Posted: 8/24/25 at 8:52am
It seems pretty simple -she had first right of refusal in her contract for Broadway. They did not negotiate in good faith. They used her after the "supposed offenses" instead of terminating her for cause. She was contractually obliged a negotiation.
Posted: 8/24/25 at 9:58am
Girl never showed up half of the time during Pippin anyway
Posted: 8/24/25 at 2:46pm
Could something have happened AFTER the paper mill production that made them not want her anymore for the Broadway production? Or maybe they didn’t care, and thought, if we get sued, we’ll just pay her off?
Posted: 8/24/25 at 3:13pm
They replace casts all the time, so there must be a valid reason for this argument, which is not clear here.
Posted: 8/24/25 at 3:21pm
Sutton Ross said: "They replace casts all the time, so there must be a valid reason for this argument, which is not clear here."
Interesting that you would respond to a post that you wrote under one of your many "aliases".
Also, pretending to be an "AfricanQueen" is a...choice!
Posted: 8/24/25 at 3:31pm
Looking over that full complaint, I am still not super clear on what agreement was made- the "the right to continue such services in a production of the Play mounted by SISTERS CLARKE in New York City or London upon completion of good faith negotiations to determine plaintiff's monetary compensation for such services" isn't an Equity contract requirement, which suggests that there was an additional agreement between Renee and the production.
Posted: 8/24/25 at 8:57pm
There just isn’t a case here. And that salary is delusional.
Posted: 8/24/25 at 9:10pm
The AEA contract says she gets 4 weeks at the Broadway minimum if she is cut loose. It is theoretically possible she had a broader rider but I doubt it because (a) why would she have gotten one and (b) had she gotten one, it would be a significant omission from the complaint to fail to plead it as such.
Another red flag for me is that the article quoted one lawyer but the complaint was filed by a different lawyer, not at the same firm, and not mentioning the quoted one. The filed complaint seems short on awareness in relation to some things theatrical. He does appear to have a book for sale on Amazon entitled "The Guide to Picking Up Girls." It's under $15 bucks but I am definitely not interested.
Posted: 8/24/25 at 10:27pm
BroadwayNYC2 said: "There just isn’t a case here. And that salary is delusional."
If she was paid out the standard 8 week buyout at scale, she has no case. If she's alleging that the production tried to get out of paying her that? Sure.
But yes, the roughly 13.8k/week the complaint says she "should" have been offered is truly absurd, and the word SHOULD is doing a lot of heavy lifting in the suit.
She had the right of first refusal, but NY is an at will employment state and the producers could still choose to let her go at any point and they would not need to buy her out for a 9 month of a salary she did not negotiate and was not ever guaranteed.
Removing all the stories countless people have heard about Ciara, there just is not a case here. I was surprised she had the ROFR at Paper Mill, It was under the assumption she stepped in for the Paper Mill run because Solea Pfeifer who was involved in the development of the show from the start (along with Liisi LaFontaine) was not available, and that Solea would do the inevitable broadway run should she be free.
Posted: 8/24/25 at 10:29pm
Does anyone have a list of the most recent workshop cast?
Posted: 8/24/25 at 10:33pm
Posted: 8/25/25 at 1:23am
I think the bigger issue here is that she claims they strung her along and had her record songs and appear at investor events and then claimed she was being let go due to conduct six months prior....I don't think she is entitled to half a million but something seems odd
Posted: 8/25/25 at 2:43am
What I’m picking up is that she behaved badly, they didnt want to deal with it anymore and she is too delulu to see the problem was her.
Posted: 8/25/25 at 8:18am
BoringBoredBoard40 said: "I think the bigger issue here is that she claims they strung her along and had her record songs and appear at investor events and then claimed she was being let go due to conduct six months prior....I don't think she is entitled to half a million but something seems odd"
This might have been a case of the majority of the “decision makers” still thinking Ciara would be playing the role, difficulties and all, until perhaps someone staged an intervention, finally/recently putting their foot down and saying “No, I can’t abide it, we have to get rid of her”.
OR, everyone knew she’d be dropped eventually, but they kept her for the promo/investor events because she knew the material and could sell it, and figured, “we’ll drop her closer to the time.” Much easier than casting the eventual replacement and getting them ready for all the incidental performances.
Updated On: 8/25/25 at 08:18 AM
Posted: 8/25/25 at 9:54am
There is a thread on Reddit where people who have known her since college really spill the tea. Evidently she has always been extremely difficult, and “pretty privilege” and her tremendous talent are what allowed her to have a major career despite her personality. I guess it’s finally caught up to her. Maybe she can get a job teaching theatre at Northwestern?
