Scarlett Johansson's decision to sue Disney for an eye-watering $50 million has unsurprisingly not gone down too well with Disney's lawyer.
Lawyer Daniel Petrocelli believes the lawsuit is a "highly orchestrated" public relations stunt designed to get the company "to write a check."
What's more, he added that the "written contract is clear as a bell."
Johansson, 36, last month slapped Disney with a lawsuit over the streaming of her latest onscreen venture, Marvel's Black Widow.
The actress accused the company of breaching her contract when it offered the film on its streaming service at the same time as it was released in movie theaters.
The film set a box office record for the Covid-19 pandemic, grossing $218 million in its first weekend, however, box office receipts then fell sharply as Johansson argues she was deprived of potential earnings, per BBC.
Johansson's earnings are based partly on the Marvel film's box office takings and, in court papers, she said the movie was intended for initial release exclusively in cinemas, per ET.
It's also reported that Johansson is demanding a jury trial to rule on this case.
Now Petrocelli has broken his silence over the lawsuit, telling Variety that Disney would not bow to "public pressure".
"It is obvious that this is a highly orchestrated PR campaign to achieve an outcome that is not obtainable in the lawsuit," he said.
"No amount of public pressure can change or obscure the explicit contractual commitments. The written contract is clear as a bell."
What's more, Petrocelli claimed the Disney Premier Access actually helped raise Johansson's contractual income because the studio's share of that streaming revenue is factored in when calculating box-office revenue for the purposes of giving actors bonuses.
"We treated Disney Premier Access like box office for the purposes of the bonus requirements in the contract. That only enhanced the economics for Ms. Johansson," he added.
The film also stars Florence Pugh, David Harbour, and Rachel Weisz. According to ET, the actress is suing Disney for intentional interference with contractual relations and for inducing a breach of contract.
In the complaint, filed in Los Angeles Superior Court, she alleged that Disney wanted to increase subscriber numbers for its streaming vehicle Disney+.
So when Black Widow debuted on 9 July in theatres, the company had also released it on streaming for a $30 charge.
The lawsuit alleged that Disney wanted to "keep the revenues for itself while simultaneously growing the Disney+ subscriber base, a proven way to boost Disney's stock price".
"Second, Disney wanted to substantially devalue Ms Johansson's agreement and thereby enrich itself," the lawsuit states.
However, despite her firm stance, Disney says there was "no merit" in the claims, insisting that it complied with Johansson's contract.
A spokesperson for Disney told ET: "The lawsuit is especially sad and distressing in its callous disregard for the horrific and prolonged global effects of the COVID-19 pandemic.
"Disney has fully complied with Ms. Johansson's contract and furthermore, 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."
.jpg_ptk2zb?tr=h-184)