Disney filed a motion to force Scarlett Johansson to undergo private arbitration to determine if she is owed millions for the simultaneous Disney + theatrical release of Black Widow
In the motion, attorney Daniel Petrocelli also argues that Disney fulfilled its obligation to give the film a premiere. “In wide cinemas”, but that nothing in the contract required that the premiere be exclusive to theaters.
Scarlett Johansson filed an explosive lawsuit on July 29, arguing that the decision to simultaneously premiere Black widow in theaters and on Disney + it cannibalized the movie’s box office revenue and cost it tens of millions of dollars.
In the motion to compel arbitration, Petrocelli argued that Black widow it actually did well at the box office, considering the ongoing pandemic. The film opened on July 9 and grossed 80 million in the United States in its opening weekend, well below Marvel standards before the pandemic, yet it grossed 10 million more than Fast and furious 9 from Universal, whose premiere was exclusive in theaters.
Disney also notes that it agreed to add the proceeds from purchases of premium access to the film to the box office total for the purpose of calculating Johansson’s backend share, even though the contract does not require it to do so.
Johansson’s contract dates from 2017, two years before the debut of Disney Plus, so its terms do not contemplate a streaming launch. Johansson’s lawyers have argued that Marvel’s general counsel claimed in 2019 that the studio would release the film. “Like our other images”.
Johansson’s lawsuit alleges that Marvel violated its contract, but does not establish a simple breach of contract claim. Instead, attorney John Berlinski filed a lawsuit against Disney, the parent company, alleging that Disney had interfered with the subsidiary’s contract with Johansson to power Disney Plus.
“After initially responding to this litigation with a misogynistic attack on Scarlett Johansson, Disney is now unsurprisingly trying to cover up its misconduct in confidential arbitration.”Berlinski said in a statement to Variety. Why is Disney so afraid to litigate this case in public? Because he knows that Marvel’s promises to give ‘Black Widow’ a typical theatrical release ‘like his other movies’ had a lot to do with ensuring that Disney wouldn’t cannibalize box office receipts to boost Disney Plus subscriptions. Yet that is exactly what happened, and we hope to present the overwhelming evidence to prove it. “.
Petrocelli’s motion calls that “Skill for the game” and argues that Johansson agreed to arbitrate all claims “Arising out of, in connection with or related to” his contract with Marvel.
“Whether Periwinkle’s claims against Disney fall within the scope of that settlement is not a close decision.”Petrocelli argued. “The plain and broad language of the arbitration agreement easily encompasses the Periwinkle Complaint.”
It seems that the soap opera Disney vs. Scarlett Johansson will continue to resonate in the coming days. What do you think?