Peter Bart, no longer the Big Kahuna at Variety but still holding a megaphone at the trade paper, speculates on possible corporate suitors for stand-alone DreamWorks Animation:
... Insiders say Time Warner is exploring a bid to acquire DreamWorks Animation, the publicly owned company that presently distributes its very successful films through Paramount. An "out clause" would permit DreamWorks Animation to terminate its Paramount deal next year provided it paid $150 million to that company or that one-third of DWA were acquired by another entity.
... Last week, veteran money manager Mario Gabelli told Barron's, "A round of consolidation will occur in the next six to 12 months because of the costs of financing, prints and advertising, the benefits of globalization and such. We hear talk of something going on."
Allow me to gaze into my crystal ball (handily embedded inside the Pegboard of Ollie Johnston's old animation desk) and give you the lowdown:
DreamWorks Animation will get gobbled up by one of the hungry conglomerates, and within the next two to three years. It's freaking inevitable because:.
1) DWA is the only successful animation studio not attached to an entertainment conglomerate, nad its pursuing the Pixarian business model of "Cash flow is predicated on every animated release being a hit."
2) DWA has built a strong animation track record and sizable 'toon library, both highly desirable things for the big entertainment congloms. It's also building a television presence after a false start thirteen years ago.
3) DWA is working to hold down costs and squeeze more efficiencies into its production pipeline. (This I know from first-hand experience.) The economizing will improve chances for wider profit margins, thus making the 'toon factory more enticing to those big entertainment companies.
4) Jeffrey K. loudly proclaims that he's not looking to merge with anybody ... much as Steve Jobs proclaimed Pixar's independence from Disney just before, you know, Disney gobbled Pixar up ... and Steve J. pocketed several billion dollars. (Jeffrey can do math, trust me.)
All this is as inevitable as the sun rising tomorrow morning. I can't tell you the month and day a marriage will occur, and the current economic troubles might slow the nuptials a bit, but there is no way that a merger won't ultimately happen.
Posts
19 comments:
This will be the moment to turn DW into a studio people respect. Whoever buys should pay off Jeffrey, put him in a figurehead managerial role, and get him out of the creative process.
It would be nice then to see DW hire directors/writers with a singular point of view, slash and burn the "development executives," as Disney has done, and make unique and a more varied production slate.
And make more short films!!
But forget about Time/Warner buying DW. They're too overextended, and DW doesn't turn enough ancilliary profit to make a long term blip on their radar.
The 2 anonymous above have zero clue as far as their comments about Jeffery, creative executives at Dreamworks, or the process at Disney.
From personal experiences, Jeffery gives great notes. He should be celebrated for the role he has made in animation.
Back off Pixies!
Why not Paramount?
Well from my personal experience Jeffery gave as many moronic notes as he gave good ones. I like Jeffery, and think he runs a mighty fine studio, but I think the less creative control he has the better.
All very interesting and probably quite likely as you predict (that a larger company will purchase DWA).
I'm curious about one of the things you mentioned above under item (2) :
"It's also building a television presence after a false start thirteen years ago."
The only false start that I can remember DWA having on television was "Father of the Pride" in 2004 , which was five years ago. What was the other DWA television flop thirteen years ago ? (Or was it a planned tv show that was never produced ?)
This isn't a surprise. DW anim. is a big company that is now at the crossroads that all large things in America come to at some point - become more gargantuan than you already are or die. In time, it also will implode from it's own addiction to financing like every other large corporation too big too fail. It just does not cost 150 million dollars to entertain people. Quality will suffer ten-fold in this miserable process of race to the top of absolutely nothing. That fate can and will easily happen to Pixar as well. Someone down below posted something about small game companines that rang very true - the small guys do take care of their own and produce amazing work. Games is a young enough industry that there is still true competition going on. Not in Hollywood. Hollywood is pure corporate entitlement and cronyism. This is predictable news. And sad, of course.
Dreamworks had an entire TV division. It produced one show, Toonsylvania, before it folded altogether. That was 1998 (according to IMDB).
