Charlize Theron To Pay For Wearing Wrong Watch

Charlize Theron will have to pay - perhaps eight figures - for wearing the wrong watch, a Manhattan judge has ruled.

Watchmaker Raymond Weil has already won summary judgment in a federal civil complaint that Theron broke their deal by failing to exclusively wear the pricey timekeeper in public.

Theron and her production company, Denver & Delilah Films Inc., were listed as defendants. The "Monster" star begged out of penalties, but US District Court Judge Colleen McMahon denied the Oscar winner.

"It is obvious that Theron cannot be dismissed . . . she was not an unwary agent," McMahon wrote, noting that Theron's initials appeared 10 times on the 10-page contract the actress broke.

Damages will be awarded at a jury trial. The watchmaker is seeking $20 million.

Comments

[bryanphoto]

What's the matter, millions for a movie isn't enough, commercials overseas? and now you sell your wrist. This is pathetic.

[suzana371]

Those contracts should not be so strict. The companies make millions of beautiful actors advertising for them. It is not just normal to ask the person to wear the same thing all the time for at least a few years? I was hoping the judge could have ruled the contract as an unreasonable one.

[CharlottesvilleVA]

Let's say I'm a hat maker. You're a star. I ask you to appear in ads wearing my hats and ask you to wear only my hats in public. I offer to pay you $1 million to do so. You agree.

You could have walked away, and we would have moved on to somebody else.

I begin my ad campaigns, and your photo wearing my hats is everywhere.

Then you are photographed wearing somebody else's hat. Didn't I pay you $1 million not to do this?

In addition to the $1 million I've paid you to wear my hats, I've paid #10 million on photography, advertising, and other marketing expenses that I would not have spent had you not agreed to wear only my hats.

I want my money back. Not just the $1 million I paid you, but the $11 million I've invested in this campaign.

-----------------

Beautiful actors are no different than homely shop keepers. She agreed to certain things, as did Weil. She broke the deal, and now she's going to pay the price for having done so. She can afford it - please let's not try to characterize her as some poor ol' sweet actor who made a mistake. She went into a business deal - she wasn't doing them a favor by wearing their watches. It was literally her job to do so. If you worked for IBM but did some free-lance consulting at no cost for HP, would you expect IBM to give you

[divergal]

I doubt Charlize will be doing many other endorsements, not because of this sour deal, but by choice. I'm hoping she'll just say no and stick to what she does best: great acting.

And isn't it time for ALL rich celebrities to stop doing advertising and voice overs? When is enough money enough? Haven't we learned anything yet? The one and only truly classy ad program was "What becomes a legend most?"

Trouble is, it was about fur coats.

Sheesh!

[Biffmeister]

I'll wear them for half of she was getting. Let me know.

[temashana]

another example of how messed up this country is. pathetic!

[Zofomofo]

What do you mean? She was paid to do something and broke a contract. Where is the messed up part, other than her absent minded greed?

[11907281]

I think the messed up part is being paid to wear a watch, ridiculous. If you sign a contract and take money to be a walking billboard then you are legally bound to be their product. I hope they get as much money as they can from her, someone this successful and talented doesn't need to do this stuff but greed overruled rationality and now the price must be paid.

[Dadeo]

Mr. Raymond Weil, Please contact me, you can superglue your watch on my behind for a measly 10 million.

[tucsonarizona1]

It's about time!

[Big0725]

If I knew how to type in a rimshot, this is where I would do it. :)

[TheBrizz]

Yes, we know, you'll be here all week... we'll remember to tip our waitress.

[ABCD]

LOL - I would have just worn the watch

[littleddemocrat]

Raymond Weil must be hard up for cash if they're going after her for some..... I guess in these economic times, not many people are buying fancy watches.

I mean, seriously -- I love Charlize -- she's pretty awesome. Do they really want bad vibes with her and by sub-conscious relation, her fans like me? Maybe they should have just told her -- "Hey CT, next time, wear our watch, allright?"

Like the writer said, who is looking at a watch on a beautiful woman. I think they might have handled this better.

[Eric8869]

A deal is a deal.

When Michael Jordan signed an agreement with COKE - he NEVER took another soft drink in public. NEVER.

[LaughingLast]

That reminds me of the time when I worked for a large computer firm. We were meeting with some of Pepsi's top technology management in the final phase of months of lengthy sales presentations and negotiations. At the break, one of the secretaries brought a cart of beverages and snacks into the room . . . of course, loaded with Coca Cola products. We didn't get the deal.

[amirtalai]

it's actually brilliant. they get the judgement, plus the press. bad vibes from fans will do nothing. Her fans are not the ones buying these watches.

[NoSillyName]

Who cares? I love my Timex.

[Charity]

why would anyone look at a watch on a beautiful woman's wrist?

[Dave24]

I believe the appropriate term for entertainers who are devoid of a soul is: TOOL. It's amazing how people sell themselves away to make a buck. Image over substance.

[Pookster84]

Also, it's not the "crazy U.S.A." -- the watch company is from Switzerland. Saying the judge has "beauty issues" or whatever is hugely prejudicial. Beauty is what gives Charlize the ability to make these huge sums of money in the first place. Holding her accountable for her actions isn't petty jealousy; it's a matter of law.

[Pookster84]

Apparently, the $20 million IS what the company paid her. If she signed the contract promising only to wear their timepieces in public, and she was photographed wearing a Dior watch at a film festival, she's in breach. It's pretty clear-cut. People aren't above the law just because they're famous and attractive. It was her looks and fame that got her the deal in the first place. If she was willing to sell a piece of herself for $20 million to convince people to buy a product, she has to deal with the consequences. I'd like to see integrity return to (or arrive in!) the entertainment industry, with no more product placement crap where two characters in an episode of TV talk about how great some car or soft drink is for the camera, but as long as this is how it works, if you reap the benefits, you also have to pay the penalties. One or two movies, and she'll make the money back; she'll never feel it. But she will think again about selling her persona so easily just to advertise some product.

[CKieffer]

If that is what they paid her, then I agree with you.

[NTO08]

Hard for her to get out of it...h--l, if someone paid me 20 mil to wear their watch, they'd have to pry that f--er off of my body in my grave!!!! LOL

[KarateKid]

I can't believe anyone would pay an actress $20 million to wear a watch. Look at it from a business standpoint. When you pay someone that much, how do you recoup that investment?

[CKieffer]

$20 million? How much did they pay her in the first place? If they are looking for "damages" that is just absurd and my guess.. a world of hurt in terms of bad publicity.

[ScoobyDoo269]

I agree - they should ask Bernake for a Bail Out - I bet they'd get it too.