I find the Watchmen situation very interesting.
The first striking thing is that for all the claims that so many make to journalism in this town, once again we have a major story – studios actually suing other studios is a rare occurrence
amit on: Review: Frozen 2 (spoiler-free)
movieman on: BYOB Fall Back, Film Forward
Christian on: BYOB Fall Back, Film Forward
movieman on: Review: Marriage Story (spoilers only in the broadest sense)
movieman on: BYOB Fall Back, Film Forward
movieman on: Review: Frozen 2 (spoiler-free)
YancySkancy on: Review: Little Women (no spoilers)
Hcat on: Why You Should Be Afraid Of The End Of The Paramount Decree
movieman on: BYOB Fall Back, Film Forward
movieman on: I Should Be Doing Box Office
Review: Little Women (no spoilers)
Why You Should Be Afraid Of The End Of The Paramount Decree
Review: Frozen 2 (spoiler-free)
Review: Marriage Story (spoilers only in the broadest sense)
see all »
[twitter-widget username="DavidPoland" hiderss="true" hidereplies="true" hidefrom="true" items="3" showts="60" title=" " targetBlank="true"][twitter-widget username="MCNTweets" hiderss="true" hidereplies="true" hidefrom="true" items="3" showts="60" title=" " targetBlank="true"]
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
I just hope Watchmen is as good as The Flintstones.
I’m sorry David, but can you please clarify this for me?
If a movie grosses, let’s say 100 mil domestically, does the studio gets all of it? what about the theater? don’t they keep about 50% (less at opening but incrementally later, averaging a 50%)
Or did I misunderstood the guy that told me so?
WTF? Not released? Fox really doesn’t get it. If you love the property so much, shoot the picture. If not, make your claim and grab a chunk of the profits.
I can’t believe that Warner didn’t have something before greenlighting this thing.
The theatre-studio split varies from movie to movie. Some start out with the studio getting as much as 90% of opening week gross. From there, it usually drops each week until the split is more in the favor of the exhibitor, which is why studios almost prefer a movie to be heavily front-loaded. A 50-50 split is usually trumpeted as what it averages out to, but it seems to me that’s probably slightly more favorable to the studio, especially in the case of those front-loaded movies.
Aw, and here I was hoping Dave would go for a fourth story that slams McWeeny and his Star Wars stance.
Aw, well. The day is young.
It’s kind of a truism that when your lawyer tells you a deal is “closed” at most studios, that means you’re done, the contracts may have a few changes here and there as the details are hammered out, but execution copies are forthcoming. But with Fox, you’re not “closed” until you cash that first check as they are tough, tough bastards famous for scotching as many deals as they make.
And – I believe – this is them living up to their reputation.
But that’s their job. If they can word a contract in such a way that, years later, it can mean even a $25 million win for their studio on another studio’s project, they’ve more than earned their paycheck.
But yeah, have to agree with David’s statement here:
“At the very least, the first thing development execs normally consider on a project that
Dave wrote: “The first striking thing is that for all the claims that so many make to journalism in this town, once again we have a major story – studios actually suing other studios is a rare occurrence
Not the case anymore, Bart.
The split is almost always 55% flat now… to the studio.
This is one of the key reasons why movies don’t stay in theaters… there is no longer any motivation for the exhibitor to keep a film on a screen longer than they have to.
Wow, Storymark… bitter?
Thank you for the clue, Assumed… their piece doesn’t mention or link to it, probably because it’s behind a pay wall.
Here is their blog entry and a pdf of the complaint.
Really, Fox Legal is repped? By Louis Karasik at Weston Benshoof?
“Unlawful Entry.”
THANK YOU, Fox complaint – I’ve been trying to remember for days what movie the trailer to “Lakeview Terrace” reminded me of.
And I can’t believe I read the whole thing, either.
Thank you Fox complaint? Who’s defending WB?