[TETENAL]

Dreamworks is going out of business.


(picture by spiegel.de)
The lion is looking sad because of it.

Personally I liked the Pixar movies a bit more though, so I don't care that much.

[starman]

Source?

[E's Lil Theorem]

Out of business? Hmm, I doubt it. As far as I know, it's being shopped around and NBC Universal is a potential buyer.

Check it.

[spatterson]

I always like Pixar movies... though I thought the Shrek movies were very good too.

[Weyland-Yutani]

I think it is sad to see major movie studios succumb to television stations. Like Viacom took over Paramount, NBC took over Universal. How the mighty have fallen.

cheers

W-Y

[Don Pickett]

Originally Posted by Weyland-Yutani

I think it is sad to see major movie studios succumb to television stations. Like Viacom took over Paramount, NBC took over Universal. How the mighty have fallen.

cheers

W-Y

Television stations? Viacom is not a television station: it is a global communications company which has TV as part of its overall strategy. NBC is part of a global communications company as well.

[E's Lil Theorem]

Originally Posted by Don Pickett

... NBC is part of a global communications company as well.

Never saw NBC's parent company, GE, as a global communications company. They have their hands in pretty much everything, not just communications.

[Weyland-Yutani]

Originally Posted by Don Pickett

Television stations? Viacom is not a television station: it is a global communications company which has TV as part of its overall strategy. NBC is part of a global communications company as well.

Viacom merged with CBS in the 90s before acquiring Paramount Pictures - sounds like TV to me.

NBC is a GE company. GE is not a global communications company, rather a heavy industry and investor company.

Back in the day it was the other way around. Disney bought ABC.

cheers

W-Y

[Scandalous Ion Cannon]

Is Dreamworks the company that made 800 zillion dollars off Shrek 1 &2?

[Sarc]

This is weird, Dreamworks had a hand in many successful movies. Shreck and Saving Private Ryan come to mind.

[osxisfun]

Originally Posted by Sarc

This is weird, Dreamworks had a hand in many successful movies. Shreck and Saving Private Ryan come to mind.

and they had their share of stinkers. and it looks like they are not the ones doing dvd dist.

I agree with the story. speilburg always seems to have one foot in dreamworks and one elsewhere...

I was never of fan of dreamworks going back to their bug's life ripoff and the back story on that...

and their other animations had a look i did not like compared to pixar. shrek was funny but everythng else they did animation wise was IMO crappy...

shark's tale anyone?

oohh i got an idea... let's put will smith in anim and let him be will smith...

meh.

[Don Pickett]

Originally Posted by Weyland-Yutani

Viacom merged with CBS in the 90s before acquiring Paramount Pictures - sounds like TV to me.

From the Viacom website:
broadcast television
cable television
television production & syndication
radio
outdoor
motion pictures & theatrical exhibition
publishing
parks

Like I said, global communications.

NBC is a GE company. GE is not a global communications company, rather a heavy industry and investor company.

From GE's website:

NBC Universal (6% and 10% of consolidated three-year revenues and total segment profit, respectively) also contributed a strong performance during the last three years as we continued to invest through acquisitions. Through the combination of NBC and VUE in 2004, and successful acquisitions of Telemundo and Bravo in 2002, we have created a diversified world-class media company. Earnings from the segment increased $0.6 billion in 2004 following a $0.3 billion increase in 200

Anywho, calling them "television" isn't correct. They're both into everything.

[ManOfSteal]

Apple is going out of business.

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by ManOfSteal

Apple is going out of business.

Finally.

-t

[BasketofPuppies]

Originally Posted by Weyland-Yutani

Viacom merged with CBS in the 90s before acquiring Paramount Pictures - sounds like TV to me.

Viacom purchased Paramount years before it merged with CBS.

Which is about to split into two companies: Viacom and CBS. (Three, if the already spun-off Blockbuster division counts.)

The ironic thing is this also happened decades ago. What became Viacom was part of CBS until the FCC forced CBS to divest itself of certain assets. Decades later, they re-merge (this time with the tail wagging the dog), only to split in two again (voluntarily this time) a few years later.

[Weyland-Yutani]

Originally Posted by BasketofPuppies

Viacom purchased Paramount years before it merged with CBS.

Which is about to split into two companies: Viacom and CBS. (Three, if the already spun-off Blockbuster division counts.)

