As the pic's slogan said, "There are no clean getaways". So actors get screwed out of dough not only happens all the time on indies but now even on faux indies that win Best Picture Oscars. Tommy Lee Jones is suing for $10 million which he claims is what he's still owed for No Country For Old Men. News reports say the lawsuit against Paramount Pictures and N.M. Classics was filed Thursday in Bexar County District Court in San Antonio, Texas. And it's a revealing look behind-the-scenes at Paramount accounting...
According to the San Antonio Express-News, Jones in the lawsuit claims he signed a contract with N.M. Classics on April 3, 2006, for a reduced upfront fee in exchange for backend and bonuses if the film did well financially. It wound up winning the Oscar and making $160M worldwide. As part of his contract negotiations, Jones insisted on favored nations with producer Scott Rudin and writers/directors/producers Joel and Ethan Coen regarding all contract terms, including the percentage of box office bonuses he would receive. But Jones argues that in December 2007 -- a month after the film's nationwide release -- Paramount told him that the contract contained a "mistake" regarding the deduction for home video expenses. Jones claims the studio revealed it was aware of the supposed error before he signed the contract. On January 10, Paramount contended there was a second "mistake" made, this time in the formula to determine box-office bonuses. He says he was fraudulently made to render his services under a contract the company knew contained mistakes, though they didn't inform him of them until after the movie had been made, by which time it was too late.
Jones wants an outside auditor to determine how much he is actually owed.
I smell a legal settlement, Western-Style.
Comment by ReelBusy — September 7, 2008 @ 3:28 pm
I want an outside auditor to determine what exactly the hell was the point of his character’s dialogue at the end of the movie…
Comment by DH — September 7, 2008 @ 4:57 pm
Paramount will offer him a couple of million to avoid any outside auditor from getting involved. No Hollywood studio wants any outsider looking into the arcane depths of studio book-keeping, for there only madness dwells!
Maybe this is why Paramount’s boosting their litigation department?
Comment by Furious D — September 7, 2008 @ 5:10 pm
You said they were lawyering up. Maybe it’s to protect themselves, not sue.
Comment by Anonymous — September 7, 2008 @ 6:21 pm
Does that mean Karen Magid will have to defend the “mistakes” that were built into a contract written under her oversight?
Comment by dimes — September 7, 2008 @ 6:37 pm
When it comes to royalties, you can’t trust Paramount. That was the bottom line of the Art Buchwald lawsuit. Eddie Murphy’s Coming to America made $220 million worldwide and Paramount said the $40 million movie was still $30 million in the hole! That’s some creative accounting!
Comment by Dan Zee — September 7, 2008 @ 6:39 pm
They signed the paper, they pay the money.
I’ve had contract disputes myself, where I was verbally told one thing, and then told if it wasn’t in the contract to forget about it. My mistake was I trusted people to do the honorable thing on their word. There is no honor in Hollywood.
So even if a mistake was made, too late to change it now, they should have caught it before the film was made. Why are they even pretending it’s going to break the bank to honor their contract? Maybe they will check their documents over more carefully in the future.
If there was a reverse of this scenario Paramount would wave the contract in the air and say, no mistakes, it’s down in black and white. I hope Tommy gets his money, and studios stop balking at paying creatives to make the product they sell.
Comment by Slimeballs — September 7, 2008 @ 7:32 pm
@DH: I’d raise that and want the auditor to work out the point of the entire movie.
Comment by michael dobrofsky — September 7, 2008 @ 7:43 pm
DH - ditto! Had the same WTF kind of moment that I had at the end of Vanilla Sky.
Comment by eb — September 7, 2008 @ 8:03 pm
and yet, there’s support for unite for strength and pro-aftra, pro-merger people who are making the argument, essentially, “trust these people (the amptp - paramount, in this case) they’ll come back to us on this contract if it doesn’t work out fairly for us.”
people who say “go along to get along” to negotiations with these… thieves! not just recently - for decades! since the business began! actors take it in the shorts day in and day out and even tommy fucking lee jones gets ripped off by producers! and unite for strength says “make a deal” they say “lets not rock the boat” they say “let’s merge with aftra” - a union that’s been complicit in actors getting ripped off - for years!
actors - wake the fuck up! if YOU don’t stand up for yourselves and call bullshit on producers EVERY TIME they try to rip you off? you deserve everything you get.
fight. fight. fight. fight. fight. not just “to fight” but for your RIGHTS.
