Ryan Coogler's deal to own 'Sinners' is a gamble that could still pay off big time
After years of making films based on existing IP like Marvel comics and Apollo Creed, Ryan Coogler finally made an original movie. It could pay dividends for the rest of his life.
The unique terms of Coogler's deal with Warner Bros. for his genre-bending vampire movie "Sinners" give the 38-year-old filmmaker ownership of the movie in 25 years, putting him in rare company with the likes of auteurs like Jim Jarmusch and Quentin Tarantino, both of whom have landed similar deals. And with "Sinners" becoming a box office sensation — it's brought in over $200 million domestically, making it the second-highest grossing North American release in 2025 — Coogler could have his hands under a moneymaking faucet.
"He's making a lot of money off it now and has the potential to make money 25 years from now through ownership," Jonathan Handel, a veteran entertainment and technology attorney with the law firm Feig Finkel, told Business Insider. "But he's rolling the dice."
Will that gamble pay off, and how, exactly, could Coogler make or lose money on the deal? Though Handel hasn't seen the contract between Coogler and Warner Bros., he used his decades of experience writing contracts for directors and stars to walk us through some scenarios to explain what could happen when Coogler regains the rights to "Sinners."
Deals like Coogler's come with creative control — but they're not a blank check
There are various ways a filmmaker can come to own their own work. Some use a tactic known as a "negative pickup," in which the filmmaker finds the financing and makes the movie on their own, then sells the finished project to a studio, which distributes it and does the marketing. M. Night Shyamalan did this with Universal for the 2019 thriller "Glass," and most recently, Francis Ford Coppola did it with Lionsgate for "Megalopolis."
Others self-distribute, side-stepping a studio or distributor and footing the bill for the entire release. For instance, Steven Soderbergh launched Fingerprint Releasing for the run of his 2017 heist movie "Logan Lucky," while Taylor Swift made deals directly with theater chains for the release of her Eras Tour concert movie in 2023.
But it's exceedingly rare to get a studio to agree to give the rights of one of its movies back to the filmmaker after some period of time. Many of the auteurs who enjoy this perk got their start on the independent film scene, where the practice was more common. Jim Jarmusch has pushed to own most of his films, while Quentin Tarantino owns "Once Upon a Time... in Hollywood" because he made a deal with Sony that grandfathered him into the rights deal he'd had since the "Pulp Fiction" days with Harvey Weinstein at Miramax Films.
Creatively, the deal was something Coogler said he needed. He previously told Business Insider that his only motivation for the deal was to emphasize the film's themes of Black ownership, as the two main characters, both played by Michael B. Jordan, set out to own a juke joint in the Jim Crow South before things take a bloody turn.
Handel noted that by pushing for ownership in 2050, Coogler is literally and symbolically betting on himself, and the prospect that "Sinners" will still be in the public consciousness two-plus decades from now.
"Coogler would have gotten more money up front if he hadn't pushed for ownership," he said. "You have to give something to get something in negotiation. So he's definitely betting that it will have value in 25 years."
Coogler could score a major licensing deal if new technology changes how we consume movies after 2050
According to Handel, Coogler could really cash in if there's a major shift in the way we watch movies after he regains the rights to "Sinners."
For example, if we're suddenly watching movies on an immersive 3D platform and "Sinners" is under the ownership of Coogler, he could take in millions landing licensing agreements to view the film in that format.
However, if that technology becomes the streaming of tomorrow before the rights to "Sinners" revert to Coogler in 25 years, the director could miss out, either because Warner Bros. could choose not to convert the title to that platform, or because of something called a "holdback," in which the copyright cannot revert to Coogler until certain conditions are met.
"In this instance, WB might do a holdback where there can be no new version created within five years of the rights reverting," Handel said.
Though this is only a hypothetical, Handel said it's an example of the level of complexity that could be in the contract Warner Bros. and Coogler signed.
Even if Coogler doesn't have the rights to 'Sinners' sequels, he could still cash in
The ending of "Sinners" hints at a potential franchise, and 25 years from now, Coogler would be in control to do whatever he wants in building that out. But chances are, Warner Bros. would want a sequel — maybe even more than one — a lot sooner than 2050.
When that moment comes, a lot of questions about payout will depend on who has the sequel rights. Reps for Coogler and Warner Bros. did not respond to a request for comment about who holds those rights.
Even if Coogler doesn't have the rights to the sequels, Handel said he would still benefit. Coogler still presumably would have profit participation on any sequels, as he does on the first movie, and if Warner Bros. wanted to do any kind of box set 25 years from now, they would have to make a deal with Coogler to have the first movie involved.
"He's got the upper hand, because if I'm Warners and I own the other pictures, I have to go to Ryan and do a deal with him," Handel said.
So how much money could Coogler make once the "Sinners" rights revert to him? Reports from Matthew Belloni at Puck put that figure at about $1 million a year, based on the predictions of Hollywood insiders who focus on movie libraries and licensing deals. But Handel isn't confident that any figure can be put on the deal as of now.
"To contend that you can make a prediction like that is fantasy land," he told BI, noting that there are too many unknown variables to predict what Coogler could earn from "Sinners" 25 years in the future.