Oh gawd, please don't let Time/Warner buy up Dreamworks. They've screwed up their classic catalog, Kids WB, all the recent superhero stuff, Hanna-Barbera, and Cartoon Network beyond belief already without having to take down another outlet for animation.
Whatever one says about Jeffrey, he's at least still doing animation, whereas Time/Warner is floundering big time.
Hi, Barry,
For what it's worth, Dreamworks also had an animated mini-series on TV called INVASION AMERICA in 1998.
Yosh! ;^)
Dreamworks much like Pixar, can need a super conglomerate to finance their operations. I am not surprised but impressed that Jeffrey has gone so long with out being owned by a larger entity. Even though they have had a string of successes, the appetite to produce budgeted 150M plus movies is a risky business that needs a lot of capital support. Its always good to have more coin on hand.
They choose to need enormous financing. It is not required. In fact, it is usually a huge detriment, on many levels.
ref. Michael Jackson, 1958 – 2009
From what you've written, Steve, it sounds as though Dreamworks is keeping artists' salaries low, and/or hiring in new artists at lower wages, all so that Jeffery can make more money when he sells it.
Not really a shocker, I know. I just hope everyone is perfectly ok with all this.
"From personal experiences, Jeffery gives great notes. He should be celebrated for the role he has made in animation."
From personal experiences, this nitwit shotguns notes--as many bad as good, with a few too many creative executive sycophants with their heads up his ass. Little Jeffery Kaztemburg is just another Hollywood yahoo with nary a good idea in his walnut sized skull.
"From what you've written, Steve, it sounds as though Dreamworks is keeping artists' salaries low, and/or hiring in new artists at lower wages, all so that Jeffery can make more money when he sells it."
More like, Jeffrey is keeping salaries low to try to gain back what he lost to Madoff. Spielberg also lost some dough in the Madoff scheme.
R.
There is not a successful CEO in the world right now that isn't totally re-assessing the house of cards they created. The world view they were used to playing craps with has been revealed to be a colossal failure. At this very moment, all of them, including Jeffrey, are locking in their financial parachutes to exit the game quickly and quietly so they can spend their golden years philosphizing over why their formula was not executed correctly. They will spin-off their results as books and lecture tours to re-write history in their favor, to secure their world view, and to put their spoiled great great great great great grandchildren through Harvard and Yale to perpetuate their mythology.
From personal experiences, this nitwit shotguns notes--as many bad as good, with a few too many creative executive sycophants with their heads up his ass. Little Jeffery Kaztemburg is just another Hollywood yahoo with nary a good idea in his walnut sized skull.
Man you have issues.
Bitterness and jealousy will only help your career goal of standing at the street corner holding up a sign for change.
I never met or worked with Jeffrey Katzemburg, but I'm always amazed at how polarizing a figure he is. I don't like everything the studio has done, nor all of their policies and methods, but you have to give him his props: There is a major animation studio in town turning out successful films that is not called, or owned by, Disney. That means, or should mean, more competition for talent, therefor higher salaries, and more jobs. Some of them, I hear, are even held by Americans!
"From personal experiences, this nitwit shotguns notes--as many bad as good, with a few too many creative executive sycophants with their heads up his ass. Little Jeffery Kaztemburg is just another Hollywood yahoo with nary a good idea in his walnut sized skull."
FFS!
First of all, how big do you think Dreamworks is? The artists outnumber the nonartists by about 100 to 1. There are something like TWO "creatives" between him and the producer/directors on any show. 2. Usually it amounts to "0" as the 2 aren't present in every situation. Pixar has Ed Catmull and other admin/"creative execs" give notes and sit in screenings, too.
And it's "Katzemberg" who got the idea to start a fucking FEATURE animation studio, which whether you like it or not has had a lot of substantial hits and some excellent films and employs some killer artists who otherwise would still be doing god knows what in the UK/EU/Canada and all over the USA. "Oh, that Jeffrey--what an annoying guy! Why the hell did he insist on committing to animation, hiring 1000 artists who are working and making cool movies?!"
I don't what your so-called "personal experience" is, but it sounds like it's pulled right out of YOUR ass. If you ever did work there-thank god you're gone.
Post a Comment