney has fully complied with Ms. Johansson’s contract and 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.”

Like several women’s equity-focused organizations, including Time’s Up, ReFrame and Women and Film, which flagged Disney’s initial response to Johansson’s lawsuit as a “gendered character attack,” Carteris homed in on the “gendered tone” of the company’s comments. “Additionally, we are deeply concerned by the gendered tone of Disney’s criticism of Ms. Johansson. Women are not ‘callous’ when they stand up and fight for fair pay – they are leaders and champions for economic justice,” said Carteris. “Women have been victimized by pay inequity for decades, and they have been further victimized by comments like those in Disney’s press statements. These sorts of attacks have no place in our society and SAG-AFTRA will continue to defend our members from all forms of bias.”...

[Captain Andy]

SAG-AFTRA President: Disney Using “Gender-Shaming and Bullying” Tactics Over Scarlett Johansson Lawsuit

Hollywood Reporter
August 6, 2021

SAG-AFTRA President Gabrielle Carteris has some words for Disney about its handling of Scarlett Johansson’s Black Widow lawsuit.

“Disney should be ashamed of themselves for resorting to tired tactics of gender-shaming and bullying,” the leader of the performers’ union said in a statement released on Friday. “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.”

She added, “Nobody in any field of work 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.”

Johansson prompted a surge of news stories and debate when she filed a lawsuit in late July alleging that her Black Widow contract had been breached. After the company released the latest Marvel film simultaneously in theaters and on Disney+ Premier Access for an added $30, the film’s star contested in the lawsuit that she had been promised a wide theatrical release and that Disney had pursued a dual release for its own benefit.

In its initial statement on the suit, Disney retorted, “There is no merit whatsoever to this filing. The lawsuit is especially sad and distressing in its callous disregard for the horrific and prolonged global effects of the COVID-19 pandemic. Disney has fully complied with Ms. Johansson’s contract and 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.”

Like several women’s equity-focused organizations, including Time’s Up, ReFrame and Women and Film, which flagged Disney’s initial response to Johansson’s lawsuit as a “gendered character attack,” Carteris homed in on the “gendered tone” of the company’s comments. “Additionally, we are deeply concerned by the gendered tone of Disney’s criticism of Ms. Johansson. Women are not ‘callous’ when they stand up and fight for fair pay – they are leaders and champions for economic justice,” said Carteris. “Women have been victimized by pay inequity for decades, and they have been further victimized by comments like those in Disney’s press statements. These sorts of attacks have no place in our society and SAG-AFTRA will continue to defend our members from all forms of bias.”...

I am enjoying this dragging of Disney (specifically Chapek) so much.

He should have taken a couple of talent management and distribution classes before stumbling so hard into his pitiful penny ditch.

[JPPT1974]

Really she helped to make a lot of money. But really it did break the contract there. As really having it on pay per view really did hurt.

[Mr Wiggins]

An excerpt from:

Scarlett Johansson’s Black Widow lawsuit has unearthed a huge problem with streaming

The Verge
August 5, 2021

The old way of negotiating talent earnings has changed rapidly. According to Johansson’s complaint, terms of her Black Widow release were initially finalized in 2017 — early enough that Disney Plus hadn’t been announced, and Johansson’s team evidently didn’t think it was necessary to negotiate terms around streaming. Her contract specified Black Widow would debut with a “wide theatrical release,” but that it would be exclusively theatrical appears to have been only an understanding.

While actors know now that they need to negotiate terms for streaming, determining their worth is more difficult than simply looking to box office receipts. Streaming services hold their performance data extremely close to the chest, and they’re reluctant to share specifics about engagement and earnings on specific titles. Data that is shared is often opaque, obscured, or lacking context for how a title’s success (or failure) was measured by respective streamers.

“I don’t see Netflix wanting to share how much of their subscriber base is growing and what their viewership is any time soon,” the attorney said. “But we would like to see it.”

This is one reason why industry analysts who spoke with The Verge expressed a need for greater transparency by not just Disney but all streamers about performance data of titles on their platforms. Without it, it’s difficult for talent to advocate for themselves in negotiations in a swiftly evolving streaming landscape, argued Karie Bible, a media analyst with Exhibitor Relations Co. who spoke with The Verge by phone.

“The streamers are, for the most part, pretty darned nontransparent about numbers, about breakdowns, about demographics,” Bible said, adding that this information is not only crucial for analysts but agents, managers, and lawyers, too, who have traditionally negotiated based on box office performance.

What this lack of transparency by streamers can lead to is not only mistrust, but possibly even more of what Bible described as “creative accounting” by companies who aren’t forthright during contract negotiations. And that could potentially mean lost earnings for talent.

Another thing to consider is that each individual streamer’s metrics for success are, by and large, unclear. Box office numbers offer a clear picture of how a movie performed relative to its budget and projected ticket sales. But with streaming, none of us really know what a win looks like — huge viewership numbers, new signups, repeat views — short of the company telling us that a movie was one.

“I think we have to understand this lawsuit in the context of the redefined success metrics for any movie in the market today,” Daniel Loria, SVP of content strategy and editorial director at Boxoffice Pro, said by phone. “Unfortunately, we are all in the dark as to what that success means in the streaming era — not just the COVID era — but the streaming as a whole.”

Like Bible, Loria added that it’s likely frustrating for people in the entertainment industry who stand to benefit from streamer-produced titles but are not getting enough transparency around data and seemingly arbitrarily concocted metrics for success, which can vary by company and service. That could lead to top-name talent thinking twice about engaging in these types of agreements, or at the very least demanding clauses that protect their earnings in the event that a film’s release rollout is changed by a streaming-adjacent studio.

“If the industry wants to redefine the metrics of success for a movie, it needs to be on the same page on what that definition is,” Loria said. “And it seems right now like every studio is playing by a different set of rules and different metrics on what is financially successful and what isn’t.”

Now, negotiations are not going to operate the same way for every actor. Streaming services are willing to shell out more for talent if they believe the production is likely to drive subscriptions to the service, the Hollywood attorney told The Verge. That in itself presents a lot of opportunity for talent willing to join a production that may be a straight-to-streaming release, as we’ve seen play out on services like Netflix and Apple TV Plus.

“I think in our business, high-end talent has always had leverage and will continue to have leverage,” the attorney said. At the same time, the attorney pointed to a “maelstrom” of two significant influences, COVID-19 and a new streaming era, that has complicated contracts negotiated prior to either.

"Whether Johansson’s lawsuit is settled out of court is less important than what we’ve learned from Disney’s response to it: streaming services are being intentionally obtuse about how owning every single element of production, including releases, and an insatiable appetite for streaming influence is impacting the entertainment industry. No one’s sure what success looks like today, and that’s made knowing who’s winning and who’s losing hard to size up. Short of streamers making that data more transparent and available, the people who make the stuff we watch are walking into negotiations blind. And ultimately, what’s bad for streaming is bad for viewers."

[Spongeocto4]

Chapek, Chapek, Chapek.....(sigh)

So in a earnings report today, Chapek made it clear that there was no bad blood between him and Iger(despite reports). He also decided to throw shade at Johansson:

After making a point of praising Black Widow as “the top performing film at the domestic box office since the start of the pandemic,” the velvet-ish glove over an iron hand Chapek laid down the law loudly for Johansson’s attorneys, CAA agents and all other talent to hear. Going forward, Disney will always do “what we believe is in the best interest of the film and the best interest of our constituents,” he said.

Later in the call, Chapek implied that Johansson may be flying solo on her complaint, literally and figuratively.

“We’ve figured out ways to fairly compensate our talent and since Covid has begun we have entered into hundreds of talent arrangements with our talent and by and large they have gone very, very smoothly,” he said.

That latter statement is a bit of a stretch, considering writers from both Star Wars and Marvel have both recently accused the company for not enough compensation from the company.

And in a related matter, Johansson's Tower of Terror film has been scrapped.

[Mr Wiggins]

‘Shang-Chi’ Star Simu Liu Fires Back At Disney CEO For Calling Film An ‘Experiment’

August 15, 2021

Disney’s rollout for its slate of pandemic-impacted blockbusters has been more chaotic than the third act of most Marvel movies and it’s only getting messier with “Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings.”

On the heels of Scarlett Johansson’s lawsuit over the hybrid release of “Black Widow,” Simu Liu, the star of the studio’s first Asian-led superhero outing, is blasting Disney CEO Bob Chapek for calling the film’s distribution an “interesting experiment.”

During the company’s quarterly earnings call this week, Chapek remarked on how “Shang-Chi” will break with its other offerings as of late, which all received simultaneous video-on-demand releases through its Disney+ streaming service, and will exclusively hit theaters for a 45-day window.

Citing the growing concerns around the COVID-19 delta variant, Chapek said the film was intended to debut in a “much more healthy theatrical environment,” but it was too late for the studio to alter its release strategy amid the recent surge in cases due to existing distribution agreements.

“On ‘Shang-Chi,’ we think it’s actually going to be an interesting experiment for us because it’s got only a 45-day window for us,” he said. “So the prospect of being able to take a Marvel title to the service after going theatrical with 45 days, would be yet another data point to inform our actions going forward on our titles.”

Chapek said the studio believes “Shang-Chi” will serve as a test of sorts for future Disney properties, as the pandemic continues to upend traditional release windows and distribution strategies, according to The Wrap.

On Saturday, Liu offered a direct rebuke to Chapek’s comments, seemingly bristling at the suggestion that the history-making film isn’t worthy of the same consideration as the studio’s past titles.

“We are not an experiment,” Liu wrote in a post on both Instagram and Twitter alongside behind-the-scenes photos of the cast and crew. “We are the underdog; the underestimated. We are the ceiling-breakers. We are the celebration of culture and joy that will persevere after an embattled year. We are the surprise. I’m fired the up to make history on September 3rd; JOIN US.”

Directed by Destin Daniel Cretton, “Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings” features a predominantly Asian cast, including Awkwafina, Benedict Wong, Michelle Yeoh and Tony Leung, and represents the studio’s latest effort to diversify its superhero ranks.

Liu, who campaigned to play the title role years before he was cast, stars as the titular crime fighter and kung fu master, who must confront his past and battle the villainous Ten Rings organization.

In an interview with HuffPost after he was attached to the project, Liu said the film stands as “an opportunity to re-introduce ourselves to the world following years of stereotypes and caricatures and tired tropes.”

“I think seeing yourself represented in that way can have a profound impact on how you view your place in society, your cultural identity and what you are capable of achieving,” he added. “I’m honored that I played a small part in this fight, and I’m ready to bear that torch if and when it is asked of me.”

“Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings” hits theaters Sept. 3 for 45 days before becoming available for streaming on Disney+.

[lemuth0922]

Scarlett Johansson Wanted $100 Million For Black Widow's Simultaneous Disney+ Release

New details have come to light via the Wall Street Journal regarding how much money Johansson wanted for the change in strategy. A cool $100 million. $80 million of that is based on the $1.2 billion Johansson's legal team estimate the movie would have made at the box office had it hit theaters before the world was gripped by a pandemic. Plus, a $20 million starting salary, bringing it up to the $100 million figure.

Disney CEO Bob Chapek handed off the responsibility to others as he was busy leading the company through a pandemic. Those who Chapek handed off the task to allegedly didn't return calls and emails from Johansson's team. That has resulted in the rather public back and forth unfolding right now. As for what Johansson actually received for her final appearance as Black Widow, a cut of the movie's $372 million at the box office, one of the worst-performing MCU movies ever thanks to the pandemic, plus the $60 million made via people paying for the movie through Disney+ Premier Access.

[Spongeocto4]

Scarlett Johansson Wanted $100 Million For Black Widow's Simultaneous Disney+ Release

New details have come to light via the Wall Street Journal regarding how much money Johansson wanted for the change in strategy. A cool $100 million. $80 million of that is based on the $1.2 billion Johansson's legal team estimate the movie would have made at the box office had it hit theaters before the world was gripped by a pandemic. Plus, a $20 million starting salary, bringing it up to the $100 million figure.

Disney CEO Bob Chapek handed off the responsibility to others as he was busy leading the company through a pandemic. Those who Chapek handed off the task to allegedly didn't return calls and emails from Johansson's team. That has resulted in the rather public back and forth unfolding right now. As for what Johansson actually received for her final appearance as Black Widow, a cut of the movie's $372 million at the box office, one of the worst-performing MCU movies ever thanks to the pandemic, plus the $60 million made via people paying for the movie through Disney+ Premier Access.

Thank you for sharing this. I was attempting to share the news myself, but the links were not working (I blame IGN's unsharable interface and Wall Street Journal's paywall.)

I admit that the proposed $60 million bonus was an overestimate of the projected revenue, considering the ongoing pandemic and how the movie has made less than $500 Million so far. A $30 million bonus may be a more accurate fraction total. Regardless, Johansson would of made at least twice her initial salary.

Chapek's action appear to be very short sighted and arrogant. Let's compare this to how Spider-Man: No Way Home was saved. When production of the 3rd installment look like it was DOA from fighting between Sony & Disney, Tom Holland sent a E-mail to Bob Iger. Holland thanked Iger for the opportunity of the role and asked for a potential phone call to works things out. A few days later, Iger actually did call Holland to chat with him. And despite the fact that Iger accidentally called when Holland was drunk at a bar (True Story!), it still paved the way for a deal to to be settled on the third installment.

Meanwhile Chapek's inaction has led to the lawsuit, and has now made the Russos brothers hesitant to sign on to direct another Marvel movie. So thanks Bobby, you may of just killed a potential adaption of Marvel's Secret Wars!

