11:56 PDT 6/06/2021
by
Borys Kit
Sources say Rian Johnson, Ram Bergman and Daniel Craig should walk away with more than $ 100 million each.
Just over a year ago, it seemed like an open and closed case.
In February 2020, Jongtheimer, CEO of Lionsgate, said during a quarterly earnings call that the company was officially continuing with a follow-up to Knives out, the surprise box office and critical smash whodunnit starring Daniel Craig and written and directed by Rian Johnson.
But on March 31, in a turn worthy of Agatha Christie, the revelation came that Lionsgate would not issue the sequel at all. Instead, Netflix would make two sequels, coloring in a $ 469 million deal with Johnson and his T-Street production partner, Ram Bergman, who has a dagger driver, both of whom are represented by CAA.
Trading points were remarkable: the deal gave Johnson tremendous creative control, sources said The Hollywood Reporter. He does not have to make notes of the spreader. The only coincidences were that Craig had to star in the sequel and that everyone had to have at least the budget for the 2019 film, which was in the $ 40 million series. Sources say Johnson, Bergman and Craig are left with more than $ 100 million each.
The other company that missed the sequels was MRC, the Beverly Hills production company that financed the first film. (MRC is also a co-parent of THR through a joint venture with Penske Media titled PMRC.) Sources say that MRC had a one-time agreement with Johnson and Bergman, the filmmaker and producer known for extremely beloved, modest budgeted one-time thrillers Brick and Looper before they made Star Wars: The Last Jedi. An MRC representative said the company was ‘proud’ of its initial collaboration with Johnson and Bergman Knives out and noted that the duo ‘always had the right control’ on the franchise. (MRC is a minority investor in T-Street, but will not participate in the windfall of the new transaction as its stake in the production company took place after Knives out was already made, and it gave no part of the movie.)
Sources note that Lionsgate had a good agreement in which the company had the first right to negotiate and the last refusal rights, all of which are part of the negotiation safety net with which companies normally protect themselves against the loss of projects. (Lionsgate and CAA declined to comment.) And Johnson and Bergman were considered big fans of the theater experience.
But that was before the pandemic, the theater made a dent and the back did not exist. In January, with the pandemic in full swing and a hoped-for summer production for a sequel, Johnson and Bergman questioned the viability of theatrical release in the short term. CAA started buying the deal and streamers like Netflix hit hard. MRC and Lionsgate, who normally got the project possible, could not compete. “It’s become a perfect storm,” says one insider. “That would not have happened a year ago.”
Despite the price, the deal made sense for Netflix on several levels. The streamer gets an immediate and proven franchise with sequel to a film that earns $ 311 million worldwide. And that weakens a theater rival.
“Yes, it pays too much, but Netflix is playing chess while everyone else is playing checkers,” said a CEO familiar with the deal. ‘It takes a proven theatrical product off the board and stuffs it in their pocket. And this is another way in which they re-educate the audience to think of streaming and their business above a studio. ”
For others, the deal shows the leverage of sought-after talent right now, thanks to the competition of streamers. “If you have talent at the moment and want to bet on yourself, this is a good time.”
A version of this story appeared in The Hollywood Reporter magazine on April 7th. Click here to sign up.