Comment by Toomuch — September 7, 2008 @ 8:48 pm
What I don’t understand is why an actor of his caliber wouldn’t have an attorney look over his contract to catch these “errors”?
Comment by Working Actor — September 7, 2008 @ 9:26 pm
I forgot all about that last scene.
I remember leaving the theatre and looking for a stranger in the audience I could go up to and ask “so, what did he say at the end?”
Comment by ToddToronto — September 7, 2008 @ 10:28 pm
I would love to see the paperwork on this. Not on the smoking gun yet…
Comment by Gaurav — September 7, 2008 @ 11:12 pm
Why is he suing only Paramount and not Miramax? They coproduced the movie and Miramax distribuited it domestically.
Comment by MS — September 8, 2008 @ 1:38 am
Leno or Kimmel (possibly both) will put together a hokey spoof of Jones taking out the studio heads with an air pressure tank, after they decide their fate in a coin toss.
Comment by 40yearoldstitzer — September 8, 2008 @ 1:52 am
This story will be huge news for the next week or so and then be forgotten as Paramount decide to settle (with cash money) well away from prying eyes.
Then a few months after that we’ll hear that Tommy Lee Jones has signed Brad Grey to become his new manager and will star in the sequel to JJ Abrams’ hugely successful Star Trek ‘re-boot’.
Jones will play an older Klingon who drives a pick up truck and tries to kill Chris Pine’s Kirk by talking dryly about the ‘way things used to be’.
Comment by Warner Borg — September 8, 2008 @ 2:39 am
Whatcha got ain’t nothin new. This industry’s hard on people, you can’t get what’s coming, it ain’t all waiting on you. That’s vanity.
Comment by Ellis — September 8, 2008 @ 6:13 am
And this is why Warren Beatty has always insisted, in the contract, on the right to bring in an independent auditor when he has points!
Comment by Unindicted Co-conspirator — September 8, 2008 @ 7:10 am
Paramount? Screwing people out of money? I’m shocked. Shocked.
Comment by Jeff — September 8, 2008 @ 8:28 am
Ahh, the promise of back end. They should call it, no back end in sight!
Those producer’s, butch of honest guys, huh?
Comment by summer — September 8, 2008 @ 8:39 am
I remember when this happened on Forrest Gump. Zemeckis and Hanks had deferred, and Paramount was dragging feet on paying them. As I remember it though they screamed and yelled before the Oscars, not afterward, and to avoid a stink Paramount started cutting them $5 million checks.
Comment by Oohla — September 8, 2008 @ 9:31 am
Why do these accounts and people at business affairs at the studios try to NOT pay people? It’s not like it’s coming out of THEIR paychecks. I guess they feel that they can gain a brownie point if they show the bosses they stiffed someone.
Comment by lemme — September 8, 2008 @ 12:05 pm
to lemme-
I will not speak about business affairs, but please check yourself when you speak of things you don’t know about accounting. Accountants are CREW, they are screwed only 2nd to Coordinators in this business, and that is only because they usually have a slightly higher start rate. They are required in most cases to join IATSE but receive no protection or set rates. They are directed to do what they do, they have no executive power, in most cases they configure your pay and then are told that this part of the deal is wrong and that crew member does not get that meal penalty and whatever other lie suits the suit at the time. But make no mistake that their job is on the line if they stand up as one person against corporate to save who… those actors that make 3 times her salary in one day. Oh or maybe that accountant should stand up for the grip who received OT, meal penalties and a gas bump - but is bitching because the PR didn’t match what ‘he thought’.
So to all of you who work in the business- nearly every cast and crew member on a show makes more money than the accountanting or office crew, so instead of acting like they are in colusion with the bad guy, maybe some of you should start supporting and using a kinder word about the support crew that orders your crap and then end up taking your crap all day too.
Comment by Audra — September 8, 2008 @ 1:42 pm
“oohla”
yeah. and aint it great to know hanks has sold sag down the fucking river because he cares more about his production company and shooting outside the country whenever he possibly can and avoiding residuals whenever he can and giving his “band of brothers” actors a one time buy out on the dvd, which will be selling for decades, rather than let them be profit participants in the dvd sales? and why? cause tom needs money? no - cause he’s a greedy arrogant fuck who doesn’t give a shit about sag actors - you know - the union that gave him his start and has covered every single film he’s done in his entire career.
