The Business: News, Rumours, Analysis, and More

[absnow54]

1 hour ago, GHScorpiosRule said:

As much as I love Scorcese, he can just SHUT IT and stick to doing what he does best and not opening his fucking mouth.

For a guy who is so anti-streaming, why would he want to make sure the theater going experience is as miserable as possible? This also ensures people dart out of the theater the second the credits start to roll.

[Guest]

No Direct Talks Monday Between SAG-AFTRA & Studios; Negotiations “In The Final Stretch” As Deal Looks Close

Quote

“There is a feeling of optimism” a guild source told Deadline today. “Looks like we’re in the final stretch,” a senior studio source added. 

Both sides expressed confidence a deal may be reached within days, but as before cautioned the situation is still fluid. 

From our understanding, SAG-AFTRA and the studios have gained “significant” traction on bridging their gap over what has been termed as success-based compensation for streaming shows and their casts.

 

[Anduin]

Looks like the big studios can't keep it up forever. Lionsgate has come to an agreement with SAG, letting the Hunger Games prequel cast do the red carpet thing and related activities.

Maybe this is how it ends? If all the big studios do their own separate agreements and leave Carol Lombardini out in the cold?

[Avabelle]

22 minutes ago, Anduin said:

Looks like the big studios can't keep it up forever. Lionsgate has come to an agreement with SAG, letting the Hunger Games prequel cast do the red carpet thing and related activities.

Maybe this is how it ends? If all the big studios do their own separate agreements and leave Carol Lombardini out in the cold?

Does that not go against the strike terms though? I didn’t think the actors could promote..

[Guest]

2 hours ago, Avabelle said:

Does that not go against the strike terms though? I didn’t think the actors could promote..

The strike is against the AMPTP. Non-AMPTP studios, like Lionsgate, who agree to the union’s terms can get interim agreements allowing the actors to return to work on those projects. A couple hundred movies have interim agreements and a lot of big name actors are still working on independent movies. 

[Irlandesa]

On 10/29/2023 at 11:59 AM, Laura Holt said:

In terms of an intermission every play I have ever gone to has an intermission built into it.  Now this may be in part for the benefit of the performers and to change the scenery etc but it's also absolutely expected by theatregoers no matter how long or short the play.

I believe the cutoff is 90 minutes.  Over that and there will be an intermission while under 90 minutes won't.  In my experience, most plays and musicals are over 90 minutes so it feels like there's always an intermission.

On 10/29/2023 at 1:39 PM, Dani said:

Exactly this. Apparently that isn’t even the complete quote. The full thing makes him look like an even bigger tool as well as surprising clueless about live theater and the history of cinema.

Ha!  Right?  Scorcese is telling us he hasn't been to a play without saying he hasn't been to a play.  No 3.5 hour play or musical is going to go on without an intermission.

16 hours ago, GHScorpiosRule said:

I think the only Hollywood movie I've ever seen that had an intermission was Attenborough's Gandhi, which ran over four hours.

A lot of the classic epics have an intermission.  Gone With The Wind, for instance. It has its problems, but the intermission isn't one of them.  If he truly cared about "cinema" then maybe he should score a 15-minute intermission that can be inserted into his movie to keep the flow going like they did back then. 

Out of curiosity, I googled movies with intermissions and it seems that even Wes Anderson recently included an optional one in Asteroid City.

Edited October 31, 2023 by Irlandesa

[Browncoat]

Monty Python and the Holy Grail had an intermission.

[Shannon L.]

I remember HBO having an intermission for Tess back in the early 80s. It was almost 3 hours long. 

[Guest]

SAG-AFTRA Negotiations to Continue Wednesday With Deal in Sight

Quote

The two sides broke off in the afternoon after a day that was spent dealing with AI issues and are set to return to the bargaining table on Wednesday. While expressing that talks are headed in the right direction, one studio-side source says it could take a few days to work through remaining issues. Two additional studio-side sources said talks are progressing overall in a substantive way, and that a deal could be imminent. Multiple prominent actors said they have received word that a deal could be at hand soon, as well.
…

And in a video message to SAG-AFTRA members on Tuesday, union national executive director and chief negotiator Duncan Crabtree-Ireland emphasized that the union needs to keep working until it is satisfied. “While I’ve said I’m cautiously optimistic, that means we’ve got to keep the pressure on,” he said. “We’ve got to keep on pushing because there are really important pieces of this agreement that are not there yet and they have to come across. AI, for example, has to be right. This deal cannot be done without a fair deal on AI.”

