Movie fans are fretting over where to peg War Horse and The Help in the Oscar pool.
But Hollywood is pondering something else: What becomes of DreamWorks Studios, the boutique studio behind those films?
The 10 nominations between the two movies, including best picture for each, have made DreamWorks a strong contender for honors on Oscar night, Feb. 26. The two dramas already lead the best picture pack at the US box office, with War Horse passing Moneyball the weekend before last, according to estimates, to become the second most popular nominee, behind The Help, which had domestic ticket sales of about US$170 million.
Photo: Bloomberg
Behind the scenes, however, executives at DreamWorks and its partners are quietly opening discussions that in the next few months will determine its future and answer a broader question about the state of Hollywood: Can a faltering film industry sustain a company that insists on making ambitious, Oscar-caliber, studio-size films — but without the deep pockets of a Viacom, which owns Paramount Pictures, or a News Corp, the parent of 20th Century Fox?
Created four years ago by Steven Spielberg and Stacey Snider in partnership with Reliance Entertainment, an Indian financier, DreamWorks was a successor to DreamWorks SKG. The earlier DreamWorks was an independent studio that was created amid much fanfare by three Hollywood heavyweights — Spielberg, Jeffrey Katzenberg and David Geffen. Eventually they sold it to Paramount and briefly worked with the studio in what became a failed marriage.
(The new DreamWorks is unrelated to the publicly held DreamWorks Animation.)
Photo: Reuters
Over the years, small, independently financed companies — some with their own distribution mechanisms, others, like DreamWorks, without — have generated hits, only to disappear or be merged into larger corporations. Miramax Films was acquired by Disney after releasing The Crying Game, a box-office success and best picture nominee; Disney has since sold the unit. Summit Entertainment was recently sold to Lions Gate; Summit investors saw the end of their blockbuster Twilight series as a prime moment to cash out.
For smaller film companies, the hunger for capital is a perennial problem. Making a studio-level film can require an immediate investment of US$100 million or more. But even the hits pay back their investors slowly, over a cycle that may last as long as 10 years, as movies are sold successively in theaters, on DVDs, to Internet streaming and cable television services and so on.
DreamWorks is now in the ticklish position of having nearly exhausted its first round of financing, which included US$325 million in equity from Reliance, and a matching US$325 million in lending from banks led by J.P. Morgan Securities. An original plan called for more from each, but the struggles of the national economy brought the investment up short. Now, DreamWorks is left to line up new financing at a time when movies are struggling.
Attendance at North American movie theaters hit a 16-year low last year. DVD sales continue to drop. Although some emerging overseas markets are picking up steam, Europe and other important sales territories are uneven. And there are no indications of an immediate reversal of the trends.
So the question becomes whether, or to what extent, Reliance and allied lenders are prepared to back another round. Executives from Reliance and DreamWorks declined to discuss their plans. However, they said in a joint e-mail releases late last month that they remained pleased with their partnership.
“Our relationship has always been structured to allow us to adapt to changing market conditions and to create the best chance for success for all parties involved,” they said in a statement. Speaking on condition of anonymity to avoid conflict with executives of the companies, people familiar with the situation said talks about further financing will probably open in the next few weeks. The outcome will determine whether DreamWorks, which distributes its films under a long-term deal with Walt Disney Studios but has also worked with other partners, will be able to maintain its ambitious course.
If not, it might have to proceed with a smaller slate of films or potentially less impressive projects, these people say. Whether DreamWorks would even be interested in making lower-risk, lower-profile movies, however, is far from clear.
DreamWorks began making movies in 2009 after raising only half of the hoped-for financing from Reliance and lenders. Despite a top-shelf pedigree — Spielberg is by far the best-selling movie director in history, and Snider oversaw hits like Bruce Almighty and The Bourne Identity while chairwoman of Universal Pictures — the company scratched for more than a year to assemble backing during a worldwide financial collapse in which the number of banks engaged in entertainment lending fell from more than 40 to fewer than a dozen.
During that hunt for funds, Reliance and Anil Ambani, the chairman of its parent, stood by a commitment to invest in the venture, even as the terms of the involvement became less favorable. But Reliance put up less than a contemplated US$550 million in equity, as it became impossible to raise US$750 million in loans to go with it. The hoped-for US$1.3 billion total would have seen DreamWorks through this Oscar season and perhaps into 2014.
