webfact Posted March 30, 2015 Share Posted March 30, 2015 Thai court lifts ban on 'Fast & Furious': lawyerAFPBANGKOK: -- A Thai court Monday lifted a ban on the latest instalment in "The Fast and the Furious" blockbuster franchise, a lawyer said, following a contract dispute with a local actor."Fast and Furious 7", due to open in Thai cinemas on April 1, was blocked by a court injunction Thursday after a Thai movie studio filed a lawsuit alleging that local film star Tony Jaa was in breach of contract for appearing in the film.But it will now open in cinemas as scheduled on Wednesday, Suwat Apaipakdi, a lawyer for the studio Sahamongkol Film International, told AFP.The Civil Court of Thailand in Bangkok ruled that "the temporary banning order would affect other actors -- therefore the court has cancelled the temporary banning", he said.Suwat added that his client is still seeking 1.6 billion baht ($49 million) damages from Jaa, film studio Universal Pictures and local distributor United International Pictures (UIP) because the actor was committed to Sahamongkol in an exclusive contract until 2023.It was not immediately possible to reach the court or UIP for comment.Thai fans of the popular films had reacted furiously to news of the ban last week, with thousands joining a Facebook page calling for the court to lift the injunction.Jaa rose from a poor background in Thailand's impoverished northeast to become one of the country's best-known "Muay Thai" martial artists.He plays a villain in the latest "Fast and Furious" title and has a scene fighting longterm franchise star Paul Walker.Walker was himself killed in November 2013, having completed much of his part in filming the seventh instalment, when a car he was riding in with another man crashed and burst into flames.The first "Fast and Furious" movie appeared in 2001. The series, with its focus on fast cars, tough guys, sexy starlets and exotic locales, is one of Hollywood's most successful global franchises. -- (c) Copyright AFP 2015-03-31 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IsaanUSA Posted March 30, 2015 Share Posted March 30, 2015 CAT says thank you for sparing them 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BSJ Posted March 30, 2015 Share Posted March 30, 2015 I could have waited.....still haven't watched #5 yet! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluespunk Posted March 30, 2015 Share Posted March 30, 2015 (edited) "The series, with its focus on fast cars, tough guys, sexy starlets and exotic locales, is one of Hollywood's most successful global franchises.' But not for it's focus on acting or story lines. Or at least variation in story lines/plot. The acting.............well, it is what it is. Edited March 30, 2015 by Bluespunk 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post ronthai Posted March 31, 2015 Popular Post Share Posted March 31, 2015 "The series, with its focus on fast cars, tough guys, sexy starlets and exotic locales, is one of Hollywood's most successful global franchises.' But not for it's focus on acting or story lines. Or at least variation in story lines/plot. The acting.............well, it is what it is. Most movies are just to watch and be entertained. Personally I like the F&F and most action, SyFy and some romantic chick movies. People should not think soo much about movies and just enjoy, like living in Thailand. Enjoy and accept the parts you don't like. You will be a lot happier and relaxed this way. Might even avoid an heart-attack or such. 9 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bangon04 Posted March 31, 2015 Share Posted March 31, 2015 "The Civil Court of Thailand in Bangkok ruled that "the temporary banning order would affect other actors -- therefore the court has cancelled the temporary banning", he said." so nothing to do with the social media ridicule, then....... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NanLaew Posted March 31, 2015 Share Posted March 31, 2015 Let's play 'spot the bung' shall we? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuwadeeS Posted March 31, 2015 Share Posted March 31, 2015 They ban it or not. Whats the point, its already online. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Srikcir Posted March 31, 2015 Share Posted March 31, 2015 (edited) The injunction had no legal standing. I'm sure a brief contact by Universal legal council with the court was able to make the court understand how contract law works. Otherwise the judges may be sued individually (this is Thailand afterall) for any revenue losses resulting from the injunction. It's a sad commentary of how poorly the court operates in the legal environment. It would seem that when it comes to global defendents like Universal, the court is way out of its legal element. This is especially so where many Western-based companies are subjected to anti-bribery laws that apply to bribes paid to foreign parties. Edited March 31, 2015 by Srikcir 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
