Videos by ComicBook.com
So naturally, the question now becomes whether or not to make Sinners into an IP empire of its own with a sequel. While nothing has been announced, the film’s critical, commercial, and Oscar success (including winning Best Actor for Michael B. Jordan and Best Original Screenplay for Coogler) means conversations about the future are definitely already happening behind closed doors. Yet the result of these decisions hinges on a highly unusual agreement Coogler negotiated with Warner Bros., which gives the filmmaker extraordinary long-term control over the property, and which The New York Times called “the deal that made Hollywood lose its mind.”
The Warner Bros. Deal and The Sequel Potential of Ryan Coogler’s Sinners
Set in 1932 Mississippi, Sinners follows twin brothers Smoke and Stack Moore (both played by Michael B. Jordan), who return home to open a juke joint only to find themselves amid a rapidly spreading vampire issue tied to America’s violent past. The result is equal parts blues musical, gangster drama, and supernatural horror, in which Coogler uses the Vampire subgenre to explore generational trauma, systemic racism, and black culture.
While the story of Sinners is a self-contained one, Coogler’s rich world instantly opens up possibilities for more stories within it. Supporting characters like Annie (Wunmi Mosaku), Mary (Hailee Steinfeld), and the Irish vampire leader Remmick (Jack O’Connell) hint at a larger mythology beyond the Moore brothers’ story. The consequence of introducing such well-thought-out vampire lore (rooted in real American history) is that the audience immediately wants more. Coogler is no stranger to sequels, having directed Black Panther: Wakanda Forever as a direct sequel to the original, and his unique deal with Warner Bros. might mean he sees franchise potential in the Sinners world as well.
During a competitive bidding war for the project in early 2024, Coogler used his momentum from the Black Panther franchise to secure insane creative terms for his involvement in Sinners. The agreement reportedly granted him final cut of the film, first-dollar gross participation (meaning he makes money as soon as tickets start selling), and, most importantly, a rights-reversion clause. Under the deal, ownership of Sinners will revert to Coogler 25 years after release.
There’s no way to know yet what this means for a sequel, but we can say the clause alters the franchise equation. In the short term, Warner Bros. controls distribution and would need to initiate or approve sequels. But in the long term, the intellectual property (at least of the original film) ultimately becomes creator-owned, meaning future installments, spin-offs, or reinterpretations could eventually be guided entirely by Coogler rather than by a studio mandate. This gives Coogler a lot of leverage, but also does not specifically restrict Warner Bros.’ rights to develop or produce a sequel in the meantime. A sequel would not only have to align with Coogler’s creative vision, but Warner Bros. would likely need to be able to rely on short-term box office gains. Still, the success of Sinners makes continuation feel possible, or even inevitable, and Coogler’s track record shows he has the artistic chops to make it just as good as the original.
Should Sinners become a franchise or stay a standalone story? Leave a comment below and join the conversation now in the ComicBook Forum!
