Mailbag for November 29, 2024
More bubbling beneath Drake vs Lamar, the NewJeans contract termination, Denzel’s odds, Wolfs sequel and theatrical releases, pre-event hair and make-up prep time, and healthy fandoms
Dear Gossips,
The biggest headline in gossip this week was that Drake filed two pre-action petitions against Universal Music Group over Kendrick Lamar’s “Not Like Us”. In the ensuing days, everyone on the internet and social media and podcasts has clowned on Drake so I don’t think I need to use up a thousand words talking about what a bad look this is for him and how the court of public opinion has ruled, and it’s not in his favour. Kendrick has already spent most of the year dunking on him, and even Drake seemed to concede defeat back in May so the petitions, coming right after Kendrick’s surprise album drop last Friday, is making him look like a suck.
Also, in “Not Like Us” Kendrick accused Drake of moving like a coloniser and, well, nothing says “coloniser” like bringing in the lawyers. Rap beef does not belong in the courtroom. So there’s no debate, where image and reputation are concerned, who the pop culture loser is here. And I can’t imagine that Drake doesn’t know this, wouldn’t be aware of it, what people are saying, that people are laughing at him and that this is so satisfying for his haters who’ve been waiting for his implosion for a long time.
So I’d rather talk about … WHY?! Because “he’s a petty sore loser” doesn’t cut it for me.
To be clear, Drake’s company, Frozen Moments, through which the pre-action petitions were filed, is NOT suing Kendrick. They’re suing UMG. UMG is a conglomerate. Drake is actually taking his hurt feelings fight to a fucking conglomerate. And this conglomerate happens to be the owner of the label that releases his music, Republic, and the label that releases Kendrick’s music, Interscope.
Is he seriously getting legal with a conglomerate over his ego?
Well, not yet. But theories abound.
There is some speculation that he’s not happy with his contract with Republic and this is one way for him to get out of it…? I mean, it’s expensive but, sure, he has the money.
But there is also speculation that this is bigger than he is. Pre-trial petitions are typically used for discovery. So if Drake really persists down this road, it’s a fact-finding mission. Or a fact exposing mission. He was hinting at something the other day when he was on that livestream and he said that “You need facts to take me out, fairy tales won’t do it”. The pre-trial petitions hadn’t come out yet when he made that statement, just after Kendrick dropped GNX, but there’s no doubt they would have already been drafting the paperwork.
For a long time, the music industry has been dealing with suspicions about bots and payola and whatever allegations related to falsifying numbers – which, by the way, if all that is true, Drake would have benefitted from that as well. He’s actually the second most lucrative artist for his label Republic; number one is Taylor Swift. So for an artist who has made so much money for UMG to be, maybe, MAYBE, blowing the whistle on industry practices…
If that’s really what’s going on here, this is no longer about beef, this is business.
And, frankly, this is why I’m frustrated about the conversations that are happening on social media about the situation. Because it’s too simple, when it can’t be as simple as Drake having a tantrum and taking off his diaper on the doorstep of the largest music conglomerate in the world. Drake is many things – petty, as established, narcissistic, exploitative, some would say morally compromised, a laundry list of unflattering attributes. But he’s not stupid. And he is an empire. Drake is obscenely wealthy, with business interests far beyond music, many of which have been unreported. There’s property, there are investments, there are all kinds of acquisitions…
Is he surrounded by yes people like so many (most) other artists who’ve made stupid decisions? Of course. But yes people want to make money, more money; they’re not interested in spending energy and MONEY on lawsuits against conglomerates! I have a hard time believing that this legal action was encouraged by the yes people who have made so much money from Drake’s ability to make money just because they’re afraid to tell him no. Drake’s as successful – and wealthy – as he is because there are actually people around him who have guided him in multiple money-making enterprises. So this decision to challenge not Kendrick through art but a conglomerate through business and legal channels wasn’t made by Drake from the hot tub. These people have an endgame in mind. The endgame may not ultimately be in his favour, and we can all laugh at him some more when and if that happens. But I just think much of the discourse over the last few days is scratching the surface of the bigger picture here. It’s worth it, then, in the next few weeks, to pay attention to what the data might reveal, if he and his company are really trying to put the bots and the industry’s shady numbers manipulation on blast. Drake is inviting scrutiny into business practices that might make UMG a heatscore. And the fact that their second most influential money-driver is doing it might be concerning. Because as big as “Not Like Us” has been this year, it doesn’t change the fact that Drake has outsold Kendrick overall. And now he seems to be threatening to take that future income away.
He's also making the song itself a heatscore ahead of the Super Bowl. The NFL is already risk-averse. Kendrick, even without the drama of “Not Like Us” was a stretch for them. Now the biggest song of his career, the one that audiences will be waiting to hear, could be tied up in litigation. Do you think that might make them nervous?
I’m snickering about this along with the rest of you. But the point here is that there are many more layers to this than a joke about him stomping his feet.
To this week’s questions…
Question from Gayle in one of the daily chats:
While my knowledge of K-Pop is not even at a basic level but I hope Lainey is going to write about New Jeans dissolving their contract. This seems like a big deal and I love reading about the business intricacies of this world.
Lainey’s Answer:
Just a brief backstory before we get into it – NewJeans announced yesterday after months of conflict between the group, their manager Min Hee-jin on one side and their label ADOR and its parent company HYBE on the other, that they are terminating their contract with the label. ADOR has responded and said they expect Hanni, Minji, Haerin, Danielle, and Hyein to fulfill their obligations. For a summary of the events that led up to this point, Jennifer Zhan has been covering the situation over at Vulture and can fill you in all the back and forth.
To answer Gayle’s question, yes, this is a very big deal. The contract itself… I mean it’s a contract, and as many people on socials have pointed out, it’s hard enough to get out of a phone contract with a telecom, let alone a talent contract where creative ownership and all that business is on the line. As NewJeans said themselves, they may not even be able to retain their group name if they are able to walk away. And even if they are able to walk away, given how these companies can operate, and these people are not teddy bears, they may be blocked from performing all together for an extended period of time. Even middle managers across multiple industries are beholden – or believe they are beholden – to non-compete clauses.
NewJeans was on a pretty meteoric ascent, for sure, but they were still relatively new to the industry prior to the controversy. They only debuted in the summer of 2022 and then this whole mess erupted in the spring of 2024. I can’t imagine that would have been enough time for them to establish, like, their own personal financial security and connections outside of HYBE to be able to engage in a prolonged fight with the corporation and also work on rebuilding momentum in their careers.
Minji is the oldest, at 20, and Hyein is the youngest, she’s only 16, they’re so young, they don’t yet have a lot of experience, this is really, really worrying and really, really sad. What they’ve gone through this year and will probably continue to go through must be so traumatising for them, considering their age and the trainee experience that they would have endured even before they broke out.
On the one hand, then, as concerning as it’s been to watch this play out, I admire how they’ve spoken out against the mistreatment that they’ve encountered. I love how they called out music industry executives and the K-pop system, really, for dehumanising young artists and playing them for pawns. Considering their position in the industry and how relatively powerless they are at this point in their careers, this has taken real courage and I really hope there will be opportunities for them to channel that courage and build on the resilience they’ve found in themselves to forge a new direction and continue performing because what we got in the short time that they’ve been around? It was SO good. “Hybe Boy” is consistently on rotation in my life, I’ll never ever stop fucking with it, might be one of my all-time favourite K-pop songs ever. And they were juuuuuust tapping into their potential.
On the other hand… I’m mystified by Min Hee-jin and her emphatic claims that she’s the mastermind behind the group and, purportedly, the creative genius (without credit) for some of the bigger groups that are out there today. Because over these last few months, that narrative has led to the impression that SHE is NewJeans, that Hanni, Minji, Haerin, Danielle, and Hyein couldn’t do shit without her.
I get it, they trust her, and their individual and collective style matches with her vision and they believe that she’s the manager who can help them reach their full potential. But there are already a lot of people who believe that K-pop stars are simply puppets, that the producers and managers manufacture the work and that the artists are dispensable, factory-ordered and not singular. BTS, of course, has done so much to reverse that stereotype but the way MHJ has gone about this dispute kinda undermines the artists’ active involvement in their own presentation.
And I’m so curious whether or not ADOR pursued this angle. If I had full access to investigate this situation, my first meeting would be with ADOR, to ask them just much effort they put into meeting and really hearing Hanni, Minji, Haerin, Danielle, and Hyein to reassure them that they would throw any and all resources behind them and invest in their star power even without MHJ. It’s possible that those attempts were made but by then the trust was broken and the girls weren’t buying it. But from the reports that are available about this conflict, there hasn’t been much indication that the label approached Hanni, Minji, Haerin, Danielle, and Hyein in a way that made them feel valued.
You would think, given how popular they became so quickly, the label would present them with a splashy proposal – especially if they were trying to get them to part ways with their mentor. This is, like, basic business shit, right? If you’re working for a company and they really want you to stay, they’ll come to the table with a proposal. An extra week of vacation, a bigger bonus, a bigger office, whatever. In NewJeans and ADOR’s case, it might look like more creative control, handpicking their own team, empowering them to direct their own careers independent of MHJ who’s been taking credit for the whole NewJeans brand.
And yet, none of the reporting suggests that ADOR did any of this.
So now we’re in a situation where the group’s manager-mentor has been pushed out, and the girls want to follow her out the door, and many people, even though it might be unfair to doubt, still don’t know how much agency Hanni, Minji, Haerin, Danielle, and Hyein have over their own futures.
Question from Hannah M.:
Two questions: first, what do we think the odds are for Denzel getting nominated for an Oscar this year for his role in Gladiator 2?
And second, the director of that stupid Wolfs movie has said he killed any chances of a sequel because he’s so mad at Apple TV for not doing the theatrical rollout they promised originally. Do we think this is just sour grapes/cover, or between this and Margot Robbie turning down Netflix for a future project, is it the start of a shift in Hollywood?
Sarah’s answer:
First answer: I think Denzel’s odds are pretty good, especially since 1) Gladiator II is performing well, so he’ll get a box office boost (which helps with voter awareness), and 2) he’s widely regarded as the best thing about the film. Will he win? That’s an entirely different conversation we can have IF he gets nominated…which I think he will.
Second answer: For anyone who missed it, Apple TV+ has decided not to move forward with a Wolfs sequel, this after they already demoted it from a wide theatrical release to a week-long limited release followed by a streaming drop. Director Jon Watts, however, says he “no longer trusted [Apple] as a creative partner”, and he returned his fee for the sequel, which was commissioned before the film premiered at Venice, rather than move forward on the project. This comes after Margot Robbie and Emerald Fennell turned down a massive deal from Netflix in order to guarantee their Wuthering Heights adaptation gets a wide theatrical release.
Obviously, this is not the case for everyone. Just last year, Richard Linklater and Glen Powell took a Netflix deal for Hit Man, despite Linklater’s dissatisfaction with how they handled his previous film, Apollo 10 ½: A Space Age Childhood. While I think Hit Man would have been a solid sleeper hit, that deal was made pre-Anyone But You and Glen Powell was still a box office question mark. Today, though, on the other side of Anyone But You and Twisters, I wonder if Powell and Linklater make that same deal, or if they roll the dice on Powell’s box office pull.
Another related story is Christopher Nolan sticking with Universal, after leaving Warner Brothers when they decided to release all their 2021 films day-and-date with streaming. There is entirely different leadership at Warners today, and Nolan is STILL signaling he values commitment to theatrical releases by taking his work to studios that will guarantee him an extended, wide theatrical release.
So, yes, I think we’re at the beginning of a paradigm shift in which SOME filmmakers—chiefly, those with the financial ability to do so—will prioritize securing theatrical releases over taking streaming deals. But that’s where it starts. The people who can afford to set the agenda can and should set the agenda, which will hopefully lead to streamers offering different deals, such as less up front money in exchange for more robust theatrical releases.