randyoon Posted March 31, 2015 Share Posted March 31, 2015 I could have waited.....still haven't watched #5 yet! You mean there was more than one??????? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlQaholic Posted March 31, 2015 Share Posted March 31, 2015 The injunction had no legal standing. I'm sure a brief contact by Universal legal council with the court was able to make the court understand how contract law works. Otherwise the judges may be sued individually (this is Thailand afterall) for any revenue losses resulting from the injunction. It's a sad commentary of how poorly the court operates in the legal environment. It would seem that when it comes to global defendents like Universal, the court is way out of its legal element. This is especially so where many Western-based companies are subjected to anti-bribery laws that apply to bribes paid to foreign parties. Yep the court finally got it......no bribes to be gotten here....just an endless row of individual counter-suits for loss of revenue...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CapeThai Posted March 31, 2015 Share Posted March 31, 2015 I could have waited.....still haven't watched #5 yet! You mean there was more than one??????? Someone has been sleeping while the world moved on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
webfact Posted March 31, 2015 Author Share Posted March 31, 2015 'Fast and Furious 7' on screen tomorrowThe Nation BANGKOK: -- The film "Fast and Furious 7" will be released tomorrow as scheduled after a civil court dismissed the injunction on it yesterday.The release of the Hollywood blockbuster was in the doldrums last Thursday when Sahamongkol Films filed a civil lawsuit against its pending release.Sahamongkol was suing actor Phanom "Tony Jaa" Yeerum for breaching his contract by appearing in the film as well as Universal Pictures and distributor United International Pictures.Yesterday, the three defendants' attorney appealed to the court to lift the ban as it was unfair to the fans. Sahamongkol was also blamed for holding the film hostage to a dispute between it and the actor.Jaa made no comments before flying to Los Angeles to attend the film's premier tonight.The legal row kicked off two years ago, when Jaa's 10-year contract was due. When the actor refused to sign a new contract, Sahamongkol claimed the contract was automatically renewed. Jaa did not respond to this claim.Apart from "Fast and Furious 7", Jaa has another two films in the pipeline - "Skin Trade", which is set to be released in Thailand on April 23, and Hong Kong film "SPL 2", set to be released in June.Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/national/Fast-and-Furious-7-on-screen-tomorrow-30257105.html-- The Nation 2015-03-31 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NanLaew Posted March 31, 2015 Share Posted March 31, 2015 The injunction had no legal standing. I'm sure a brief contact by Universal legal council with the court was able to make the court understand how contract law works. Otherwise the judges may be sued individually (this is Thailand afterall) for any revenue losses resulting from the injunction. It's a sad commentary of how poorly the court operates in the legal environment. It would seem that when it comes to global defendents like Universal, the court is way out of its legal element. This is especially so where many Western-based companies are subjected to anti-bribery laws that apply to bribes paid to foreign parties. Yep the court finally got it......no bribes to be gotten here....just an endless row of individual counter-suits for loss of revenue...... Nonsense! Look out the window. What country is this? There's ALWAYS a bung! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Docno Posted March 31, 2015 Share Posted March 31, 2015 Tony Jaa is locked into an exclusive contract until 2023??? That seems potentially exploitative, to say the least. Can imagine a poor but talented kid seeing this as his only option, and I presume he didn't have competent representation with him at the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeyrobot Posted March 31, 2015 Share Posted March 31, 2015 It was all a publicity stunt to increase attendance and it worked great, they would never ban it from the start and they received front line headlines for this little stunt ,with school holidays they should make a killing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cmiuc Posted March 31, 2015 Share Posted March 31, 2015 The series has to grow on you... and PW is gone(RIP) would make it a good film and to honor his memory. PW always played an actor with values. Its kewl Jaa got to introduce himself into american movies now...maybe his career can grow instead of bottoming out as it had been with this Thai mongrel company. (the last movie that ever seem to be popular was in 2006 or something, "tom yum kung"? ever since never heard of any successful hit he had. So it is this movie companies fault for not producing quality hits for the man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arthurwait Posted March 31, 2015 Share Posted March 31, 2015 It was all a publicity stunt to increase attendance and it worked great, they would never ban it from the start and they received front line headlines for this little stunt ,with school holidays they should make a killing. Yeah like they need to do that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anthony5 Posted March 31, 2015 Share Posted March 31, 2015 The legal row kicked off two years ago, when Jaa's 10-year contract was due. When the actor refused to sign a new contract, Sahamongkol claimed the contract was automatically renewed. Haha, here we go, Thai company thinks once again that they can just make up new rules as they go. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowgard Posted March 31, 2015 Share Posted March 31, 2015 I wait that Hollywood strike back and don't make films in Thailand anymore for the next 10-20 years. Thailand got so much tourist just about the Hollywood films. So they can loose much more as they want. And if Hollywood ban Sahamongkol Film International from they contract cinemas (I am sure they have this power) the international part of Sahamongkol Film International will maybe work in Sibiria. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thaiguzzi Posted March 31, 2015 Share Posted March 31, 2015 Ongbak, Ongbak 2 and 3 are damn good movies. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lildragon Posted March 31, 2015 Share Posted March 31, 2015 FF series aren't works of art by any means but they are good popcorn flicks. Switch your brain off and enjoy. Good for Tony too. His career haa been stagnating for 7 years or so now.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluespunk Posted March 31, 2015 Share Posted March 31, 2015 "The series, with its focus on fast cars, tough guys, sexy starlets and exotic locales, is one of Hollywood's most successful global franchises.' But not for it's focus on acting or story lines. Or at least variation in story lines/plot. The acting.............well, it is what it is. Most movies are just to watch and be entertained. Personally I like the F&F and most action, SyFy and some romantic chick movies. People should not think soo much about movies and just enjoy, like living in Thailand. Enjoy and accept the parts you don't like. You will be a lot happier and relaxed this way. Might even avoid an heart-attack or such. I do enjoy some mind pop corn movies, love sci fi, but repeating basically the same movie 7 times.... I don't stress about it, I just think it's lazy, unimaginative and ultimately pointless. It does one no harm to be challenged and made to think, f and f does neither Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluespunk Posted March 31, 2015 Share Posted March 31, 2015 (edited) "The legal row kicked off two years ago, when Jaa's 10-year contract was due. When the actor refused to sign a new contract, Sahamongkol claimed the contract was automatically renewed. Jaa did not respond to this claim." So in effect there was no contract to breach? Still nice publicity for f and f. Edited March 31, 2015 by Bluespunk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
indieke Posted March 31, 2015 Share Posted March 31, 2015 It is easy to critic the movies. I thought the last two were a bit over the top, but they remain very entertaining, and well done. James Bond is not the most realistic franchise either, ha? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluespunk Posted March 31, 2015 Share Posted March 31, 2015 It is easy to critic the movies. I thought the last two were a bit over the top, but they remain very entertaining, and well done. James Bond is not the most realistic franchise either, ha? Don't watch them either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fareastguy Posted March 31, 2015 Share Posted March 31, 2015 "The Civil Court of Thailand in Bangkok ruled that "the temporary banning order would affect other actors -- therefore the court has cancelled the temporary banning", he said." so nothing to do with the social media ridicule, then....... Or the loss of revenue at cinemas nationwide?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cookee68 Posted March 31, 2015 Share Posted March 31, 2015 "The Civil Court of Thailand in Bangkok ruled that "the temporary banning order would affect other actors -- therefore the court has cancelled the temporary banning", he said." so nothing to do with the social media ridicule, then....... how would it affect other actors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Papayabokbok Posted March 31, 2015 Share Posted March 31, 2015 You could say the Ban was "GONE IN SIXTY SECONDS!" 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theguyfromanotherforum Posted April 1, 2015 Share Posted April 1, 2015 I just saw it. Very disappointed. It looked like a direct sequel to Tokyo Drift and all I got was a bunch of superhero clowns. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now