Battle: Los Angeles vs. Skyline... uh oh!!

Collector Freaks Forum

Help Support Collector Freaks Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

Kuzeh

Machete Don't Tweet!
CF Supporter
Joined
Jun 29, 2006
Messages
17,920
Reaction score
31
Location
San Diego, CalifAztlán
Seems like the Strause Bros. are in deep crap... morons... who makes a movie with the same topic and setting while doing the effects for the other one?? :dunno
:lol:lol:lol

https://www.latinoreview.com/news/out-of-this-world-lawsuit-battle-los-angeles-vs-skyline-10852

Out Of This World Lawsuit: Battle Los Angeles Vs. Skyline
By George 'El Guapo' Roush on August 16, 2010

Uh-oh! Looks like there's a lawsuit bout to happen between two alien invasion properties that sounds interesting at first, until you read more about it and realize you don't give a crap.

Battle: Los Angeles vs. Skyline. Here's the details via Deadline:

A real battle is brewing between rival aliens-invade-Los Angeles films Skyline and Battle: Los Angeles. Sony Pictures Entertainment, the studio behind the big budget Battle: Los Angeles, is exploring its legal options. At issue: Greg and Colin Strause, the owners of visual effects house Hydraulx, were paid millions of dollars to generate visual effects work for Battle: Los Angeles. But Hydraulx never informed SPE the siblings were directing a VFX-driven rival alien invasion feature that will hit theaters four months before SPE's March 12, 2011 release. SPE higher-ups discovered it was in a real horse race after Universal Pictures released a trailer that showed Los Angeles denizens being vacuumed into the sky by hovering space ships.
SPE lawyers have just started digging into the matter. This can be viewed as a Goliath vs. David story considering that the Strause brothers shot most of their film in an apartment, with the entire film costing a fraction of what SPE has spent for a full-scale alien battle film. But Skyline created strong buzz at Comic-Con that will give it a wide release through Relativity and Universal Pictures. Battle: Los Angeles could certainly have its thunder stolen. At issue: did Hydraulx and its owners owe SPE a heads-up?

And is SPE trying to create a legal issue with a film that can't afford it, to leverage a release date change that delays Skyline.

Skyline will be released November 12 by Universal. I'm told the questions that SPE legal are asking include whether Hydraulx’s work on Battle: Los Angeles served as a springboard for Skyline, or gave the Strause brothers access to equipment that helped bolster the visual effects on their small budget film. SPE’s position is that at minimum, the Hydraulx principals should have disclosed their intention to make the rival project, to avoid any conflict of interest issues. Expect the legal letters to begin flying shortly.

A rep for the Strause issued a statement: "Any claims of impropriety are completely baseless. This is a blatant attempt by Sony to force these independent filmmakers to move a release date that has long been set by Universal and Relativity and is outside the filmmakers' control." SPE declined comment as did Relativity.

Click HERE to read the rest.

I'm no lawyer, but it sounds like Sony just wants to make sure Skyline doesn't open before their movie and is doing whatever they can to make sure it stays way out of the way. I don't see how their claims of conflict of interest could possibly hold up in court. But if I knew anything about the law I'd be a scumbag lawyer making the big bucks instead of a scumbag internet writer who works for praise and food stamps.
 
Sony has a bit of a problem with their argument - they want to say that Hydraulix should have given them a head's up in advance of working on Skyline that they were doing Battle LA, implying (as does the release dates) that Battle LA was arealdy in the works when the started Skyline. But then they want to argue that by doing Skyline it made the Battle LA movie better by giving them access to equipment/resources/etc, which somewhat implies that they started those aspects AFTER taking the contract for Skyline. And of course, Hydraulix can make the same argument - that by working on Battle LA first, the effects were better in Skyline because of the additional experience. Claiming a conflict of interest is difficult unless what they are arguing is something like "they took longer with our effects and slowed our movie down to get theirs out first", and that doesn't sound like what they are trying to say. I'm betting it's unlikely that their contract had any thing to protect Sony against something like this, and the author is right - what Sony REALLY wants is to alter the Skyline release date, which isn't going to happen. The real idiots here are Sony's lawyers for not covering this in the contract in the first place.
 
Frivolous, yes. But it does have a purpose. The lawsuit draws attention to Sony's movie and I'm sure Sony is hoping that people will want to see both movies to compare. It also covers Sony in that, when comparisons are made (which is inevitable) people will remember Sony suing and (right or wrong) state: "Well Sony's movie was actually done first so Skyline bit Battle Los Angeles".

I see it more as a publicity stunt than anything else.
 
Back
Top