Harvey and Bob Weinstein are being accused of being responsible for the commercial failure of the sequel to the wildly popular movie, “Sin City.”
According to documents obtained by The Blast, a lawsuit was filed against Harvey, Bob and producer David Glasser, by the producers of “Sin City: A Dame to Kill For.”
The producers claim way back in 2012 they acquired the rights to make the sequel to Frank Miller’s gritty comic book-style, neo-noir action flick and made an agreement with The Weinstein Company to handle the distribution.
TWC apparently agreed not to promote any other films during the time around the release of “Sin City,” and also agreed to pump at least $25 million into advertising.
The producers, including Sergei and Marina Bespalov, claim during the same time, TWC was actually promoting the sci-fi movie, “The Giver,” starring Jeff Bridges and Meryl Streep, which they claim the Weinstein’s had a financial interest in.
“Because defendants held a substantial personal interest in The Giver’s financial success, Defendants took action to make certain The Giver achieved a profitable distribution, even though doing so directly harmed Plaintiff’s film Sin City 2; a film in which Defendants had no financial interest,” the documents state.
The producers claim “Sin City” eventually went on to become a commercial failure, only grossing $18.5 million domestically and in Canada.
Furthermore, they claim TWC stated that over $30 million was spent on marketing the film. The producers now believe TWC was “commingling” the funds, and actually only spent around $5 million in promotion.
According to the documents, the producers believe TWC was in a practice of screwing over movies they did not have a financial interest in, so they took the Weinstein brothers’ former company to arbitration, and claim to have been awarded $17.4 million in 2018.
They now believe there are greater damages, as the movie, which earned a 42% on Rotten Tomatoes, could have grossed many millions worldwide if allegedly marketed correctly.
The producers of the film believe they are owed more damages in lost profits and damaged reputation, and are demanding an unspecified amount be determined at a trial.