Steven Spielberg's DreamWorks finalized a distribution deal with Disney today, giving the filmmaker key financial demands he failed to extract from his longtime studio alley Universal Pictures: a commitment to risk hundreds of millions in film prints and advertising costs and to share its valuable pay TV slots.
As part of the deal, Disney will also give DreamWorks -- which has been struggling to raise money for its new studio -- a cash advance of about $100 million and a potential $75-million credit line which Spielberg & Co. can draw on for future productions. Disney's total outlay of $175 million is taking the form of a loan and is not an equity investment.
But, here's the catch. While DreamWorks desperately needs the cash advance to get its slate of movies rolling, it can't access Disney's money until it raises the first phase of its debt financing -- $325 million -- which will trigger a matching equity investment by Spielberg's new studio partner India's Reliance Entertainment.
"Disney has given us all the support we need to be in a position to raise our money and launch our company," said Stacey Snider, partner and chief executive of DreamWorks.
DreamWorks initially hoped to close its bank financing by the the end of the first quarter, but that now appears to be unlikely. A person close to the matter said that a more realistic time frame is late April.
Spielberg and Reliance will continue to fund overhead at DreamWorks, which employs about 60 people, until the deal is completed.
Disney's distribution agreement calls for DreamWorks to deliver up to 30 movies over the term of the deal. DreamWorks hopes to make up to six films a year for Disney's Touchstone Films banner. The first release -- yet to be identified -- will be in 2010.
Disney will market and release the movies worldwide everywhere except India, where Mumbai-based Reliance retains the distribution rights.
The Burbank studio will advance all the prints and advertising costs in exchange for collecting a distribution fee of what could amount to as much as 10%.
DreamWorks will also be able to piggyback on Disney's pay cable deal with Starz Entertainment, which provides movie producers with a significant revenue stream worth hundreds of millions of dollars. Last year, DreamWorks had failed at an attempt to secure its own pay-TV deal with HBO.
Spielberg hooked up with Reliance last year in a 50-50 venture to relaunch DreamWorks as a new studio with hoped-for funding of $1.25 billion. Reliance agreed to match in equity what DreamWorks raises in debt, but those efforts have been greatly hampered by the global credit crisis.
Surprising news of a pending deal between DreamWorks and Disney came late last week after a previously announced agreement between the Spielberg studio and Universal Pictures fell apart. Last fall, Universal had beat Disney and other potential distributors to the punch by cinching the right to distribute DreamWorks new movies. But, as DreamWorks' attempts to raise all of its funding by early this year became derailed by the financial markets, Spielberg and Reliance put pressure on Universal to change the original terms of its distribution deal.
Among sticking points between Universal and DreamWorks was that Universal refused to put up hundreds of millions in funds for prints and ads of DreamWorks movies -- an extremely risky investment in the volatile film business. DreamWorks also wanted more movie slots from Universal's deal with HBO than the studio was able to provide.
-- Claudia Eller
Left photo: Steven Spielberg. Credit: Hector Mata / AFP
Right photo: Stacey Snider. Credit: Vince Bucci / Getty Images
Richard Hatch speaks out about 'Battlestar Galactica's' Tom Zarek
What do you think of Tom Zarek?
There's been a spirited debate in the comment area of last Friday's post on "Blood on the Scales," the most recent episode of "Battlestar Galactica." That piece contains an interview with Michael Angeli, who wrote the episode, and some analysis of the episode from me.
Readers have continued to weigh in with their own takes on the episode, which continued the tense events that began in "The Oath."
Also commenting on that post: Actor Richard Hatch, who plays Tom Zarek on the show.
I've been able to confirm that it is indeed Hatch who left the following spirited defense of the character in the comment area. Angeli also left a comment on the post as well.
Read on if you want to see Hatch's take on Zarek, which I've copied from the comment area and posted here, as well as some other comments on the character and on the depiction of power on "Battlestar." But be forewarned, it's best if you've seen "Blood on the Scales" before you read on.
One more interesting bit of news that surfaced over the weekend: Angeli said we will probably see extended cuts and deleted scenes for many of the Season 4.5 episodes when the season comes out on DVD.
Another random thing that Sci Fi just announced: The Apple App Store now has a Cylon Detector for sale.
OK, on to the comments.
By way of context, here's part of a comment from reader Harold S., who was disappointed in "Blood on the Scales" (and by the way, it's best to check out the full gamut of comments to get a sense of the debate about Zarek, Adama, Roslin and the uses and abuses of power as depicted on the show):
From Harold S.: As you've explored in various conversations with thewriters, the beauty of finding Earth is that this decision had alogical outcomewhich is that somewhere, sometime, that leadershipwas going to have to be questioned for the first time since "DirtyHands" and on a larger level, really since "Kobol's Last Gleaming."
