Without knowing all the details, no one can made a call on this. If she has no legal grounds, her lawyer will soon find out. If her photo was used without permission her lawyer will seek responsibility.
One thing is for certain, the lawyer will get paid! And this whole story will be last weeks news.
Broadway Legend Joined: 5/14/03
I see absolutely nothing humiliating about it. She's clothed, it's a cute picture and so what that they enhanced her chest? Big flippin deal. I hate cry babies.
Im sure someone was paid for the use of her picture (assuming it really is her picture and not someone who looks like her -- face it, everyone has someone who looks like them. though it's a small chance it could be true).... The shot was probably bought from the owner of the picture (being the person she took the pictures for initially) in which case she has no reason to be upset.
And frankly, if this is all legit and the picture really WAS used without her permission, it's not The Shubert Org's fault -- it's Serino Coyne's fault. She should be suing them, not Shubert.
Hell, she has THAT big of an issue with it, take the damn picture down and they can put one of me up there At least they won't have to enhance my breasts!
If in Heaven you don't excel, you can always party down in hell...
how the hell have i never noticed that there?
Broadway Legend Joined: 5/14/03
It's on the 44th street side of the theatre.... it's actually a drop sheet that covers the top of the building.
If in Heaven you don't excel, you can always party down in hell...
"They are claiming her picture must be a character from the show and they picked the Lady of the Lake. She does not resemble the Lady of the Lake at all, and they said she's played by Lauren Kennedy who is a brunette, when on the billboards she is a blonde."
Not only that, but, if memory serves me correctly, that picture has been up since the show began. Sara Ramirez was certainly not caucasan ot blond.
Broadway Star Joined: 12/31/69
Looks like a classic case of overreacting.
The models I was referring to for Hairspray/Millie were hired to be photographed for mock-ups, that were never intended for public use. So they did not sign a release endorsing their image to be used.
Marissa has referred to the logo as her. Its not. Look at it.
Broadway Legend Joined: 5/14/03
If you want to get technical, they could say the picture was just to resemble one of the other girls in the company. Right now it's all speculation.
If in Heaven you don't excel, you can always party down in hell...
Are we sure that the actress/model who is in the Millie logo is not Sutton Foster? That squinty nose looks awfully familiar. Has Sutton said that it was not her?
I believe it, I just always assumed it was her.
Which one of the pictures is the model?
Broadway Star Joined: 10/22/05
The only picture that's of a human.
I think she looks lovely in the photo. Although I would be dumbfounded if my picture ending up on the Shubert too, so I suppose she has a vaid point. Maybe she needs money?
Broadway Legend Joined: 5/14/03
I'd be dumbfounded.... and FLATTERED.
Just sayin.
If in Heaven you don't excel, you can always party down in hell...
Me too, especially with bigger boobs!!!! It'd be my dream come true!!!!!!!!
Stand-by Joined: 10/10/05
It all depends on the contract that she signed. Most of the time unless you are a huge name you get paid a flat fee and the photographer owns the negatives and can use them as he/she wants. Personally, it seems a frivilous lawsuit. It's not as if she was manipulated to look nude and put on the internet, but I am curious to see how it plays out.
The hairspray logo is Marissa Jaret Winokur.
1. It would be my DREAM to walk in the thearter district and see my face against the Shubert Theater, a theater that has changed the American Musical, I would sue them when they take it down.
2. She looks amazing in that picture, but yes, I know how some woman think that there boobs are way big, and so they want there boobs to shrink.
3. I don't get what she wants out of the lawsuit except money, which is really shallow
Ive seen that picture a hundred times...how did she not see it until her friends pointed it out?
The fact that you're all giving this any sort of creedance at all is odd. It's an obvious and desperate attempt at what is basically, an out of work actress, (model, whatever's), bid for publicity. And well, it's working. There is no way the photographer just took a random picture and that it's been up there all this time and poof, she *just noticed*. Let's not forget, it's what is commonly known in the business as pilot season and now casting directors know this girls' name.
I don't remember her name from this morning, so I highly doubt that casting directors will remember (and then hire) The Girl Who Sued Spamalot. If that's her reasoning, it's not working.
Craig, the courts are working out the Hairspray issue right now, and it will be up to them to decide. I maintain that the logo is not Marissa, and having seen the model and compared it, I firmly believe that. We shall see.
Leading Actor Joined: 8/1/03
Kind of ironic that this woman is complaining about being embarrassed by this photo and yet now it is all over every newspaper as well as the internet. Meanwhile I have seen Spamalot many times and never even noticed the photo on the building. She obviously is looking for publicity.
Understudy Joined: 1/8/05
If she was so embarassed why did she wait almost a year to sue?
I think she is trying to get publicity, and I don't think it will work much because she is just the gal on the billboard-no one knows or cares who she is.
Broadway Legend Joined: 9/12/04
It would be interesting to know how she is going to prove that the photo really was taken after the actual photo session and 'as a joke'...
Updated On: 1/26/06 at 03:28 PM
I have often thought that the green witch in the Wicked logo looks like Bebe Neuwirth.
Videos