Add this to the list: The owner of the film rights to Charles Bukowski's semi-autobiographical novel, Ham on Rye is suing Franco over copyright infringement laws. Humphris claims he and Franco struck an agreement in 2009 but that the agreement expired in 2010 and despite its expiration, Franco went on to make the film anyway. The suit claims that the film “incorporates entire scenes, including substantially their dialogue” from the book.
From what Humphris says, it sounds like Franco is being a bit wiggly, telling Humphris he was “doing a little project with some of my NYU colleagues based on one of Bukowski's biographies” — despite Franco and his brother, Dave Franco, both stating that they planned to adopt “Ham on Rye.”
Franco just doesn't seem to give a flying fuck. He's making his own rules, creating his own opportunities. He's got 13 titles in one stage of post production or another. IMDB lists Bukowski as completed with a screenplay by Franco and Adam Rager (this seems to be his maiden voyage) and no mention of Ham on Rye. Maybe they made it up? Seriously, Franco, if you owe the man the money, pay up and move on.
Bukowski focuses on Bukowski's early years as a teenager struggling with an abusive father, alchohol addiction, his own writing problems and disfiguring acne. The film stars Josh Peck (The Mindy Project) as Bukowski, Keegan Allen (Pretty Little Liars) as pal Jimmy Haddox, Beverly Hills, 90210 alum Shannen Doherty as mom Katharina Bukowski, and Tim Blake Nelson as Bukowski's dad. The film is supposed to come out sometime this year. We'll see!
Humphris wants an injunction against the film plus 'compensatory damages.'
What do you think? If Bukowski's Ham on Rye informs Franco's Bukowski, does Humphris have a case? Or the real question, Shannon Doherty???