GameSpot may receive revenue from affiliate and advertising partnerships for sharing this content and from purchases through links.

Scarlett Johansson Sues Disney Over Black Widow Streaming Release, Disney Responds

After the latest MCU movie, Black Widow was released on Disney+, star Scarlett Johansson has filed a lawsuit against Disney

335 Comments

Update: In response to the lawsuit, Disney has released a statement obtained by Variety. "There is no merit whatsoever to this filing," it reads. "The lawsuit is especially sad and distressing in its callous disregard for the horrific and prolonged global effects of the COVID-19 pandemic." Furthermore, the statement says the company has upheld its end of the contract, while noting the actress has already received $20 million for her role in the film, adding that "…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." You can read the original story below.

Black Widow isn't done fighting yet. Scarlett Johansson, who reprised her role as Natasha Romanoff in the latest Marvel Cinematic Universe film, has filed a lawsuit against Disney, alleging that the company releasing the movie on the Disney+ streaming service at the same time it did so theatrically was a breach of her contract.

The news comes from The Wall Street Journal, which reports that Johansson's contract not only guaranteed an exclusive theatrical release for the film but that its performance on the big screen would ultimately determine the actress's salary. Of course, Black Widow was originally scheduled to hit theaters in 2020 but was ultimately delayed due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

When a new release date was set, it was announced that the film would hit theaters and Disney+ Premier Access on July 9. According to the suit, "Disney intentionally induced Marvel's breach of the agreement, without justification, in order to prevent Ms. Johansson from realizing the full benefit of her bargain with Marvel."

Per the suit, Johansson's team attempted to renegotiate her contract after the decision to debut the film on Disney+ was made, but Disney and Marvel were not responsive. However, in a copy of the lawsuit, obtained by Deadline, Marvel's chief counsel is quoted as previously saying, "We totally understand that Scarlett's willingness to do the film and her whole deal is based on the premise that the film would be widely theatrically released like our other pictures. We understand that should the plan change, we would need to discuss this with you and come to an understanding as the deal is based on a series of (very large) box office bonuses." According to WSJ, the decision to not renegotiate could end up costing the actress over $50 million.

Black Widow wasn't the only Disney film to get the Premier Access treatment, which allows audiences to watch the film at home for a limited time for a $30 fee. Before Black Widow, Mulan, Raya and the Last Dragon, and Cruella were all released with this model. Mulan was the lone film to initially only be released via Premier Access, as most theaters around the world were closed. Jungle Cruise--due on July 30--will hit theaters and Premier Access simultaneously and is currently the last announced Disney movie to be getting that treatment.

Likewise, Warner Bros. announced that its 2021 movie slate would debut on HBO Max and in theaters on the same day. When the move was announced at the end of 2020, some film creatives were not thrilled with the decision--namely Dune director Denis Villeneuve, who claimed he only learned his movie would be released on streaming through Warner Media's public announcement.

During its opening weekend, Black Widow earned $80 million at the domestic box office--along with an additional $60 million in Premier Access sales. The following week, though, theater revenue dropped 68% to just $26 million, a rather steep drop, especially for a Marvel Cinematic Universe film. Theater owners claimed this was due, in part, to people pirating the film following its digital release--a sentiment echoed in Johansson's lawsuit. "Millions of others who would have watched in the theatres will instead view the Picture on perfect digital pirated copies—-all made possible by Disney's decision to release the Picture 'day-and-date' on Disney+," the legal document reads. "Indeed, Black Widow was the No. 1 pirated title of the July 19 week, per the news site TorrentFreak."

Black Widow remains in theaters and on Disney+ Premier Access for those who have yet to see it. The next Marvel movie, Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings, hits theaters on September 3. Beyond that, the Hawkeye series debuts on Disney+ on November 24.

Got a news tip or want to contact us directly? Email news@gamespot.com

Join the conversation
There are 335 comments about this story
335 Comments  RefreshSorted By 
GameSpot has a zero tolerance policy when it comes to toxic conduct in comments. Any abusive, racist, sexist, threatening, bullying, vulgar, and otherwise objectionable behavior will result in moderation and/or account termination. Please keep your discussion civil.

Avatar image for cherub1000
Cherub1000

1369

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

Wow Scarlett, talk about rich people problems, you must feel terrible not being about to buy a dozen ferraris this year? Poor thing.

4 • 
Avatar image for sebb
SebB

2039

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@cherub1000: It's a breach of contract. You'd let it go if your employer only paid you 60% of what your contract said you should be paid?

3 • 
Avatar image for cherub1000
Cherub1000

1369

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

@sebb: dude did you just copy and paste this reply? Quite frankly I'm offended!

