MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland poland@moviecitynews.com

Doing The ParaWorks Math

There are still some movies coming down the pike, but it seems like today is a good day to do that math on DreamAmount/ParaWorks.
DREAMWORKS MOVIES UNDER PARAMOUNT
15 movies in the last 3 years : Dreamgirls, Perfume, Flags of Our Fathers, She’s the Man, The Last Kiss, Transformers, Norbit, Sweeney Todd, Blades of Glory, The Heartbreak Kid, Disturbia, Things We Lost in the Fire, Tropic Thunder, The Ruins
Worldwide Theatrical Gross; $1.996 billion
Worldwide Rentals: $1.098 billion
Estimated Post-Theatrical Gross Returns To Par: $950 million
Estimated SS Cut On Transformers: $75 million
Estimated Gross Points Out (Murphy, Depp, Ferrell, Stiller): $25 million
Total Estimated Income To Par: $1.948 billion
DREAMWORKS ANIMATION AT PARAMOUNT
5 movies: Shrek the Third, Over the Hedge, Flushed Away, Bee Movie, Kung Fu Panda
Worldwide Theatrical Gross; $2.219 billion
Worldwide Rentals: $1.220 billion
Total Theatrical Return to Paramount (10% distribution deal):$ 122 million
Estimate Fees To Par For Home Video Distribution: $100 million
Initial Cost of Deal: $75 million
Par Net On DWA over 3 years: $147 million
TOTALING
Estimated Revenue Created For Paramount via DW & DWA: $2.1 billion
Unrecoverable Cost of DreamWorks Deal: $900 million
This leaves $1.2 billion against the marketing and production costs of the 15 movies listed above.
My estimate on production costs? Just under $800 million. (This takes into account nothing but release costs on Perfume, a split on Flags, and a split on Sweeney.)
A conservative estimate on marketing on these films is $450 million.
POST-SCRIPT
Yes, Paramount owns the non-DWA films and they go into the Par library. That more than makes up for what seems to be an overall loss on the deal.
On the DreamWorks side? Nothing but a mountain slot machine. Win. Win. Win.
If AIG/USA ends up this way, with America coming out about even and AIG recovering from its troubles to be stronger than ever, I would consider that a win.
But Paramount didn

Be Sociable, Share!

One Response to “Doing The ParaWorks Math”

  1. Roman says:

    David, where did you your calculate the worldwide rental figures yourself or got them from somewhere?
    It seems like DW purchase would have been quite protiable for Paramount too if only the studio stayed with them for a couple of years longer.

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