Interesting, thanks for the detail. The articles I read said there was no dispute that Antonio was entitled to a good deal of money (whether legally speaking or because it was the right thing to do by Gianni), but they had to negotiate exactly how much and lump sum verses monthly payouts, living arrangements, etc. Whereas the dramatization made you think the locks would be changed on him tomorrow. We can agree that the truth is murky so they went with the most dramatic possibility.
And the same conflicting reports re the dog food - the owner didn't have a dog, according to several articles, so why would there be dog food there? But again, if it had been unoccupied for months why was there any food at all? It's very confusing. But I loved that they made the 72 year old caretaker a badass ninja with the dramatic stop, drop & roll.