Ok ok, all jokes and my lame english sarcasm aside, your right, it's a breach of contract. Kinda hard to feel pity though isnt it? I mean c'mon, if my boss paid me 60% yeah I'd be raging. Her 60% can feed a country so sorry but I wont be shedding any tears.

2 • 
Avatar image for sebb
SebB

2039

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@cherub1000: yeah I copy pasted MY reply. It's my reply that I put somewhere else and decided to paste here too.

It's not about feeling sorry for her or not. It's about the principle. It's not because her 60% amounts to a lot of money that Disney breaching her contract is legal. What they did was illegal. You can bet they'd be suing if she only did 60% of her job.

2 • 
Avatar image for cherub1000
Cherub1000

1369

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

@sebb: wow wow boss. I did say your right before, I agree with you.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for dzimm
dzimm

6615

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 23

User Lists: 0

Edited By dzimm

Johansson signed a contract that apparently overestimated her own value to theater goers. Surely that's her problem. After the movie flopped in theaters, Disney has every right to attempt to recoup its losses by putting it on Disney+.

And seriously, she has $20 million in the bank from this fiasco, so what is there to complain about? I wouldn't have to work another day in my if I had $20 million.

7 • 
Avatar image for sebb
SebB

2039

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@dzimm: still a breach of contract. And if you had 20 M you would still have to get back to work eventually. Average rent in the US is $1200. So $20,000,000 / $1,200 = $16,666.6667. $16667 / 365 days = 45.66 days. So you have enough to pay rent only for the next 45 years. That's not counting electricity, gas, water, taxes, food, transport, holidays, hospital bills, etc. all of which will eat away at that money very quickly. The best thing to do is to invest it in a business that makes more money.

3 • 
Avatar image for dzimm
dzimm

6615

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 23

User Lists: 0

Edited By dzimm

@sebb: Well, yeah, if you manage your money like an idiot then $20 million might only last you 45 years, but if you know how to invest and save and not spend more then you need to (for example, buy a house instead of renting; much cheaper in the long run even with maintenance and utility expenses), then not only could you retire but you could leave a nice inheritance for your kids.

2 • 
Avatar image for ironhorse89
ironhorse89

1331

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

@dzimm: Exactly. But we all know these dipstick celebs can't manage their money worth a damn and hence why you hear so many stories of them going flat broke after making millions.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for deactivated-64efdf49333c4
deactivated-64efdf49333c4

21783

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 36

User Lists: 0

@dzimm: Actually, given the amounts she's talking about it sounds a lot more like she DIDN'T want to do the movie, but Disney offered her so much money she felt like she couldn't refuse. Remember, a lot of MCU actors have said they signed deals to do upwards of like 10 movies early on, so they likely weren't getting that much in the first place, or at least not as much as they felt like they deserved which of course is always a ridiculous amount. It seems more like Disney greatly overestimated her worth...but then Covid hit and we all had time to get over her.

3 • 
Avatar image for xnshd
xNSHD

3145

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

@Barighm: thats on her then isn't it. clearly wanted to do it enough for 20 mil.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for bloodbornelore
BloodborneLore

1356

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

Poor Scarlet…

5 • 
Avatar image for PETERAKO
PETERAKO

2579

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Tis gon' be gud. "Grabs popcorn"

3 • 
Avatar image for analgrin
analgrin

1575

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 12

User Lists: 0

Edited By analgrin

Well this movie was supposed to release in May 2020. So is she saying she'd rather they release it in cinema back then and she would have been paid more??? I don't think so. No one would have been able to go see it as we were mostly all in lock down. Sounds like them both delaying the release AND putting it on Disney+ actually made her more money as more people could pay to see it that way.

Lots of people had to make sacrifices over the last 18 months. Taking pay cuts, being paid a reduced furlough wage etc. Seems like she was affected like most of us. Should we all sue?

4 • 
Avatar image for sebb
SebB

2039

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By SebB

@analgrin: She should sue the government for putting in place restrictions that ultimately cost her. We should all sue the government.

Many outright lost their livelihood. Saved from covid but dying of hunger because of lack of income. Government logic: covid is killing us, oh I know let's prevent everyone from working and earning a living, and destroy the economy. It's like seeing flames burn a tree and you decide to cut the branch you're on. What do you think will happen? You'll fall to the ground and die. When no one works, no taxes are collected. No taxes, no public service, no hospitals, no covid treatment, no police, no army, no salaries for government officials. Solution: act like a democratic country and give people the CHOICE. You want to be safe and lose your income, stay home and isolate. You want to have a chance, go to work.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for returnofthebrotha
ReturnoftheBrotha

355

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

@analgrin: We should all go to war!