The ironic thing is this also happened decades ago. What became Viacom was part of CBS until the FCC forced CBS to divest itself of certain assets. Decades later, they re-merge (this time with the tail wagging the dog), only to split in two again (voluntarily this time) a few years later.

Thanks for the correction BasketofPuppies

cheers

W-Y

[Salty]

Shrek made a lot of money... but what else have they made that was worth watching?

Meh... I don't care... though it would have been nice to keep some competition around for Pixar to trounce...

[lavar78]

Originally Posted by Salty

Shrek made a lot of money... but what else have they made that was worth watching?

Amistad, Saving Private Ryan, Prince of Egypt, American Beauty, Gladiator, Meet the Parents...

[andreas_g4]

Originally Posted by ManOfSteal

Apple is going out of business.

News to me. Haven't heard it for two weeks or so.

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by lavar78

Amistad, Saving Private Ryan, Prince of Egypt, American Beauty, Gladiator, Meet the Parents...

You guys are confusing Dreamworks and Dreamworks Animation (a division of Dreamworks).
The Animation division was so screwed up that they caused trouble for Dreamworks.

When comparing Dreamworks with Pixar, don't compare stuff that was NOT done by the Animation division (like most of the movies quoted above).

-t

[SirCastor]

Well said Turtle,

Dreamworks Animation is just a division. I can't say that I've liked a lot of the stuff they've put out, but just because they have lousy products doesn't mean that Dreamworks as a whole is going to crash and burn. It's far too successful as a company to do that.

Fox Animation studios on the other hand has fared far worse. I thought it had gone under, but a quick IMDB search shows that they've got more stuff on the burner.

[BasketofPuppies]

Originally Posted by SirCastor

Fox Animation studios on the other hand has fared far worse. I thought it had gone under, but a quick IMDB search shows that they've got more stuff on the burner.

It did. Twice.

20th Century Fox has worked with three different animation studios in the past decade. First Turner Animation (a polite way of saying Hanna-Barbera), which ended after Turner decided to produce Cats Don't Dance on its own; then with Don Bluth Animation, which was shut down because Titan AE was one of the biggest money losers in the history of movies; and most recently with Blue Sky Studios, which it's still working with.

[E's Lil Theorem]

Originally Posted by turtle777

...
The Animation division was so screwed up that they caused trouble for Dreamworks.
....

Really? The Animation division was spun out last year during an October IPO, which would imply they were doing all right.

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by E's Lil Theorem

Really? The Animation division was spun out last year during an October IPO, which would imply they were doing all right.

What does an IPO have to do with a successful, solid business ?
Maybe they just needed the money.

-t

[E's Lil Theorem]

Originally Posted by turtle777

What does an IPO have to do with a successful, solid business ?
...

It has quite a lot to do with it, actually. For the most part, you can't put out a big hunk of crap of a business out there for a public offering. Now, that's not saying that the business that goes public wont turn into crap, but it can't be crap (or at least too crappy) when it first goes public. All this is even more true during recession recoveries, i.e., after the dot.com bust.

Going back to DreamWorks Animation, they had two big hits in the Shrek series, but beyond that, I don't know what else they've done. However, the two Shreks combined for more than a billion worldwide. That's not exactly pocket change. Furthermore, as far as I know, most of the stinkers that came from DreamWorks came from the parent company; at least in sheer numbers.

Perhaps you should explain what you meant when you said DreamWorks Animation caused trouble for DreamWorks. Si?

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by E's Lil Theorem

It has quite a lot to do with it, actually. For the most part, you can't put out a big hunk of crap of a business out there for a public offering.

Evar heard of the dot.com bubble ?

-t

[E's Lil Theorem]

Originally Posted by turtle777

Evar heard of the dot.com bubble ?

-t

Do you read the entire post before you reply? It really doesn't seem like it

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by E's Lil Theorem

Perhaps you should explain what you meant when you said DreamWorks Animation caused trouble for DreamWorks. Si?

http://www.spiegel.de/wirtschaft/0,1518,367725,00.html

Google translation from German:
http://translate.google.com/translat...language_tools

-t

[E's Lil Theorem]

Originally Posted by turtle777

http://www.spiegel.de/wirtschaft/0,1518,367725,00.html

Google translation from German:
http://translate.google.com/translat...language_tools

-t

A little hard to understand, but I think I got the gist of it. Basically, they had two hits and a bunch of other projects that no one wanted to watch on screen, much less buy on DVD. The apple doesn't fall far from the tree, I reckon.