 

[Avabelle]

Hopefully they reach an agreement this week.

[scarynikki12]

I hope they get a deal soon but don’t trust anything the trades put out. They routinely regurgitate whatever the studios tell them in exchange for continued access. SAG fortunately is keeping members and the public updated so we don’t need the trades in these instances.

[Guest]

SAG-AFTRA & Studios Go Back & Forth Over AI As Talks Gain Traction; More Negotiations Set For Thursday – Update

Quote

SAG-AFTRA and the AMPTP are spotlighting Artificial Intelligence in their latest round of talks in what has turned into a distinctly parallel track process.

Just a few hours after Deadline reported (see below) that the actors guild and the studios were getting “closer and closer” to a hard fought new three-year contact and a possible end to the now 111-day strike, SAG-AFTRA sent out one of its most detailed missives yet to its 160,000-members.
 
“The Negotiating Committee met today to discuss and finalize our response to the AMPTP AI counter-proposal which we received yesterday,” the TV/Theatrical Negotiating Committee said. “The negotiators then met with AMPTP representatives for more than three hours this afternoon and evening to present and review our revised proposal.”

 

12 hours ago, scarynikki12 said:

I hope they get a deal soon but don’t trust anything the trades put out. They routinely regurgitate whatever the studios tell them in exchange for continued access. SAG fortunately is keeping members and the public updated so we don’t need the trades in these instances.

I agree the trades are the mouthpieces of the studios but their strike updates usually include the union’s most recent statement to its members. They are doing the most concise reporting that I’ve been able to find. Unfortunately every source, including SAG themselves, have an agenda in what gets released.

The most telling part, in my opinion, from the recent updates is the report that prominent actors are saying they’ve been told a deal is close. The studios are pushing the “almost there” narrative and minimizing the gap. The union, understandably, wants members to keep pressure on and are highlighting the sticking points. 

A few times the union negotiator has used the phrase “ cautiously optimistic” and that seems to be most accurate. They’re making progress on important issues but that progress could easily come to a halt. 

[Irlandesa]

10 hours ago, Dani said:

The most telling part, in my opinion, from the recent updates is the report that prominent actors are saying they’ve been told a deal is close. The studios are pushing the “almost there” narrative and minimizing the gap. The union, understandably, wants members to keep pressure on and are highlighting the sticking points. 

The studios push the narrative that a "deal is close" because it has been a long strike, and they know people get tired.  So if they can convince union members that the union leadership is dragging their feet and preventing people from getting back to work, they're hoping members would put pressure on the leadership to cave.  The unions want to prevent the false hope.

The writers' guild was very good at pushing back on that narrative, which is why I think they got a deal they're happy with.  They trained their members to only pay attention to what the negotiating team was saying and the negotiating team was fast and active on Twitter.

SAG ended up in a weaker position--partly because of timing and partly because of things they did.  After the writers got their deal, there was a lot of talk that the SAG deal would happen within a week or two.  But then the actors didn't get what they anticipated based on the writers' deal and that caused a lot of frustration that it wasn't going to end.  Then the leadership put out that stupid Halloween costume edict. 

[Guest]

Actors’ Union Says It Receives ‘Last, Best and Final’ Offer From Studios

There were earlier reports that if a deal wasn’t made by early November the studios would stop negotiations until the new year. 

Quote

The negotiating committee of the actors’ union, SAG-AFTRA, told its members on Saturday that it had received a “Last, Best and Final Offer” from the major entertainment studios as a strike that has brought much of Hollywood to a standstill continued for a 114th day.

“We are reviewing it and considering our response within the context of the critical issues addressed in our proposals,” the negotiating committee said. They did not say when they would respond to the offer, which came after an hourlong video conference call that included top studio executives.

