Weinstein talks to Thompson
Harvey Weinstein (whom my son Jett overheard snarling at someone the other day in Cannes) talks to Variety columnist Anne Thompson about the financial health of the Weinstein Co., trying to swat down rumors that he and brother Bob are on the ropes.
Harvey was probably snarling, because they didn’t have his favorite snack at the buffet.
How much money do you think Weinstein got from the LORD OF THE RINGS movies? Just curious. (He was an executive producer, right?)
yes, i’m sure harvey is struggling. jeez.
Jeremy, I’m sure he wound up with more than Jackson, otherwise there wouldn;t be a lawsuit.
Somewhere in the neighborhood of 100-150 mil for LOTR.
Jeremy: A few million? I could swear he only made about 5-10% off the deal. Of course, even if it’s more than that, if he’s using it to finance his new company, the idea of him “struggling” wouldn’t appear to be that questionable.
5% of what though, worldwide gross? That would still give him well over $100m.
Harvey’s problem is that he wants to be an old-Hollywood mogul and have total control over huge budgets but he currently has to live on an indie scale.
Harvey wants us to think that it take a while for his company to have a real hit, but he’s not dealing with an expansion franchise. He’s got the same directors that made him a mint and so far they’ve tanked on his ass. Did Minghella’s Breaking and Entering do anything besides take up space at Blockbuster?
jeff: “Harvey’s problem is that he wants to be an old-Hollywood mogul and have total control over huge budgets but he currently has to live on an indie scale.”
Harvey’s problem is he’s a compulsive gambler in an industry which is becoming more restrained. Half the projects I’ve read about him picking up don’t even make sense, financially. And if you want to be technical, LOTR was done on an indie scale, too. If New Line shot it outside of WETA, it probably would have been twice or even three times as expensive. The reason Harvey can’t get the job done as well as PJ is because he’s had a straight-to-video mentality since Miramax’s inception. The films which don’t look like crap are the ones he doesn’t “improve”.
corey: I really don’t get how he could give Minghella a second gig after Cold Mountain flopped. It’s like when he thought re-releasing Benigni’s Pinocchio subbed(because it’s not Asian) would save it.
D.Z., in what world did Cold Mountain flop? It grossed close to $100 million in the U.S., and I’m sure it made its money back and then some. It just missed a BP nomination (which it richly deserved over Seabiscuit), and really only earned a bad reputation because of the divisiveness of Zellweger’s perf (which did win an Oscar, for the record) and because Kidman looked too clean and pretty near the end of the film.
That means nothing compared to the film’s fantastic screenplay, cinematography, editing (by Walter Murch, the best in the business), some horrific battle scenes that are as equally impressive as anything in Saving Private Ryan, and a very uncharacteristic perf from Jude Law, relying little on his good looks and charm, which in an off year may have earned him awards.
Considering Minghella made a film that swept the Oscars in 1996, really putting Miramax on the map prestige-wise, and garnered profits and awards attention with The Talented Mr. Ripley, why wouldn’t he give Minghella another chance? Breaking & Entering was a modest film with modest intentions, and while it wasn’t successful, I suspect the timing of the release had much to do with it. It was never destined to make much money anyway, but the perfs of Law, Binoche, Wright, and Farmiga were all nom-worthy.
Aside from that, I agree with much of what you’ve said about Weinstein, though I think he also makes a lot of valid points in the article. The guy’s no dummy, and even if he comes off as defensive, he is under a disproportionate amount of criticism. I suspect he and his company will do fine in the long run.
Iazarus: “D.Z., in what world did Cold Mountain flop? It grossed close to $100 million in the U.S., and I’m sure it made its money back and then some.”
Harvey? Actually, it only made $80 million in profits max, and that doesn’t take into account P+A.
“It just missed a BP nomination (which it richly deserved over Seabiscuit),”
Yeah, because movies with Aussies with shitty Southern accents are underrated.
“and really only earned a bad reputation because of the divisiveness of Zellweger’s perf (which did win an Oscar, for the record)”
Probably the only one she’ll ever get, too. That was more like charity.
“Considering Minghella made a film that swept the Oscars in 1996, really putting Miramax on the map prestige-wise, and garnered profits and awards attention with The Talented Mr. Ripley, why wouldn’t he give Minghella another chance?”
Because that was over ten years ago, and English Patient was done on the cheap? Also, Ripley’s success had more to do with Damon than Minghella.
“The guy’s no dummy,”
Yeah, selling LOTR to another studio while investing the same money in Gangs of New York was shrewd.
Harvey spent the last few years of Miramax getting out of the indie game and putting his attention on budget busters. He didn’t want to be the little engine that could win the Oscar.