Comment by gee tom? — September 8, 2008 @ 2:35 pm
Maybe I am naive to the doings but how is it that a guy who now runs the studio - a former artists rep - not be on the side of the artist and insist that deals be on the up and up?
Does Brad Grey turn a blind eye to this stuff now that he’s on the other side of the fence? How does he square that with his actors I would assume he courts?
Why would top talent do another project with Paramount after past debacles?
I realize the movie business is low margin (at least that’s what we’re all told) but does cheating and legal wrangling really make the difference?
I’ve never seen it, but it sure would be cool to have someone from business affairs do a “Pentagon Papers” leak and really let us see the goods.
Comment by ordinaryjoe — September 8, 2008 @ 2:40 pm
To “gee tom?”
You really can’t say “SAG gave Tom (Hanks) his start.” That’s way too “unionistic” for me.
Hanks worked his ass off, had talent and made it work for himself. SAG was just there to see he got paid properly.
Comment by ordinaryjoe — September 8, 2008 @ 3:32 pm
ordinary joe:
“just to see he got paid properly?”
are you an actor? do you have any sag credits? they do a lot more than “make sure you get paid properly” my young friend. they make sure you get a 12 hour turnaround. they make sure you get meal penalties. and overtime. and residuals. and travel expenses. and a reasonable amount of hours in one workday. they have created a first class pension and health plan that our employers pay into. when you have a few more rings around your tree, IF you’ve done enough work, you’ll start to stare long and hard at that pension statement when it comes. they will pay your bills if you get sick. most of them anyway. you ever been sick “ordinary jor?” like sick, sick - real sick? you got any kids “ordinary joe?” didn’t think so. wait till you do and one of them has to have an operation. got 100k laying around? how about 250K? how bout a million bucks? want to float the tab on that without sag healthcare “ordinary joe?”
sag protected hanks PROFESSIONALLY for YEARS before he, by his own talent, ambition and luck, popped and made it in movies. and every single movie he’s done? has been under a sag contract - which means, in case you don’t know - the whole show is under the watchful eye of sag - and if the producers start to fuck with actors (which, when you’ve worked a few jobs “ordinary joe” you’ll find out they’ll do at the drop of a hat to save time and money and because they mostly view actors as talking props) it’s sag that will bail your ass out. protect you from the suits. make sure your rights are observed and enforced.
if that’s too “unionist” for you? go fi-core. you don’t think sag is important? - it’s all about your big swingin” talent “ordinary joe?” well, you better be pretty fucking good and pretty fucking lucky, cause these guys - producers - will eat you for lunch.
it was years before hanks became self-insured, didn’t need these protections. he could use a little refresher course. he’s a union busting producer who should be called out on it. and, when all this is over? don’t think people will forget.
trivializing and selling out sag and favoring aftra (wtf!) over sag in all this? it’s gonna come back to haunt him. you watch. a billion dollars can buy a lot of shit, but it will never buy him his reputation back as someone who WOULDN’T sell out his union because of his own self-interest in his producer gigs, and his belief he’s above all us little people, so he gets to smirk and say “take the dga deal - I don’t care if you want paper or plastic on your set - just take the dga deal” (a direct quote).
Comment by gee tom? — September 8, 2008 @ 8:32 pm
gee tom?:
Any progress on the millions of $’s of overseas residuals being handed out lately?
Zoinks!
To answer your question.. I am not an actor, thankfully.
I love actors, but don’t like dealing with SAG. Not because I don’t believe there are fair protections, mind you, just that the dudes running the show don’t care much for the customer(s) from what I have experienced.
I could go on about it but have to end it there or else my underwear will show.
Best to you though.
Comment by ordinaryjoe — September 9, 2008 @ 1:48 am
I worked at several broadcast networks and studios in my very long career (I retired several years ago), and I sat in many business affairs meetings where a producers back-end share would come up, or a bonus, or a blind script commitment, or a penalty owed to a producer/actor/writer would be discussed, and I can’t tell you how many times I heard the prexy or head of business affairs simply announce, “Screw ‘em. Make ‘em sue us,” or the old, “Don’t pay it and let’s see what happens.”
This is business as usual, because most writers or producers or even big time actors won’t sue a network or major tv studio because they’re looking at the bigger picture of future employment.
It’s very slimy, and I always wanted to take a shower after those meetings.
Comment by ex-network exec — September 9, 2008 @ 12:42 pm