Prev
Next

Gordon Gekko said greed is good, until you foot the bill

Lucy Kippist

by Lucy Kippist

29 Jun 10:33am

Must Reads

The Punch is moving house - this is a caption

The Punch is moving house

385

Will Pope Francis have the vision to tackle this? - this is a caption

Will Pope Francis have the vision to tackle this?

122

Advocating risk management is not “victim blaming” - this is a caption

Advocating risk management is not “victim blaming”

251

Filed under: Divorce, Hollywood, Lightweight, Michael Douglas, Wall Street

13 comments

Hollywood divorce stories usually fall into three categories. The good-for-a-laugh-because-they-have-more-money-than-sense kind of story, the too-painful-to-read-story-of-betrayal (most recently, Sandra Bullock) and the unbelievable-jaw-dropping-can-they-really-do-that, kind. The subjects of today’s Lightweight are an example of the third kind.

Divorce can be ugly. Picture: AP.

Cue Diandra Douglas, the 52 year old ex-wife of actor Michael Douglas, who is claming half of the profits from his latest movie, Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps.

The Herald Sun reports that the ex-Mrs Douglas is, “citing a provision in the couple’s 2000 divorce that promises half the profits of any movies done by her famous husband during their two decades as man and wife -including residuals, merchandising and ancillary rights.”

But Mr Douglas, 65 years of age and currently married to Catherine Zeta Jones, is not having any of it. He’s arguing that his latest flick is a “sequel” and not a “spin-off” of the 1987 original and therefore, doesn’t count.  And it’s a fair retaliation, when you consider that he’s reported to have already paid his ex-wife approximately $US45 million in their original divorce settlement.

But what do you think? Does she have a right to the money or not?

Most commented

13 comments

Show oldest | newest first

    • 6c legs says:

      02:26pm | 29/06/10

      All that botox and ahem, ‘matinaince’ costs serious money you know. Or it could be that she’s lost the previous 45mill in the GFC collapse, either way it can’t be easy being a single 50 something female in Hollywood. Her lawyers must think she has some sort of claim - and spin off or sequel is pretty much the same thing in movie lingo.

      She was dumped for a younger sexier version, (that her DH knew he could make mega bucks with) men will never get what that must feel like - at least men like “Eric” can’t…

      Hollywood is a shallow place filled with shallow people, so why are people surprised when they behave in the only way shallow people know how to behave? *shrug*

      Reply

    • LifeofY says:

      02:37pm | 29/06/10

      This is a whole new level of greed.
      She received $45 million in the original settlement, so unless she’s completely financially irresponsible, this has nothing to do with money.
      It’s about sticking it to Michael because she’s still bitter.
      Move on Diandra, he’s been re-married for 10 years!!
      Nothing more scary than an angry, bitter divorced woman with too much time and too much money.

      Reply

    • Peter says:

      03:14pm | 29/06/10

      Well if Michael Douglas is going to preach that greed is good, then he should cop this…  Now i want him to tell us again just how good greed is…

      Reply

    • Greg says:

      04:06pm | 29/06/10

      You don’t reckon you’re getting Micky mixed up with Gordy a little Pete!

    • Peter says:

      04:39pm | 29/06/10

      Not getting mixed up, I know the difference between a character in a movie and an actor. But I was just knocking the doctrine that came out of America after his movie..

      I would never support an ex coming after more money after a settlement was already reached 10 years ago. But strange things happen in Hollywood and i for one am glad i don’t live there…

    • Dan says:

      04:00am | 01/07/10

      Peter, funnilly enough, journalists have asked Douglas whether he still believed that greed was good! It seems that there are people who don’t understand what playing a character is.

    • Bitten says:

      03:45pm | 29/06/10

      Her conduct is shameless. She doesn’t ‘need’ any more than she has already received. Women should stop perpetuating the myth that we’re poor defenceless little lambs who can’t take care of ourselves - it’s crap. I find her behaviour absolutely disgusting.

      If a relationship breaks down, the property/cash/assets/debts accrued during the marriage should be split 50:50. Nil ongoing spousal support (save in very very limited cases - otherwise, get a job, everyone else has one!). Compusory support payments (garnished from wages if necessary similar to ATO payment plans) for all children of the marriage to be made by both parents and paid directly into trust administered by an independent guardian for the child, until the age of 18 (as a minimum or later as agreed between the parties).

      Reply

    • Peter says:

      05:01pm | 29/06/10

      I recall reading in the herald sun many years ago a judge lambasting a guy for giving reasons for his pending divorce by telling him that “this is not Italy”. Im guessing he was of Italian background.