But Harvey the Hustler who knew how to works a small film into a medium size return is dead. he’s as bad as Sony Classic – just throw it against the wall and see if it sticks.
One thing is for sure – if Harvey puts his name on a CGI kiddie film – run the other way.
corey: That’s not fair to Sony Classic, since they actually have taste. Fox Searchlight’s a better analogy.
Wow, now I understand what it’s like to interact with D.Z. I guess by quoting invididual lines you can reply to what you want and discard whatever makes your position incorrect.
Your original post had two problems with it: the first was that you called Cold Mountain a flop. With a budget of $83 mil and a domestic gross of $95 mil, there’s no way the film failed to turn a profit with international and DVD included. So worst case scenario, it made a fair amount of money. Considering how many period pieces bomb and fail to show any profit, I think it’s disingenuous to call the film a flop.
The second problem was that you don’t understand Weinstein’s willingness to give Minghella a “second chance”. Since they had already made 3-4 films together, I guess it’s a 5th chance. You won’t acknowledge that they just made 3 films together that were successful from a monetary and awards standpoint, which would guarantee any filmmaker the clout to make a smaller and less bankable film, but then turn around and give the credit for Ripley to Damon. Get real. The performance that everyone talked about from that film was Jude Law (note the Oscar nom and his subsquent work with high-profile directors and projects), and while Damon was great as well and was likely responsible for a portion of the audience turnout, Minghella put together the whole package. He wrote the screenplay, directed it, brought back most of his crew from The English Patient, and enlisted the help of Paltrow and Blanchett as well.
Ultimately, Harvey likes to put out good movies, no? He believed Minghella had put out a few of them which made money. I don’t understand what more there is to it.
Your snarky comments re: Zellweger and Kidman don’t really add anything to this argument. Have you nothing constructive to say about the actual quality of Cold Mountain?
God forbid Harvey pours his money into Martin Scorsese’s most personal film project ever, regardless of whether you liked the finished product at all. For shame. People attack him for thinking only about the dollar, and when he gets behind something riskier, he’s an idiot. That doesn’t make any sense. I think that selling the rights to LOTR was a pretty shrewd move. No risk (and it WAS a risk, let’s not forget), big reward. Correct me if I’m wrong, but Peter Jackson praised Weinstein for allowing him to shop it somewhere else after they couldn’t come to terms.
Welcome to the club. You can’t have a discussion with DZ, you can only feed him ammo to be launched back at you.
“Breaking & Entering was a modest film with modest intentions, and while it wasn’t successful, I suspect the timing of the release had much to do with it.”
It received a release? Better tell Harvey that.
Believe it or not, I saw B&E in a tiny art house theatre in Sausalito, CA. Wasn’t even playing in San Fran anymore.
Of course, that’s probably 1 of only 5 films that actually showed the thing.
There’s really no excuse for not being able to pull at least $5 mil out of a film starring Law and Binoche. I don’t know what they thought they were doing, but they fucked it up royally. Harvey never seemed to have a problem shelving films ’til later so why didn’t he just hold onto it ’til Fall ’08? Out of respect for Minghella?
(should have read “1 of 5 THEATRES that showed the thing”)
Binoche isn’t exactly a draw in the states. I don’t know of a single person who said “oh man, the new Juliette Binoche film is out”. But, I do think they should have been able to make a bit more from a film starring Jude Law and “from the filmmaker who brought you The English Patient, Talented Mr. Ripley and Cold Mountain”. But Harvey doesn’t understand the business anymore, especially marketing. Or maybe he just doesn’t have the funds. But it seems to me that he’s more interested in buying his girlfriend a fashion line than dealing with the films.
Iazarus: “With a budget of $83 mil and a domestic gross of $95 mil, there’s no way the film failed to turn a profit with international and DVD included.”
It might have been profitable, but it’s still a flop, because the expectations for it were clearly higher, and because it cost more than it got back in the end.
“Considering how many period pieces bomb and fail to show any profit, I think it’s disingenuous to call the film a flop.”
Most period pieces don’t cost almost $100 million.
And they’re not given 2,000+ theaters.
“The second problem was that you don’t understand Weinstein’s willingness to give Minghella a “second chance”. Since they had already made 3-4 films together, I guess it’s a 5th chance. You won’t acknowledge that they just made 3 films together that were successful from a monetary and awards standpoint,”
Technically, they only made two films together. Ripley was handled by Paramount. And only the English Patient can be considered a success.
“which would guarantee any filmmaker the clout to make a smaller and less bankable film, but then turn around and give the credit for Ripley to Damon. Get real. The performance that everyone talked about from that film was Jude Law”
If people liked Jude Law, he’d be as big or bigger than Damon. But that’s clearly not the case. And even the ads emphasized Damon.