The question, really, is whether or not Netflix ever gets on board with this. They are not in the theatrical business, they have never been in the theatrical business, they have, so far, shown no sign of wanting to be in the theatrical business (besides goodwill gestures to filmmakers, like buying and restoring historical repertory theaters such as the Paris in New York and the Egyptian in LA). But in terms of wide theatrical releases, that’s just not their business model. Will they make it their model, at least sometimes, if more filmmakers start turning them down? I remain unconvinced.
Question from Elizabeth K:
How long does it take to do hair, makeup, and wardrobe before red carpet appearances? And what are the differences for if you’re press vs a celebrity, and also (if relevant) differences between levels of celebrities? Like does Nicole Kidman take longer than someone promoting their first big movie? (Would the makeup artist want to spend more time on her because she’s Nicole, for example?)
Lainey’s Answer:
The status of a star shouldn’t have an impact on how long it takes for the glam to happen. In fact, Nicole’s hair and makeup, for example, might take less time than someone new to the business and promoting their first movie because Nicole’s been working with her team for much longer so they’re familiar with her likes and dislikes and the products that suit her best and how to do her eyeliner. In my case, for example, with the makeup and hair artists I’m with on the regular, the process is quick, because we have a shorthand. It’s when I’m working with a new artist where it can take much longer because they haven’t done my eyeliner before, they don’t know how I prefer my blush etc etc.
As for how long it takes, in general, to get ready – this of course ranges, not necessarily by the level of fame of the star but really what the look they’re going for would be and how beat they want their face to be. The Kardashians, for example, and those who subscribe to that style of makeup, they want a full beat every time, like almost to the point of drag, where you’re layering and layering and layering and layering. This takes hours, three or four. Because that’s a very specific look, with all the foundation and the contouring and the brow shaping – it’s called “building”, and building is a process.
Certain Asian styles of makeup are similar. There’s not as much contour but there is a lot of building of the product to get that, as an example, glass face look, so you’re still looking at at least two or three hours for face and hair. Especially if hair pieces are involved.
When I’m going for a particularly intricate hair look, like for Lunar New Year or the Oscars, and adding pieces to it, it might be 90 minutes or two hours just for hair. This is me for LNY in 2023, scroll through the carousel to see the hair from the front and the back. It was achieved by adding my hair to fake hair and wrapping each braid around wire to hold the shape of the loops. The back is the most intricate, with those tiny braids coiling up like snakes to make interlocking infinities that symbolised unity for the new year. It took two people and three hours to happen. Makeup was at the same time.
Someone like, say, Jennifer Aniston, who doesn’t usually get a full beat and her hair is never all that different, I feel like she can get it all done in two hours or under.
As for the difference between press and celebrity, I’m press, and I’ve been fortunate enough to work with some amazing artists so I’m not going to say there’s a difference in quality; where there is a difference is time and money. The artists I work with might have three faces to do in a shorter amount of time. On Oscar morning, Nicole Kidman probably doesn’t have to start getting ready until 10 or 11am. On Oscar morning, those of us covering the Oscars and doing the reporting are in makeup by 5am. Because our artists have to process three or four of us that morning and get us ready much earlier because press need to be in position at least two hours before arrivals.
Big name celebrities like Nicole will be able to book the glam team just for them for the day and night so the artists can stay with them, take their sweet time with the look, and stay with them for touch-ups throughout. This, then, may be a factor for an actor who isn’t as famous as Nicole. They might not be able to hold the artist for an entire day.
Question from Myra:
The opener on Wicked and their theatre kid fanbase made me wonder about your opinion on this topic. Who do you think has the best fandom? Not best in terms of number of fans. The best overall quality, positive impact, and fan-to-artist relationship.
Sarah’s answer:
Supernatural – The long-running TV series nurtured a devoted fanbase, in no small part due to a Supernatural-centric fan convention circuit, which helped develop a strong fan-artist connection. One might call it parasocial, but the SPN fandom always seems to be raising money for someone or something, and overall, it’s a positive place. Also, in terms of transformative works, this fandom is loaded with talented writers and artists, who thrive because 1) they can sell their wares at those fan conventions, and 2) the show’s producers never got bent out of shape about fanfic. If you let the fic flourish, so will the fandom. As the fic goes, so go the fans.
