Feud (Ryan Murphy anthology series on FX)

JP Liz V1

Season 1 of Feud will chronicle Joan Crawford (Jessica Lange) and Bette Davis’ (Susan Sarandon) combative collaboration on the big-screen classic What Ever Happened to Baby Jane?.

The cast also includes Sarah Paulson (as Geraldine Page), Catherine Zeta-Jones (as Olivia de Havilland), Stanley Tucci (as Jack L. Warner), Judy Davis (as Hedda Hopper), Alfred Molina (as Robert Aldrich), Kathy Bates (Joan Blondell) and Dominic Burgess (as Victor Buono).

Feud is slated to launch in 2017

http://tvline.com/2016/11/03/kathy-bates-feud-fx-joan-blondell-cast/

JP Liz V1

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nZpANeIWWXI

FEUD: Bette and Joan debuts Sunday, March 5 at 10/9c on FX

http://tvline.com/2017/02/14/feud-bette-and-joan-trailer-video-jessica-lange-susan-sarandon-fx/

BettePorter

Salivating for this! Can't wait! Hope it's good. Good calibre of cast so here's hoping!!

Capajoma

Anyone seen this?

Just finished it and couldn't recommend it enough. Great performances all round, with this and the OJ miniseries, Ryan Murphy is beginning to change my opinion on him.

bonzodog2

Yes, watched e8 a couple of days back. Enjoyed. According to IMDB, there's 10 episodes in 2018. Can't imagine what could be in them !

Capajoma

Season 2 is about Prince Charles and Princess Diana apparently.

The Black Oil

Good enough show, if not really reaching the heights of others. Can't really fault the acting or production values. Very sad towards the end.

Agent Coulson

I love that aged 101 Olivia de Havilland is suing the sh1t out of Murphy and FX for their depiction of her.



That's season 3 sorted now

JP Liz V1

It starts on BBC 2 on Saturday December 16th at 9pm with a double-bill

Agent Coulson

Agent Coulson wrote: »

I love that aged 101 Olivia de Havilland is suing the sh1t out of Murphy and FX for their depiction of her.



That's season 3 sorted now

The trial is due to start today in the States.

Update from the Lady herself.

dame_olivia_de_havillandDame de Havilland’s legal counsel has provided an update on the status of the pending suit against FX Networks & Ryan Murphy productions- “After defeating the motion to dismiss under the anti-SLAPP statute, FX exercised its right to an immediate appeal. The appeal stays all proceedings in the trial court. The FX brief is due to be filed on December 4th, and our brief is due two weeks later. The Court of Appeal granted our motion for expedited treatment, and we hope to get a decision by the end of January, and get back on for trial as soon as possible.” #OliviadeHavilland

https://www.instagram.com/p/BbvQ7GsgyQI/?taken-by=dame_olivia_de_havilland

branie2

Anyone here see this TV miniseries about the rivalry between Joan Crawford and Bette Davis during and after the making of Whatever Happened to Baby Jane? I have to say that it was very good.

The Black Oil

Threads merged.

branie2

Sorry about that, I didn't know there was a thread about this alreadly

Agent Coulson

Olivia de Havilland’s Lawyer Says ‘Feud’ Lawsuit Is “Destined For A Higher Court”, Hints At Judge Bias

Olivia de Havilland’s Feud lawsuit that was thrown out by an appeals court today might not be over. The Oscar-winning actress’ lawyer said tonight that the case “appears to be destined for a higher court,” noting that it was “an entirely pro-industry decision” and that one of the appellate judges once was a partner in the firm that represented FX Networks in the case.

“We will be preparing the appropriate petition for such review,” Smith added. The next level of appeal would be the California Supreme Court.

In a statement released to the media (read it below), attorney Suzelle Smith cited the official bography of Justice Anne Egerton, who was appointed to the 2nd District Court of Appeal in November by California Gov. Jerry Brown. It says the jurist formerly was an SVP at NBC from 1990-2000 and before that a partner at Munger, Tolles and Olson LLP from 1987-90, where she was an associate from 1983-86.

“Miss de Havilland, her many fans all over the world, and actors in similar situations are rightly disappointed in this Opinion,” Smith says in her statement. “The Opinion does not properly balance the First Amendment with other important rights. This case appears to be destined for a higher court, and we will be preparing the appropriate petition for such review.” Read her full statement below.

Here is Smith’s full statement, via her assistant at Howarth & Smith in Los Angeles; note the last two paragraphs:

Four business days after the hearing on FX’s appeal of the trial Court’s ruling that Olivia de Havilland could proceed to a jury on her case against FX for the unauthorized and false portrayal of her in Feud, Justice Anne Egerton of the Court of Appeal published a 36-page opinion entirely in favor of FX and the industry, reversing the trial Judge, the Honorable Holly Kendig.

The Opinion holds that Miss de Havilland is not entitled to a trial on her claims because, according to Justice Egerton, the “portrayal of de Havilland in Feud is not highly offensive to a reasonable person as a matter of law,” and that had Feud made the reference to Fontaine as “my dragon lady sister” rather than bitch, the “effect on the mind of the reader” would not have been appreciably different.