2 • 
Avatar image for sebb
SebB

2039

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@returnofthebrotha: Don't worry they'll catch up once they have no income. We'll see how the holier than though BS of helping fellow humans stack up against I lost my job and have no food to eat anymore, let alone feed my family.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for kuda001
kuda001

608

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

Based on what has been said, it is likely Disney will settle. It could have been handled better by both sides but I think it would have made less money had it not been released on Disney+ as well. Disney would not have delayed the film's release any further. $50m is a lot and I assume is based on box office performance but I don't it would have been made that much to begin with. I watched the film and it was... okay.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for sebb
SebB

2039

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@kuda001: The issue is that they should have re-negotiated to give her more money given that they had plans to focus on streaming instead of cinema, which breaches the contract apparently.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for returnofthebrotha
ReturnoftheBrotha

355

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

@kuda001: This phase of Marvel will be it's downfall. The are making films out of the lamest, most obscure characters that only hard-core comic readers knew about - and never liked! I did not care about a Black Widow film, but the zombies feel that they must see every marvel film, no matter if they like the character or not.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for ironhorse89
ironhorse89

1331

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

@returnofthebrotha: Nobody cared about Captain Marvel nor the Guardians of the Galaxy either until those movies came out and made money so this next round of films will do just fine.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Litchie
Litchie

36343

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 13

User Lists: 0

lol. Poor rich people.

7 • 
Avatar image for Carpetfluff
Carpetfluff

927

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

I've not read her contract, so I'm not even going to comment on that side of it, but the "Millions of others who would have watched in the theatres will instead view the Picture on perfect digital pirated copies" statement really pissed me off. No, lawyers, those people were going to pirate the movie regardless and never had any intention of going to the theatre to see it to start with.

9 • 
Avatar image for sebb
SebB

2039

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@Carpetfluff: I disagree. If the movie had not released on streaming, pirates would have been forced to wait for the dvd release. Some people don't want to wait months before they can see the movie and just go to the cinema to see it instead. That's what I do. When I saw that many movies were releasing on streaming I was quite happy because it meant I didn't have to wait for the dvd release nor bother going to the cinema.

2 • 
Avatar image for dzimm
dzimm

6615

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 23

User Lists: 0

@Carpetfluff: Every time I put a disc in my video player and see the "Don't steal this movie" warning, I always think, "If I stole your movie then I wouldn't be sitting through this damn unskippable warning."

7 • 
Avatar image for zeke_pliskin
zeke_pliskin

104

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 6

User Lists: 0

@dzimm: I used to rip the VOB files straight off the DVD so I could have just the movie and none of the 5 minutes of crap beforehand.

2 • 
Avatar image for cherub1000
Cherub1000

1369

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

@dzimm: hahaha never thought of it like that.

2 • 
Avatar image for n0matter
n0matter

742

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Let's just ignore the fact that the movie sucked. That couldn't have had anything to do with its box office showing, right? Also, movies are NEVER pirated before or the day of release. This is all Disney's fault.

Thank god we don't have to see her anymore. BW was a forgettable, needless character in the franchise. And I doubt anyone will be in a hurry to sign her for future projects after this. Poor thing and her $20 million...

9 • 
Avatar image for ironhorse89
ironhorse89

1331

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

@n0matter: She should stick to being ignorant and defending pedophiles ie Woody Allen instead of crying about making only 20 mil for a movie nobody gives two craps about nor asked for. Seriously, that movie was garbage and once again ruined another Marvel character all in the name of some lame twist like the Mandarin.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for NeverMore0
NeverMore0

1278

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

People like her and the execs all taking home 20 million for a single movie is the reason a night at the theater with your family costs $80. It's greedy people shitting on those who have no recourse so please Scarlett, cry me a fucking river.

12 • 
Avatar image for rinshun
rinshun

51

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 23

User Lists: 0

@NeverMore0: a night at the theater costs $80 because people are willing to pay $80.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for cherub1000
Cherub1000

1369

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

@NeverMore0: this!!!!

Upvote • 
Avatar image for NeverMore0
NeverMore0

1278

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Maybe they breached the contract but it's hard for me to feel bad for someone for "only" making $20 million.

6 • 
Avatar image for ironhorse89
ironhorse89

1331

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

Edited By ironhorse89

@NeverMore0: Especially since the majority of us peons have been scraping by this last year thanks to this stupid pandemic among other issues. She needs to get some serious perspective and come back to Earth.

Upvote •