Woody Allen may claim to be an advertising “virgin,” but his scandalous past has driven down the value of his celebrity, lawyers for American Apparel chief Dov Charney said yesterday.
The Oscar-winning filmmaker wants at least $10 million from the equally controversial Charney’s hipster clothing company for plastering his face on billboards that briefly appeared in New York and Los Angeles two years ago.
But his Manhattan federal court suit has unleashed a torrent of trash talk from mouthpieces for Charney, who has repeatedly been sued for sex harassment and once reportedly masturbated in front of a reporter.
In court papers, Charney’s lawyers are demanding that the famously neurotic nebbish cough up records to prove his tarnished reputation hasn’t hurt his ability to demand a “premium price” for his endorsement.
“We believe that Mr. Allen’s popularity has decreased significantly, especially in light of the scandals he’s been associated with,” American Apparel lawyer Stuart Slotnick told The Post.
“We believe that he greatly overvalues the worth of his endorsement — if he can get one.”
American Apparel cites Allen’s notoriously bitter custody battle with ex-girlfriend Mia Farrow, as well as his horndog high jinks with her adopted daughter, Soon-Yi Previn, whom Allen secretly romanced and later wed.
“The term ‘sex scandal’ shall mean . . . your relationship with Soon-Yi Previn including the discovery and public reports thereof, the nude pictures you took of Soon-Yi Previn, and your marriage to Soon-Yi Previn,” Charney’s lawyers wrote.
In a deposition last week, Allen’s agent, John Burnham, testified that his client was one of no more than five or 10 “iconic” figures in American cinema, with the others including Clint Eastwood, Charlie Chaplin and Frank Sinatra.
Allen testified at his own deposition that his asking price for appearing in an advertisement in the United States was $10 million.
He also blasted American Apparel — whose billboards featured an image of him dressed as a bearded rabbi in his 1977 film “Annie Hall” — for its “low-end” clothing and its “sleazy,” “infantile” and “adolescent” ads.
But Allen conceded he was a “special kind of entity” and a “special taste,” whose brand of comedy doesn’t appeal to everyone, Charney’s lawyers revealed.
“Because of his limited appeal, the demand for a Woody Allen endorsement is quite low,” the lawyers wrote.
In its filing, American Apparel accused Allen of intentionally stonewalling the company, saying he should have marketing studies, movie reviews and fan mail that “would shed considerable light on Allen’s popularity and mass appeal.”
The company also complained his legal “gamesmanship” was hurting its efforts to prepare for trial, set to begin on May 18.
Allen’s attorneys didn’t return calls for comment.