Instead, the company’s resources are nearly played out, even while the potential from its first round of films remains uncertain. The Help, War Horse, and, by a whisker, Real Steal, appear poised to make money, once their full run is complete. But Cowboys and Aliens (released by Universal), I Am Number Four, Fright Night and Dinner for Schmucks (released by Paramount) were soft at the box office, and either lost money or made too little to create a strong portfolio for investors.
Spielberg is currently finishing Lincoln, partially financed by DreamWorks, with additional backing from Participant Media and Fox. Fox is cofinancing another Spielberg film, the sci-fi thriller Robopocalypse, which is set for release in July next year by Disney in the US and by Fox abroad. (Spielberg’s many television projects are financed separately from DreamWorks Studios.)
Despite rumblings in Hollywood of friction between DreamWorks and Disney, their distribution partnership is solid, with roughly four years yet to run. “DreamWorks provides a diverse slate that’s a key part of our release strategy, and we’re pleased with the results so far,” Rich Ross, Disney’s movie chairman, said in an e-mail.
And DreamWorks has cofinancing avenues to pursue. Fox, which has previously worked closely with Spielberg, appears ready to continue supporting individual projects. Participant, meanwhile, is eager to help pay for issues-oriented films like The Help, which it backed in part. “We plan to continue to work together on at least one film per year,” James G. Berk, Participant’s chief executive, said in an e-mail.
But the pace of film production and development has already slowed for DreamWorks and its 80 employees, who work from a complex on the Universal Studios lot. Instead, Spielberg, Snider and their lawyer, Skip Brittenham, are preparing for talks with Ambani, his lieutenant Amitabh Jhunjhunwala. Reliance must now decide whether to double down on an initial investment that was never large enough to match the ambitions of the company it supports.
There is no immediate deadline to hurry the discussions, according to people who have been briefed on DreamWorks and its underpinnings. But the company’s Reliance backers are almost certain to be in Los Angeles for some glamour and glory at the Oscars later this month.
And the table talk will most likely be more about money than movies.
May 6 to May 12 Those who follow the Chinese-language news may have noticed the usage of the term zhuge (豬哥, literally ‘pig brother,’ a male pig raised for breeding purposes) in reports concerning the ongoing #Metoo scandal in the entertainment industry. The term’s modern connotations can range from womanizer or lecher to sexual predator, but it once referred to an important rural trade. Until the 1970s, it was a common sight to see a breeder herding a single “zhuge” down a rustic path with a bamboo whip, often traveling large distances over rugged terrain to service local families. Not only
Ahead of incoming president William Lai’s (賴清德) inauguration on May 20 there appear to be signs that he is signaling to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and that the Chinese side is also signaling to the Taiwan side. This raises a lot of questions, including what is the CCP up to, who are they signaling to, what are they signaling, how with the various actors in Taiwan respond and where this could ultimately go. In the last column, published on May 2, we examined the curious case of Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) heavyweight Tseng Wen-tsan (鄭文燦) — currently vice premier
The last time Mrs Hsieh came to Cihu Park in Taoyuan was almost 50 years ago, on a school trip to the grave of Taiwan’s recently deceased dictator. Busloads of children were brought in to pay their respects to Chiang Kai-shek (蔣中正), known as Generalissimo, who had died at 87, after decades ruling Taiwan under brutal martial law. “There were a lot of buses, and there was a long queue,” Hsieh recalled. “It was a school rule. We had to bow, and then we went home.” Chiang’s body is still there, under guard in a mausoleum at the end of a path
Last week the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) released a set of very strange numbers on Taiwan’s wealth distribution. Duly quoted in the Taipei Times, the report said that “The Gini coefficient for Taiwanese households… was 0.606 at the end of 2021, lower than Australia’s 0.611, the UK’s 0.620, Japan’s 0.678, France’s 0.676 and Germany’s 0.727, the agency said in a report.” The Gini coefficient is a measure of relative inequality, usually of wealth or income, though it can be used to evaluate other forms of inequality. However, for most nations it is a number from .25 to .50