Back to your original statement, I suppose the Animation division was causing trouble for the parent company. But, really, given that the whole company wasn't doing too hot, it seems more like the Animation division simply wasn't helping the cause. Tomato, tomahto.

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

DreamWorks Animation deserves to go under as a public company- they lied like rat bastards about everything when they went public- they grossly underestimated their production costs, overestimated their DVD sales- and on top of that I know that they have a number of really ultra-crappy projects in the pipeline that are almost guaranteed to fail.

I guess Katzenberg was used to futzing the numbers answering only to DreamWorks, but as a public company that doesn't fly.

[Severed Hand of Skywalker]

I hate them for what they did with ANTz. I recently read in a book that they heard pixar was making a movie about Antz and Grasshoppers so they contacted work with the strict rule it must beat Bugs life to theatres or no deal. Antz was about ants vs. Grasshoppers.

[olePigeon]

Is this just their animation department? Or the whole company? They did a LOT of special effects for movies, they're the "other ILM."

[BasketofPuppies]

Originally Posted by Severed Hand of Skywalker

I hate them for what they did with ANTz. I recently read in a book that they heard pixar was making a movie about Antz and Grasshoppers so they contacted work with the strict rule it must beat Bugs life to theatres or no deal. Antz was about ants vs. Grasshoppers.

A Bug's Life was in production for more than a year before Dreamworks Animation started work on ANTz.

The rumor is Jeffrey Katzenberg and Bill Gates, an initial investor in Dreamworks SKG, rushed ANTz through production in an attempt to make Michael Eisner and Steve Jobs look bad and/or lose focus.

I'm not one for conspiracy theories, but this one at least makes sense to me.

[ReggieX]

Dreamworks scheduled the DVD release of Shrek to be on a Friday (rather than the usual Tuesday release), to coincide with the theatrical release of Monsters, Inc. in order to steal Pixar's audience. Frankly, as a kid, I'd be more excited about seeing a new movie, but whatever gets you a big opening weekend is the only thing Hollywood knows anymore.

[ReggieX]

Originally Posted by BasketofPuppies

The rumor is Jeffrey Katzenberg and Bill Gates, an initial investor in Dreamworks SKG, rushed ANTz through production in an attempt to make Michael Eisner and Steve Jobs look bad and/or lose focus.

I'm not one for conspiracy theories, but this one at least makes sense to me.

There's no conspiracy: Antz was rushed to beat A Bug's Life to the screen. Pixar/Disney laughed all the way to the bank on that one, maintaining their focus and original schedule. Dreamworks has tried to play catch-up ever since, even doing DVD releases against Pixar thatrical releases (above).

[Severed Hand of Skywalker]

Oh and Bugs life made over 120 mil when Antz made 86 mil.

[BasketofPuppies]

Originally Posted by ReggieX

There's no conspiracy: Antz was rushed to beat A Bug's Life to the screen. Pixar/Disney laughed all the way to the bank on that one, maintaining their focus and original schedule. Dreamworks has tried to play catch-up ever since, even doing DVD releases against Pixar thatrical releases (above).

That we know. What we don't know, and probably won't ever know, is if it was done specifically to make Mike and Steve look bad.

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

Originally Posted by BasketofPuppies

That we know. What we don't know, and probably won't ever know, is if it was done specifically to make Mike and Steve look bad.

There's no conspiracy there either- of course Katzenberg wanted to stick it to Eisner anyway he could from day 1. Too bad he didn't considered doing it with the actual use of talent and top notch production, rather than gimmicks, scams and bullcrap. I doubt that it had anything to do with Steve Jobs though- some bullcrap do-or-die feud between Gates and Jobs is largely only the invention of platform warrior stooges stuck in Mac vs. PC fantasyland, not reality.

[BasketofPuppies]

I got news for ya. Despite playing nice for the past eight years, Steve Jobs and Bill Gates genuinely hate each other.

"Develop for NeXT? I'd rather piss on it".

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

They both genuinely love the money that the silly ‘US vs. THEM’ imaginary do-or-die platform war between them generates. Corporate marketing at its finest could scarcely dream of a better money making scheme. Generate diehard "converts" that will actually lionize and root for your corporations’ CEO vs. the other guy’s CEO! What CEO in his right mind that somehow managed that would ever want the notion dispelled?