“(note the Oscar nom and his subsquent work with high-profile directors and projects)”
Being nominated isn’t the same as winning, and his subsequent work has been marginal at best, and mostly in flops, too. I’m hoping for WKW’s sake that he doesn’t kill Blueberry Nights, either, but
there’s no guarantee of that. Plus he’s an ass for cheating on Sienna Miller. The only reason I might be interested in the remake of Sleuth is because I haven’t seen the original, and because of Michael Caine. (BTW, the site’s up at http://www.sonyclassics.com/sleuth/ )
“and while Damon was great as well and was likely responsible for a portion of the audience turnout, Minghella put together the whole package. He wrote the screenplay, directed it, brought back most of his crew from The English Patient, and enlisted the help of Paltrow and Blanchett as well.”
Yes, but it’s clear that Damon has more pull than all three of them combined.
“Ultimately, Harvey likes to put out good movies, no?”
Yeah, “My Baby’s Daddy” is really classy stuff.
“God forbid Harvey pours his money into Martin Scorsese’s most personal film project ever, regardless of whether you liked the finished product at all.”
He only funded it, because he was hoping Leo would
guarantee it to be a hit, even though audiences really saw Titanic for the sinking ship.
“For shame. People attack him for thinking only about the dollar, and when he gets behind something riskier, he’s an idiot.”
He’s an idiot, because he didn’t actually believe in the project, or he would have let it stand on its own. GONY was just an ego boost for him and nothing more.
“I think that selling the rights to LOTR was a pretty shrewd move. No risk (and it WAS a risk, let’s not forget),”
How was it anymore of a risk than GONY, especially since at least you can get a PG 13 out of LOTR?
“Correct me if I’m wrong, but Peter Jackson praised Weinstein for allowing him to shop it somewhere else after they couldn’t come to terms.”
Yes, he praised Harvey, because he was glad to be rid of him.
“Harvey never seemed to have a problem shelving films ’til later”
Excuse me? He’s been doing it since the beginning.
DZ
I had pals on the set of Gangs of New York. it was Harvey’s major ego trip because he promised Marty on the set that he’d finally win an Oscar for it. The greatest story I heard off the set was how production was shut down for a day when Marty’s magic pencil sharpner was broken by a PA. He couldn’t work until a new one was aired in from New York City.
Harvey has always defended his ugly behavior with “but he loves movies” and his whole business that he knows how to edit to make hits and award winners. Who cares about the money – the simple fact is that the Harvey has lost the magic. Did anyone utter his name this Oscar season except out of nostalgia?
Mignella’s new film is bound to end up straight to Blockbuster with a plot that reads “A Botswana woman starts up the country’s first female-owned detective agency.” That’s exactly what all those folks lining up for Pirates 3 were asking “When will a movie about Botswana detectives come out?” Put this next to Doogle 2.
and judging from Sienna Miller’s attitude during interviews, it’s easy to see why Jude Law would spend quality time with the nice comfortable nanny.
Jesus Christ, DZ. Your cut-and-paste style is worthless. It allows you, as said above, to pick and choose tiny snippets that you can find fault with while avoiding the need to craft anything that could be considered a full-scale, detailed ‘argument’ It’s lazy and intellectually dishonest to do what you do.
We know you don’t like Harvey Weinstein, but, and I cannot emphasize this enough, YOU ARE NOT HELPING YOUR CASE IN THIS MANNER. All you’re doing is annoying people.
Unless that’s your overall goal, then mission accomplished.
Please stop.
“Harvey’s problem is he’s a compulsive gambler in an industry which is becoming more restrained”
so what’s wrong with that? that’s exactly what’s missing from studios these days. do you want more corporate writeoffs like POTC? GRINDHOUSE was a gamble — should never have cost that much — but it’s an instant cult classic that will make its money back.
Thanks for the back up, jeffmcm. I imagine D.Z.’s style of rebuttal is a reubuttal itself, and to ask him to formulate his thoughts in a way that reads legitimate is like getting an ADD Playstation-thumping adolescent to sit down for a game of chess.
I’m not going to play the cut-and-past game except to say that the notion of “flop” is still being used incorrectly. D.Z. claims that Cold Mountain may have been profitable, but still cost more than it got back. Huh? An $83 mil budget + publicity and advertising
DZ: “It might have been profitable, but it’s still a flop…”
How can we possibly compete with logic like that?
jeffmcm: Welcome to the club. You can’t have a discussion with DZ, you can only feed him ammo to be launched back at you.
Cha-Ka!
