September 23, 2003

I am starting the column now at 12:55 am, which is to say, I’ll be writing the rest of this in the morning.

However, just a thought to jumpstart your morning… What the FUCK is happening over at DreamWorks?

If you don’t know what I’m talking about, take a look at The Spyglass & Team Todd stories here. November will mark two and a half years since Mike DeLuca signed on with the Dream Machine. Hmmm…

Here is a great piece by DeLuca, circa June 2000 to chew on.

GOOD MORNING: Okay, maybe the caps weren't called for. But coincidences like this - two production partners, one major and one not so major - are rarely coincidental. Speculation, which is all this really can be, is flying all over town.

There is the still-breathing speculation that started back when DreamWorks had a months-long greenlight slowdown, suggesting that the studio was about to be acquired or dismantled. But then DreamWorks got some big cash and the production pipeline started flowing again. They have 10 films scheduled for 2004 (if you include Envy) and in the group, there is Shrek 2, a Spielberg/Hanks, a Mann/Cruise, The Ring sequel, the first post-Elf Will Ferrell movie, SharkSomethinger and the heated sleeper, Win A Date With Tad Hamilton!!!. Biker Boyz and Sinbad will be put in the past.

The second tangent in the rumors around the production slowdown was that Spielberg & Geffen were bored and not very interested in the company anymore. But Spielberg is now making movie after movie and you may have noticed that David Geffen's name is turning up these days a lot more often than it was.

Then there was the DW/Universal merger that was rumored back when John Malone was a potential suitor to buy Universal from Vivendi. But GE is not Malone. And DreamWorks remains a privately held company, privately held by three men (and their quiet investors) who like their privacy. Every indication is that GE will stick with the Universal film team and acquiring DreamWorks would not only upset that apple cart, but also make a lot of people scratch their heads. As good as DreamWorks 2004 line-up appears to be, Sher & Co. are on a roll that should continue though the fall, into next May and as far along as King Kong.

One deal that NBC will have to re-close as they get closer to officially taking the reins at Universal will be DreamWorks' distribution deal that was made almost 10 years ago - and which has an out for DreamWorks upon each sale of Universal. But there's no reason to think that GE will not make this continue to work for DreamWorks and there is certainly no reason why a deal worth less than $100 million a year to Universal would actually spur even a thought of a DreamWorks takeover by GE. The Diller situation is far more critical to GE/Universal's future.

So… what the heck did happen at DreamWorks this week?

My guess would be that two Mike DeLuca-loving companies announcing the move away from DreamWorks on the same day was not a coincidence, but more likely an effort to get people asking the question, "What the FUCK is happening over at DreamWorks?"

DeLuca, who is adored by his supporters and positioned as "trouble" by his detractors, has not had a great go at DreamWorks. The situation appeared to be getting a little better in recent months, as he finally got some apparent greenlights past Walter Parkes, but his stamp has not been made at the studio. And the exit of Spyglass & Team Todd leaves him with a little less power. If Claire Rudnick Polstein heads out the door around her second anniversary with the studio, the die will be cast.

DeLuca's contract at the studio isn't up until next summer. But speculation should continue to swirl around him between now and then. MGM rumors were squashed a while back. Columbia has recently reset its hand. If Sherry Lansing were finally to retire, you can bet that Sumner Redstone will be looking for a Dick Cook of his very own and not a young hotshot. With due respect to Mark Gill, if WB were ready to be in the Mike DeLuca business, Warner Independent would have been the natural fit. Disney… ask Chris Pula how well Mike would fit in there. And the grand assumption at Fox is that any change at the top will be to make room for Peter Rice's ascending star.

Ironically, the best place for DeLuca would be at New Line. And that won't happen. No one goes back to New Line after they've left. It doesn't happen.

That said, everyone seems to want to get into "The DeLuca Business," which is to say, lower budgets, fresh talent, more genre. Sony's Screen Gems division seems to have found its voice recently, becoming a consistent profit center for the studio. Dimension fills that slot at Disney. New Line is a bit confused as to why WB needs Warner Indie when they have New Line already. Searchlight fills the bill at Fox. And maybe that is the answer… maybe Viacom needs a "DeLuca arm" to oversee MTV and to build a $25 million budget business.

In any case, the instinctual reaction to want to assume that there is a fire at DreamWorks that needs to be put out seems to, once again, require restraint. But I'll still sleep with one eye open.

READER OF THE DAY: WRAPPED UP LIKE A DEUCE writes: “I'd like to see re-releases of Animal House, Caddyshack, and Revenge of the Nerds. Folks always seem to think of gotta-see-it-on-the-big-screen epics like Lawrence of Arabia when discussing revivals, but don't you think a one-week booking of Animal House would play to anyone who's been to college since 1977? Grease did a lot of business a few years ago, and it wasn't exactly an obvious choice for re-release. I think reputation alone would draw people to the theater, and not just for blockbusters like Star Wars or Lord of the Rings.

That said, where the hell is the Texas Chainsaw Massacre re-release, and where is the associated double-bill with the new version?”

THE D.A. writes: “Die Hard. (The first one.) I saw it briefly on cable over the weekend and it reminded me how much that movie loses on the small screen (not to mention the pan and scan format). I first saw it in '88 in 70MM and to me it's one of the last true "big screen" films in the last 20 years.”

B.E. ALL THAT HE CAN BE writes: “I've always been slightly annoyed that Disney never chose to re-release SLEEPING BEAUTY before its several video incarnations (including its latest). It's a gorgeous widescreen film, and it was one of Disney's most visually daring animated movies at the time -- still is, actually. And it's aged remarkably well. People always like to mention how they still cry during BAMBI. Well, I still cower in fear everytime Maleficent shows up in SLEEPING BEAUTY. She's still the most terrifying witch ever put on film.

I think Stanley Kubrick's BARRY LYNDON, much reviled at the time of its release and now considered by many (myself included) to be one of the director's greatest works, deserves a proper release again. The film was just not right for many moviegoers in 1975: Ryan O'Neal was too much of a young pretty-boy heartthrob, the prevailing film culture was favoring gritty dramas rather than staid period pieces, and people were expecting some kind of controversial, visionary genre fantasy from Kubrick, whose last three films had been A CLOCKWORK ORANGE, 2001, and DR. STRANGELOVE. It did get some brief play among various Kubrick retros at the time of the master's death, but not a real re-release that would have allowed a serious re-assessment (especially for such a visually rich film). That said, Warners barely gave freaking 2001 a re-release, so who am I kidding?

On a more obscure note: I'm not sure this ever got properly released in the first place, but maybe some enterprising company will try to put ARIZONA DREAM into theaters. It's not perfect by any means, but jeezus, it's got Johnny Depp and Vincent Gallo playing cousins (!) Not to mention Lili Taylor, Jerry Lewis, Faye Dunaway. It was also directed by Cannes-award winning Emir Kusturica. It was a hit all over the planet, except here in the US. Somebody, help.”

MICHIGAN J writes: “I've always been a big believer in re-releases. I manage a theatre, and a few years ago, I initiated a program that brought back old movies. At one theatre I managed, I did one old movie only for a midnight show, and at my current theatre, I played an old movie for the whole day for a whole week. Some of the biggest titles we showed were The Shining, The Princess Bride, Pink Floyd The Wall, Close Encounters, Braveheart, Top Gun, A Clockwork Orange, Ghostbusters, and yes, the trilogy of the Indy movies--one each week. (In fact, I fulfilled an Indy fan's dream--one night while we still had all 3 prints, a fellow manager and I ran all 3 in a row on our biggest screen back to back from 11 pm to 6 am. Made us realize just how bad Temple of Doom actually is...)

All this is to say that I don't know why in the world these studios don't jump on replaying these films. We made mucho bucks while reviving old memories of great and fun films gone by, as the program lasted for several months.

My greatest thrill was walking in the back of a sold-out theatre for The Shining (approx. 250 people) and watching the scene where the chef comes back to the hotel and walks down the hall. I'm sure that every person in that theatre had seen the movie before at least once, and 90% knew what was coming up at the end of that loooong hall. And yet, it was so much fun to watch the entire theatre jump three feet in the air when Jack comes around swinging an axe, and then laughing at their realization of how involved they were with this movie.

These studios have gold on their hands. All they have to do is use it.”

NOT DEYOUNG TO KNOW BETTER writes: “First of all, there may be bad news for Howling Wolf, who asked about the Scarface re-release. The movie will be the 1983 theatrical cut, and it's playing in only a few cities (NY, LA, Chicago, and yes, Miami).

Next, I don't agree with you about the viability of the re-release business. Yes, the Star Wars trilogy was a huge success in re-release, The Exorcist did quite well, Grease did okay. but what about The Godfather? It had a 25th year trot-out in 1997 (same year as the SW Special Edition) but the grosses wouldn't have made Moe Green's eye blink.

I think that home video and cable saturation have dealt a real blow to the theatrical re-release. I think a lot of people would think twice before shelling out multiplex megabucks to see an older film they known by heart, especially when they either own the film, are planning to own the film (as you noted, most current re-releases are essentially ad campaigns for the DVD), or have only to pop down to Blockbuster to rent the film again.

Having said that, I do think there are a lot of movies that would be great to see on the big screen, especially films that never found their audience their and had to wait for home video and cable to hit it big. A Christmas Story turns 20 this year, for instance, and I'm the only person I know who saw that first in a theater. (I get the same astonished stare from kids that others get from people my age when they tell of seeing It's a Wonderful Life in a theater.) Or how about The Shawshank Redemption (10th's next year, Castle Rock, hint-hint). What about a Coen brothers mini-fest--now that O Brother has given them mainstream appeal, imagine seeing Raising Arizona, Barton Fink, or The Hudsucker Proxy again?

As much fun as these re-release might be, I simply doubt they'd earn enough to offset the cost of new prints and advertising--they'd generate more goodwill than profits, and any exec who values his parking space knows which to opt for.”

E ME: Keep on rockin’ me, baby…