The reason for the lawsuit is predictable: Brody says he was never paid the $640,000 he is owed for starring in the film. Why does that entitle him to prevent the producers from releasing the film (rather than just suing for the money)? Well, Brody signed a contract that entitled him to "withhold consent to the use of his likeness in the picture" in exchange (and as collateral) for deferring payment of his salary. According to Brody, the producers brazenly never paid him (and never intended to), and have ignored his attempts to exercise his right to keep the movie from being released.
The complaint lists Dario Argento as a "non-party co-conspirator," implying that the venerable Italian filmmaker, though not himself a Defendant, had a part in repeatedly lying to Brody to induce him to complete the film. Brody asks for either full payment of the $640,000 or an injunction barring the release of the film, and $2 million on top of that for fraud.
On Friday, the judge denied the Plaintiff's emergency motion for a restraining order, so the Court will not issue an injunction in time to prevent the DVD release tomorrow. It could still conceivably order the producers to take the movie off the shelves at a later date, though a more likely outcome is a confidential settlement and dismissal of the lawsuit before the Court has a chance to act.
Meanwhile, has anyone here seen this thing? The early reviews did not inspire confidence. If Brody buries 'Giallo,' how much are we losing?