Executive shifts »

You're this small company, and one day, after MTV Films* and other studios pass on this little young adult vampire romance series, you pick it up. You spend roughly $40 million to make the feature, slip it onto the big screen, and suddenly, you've fostered a phenomenon. Your opening weekend alone pays for the film and then some. You score $191 million domestic, and another $192 million from the foreign box office. You find yourself at the heart of a film and marketing goldmine.

So what do you do with the money? You've blown off Lionsgate. You've given your stars sweet pay raises. But there's still a whole lot left over. Nikki Finke has thrown up an in-house memo that discusses talks with Morgan Stanley and how it's time to "look beyond the initial goals we have achieved and plan the next chapter in the studio's journey." Finke's sources say that means "looking mostly for libraries to acquire." Not to mention rumors of a Weinstein takeover.

Between my must-save nature and the number of studios that grabbed big success only to fall into oblivion a short time later, I'm hoping they take it easy and don't go on a Gimme! Gimme! shopping spree. But even then, there will be decisions to make. Stick with books? Youth fare? Stretch the boundaries? Continue to score the projects everyone else leaves behind? If it were up to you, what would you do?

*Gotta love a company that passes up a property, then becomes its most fervent supporter.

Only a few days after Bob Weinstein announced a whole slew of upcoming projects based on existing franchises (including a new Scream trilogy, Spy Kids IV 3D, Halloween 3D, Scanners and Hellraiser), there's now talk that Summit Entertainment (aka Home of the Twilight Saga) may be interested in acquiring either The Weinstein Co. or MGM (both of which are currently trying to dodge buckets full of money woes). Not only that, but Deadline Hollywood also reports that the Weinstein boys have decided to shelve Halloween 3D for now since they felt the production schedule (one that had them shooting in November for an August release) was too rushed, though perhaps these talks of a merger also played a part in that decision. DH claims, however, that Weinstein plans to start Halloween 3D once director Patrick Lussier is free to shoot it (he's working on another film in January, so chances are H3D won't start until sometime in the middle of next year if it happens at all).

Instead of Halloween 3D, though, The Weinstein Co. will be re-releasing Halloween 2 on Halloween -- a move that's left most fans scratching their heads, wondering why they never released a film called Halloween on Halloween to begin with. Part of that reasoning was due to not wanting to compete with the Saw franchise, and when the first Halloween killed (no pun intended) at the box office in August, it was pretty obvious the Weinstein boys would once again try their luck then instead of at the end of October. I'd be curious to see if the re-release decision pays off, and kids looking for a theme and some uneven scares will crowd the multiplex instead of spray shaving cream all over their neighbor's brand new Mercedes. What do you think?

Meanwhile, we'll be keeping a real close eye on this Summit thing ...

It's been nearly two months since Leonardo DiCaprio optioned a new project, and he must have thought we would start calling him lazy. In August, Monika reported that he had 25 projects in various stages of pre-production, and now you can add a 26th, as Variety says he's attached to star in The Deep Blue Goodbye, an adaptation of John D. MacDonald's 1964 thriller.

Goodbye is the first of MacDonald's Travis McGee series, which spanned the course of 21 novels. McGee is like a beach bum version of James Bond, a bachelor who happily resides on a houseboat named the Busted Flush. (To add to his cool, he won it in a poker game.) He works as a freelance "salvage consultant," which means he tries to retrieve money or property that a client has been wrongfully deprived of. His life is one of money, adventure, dames, and weird villains all set against sunny Florida, some of whom he'll "bend way, way, over, but not break." Sexy stuff!

To be fair, DiCaprio has reportedly been attached to produce and play McGee for some time, but the movie reporting world learned about it thanks to Fox's new executive Peter Chernin, who is coming aboard Goodbye as producer alongside DiCaprio and his Appian Way partner Jennifer Davisson Killoran. Dana Stevens is penning the script, and the film does not yet have a start date. With DiCaprio's ever growing slate, this post could be long forgotten by the time Goodbye sails in front of the camera.

MGM has been plagued by financial woes for much of their long and illustrious career, but their most recent crisis could end up costing them two of their biggest titles. Nikke Finke of Deadline Hollywood Daily is breathlessly reporting that the studio is teetering on the edge of bankruptcy with over $3.5 billion in debt. MGM held a very long conference call with their creditors, pleading with themto waive their interest payments until February 2010, and allow them the cash they need for the rest of the year, particularly to fund its upcoming slate of films. Naturally, some of those are highly anticipated, such as Robocop, The Hobbit, and the latest James Bond installment.

However, MGM's creditors aren't feeling particularly charitable, and may force the studio to file for bankruptcy. If that happens, they could lose James Bond, The Hobbit, and numerous other franchises as MGM would have to sell them to the highest bidder. Right now, they're trying to convince their Scrooges that bankruptcy is the worst possible option, and that Bond and Bilbo are big enough moneymakers to cover their debt. That's where the situation stands now, and it'll certainly be quite the economic spectacle to watch.

I find the news particularly interesting in light of Peter Jackson's remarks on The Hobbit at ComicCon, when he squashed rumors that the film was in the casting stages, and noted that it hadn't even really been green-lit or had its budget approved yet. It was a douse of cold water after a lot of breathless excitement, much of which seemed to come straight from the filmmakers themselves. Could the brakes have been put on because of MGM's financial woes? Possibly.

Continued below the jump

As the entertainment world headed out for the weekend, there was a very big shake-up at Disney, with studio head Dick Cook being ousted from the company. Disney's president Bob Iger is determined to reinvent the studio from top to bottom, and reportedly saw Cook as a relic of Disney's cartoonish past. But Cook has a lot of success under his belt, and friendships with the likes of Steven Spielberg, Tim Burton, and Johnny Depp. Depp was one of the first to speak out about Cook's departure, and hinted darkly to The Los Angeles Times about the fate of Sparrow and the Black Pearl.

Depp revealed that he only has a potential deal in place for Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides. It's all dependent on how good the script is, and how favorable he is towards a post-Cook Disney. "There's a fissure, a crack in my enthusiasm at the moment. It was all born in that office." Jack Sparrow was indeed born in Cook's office. As all Sparrow and Depp fans know, Disney had been trying to convince Depp to sign on for a Disney film for years, but it wasn't until Cook name-dropped Pirates that Depp was in.

Cook was one of Depp's supporters against a studio who was unimpressed with his eyeliner, gold teeth, beaded dreads and drunken demeanor. "When things went a little sideways on the first Pirates movie and others at the studio were less than enthusiastic about my interpretation of the character, Dick was there from the first moment. He trusted me." Lo and behold, an icon was born (whether you love him, hate him, or are just tired of him, you have to admit that Sparrow will outlast us all), and we got a little swashbuckling in the summertime. Hats off to Captain Cook for that, and if Sparrow never sails again, at least we'll know that friendship won out over a love of franchise gold.

The dust hasn't even begun to settle on the Marvel / Disney deal before DC Comics decided to engage in some major overhauling on their own. Deadline Hollywood Daily broke the news that Warner Bros had taken over DC Comics and created a new brand called DC Entertainment. DC Comics' president Paul Levitz will step down, and Diane Nelson will head up DCE. She's a name moviegoers wouldn't know, but you know her results, as she's the other woman who helped make Harry Potter such a worldwide phenomenon.

While you might think the timing is a knee-jerk reaction to what Marvel and Disney just did, the truth is that Warner Bros and DC have been working on this revamp for a long time. That's apparent in the slow and steady changes we've seen lately, like the studio reaching out and bringing notable DC writers on board to oversee their movie development. According to Variety, one of the ongoing problems with Warner Bros developing DC titles was that they didn't have an executive "inside the comic book company with the right sensibility for producing tentpoles, or at least the experience of managing all aspects of a major franchise." Finke notes that the uneven relationship between the two companies produced all those pre-production stops and starts that annoy fans so much, and caused the Watchmen lawsuit that nearly delayed the film this past spring.

Without a doubt, there's a potential for greatness with the news that Disney bought Marvel Entertainment. With Pixar in the mix, this could mean a whole collection of cool animated superhero movies where the boundaries of human law are no object. But what about the other side?

Even the best laid plains or ideas can go horribly wrong. It's not like Hollywood, or Disney for that matter, have a perfect track record of cinematic goodness. Obviously, they picked up Marvel because they like what the company is doing, and want to get in on the action. But admiration doesn't always make for loyal productions. Just think about all the great books that get made into terrible films, or any company that buys another and then strives to make "improvements."

It's a shocking deal no one saw coming in a million years. According to an official press release from the Walt Disney Company, Disney has bought Marvel Entertainment for the hefty price of $4 billion. Under the deal, Disney gains control of more than 5,000 Marvel characters, and Marvel gains their massive marketing infrastructure.

"This transaction combines Marvel's strong global brand and world-renowned library of characters including Iron Man, Spider-Man, X-Men, Captain America, Fantastic Four and Thor with Disney's creative skills, unparalleled global portfolio of entertainment properties, and a business structure that maximizes the value of creative properties across multiple platforms and territories," said Robert A. Iger, President aof The Walt Disney Company. "Ike Perlmutter and his team have done an impressive job of nurturing these properties and have created significant value. We are pleased to bring this talent and these great assets to Disney."

So, there you have it. Marvel is now a Disney brand in all senses of the word. Obviously, this has just been announced, but the big question looms: What will this mean for all those upcoming Marvel movies? We've all marveled at the creative networking Marvel Entertainment has been doing, and the way Kevin Feige has been building little bridges of creative continuity throughout their cinematic universe. So far, they seemed to be doing everything right by fans, and creating movies that could draw in newcomers and hardcore geeks. What is it going to mean for the films when a behemoth like Disney takes control? Family friendly, mythology-be-damned, direct-to-DVD offerings? Or will it just mean a lot more Slurpee cups and action figures? Time will tell, but something tells me the future of the Marvel cinematic universe might have become a little less bright.

He's terrorized Veronica Mars, he's chilled with Jennifer's Body, he's been through A Haunting in Connecticut, and now Kyle Gallner is getting more horror. The Hollywood Reporter posts that the young actor has grabbed the lead teen role in the new, Jackie Earle Haley-starring A Nightmare on Elm Street. He'll play Quentin, and indie kind of guy who runs a school podcast called "Insomnia Radio." While not the same role, it's basically the gig Johnny Depp had in the original. Will he also die by bedding? And, can Elm Street be the same without a horde of Just the Ten of Us sisters?

Meanwhile, Virginia Madsen is defying gravity. Variety reports the actress is getting involved with a new documentary called Fighting Gravity. The project focuses on women ski jumpers, and their battle to get the right to compete in the 2010 Winter Olympics. Specifically, it'll follow 15 female athletes who have challenged the Intl. Olympic Committee's decision to bar them from the games -- making it the only men-only sport in the Games. Sometimes it's hard to believe we're in 2009...

Finally, Steve Buscemi and Stanley Tucci are teaming up once again. Most recently, the pair both made English language remakes of Theo van Gogh's work (Interview and Blind Date). Now Variety reports the friends have created a new shingle, Olive Productions, and have signed a first-look deal with Lionsgate to develop and produce television shows for cable and broadcast networks. The pair are already being commended for their "daring, innovative aesthetic," and I can only hope that from time to time they'll also jump in front of the camera.

While skimming my feeds, I came across a post at THR about a Stanley Kramer celebration called "Films That Changed the World." It immediately got me thinking of world-changing cinema, and how much a film can impact us. But try as I might, I couldn't come up with films that changed my world, and instead, kept going back to the story. See, this new series is celebrating the films connected with the iconic filmmaker that were socially conscious. First up: Yentl.

It wasn't so much the film that kept grabbing me, but a quote by Kramer's daughter, Kat: "The history-making film, the first major studio production ever produced, directed and co-written by its female star, shattered Hollywood's glass ceiling like no other film ever did." I wish I could say that it shattered that glass ceiling. If it did, we wouldn't have such abysmal percentages of women in the industry -- both in it and writing about it. Last year, 25 years after Yentl, women didn't even hit 20% of all directors, producers, writers, and the rest of the big behind-the-scenes roles in the industry. We couldn't even hit 10% of all directors. Not even a quarter. Not even a tenth.

That's not a shattering of the glass ceiling, it's a crack in the glass that few women survive when they try to pull themselves through. It's monumental when a woman directs a big, supernatural romance (Twilight), and sadly not surprising when she's then pulled from it. More specifically, it was monumental for a woman to helm it from the pens of other women, even though the film is geared towards the girls itching for a little dark, vampiric action. Women directing for girls? Shocking!

The only way to stretch that crack, and just possibly create that shattered ceiling Kat Kramer was talking about is to do it again. And again. And again. Sadly, it can't just be with solid, noteworthy work. For every wonderful Protagonist, there needs to be a ceiling shake by Amy Heckerling, or a solid kick by Kathryn Bigelow, or Mary Harron -- blockbusters, hits, action, and horror that prove we're not all clumsy romance fiends and fashion victims. It's a fact that seems to be forgotten much too often.