Harry Potter – I get why someone would choose to move on from HP, but in the wake of JK Rowling turning into a TERF loony, a lot of Potter fans decided, No, fuck that, WE will make this OURS. The so-called “Marauders” fandom has flourished, focusing on James and Lily Potter and their friends and families. The Marauders fandom, in particular, has turned into a super queer, welcoming space as fans have refused to cede ground to Rowling and her ilk. But even in the mainline HP fandom, there has been a concerted effort to “save” HP from Rowling. HP means a lot to a lot of people who responded to a story about friendship and fighting authoritarianism, and while Rowling’s heel turn could have killed the fandom, it didn’t because fans refused to let it. I’ve never seen a fandom collectively dig in their heels like that. The HP fandom also started “Fandom Forward”, which is now a full-blown non-profit with a commitment to creating sustainable activism in pop culture spaces.
Doctor Who – It’s a multi-generational fandom of opinionated sci-fi nerds. It should be toxic by default, but it’s not (the online reaction to Jodie Whittaker becoming the first female Doctor was more about internet toxicity than actual Whovians). And like Supernatural, Doctor Who has nurtured a fandom full of vibrant artists and writers, many of whom went onto successful careers in filmmaking. Hitchhiker’s Guide author Douglas Adams grew up loving the show from season one, eventually becoming a writer for the series even as he authored his own wildly popular space adventure series. Other famous fans include Peter Jackson (the Whovian influence shows in his early films and their handmade aesthetic), Edgar Wright, and comic book writer Grant Morrison, never mind all the actors who love Who, like Benedict Cumberbatch, RDJ, and David Duchovny.
Star Trek – It’s like Star Wars, but with much less toxicity and WAY more philosophy. Star Trek pioneered the subject-specific convention which helped grow the fandom in the early days, and it inspired generations of other storytellers and continues to have a vital artistic community around it. Fans might debate their favorite captain and what timeline the JJ Abrams-produced films fall into (I think they have their own carve-out as an alternate timeline), but Star Trek never reaches the level of toxicity seen in the Star Wars fandom. Acknowledging there is always SOME toxicity because someone will always insist on being an asshole, but spend some time in a Trekkie space, and you will clock the kinder, gentler fandom pretty quick.
The Grateful Dead – Look, BTS Army and Swifties are both notable for their size, devotion, and impulse to do good. But those fandoms can run because the Deadheads walked…in a slow, meandering stroll to stop and like, smell the roses, man. The original music mega-fandom, Deadheads set the precedent for future music fandoms by treating concerts like a pilgrimage, supporting a fuckton of merch, and reveling in a unique live experience (dubbed the “X factor” by fans) that separates the Grateful Dead from other musical acts. Just as the Grateful Dead influenced generations of musicians, Deadheads paved the way for the next generation of mega-fandoms in the music industry.
And finally…
We were asked last week about doing an AMA (Ask Me Anything) or, rather, an AUA (Ask Us Anything) for our paid subscribers. Most of you seem to be into it, so now it’s about timing. Daytime, like when we’re all at work? Or evening? Like after dinner? Midweek or late week? Please let us know in the comments or in the poll below.
Thanks so much for another great week!
Keep squawking and keep gossiping,
Lainey and Sarah
The thing about Drake is that even if does expose something shady on the part of UMG, like using bots to bump songs, he's still going to look like a loser, because even if there were some bots involved with "Not Like Us", the song definitely was a hit, it was inescapable for a while. Never mind the court of public opinion already ruled in Kendrick's favor.
Loved the question about non-toxic fandoms and Sarah’s response. I completely agree with her about how Harry Potter fans have refused to let Rowling’s persona dictate their relationship to the books and films. I teach an undergrad HP film course and have had such thoughtful conversations with my students about how Rowling has or has not impacted their feelings about the fandom. The ones who do feel like her bigotry has negatively impacted their relationship to the HP franchise always talk more about not wanting to spend money that goes in her pocket, not their feelings about the books/films and fandom.