That's why "Oath" was so gripping; Adama and Roslinfinally faced the consequences of their actions, and as your interviewpointed out, there were no right or wrong answersZarek and Gaetawere, in fact, just as right as Roslin/Adama/Lee/Starbuck.
Besides much of the logical discontinuity, droppedplot lines, and characters taking actions that didn't make sense,"Blood on the Scales" was so disappointing because this got pushedentirely to the side save for the moments with Kelly switching sidesand Nacho telling Adama he'd always respected him.
Zarek ends up living out his last act as astereotypical powermongering dictator villain (probably why Hatch hatedthe end so much), murdering the Quorum and desperately giving Gaetaorders, when the beauty of his character all along was just howambiguous he'd been for four years.
Here's a response from me to various commenters who'd remarked on the fact that Adama and Roslin weren't particularly democratic leaders:
From Mo: I've said that I've always wished we heard more fromthe Quorum, and it's been pretty clear over the years that Adama-Roslinpretty much do what they like, and that democracy in the fleet is moreof an idea than anything.
Have they had too much power? Maybe. Then again, themajority of humans left in the universe are alive to complain abouttheir fates, so it ain't all been bad.
Here's the thing: I get this position -- that theseparticular people have been scrupulous with power, but they could befollowed by others who are not so scrupulous. They may take all theexecutive and practical power, and they may be honest and honorable andwell-intentioned, but the inheritors of that power, whoever they mightbe, may not be. Some take power and use it wisely and well, or try to.
Then there's Cain.
So, you know, I get what you're saying about the whole issue of "royalty" and power, etc.
Having said that, what this show does quitebeautifully is continually present the characters between an array ofbad options. And that's pretty frakking true to life, imho.
Absolutely Adama and Roslin should be heldaccountable for getting the fleet in this fix and for their summarydecision to ally with the Cylons. No doubt. This revolution didn't haveto go down, and it didn't have to go down this way, and some of thatresponsibility lies with them.
But let's say that Zarek and Gaeta succeeded. Then what?
Option A is Zarek and Gaeta taking over, and youknow that Gaeta in that scenario is soon headed for an airlock. OnceZarek has power, Gaeta is a liability. "Nice knowing you, Felix, it'sbeen real." And soon we're presented with Most Supreme Dear Leader TomZarek.
Option B is that, despite everything they've done wrong and every error they've made, Roslin and Adama hang on to power.
I think the fleet was more or less OK with Option B. They're the devil the fleet knows.
Zarek would not have been a great leader, imho, andrealistically, at that point, the two choices were the Zarek factionand the Adama faction. Yes, Adama-Roslin have screwed up plenty. Butthe other option -- to have Zarek and his goons in power -- I think themajority of folks were not OK with that. Let's say I'm in the fleet,I'm Jane Schmoe, I secretly sided with the anti-alliance faction. Theylose. I'm grumbly but OK with that. That's just my two centurions.
I'm sure people will come up with a zillion OptionCs, other scenarios that could have been played out. But to all that Iwould say, this is a work of serialized drama.
We have this set of characters that we''refollowing. I'm sure the delegate from Saggitaron is/was perfectly swellbut I don't want a three episode arc about how he/she was swept intothe presidential office. Not at this late stage in the game.
Here's Richard Hatch's comment on Zarek:
First, having played Zarek for the past four years Iwould like to say that never did I play this character as a villain nordid I think he was one and I still feel that way. After paying theprice of 25 years in prison for standing up for human rights and seeingboth his family, friends and cohorts killed by a supressive governmenton his home planet he had every right to distrust the powers that be onGalactica that seemed to think that only they had the right to makedecisions for the people.
And since Zarek was blocked illegally by Roslin andAdama at every turn including from winning a fair election he had toresort to any leverage he could gain to assert some kind of voice inwhat had become an almost dictatorial government run by Adama and Roslin, who looked with disdain upon the council of the 12 and didpretty much what they wanted without consensus of the people.
And after four years Zarek had basically only twosuits and hardly any money and as the smart man he was from learningmany lessons the hard way why would he want power for the sake ofpower. He experienced first hand what power could do on his home planetand how it could corrupt, and the only reason he would want powerhaving been to hell and back was to ensure that the people had a voicein their govenment.
Did everyone forgot what democracy is about or do wejust shut our eyes when the government no longer listens to thedemocratically elected representatives of the people just because welove the characters. And by the way I love both these actors and thecharacter they play too the fact is they broke as many laws as theyclaim Zarek did.