      I work with a guy here who has spent his life serving in the Australian Army and now continues to help defend his country with his role in the Army reserve.. When he suggested to his ex-wife that she get a job, she told him that she loves the “latte lifestyle”..

      It might not be Italy for the blokes, but certainly is for female divorcees it seems…

    • Greg says:

      04:18pm | 29/06/10

      I reckon that a rational person might well say come on now Lucy, Diandra the Digger has got her cue on where the latest pay dirt is.
      Like it’s a bit far fetched to even call a film a sequel when it has been motivated by a different set of events 20 years on but then anything could happen in the US and perhaps that was Mickeys first mistake, well lets say his second or third.
      But bettcha your last $$$ that some smart arse gold digging lawyer has got into her ear if not elsewhere and said just putting it out there will get us a few easy million.
      But she did care and nurture the fella through some torrid times I imagine even if she had fallen out of love, so you could argue that a good woman behind a man has helped shape his future some.
      And if he’d loaded, why not share the wealth about a bit and the greater sharing, the quicker it’ll filter back into the economy in a broader manner.

      Reply

    • Dan says:

      03:58am | 01/07/10

      They haven’t been married for ten years. He paid her $45,000,000 in the original settlement. He owes her nothing. As for ‘And if he’d loaded, why not share the wealth’, shouldn’t it be his choice? Would you not have a problem if you were forced to pay your ex-wife extra money whom you divorced ten years ago? Or is it only wealthy people who should share around the money? It’s his money, it’s not yours to spend.

    • Phillip says:

      09:51pm | 29/06/10

      Its GEKKO not Gecko!!!

      Reply

    • Sirro says:

      10:01pm | 29/06/10

      The money should actually go directly to Catherine Zeta Jones. After all it is that foxy babe that has had to sleep with the 75 year old MD for the past ten years. The first missus should be glad that she has had 45 million clams and no ties to a wrinkly old dude.

      Reply

    • igorgt says:

      09:43am | 15/07/10

      I want to quote your post in my blog. It can?
      And you et an account on Twitter?

      Reply
 
Sorry, comments are now closed for this article.

Facebook Recommendations

Read all about it

Punch live

Up to the minute Twitter chatter

tory_maguire

_Tors 25 May 13 09:25AM

Who are this horrible little person's parents? http://t.co/xLQld5jWxZ

Paul Colgan

Colgo 25 May 13 08:20AM

@sarselack The question was to implications for public projects *like NBN* when industry is building vast internet infrastructure

Malcolm Farr

farrm51 25 May 13 07:54AM

Dead tree journalists D Crowe and J Hewitt get a fix in Gladstone Airport. http://t.co/NtTfOuTpGZ

Paul Colgan

Colgo 25 May 13 07:18AM

Google is planning to build a wireless network to reach a billion people http://t.co/e972OOc2FT ... NBN implications?

See all tweets

Recent posts

The latest and greatest

The Punch is moving house

by The Punch Team

385

The Punch is moving house

Good morning Punchers. After four years of excellent fun and great conversation, this is the final post…

Will Pope Francis have the vision to tackle this?

by Hannah Harborow

122

Will Pope Francis have the vision to tackle this?

I have had some close calls, one that involved what looked to me like an AK47 pointed my way, followed…

Advocating risk management is not “victim blaming”

by Sarrah Le Marquand

251

Advocating risk management is not “victim blaming”

In a world in which there are still people who subscribe to the vile notion that certain victims of sexual…

Nosebleed Section

choice ringside rantings

From: Hasbro, go straight to gaol, do not pass go

Tim says:

They should update other things in the game too. Instead of a get out of jail free card, they should have a Dodgy Lawyer card that not only gets you out of jail straight away but also gives you a fat payout in compensation for daring to arrest you in the first place. Instead of getting a hotel when you… [read more]

From: A guide to summer festivals especially if you wouldn’t go

Kel says:

If you want a festival for older people or for families alike, get amongst the respectable punters at Bluesfest. A truly amazing festival experience to be had of ALL AGES. And all the young "festivalgoers" usually write themselves off on the first night, only to never hear from them again the rest of… [read more]

Light weight

Gentle jabs to the ribs

Superman needs saving

Superman needs saving

Can somebody please save Superman? He seems to be going through a bit of a crisis. Eighteen months ago,… Read more

28 comments

Newsletter

Read all about it

Sign up to the free News.com.au newsletter