The Court of Appeal adopting the FX characterization, rather than Miss de Havilland’s view of her character using profanity and disclosing confidential information about friends, states that the “de Havilland character is portrayed as beautiful, glamorous, self-assured, and considerably ahead of her time in her views on the importance of equality and respect for women in Hollywood.”

The Court of Appeals holds for the first time that “fiction is by definition untrue…. Put more starkly, it is false. Publishing a fictitious work about a real person cannot mean the author, by virtue of writing fiction, has acted with actual malice.” The Court of Appeal further dismissed Miss de Havilland’s claims based on the admitted unconsented and uncompensated use of her name and identity, “se of a person’s name and likeness to advertise a novel, play, or motion picture concerning that individual is not actionable as an infringement of the right of publicity.”

The Opinion is breathtaking in its failure to follow established precedent from both the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court. It ignores the rule of law that the Justices cannot weigh the evidence and must credit all plaintiff’s evidence,” said Suzelle Smith, counsel for Miss de Havilland. Smith continued, “The Court of Appeal, unlike the trial Court, has taken on itself the role of both Judge and jury, denying Miss de Havilland her Constitutional rights to have a jury decide her claims to protect the property rights in her name or to defend her reputation against knowing falsehoods.

Smith also stated, “This is an entirely pro-industry decision, and was clearly written before the hearing less than a week ago.” She notes that the official biography of Justice Egerton, a recent appointee to the Court of Appeal, states that the Justice was previously the West Coast General Counsel for the National Broadcasting Company (NBC) and before that was a partner at Munger Tolles & Olsen, the firm representing FX in this case.

Smith concluded, “Miss de Havilland, her many fans all over the world, and actors in similar situations are rightly disappointed in this Opinion. The Opinion does not properly balance the First Amendment with other important rights. This case appears to be destined for a higher court, and we will be preparing the appropriate petition for such review.”

http://deadline.com/2018/03/feud-lawsuit-olivia-de-havilland-lawyer-appeal-1202353813/

The Black Oil

Capajoma wrote: »

Season 2 is about Prince Charles and Princess Diana apparently.

We won't be seeing that any time soon.

https://eu.usatoday.com/story/life/tv/2018/08/03/ryan-murphy-charles-diana-feud-off-katrina-acs-scripts-fx-john-landgraf-american-horror-story/900669002/

Agent Coulson

Aged 102 and Olivia de Havilland keeps going..

Olivia de Havilland Vows To “Persevere” In Getting ‘Feud’ Feud Before SCOTUS

Time might not be a luxury for Olivia de Havilland in the battle with FX over her depiction in Ryan Murphy’s Feud, but the 102-year old Oscar winner is determined to be heard by the Supreme Court.

“We shall continue to persevere in this important case,” the Gone with the Wind actress said today from her Paris home as her attorneys filed an answer to FX’s opposition to de Havilland’s Petition for review to Chief Justice John Roberts and the other eight justices. FX Networks filed a writ of certiorari this month asking SCOTUS not to hear de Havilland’s case, which was first launched in June 2017 and most recently was rejected by California’s high court in July after it had been dismissed by an appellate court a few months beforehand.

On October 5, de Havilland filed her petition with the Supreme Court citing that her “fight is itself important to the principle of honesty, so much in need today in the face of deliberate public confusion for selfish agendas.”

Supremecourt.gov

“The First Amendment is at the heart of this controversy,” de Havilland’s main lawyer Suzelle Smith said in a statement Monday. “He who lives by the sword, dies by the sword,” the Horwarth & Smith lawyer added. “FX is trying to avoid the Supreme Court upholding Miss de Havilland’s First Amendment rights to prevent attribution of false beliefs to her in its docudrama,” Smith asserted. “The California Court of Appeal focused exclusively on protecting industry interests, and ignored these rights entirely. The Supreme Court should hear this case.”


The two-time Academy Award winner has said for over a year that FX, Murphy and Fox 21 TV never obtained nor even sought her permission to depict her or use her name in Feud: Bette & Joan, their eight-episode series about Joan Crawford and Bette Davis that aired in 2017. Among the prickly personal matters involved, de Havilland’s lawsuit specifically targeted the alleged backstage drama involving her depicted in Feud‘s “And the Winner Is …” episode about the 1963 Oscars and language that the Catherine ZetaiJones depiction of her uses.

“The state court’s position that the knowingly or recklessly false words placed into the mouth of the real, living Miss de Havilland are not defamatory and do not violate her right of publicity ignores the First Amendment right of the individual, as recently expressed by this Court, to prevent attribution of beliefs to a person which he or she does not hold,” today’s filing by Team de Havilland states (read it here). “A person may not be compelled to speak against their views.”

The high court is expected to consider the petition on or around January 4 next year.

FX Networks said it had no statement on the latest filing to SCOTUS by de Havilland.

https://deadline.com/2018/11/olivia-de-havilland-supreme-court-feud-case-petition-plea-1202509219/