Actress Eva Green has stated her "professional reputation has been upheld" after she received her High Court case over fee for an deserted movie.

The 42-year-old, finest identified for showing in James Bond film Casino Royale, sued White Lantern Film for the million-dollar charge she was on account of be paid by the makers of A Patriot.

The firm and its lender countersued, saying she had renounced the contract by refusing to carry out and making "excessive creative and financial demands". Production on the movie was halted in October 2019.

In WhatsApp messages revealed within the case, Green referred to as one member of the movie's group a "f****** moron" who she thought needs to be fired and labelled one other employee "evil".

She additionally described some proposed crew members as "s***** peasants" and govt producer Jake Seal as "pure vomit".

Green later apologised for "inappropriate language" and advised her "Frenchness" was accountable.

She stated one of many messages was an "emotional response" after being lied to about the place the manufacturing could be shot.

Green stated after her courtroom win that the corporate had used her "as a scapegoat to cover up their own mistakes" and "made false allegations".

"I am proud that I stood up against their bully-boy tactics," she added.

'Cruel and unfaithful'

Green stated reporting of the case had "felt like being set upon by hounds" and that the ordeal had been "painful and damaging".

She stated: "I found myself misrepresented, quoted out of context and my desire to make the best possible film was made to look like female hysteria.

"It was merciless and it was unfaithful."

The actress previously said having her messages disclosed was "humiliating" and denied she'd refused to perform.

"In the 20 years that I've been making movies, I've by no means damaged a contract and even missed in the future of capturing," she informed the courtroom in January.

In her victory assertion, she stated she'd "fought tooth and nail to defend the beautiful film that I loved and had signed on for".

The choose determined Green had not renounced her contract nor dedicated any "repudiatory breaches" - which means she's set to get her $1m (£803,000) charge.

'Sarcastic and denigrating'

Mr Justice Michael Green stated there had been an "overinterpretation" of her messages - which stemmed from "a genuine feeling of concern that any film made under Mr Seal's control would be of very low quality".

He stated the producer had been "patronising, sarcastic and denigrating" throughout proof and he might see how others may dislike him.

"The reality is, however, that neither side was prepared to make the film that the other wanted to make," the choose stated.

"Ms Green made it clear that she did not want to make the film under Mr Seal's full control; and the defendants were only interested in recovering SMC's loan."

He additionally criticised Green, calling her "surprisingly under-prepared for her evidence" and "in some senses a frustrating and unsatisfactory witness".

The choose wrote: "She said it was 'humiliating' but some of her explanations for the language she used and the feelings she expressed - such as they were down to her 'Frenchness' - were not credible or adequate."