The Wrap points to what's kind of obvious ... and has been for awhile.
... “Katzenberg started this business hoping to create a Disney,” Michael Pachter, an analyst with Wedbush Morgan Securities, told TheWrap, referring to DreamWorks. “It’s 10 years later, and it’s not quite Disney yet.” ...
It's not even Pixar. ...
Oh ... snap!
DreamWorks Animation isn't Pixar for two reasons: 1) Some of its films haven't been the monster hits equal to the Emeryville studio's output, and 2) DreamWorks Animation has produced a lot more animated features, year over year, than Pixar.
Seven or eight years ago, Pixar and DWA had similar profiles. Both were stand-alone animation houses, and both had business models that stipulated each studio's animated features would be hits. Otherwise DreamWorks Animation and/or Pixar would be in waist-deep doo doo.
In 2011 the situation is different. Pixar is now just another division of the Disney empire (a magical transformation from indie to subsidiary that has made Steve Jobs Disney's largest stock-holder, and also one of the richest.)
But DreamWorks Animation still flies solo. Despite energetic denials, I don't doubt that Jeffrey K. would sell the Glendale and Redwood City units for the right price. Trouble is, the "right price" is probably near Pixar's sell point, which is probably more than our fine, entertainment conglomerates want to pay. (Viacom might be willing, but doesn't have the bread; Time-Warner continues to muck about with Animal Logic, Disney is obviously out; Comcast-Universal has its own new feature animation group with Illumination Entertainment.)
What then, is an independent cartoon factory to do? Probably, for the moment, more of what it's been doing. Features will continue to flow forth from Glendale, earning profitable sums that aren't profitable enough for finicky Wall Street. And Mr. Katzenberg will keep casting about for more and larger cash streams.
In short, the high-wire act will continue, and DWA's feature library will keep on growing. And when some large, hungry entertainment conglomerate is willing enough and eager enough, DreamWorks Animation will go on the sales block.
Posts
26 comments:
For a moment, I thought one of the reasons Dreamworks didn't compare to Pixar was going to be merchandising. Pixar characters seem to have more toys/games/tie-ins/mugs/clothes than Dreamworks characters.
That would be mostly correct. People tend to forget that the first 5 or so DW films were flops. And frankly not very good movies. But not many of their films have done well with merchandising. Most movie-toy tie ins just don't fly (Ratatouille, Wall-e, and Up didn't do so well in regards to that, and neither did the new star wars films). But the other Pixar films did VERY well with merchandising--with both Toy Story and Cars leading the pack.
It'd be great to see DW focus somewhat on this-if only to provide a cash cushion.
create another Disney how ? be one of the most leaders in animated feature entertainment ? check. extend brands into TV - check. Live action ? Fail. Licensing, merchandising and cross platform - Nada. I sersiouly doubt they planned to do their own theme parks ... but they do have hit ride films. Mixed scorecard but not a bad accomplishment given Disney's had a 60 yr head start. What about head to head in animated entertainment since they started - leaving out disney legacy properties ? that's a blowout.
how's the licensing, merchandising and theme pak spinoff business doing for Chicken Little, Robinsons, Princess and Frog, Tangled ?
Chicken Little and Robinsons - Not so hot.
Princess and the Frog, Tangled - doing GANGBUSTERS. Loads of cash when it comes to merch. On these two projects the merchandise lived up to or exceeded expectations. Sadly, Frog underperformed, but the girls still bought everything around it. Tangled did great B.O. AND great merchandise.
Forget comparing DreamWorks to Pixar or Disney. Compare Katzenberg to Eisner. Jeffrey comes out the clear winner.
Tangled did moderate merchandising-- hardly "gangbusters.". At a recent talk on the subject, Disney merchandising head didn't even MENTION it.
Not much DWA love here. I think it's remarkable that Jeffrey's part of DreamWorks -- launched fifteen years ago -- is the only part that really prospered.
While it's true that many of DreamWorks Animation hand-drawn features under-performed, people forget that "Prince of Egypt" -- the company's first -- grossed over $200 million worldwide. Not a big hit, but not a money loser, either, after all markets and acnillary rights were factored in.
Kind of unfair to compare DreamWorks to Disney don't you think? Disney has come a long way, and DreamWorks is going into TV a few times. They just sadly wasn't as good. Regardless, I think Pixar's movie aside from Toy Story and Cars, they didn't have much that you can merchandise as well. Who would want an old Carl Fredickson's plush? There's Remy but Linguini doesn' tmake a good merchandise.
Yeah sure DreamWorks' early movie stinked, but what matters most is DreamWorks has been improving, and it's already many people's destination to get into to work for some day. They have only just begun.
Tangled did moderate merchandising-- hardly "gangbusters.". At a recent talk on the subject, Disney merchandising head didn't even MENTION it.
