• Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
  • We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Status
Not open for further replies.

ZattMurdock

Banned
Oct 26, 2017
10,333
Earth 616
"Wonder Woman" star Gal Gadot is continuing to battle accused Hollywood sexual harasser Brett Ratner by refusing to sign for a superhero sequel unless the movie-maker is completely killed from the franchise.

A Hollywood source tells Page Six that Gadot — who last month backed out of a dinner honoring Ratner, where she was due to present him with an award — is taking a strong stance on sexual harassment in Hollywood and doesn't want her hit "Wonder Woman" franchise to benefit a man accused of sexual misconduct.

Ratner's production company RatPac-Dune Entertainment helped produce "Wonder Woman" as part of its co-financing deal with Warner Bros. The movie has grossed more than $400 million internationally, and Ratner's company will take a healthy share of the profits. A Warner Bros. insider explained, "Brett made a lot of money from the success of 'Wonder Woman,' thanks to his company having helped finance the first movie. Now Gadot is saying she won't sign for the sequel unless Warner Bros. buys Brett out [of his financing deal] and gets rid of him."

The source added of Israeli-born Gadot, "She's tough and stands by her principles. She also knows the best way to hit people like Brett Ratner is in the wallet. She also knows that Warner Bros. has to side with her on this issue as it develops. They can't have a movie rooted in women's empowerment being part-financed by a man accused of sexual misconduct against women."

Source: https://pagesix.com/2017/11/11/gal-...ow&utm_source=P6Twitter&utm_medium=SocialFlow

Gal has just become one my favorite superheroes.

MOD EDIT: This thread is about Hollywood, not Gal Gado's political views. Do not veer from the topic.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
OP
OP
ZattMurdock

ZattMurdock

Banned
Oct 26, 2017
10,333
Earth 616

Oh damn. Sorry mods, I did a search and literally nothing came up. Either way, Gal made me proud and that's the exact the kind of stuff that I'd expect of people playing superheroes. Great and powerful move, so you do you, Wonder Woman.

Didn't WB already parts ways with Brett?

At least I hope they have.

RatPac is a producer in JL, BvS, WW, SS and I think MoS too. Not entirely sure.


EDIT:

I'm not sure if it's even okay to post on the thread anymore, so if a mod sees this, it'd be cool to get some clarification.


Either way, here's some new "news" that complement Page Six's article, an analysis of Ratner involvement with WB and the possibility of RatPac's logo not even showing up in JL:

Having said that — and you knew this was coming — Ratner is very good at making friends, especially with extremely rich people. That's how he sort of shifted from Hack Director into Big Time Producer over the past decade. Thanks to his relationship with Australian billionaire James Packer, Ratner established RatPac Entertainment, a financing endeavor that signed a deal to work with Dune Entertainment and Warner Bros. to co-fund up to 75 movies. Among the list of films that have come out of RatPac are Oscar winners such as Gravity, The Revenant, and American Sniper, genre fare like Annabelle and Lights Out, blockbusters like It and The LEGO Movie, and the DC Comics movies, Batman V Superman: Dawn of Justice, Suicide Squad, Wonder Woman, and next week's Justice League. Earlier this year, following a bad run of disappointing grosses, Packer decided he'd spent enough of his money without seeing the right return, and he walked away, allowing himself to be bought out by Access Entertainment billionaire Len Blavatnik.

Now, there's still life left in the RatPac deal with Warners, and with several hundred millions of dollars hanging in the balance, that's not something that's so easy to discard. Even as Ratner personally steps away from RatPac to "resolve" his personal issues, his name is still on the company and its giant R-shaped logo, and Warner Bros. still needs that money. Sure, there's always someone out there willing to get into the movie business, and spend a lot of dough to do it, but knowing those people are out there is one thing. Walking away from a committed pile of cash in hand to go and find them is another entirely. Especially these days, when corralling that money isn't nearly as easy as it used to be. In the meantime, when Warner Bros. opens its wallet, it'll be paying with RatPac money.

One major question looming large is whether or not the RatPac logo will still appear in front of WB's upcoming movies, including its prized pony Justice League, which hits theaters in a mere 10 days — too soon for the stink to simply disappear. Will Ratner's involvement keep audiences away, knowing their hard-earned money will (partially) be going to his legal defense? There's simply no escaping Ratner's involvement with the film, and the matter of his $450 million co-financing deal with the studio becomes an even larger issue when one considers the pending $85.4 billion purchase of Time Warner by AT&T. The phone people are not big on controversy, after all, so it cannot be overlooked how big a deal this is for Warner Bros., though the accusations themselves are an even bigger deal for Ratner, who may never recover his stature in Hollywood.

I won't be surprised if Blavatnik buys out Ratner's stake and renames the company. The question is whether Warner Bros. will consider the money to be tainted by Ratner's alleged actions, or whether it'll honor its co-financing deal with RatPac. This being Hollywood, my bet is on the latter. It's one thing to express shock and dismay about someone's transgressions and excommunicate them, but walking away from their money? That's another story altogether.

Source: http://www.tracking-board.com/brett...arner-bros-and-the-release-of-justice-league/
 
Last edited:

4859

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
7,046
In the weak and the wounded
Who is Brett Ratner? I gather he is a scumbag, ah well google here we go.

Oh, no wonder, I don't give a flying blip about any of his garbage. Garbage being craps out garbage productions. I don't think the next wonder women will be missing anything without him.

I also see resetera is going all in on the lack of tension variety of peacekeeping.
 

Drakeon

Member
Oct 25, 2017
6,274
I mean, she's the star of the dceu, wb doesn't really have a choice in who to side with, WW is like their one giant hit.

Great on Gal Gadot for trying to make Hollywood less of a shitshow.
 
Oct 25, 2017
5,846
The next WW film is clearly in a position to make money, so it doesn't seem like any reason aside from contractual ones they couldn't find another financing partner. Galdot is the heavyweight in this fight, I don't see why WB wouldn't fold.
 
Oct 25, 2017
3,686
Kudos to her trying to use influence for good. It looks like the other thread got locked because of repeated derails so hopefully this one fares better.
 

Juan29.Zapata

Member
Oct 25, 2017
2,353
Colombia
This is incredibly awesome of her. If WB sides with them, they would take a huge PR hit. They know they have to drop them. I hope they don't have a contract with his company.
 

Deleted member 8860

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 26, 2017
6,525
palestinian-chicken-05-1024.jpg
 

hodayathink

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,055
Like, if Ratner has a contract that attaches him to the sequel, he could demand a huge payday or the WB loses out on a huge sequel. Just the way it was worded in the OP about buying Ratner out made me think that

As the other article says, what's likely going to happen is that Ratner is going to get bought out by his business partner and the company will go on without him. Ratner's walking away from this millions of dollars richer, no matter what Gadot or probably anyone else says or does.
 

Thisman

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
2,841
A Broken clock is right twice a day. One that she makes a great WW and the other her position on Ratner . Nothing else though
 

Trojita

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,721
If Ratner stays he makes money if he doesn't stay he makes money because of the contract agreements. Either way WB will have to give him money unfortunately.

How are you not supposed to bring up Gadot's views when people are saying "that's the exact the kind of stuff that I'd expect of people playing superheroes"? Questioning a public person's views or actions when they are a focus of the thread should not be considered a derail.
 

Alastor3

Attempted to circumvent ban with alt account
Banned
Oct 28, 2017
8,297
I still haven't seen Wonder Woman and she's already a hero.
 

spider

CLANG
On Break
Oct 23, 2017
973
Australia
If Ratner stays he makes money if he doesn't stay he makes money because of the contract agreements. Either way WB will have to give him money unfortunately.

How are you not supposed to bring up Gadot's views when people are saying "that's the exact the kind of stuff that I'd expect of people playing superheroes"? Questioning a public person's views or actions when they are a focus of the thread should not be considered a derail.

I think discussion of the encompassing complexity of her person as a woman, as an actor, as a mother, and as a born Israeli, etc. should be within scope. Derail is when the scope of the discussion is veered primarily to condemn one particular aspect of her choices.

We can .... probably try to address that her stance with regards to sexual harassment in hollywood has merits whilst also acknowledge that there are other aspects of her that are worthy of criticism?
 

Chuck Noblet

Member
Oct 27, 2017
2,090
I could swear Warner Bros already cut all ties with Ratner over a week ago.
http://deadline.com/2017/11/brett-ratner-statement-amid-sexual-harassment-claims-1202199821/

I imagine his partners will try to buy him out as well.

If Ratner stays he makes money if he doesn't stay he makes money because of the contract agreements. Either way WB will have to give him money unfortunately.

How are you not supposed to bring up Gadot's views when people are saying "that's the exact the kind of stuff that I'd expect of people playing superheroes"? Questioning a public person's views or actions when they are a focus of the thread should not be considered a derail.
Other thread was locked my dude. You may want to ask a mod.
 

Trojita

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,721
I will add that I think this is a powerful position to take that a sexual harasser shouldn't benefit from a movie about a character that women look up to. I just don't know any way of getting him out of the contract without him making money.
 

broncobuster

Member
Oct 26, 2017
8,139
If Ratner stays he makes money if he doesn't stay he makes money because of the contract agreements. Either way WB will have to give him money unfortunately.

How are you not supposed to bring up Gadot's views when people are saying "that's the exact the kind of stuff that I'd expect of people playing superheroes"? Questioning a public person's views or actions when they are a focus of the thread should not be considered a derail.

Reason why the other thread was locked was because of toxic attitudes like saying she should die and never interacting with the thread topic. There's a civil discussion to be had and understanding the complexities of a person you don't like doing a good thing. Her using her clout as an actress to try and change the dynamics in Hollywood, however little that might be. But those guys couldn't be civil, they didn't want a discussion, and that's why it's considered derailed. Simple as that.

And like the Ed Skrein backing out of Hellboy over the white washing casting, these are actions I'd love to believe will set a precedent for Hollywood, but am a little too cynical to think will.
 

Trojita

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,721
Reason why the other thread was locked was because of toxic attitudes like saying she should die and never interacting with the thread topic. There's a civil discussion to be had and understanding the complexities of a person you don't like doing a good thing. /QUOTE]

Wait, people said that? Were those posts removed or something? Didn't see them.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.