[Mr Wiggins]

...Chapek's action appear to be very short sighted and arrogant....

Those four words describe what many people in town have thought of the Mouse in general since Eisner's day. The difference with Chapek is that he doesn't know when to cover it up.

[Mr Wiggins]

Jamie Lee Curtis Warns Everybody Not To ‘F**k With’ Scarlett Johansson Amid Disney Lawsuit

The “Halloween” star defended Johansson against “real-life manipulation” in her legal battle against the studio over the release of “Black Widow.”

HuffPost
September 16, 2021

Jamie Lee Curtis is more than familiar with the horrors of Hollywood, on screen and in real life, so there’s perhaps no better person for an actor going head-to-head with a major studio to have in their corner.

Consider Scarlett Johansson in good company, as Curtis has fiercely come to her defense in her ongoing legal battle with Disney over the hybrid release of Marvel’s standalone “Black Widow” film this summer.

In a lawsuit filed in July, Johansson claimed that Disney breached her contract and shortchanged her pay to boost its own streaming service by simultaneously dropping the much-delayed blockbuster in theaters and on Disney+.

While Johansson’s public supporters have been few, Curtis didn’t mince words in a piece honoring Johansson as one of Time magazine’s 100 Most Influential People for its annual issue.

“I recently watched her own the screen as the Black Widow, who exacts revenge on a powerful figure who manipulates (emphasis on man) women to fight for him,” Curtis wrote in an essay published on Wednesday. “And then I saw her brilliant response to a real-life manipulation (same emphasis), when she filed a breach-of-contract lawsuit against the studio, alleging its decision to release the film simultaneously in theaters and on streaming cost her substantial losses in pay.”

“Whether as an assassin with a conscience, an actor with an emotional center or, having just given birth to her second child, a fierce mother, the message is clear: Don’t f-ck with this mama bear,” Curtis continued.

The “Halloween” star said that she “always felt a kinship” with Johansson over their shared birthday, but her appreciation deepened when Johansson portrayed her real-life mother Janet Leigh in the 2012 biopic “Hitchcock.”

“We spoke — she wanted to understand my mother’s interior life. There were obvious touch points: they shared Danish roots, a passion for acting and multiple talents,” Curtis recalled. “There’s a moment in that movie that startles me, where I look at Scarlett and she is my mother.”

Curtis’ comments arrive days after Johansson’s co-star Benedict Cumberbatch, who appeared alongside her in “Avengers: Infinity War” and “Avengers: Endgame,” addressed the lawsuit, calling it “a bit of a mess.”

Fellow Avenger Elizabeth Olsen has been Johansson’s most supportive Marvel co-star.

“I think she’s so tough and literally when I read that I was like, ‘Good for you Scarlett,’” Olsen said, reacting to news of the lawsuit. “When it comes to actors and their earnings, I mean, that’s just, that’s just all contracts. So it’s either in the contract or it’s not.”

The legal battle between Johansson and Disney got even more contentious after the studio said her lawsuit showed a “callous disregard for the horrific and prolonged global effects of the COVID-19 pandemic.”

The statement was widely criticized at the time, with Johansson’s agent calling it a “direct attack on her character” and blasting the studio for “shamelessly and falsely” accusing the actor of being “insensitive to the global COVID pandemic, in an attempt to make her appear to be someone they and I know she isn’t.”

[Spongeocto4]

Scarlett Johansson and Disney have come to a settlement. And surprisingly, Johansson will continue to work in Disney related properties:

Scarlett Johansson and Disney have reached a settlement over her blockbuster lawsuit that accused the studio of sabotaging the theatrical release of “Black Widow” to prop up Disney Plus.

Terms of the settlement were not disclosed. Johansson had sought a $50 million payout from the studio.

“I am happy to have resolved our differences with Disney,” Johansson said in a statement on Thursday. “I’m incredibly proud of the work we’ve done together over the years and have greatly enjoyed my creative relationship with the team. I look forward to continuing our collaboration in years to come.”

Alan Bergman, the chairman of Disney Studios Content, said he, too, was pleased to have resolved the dispute.

“I’m very pleased that we have been able to come to a mutual agreement with Scarlett Johansson regarding ‘Black Widow,'” he said in a statement. “We appreciate her contributions to the Marvel Cinematic Universe and look forward to working together on a number of upcoming projects, including Disney’s ‘Tower of Terror.'”

Am I surprised that a settlement was made? No. Am I surprised that the Tower of Terror project is not actually dead? Yes, quite a bit.