Hollywood Execs Fear Ryan Coogler’s Sinners Deal ‘Could End the Studio System’

by

The screenplay for “Sinners” started spreading among Hollywood studios during winter 2023, leading to a fierce competition by January the following year: a captivating mix of drama-thriller and survival-horror genre, combined with elements of blues music, intense sex scenes, Deep South occultism, and a troupe of vampires dancing like Riverdance performers. The project’s commercial appeal was further boosted due to its being written by Ryan Coogler—the mastermind behind Marvel’s blockbuster “Black Panther”—and featuring Michael B. Jordan in a double role as twin brothers, Smoke and Stack, who run a juke joint after transitioning from gangster life.

As studio after studio expressed interest in paying the script’s estimated $90 million price tag, Coogler’s agents at WME made it clear there were some conditions attached. Coogler would maintain final editing rights (a privilege usually given to the industry’s top-tier creators), receive a share of the box office revenue starting from the movie’s premiere (rather than waiting for the studio to turn a profit), and, most controversially, 25 years after its release, ownership of “Sinners” would revert back to Coogler.

The final point was a deal-breaker for many production houses; Quentin Tarantino is one of very few filmmakers who have recently secured such an uncommon rights-reversion contract. In 2017, this multiple Oscar winner struck a complicated deal with Sony where the copyright control rights to his “Once Upon a Time in Hollywood” would revert back to him 30 years after its initial cinema release. While Sony and Universal were keen on “Sinners,” only Warner Bros.’ co-chairmen/CEOs Pam Abdy and Michael DeLuca agreed to accommodate Ryan Coogler’s unique contract terms.

It’s unusual for directors to own their films, which can make studio executives quite anxious. As per high-ranking officials at competing studios, the Sinners deal sets a potentially harmful precedent. One executive remarks, “It might signal the demise of the traditional studio system.

Essentially, Coogler’s agreement is reshaping filmmakers’ assumptions about copyright ownership and distribution rights, fundamentally altering the traditional power dynamics within the industry. This shift could potentially undermine the value of movie studios’ catalogues, which form the basis of their worth. As this executive explains, “Studios exist primarily to amass a library.” The enduring value of these film properties is what defines a studio as a studio and drives acquisitions like David Ellison buying Paramount or MGM being sold for $8 billion. Revenue streams such as licensing and distributing films generate hundreds of millions of dollars annually worldwide. So, the concept of investing in a library only to lose it after 25 years is concerning, because that means giving up future income.

A different studio executive anticipates that Coogler’s deal could strain existing talent partnerships further by setting unattainable standards for top-tier directors: “If we grant such a deal to [Coogler], and another talented individual we wish to collaborate with demands the same – but we deny their request – how can we expect them to continue working with us?” he questions. “It’s detrimental to business, it’s damaging for filmmaking relationships.

In a recent discussion, Ryan Coogler – known for his powerful films such as the Sundance hit biopic “Fruitvale Station”, “Black Panther” (nominated for a 2019 Best Picture Oscar), the “Rocky” franchise spinoff “Creed”, and the upcoming “Black Panther: Wakanda Forever” – emphasized the symbolic significance of him, as a Black director, taking on a film about Black ownership. He stated that this was his sole reason for pursuing the rights reversion deal. Unfortunately, a publicist for Coogler was unable to arrange an interview with Vulture.

According to several sources within the company, Warner Bros. approached negotiations with a protective stance in 2020, during the height of the pandemic. This was when the studio based in Burbank caused outrage among its top filmmakers by announcing that it would release all its 2021 films on its streaming platform (which was called HBO Max) simultaneously with their theater releases. This move led Denis Villeneuve, a renowned director of Warner’s $165 million sci-fi movie Dune, to write an op-ed for Variety stating that “Warner Bros. might have just ended the Dune franchise.” On the other hand, Christopher Nolan, who had been a consistent box office success for Warner Bros., moved to Universal to produce his next billion-dollar film, Oppenheimer. (Warner Bros. chose not to comment on this matter.)

DeLuca and Abdy, who are well-known for their extensive ties with creative filmmakers and long association with the high-end movie industry, were brought on board by David Zaslav, CEO of Warner Bros. Discovery, in 2022. Zaslav’s leadership style is described as not particularly artist-friendly but aware and adjacent to the arts. Their task was to rejuvenate Warner Bros., specifically addressing its negative image in Hollywood for prioritizing profits over talent. The duo swiftly demonstrated their influence by approving large-scale productions for a roster of respected, if not always profitable, directors: $130 million for Paul Thomas Anderson’s crime thriller “One Battle After Another” starring Leonardo DiCaprio, $80 million for Maggie Gyllenhaal’s reinterpretation of “The Bride of Frankenstein,” and $80 million for Emerald Fennell’s adaptation of “Wuthering Heights.” Naturally, they also greenlit Ryan Coogler’s project, titled “Sinners.”

As a film enthusiast, I find myself expressing similar sentiments about Warner Bros. Their current approach seems to be one of excessive spending, as our first executive put it. The acquisition of Wuthering Heights rights, for instance, appears extravagant and unjustified. The studio’s mindset seems to be: ‘Our studio is in a crisis. We need to act swiftly.’ However, the individuals steering the ship in a quarter-century won’t be Zaslav or Pam and Mike. The Sinners deal, therefore, appears to be a tactical move to boost immediate finances, but it overlooks the potential long-term consequences. They seem oblivious to the notion that such short-term decisions could potentially dismantle the entire studio system.

Indeed, there are other notable members of what is commonly known as the Copyright Club, such as Mel Gibson (who maintained ownership rights for The Passion of the Christ by self-funding its production budget when no one else would take on the project), Richard Linklater (who negotiated partial copyright ownership for his coming-of-age drama Boyhood, filmed over 11 years in segments), and Peter Jackson (who, as a producer, acquired the underlying rights to District 9 by financing the sci-fi thriller directed by Neil Blomkamp for the first time). It’s important to note that Tarantino’s recent rights-reversion deal with Sony wasn’t particularly innovative or rare. Instead, it was a carryover from an agreement at his former film production company, Miramax (then led by the disgraced executive Harvey Weinstein), where Tarantino had limited license terms for all his films like Pulp Fiction and Kill Bill. Essentially, this arrangement was grandfathered in because Tarantino’s success at Miramax gave him whatever he desired. As Tarantino moved on to work elsewhere, Sony essentially said, “Since he had it, we want to continue doing business with him by keeping the agreement going.

According to an experienced talent agent with extensive knowledge in Hollywood negotiations related to Coogler’s deal, concerns among studio executives that directors will collectively ask for copyright ownership are likely exaggerated. This agent explains that not every director can make such a request; only the top-tier, AAA-level directors who possess intellectual property (IP) have the ability to do so. These directors are highly sought after because they bring their IP with them, making it valuable to studios.

He goes on to explain his viewpoint about Hollywood, “You see, there’s no sense or reason guiding anything at all. Whenever a filmmaker gains popularity, particularly those who are diverse or female, it boils down to, ‘What can I acquire?’ Hollywood will pay for what they feel obligated to, if you control the situation and have multiple bidders, you can establish a different kind of market.” (Coogler clarified that this deal is unique and he won’t seek ownership rights for future films.)

As a devoted cinema enthusiast, I’m eagerly anticipating the release of “Sinners,” currently boasting a near-perfect 99% on the Tomatometer. However, breaking box office records might prove challenging for this captivating vampire thriller. Historically, films with predominantly Black casts have faced skepticism about their commercial success outside the US. A recent industry analysis by Puck suggests that “Sinners” would need to rake in a staggering $300 million just to turn a profit – an ambitious goal for an R-rated, original film with diverse genre elements.

The pressure is undoubtedly mounting on producers Abdy and DeLuca. With a string of costly flops such as “Alto Knights,” “Mickey 17,” “Joker: Folie à Deux,” “Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga” under their belt, they’re under the microscope. Rumors abound that their tenure in the Warner Bros C-suite could be numbered unless they can churn out hits soon. The recent success of “A Minecraft Movie” offers a glimmer of hope, signaling a step towards redemption.

It’s possible to contend that the generous studio treatment given to Coogler is causing ripples throughout the film industry. Although it may not have been directly caused by the Warner Bros. copyright-reversion agreement, a series of new deals and recent negotiations suggest a significant shift in power dynamics within Hollywood. For instance, Netflix unveiled an unprecedented distribution strategy for Greta Gerwig’s adaptation of Chronicles of Narnia, planning to release it in 1,000 theaters across 90 countries and IMAX, before streaming it—the biggest theatrical push for Netflix yet. This move is seen as a special consideration given to a high-profile filmmaker by the platform. Moreover, according to a studio executive trying to collaborate with Matt Damon and Ben Affleck on a project, the actor-producers are demanding ownership rights through their production company, Artists Equity. As this person explains, “They’re making the deal almost impossible.” They’re insisting on owning a share and being partners, even if it means passing on profitable projects because they want control.

The Coogler deal, which comes at a time when Hollywood has been hit by numerous disasters like the pandemic, strikes, layoffs, a decline in the box office, and fires, is now seen as one of the most significant potential extinction-level threats. A rival studio executive I spoke with isn’t wishing ill on Mike and Pam, who are known for their filmmaker-friendly approach and taking bold risks. However, they express concerns about this deal, stating that it has distorted the competitive landscape so drastically, all due to desperation. The idea of copyright reverting back to them is seen as extremely risky.

Read More

2025-04-18 22:54