PARK CITY, Utah — Michael Shanks soared to prominence after his feature debut “Together” garnered a stunning $17 million acquisition by Neon at the Sundance Film Festival. However, the success has been marred by a lawsuit alleging that the film’s concept was improperly lifted from an indie comedy titled “Better Half.”
In a statement released Wednesday, the 34-year-old Australian writer-director expressed his distress over the accusations, emphasizing that “Together” is deeply inspired by his own experiences of love and loss. Shanks articulated his frustration, calling the claims not only upsetting but fundamentally false. “This story is rooted in my own lived experience, developed over several years,” he said.
Set to hit theaters on July 30, “Together” centers around a couple who become physically fused due to mysterious forces. The lawsuit claims that actors Alison Brie and Dave Franco were pitched “Better Half” in 2020, but their agency, WME, declined the project. After its release earlier this year, producers of “Better Half” reportedly attended the Sundance screening of “Together” and felt “stunned” by the parallels between the two films.
In their defense, Neon and WME responded to the allegations by asserting that the lawsuit appears to be an attempt to gain publicity for a project that did not succeed. The defendants’ lawyer, Nicolas Jampol, insisted the two films are “not remotely similar” and pointed out that Shanks registered his screenplay in 2019, well before the “Better Half” pitch.
Shanks elaborated on his timeline in a follow-up statement, noting he completed the first draft of “Together” in 2019 and obtained development funding from Screen Australia the following year. Additionally, he shared that he met Franco in 2022, and they quickly connected over their passion for horror and cinema.
Despite the challenges, Shanks described the journey to create “Together” as a realization of a dream that demanded years of dedication and some luck. He expressed concern that the copyright infringement claims could overshadow the film’s release, saying the accusations not only diminish his work but also threaten to distort the narrative of his creative journey.
As legal proceedings unfold, Jampol has encouraged the plaintiffs to withdraw their claims, although no immediate response has been made in court. Without a settlement, the lawsuit could linger long past the film’s premiere, potentially taking a year or more to resolve.
The plaintiffs’ attorney, Daniel Miller, previously indicated that the similarities between the two projects are striking, and he remains confident in the validity of their claims. He accused the defendants of attempting to rationalize what he views as substantiated evidence.
This evolving legal saga not only highlights the complexities of intellectual property in the film industry but also poses significant implications for future projects rooted in personal experiences and shared narratives.
This article was automatically written by Open AI, and the people, facts, circumstances, and story may be inaccurate. Any article can be requested for removal, retraction, or correction by writing an email to [email protected].