Another reason to dislike Sequels.

Is new ‘Wall Street’ a spinoff or a sequel? Michael Douglas’ ex-wife wants to know.

Staring down the ex-wife.

The long and short:  the ex Mrs. Michael Douglas wants a piece — actually half — of Michael’s action on WALL STREET 2.  Seems she thinks if he is to make any do-re-mi then she deserves some sol-la-ti.  [Sorry…just caught SOUND OF MUSIC on AMC last week].

At first glance this would appear to be a desperate grab at someone else’s money.  But at second glance it appears to be…a desperate grab at someone else’s money.

With all due respect to the former Mrs. Douglas — please concentrate on getting your son Cameron sober.  Gouging your ex-husband for more money 10 years after your divorce isn’t going to accomplish that.  Unless you both use the money for parenting classes and an escrow account for future drug rehab stays.

Cameron is going to need it if his parents keep on this way.

And to top it off — you pull this after Michael shared a car with you.

But it is an interesting point and I {shudder} find myself siding with the ex-Mrs D.

The most common use of the word spin-off is used in television.  As Michael Douglas only appeared in one TV show of note (STREETS OF SAN FRANCISCO) that would garner a spin-off or adaptation,  I doubt this clause would be included by the plaintiff’s original lawyers to cover this single contingency.  They obviously were referring to a derivative work of anything he made when they were married.

I would be interested in seeing the notes on the various drafts of the settlement agreement.  I am sure at some point the clause read “spinoffs and sequels” and someone on Michael’s side had the forethought to strike the word “sequel” and someone on Diandra’s side was stupid enough to agree.

I can see it now —

  • Michael:  “We don’t need the word sequel.  Spin-off means the same thing.”
  • Diandra:  “It does?”
  • Michael (knowing chuckle): “Yes, of course.”
  • Diandra: “Will you put that in writing?
  • Michael:  “Um…no.  But you can trust me.  Besides…what are the odds of me getting any more work in this town?  I’m old.  Washed up.  I haven’t had a bonafide boxoffice hit since WALL STREET.  And it’s not like we are ever going to see a sequel to that.”

Okay.  He probably didn’t say that last part.

So the question becomes should the judge should interpret the spirit of the clause — Diandra wins — or the exact wording — Michael wins.   I guess we will wait and see.

With bated breath.

[UPDATED JULY 12, 2010]

A friend of mine pointed out to me the obvious irony of this story.  It was so obvious I missed it.

“Greed is good.”   Gordon Gekko “Wall Street”

Touche, Diandra.  Touche.

Tagged ,

One thought on “Another reason to dislike Sequels.

  1. The iMac says:

    Insightful and witty. Keep it up dude.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: