![]() ![]() Now, a few years into Disney+'s lifecycle, Chapek said the company has a "full understanding of what's needed" and they'd no longer need to "steal content" for different release pipelines. But at that very same time, we started a very methodical plan to try to determine how much content we as a company would need to fully take advantage of the opportunities in theatrical, because we love the theatrical business, and how much we would need to be able to feed the content pipes that were leading into Disney+ so that we can embrace that opportunity." "Our viewers, our subscribers were asking for more so we started diverting content that was originally intended for theaters before Disney+ was even envisioned. You either postpone it for a couple years - and we started postponing, as you remember - but we also had this sort of empty pipeline into this very important strategic initiative for the company, which was Disney+."Ĭhapek said it was this coupled with subscriber demand that lead to them "diverting content that was originally intended for theaters" whilst also putting a plan in place to "take advantage of the opportunities in theatrical: When the theatrical world was shut down because of COVID, it was kind of an easy decision. So we had very precious few things that were trickling into our system, and we had to make the very difficult decision where to put those things. "As we were realizing that, COVID hit and we were completely constrained in terms of making new things. ![]() The CEO said that when the pandemic occurred they became "completely constrained" and had to make a "very difficult decision" regarding their content: "It’s important to go back to when Disney+ was launched and what the hypothesis was about how much food you had to give that system for it to truly maximize its potential, and I would say we dramatically underestimated the hungry beast and how much content it needed to be fed." And I was one voice, and I’ll just say that our relationship with her agency and her has never been better."Ĭhapek also gave some insight into the streaming release strategy that caused the whole ordeal, revealing that the company "dramatically underestimated" how much content Disney+ would require. "There were a lot of people that got a vote in how we handled that. When it came to Disney's current partnership with Johansson, Chapek said optimistically it has "never been better.": In an interview with The Hollywood Reporter, Disney CEO Bob Chapek spoke about the company's current relationship with Scarlett Johansson and revealed some context behind the controversial Disney+ release strategy. Disney's Current Relationship With Scarlett Johansson Marvel The issues were resolved in Fall 2021 when Disney and Johansson reached a mutual agreement for an undisclosed settlement amount, which was believed to be over $40 million in the actor's favor.Īlmost a year on, Disney's new CEO has addressed the company's relationship with the Black Widow star. ![]() The lawsuit claimed that this alternative release strategy prevented Johansson "from realizing the full benefit of her bargain with Marvel." Johansson filed a lawsuit over a breach of contract which allegedly occurred when Disney opted to release Black Widow onto streaming at the same time as its theatrical premiere. Marvel Studios' Black Widow was one of the first major blockbusters to attempt this and it resulted in an unexpected set of problems when starring actress Scarlett Johansson decided to sue Disney for its dual release strategy. With films well and truly back in theatres, it's easy to forget that time when Disney started to release its movies directly onto streaming during the pandemic. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |