Jump to content

Tony Jaa's Thai manager threatens to sue 'Fast & Furious 7'


webfact

Recommended Posts

Tony Jaa's Manager Threatens To Sue 'Fast & Furious 7'
By Khaosod Online

tj.jpg

BANGKOK: -- The motion pictures tycoon Somsak Techarattanaprasert threatened a lawsuit against the producers of that upcoming movie ′Fast and Furious 7′ if they featured the Thai action star Tony Jaa in the film.

Mr. Somsak, the president of Sahamongkol Film International, said the actor, whose real name is Panom Yeerum, is still under a contract with his company, so Mr. Panom needs his consent for any project.

Mr. Panom became famous after he starred in the action-comedy films Ong Bak and Tom Yum Goong, which were produced by Sahamongkol. The actor also was reported that he would also star in a sequel to the international hit Fast and Furious series.

Mr. Somsak, known to the Thais as Siah Jiang, was speaking in a press conference alongside Pratchya Pinkaew and Panna Rittikrai, directors of the movie ′Tom Yum Goong 2′, in which Mr. Panom reprised his role.

According to the tycoon, Mr. Panom told him he would feature in an advertisement and did not inform him anything about a movie. A few days later, Mr. Somsak said, he received a letter from Mr. Panom′s lawyer saying that the contract the actor has signed with Sahamongkol is now terminated.

Full story: http://www.khaosod.co.th/en/view_newsonline.php?newsid=TVRNM09ESTVOakExTmc9PQ==

-- KHAOSOD English 2013-09-05

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If he's still under contract then the company he's contracted to has every right to take legal action. Being ungrateful is one thing but breaking a legal document is another. Will be interesting to see how this plays out in court. I doubt the Fast And Furious 7 producers will let it get this far. They should just drop him and get another action star with less baggage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why are most people posting here so ready to say Tony Jaa is at fault ?

None of us know the details.

However, there are plenty of examples in the entertainment world (and more particularly in Thailand) of young innocent artists signing contracts when they were unknowns, which seem great at the time, because they do things such as provide a set salary for life, a car, rent free house etc. Then the act goes on to become famous and generates bucket loads of money - which he, or she never sees, beyond what they signed for in the original contract.

Some of the most notable examples in the Music world have been, Dionne Warwick, Percy Sledge and Tina Turner. It took each of these artists a long time to get out of agreements signed when they were unknown kids.

Tony Jaa is now a worldwide bankable Movie Star.

Does his current agreement take this into account ?

In his case, I am not saying, just saying....

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why are most people posting here so ready to say Tony Jaa is at fault ?


None of us know the details.


However, there are plenty of examples in the entertainment world (and more particularly in Thailand) of young innocent artists signing contracts when they were unknowns, which seem great at the time, because they do things such as provide a set salary for life, a car, rent free house etc. Then the act goes on to become famous and generates bucket loads of money - which he, or she never sees, beyond what they signed for in the original contract.


Some of the most notable examples in the Music world have been, Dionne Warwick, Percy Sledge and Tina Turner. It took each of these artists a long time to get out of agreements signed when they were unknown kids.


Tony Jaa is now a worldwide bankable Movie Star.


Does his current agreement take this into account ?


In his case, I am not saying, just saying....



crazy.gif



Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well he's been in the business for more then 10 years and the fact is, he did sign a NEW contract when he was already famous. As much as there are innocent starlets who probably really are being exploited, I really doubt Tony Jaa is that naive stereotype. Whatever the case, a contract is a contract.

Why are most people posting here so ready to say Tony Jaa is at fault ?

None of us know the details.

However, there are plenty of examples in the entertainment world (and more particularly in Thailand) of young innocent artists signing contracts when they were unknowns, which seem great at the time, because they do things such as provide a set salary for life, a car, rent free house etc. Then the act goes on to become famous and generates bucket loads of money - which he, or she never sees, beyond what they signed for in the original contract.

Some of the most notable examples in the Music world have been, Dionne Warwick, Percy Sledge and Tina Turner. It took each of these artists a long time to get out of agreements signed when they were unknown kids.

Tony Jaa is now a worldwide bankable Movie Star.

Does his current agreement take this into account ?

In his case, I am not saying, just saying....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A film company owning an actor.

How very 1950's. I think Tony Jaa needs slightly better management.

Absolutely agree, its the same situation with record companies in Thailand as well.

Not at all legal for Western media companies to do this as its represents a classic "conflict of interest"

But of course TIT

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A film company owning an actor.

How very 1950's. I think Tony Jaa needs slightly better management.

Absolutely agree, its the same situation with record companies in Thailand as well.

Not at all legal for Western media companies to do this as its represents a classic "conflict of interest"

But of course TIT

I think boss or oowner might be a better description of this business relationship.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If he's still under contract then the company he's contracted to has every right to take legal action. Being ungrateful is one thing but breaking a legal document is another. Will be interesting to see how this plays out in court. I doubt the Fast And Furious 7 producers will let it get this far. They should just drop him and get another action star with less baggage.

Of just pay off the peanuts that his Thai contract would be worth - relative to a Hollywood franchise budget.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Brilliant advertising and promoting of the new film Fast and Furious 7. I bet many posters will be kicking themselves when we find out that Tony Jaa has been released to the US production company with a distribution deal for Thailand involving Sahamongkol. Theaters will be full to the brim and all thanks to Ex-Pat and Thai posters who were so busy commenting that they forgot about advertising and promoting of a product! Brilliant!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It seems like many international stars are rumored to be in FF7?

Tony Jaa, Deepika Padukone, Kurt Russell (replaces Denzel Washington).

If they can't get Jaa then Iko Uwais might be an alternative?

Possibly Korean Pop Star 'Rain' who did a pretty good job in Ninja Assassin

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1186367/

Edited by Garry
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

He could sue Tony Jaa himself for breach of contract, but I'm pretty sure he won't have a case if he tries and sue the american producers.

This is the whole point.

Tony Jaa illegally signed the contract.

Ah, you've read his existing contract have you? The one the movie mogul claims he is still under.

If not, then you are potentially putting yourself at risk for a defamation suit from Tony Jaa for writing that he has acted illegally. In fact, given Thai defamation law, there is no "potentially" about it.

Edited by Baerboxer
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sahamongkol are a large greedy corporation that just want a piece of the pie. While this might be understandable in many cases, they have not used Tony for several years now. The man has a right to make a living.

If this really is the case, then he defeats the suit with a counter-suit based upon 'constructive dismissal'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fair enough, just ignore him for a part. He can go back to making thai soaps for 300 baht per day. Hollywood doesn't need him, he needs Hollywood. Bye Bye Tony.

You do know, of course, that he is not a soap star ? imdb

Had a look on youtube trashy C grade movies made for the teenage audience. Terrible acting. he will never get nominated for an Oscar that is for sure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To be fair, neither will Vin Diesel.

Fair enough, just ignore him for a part. He can go back to making thai soaps for 300 baht per day. Hollywood doesn't need him, he needs Hollywood. Bye Bye Tony.

You do know, of course, that he is not a soap star ? imdb

Had a look on youtube trashy C grade movies made for the teenage audience. Terrible acting. he will never get nominated for an Oscar that is for sure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fair enough, just ignore him for a part. He can go back to making thai soaps for 300 baht per day. Hollywood doesn't need him, he needs Hollywood. Bye Bye Tony.

Correct. Or, the Hollywood guys will offer a token release to the Thai agent/film company. The Thai film guy may have been better off with a 'friendly call" to the Hollywood producer's lawyer reminding him that the actor was under contract. Instead, in typical Thai style, they threatened to sue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.







×
×
  • Create New...