WSJ Talks about "Terminator 3"

[Maxie Zeus]

Head's up: For those interested, there is a front-page article in today's (Friday 3/8) Wall Street Journal about the madness surrounding the attempts to resurrect the "Terminator" franchise.

The on-line article is for subscribers only, so I can't give you a link. Nor am I going to type the whole thing in for you. But if you're interested, you can go hunting for it at a newsstand or library.

Opening paragraph:



Last December, top Hollywood studio executives one after another drove in secret to a secure location to glimpse a document that each feared might fall into the wrong hands. The latest threat from terrorists? No, they were scanning the script of "T-3: The Rise of the Machines," the most sought-after movie of the year.

[BLACKHEART]

You could cut and paste the article.

[Maxie Zeus]

Originally posted by SLIPKNOT
You could cut and paste the article.

But I don't have access to the on-line version either. :(

I typed out that paragraph from the hard-copy I bought.

[The Mad Hatter]

I wouldn't suggest anyone cut and paste the article... since WSJ makes you pay for the article, posting it for free is tantamount to stealing.

Yes, it really sucks, but I'd rather be honest. Actually, I'd rather not tick WSJ off.

[Maxie Zeus]

Well, having now completely read and digested the article, I can give you the highlights.

1. The movie is being produced by "C-2 Pictures" an independent company co-owned by Mario Kassar and Andrew Vajna. That is the corporate entity that will own the film, not (as reported) Warner Bros.

2. Warner Bros. has paid $50 million for the rights to release the film in the U.S. Sony Pictures (which released T-2) paid $75 million to release the film internationally, except for Japan and Germany, where it is being handled by local distributors. Ownership of the film, and the right to make further sequels does NOT pass to either of these major studios.

3. Warners bought the U.S. rights so that it could control the circumstances of its release; it is mostly interested that T-3 does NOT compete head to head with its Matrix sequels, and was worried that if the domestic rights landed at another studio, that studio would use it against the Matrix. Warners' tactic is purely defensive, and in fact the studio only expects to make a modest profit -- perhaps only $25 million, less than Schwarzenegger will be paid.

4. That being said, as a condition of sale WB had to pledge to spend at least as much marketing T-3 as the "Matrix" sequels, and to release it in the summer of 2003.

Okay, that's to clarify the record about whether or not WB is "swallowing up" all the major franchises. (And in the same edition of the WSJ is a major story about Sony and its franchise-heavy lineup next year.) Now for the really juicy stuff.

5. James Cameron initially owned a 50% interest in "The Terminator" and its sequels, but sold that interest to Gale Ann Hurd, his co-producer and one-time wife, for $1. (No explanation given; probably tax reasons, I'd bet.) That is why the sequels can be made without his participation or blessing.

6. The other half of the ownership of the first film was held by Hemdale Films, which produced it and released it through Orion. Hemdale eventually went bankrupt, and a bankruptcy court disposed of its assets, one of which was the 50% interest in all Terminator sequels. Carolco Pictures (co-owned by Kassar and Vajna) purchased that 50% stake for $10 million. They also purchased from Ms. Hurd her 50% stake in the second sequel -- she retained a 50% stake in all subsequent sequels. With the complete rights to a second Terminator film, they signed up Cameron and Schwarzenegger and made T-2.

7. Then Carolco went bankrupt, and one of its biggest assets was the 50% stake in further Terminator sequels. But Hollywood had entered one of its periodic retrenchments and was trying to swear off megamovies, and the rights languished; the bankruptcy trustee overseeing the assets refused to part with those rights for less than $5 million. And a 3rd film would still require that Hurd sell her 50%.

8. Cameron, meanwhile, went to work to get 20th Century Fox to pick up the rights, but Fox missed the boat and Vajna and Kassar (who had started up a new company, C-2) scooped up the rights for $8 million. This pissed off Cameron, who swore he wouldn't direct the sequel. Hurd again sold her 50% stake for $ 7 million (whether her share for all Terminator sequels or just this one, the article doesn't say). The article marvels at Hurd's ability to milk the franchise: From $1 she has earned $14 million.

9. At this point it gets complicated (!!!) and I won't go into any more financial details. Suffice it to say that $50 million has had to be paid out to a diverse group of producers and writers and middlemen and bankers (and Schwarzenegger) before things got sufficiently set up that cameras could start turning.

[Terminatah]

Oh well. They can have my $8.50 when they're done.

-Terminatah

[James]

God , this is very complicated (either that or I need to sober up and get dome shut eye).

The upturn of it all seems to imply that this film is probably costing more than it's worth - however will the punters reflect this cost burden or will the probable horrendous advertising pay off?

I hope it's good - for the investors sake rather than mine - what's 2 hours of my viewing to an entire fiscal, and possibly devastating venture?

[The Game]

Does anyone know the plot of T-3, most particularly who the baddie is? I heard a rumor it was Chyna :eek: !

-The Game

[Terminatah]

Originally posted by thegame8866
Does anyone know the plot of T-3, most particularly who the baddie is? I heard a rumor it was Chyna :eek: !

-The Game The movie is about John Connor and the beginning of his war against Skynet's killer terminators. According to the latest rumors:

The villain is a female terminator called the T-X and Arnold once again plays a T-800 programmed to protect John Connor. But apparently a glitch is causing him to switch back and forth between good and evil.
-Terminatah

[BLACKHEART]

There's no way anyone would pay money to watch a film where Chyna spoke for 2 hours. That's also why she lost the Wonder Woman spot. No one can take her voice for that long. It's not marketable.