The truth is from everything I've read and from allthe scripts I played it was clear to me that Zarek's actions werealways about making a positive difference which is what his whole lifewas about. My god he paid with 25 years in prison for it and with hislife. And tell me, knowing what we know about the Cylons and theirprogramming how could anyone ever trust them again. Even the humanCylons themselves have no idea of what they're capable of doing becauseof their hidden programming.
Also, Zarek was far from perfect, but tell me how inhell could he have accomplished anything in a honest andstraightforward way when he was blocked in every way possible and hisreputation tarnished by Adama so no one would trust him. Adama had allthe power and the military behind him so he had to resort to whoeverand whatever he could use to have any voice at all.
Does anyone forget that Zarek was in solitaryconfinement on New Caprica because he didn't go along with Baltar'sagenda. Is that the M.O. of a power hungry terrorist.
Did anyone ever read Zarek's backstory. Doesn't seemso. People only took what Adama said about him as God's truth but ifyou really study his actions you would see that he never did anythingthat wasn't for the reason of supporting his idealistic vision of atrue democracy where the government is accountable and this governmentwas definitely not accountable.
The government of Adama and Roslin as much as welove these character broke every constitional rule or law to stay inpower and to assert their will, regardless of their positivemotivations they had destroyed a true democracy on the Galactica andyet Zarek is looked upon as the power hungry bad guy because he was oneof the few to stand up and challenge them.
And why, because he believed that just because wehave a 9:11 type holocaust you don't shut your eyes and turn over yourpower to the govenment because that's the surest way to lose yourrights and what we as a people have fought many wars to protect. In myopinion to say that Zarek wanted power only for the sake of power isabsolutely wrong and doesn't make any rational sense if you truly studythis characters actions and words.
In truth Zarek, Adama and Roslin all wanted powerfor the same reason, to make a positive difference but Zarek stillidealistically believed that the government should always beaccountable to the people represented in this show by the council ofthe 12.
In closing it's so easy to just write off Zarek asanother power hungry terrorist but tell me where in this four yearstory arc did he ever do anything that supported that belief. Hiswords, his feedback his words of wisdom, his actions were always insupport of his agenda to make the government accountable, and thereason for that was because he had suffered as much as anyone under agovernment that operated without acccountability and I hate to say itthis seems to be the direction the present govenment on Galactica isheading. You're telling me that only Roslin or the Adama familyincluding Apollo has the right to lead and no one can challenge them.That seemed to be the case here. Democracy is a fragile institution andcan easily be lost if we don't make our govenments accountable and forme this amazing series BG has truly explored this theme in a powerfullyhonest way.
I feel privileged to have been a part of thiswonderful series and I truly loved playing Tom Zarek. One of the mostflawed, complex and misundertood characters I've ever played.
Angeli also commented after Hatch did:
[To] Harold S.: I respect you criticisms and hope thatthe remaining episodes will compensate for your disapointment with"Blood on The Scales." But for the record, Mr. Hatch didn't "hate theend of the show" -- at least that's what he told me and after spendingmany hours with him on and off the set, I'm inclined to take Mr. Hatch,a passionate and consummate professional, at his word. Once heunderstood the intent of the script, he fully embraced the ending. It'sone of the reasons why Mr. Hatch's performance was so extraordinary (inmy opinion).
OK, this is Mo again (and this bit is new, it's not from the "Blood on the Scales" comment area).
My final take on Hatch's defense of Zarek? He makes many good points. But it doesn't address Zarek's cold-bloodedmurder of Laird (poor Laird!) and it doesn't address the murder of theQuorum.
I'm with Hatch up to a point -- he makes a pretty good case (heshould form a law firm with Romo, they'd make a killing, no punintended). But how can we accept Zarek as the man championing the will of the people if he is murdering their representatives? Even those who(secretly or openly) sided with the coup might have gotten a bad feeling if Zarek and Co. hadwon on the back of that kind of bloodshed.
In any case, I don't see Zarek as a simple bad guy. I see Zarek as being similar to Cain, one of the show's iconic characters. Both are ruthless forwhat they see as good reasons, both full of complicated shades of good andbad and both died believing they'd made the right choices. I disagreed with many of those choices, obviously, but it's impossible to write off either character as being a simple villain.
What do you think?
'Picasso' is a bona-fide hit about art, politics and desire
Jeffrey Hatcher etches a play about art, politics and desire in which the mind game is the thing. As in 'Turn of the Screw' and 'Jekyll & Hyde,' the prolific playwright thrusts the actors' craft to the fore. While the text feels schematic at times, the exquisitely detailed performances make this 80-minute tete-a-tete a bona-fide hit.
Amazon's Kindle Gets A Second Edition
The online retailer launched a revamped version of its e-book device at a New York event today. Analysts say the first version has sold between 375,000 and 500,000 units, becoming "the iPod of the book world."
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar