|
Post by rknron on Sept 9, 2009 22:06:42 GMT -5
since the storyline is fictitious, the purported lesbian scene between Joan and Cherie never happened either. I doubt Lita will care.. As long as Cherie got paid, I' m sure she is happy. She may even have points on the back end.
|
|
|
Post by dagtoking1 on Sept 10, 2009 7:27:54 GMT -5
Ha! I doubt that.
|
|
|
Post by jettigre on Sept 11, 2009 20:56:57 GMT -5
I started reading alittle bit of the script......
***EDITED****NO SCRIPT POSTING HERE!
Sorry.
Hawk
|
|
|
Post by crave on Sept 12, 2009 7:42:10 GMT -5
I read it. It's gonna be entertaining, but also a little dark. Isn't that the big complaint about EDGEPLAY also?
|
|
|
Post by isitdayornight on Sept 12, 2009 10:45:58 GMT -5
I don't believe this movie is necessarily for Runaways fans. I think it's evolved into catering more to Kristen Stewart's fan base. Why don't they just add a little more fiction and turn it into a weekly cartoon series? OH WAIT! SOMEONE ALREADY DID THAT: JOSIE AND THE PUSSYCATS!
|
|
|
Post by littlesister on Sept 12, 2009 11:32:32 GMT -5
"The Doors" w/ Val Kilmer was not made for fans of the Doors.
"Walk the Line" was not made for fans of J.Cash
"Ray" was not made for fans of Ray Charles.
|
|
|
Post by playinwithfire on Sept 20, 2009 15:27:46 GMT -5
Is it still lurking around out there? I tried in vain to find it.
Littlesister: Absolutely spot on!
|
|
samy
New Member
Posts: 2
|
Post by samy on Sept 20, 2009 18:01:18 GMT -5
arhs.. this is so stupid.. just 3 things
1.- I wasn´t aware of lita´s statement about cherie, I had an orgasm when I read it, and she´s right.
2.- the whole thing about the trademark is so confusing to me but about one thing Im sure, the 5 girls should have a right on it doesn´t matter who left first or last, they were kids and needed to survive and each one of them did what they needed to do in matter of make it but the runaways happened thanks to the spirit, talent and braveness of the famous five.
3.- the only thing that worries me is the movie, I will be so mad if it gats pushed back or freeze or whatever, those women have had this kind of relationship for dacades, it´s a fvck u/I love you and vice versa chain and I dont think it´ll change
|
|
|
Post by dagtoking1 on Sept 21, 2009 9:07:06 GMT -5
It will be interesting to see where this goes. It looks like the lawsuit seeks to establish ownership of the trademark which will open the door for Jackie to file a counter lawsuit. She could claim she has not been paid royalties that were due her and Blackheart could be subject to turning over copies of their financial records to forensic accountants as part of the discovery process. I don't think they are going to want that; it could turn into a windfall for the other bandmates if they win.
|
|
|
Post by playinwithfire on Sept 21, 2009 22:12:38 GMT -5
Dag, for stuff she just happened to record or just for things she has CREDIT for writing? Because I was under the impression that she did not own much of anything. Just curious.
|
|
|
Post by jettigre on Sept 22, 2009 1:50:51 GMT -5
yeah, I agree DAG.....
Blackheart will have to pay royalties to Jackie.Remember blackheart was selling T-Shirts and Cd's with Jackie's face on it?Not, only Jackie's face but the other girls too.Hell, I even bought my Runaways t-shirt from Blackheart of the pix of ''LIVE IN JAPAN'' on the front of the t-shirt a few years ago.Jackie is entitled to get payed for that and the other girls too.Now,The Runaways logo? I am not sure cause I believe Blackheart owns the rights to name but NOT cd's ,t-shirts or anything else with the girls face on it.That's the same as me taking a pix from one of the members on here and making a profit.It's Illegal and I do think Jackie is owed some sort of profit for the t-shirts and cd's blackheart sold.I feel Jackie also had a right to see the script of The Runaways movie.Why Not? If, I was in a band and the ex - members were making a biopic I would want to see the script also.Wouldn't you? Jackie doesn't know that they aren't going to use her in the movie.Just cause you tell me your not, I want proof and Jackie deserves Proof.Why be secret about it Joan/Kenny? If you have nothing to hide and your not useing her then just show Jackie right?
I feel Joan/Kenny handled this the wrong way IMO.
and like someone said .........
The money Joan/Kenny have to spend on a Lawyer/Court Cost and Filing Fee's could have just went to Jackie and there would be no beef with anyone but instead Joan/Kenny have to feel like they have to always be in control.
I love Joan and always will but I don't believe in all the choices she makes with KENNY!!!!
|
|
|
Post by dagtoking1 on Sept 22, 2009 7:12:50 GMT -5
Not sure what you mean...Jackie being one of the "Mercury Five" should have entitlements to royalties for some but not all of the band's work...I never did get why Joan should have exclusive rights to the band's name or anything else other than her own name and for songs she wrote. BTW, "Heartbeat" is one of my favorite Runaways songs.
They have been down this road before...I think it was 2004 when Ritchie Cordell sued them shortly before his death for not being paid royalties. I wonder if his estate ever collected.
|
|
|
Post by dagtoking1 on Sept 22, 2009 7:25:38 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by crave on Sept 22, 2009 10:00:28 GMT -5
Ric Browde who worked on UP YOUR ALLEY also claims he and Desmond Child were never paid fully. Who knows.
|
|
|
Post by playinwithfire on Sept 22, 2009 15:13:05 GMT -5
DAG: Oh, I just meant that she should receive royalties for projects that she was involved in only. Not a blanket issue of "well it's Runaways, so I want to be paid." That's all I meant. Sorry, I worded it a bit weird, actually confused myself when I re-read that.
I also have to agree with Jettigre....I'd have just given her a copy of the script to ease her mind and get her off of my back, if that would have worked at all. We'll see.
|
|