Is CEO Bob Chapek to blame?

As one of the main producers of a huge movie franchise complained to TheWrap, “Chapek almost certainly made the mistake. He didn’t think it would explode in his face. He doesn’t care about talent.

The feeling that Disney’s last CEO Bob Iger would have handled things differently was all the more pronounced by Disney’s official response to the lawsuit, which called Johansson “insensitive” and disclosed his $ 20 million salary – suggesting she was greedy to claim $ 50 million in a box. office based backend pay in the suit. Johansson’s camp told TheWrap the actress was shocked at the tone. The same was true for many others around Hollywood.

“The last time I checked I was pretty sure the senior Disney team wouldn’t get much buying by accusing someone else of being greedy,” a senior said. industry executive, who called the response “awkward.” ”

Another pressure point is that Marvel chief Kevin Feige was reportedly angry and embarrassed by the way the company handled the dispute with a star who had made nine high-grossing films for his biggest franchise. Feige had lobbied against the streaming plan for the day and date and was not listened to. The decision appears to have been made by Chapek’s right-hand man, Kareem Daniel, president of Disney Media and Entertainment Distribution, another executive with little to no experience managing talent relationships.

“It seems Chapek puts a lot of his industry and his talents into his distribution group, which has proven inexperienced in the traditional ways of doing things,” an entertainment executive told TheWrap. “It 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,” said Eric Schiffer of The Patriarch Organization and president of Reputation Management Consultants. Iger’s team “would have tried to work behind the scenes and maintain a greater level of trust in the relationship,” he added.

Gene Del Vecchio, assistant professor of marketing at USC Marshall School of Business, agreed that this situation requires some of Iger’s signature diplomacy. Bob Iger was appointed CEO in 2005 not only because of his business acumen, but also for his mastery of developing and maintaining the relationships he had honed over decades working with capricious stars and prominent, ”Del Vecchio told TheWrap. “Disney’s acquisition and management of Pixar, Marvel and Lucas is a testament to its capabilities. Chapek’s previous experience with consumer products, Disney parks and resorts did not require the same level of interaction with stars.

Del Vecchio also noted the recent surge around former mixed martial arts star Gina Carano, a star of the Disney + “Star Wars” series “The Mandalorian” who was set to helm her own spinoff series – until that the actress was criticized in February for an Instagram post that compared being a Republican today to being a Jew during Nazi Germany. Disney’s Lucasfilm publicly fired her and called her social media posts “odious and unacceptable.” “The dispute with Scarlett Johansson, which follows Disney’s mismanagement of the relationship with Gina Carano, makes you wonder if this latest incident is not so much about a broken contract but about a broken relationship,” he said. .

Other insiders who spoke to TheWrap on condition of anonymity said it was Chapek’s decision to prioritize the studio’s streaming business – and shareholders – over talent relationships.

Chapek has just “done what was the right choice for his shareholders, which is to drive people to Disney +, which he has done successfully while increasing the share price,” said declared a leading agent. “Notably, the many successes of various Marvel films (in theaters) have done nothing to increase Disney’s share price. But the increase in Disney + subscriptions has done it. So what is $ 50 million or so for Chapek? “

In Johansson’s lawsuit, the actress alleged that she lost income as a result of Disney’s decision to release “Black Widow” both on Disney + and in theaters simultaneously, and accused Disney of wanting to increase it. its streaming revenues at the expense of the box office. Plus, if it can prove damages, Disney may have to pay Johansson even more than the $ 50 million windfall that insiders told The Wall Street Journal that it could earn from the Marvel movie hitting highs. box office targets. The lawsuit also said she tried to speak to Disney and Marvel to right the wrong, but was “ignored”.

A second entertainment executive agreed that $ 50 million was big money for a company like Disney: “It’s a few million dollars and Chapek is the CEO of a multi-billion dollar company. It’s a much bigger question for Feige. He is Hollywood’s holiest executive today, and no one will fight him. “

Feige, widely regarded as the architect of the success of Marvel’s multi-franchise cinematic operation, previously responded to Marvel Entertainment CEO Isaac “Ike” Perlmutter. Tensions arose between Feige and Perlmutter during the early stages of the MCU due to the frugality and style of micromanaging reported by Perlmutter. In 2015, when Feige threatened to leave Marvel when Perlmutter wanted to cut the budget for “Captain America: Civil War,” Iger stepped in and approved a reorganization where Feige reported directly to Walt Disney Studios president Alan Horn. Perlumutter has also actively opposed efforts to develop films like “Captain Marvel” and “Black Widow” that focus on female superheroes.

While Feige’s attorney declined to comment, former Hollywood Reporter editor Matthew Belloni in his Thursday newsletter “What I’m Hearing” said the Marvel boss was not happy. of the situation and had put pressure on Disney against showing the film on Disney + on the same day as in theaters and not “wanting to upset its talent”.

“History has proven, don’t f- with Kevin Feige,” said the second director of entertainment. “He wins every time – there is no such thing as Marvel.”

Schiffer called Johansson’s costume a “reckless war on both sides” and said Chapek wasn’t necessarily wrong in resisting the actress’ demands. “We don’t know what happened behind the scenes. Were (his actions) so deadly stupid it would have been (just as stupid) if Disney hadn’t? Said Schiffer. “These facts will come out later and Hollywood players can get a better idea of ​​how the decision was made. But that’s big stakes, and given the clear lights on this event, best handled behind the scenes. .

A Disney spokesperson did not respond to TheWrap’s request for comment.

As for Johansson, it remains to be seen whether she chooses to continue working at Disney, regardless of the outcome of her trial. Just a month ago, it was announced that she would be producing a “Tower of Terror” movie based on the Disneyland theme park ride through her These Pictures banner. It is not yet known whether she chooses to continue.

Sharon Waxman contributed to this report.