December 1, 2003

“Boss: Now, if there's anything I can do for you...
Fired Employee: Well, I certainly hope you'll die soon.”
................................Written by James L. Brooks, Broadcast News

Thanksgiving weekend came in like a news lamb, but went out like a lion. When the judge mocked both the screener-hungry plaintiff and the screener-ban-fronting defendant out of court last Wednesday, delaying any action until this upcoming Wednesday (12/3), he basically ended what hope there was for any real action over the long weekend. Thanks. I needed the rest.

I have a perverse pleasure at the idea of Judge Mukasey giving the producer’s group a Temporary Retraining Order, if only to watch each studio go to war with itself. Like I said, perverse. While Harvey Weinstein may now believe that the clock is ticking away on his Disney relationship anyway and thus he may be willing to piss all over Mr. Eisner (more on that kind of activity in a moment), I would love to see other dependent distributors try to convince their parent companies that they should be allowed to break the ban while the parent companies remain Academy-only. Tee hee!

Ironically, that is really what should have been done in the first place, no matter how tough on each studio. They should have sent out small, unlikely-to-be-pirated films and not the bigger ones. It would have been hard, but they should have negotiated the details. The biggest problem, I would guess, is that classifying Miramax as an art arm while it is putting an $80 million favorite into the race meant “no go” for competing studios.

The next laugh would be watching Dependents trying to effectively produce, distribute and promote screeners in the 44 days between Wednesday and the close of Oscar nominations. In reality, it’s already too late. Most Oscar voters have received fewer than 10 screeners, including the DVD trio from non-signatory Lions Gate. And it’s looking more and more like some of the majors will decide not to send much or any product to Academy voters… at least not until nominations come out.

But that’s the lamb part. The lion roared on Sunday when The Wall Street Journal’s Bruce Orwall broke the story of Roy E. Disney’s resignation from the Disney board and from his chairmanship of the animation division. His cuts-like-a-knife letter of resignation can be read here.

Old Roy’s seven-point attack doesn’t really put anything new on the table. ABC has been a problem for a while. Fortunately, Roy doesn’t suggest that Eisner is responsible for John Ritter’s death. But he does everything else. The core of the attack is personal. According to Roy Disney, Eisner is a micro-manager who forces out too many creative employees, can’t get along with Harvey Weinstein or Steve Jobs and somehow is responsible for an allegedly worldwide perception that Disney Co. is now seen as “rapacious, soul-less and always looking for the “quick buck.”

Ouch.

What reminded me of the quote from Broadcast News was Roy’s line, “Michael, it is my sincere belief that it is you who should be leaving and not me.” But what was really interesting was his call for “fresh, energetic leadership” to replace Eisner as he closes in on his 20th anniversary in charge of the studio.

Where from?

It is breathtaking how much of Hollywood still centers around the men who were at Paramount in the late 70s and early 80s. Eisner, Katzenberg, Diller and Bruckheimer all came out of one moment in time. Sherry Lansing’s producing career started with a greenlight from Paramount at the very end of that era. At Fox, they turned to Diller and then Bill Mechanic, who came of age in the Katzenberg/Eisner Disney regime, before going for the first “new Hollywood” studio leadership, in homegrown Tom Rothman and International/Video guy Jim Gianopulos.

Stacey Snider and Amy Pascal have been “fresh, energetic leadership” for a while now. Alan Horn and Barry Meyer were brought into Warner Bros. because they were established and responsible.

If you wanted to start anew with “fresh energetic leadership.” where would you go right now? There has been no phenomenon like the Paramount of the late 70s, early 80s. Katzenberg & Eisner then created a new model at Disney, which lasted for a while. Mike DeLuca had the “fresh, energetic” thing going at New Line, but now he’s working for Katzenberg. DreamWorks is still a boutique, however muscular in some years. Miramax’s unrelenting aggression is the last truly fresh attack at the game on a bigger budget level in recent years.

There has been some fresh, energetic thinking at the mini-major level. Peter Rice is eternally being mentioned as the inevitable “next guy” at Fox. Schamus and Linde have been hot for a while now. Mark Gill is the new, unproven kid on the block.

Thinking out of the box right now is mostly a home entertainment mindset. That’s where the money is. But do we want a bunch of home entertainment guys taking over the business? There is the international scene, where I must claim ignorance. Unfortunately for fresh and energetic, the leading thinker overseas seems to be Rupert Murdoch, who has built a satellite empire.

One point that is easy to lose is that no one fresh and energetic has ever been hired to do what Michael Eisner does since Michael Eisner was hired to do it. No one else is as hands-on in as expansive a way, for better or for worse. With due respect, Peter Chernin, Mel Karmizan, Howard Stringer, Alan Horn/Barry Meyer and nowJeff Immelt, have not brought the kind of change that Roy Disney seems to be seeking. They are excellent execs that have done remarkable jobs, but it’s not the same.

Perhaps fresh and energetic at Disney really means experienced and less centralized in one man or woman. Ironically, Susan Lyne at ABC was a daring choice and very much of the fresh and energetic school, while hottie-of-the-second Jamie Tarses was clearly not. Dick Cook is as old school as you can get, but he’s riding one of the studio’s strongest years in memory. Pixar is the hottest content provider in the game right now, but amazingly, they are still talking with Disney. The break may happen, but it has not happened yet.

The other oddity of this discussion is that leadership – or at least the image of leadership - comes from very different positions at each of the studios and the corporations that own them. This came up a few weeks ago in discussions of – you guessed it! – the screener ban. Who signed off at Sony and left Howard Stringer out there to question the decision? Where were Alan Horn and Richard Parsons while Barry Meyer took the heat for leading the charge? Who cares the most about the piracy issue at Fox; Tom Rothman, Peter Chernin or King Rupert himself?

The Disney story is breathtaking in that a 61-year-old man who has had significant heart trouble does not have a true line of succession in place. Disney would keep going if Michael Eisner died tomorrow. There are people filling those jobs. But it is much like a football team with a superstar quarterback moving towards the end of his career that never is challenged by a back-up because no one wants to bring someone in to tarnish the legend.

Roy Disney wants Eisner out. I’m not sure that a move like that would be good for the company. But Eisner dying suddenly and leaving a kingdom without a king and no heirs on the horizon is really quite scary… fresh and energetic or not.

THB EXTRA: There’s a review of The Last Samurai up on Movie City News right now. Go take a look if you like.

READER OF THE DAY: B To The T writes: “I walked out of Last Samurai with one thought in my head as I said to my friend. "The Green Mile". They didn't quite get it but I did in this small Midwestern theater. Last Samurai has absolutely zero chance of getting gleeful critical reviews, but the Midwestern audience cried their eyes out. This adds up to me an oscar nom, but no win. I think word of mouth will be strong, no one was upset at the sneak preview. But no one was blown away. It was in the talk of Iowans everywhere "a good one".

Last Samurai has some problems, not big ones. I think it’s about as good as Zwick could do. Reminded me of Glory, and all that stuff. Nice, but not great. I enjoyed it, the time went fast and I was never bored. Some amazing shots. Cruise is reserved, which is good and the cast solid. Conventional, traditionally moving, and well made. That’s it. Not much more.

Here is the interesting part, the ticket counter told everyone when they bought their ticket that they could stay for Revolutions. Two people stayed.

E ME: Where is the love?