[ad_1]
For fans, the fact that when Disney finally released Black Widow it was available on its Disney + streaming service, alongside a theatrical release, was good news. If you weren’t ready to venture into a movie theater, you could just pay Disney $ 30 – on top of your monthly membership – for what he calls “Premier Access,” which lets you see the movie. one of the most anticipated films this year in your living room.
It was also great for Disney, because having access to the latest blockbuster is undoubtedly a motivation for people to sign up for Disney +. Considering the company claims to have made $ 60 million from Premier Access purchases, that’s pretty good for Disney. Considering that Disney CEO Bob Chapek and Executive Chairman Bob Iger have their bonuses tied to the success of Disney +, I’m sure they were very happy as well.
On the flip side, judging by the trial of Black Widow star Scarlett Johansson, the decision was not a good one for any of the cast or production crew whose salary was largely based on a deal. back-end. This is where a contract includes a smaller upfront payment, in exchange for the possibility of earning more based on a movie’s box office performance.
If there’s no box office, or if it’s limited by other factors, there’s not much left behind. This was the case with Black Widow. Disney isn’t the first studio to experience a backlash following its decision to release streaming movies alongside a theatrical release.
Earlier this year, WarnerMedia CEO Jason Kilar said the studio will be releasing its entire list of films on HBO Max for the first 30 days while they’re in theaters. Christopher Nolan, whose film Tenant was delayed due to the pandemic, was one of the movement’s most vocal critics. Eventually, WarnerMedia ended up spending $ 200 million on renegotiated deals with talent in an attempt to smooth things over.
Johansson says she tried to renegotiate the terms of her deal in light of Disney’s decision to change Black Widow’s release, but the company has not responded. If that’s true, that he ignored the lead actress in one of his flagship franchises, that would be a pretty big deal.
The fault would lie with Chapek’s inexperience and his inability to take Johansson’s concerns seriously. Iger, who is Chapek’s predecessor, was known for his ability to build relationships and would be mortified at the way Chapek handled this situation. Of course, when Disney finally responded, things only got worse.
“There is no merit in this filing,” the company said in a statement. “The lawsuit is particularly sad and distressing in its callous disregard for the horrific and prolonged global effects of the COVID-19 pandemic. ”
Disney did not respond to Johansson’s claim that Disney ignored his attempts to renegotiate their deal, saying only that it “dramatically improved Johansson’s ability to earn additional compensation on top of the $ 20 million he was paying. she has received to date “.
Look, reasonable people might disagree on how much money is enough for a filmmaker or a movie star. It can be easy to think that everyone involved is just greedy, so it doesn’t really matter. Disney certainly seems to want us to think that Johansson is greedy and solely motivated by his own selfish interests.
That may be true, but honestly, that’s really not what it is.
Looking at this from the outside, what strikes me the most is not just that Disney broke their word – which it appears to be. What really strikes me is how Disney seems to misunderstand how bad this is for their reputation. Of course, the lawsuit is bad, but the company’s response is much worse. Here’s why:
More than any other business on earth, Disney has carefully built a reputation for itself as a “magical place.” It is the narrative that serves as the basis for everything he does. Movies, theme parks, TV, toys – it all hinges on Disney’s masterful storytelling. Sure, it’s a business, but more than that, it’s home to some beloved stories we’ve all grown up with.
This is why Disney + is so successful in the first place – this is where you can go and watch movies you’ve loved all your life and find a constant stream of new versions of those stories. In this case, however, Disney’s response makes the company look cold, callous, and vindictive. He opens the curtain and reveals a much uglier story.
The way you keep your promises to the people who work for you says a lot about your ability to keep the promises you make to your customers. By going after Johansson and using the pandemic to try to shame her, Disney has essentially broken not only her promise to her, but to all of us. This is something no business should ever do.
[ad_2]
Source link