MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland

How Are Things Going At DreamWorks?

THB. React.
LATE ADDITION: An excellent piece on DW by Kate Kelly and Merissa Marr at the WSJ brought up a key element that has escaped me… a major piece of the value of DreamWorks live action is that they have distribution rights to all the DreamWorks Animation films. That alone could add $50 million to $100 million a year in net revenue to DreamWorks SKG. Interesting….

Be Sociable, Share!

36 Responses to “How Are Things Going At DreamWorks?”

  1. oldman says:

    Is the above logo JAWS IV?

  2. joefitz84 says:

    Looks like Dreamworks is going out in a blaze of glory.

  3. Panda Bear says:

    They need a serious cash infusion. STAT.

  4. Lota says:

    your picture isn’t finished. You need a caption that has the shark saying: “WHo’s your Daddy?” to DreamWorks

  5. oldman says:

    Dreamworks must have said or done something that really peaved off Paul Allen. He has the deep pockets and patience to back risky ventures. I vagely recall that Allen was suppose to be able to cash out (5 years?) in the original deal. The fact that he wants out must make DW nervous.

  6. jeffrey boam's doctor says:

    that would be JAWS V old man.

  7. oldman says:

    Jeezz, you mean I missed Jaws IV? sigh

  8. Angelus21 says:

    They really needed a studio lot. They are just a big production company and no production company can afford 50mill bombs.

  9. sky_capitan says:

    Paul Allen should pull his money out of the Portland Trailblazers first (although he’s the one who drove that NBA team into the ground…)

  10. jeffrey boam's doctor says:

    forget THE ISLAND – i think infuriating your shareholders by returning 30,000,000+ dvd units over the space of a couple of months is a lot worse than a Bay bellyflop.

  11. lindenen says:

    I’m clueless. Why would a studio lot have made much of a difference?

  12. Chester says:

    JBD, is that 30 million number of returns right? I know the DVD has sold about 35 million units so far, well below projected estimates, but an extra 30 million copies seems amazingly high. I’m not doubting you, I’m just asking for a confirmation.

  13. jeffmcm says:

    Studio lots are huge sources of income. They rent studio space, office space, sets, costumes, props, scoring stages, etc. out to productions. Dreamworks has been living off of Universal its entire life.
    What DVD are you talking about?

  14. Panda Bear says:

    How are the Trail Blazers in the ground? They got the best collection of young talent in the league right now. The Jail Blazer stuff is done.

  15. Chester says:

    The DVD in question is “Shrek 2.”

  16. jj says:

    This looks like it’s becoming inevitable. Sadly, more excellent marketing and distrobution people will loose their jobs. In a market already flooded with MGM and soon to be Miramax people looking for work. Didn’t Sumner Redstone say the big Media model wasn’t working any more? I would be happier with EA or an outside company buying DW than Uni.

  17. KamikazeCamel says:

    I believe something like 80% of Miramax’s staff is simply moving to the Weinstein’s new company.

  18. bicycle bob says:

    so dreamworks owes its existence and future existence to shrek?

  19. Bruce says:

    They have really been a waste of talent and money and time since they started. They’re television division has been downright awful. It’s a miracle they didn’t need this money 3 years ago.

  20. BluStealer says:

    I don’t really care of the internal politics of the this situation and others like it but if we lose Dreamworks then thats a lot of movies that won’t get financed or made.

  21. Bruce says:

    I hope they don’t go under or start cutting back on their already minimal production schedules. A lot of cast and crews will be out of work.

  22. PastePotPete says:

    The main problem with Dreamworks imo is that there was no point to it. Any of their movies could have been made anywhere else, it’s not like Miramax where they pretty much created a category. Even New Line for a long while was adept at providing films that the majors wouldn’t touch. Dreamworks felt like a carbon copy of a major studio from day one.

  23. Terence D says:

    I always assumed they’d build a lot and make it like one of those classic studios from the Golden Age.

  24. joel says:

    This is what happens when you get in business with Michael Bay.

  25. teambanzai says:

    After the eco-terrorists stopped them from building a studio on the old Hughes property they just sort of gave up on the idea and settle at Universal.

  26. oldman says:

    Is Bay being set up as “the man who killed DW”?

  27. Panda Bear says:

    All the people before this who made Millions off of Bay aren’t complaining.

  28. Terence D says:

    One movie doesn’t sink a studio. The Island isn’t Heaven’s Gate. Far from it.

  29. Mason says:

    Actually it’s pretty damn close.

  30. jeffmcm says:

    Studios have a bomb this size on an annual basis these days. Heaven’s Gate was the equivalent of a movie like Titanic grossing $20 million.

