Multiple Movie companies making movies. (1 Viewer)

[Dan Shogren]

I know this is kind of weird, but i just saw SEABISKET today, and noticed something odd. It had logos at the beginning for Universial, Dreamworks, and Searchlight. Why so many different Companies? And also, an ad for MASTER AND GENERALS that came on before the movie quickly flashed Universial, 20th Century Fox, and Mirimax right by the screen. And if im not mistaken, these companies are not all linked together, correct? So what is the purpose of splitting the movie into all these different companies?

 

[Werner_R]

I think you mean Master and Commander

I also noticed that when I saw the new Master and Commander trailer. I think the main reason would be to reduce the risk factor. These days a blockbuster movie like Master and Commander isn't very cheap, spread the costs between 2 or 3 movie studios and you're still safe if it flops.

 

[Hendrik]

...nothing new about that: I recall THE TOWERING INFERNO (1974!!!) being advertised as having cost sooo much that not one, but two studios (WB & TCF) got together to produce it...

...for a more recent example take a movie like Steven Spielberg's A.I. - the IMDb gives as Production Companies: Amblin Entertainment, Dreamworks SKG, Stanley Kubrick Productions(!), Warner Bros...

. . . . . .

 

[Chad R]

Not unusual at all. With the spirallng costs of movies studios are often splitting production costs on bigger movies to alleviate financial stress of investors. How they divvy up the profits can be one studio take domestic, one foriegn, or maybe one gets theatrical and one gets video rights, or even one gets domestic theatrical and foreign video and the other takes foreign theatrical and domestic video.

'Titanic' is a classic case of this. After the budget got as high as $200 million dollars and there weren't signs of sure-fire hit all over it, Fox got nervous and sold off Domestic rights to Paramount. Little did Fox know that it would become the largest moneymaker of all time and if they hadn't done that their profit would have far exceeded what it actually has. It's a gamble, and they sort of lost on that one.

 

[Steve Schaffer]

Not to mention that Paramount rather than Fox got the US home video rights to Titanic, resulting in a bare-bones non-anamorphic dvd release.

 

[Chad R]

Oh yeah, and Spyglass was teh production company who got financing from the studios or investors. So you could conceivably have two studios finance it, and then three production companies produce it and all five of them will have their little logo at the beginning. Personally, I think production company logos should be left to the end to avoid the trafffic jam at the head of a movie, but I'm sure they want as much name recognition as possible.

 

[Leo Kerr]

Although last night, I saw the result of an interesting fiasco... Camp was initally being produced by Jersey Films. Then Killer Films got it, and then it was finally actually produced by IPC Films...

The number of Executive Producers, Producers, and Associate Producers outnumbered the named cast. It was rediculous.

The film was pretty good, though... try and find it when it hits its so-called general release in mid August.

Leo Kerr
[email protected]