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."

Featured image credit: PictureLux / The Hollywood Archive / Alamy

Scarlett Johansson has slapped Disney with a lawsuit over the streaming of her latest onscreen venture, Marvel's Black Widow.

The actress, 36, is accusing 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.

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."

Johansson, who also serves as executive producer on the Black Widow film, told ET about what it was like for her to become the first Avenger to helm a project like this.

"In many ways, my greatest accomplishment on this film was being able to executive produce it and carve this out of nothing," she said.

"We made the movie because we wanted to, not because we had to, which was liberating in a lot of ways. We got to really focus on what we thought was the most important part of Natasha’s story and this is the result."

Featured image credit: PictureLux / The Hollywood Archive / Alamy

Disney is facing criticism on social media following the company's public response to Scarlett Johansson's recent Black Widow lawsuit.

As reported by BBC News, the 36-year-old Marvel star has filed a lawsuit against Disney after it streamed the new MCU movie on Disney+ at the same time as its release in movie theaters. Johansson's lawsuit claims that, in doing so, Disney has breached their contract.

Johansson, who reprises her role as Natasha Romanoff in the highly-anticipated solo outing, says that she was promised by Marvel Studios - which is owned by Disney - that movie would be a "theatrical release".

The lawsuit states that the star understood this to mean that Black Widow would not be streamed on Disney+ for at least 90 days.

However, Disney opted for a simultaneous release of the superhero movie - a move that the actor claims has impacted her compensation for the flick.

Per The Independent, the lawsuit states: "Disney was well aware of this promise, but nonetheless directed Marvel to violate its pledge and instead release the Picture on the Disney+ streaming service the very same day it was released in movie theatres."

Now, in response to the lawsuit, Disney has told The Independent in a statement: "There is no merit whatsoever to this filing. 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."

Disney's response has since been slammed by both Johansson's agent and fans alike.

Bryan Lourd, Johansson's agent, said in a statement: "Scarlett has been Disney's partner on nine movies, which have earned Disney and its shareholders billions.

"The company included her salary in their press statement in an attempt to weaponize her success as an artist and businesswoman, as if that were something she should be ashamed of.

"Disney's direct attack on her character and all else they implied is beneath the company that many of us in the creative community have worked with successfully for decades."

Fans of the Black Widow star also took to Twitter to voice their support, with one person writing: "when someone says you breached a contract and you start talking about global pandemics you 100% breached that contract."

A second wrote: "If Disney can do this to Scarlett Johansson - a Big Name - imagine what they're able to do to creators/actors with a lot less power and money.

"There are implications to this breach of contract beyond ScarJo herself, or even the convenience (& safety) of home streaming."

"I’m not personally a fan of Scarlett Johansson for myriad reasons but the idea that Disney, a corporation, is chastising one individual for “callous disregard” to the pandemic when they opened their theme parks in summer 2020 makes you just wanna laaaugh laugh laugh," a third wrote.

The movie was originally scheduled to be released back in May 2020, but due to the pandemic, was pushed back to last month.

Featured image credit: Credit: Barry King / Alamy

Each year, Forbes compiles a list of the highest-earning actors based on data cross-referenced from Nielsen, ComScore, Box Office Mojo and IMDB, as well as special intel from "industry insiders". A few days ago, Forbes released the top ten list for the world's highest-earning actresses and yep... they probably earned a lot more in the past 12 months than you ever will in your lifetime.

The actress who took the number one spot surprisingly didn't feature at all in the top ten last year. This year, it was Scarlett Johansson who earned the most, taking home a breezy $40.5 million. It was reportedly four times what she earned last year, and it's largely thanks to her role as Black Widow in the latest Avengers flick.

[[instagramwidget||https://www.instagram.com/p/BhJ_lmSFNK3/?taken-by=avengers]]

It goes to show how successful the superhero franchise films are - which also explains why they keep pumping them out at speeds that are really starting to get alarming. While it's probably not the most esteemed film that Scarlett's worked on, it seems to be the one with the biggest pay-check.

While the 2018 male actor's list hasn't yet been revealed, Scarlett's Avengers co-star Robert Downey Jr also featured on the men's top ten last year, earning $48 million thanks to his repeated stints as Iron Man. But even though he earned nearly eight million more than Scarlet, he was only ranked at number six at the men's list. Mark Wahlberg took the top spot with $68M.

Last year, the highest-earning female was Emma Stone, whose $26 million paycheck was largely thanks to La La Land. She was absent from the list this year, as were Emma Watson, Charlize Theron and Amy Adams, who all had spots among the top ten in 2017. None of them made more than the $10 million cut off for the list this year.

The gender pay gap is quite apparent in the entertainment industry, and that's reflected in the number of career opportunities available to women in Hollywood too. A 2016 study found that female characters only make up 28.7 per cent of speaking roles in movies, meaning there are fewer opportunities for women to land big roles with big pay-checks compared to their male co-stars.

Credit: Getty

However, thanks to new production companies like the one that Reese Witherspoon founded, women are beginning to create opportunities for themselves. Reese is at the helm of supporting productions with more female-led parts, as well as getting more women involved in technical production jobs. It's largely thanks to the success of her company, Hello Sunshine, that she landed herself spot number five, earning a total of $16.5 million in the past year.