D.Z.: He’s an idiot, because he didn’t actually believe in the project, or he would have let it stand on its own
Cha-Ka!
corey3rd: judging from Sienna Miller’s attitude during interviews, it’s easy to see why Jude Law would spend quality time with the nice comfortable nanny.
Cha-Ka!
lazarus: So now you have to actually win the Oscar to be successful?
Cha-Ka!
Jayne Gacey: How can we possibly compete with logic like that?
Cha-Ka!
Cha-Ka!
christian: “that’s exactly what’s missing from studios these days. do you want more corporate writeoffs like POTC?”
I’ll take those over pretentious period films trying to top Heaven’s Gate’s budget and its mediocrity.
“GRINDHOUSE was a gamble — should never have cost that much –but it’s an instant cult classic that will make its money back.”
If you want to hear women talk dirty for more than 15 minutes, call a phone sex line. That doesn’t make for a cult film, however.
lazarus: “and to ask him to formulate his thoughts in a way that reads legitimate is like getting an ADD Playstation-thumping adolescent to sit down for a game of chess.”
You can play chess on a videogame system, you know.
“So now you have to actually win the Oscar to be successful?”
That’s certainly the only way The Departed was going to make any money.
“To go from near-obscurity to a nomination is nothing, apparently.”
Yep. Just ask Hillary Swank and Charlize Theron.
“the fact remains that post-Ripley he had a big part in Spielberg’s most ambitious film and Sam Mendes’ American Beauty follow-up, among other films. It looks like he made quite an impression.”
Law only got those parts, because he’s got a good agent and/or he works cheap.
Jayne: “How can we possibly compete with logic like that?”
When a film’s a hit, it makes its money back, a profit, and a high gross. If it only makes a profit, that usually means it barely broke even on
its costs.
jeffmcm: Welcome to the club. You can’t have a discussion with DZ, you can only feed him ammo to be launched back at you.
Cha-Ka!
D.Z.: He’s an idiot, because he didn’t actually believe in the project, or he would have let it stand on its own
Cha-Ka!
corey3rd: judging from Sienna Miller’s attitude during interviews, it’s easy to see why Jude Law would spend quality time with the nice comfortable nanny.
Cha-Ka!
lazarus: So now you have to actually win the Oscar to be successful?
Cha-Ka!
Jayne Gacey: How can we possibly compete with logic like that?
Cha-Ka!
Cha-Ka!
“You can play chess on a videogame system, you know.”
The single smartest thing that D.Z. has said on this board.
For fuck’s sake, DZ, you obviously can’t tell when a strategy doen’t work.
Do you really believe The Departed was unsucecessul? Good lord you’re an idiot. Why do I waste my time on you? The only reason is because of your extreme stubornness. Your ignorance and arrogannce do nor merit it otherwise.
Sorry for the typos.
Wow, Jayne. I think that’s exactly what I was going to say.
D.Z., when The Departed won it’s Oscar on February 25, 2007, it had $131 million. On a budget of 90 mil, with say 20-30 mil in p&a, we’ll be childish and say it “broke even”, before winning the Oscar. It was very much already winding down its domestic run by then. It was in fact one of the big resonant hits of the year, and it could be argued this helped it win Best Picture.
Let’s also briefly address this Heaven’s Gate thing, which you clearly picked up somewhere and just started using, probably much how “650,000 civilians died in Iraq”. In 1980, Heaven’s Gate was budgeted at 40 million dollars. Even adjusted for inflation, that puts it nowhere near the current budgets for films like Spider-Man 3, Superman Returns or Pirates. And it’s not a masterpiece, but anyone who doesn’t want to see a well photographed Western starring Kristopherson and Walken can go fuck themselves.
Excellent!
although I still think the soundtrack to the Departed was a loser. A Boston area mobster flick without “Dirty Water” by the Standells, “Moving In Stereo” by the Cars and “This Monkey’s Going To Heaven” by the Pixies? And if you must play Van Morrison, why not pick a track off Astral Weeks since Van wrote it while living in Boston. Why not “Madame George” playing as Jack plots? And yet Marty gives us another film with Gimme Shelter? Gimme a Break (as the loser on 20/20 would say)
Excellent!
jeff: Departed was successful for a Marty movie, but it was still more over-budget than necessary. Why the fuck does it cost more than ten times the price of the Boondocks Saints?
Jayne: It won an Oscar, because the Academy was desperate to appear relevant, not because they care about box office. Even the people who liked The Departed think Marty should have gotten an Oscar for his previous work.
Oh, wait, when a Marty movie costs more than $100 million, it’s ok, because it can’t possibly be more bloated and padded for time than POTC.
Excellent!