Richard Marks — Direct/Cross/Redirect
192 linesMS. LECAROZ: Plaintiff calls Richard Marks, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Okay Mr Marks Sir just a reminder that you're — hold on. Just give us a second Sir just a reminder you're still under oath okay sir RICHARD MARKS having been previously sworn was examined and testified as follows Allright. Good morning, sir. Allright. Yes, ma'am
MS. LECAROZ: Thank you, Your Honor.
MS. LECAROZ: Welcome back, Mr. Marks. You've testified in this case previously, but would you just briefly remind the jury who you are? I'm Richard Marks, and I'm a full-time entertainment transactional attorney. I make deals every day for productions and for individuals. I'm in the trenches, negotiating and then making sure the contracts reflect the deals. And I'm very much distinguished from the other side's expert, who is not an attorney, who's not making deals, is not in that day-to-day process.
MS. LECAROZ: And are you familiar with the testimony of Kathryn Arnold in this matter?
RICHARD MARKS: Yes.
MS. LECAROZ: Have you been asked to analyze that testimony and provide opinions in response?
RICHARD MARKS: Yes.
MS. LECAROZ: And generally what are those opinions?
RICHARD MARKS: Well, my opinions are that she's very slick and smooth, but she's not an expert in dealmaking. Her assessment of damages is built on nothing, and it's wildly speculative.
MS. LECAROZ: Are you familiar with Ms. Arnold's opinion that it's customary for an actor to renegotiate the fee for a subsequent picture option in a multi-picture contract when a film is successful?
RICHARD MARKS: Yes, I heard that opinion.
MS. LECAROZ: And are you also familiar with her testimony that under those circumstances, an actor will renegotiate a 50 to 100 percent increase in their salary for the next option of film? Yes, I heard her say that. Do you agree with those opinions? Absolutely not. Why not, sir? Well, what we're dealing with in this case is a test option agreement, and that's an agreement, it's a multi-picture agreement, and it's the nightmare for people like me.
MS. LECAROZ: You -- the test is going to take place, let's say, for ten actors the next morning at nine, and you have to fully negotiate a contract that might cover four movies and have it signed before they're allowed to test so that if they're chosen for the part, we have the full contract. There's no renegotiation. So you've got a contract for a multi-picture deal -- it's usually a franchise -- and you negotiate the first movie.
MS. LECAROZ: And normally, if they get the part, they're the chosen one, their "the star is born" moment, if you will, they get the part, normally their salary is inflated from their normal salary because now they're going to play a character that could go on for four movies. In this case, Ms. Heard's first salary when she got the part was $450,000. If Warner Brothers and DC Comics decided to make a next movie, they could recast her. They had no obligation; all they had was an option. But if they did cast her, up front, that they had agreed to more than double her salary, like, two and a quarter times, to get to the million dollars. These are large bumps, if you will. If an actor is on a series, say, they go - and they have five options.
MS. LECAROZ: They go up in increments of 5 percent, 10 percent, 20 percent, not these multiples that you see in a test option agreement, and that's one of the reasons that they aren't renegotiated normally. They are in some instances, but not normally.
MS. LECAROZ: What's the significance of a "test" part in a test option agreement? The test significance is that an established actor usually wouldn't test; they'd be offered the role. Ms. Heard was in a group of actors that needed to be tested to see if the studio wanted to hire them, and then if they hired them, they would be locked up for -- potentially for movies at very lucrative increases because after Aquaman I, she gets to a million dollars. Aquaman 2, she gets to $2 million, and Aquaman 4 - 3, excuse me, you get to $4 million. These are unheard of bumps if you're going on a normal career and trying to increase your salary by increments.
MS. LECAROZ: In your experience, what is customary for negotiation of multi-picture deals?
RICHARD MARKS: Well, I think what happened in this case was customary for negotiation of multi-picture deals. And by that I mean that you assume success. The reason you go from the first Justice League movie, where Ms. Heard played Mera the first time, the reason you more than double her salary is you assume success. So you've already built in the bonus that Ms. Arnold was referring to, a renegotiation, if you will, for the third movie. Instead of doubling her salary, Ms. Arnold said it would only be fair to quadruple her salary. And that's just not the way these idiosyncratic contracts work. They're a very small portion of the contracts we deal with.
MS. LECAROZ: Are you familiar with Ms. Arnold's opinion that Ms. Heard's salary for Aquaman 2 could have been renegotiated to around $4 million?
RICHARD MARKS: I am.
MS. LECAROZ: Do you agree with that opinion?
RICHARD MARKS: No.
MS. LECAROZ: Why not?
RICHARD MARKS: Well, as I've said, that would now be after a healthy first payday. It's more than doubled, and now it would be quadrupled. That's not the way it happens. Walter Hamada, who is the president of that part of the studio, said it 18-doesn't happen. They're not going to do it. “Ms. Arnold, for some substance, says "Well, Jason Momoa got to do it," but she doesn't give us any of the details. We know that Jason Momoa was in a movie before the Justice League. re CONAN BW N Momoa was in a movie before the Justice League. He played Aquaman in a movie not opposite — not with Mera in that movie. So he had a history. Before the first movie with Amber Heard, he played Aquaman. We don't know what the contract, the state of it, was when you got the Aquaman 2. And she says, unsupported, that he renegotiated; we're not sure what he renegotiated to. But I can say that at the end of the option period, when you've only got one option left and you want that star in more movies, you may renegotiate, but it's not a gratuity.
RICHARD MARKS: It's "We'll give you more for the last option if you'll give us three more options." It's a give-and-take. And, unfortunately, Ms. Arnold didn't give us any of that background or those building blocks. And then I think yesterday she said, "And the other actors renegotiated." And, again, we don't know their salary history. We don't know their contracts. We don't know anything except she's asking you just to believe her as what I refer to as a "professional expert." Q: Are you aware that Ms. Arnold's opined that but for the alleged defamatory statements by Mr. Waldman, Ms. Heard would have earned 45 million in the last 18 months and then the next three to five years?
RICHARD MARKS: Yes, I am. QI would like to address some of the components of that one by one with you, Mr. Marks. Are you familiar with her testimony that Ms. Heard would continue to make films for approximately $4 million each following Aquaman 2?
RICHARD MARKS: Yes.
MS. LECAROZ: Do you agree with that testimony?
RICHARD MARKS: No.
MS. LECAROZ: > Why not?
RICHARD MARKS: Well again in Aquaman 2 Amber Heard has already had this huge increase She worked on Aquaman 2 for 2 million What Ms Arnold is saying is Oh she should have worked on it for 4 million which I disagree with and I don't think there is reasons to renegotiate They weren't here in this case So the 4 million I have a disagreement with But even if it was at million or if it was at 2 million the four or five movies that Ms Heard might get might be independent movies They might be stand alone studio movies Might be passion projects Every actor has a quiver full of quotes and their highest quote is for the superhero fantasy journey Their lowest quote might be for the independent passion project where they'll defer their salary and almost take nothing to work just SAG minimum And to assume that she'd get four or five more movies at this her last fantasy quote would be to assume that those are also those type of movies playing another character And Ms Arnold says that Ms Heard's breakout moment her star is born moment is Christmas 2018 If that's true and I don't think it's true those moments don't normally happen to supporting cast But if it's true as a dealmaker you would expect if you represented producers production companies to flock in and take advantage of this hot star and to sign them up and we have from Christmas 2018 to spring '20 where there is none of this activity The star is born phenomenon didn't happen Ms Heard starred in one series of eight episodes and she earned a healthy fee 200000 an episode But that's five times less than the million Ms Arnold is tossing out supposedly based on Jason Momoa's approach She doesn't prove it or give us facts and Jason Momoa is not a comparable actor He's been in a series where they shot 78 episodes, 44 episodes, 21 episodes. He played Conan the Barbarian. He was in Game of Thrones. It's not a comparable --
MR. NADELHAFT: Objection. Nonresponsive.
THE COURT: Allright. Sustain the objection. Next question.
MS. LECAROZ: Mr Marks we'll get to some of those issues in a moment But I want to take you back for a second I believe you testified a few minutes ago that your understanding is that the last option in a multi picture deal might be renegotiated under some circumstances Do you have an understanding of whether Aquaman 2 was the last option in Ms Heard's contract with Warner Brothers
RICHARD MARKS: Oh, no, no. Aquaman 2 has not even been released, and Warner Brothers has a fourth option for Aquaman 3 or another movie where Mera appears, that character, and have agreed to double the salary again. So it's in success, and that assumes that they recast and that they make the movie.
MS. LECAROZ: Are you aware of Ms. Arnold's testimony that Ms. Heard would have made several million dollars on endorsement deals such as the one she had with L'Or�al? I'm aware of that testimony. Do you agree with that opinion? No. Why not? Again, this is a business of personalities. We didn't -- after the breakout moment that Ms. Arnold talked about, Christmas 2018, we didn't see endorsement deals flocking to Ms. Heard during that 16-month period before Adam Waldman made a few statements in the London Daily Mail, I believe it was. We didn't see those endorsements coming to her. We didn't -- what Ms. Arnold shows you is these noncomparable actors, they have endorsement deals.
MS. LECAROZ: But she doesn't show you, when she describes the breakout moment, and why she's comparing Amber Heard to these what I call uncomparable actors, but she's making the comparison. She's saying, "Well, they had all these deals. Why wouldn't she?" but for the statements that happened 16 months later. And I guess my primary question is what happened in the 16 months, even if you believe three statements in the Daily Mail are the stake through the heart of this "star is born" moment. Do you have an opinion about Ms. Arnold's testimony that Ms. Heard would have made $1 million an episode in a couple of streaming series following her "a star is born" moment?
RICHARD MARKS: Yes, I heard it. J have an opinion.
MS. LECAROZ: What's your opinion?
RICHARD MARKS: Well, after Aquaman 1, this is a major coup, Amber Heard got that role, she tested for it. She could have been the other 19 actresses or ten or whoever else tested and didn't get it. She got the role. And she got her salary doubled for Aquaman 1 for a million dollars. Now, Ms. Arnold wants you to believe that that million dollars would translate into she'd get that for each episode of the series. We know what she got for a series. She got a series in that period after Christmas 2018, before spring of 2020. She got a series. It was eight episodes, and it was $200,000 an episode. And Ms.
RICHARD MARKS: Arnold is, from somewhere, in a glib way, saying she'd get a couple series at a million each. And I can tell you as someone in the to May 24, 2022 trenches, rarely, rarely does an actor get 2 million dollars for a series episode. And, again, in those 16 months, there were no offers for series at a million dollarS an episode. In fact, her only series is the 200,000. And if you look at her r�sum�, the series that Ms. Heard were in, I think the longest one ran eight episodes. Jason Momoa, if you were to believe Ms.
RICHARD MARKS: Arnold and somehow Jason Momoa's agent broke their confidentiality and agreement and he had a series at a million dollars an episode, if you would believe that, Jason Momoa has had a series with 78 episodes, with 44 episodes, with 21 episodes, with 18 episodes, with 21 episodes. He was in -- again, there's not a comparableness there.
MS. LECAROZ: We spoke a few minutes ago about the test option agreement. What's the significance of the option part of that agreement?
RICHARD MARKS: The option part of the agreement gives the employer, the studio, the option. They don't have to do anything, They have an option to Inn eR WN have to do anything. They have an option to either employ you, at a very healthy salary, to play this role or not. They can recast the superhero role. You just have to think of how many actors played Batman or Superman. They can do what they want. And, indeed, since there's no contract, they only have a choice to exercise their option or not. They might say, "We're not exercising unless you reduce your compensation." Who knows what the negotiation would be? But it's not a contract until the studio exercises the option, and they don't have to.
MS. LECAROZ: What's the alternative to an option agreement?
RICHARD MARKS: Well, the alternative, as most agreements in Hollywood, you're hired to play the role. Or once you exercise the option, then it becomes, for that picture, an agreement like others in Hollywood: You are now hired to play that role. So most contracts are guaranteed; you're hired to play the role. In an option agreement, once they exercise the option, for that movie it becomes a guaranteed contract.
MS. LECAROZ: Are you aware that Ms. Arnold testified that Ms. Heard was released from her Aquaman 2 contract and then subsequently rehired?
RICHARD MARKS: Heard that testimony.
MS. LECAROZ: Is that consistent with your experience of the film industry in connection with these multi-option contracts?
RICHARD MARKS: No.
RICHARD MARKS: Again, studios don't do things they don't have to do, As we heard Mr. Hamada, the president of the studio, say, you either exercise your option or you don't. They exercised their option. He denied releasing and then rehiring, and in my experience in almost five decades in the business doing this type of work, not talking about it, not consulting, I mean, I have -I heard Ms. Arnold say she'd been an expert a hundred times. I'ma transactional lawyer. I do this occasionally. Basically, you know, it's not this occasionally. Basically, you know, it's not a contract until they option it and they pick up their option. And at that point, it's a guaranteed contract, and then different rules apply to if.
MS. LECAROZ: In your experience in the industry, do studios typically comment on those types of actions that they're taking with respect to options?
RICHARD MARKS: No. Just like Mr. Hamada said, they don't need to comment on it. They either exercise the option or they don't. In Hollywood, silence is the default. You play no card before its time. And the cards there were exercise the option or not. And I was surprised by Mr. Hamada under oath basically saying that there was this discussion of chemistry. That —
MR. NADELHAFT: Objection, Your Honor. Hearsay.
MS. LECAROZ: I think it was -- it was an in-court statement this morning, I believe, Your Honor. to May 24, 2022
THE COURT: That's fine.
MR. NADELHAFT: It's the same hearsay that you were -- it's hearsay like yesterday. I mean, it's hearsay.
THE COURT: I'll overrule the objection. Go ahead.
RICHARD MARKS: I didn't hear.
THE COURT: Go ahead, sir.
MS. LECAROZ: Overruled. You can continue, Mr. Marks.
RICHARD MARKS: Oh. I'm surprised to hear Mr. Hamada say that they talked about chemistry. That would normally be behind closed doors because you can't help your relationship with the actor. You're either going to exercise or not, and that was quite a bit of candor from someone at his level. And so, therefore, I take it at face value. I think he felt that he was under oath, and he was telling the truth. But when you —
MR. NADELHAFT: Objection, Your Honor.
THE COURT: I'll sustain the objection. OQ Were there circumstances where a studio woman nut WN
MS. LECAROZ: Were there circumstances where a studio would be more likely to say something about not using an actor again in a franchise?
RICHARD MARKS: Yes.
MS. LECAROZ: What are those circumstances?
RICHARD MARKS: Once they have exercised the option, once the contract is guaranteed, the studio still has the right to pay the actor but not play them, pay or play them. And that is a rare condition because you've hired the actor. You've got to pay them, but you say, "Go home. We're recasting." In that situation, after you've exercised the option and the contract is guaranteed, if you pay off the actor, that's normally commented on. That becomes a bit of information because it's not normal.
MS. LECAROZ: Is that circumstance different from Ms. Heard's contract with Warner Brothers for the Aquaman movies?
RICHARD MARKS: Oh, yeah. Yeah. Ms. Heard's contract, again, it was just an option: Either we exercise it or we don't. And if we exercise it, she's in the film. If we don't, she's not. Until we exercise it, we have our right to recast or not make the movie, and even after we exercise it, we'd still have a right to recast and not make the movie. We'd just have to pay her her salary.
MS. LECAROZ: Do you understand that Ms. Arnold compares Ms. Heard's career trajectory with that of other actors including Jason Momoa, Gal Gadot, Zendaya, Ana de Armas, and Chris Pine?
RICHARD MARKS: I heard that.
MS. LECAROZ: And what's your opinion of those actors as comparables for Ms. Heard? Even Ms. Heard's agent, Jessica Kay, said that four of those actors weren't comparable.
MR. NADELHAFT: Objection, Your Honor. Hearsay.
MS. LECAROZ: I believe -- same response, Your Honor, that it was in testimony that was played in court earlier this week.
MR. NADELHAFT: That's not what she testified to. I mean, he's characterizing testimony that was from days ago, and I don't even think she testified to that, Your Honor.think she testified to that, Your Honor.
THE COURT: You can cross-examine, Overruled. You may continue, Mr. Marks.
RICHARD MARKS: Again, they are not comparable. Jason Momoa was Aquaman. Chris Pine was Captain Kirk, Gal Gadot was Wonder Woman, Zendaya has been working on Destiny's Child since she was 13; she's in all the Spiderman movies. She goes by one name. Ana de Armas, you know, when she was in a movie that they call, you know, her breakout, it was as a nude poster. She's been in an ensemble piece, Knives Out. These are not comparables. Now, Ms.
RICHARD MARKS: Arnold stuck to Jason Momoa, who is the most noncomparable, because of his history and his career, but she didn't give us the advantage of telling us what his contracts were, what he renegotiated to, what he earned. She didn't give us any of those building blocks. She just created -- she set him up as a comparable and then said what Ms. Heard should earn, but she never gave us the salary of Jason Momoa or the other comparables, and if she built, like, this house of cards on nothing, you know. She showed us the -- with her words the beautiful clothing that the emperor was wearing, but we could see, if you know the business--
MR. NADELHAFT: Objection, Your Honor. Beyond the scope of the question.
THE COURT: Allright. I'll sustain the objection. Next question.
MS. LECAROZ: Okay. a Q_ You were just speaking about Mr. Momoa as a comparable. Are you-aware that Ms. Arnold compares Ms. Heard to Mr. Momoa as an actor with equivalent franchise experience who was able to renegotiate his salary for significant increases in bonus?
RICHARD MARKS: Yes.
MS. LECAROZ: What's your response to that opinion?
RICHARD MARKS: Again, he didn't have comparable franchise experience to Ms. Heard. He was Conan the Barbarian. He played Aquaman in a movie that Amber Heard was not in. He played Aquaman, not a supporting character like Mera. It's just not comparable, and you can say the words, but I saw nothing from Ms. Arnold to back it up, something to build on, which if she's a negotiator in the trenches, the studio negotiator would say, "Okay. So show us. You know, where's the comps? Let's talk numbers because eventually that's where we have to get to, not just because you say it's so. We just don't believe you; you've got to show us.
MS. LECAROZ: In your experience in the industry, what factors influence the negotiation of the terms of a film agreement with an actor? If the film is a million-dollar movie and everybody's deferring their salaries, that's one thing. If it's a superhero movie, that's another. But for dealmakers and negotiators, the best predictor of what the deal should be is past earnings, precedent, comps. You also look at the budget of the movie, what it can bear, because if Jason Momoa's comp is $10 million but the budget's 10 million, obviously he has another price for that movie. But the best predictor of future earnings is past earnings. And I didn't see any - Ms. Arnold talked about past earnings at all, except the earnings in this rarified superhero four-picture deal where instead of incremental increases, which you normally see; it was multiples, increases. And they weren't even on a series. The big renegotiation is - was when the network has no more options. Until then the actors on a series get 5, 10, 50 small percentage raises. They don't get multiples.
MS. LECAROZ: They get the multiples if it's a success and the studio wants to continue making the series and they want to keep these characters, that's when the renegotiation happens. Here, even if we believe Ms. Arnold, after Aquaman 2, there were still an option waiting at a big price, you know, double the previous payday.
MS. LECAROZ: What's the significance of the timing of the Waldman statements to the opportunities Ms. Arnold claims Ms. Heard lost? Ms. Arnold claims Ms. Heard lost?
RICHARD MARKS: The argument as I understand it is that Ms. Arnold says that Ms. Heard lost all these opportunities because of — those losses were caused by Adam Waldman's statements 16 months later. So I think the timing —
MR. NADELHAFT: Your Honor, may we approach?
THE COURT: Sure.
MR. NADELHAFT: I don't believe I've seen anywhere in the designation that he would comment on what the Waldman statements have to do with the renegotiation.
THE COURT: Okay.
MS. LECAROZ: I mean, I don't think he is responding to Ms. Arnold, and I'm going to discuss this with him. on NAM AR WH NR wo
MR. NADELHAFT: And it's in the rebuttal report.
THE COURT: That's in the rebuttal report, so you can't go into the Waldman statements because it's not in the rebuttal 24, 2022 (6800 to 6803) report.
MS. LECAROZ: Okay. I think's just talking about the timing, the period of time after the Waldman statements and the impact on her analysis.
MR. NADELHAFT: He can't go into that.
THE COURT: So I'll sustain the objection.
MS. LECAROZ: Okay. Thank you, Your Honor.
MS. LECAROZ: Mr. Marks, what's your overall assessment of Ms. Arnold's opinions in this case?
RICHARD MARKS: My overall assessment of her opinions is that they're not worth the paper they're not written on. She knows something about our business, but not about negotiating deals. She may have gotten someone at the Endeavor office to breach confidentiality, but she —
MR. NADELHAFT: Objection. Beyond the scope.
THE COURT: Excuse me. There's an objection. You have to stop talking, Mr. Marks. Thank you. Beyond the scope.
MS. LECAROZ: Mr. Marks, can you just limit your testimony to your opinion about Ms. Arnold's opinions, please?
RICHARD MARKS: Okay. My opinion, as someone who's made deals, as a dealmaker for almost 50 years, is that she calls herself an expert, but she's not. She doesn't have the background. She doesn't have the day-to-day knowledge, and her testimony that I heard did not back up her bottom line. If you want to get those figures, you have to show why they're deserved. And, again, she was constructing a Jenga without the bottom pieces. It does not hold up under scrutiny by someone who makes deals.
MS. LECAROZ: No further questions.
THE COURT: Allright. Cross-examination.
MR. NADELHAFT: Good morning, Mr. Marks.
RICHARD MARKS: Good morning.
MR. NADELHAFT: So you agree that studios use comps to negotiate deals, correct, with actors?
RICHARD MARKS: Sometimes they do.
MR. NADELHAFT: And you have an issue with the comps that Ms. Arnold used, correct, as you testified? I have an issue with the comps that she says she used that she didn't disclose. The comps being the actors that you just talked about. She did disclose -- I mean, she disclosed the actors, She disclosed the actors and budget figures from their movies. She never disclosed their salaries and salary history as comps.
MR. NADELHAFT: You're not offering a different set of comparators that should be used, correct?
RICHARD MARKS: I'm saying if you were going to —
MR. NADELHAFT: That's not my question. Are you QQ. That's not my question. Are you offering a different set of comparators than what Ms. Arnold used?
RICHARD MARKS: I'I'm not here offering comparators. I'm saying what she offered —
MR. NADELHAFT: That was my question. You're not offering comparators, correct?
RICHARD MARKS: No. I would say that Ms. Heard's —
MR. NADELHAFT: That was my question.
RICHARD MARKS: —comparisons are —
MR. NADELHAFT: That was my question.
MR. NADELHAFT: Motion to strike after the "no."
THE COURT: Allright. We'll strike after that. Just answer the questions, Mr. Marks, thank you.
MR. NADELHAFT: = You're a dealmaker, correct?
RICHARD MARKS: Yes.
MR. NADELHAFT: What actors have you negotiated for in superhero movies? Well, recently, I've acted - I've negotiated for Chris Pratt in a superhero series for Amazon. I've negotiated a deal for Michael Douglas, not in a superhero movie, but a historical movie. I've negotiated recently a deal for Paul Rudd and Will Ferrell on an Apple series. Billy Crudup on an Apple series. These are recent talent deals.
MR. NADELHAFT: What actors have you negotiated for in a superhero movie?
RICHARD MARKS: As {sit here now, I can't remember a superhero movie that I've negotiated. I've certainly negotiated, over my career, franchise movies and fantasy movies.
MR. NADELHAFT: Your Honor, that --
MR. NADELHAFT: So it's no, you haven't negotiated with any -- for any actors for superhero movies, correct? <A Could you define, like, I don't know, Jungle Book isn't a superhero movie; it's more of a fantasy.
MR. NADELHAFT: Okay. So no, correct? Your answer's no?
RICHARD MARKS: Allright. So as I sit here, I can't think of a Marvel-type superhero movie that I've think of a Marvel-type superhero movie that I've negotiated, although I know there's one or two in there.
MR. NADELHAFT: Now, you testified, and you agree, that Mr. Momoa negotiated his multi-picture contract for Aquaman 2, correct?
RICHARD MARKS: Heard Mr. Hamada say there was a renegotiation, but no facts were pro-offered, such as he didn't have an option. His options were out. What he was earning and what he renegotiated to, and he is Aquaman. So, yes, I did hear there was a renegotiation.
MR. NADELHAFT: And you understand that his salary went from 3 to 4 million to $15 million?
RICHARD MARKS: If you tell me that. I haven't seen his contract, and I haven't heard any testimony under oath that that's where the league was.
MR. NADELHAFT: Now, Ms. Heard's contract --
RICHARD MARKS: Did he get more options when he made that deal? Did they get more options?
MR. NADELHAFT: Ms. Heard's option was a talent option contract, correct?
RICHARD MARKS: Yes.
MR. NADELHAFT: And you agree that for the -- if there's an Aquaman 3, Ms. Heard would have an option to receive $4 million, correct, for the movie?
RICHARD MARKS: Well, actually you would language it Warner Brothers would have the option to engage her.
MR. NADELHAFT: And if they engaged her, she would receive $4 million, correct?
RICHARD MARKS: She doesn't have the option to refuse. They have the option to engage her. 12. Q . And she would receive $4 million, correct?
RICHARD MARKS: Yes, $4 million.
