I haven't read the thread Phineas shared, but the Cameron Diaz deal for "Bad Teacher" is well known. when ScarJo negotiated the deal, this is probably what she was expecting. Enough money she never had to work again.
https://www.businessinsider.com/16-of-the-highest-paid-movie-roles-of-all-time-2018-5#14-cameron-diaz-as-elizabeth-halsey-in-bad-teacher-7 $42 million Source: Yahoo Finance <https://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/daily-ticker/the-10-best-deals-ever-struck-by-hollywood-actors-141916181.html> Diaz was paid a mere $1 million to get "Bad Teacher" produced, but received a portion of box-office earnings, which secured her over $40 million for the movie. It's known as one of the most "legendary" deals <https://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/daily-ticker/the-10-best-deals-ever-struck-by-hollywood-actors-141916181.html> in Hollywood history. On Thu, Jul 29, 2021 at 6:29 PM PGage <[email protected]> wrote: > There is a larger, and more interesting, issue at stake here, though > creative Hollywood accounting is part of it. > > I highly recommend the account available at this tweet by Matt Bellini, > former editor at The Hollywood Reporter and entertainment lawyer, who has > been all over this evolving story. > > https://twitter.com/mattbelloni/status/1420802198724698119?s=21 > > Basically, the pandemic accelerated the transition of the finances of the > film industry from being based on ticket sales to streaming revenue. He > says film studios are now basically streamers. Problem is blockbusters > being released now had their deals with “talent” based on the old model, > but are being released in the new environment. > > The main problem is not really creative accounting, though in a new way > that is part of it. The old style creative accounting was mostly about how > ro define net profits, but big stars these days structure deals based on > gross revenues, so that is less of an issue, as ticket sales are (kind of) > verifiable. But there is no way currently to independently access streaming > and subscription numbers. Bellini recommends that going forward talent > build in contract language giving them the right to independently audit > streaming and subscription data. > > The real problem Bellini says is a new divergence between the financial > interest of Talent, whose deals are tied to box office, and studios, whose > profit is now tied primarily to streaming subscriptions. Studios have been > streaming blockbusters early, reducing ticket sales, but boosting streaming > subscribers. > > Warner had a similar problem earlier in the year, and after initially > lowballing its talent, came up with significant additional payments. Disney > has been significantly more Dickish, even though stars’ contracts (as > ScarJo’s does) often specifically preclude quick release of films to > streaming. > > So ScarJo’s suit is not about getting paid fir this film (though it is > about that of course) but also about trying to curtail attempts by big > studios to unilaterally grab a larger share of film revenues under the new > model. > > > > On Thu, 29 Jul 2021 at 3:33 PM Kevin M. <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I worked in Hollywood for five years, and the single biggest lesson I >> learned is to always get paid in advance. I can’t believe she’s been in the >> business for over a quarter of a century without learning that lesson. >> >> On Thu, Jul 29, 2021 at 3:20 PM 'Bob Jersey' via TVorNotTV < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>> “Disney chose to placate Wall Street investors and pad its bottom line, >>> rather than allow its subsidiary Marvel to comply with the agreement,” >>> attys argue in a breach-of-contract action filed today (7/29) in L.A.... >>> WSJ, who first reported the suit, estimated about $50mil in lost bonuses... >>> >>> >>> https://variety.com/2021/film/news/scarlett-johansson-sues-disney-black-widow-1235030582/ >>> (link) >>> >>> B >>> >>> -- >>> 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 [email protected]. >>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/878fb2dd-7352-4c6e-a753-25f778a97ebbn%40googlegroups.com >>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/878fb2dd-7352-4c6e-a753-25f778a97ebbn%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>> . >>> >> -- >> Kevin M. (RPCV) >> >> -- >> 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 [email protected]. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/CAKgmY4AJ%3Dm_HcXa_EHVVJ597h0Sy8N2V5%2BUE%3Duc9eJpdjJbKfQ%40mail.gmail.com >> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/CAKgmY4AJ%3Dm_HcXa_EHVVJ597h0Sy8N2V5%2BUE%3Duc9eJpdjJbKfQ%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >> . >> > -- > Sent from Gmail Mobile > > -- > 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 [email protected]. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/CAKGtkYKibcAbO9YOcwobOMFNzmN%3DzuuqzKOXOUZ-dkq7w20AuQ%40mail.gmail.com > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/CAKGtkYKibcAbO9YOcwobOMFNzmN%3DzuuqzKOXOUZ-dkq7w20AuQ%40mail.gmail.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 [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/CAH5J8yxk48uJH8MCkbpETVynkjg1EiLaVt62nYcTAevZqAFdVA%40mail.gmail.com.