The full list included familiar names, with (fun fact!) 60 per cent of the highest-earning actresses being older than 40. Here are the top ten female earners in the movies right now:

1. Scarlett Johansson ($40.5 million)
2. Angelina Jolie ($28 million)
3. Jennifer Aniston ($19.5 million)
4. Jennifer Lawrence ($18 million)
5. Reese Witherspoon ($16.5 million)
6. Mila Kunis ($16 million)
7. Julia Roberts ($13 million)
8. Cate Blanchett ($12.5 million)
9. Melissa McCarthy ($12 million)
10. Gal Gadot ($10 million)

Their earnings include movie and TV show payouts, as well as things like endorsement deals and profits from individual business ventures.

One of the most successful content creators on OnlyFans has recently revealed her earnings over the past year, and the figures are nothing short of astounding.

With an annual income of $43,477,695.01, Sophie Rain's earnings not only dwarf those of many traditional professions but also surpass the annual earnings of several A-list Hollywood celebrities.

Rain shared her financial success on social media, highlighting that in one year, from November 28 last year to this year, she managed to earn what would take some top movie stars several projects to accumulate.

To put her earnings into perspective, a currency conversion notes it as £34,265,028.22. This amount, as noted by the Tribune, positions her ahead of Oscar-winning actress Emma Stone, who made $26 million last year, and Scarlett Johansson, who earned $20 million for her role in Black Widow.

The revelation of Rain's earnings comes at a time when OnlyFans has been experiencing record revenues. According to Variety, the platform garnered a total of $6.63 billion (£5.22 billion) in payments during the fiscal year of 2023, with over 4.12 million content creators active on the site.

However, despite the platform's success, the average payout to a content creator on OnlyFans is around $1,300 (£1,024) per year, showing the competitive and varied nature of earnings on the platform.

Sophie Rain's success story is exceptional and not typical of the average OnlyFans content creator. While some like Rain are making fortunes, many others struggle to achieve financial success, highlighting the platform's saturated market.

Rain's earnings put her in the same financial realm as Hollywood stars like Matt Damon and Ryan Gosling, who both reportedly earned about $43 million last year, according to Yahoo. If Rain were in Hollywood, she would only be financially outpaced by giants such as Tom Cruise, Margot Robbie, and Adam Sandler.

The success of Rain on OnlyFans brings to light the changing dynamics of how people earn and the new possibilities the digital age offers. It prompts a reevaluation of traditional career paths like acting, suggesting that platforms like OnlyFans can be just as lucrative, if not more so, for individuals who succeed in them.

Rain expressed gratitude for her platform success, acknowledging how it has transformed her life financially and made her a very wealthy woman. Her story is a testament to the potential of new media platforms to rival traditional entertainment industries in terms of the financial opportunities they offer to creators worldwide.

Featured image credit: Sophie Rain / Instagram

When she's not fighting comic book villains on the big screen, Scarlett Johansson has been an advocate for social justice. She campaigned for Barack Obama, gave a speech at the Women's March and criticized Ivanka Trum, for being complicit in her father's policies. "If you take a job as a public advocate, then you must advocate publicly," said Scarlett.

However, she's also been the target of criticism. When the 'Avenger' commented on alleged sexual harasser James Franco, people called her a hypocrite, since she worked with alleged child abuser Woody Allen. Then, in 2017, she was accused of 'whitewashing' for her role as Motoko Kusanagi the film adaptation of Ghost in the Shell. In the manga, Motoko Kusanagi was a cyborg with a Japanese woman's memories. However, ScarJo defended the part, explaining the movie version of her character wasn't supposed to be Japanese.

"I certainly would never presume to play another race of a person. Diversity is important in Hollywood, and I would never want to feel like I was playing a character that was offensive. Also, having a franchise with a female protagonist driving it is such a rare opportunity."

[[twitterwidget||https://twitter.com/elbirdilara/status/1013946959638515712]]

Now Scarlett is stirring controversy once again. She announced she's reuniting with Ghost in the Shell director Rupert Sanders to play a transgender man in the movie Nip & Tug. The project is about the true story of larger-than-life character Dante 'Tex' Grill, who was born a woman, Jean Marie Gill. Here's the synopsis, as provided by The Hollywood Reporter.

"Joel Silver and New Regency will produce the pic about Jean Marie Gill (Johansson), a person assigned female at birth who succeeded in Pittsburgh's 1970s and 1980s massage parlor and prostitution business by assuming the identity of a man, Dante "Tex" Gill."

[[twitterwidget||https://twitter.com/red3blog/status/1014219852742053890]]

It sounds like a compelling story, but there's been some confusion about pronouns. According to Gil's 2003 obituary, Gill  "insisted she was a man," "wanted to be called "Mr. Gill," and "may even have undergone the initial stages of [medical transitioning] that made her appear more masculine." However, Hollywood trades like Deadline and Variety referred to the character as a woman dressed as a man. Meanwhile, the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette called Gill a "lesbian dressed as a man."

[[twitterwidget||https://twitter.com/faithchoyce/status/1014238719748931584]]

So, it's not clear how Gill will be portrayed in Rub & Tug. But Twitter is mad at the idea of Scarlett playing a transgender man. In their view, the studio should have cast a transgender man for the role, not a cisgender white woman.

[[twitterwidget||https://twitter.com/missunitedface/status/1014178470090412033]]

Bustle contacted Scarlett for a response, and received this statement from her representative: "Tell them that they can be directed to Jeffrey Tambor, Jared Leto, and Felicity Huffman's reps for comment."

Burn! In case you're lost, Jeffrey Tambor, Jared Leto, and Felicity Huffman are all cisgender white actors who played transgender roles (in Transparent, Dallas Buyer's Club and Transamerica, respectively). Their performances were praised by critics, and won prestigious awards, while getting minimal controversy.

But times are changing, aren't they? What was appropriate years ago is considered inappropriate now and even the Black Widow gets caught in controversy.