Sigh. I have to provide this link again?
http://www.earningswhispers.com/newsarticle.asp?symbol=DIS&article=158431849&adate=5/10/2011%204:15:02%20PM
"The increase at the Disney Store North America was primarily due to comparable store sales growth and improved margins reflecting the strength of Tangled and Toy Story merchandise. Improved Merchandise Licensing results reflected the strong performance of Cars and Tangled merchandise. "
Didnt we already do this? Unless you have some sort of other proof that Tangled merch didnt do well, I'm going to believe this report, and the information that I receive from the people who actually work here at the studio.
I believe you are simply trying to incite an anti-Disney discussion once again with your ignorant flame-baiting.
Pwned!
I can only judge Disney/Pixar and DWA by how I feel with each movie release. I seriously look forward to every June when I know a new Pixar film will be out. It's a big event in my movie-going life. I look forward to what I know will be a great film, along with a new animated short and a peak at Pixar's next film. I'll likely get back to the theatre to see it a 2nd time, and will buy the DVD and watch more times.
I don't look forward to DWA movies. I'll usually see them because their art and animation is pretty grerat. Or I'll go with a niece or nephew 'cause I know they'll get a kick out of the Dreamworks humor. With "Train Your Dragon" as a small exception, I'll leave the movie with no desire to see it again.
I don't ever expect Katzenberg to make Dreamworks Disney-esque. But I DO wish he'd try to put out movies that are a little deeper than what he's putting out now.
Perhaps it's unfair to expect anybody to have the all-around big-picture brilliance of John Lasseter. That guy just gets it. Hell, I'm a grown man and not only can't wait to see Cars 2, but have bought a few of the diecast cars 'cause they're so freaking cool and well-designed.
Jeffrey isn't Eisner all right. He never would have been stupid enough to buy the Muppets, much less make another movie of them.
Anyone else here seen the early screenings of that thing? TERRIBLE.
Trailer looks funny.
^It pretty much backfired though. All it really did was confuse audiences.
I uh...I think people got it.
I'm not quite sure what the Muppets have to do with Dreamworks, but let's keep this derail going!
"...People tend to forget that the first 5 or so DW films were flops. And frankly not very good movies...."
A Bug's Life rocked!...
-> Not much DWA love here.
I'm not at DWA, they wouldn't hire me, so I hate them for that.
But...I'll see any DWA film upon release. Since Up, I wait for Pixar films on DVD. Did not like TS3 at all, at all.
DWA art direction is stunning, 3D is the best, stories are a little off sometimes, but on the whole, quite entertaining. More value in a DWA theater experience than in a Pixar theater experience, particularly 3D. Kudos to Katzenberg.
Obviously, just one person's opinion.
"But...I'll see any DWA film upon release. Since Up, I wait for Pixar films on DVD. Did not like TS3 at all, at all.
More value in a DWA theater experience than in a Pixar theater experience, particularly 3D. K"
DREAMWORKS: Great art and sets. Entertaining movies, though not as funny as the DW writers probably think they are, perfectly worth spending $ to take kids to. Adults likely will forget about it soon after.
PIXAR: Great art and animation. Great depth in stories. Great characters. Great animated short. Always a must to purchase on DVD (including the great TS3). Timeless.
"I uh...I think people got it"
*shrug* Somebody needs to explain why most movie audiences responded to it with baffled silence then.
You were in most of the movie audiences to witness their reaction? You're busy!
^You think Disney doesn't track this stuff? Not EVERY theater, but a decent sampling?
Online enthusiasm doesn't count, BTW. Not since Tron2 underperformed.
Disney's a tad worried about Cars2, also. Enthusiasm hasn't been high. Could be Pixar's first underperformer.
As for Dreamworks, no, it's not Disney, but it's EXTREMELY healthy competition.
"A Bug's Life rocked!..."
Not my favorite, but far better than prince of egypt, road to eldorado, sinbad, shrek, that horse movie, and antz.
I can't believe there are still people posting misinformation about how the merchandising on "Tangled" and "Princess & the Frog" was soft. Are you kidding ? Both of these "princess movies" (supposedly outdated for modern audiences?) did major business with the merchandise. Theatrical box-office is only one piece of the pie. Follow the money.
And speaking of the power of merchandise: the new Winnie the Pooh movie is only being made as one part of an effort to rejuvenate the merchandise line of Pooh products , so the theatrical box-office is not the thing to watch on Pooh. The movie can be thought of as just a very big "commercial" for the whole franchise.
-> the new Winnie the Pooh movie.
-> The movie can be thought of as just a very big "commercial" for the whole franchise.
Uh, yes, we all understand that we are talking Disney here. No surprise that the movie portion of the vertical integration is really just a commercial for other products, and not a source of artistic pride in and by itself within the lineage of Disney's movie heritage.
It is Disney, after all.
Post a Comment