MR. NADELHAFT: Would you agree that the money Amber was making on Aquaman 2 or 3 would be her market rate for future studio movies?
RICHARD MARKS: I would think it would be her rate for future studio superhero movies, but not necessarily studio movies that aren't superheroes. That could be stand-alone. That could be type of studio movies.
MR. NADELHAFT: But for studio superhero movies, it would be $4 million, correct?
RICHARD MARKS: If was Ms. Heard's agent, that's where I would start, assuming everything was equal, the budget of superhero movie, that she was in the ensemble. There's a lot of ifs to Jook at, but all things being equal.
MR. NADELHAFT: You agree that Aquaman was a breakthrough role for Ms. Heard, wasn't it?
RICHARD MARKS: It's the first movie of that ilk that she makes, but she is not Aquaman; she is Mera.
MR. NADELHAFT: But it was a breakthrough movie for Ms. Heard, correct?
RICHARD MARKS: For her, it's a breakthrough movie to be in that film and in the ensemble, absolutely.
MR. NADELHAFT: And she was the female star of that movie, correct?
RICHARD MARKS: I believe so.
MR. NADELHAFT: You agree that for all of the actors Ms. Arnold listed as comparables, their career trajectory went up after their breakthrough, correct? May 24, 2022
RICHARD MARKS: She didn't give us the raw materials to look at, but I'll take your word that all those unrelated actors in unrelated films, except for Jason Momoa, their — they went up.
MR. NADELHAFT: In your-
RICHARD MARKS: As did Ms. Arnold's when she went from 1 to 2.
MR. NADELHAFT: In your experience, can you identify an actor or an actress who's not been able to get a new studio movie after a breakthrough performance in a superhero movie?
RICHARD MARKS: As{sit here, no, I haven't been asked to opine on that, but there are lots of supporting characters in movies that don't appear in the next movie.
MR. NADELHAFT: But a female star in a breakthrough movie, in a superhero movie, can you identify any actress who's not gotten another studio movie after that?
RICHARD MARKS: Well, after Ms. Heard's breakthrough in 2018, she did get Aquaman 2.
MR. NADELHAFT: Aquaman 2 was already -- she already Aquaman 2 was already -- she already had the option for Aquaman 2, correct?
RICHARD MARKS: Allright. So Ms. Heard did not get any movies after 2018, long before the Adam Waldman statements.
MR. NADELHAFT: Other than Ms. Heard, can you identify any actor or actress who has not gotten another studio movie after their breakthrough in a superhero movie?
RICHARD MARKS: As I sit here now, I haven't been asked to research, and I can't. That would be a normal thing.
MR. NADELHAFT: You're not providing an alternative number for Ms. Heard's damages, correct, for the jury?
RICHARD MARKS: Correct. I'm not providing an alternate number. J think, you know, she's been more than adequately paid.
MR. NADELHAFT: I move to strike after "No, I've not been provided another number." That's all. I mean, my question was "You're not providing another number?"
THE COURT: Response?
MS. LECAROZ: I think it's, in fairness, the fill answer of the question, Your Honor.
MR. NADELHAFT: It was a yes-or-no question. His answer was no.
THE COURT: I'I'm not going to strike it,
MR. NADELHAFT: Okay. Allright. No further questions.
THE COURT: Allright. Redirect.
RICHARD MARKS: No. I've had such a long career that I mainly forget what I've done. But I negotiated all the contracts for Pinocchio, if you will, that was produced. You know, is Coming to America, the original, is that a fantasy movie? The Golden Child, is that a fantasy movie? Yeah, and by the way, I may have negotiated contracts and ultimately the film wasn't made, but as I sit here now, those are the only ones that come to pass. If I was looking at my résumé or going through my files, I might think of others, but there isn't a deal that I haven't made.
MS. LECAROZ: And I think you also testified in response to Mr. Nadelhaft's questions that you had negotiated some deals for Chris Pratt and Paul Rudd. Do you recall that testimony?
RICHARD MARKS: Yes. These are for a streaming series.
MS. LECAROZ: Do you happen to know if both of those actors have played in Marvel superheroes?
RICHARD MARKS: I believe they have, but don't quote me because, you know, that's not my genre. on Ai Rh WBN Ne)
MS. LECAROZ: No further questions, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Allright. Thank you, Mr. Marks. You're free to stay in the courtroom, or you can leave, okay?
RICHARD MARKS: Thank you. Thank you very much