When Amazon decided to break its contract with Woody Allen back in 2018, due to the still unwarranted claims from Mia Farrow that Allen had sexually abused their daughter back in the ‘90s, Allen’s latest film, “A Rainy Day In New York,” was a victim of the fallout. It has yet to be released by Amazon and likely won’t be anytime soon. The film, in other words, is in total limbo.
And so, do you blame Allen for suing Amazon back in February? Amazon had him signed up for a multi-film deal worth tens of millions of dollars. Allen’s lawsuit was all about Amazon violating the terms of agreement of the contract. The original complaint by Allen stated that “Amazon has tried to excuse its action by referencing a 25-year-old, baseless allegation against Mr. Allen. The allegations were already well known to Amazon (and the public) before Amazon entered into four separate deals with Mr. Allen — and, in any event, it does not provide a basis for Amazon to terminate the contract. There simply was no legitimate ground for Amazon to renege on its promises.”
We hadn’t heard from Amazon since the suit was filed, but now, months later, they are talking. Their argument is that Allen was responsible for his own actions, whatever the hell that means.
The gist of it all has Amazon implying that the the details surrounding Allen’s sexual abuse allegations were already well-known, but that they reemerged because of Allen himself. If you remember, Allen was caught saying, “I should be the poster boy for the #MeToo movement. Because I have worked in movies for 50 years. I’ve worked with hundreds of actresses and not a single one — big ones, famous ones, ones starting out — have ever suggested any kind of impropriety at all. I’ve always had a wonderful record with them.” This unleashed the Kraken aka Mia Farrow and her son, journalist Ronan Farrow, as they teamed up, once again, to try and take down Allen. Given that this was in the middle of #MeToo hysteria, the public decided to adhere to its “believe all victims” mantra and vilify Allen. This brought back a ton of headlines based upon previous allegations, which were already discounted in court.
“Understood in the broader context, Allen’s actions and their cascading consequences ensured that Amazon could never possibly receive the benefit of its four-picture agreement,” Amazon stated in its response (via the LA Times).
The short version: "Woman Unknown" was a compromise. The jury deadlocked over "Possible Love" and "NAZA," not able to com to terms, fell back on their #3, May el-Toukhy's film.