  31. Mark says:

    The Island will make most of its money back overseas and on the DVD market. The only people taking shots now are the anti Bay crowd.

  32. teambanzai says:

    I don’t think it was the size of the budget of the Bay bomb that worried people. I looks like it was more of a case of none of them saw it coming. When you’re predicting 20+ million opening weekend, which granted is already low for what’s supposed to be a summer blockbuster and you get 12, I think that shakes the cofidence in the yet to be released. Especially after what happened with the Shrek 2 DVD sales. So while they may not have been dragged under by The Island, but they may fear it could happen so it’s just easier to shore everything up by dragging another studio down with them.

  33. Sanchez says:

    The Island will make it all back overseas. Foreign people love dumb action movies.

  34. KamikazeCamel says:

    But the movie business is different that how it was when Heaven’s Gate was out. As Jeff said studios suffer movies like The Island every year now. Besides, I think xXx2 will go down as the biggest flop of this year, considering The Island has a much better looking outlook for DVD.
    Besides, Dreamworks has been coasting along for a few years now. It seems that only their animated films and Meet The Fockers were successes. Infact those are the only Dreamworks movies I can think of of the last few years.
    And somebody up there said that Dreamworks’ movies could’ve been made anywhere else. And that’s true. In fact, a lot of them were. Spielberg’s are basically Universal, right?
    Seriously, I can’t really think of anything substantial that Dreamworks has done. They’ve been quiet on the awards circuit too, i believe.

  35. TheBrotherhoodOfTheLostSkeletonOfCadavra says:

    “They’ve been quiet on the awards circuit too, i believe.”
    Say what? How about three consecutive Best Picture Oscars: AMERICAN BEAUTY, GLADIATOR and A BEAUTIFUL MIND. (And they came within a whisker of four in a row with SAVING PRIVATE RYAN.)

  36. jeffrey boam's doctor says:

    kamikaze – being australian is not enough of an excuse for such clueless comments. Brotherhood served yo ass. ownd.

The Hot Blog

Quote Unquotesee all »

It shows how out of it I was in trying to be in it, acknowledging that I was out of it to myself, and then thinking, “Okay, how do I stop being out of it? Well, I get some legitimate illogical narrative ideas” — some novel, you know?

So I decided on three writers that I might be able to option their material and get some producer, or myself as producer, and then get some writer to do a screenplay on it, and maybe make a movie.

And so the three projects were “Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep,” “Naked Lunch” and a collection of Bukowski. Which, in 1975, forget it — I mean, that was nuts. Hollywood would not touch any of that, but I was looking for something commercial, and I thought that all of these things were coming.

There would be no Blade Runner if there was no Ray Bradbury. I couldn’t find Philip K. Dick. His agent didn’t even know where he was. And so I gave up.

I was walking down the street and I ran into Bradbury — he directed a play that I was going to do as an actor, so we know each other, but he yelled “hi” — and I’d forgot who he was.

So at my girlfriend Barbara Hershey’s urging — I was with her at that moment — she said, “Talk to him! That guy really wants to talk to you,” and I said “No, fuck him,” and keep walking.

But then I did, and then I realized who it was, and I thought, “Wait, he’s in that realm, maybe he knows Philip K. Dick.” I said, “You know a guy named—” “Yeah, sure — you want his phone number?”

My friend paid my rent for a year while I wrote, because it turned out we couldn’t get a writer. My friends kept on me about, well, if you can’t get a writer, then you write.”
~ Hampton Fancher

“That was the most disappointing thing to me in how this thing was played. Is that I’m on the phone with you now, after all that’s been said, and the fundamental distinction between what James is dealing with in these other cases is not actually brought to the fore. The fundamental difference is that James Franco didn’t seek to use his position to have sex with anyone. There’s not a case of that. He wasn’t using his position or status to try to solicit a sexual favor from anyone. If he had — if that were what the accusation involved — the show would not have gone on. We would have folded up shop and we would have not completed the show. Because then it would have been the same as Harvey Weinstein, or Les Moonves, or any of these cases that are fundamental to this new paradigm. Did you not notice that? Why did you not notice that? Is that not something notable to say, journalistically? Because nobody could find the voice to say it. I’m not just being rhetorical. Why is it that you and the other critics, none of you could find the voice to say, “You know, it’s not this, it’s that”? Because — let me go on and speak further to this. If you go back to the L.A. Times piece, that’s what it lacked. That’s what they were not able to deliver. The one example in the five that involved an issue of a sexual act was between James and a woman he was dating, who he was not working with. There was no professional dynamic in any capacity.

~ David Simon