Posted: 8/25/25 at 10:08am
As long as Renee was paid for any additional work she did, be it demos or appearances, I don’t think any legal wrong was done to her. SH*Tty to be dropped from the production, but that’s the business and there’s nothing inherently illegal about it.
However, if the producers were foolish enough to enter into a separate agreement that went so above and beyond AEA first refusal requirements, then that’s on them. I cannot imagine any producers worth their salt doing something like that with a performer at Renee’s level.
Posted: 8/25/25 at 10:30am
The Distinctive Baritone said: "Maybe she can get a job teaching theatre at Northwestern?"
Nice jab, hehe...
Posted: 8/25/25 at 12:35pm
I’m still baffled why she continues to pursue work on Broadway. A friend worked with her on a film several years ago and at cast dinner the night before filming started she just went on a random tangent about how much she hated Broadway and all its politics, etc. Needless to say, this unsolicited venting was not a good look on her and most definitely didn’t make a good impression to many who were first meeting her at that dinner.
Posted: 8/25/25 at 12:43pm
Well, actors love to bitch about the powers that be. That's like, our favorite thing to do.
I love this joke I heard once:
"How do you make an actor miserable?"
"Give them a job."
Posted: 8/25/25 at 12:43pm
gibsons2 said: "The Distinctive Baritone said: "Maybe she can get a job teaching theatre at Northwestern?"
Nice jab, hehe..."
Can someone explain this joke? Ciara went to Baldwin Wallace. How is Northwestern involved here?
Posted: 8/25/25 at 12:52pm
It’s possible the show had wanted to Solea to be involved with the show at Papermill, but the timeline of Gun & Powder overlapped with Gatsby at ART and Solea chose Gatsby. By the end of 2024 Gatsby’s future was looking less certain opening her up for new or “old” work. Ciara was just, unfortunately, in the crosshairs of it all.
Posted: 8/25/25 at 12:53pm
She may be hard to work with, a complainer, etc. But after reading the entire filing, it sounds like she has a pretty valid case. I suppose we’d all like to see a copy of the agreement containing her right of first refusal for Broadway/London.
If she was such a problem, they should have given her notice and opportunity to cure any issues and if she didn’t do so, then fire her from the Papermill run and be rid of her. I bet they’re wishing they had. She may be about to make more money than if they’d opened on Broadway with her and flopped after 8 weeks or so.
Updated On: 8/25/25 at 12:53 PM
Posted: 8/25/25 at 12:53pm
BorisTomashevsky said: "Interestingly she only did five and a half months in Pippin. I wonder if the honeymoon period wore off quickly there for both parties."
Her engagement in Pippin was practically just her audition for Hunchback
Posted: 8/25/25 at 1:04pm
Call_me_jorge said: "gibsons2 said: "The Distinctive Baritone said: "Maybe she can get a job teaching theatre at Northwestern?"
Nice jab, hehe..."
Can someone explain this joke? Ciara went to Baldwin Wallace. How is Northwestern involved here?"
Teachers: what theatre artists become when they are tired of being poor (or no one wants to work with them anymore)
Posted: 8/25/25 at 1:18pm
Ok after pouring over the language in her filing, I think Renee has a valid case. BUT what she wants out of it is absolutely insane and never going to happen.
If everything in the filing is truthful, then it seems plainly clear that producers did not offer her the chance to "cure" the issues that would have allowed them to not move forward with her. Instead they continued to hire and pay her for events and demo recordings. When asked why she wasn't being given a Broadway negotiation session producers responded that in "post-mortem" discussions that some creatives reported issues with her and that she was not a good collaborator and failed to take feedback. No specifics were given. This DOES seem to put producers in breach of contract because if those issues were present, they needed to tell her during the Papermill run, or else not hire her for any future appearances with the musical.
Whatever the reason for this producing failure is (perhaps its something that fell through the cracks as "Make Way Broadway" took over some main duties from P3?), she has a case! But here's where it gets crazy. What she SHOULD be asking for is AEA's required 4-week Broadway minimum pay which would be guaranteed for a first right of refusal clause. And she would likely be granted legal fees and perhaps a small amount in damages. But the claim NEVER mentions this 4 week payment. Instead, in point 36, it says that based on her "experience and talent" that said Broadway negotiations should have resulted in a $13,500/week salary. And that she is seeking said supposedly deserved salary to be paid out for her entire would-have-been 9-month contract. GURL WHUT?! A total of "at least" $486,000. There is no way an actress who's biggest claim to fame is playing Hawkgirl in one season of the CW's Legends of Tomorrow nearly 10 years would ever command this salary. It's delulu of the highest order.
She does have a case here, due to what appears to be some mistakes in producing. But nearly half a million dollars? lol. She's got confidence I'll give her that!
.jpg?format=auto&width=365)
