website tracking
Search The Big Picture

« Philip Seymour Hoffman Playing The Penguin? News to Him | Main | Elizabeth Banks Slams MPAA Over Original 'Zack and Miri' Rating »
Monday
08Sep2008

'Disturbia' Being Sued For Ripping Off 'Rear Window'

DateMonday, September 8, 2008 at 10:45PM
Rear Window is my favorite movie. Not just my favorite Hitchock movie or Jimmy Stewart movie or my favorite old movie: It's my favorite film. I don't think it's the best movie ever, but I love it more than anything else.

Last year, there was a pretty obvious remake of Rear Window in theaters, Disturbia with Shia LaBeouf and it's a damn good remake. There's no way around it, though; they're the same movie: A guy is holed up in his house, sees what he thinks is a murder across the street and starts investigating his neighbor with the help of his hot girlfriend. I mean, that's Rear Window.

Well now, DreamWorks, Universal and Steven Spielberg are getting sued by the copyright holder of Cornell Woolrich's short story, according to court documents filed today in New York. The suit, brought by the Sheldon Abend Revocable Trust, claims that Hitchcock and Jimmy Stewart bought the rights to the story in 1953, and producers of Disturbia should have done the same thing.

"What the defendants have been unwilling to do openly, legitimately and legally, (they) have done surreptitiously, by their back-door use of the Rear Window story without paying compensation," the lawsuit claims.

Saying Disturbia is in essence an unauthorized remake, the suit continues, "In the Disturbia film the defendants purposefully employed immaterial variations or transparent rephrasing to produce essentially the same story as the Rear Window story."

I can't really argue with that. I guess my only question relating to the fact that there is a lawsuit would be, "What the hell took so long?" I suppose because no credit is given to Woolrich in Disturbia, there's a bit of a slap in the face for not acknowledging his inspiration on the film, which went on to gross nearly $120 million in theaters worldwide, and millions more on the home video market and through broadcast and cable performance contracts.

I can't believe Spielberg, with his billions, wouldn't have acquired the rights or made sure that the proper credit was given. I don't know what the possible defense could be, frankly; it's a pretty direct lift of the story. I'm sure a settlement will be reached and the Sheldon Abend Revocable Trust will have one hell of a pizza party someday soon.

AuthorColin Boyd | | in , , , , | Print ArticlePrint Article | | Comment4 Comments |

Reader Comments (4)

This is oddly timed. Maybe they were stuck behind Tommy Lee Jones in line at the clerk of courts office.

Monday, September 8, 2008 | Unregistered CommenterJeremy

Greatest. Comment. Ever.

Monday, September 8, 2008 | Registered CommenterColin Boyd

I too wonder what took so long! If he was so angry about it why didn't he sue months ago?

Wow that sounds lame after the Tommy Lee Jones comment. lol

Tuesday, September 9, 2008 | Unregistered CommenterJulie

Well, Spielberg should try to get the same judge as in the Dan Brown case where he was miraculously cleared of ripping off The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail.

Tuesday, September 9, 2008 | Unregistered CommenterLengthy Johnson

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.

My response is on my own website »
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Post:
 
Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>