Live-Action DreamWorks to end Disney deal, jump to Universal

[Dan]

This ain't official, but it appears that the live-action division of DreamWorks will be ending their deal with Disney next August 2016 with signs pointing to them hooking back up with Universal.

Source: http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/s ... ney-819594

It's interesting that the last two films under the deal with Disney are both Spielberg-directed films, Bridge of Spies and The BFG, the latter being the first Spielberg-directed feature to be released by Walt Disney Pictures. The other Spielberg-directed project, the adaptation of Ready Player One, is primarily with Warner Bros. and the live-action adaption of Ghost in the Shell with Scarlett Johannson is primarily with Paramount.

[EricJ]

It's interesting that the last two films under the deal with Disney are both Spielberg-directed films, Bridge of Spies and The BFG, the latter being the first Spielberg-directed feature to be released by Walt Disney Pictures.

(Seeing as War Horse was released under Touchstone.)

[Dan]

As was Lincoln and as will Bridge of Spies.

[Dan]

Okay, so if I'm readying this article correctly, the live-action DreamWorks will essentially be part of Amblin Partners, which has entered a deal with Universal. The DreamWorks banner will still be used, but it's no longer a studio and instead a production house. At least, that's how I read it. You tell me.

Source: http://variety.com/2015/film/news/steve ... 201662956/

[Ben]

Yeah. Amblin Partners is the consortium of finance: they will put films out through DreamWorks (for riskier, edgier adult/mature movies) and the original Amblin name for family films.

DWs essentially becomes a label, while Amblin becomes the parent company...just as Steve should have done right at the beginning!

[ShyViolet]

Where this leaves DWA is anyone's guess.

I doubt Spielberg would want the perfect and streamlined simplicity of his new/old Amblin relationship to be spoiled by a faltering animation company. I mean let's face it, he always kept his distance from the animation branch of DreamWorks throughout the entire 10-year run (1994-2004) when they were still part of DreamWorks proper; I really don't think he'd want to go back to being dragged into something he didn't even want to do in the first place.

DWA is at sea now, with no Spielberg life preserver.

[Ben]

It has been since it went public, Vi.

And this deal doesn't change DWA one bit. If anything I can see the DWs name fading out, meaning it becomes stronger for DWA as a brand. They just need to back it up with great movies again. Spielberg won't be competing for family audiences: he'll be using the Amblin name on those. Nothing really has changed, I don't see any confusion...?

[EricJ]

DWA is at sea now, with no Spielberg life preserver.

Basically, when SKG was formed, Spielberg had moved from producing his own Don Bluth clones, hoping for his own private Secret of NIMH, to getting Katzenberg on board, who was coasting on wayyy too much of his own late 90's Lion King reputation (easily more than was properly warranted), because Spielberg wanted his own private Lion King.
Now that it's The House That Shrek Built, and Disney and Pixar attract their own audiences again, Spielberg has pretty much gone back to making his own Amblin' films again and Katz is still trying to find that philosopher's-stone replacement for the Shrek 6 he didn't get to make.

I think it's safe to say The Dream is Dead, and we can all move on, but there is still that problem of burying the bodies that keep trying to hop off the cart.

[Dacey]

Katzenberg wanted to make Shrek 6 before he got to make Shrek 5?

And, for what it's worth, apart from the Batman Vs. Superman trailer (which got thunderous applause and cheers), the audience reaction to the Kung Fu Panda 3 preview was probably the most enthusiastic of the night before the sold out showing of Star Wars I went to. Might be a bit premature to call DWA "dead."

[ShyViolet]

I still have major worries. But I'll continue to hope for the best.

(By the way maybe we should move this into the DWA thread! )

[Ben]

Katz actually had announced Shreks 4, 5 and 6 when 3 was in production, so...yeah...he was angling to get to six before three had even been competed. When three died, there was enough mileage for another one, but not all six (remember that Kung Fu Panda was mooted for six films too).

[EricJ]

Katz actually had announced Shreks 4, 5 and 6 when 3 was in production, so...yeah...he was angling to get to six before three had even been competed. When three died, there was enough mileage for another one, but not all six (remember that Kung Fu Panda was mooted for six films too).

Actually, Third was supposed to introduce Prince Artie as a new running character, but when the sneak audience preview for #3 was a train-wreck disaster and most hated him, the studio quickly retooled their plans, took it back to the shop, and cut to the ending:
According to the studio's own pre-3 hype, #4 would have "father-figure" Shrek helping Artie in search of a bride (and the Little Mermaid parody), and coming home to get the big news about his own ogrelings in the climax. #5 would presumably have the New-Dad Calamities of an ogre and three babies, and #6 would be the big wrap-up we got.
(Which is why they went back after the preview and crammed the babies into Third at the last minute while they could, to save time on two films.)

But at least that would have had some actual arc to make fans think six movies were justified, whereas stretching Panda or Dragons out to six films without some general franchise roadmap, just to get the numbers they didn't get the last time, is just glory-days desperation.

[ShyViolet]

None of us have seen Panda 3 yet. I think it's a little early to write it off as nothing but "glory days desperation". Let's at least wait until it's actually released to start judging it.

Also, we have no way of knowing whether any of those supposed "plans" for the Shrek franchise vis a vis his midlife crisis or whatever you want to call it are even true. Just because Jim Hill or AICN reported them doesn't mean they're right.

And we don't know anything about what sort of arc DWA was planning for Panda and Dragon. Maybe they did have to cut it down a bit from 6 to 3 films but that doesn't mean they don't have a worthwhile story to tell.

[EricJ]

Also, we have no way of knowing whether any of those supposed "plans" for the Shrek franchise vis a vis his midlife crisis or whatever you want to call it are even true. Just because Jim Hill or AICN reported them doesn't mean they're right.

That's what Richard Pryor once referred to as the "Who you gonna believe, me, or your own lyin' eyes?" argument.

(At least I know the story of Third's early preview being not only an unholy disaster but different from the final release script is fairly reliable, since I'd heard it from the richly detailed scene-specific rant on one of our movie boards from one of the actual survivors of the screening, months before any of us knew even the faintest carefully studio-guarded plot hint about Third.
If you're saying the ideas about what was dropped and added to the newly retooled "Go into your dance and get offstage" final release strategy are "merely conjecture" , trust me, they're not too darn far off.)

[Dan]

And, for what it's worth, apart from the Batman Vs. Superman trailer (which got thunderous applause and cheers), the audience reaction to the Kung Fu Panda 3 preview was probably the most enthusiastic of the night before the sold out showing of Star Wars I went to. Might be a bit premature to call DWA "dead."

At the showing I went to, the audience cheering kept building with each trailer that came out. KFP3 was second to show (after Laika's Kubo and the Two Strings), Civil War showed after BvS and Jungle Book was the last. What's funny was that the audience was at first getting impatient that it wasn't Star Wars yet with each trailer, but the then the trailers played and they got pumped.

The theater also had some fun little wall stickers with the various reactions the Furious Five have with little pandas.