What he is sure of is that Coogler's deal has left the rest of Hollywood interested and intrigued: "The high-level directors are having conversations with their representatives about this."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Gizmodo
5 hours ago
- Gizmodo
The Newest Marvel/DC Crossover Will Have Some Fun Team-Ups
In May, Marvel Comics and DC finally confirmed they were doing a new crossover for the first time in over 20 years. At the time, we only knew it'd involve Deadpool and Batman teaming up in a pair of one-shots from Zeb Wells and Greg Capullo (Marvel) and Grant Morrison and Dan Mora (DC). Thanks to the latest Marvel solicitations for the month of August, we know the full scope of the crossover on its side of things. Along with the previously announced duo, Marvel/DC: Deadpool & Batman will feature stories pairing Daredevil and Green Arrow (from Kevin Smith and Andy Kubert), Captain America and Wonder Woman (Chip Zdarsky and Terry Dodson), and superpets Jeff the Shark and Krypto the Superdog (Kelly Thompson and Gurihiru). Each story also gets its own variant cover, and you can see most of them down below. That's a solid lineup of fan favorites and heavy hitters, helped by the fact none of the human characters spent time together in prior crossovers. Marvel and DC have already confirmed there's more hangouts coming: Batman/Deadpool is dropping in November, and there's another set of one-shots coming in 2026. DC's currently mum on whether its one-shot will have extra stories, and both are just as quiet on other heroes waiting in the wings in future installments, or if these are leading to something bigger on the horizon. Superheroes do tend to get caught up in multiverse problems on a frequent basis, after all. Marvel/DC: Deadpool & Batman #1 hits shelves on September 19. Want more io9 news? Check out when to expect the latest Marvel, Star Wars, and Star Trek releases, what's next for the DC Universe on film and TV, and everything you need to know about the future of Doctor Who.
UPI
5 hours ago
- UPI
'Sinners' to stream on Max starting July 4
Ryan Coogler (L) and Michael B. Jordan arrive on the red carpet at the Warner Bros Pictures "Sinners" New York premiere at AMC Lincoln Square Theater on April 3. File Photo by John Angelillo/UPI | License Photo June 21 (UPI) -- Sinners -- a blockbuster horror movie starring Michael B. Jordan in dual roles -- is slated to start streaming on Max July 4. You keep dancing with the devil, one day he's gonna follow you home. #Sinners begins streaming July 4 exclusively on Max. Max (@StreamOnMax) June 20, 2025 "You keep dancing with the devil, one day he's gonna follow you home. #Sinners begins streaming July 4 exclusively on Max," the platform announced Friday. Directed by Ryan Coogler, the supernatural film takes place nearly a century ago in the Mississippi Delta. The ensemble also includes Hailee Steinfeld, Jack O'Connell and Delroy Lindo. Michael B. Jordan, Hailee Steinfeld attend 'Sinners' premiere Cast member Michael B. Jordan arrives on the red carpet at the premiere of "Sinners" in New York City on April 3, 2025. Photo by John Angelillo/UPI | License Photo
Yahoo
5 hours ago
- Yahoo
James Gunn Says the 'Movie Industry Is Dying' Due to Films Being Made With Unfinished Scripts
James Gunn has a 'number-one reason' why he believes the 'movie industry is dying.' The filmmaker and co-head of DC Studios recently told Rolling Stone that a lot of the bad movies being released are due to production dates being set before scripts are completely finished. More from The Hollywood Reporter Rachel Brosnahan Says Actors Should "Stand By" Their Bad Superhero Movies Warner Bros. Animation and DC Studios Order Adult Animation Series 'Mister Miracle' 'Superman' Final Trailer Shows David Corenswet "Doing Important Stuff" 'I do believe that the reason why the movie industry is dying is not because of people not wanting to see movies. It's not because of home screens getting so good,' Gunn said. 'The number-one reason is because people are making movies without a finished screenplay.' When Gunn took over at the helm of DC Studios with Peter Safran, he emphasized that superhero films under his guidance would not go into production until scripts were finalized. He even admitted that they 'just killed a project' due to that very reason. 'Everybody wanted to make the movie. It was greenlit, ready to go,' the Superman director said. 'The screenplay wasn't ready. And I couldn't do a movie where the screenplay's not good.' Gunn added, 'And we've been really lucky so far, because Supergirl's script was so fucking good off the bat. And then Lanterns came in, and the script was so fucking good. Clayface, same thing. So fucking good. So we have these scripts that we've been really lucky with or wise in our choices or whatever the combination is.' Not having a mandate from Warner Bros. to deliver a certain number of DC projects has also helped Gunn, as the Guardians of the Galaxy director believes Disney's previous mandate to increase Marvel films and TV shows 'killed them.' Disney CEO Bob Iger has since refocused Marvel on quality over quantity. 'We have to treat every project as if we're lucky,' Gunn explained. 'We don't have the mandate [at DC Studios] to have a certain amount of movies and TV shows every year. So we're going to put out everything that we think is of the highest quality. We're obviously going to do some good things and some not-so-good things, but hopefully on average everything will be as high-quality as possible. Nothing goes before there's a screenplay that I personally am happy with.' Best of The Hollywood Reporter 13 of Tom Cruise's Most Jaw-Dropping Stunts Hollywood Stars Who Are One Award Away From an EGOT 'The Goonies' Cast, Then and Now