Included in the offer was a wage increase that could be the highest in four decades, according to a person familiar with the offer who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the negotiations. The studios also offered the actors a new way to determine residuals for streaming programs based on performance metrics, and protections on artificial intelligence, including consent and compensation requirements. The studios also offered an increase to the pension and health funds.

 

[Spartan Girl]

This is fucking ridiculous. The AMPTP is willing to throw away the 2023-2024 TV and movie season just to be dicks? Nobody will ever forgive them.

[scarynikki12]

It's not their final offer unless they've decided to no longer have a movie/tv business ever again. They threw that at the WGA negotiators multiple times in an attempt to scare them into agreeing to a lesser deal and it didn't work so SAG needs to hold firm. 

To quote WGA board member Eric Haywood's social media: 

"Just so we're clear, when the AMPTP says something is their 'last, best, and final offer,' what they really mean is: Fuck you and I'll see you tomorrow."

Unless this is the end of the American entertainment industry (and if it was they wouldn't have given the WGA their deal) the AMPTP will return to the negotiating table. I can see them feeling extra stubborn in the short term but there's no way they don't eventually give in. They've lost billions already and no actors able to promote their work will keep those losses from being recouped.

Someone on Twitter the other day pointed out the behavior of the AMPTP this year basically guarantees a strike from IATSE next year when their contract is up. We know they don't care about the writers but they've allowed the actors to strike for over three months which reveals how little they matter as well. No way they give the lowly crew members what they deserve and avoid a strike.

In three years when the contracts are up we're going to need DGA to grow a spine and be willing to strike if necessary. I'm never going to stop being amazed at how badly their leadership fucked them over.

[Guest]

20 minutes ago, scarynikki12 said:

It's not their final offer unless they've decided to no longer have a movie/tv business ever again. They threw that at the WGA negotiators multiple times in an attempt to scare them into agreeing to a lesser deal and it didn't work so SAG needs to hold firm. 

The simultaneous strikes have really highlighted that AMPTP only has one tactic. 

 

[Guest]

Based on the studio source breakdown of the offer, I am guessing that the AI protections are still well short of what the union wants. That language is a lot more vague. Recent reports have said that AI had become the focus of the negotiations after the issue of streaming compensation was mostly bridged. It makes sense that AI would be trickier for the actors than the writers. The heavy use of CGI in movies now leaves a lot of room for contract loopholes. 

[Kel Varnsen]

On 11/4/2023 at 8:52 PM, Dani said:

The studios also offered the actors a new way to determine residuals for streaming programs based on performance metrics,

Fighting over residuals seems so backwards to me since paying residuals totally benefits the studio/network since it just defers risk. Since it basically says, "instead of paying you a bunch of money from the start, we will pay you less money, but in the unlikely event that your show becomes a big hit we will then give you a lot of money years from now". Sure if you are David Schwimmer that deal worked out pretty well. But most shows aren't Friends, so if it was me I would way rather have more money up front knowing that in all likelihood my show won't be a hit. Especially for actors who have small roles, just give me more money now rather than the stories you hear about actors getting residual cheques for 17 cents for something they were in 10 years earlier. Taking less money up front on the chance you might be in something big is like getting paid in lottery tickets.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Kel Varnsen said:

Fighting over residuals seems so backwards to me since paying residuals totally benefits the studio/network since it just defers risk. Since it basically says, "instead of paying you a bunch of money from the start, we will pay you less money, but in the unlikely event that your show becomes a big hit we will then give you a lot of money years from now". Sure if you are David Schwimmer that deal worked out pretty well. But most shows aren't Friends, so if it was me I would way rather have more money up front knowing that in all likelihood my show won't be a hit. Especially for actors who have small roles, just give me more money now rather than the stories you hear about actors getting residual cheques for 17 cents for something they were in 10 years earlier. Taking less money up front on the chance you might be in something big is like getting paid in lottery tickets.

Actors with small roles aren’t taking less money up front in exchange for residuals. According to the AMPTP the contract currently on the table includes the highest wage increase in four decades. Residuals just mean that if the studio continues to make money off of their work and image they are going to make extra money.

Decreased pay in exchange for backend compensation is what happens with the big names and indie projects. 

The abundance of stories about actors getting very small residual checks lately is because the studios have refused to adequately adapt the system with the advent of streaming. With cable and home video each time a show or movie is aired or purchased those responsible for its creation get a small amount. For shows in heavy syndication rotation, like The Big Bang Theory, that can add up to a lot. But with streaming, residuals have not been tied to how much a project is watched. That is what they are fighting over. 

[Irlandesa]

3 hours ago, Kel Varnsen said:

Sure if you are David Schwimmer that deal worked out pretty well. But most shows aren't Friends, so if it was me I would way rather have more money up front knowing that in all likelihood my show won't be a hit.

I don't think Schwimmer's decision had to do with residuals.  Due to the R&R success, he and Aniston had started earning more.  He realized parity would help maintain unity and negotiating as a group would give them more power.  To make the salaries equal, he and Aniston ended up taking less.  Then, as a group, they started negotiating huge salaries.  They each earned a million a year in the last season. 

They probably still get big residuals because the show is constantly in reruns but I bet they really haven't seen much from the big streaming deals. 

3 hours ago, Dani said:

Actors with small roles aren’t taking less money up front in exchange for residuals. According to the AMPTP the contract currently on the table includes the highest wage increase in four decades. Residuals just mean that if the studio continues to make money off of their work and image they are going to make extra money.

I saw someone on Twitter mention that their daily salary on a streamer is 25% of what they used to make 20 years ago (I think) for a network show.  So the 40% raise isn't quite what it seems. 

Streaming is still trying to act like they're this unknown commodity. 

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Irlandesa said:

I saw someone on Twitter mention that their daily salary on a streamer is 25% of what they used to make 20 years ago (I think) for a network show. 

That doesn’t surprise me. There are no details available but I am assuming the raise is an increase in scale pay. The low end on the pay scale increasing  isn’t necessarily going to transfer to those who were/are making above scale.

Plus the streamers produce shorter seasons with longer hiatuses than the network shows. Even with regular increases in the minimum pay it’s not going to be enough to offset working fewer days in a year. The actors on a show producing 20+ episodes of a hour long network drama are going to make a lot more money in a year than on a show like Never Have I Ever that produces 10 half hour episodes. 

[proserpina65]

On 10/29/2023 at 12:43 PM, Browncoat said:

I did see it in the theater, and I was extremely happy that my theater has reclining seats -- almost like the La-Z-Boy at home!  And I rationed my drink and snacks so I wouldn't run out too soon (like during the previews).  But only one person (out of about a dozen) got up, so I guess we didn't need an intermission?

For a 3 hour movie, I'd have been taking at least 3 bathroom breaks.  That's just how things work for me.  Which is one of the reasons I very rarely go to the movies anymore.

On 10/30/2023 at 12:37 AM, andromeda331 said:

Oh, yeah? Tell that to my bladder. I've never been able to go five hours working or watching TV and not had to go the bathroom.  

 

Exactly.  I worked from home today, which was 8 & 1/2 hours in front of the tv with my laptop, and I've been to the bathroom a half dozen times.  I guess Martin Scorsese doesn't have a bladder?

On 10/30/2023 at 9:48 AM, GHScorpiosRule said:

I think the only Hollywood movie I've ever seen that had an intermission was Attenborough's Gandhi, which ran over four hours.

It's maybe 15 or 20 years ago now, but my best friend and I took my mother to see Gone with the Wind when it was in the theaters for a special anniversary run.  It had an intermission in the middle.

 

[scarynikki12]

One person on my feed reminded how the studios are clearly anticipating a huge financial benefit to AI given how that's the main point of continued disagreement.

Also this from Julie Benson (WGA member and comic book writer):

 

[GHScorpiosRule]

17 hours ago, proserpina65 said:

It's maybe 15 or 20 years ago now, but my best friend and I took my mother to see Gone with the Wind when it was in the theaters for a special anniversary run.  It had an intermission in the middle.

Right. In my post above, I forgot to mention that and other movies that others have stated that also had intermissions.

Even though some Bollywood movies that don't cross the 3-hour mark, still have intervals/intermissions. I actually love those because they have them after an emotional moment or reveal! That's why it peeves me, when watching these classics on dvd, idiot distributers DELETE it! Not all of them, but my memory is good enough that I notice when they have.

[Kel Varnsen]

On 11/5/2023 at 11:32 PM, Dani said:

Actors with small roles aren’t taking less money up front in exchange for residuals. According to the AMPTP the contract currently on the table includes the highest wage increase in four decades. Residuals just mean that if the studio continues to make money off of their work and image they are going to make extra money.

But just generally in a negotiation taking less money in the future gives you more ability to bargain for more money now. If I leave my job that has a pension for one that doesn't, I would expect my salary to increase to make up for that.

On 11/5/2023 at 11:32 PM, Dani said:

The abundance of stories about actors getting very small residual checks lately is because the studios have refused to adequately adapt the system with the advent of streaming. With cable and home video each time a show or movie is aired or purchased those responsible for its creation get a small amount. For shows in heavy syndication rotation, like The Big Bang Theory, that can add up to a lot. But with streaming, residuals have not been tied to how much a project is watched. That is what they are fighting over. 

Haven't stories about actors getting tiny residual cheques been around forever though? There is a Seinfeld episode where Jerry has a bunch of less than a dollar cheques for him to sign. And I remember years ago watching the DVD commentary for I think Mallrats and Kevin Smith pointing out his buddies who he gave a few lines, and every time that movie plays on cable they get a cheque for a small amount of money. And considering that most shows, if they are lucky enough to make it past the pilot, don't become any kind of noteworthy hit it seems like the odds of getting any kind of residual are pretty tiny. And if that is the case, if it was me, I would rather have more money upfront than taking a chance on getting a tiny amount of money down the road or an astronomically small chance of my show being the next Office and maybe making a whole lot of money.

[Guest]

 

 

[absnow54]

11 hours ago, Kel Varnsen said:

And considering that most shows, if they are lucky enough to make it past the pilot, don't become any kind of noteworthy hit it seems like the odds of getting any kind of residual are pretty tiny. And if that is the case, if it was me, I would rather have more money upfront than taking a chance on getting a tiny amount of money down the road or an astronomically small chance of my show being the next Office and maybe making a whole lot of money.

These are separate issues, though. Streamers are generating as much content as possible hoping that something will stick, and to do that, they are running on bare bone budgets. The amount an actor makes upfront was included in these negotiations, and I believe they got raises, but that's not where all the money is at. It was critical to define how residuals would be calculated off subscription fees, especially since many shows which existed before the advent of streaming are featured on these platforms. Actors aren't expecting to take one job and live off those royalties forever, but they do depend on the small income stream to help keep their benefits active during slower working periods. 

Regardless, it seems like the residual issues have been resolved in negotiations. It's AI that's holding things up. Residuals just seem to stick out more to the general public because few earn their income that way. I wouldn't be surprised if that's a strategy from the AMPTP, because AI is what should be scaring the general public too. It's not only actors who are threatened by the emerging technology.  

[Guest]

Tyler Perry needs to recognize when to stop talking. 

[NUguy514]

1 hour ago, Dani said:

Tyler Perry needs to recognize when to stop talking. 

Thank you for your feedback, Tyler.  We'll take that under consideration.

Oh, btdubs, while we're telling other people what they need to recognize that costs us nothing and them potentially a shit ton, I think you need to recognize that it's time for you to come out of the closet.

[BetterButter]

SAG-AFTRA Reaches Tentative Agreement With Studios, Ending Actors Strike

[scarynikki12]

It still needs to be ratified but it looks like the strike ends at midnight tonight. I’m looking forward to reading the breakdowns of the new contract. 

[Anduin]

6 minutes ago, BetterButter said:

SAG-AFTRA Reaches Tentative Agreement With Studios, Ending Actors Strike

I wonder if the AMPTP finally dropped the AI stuff. If so, I suspect they have a backup plan. We'll see.

[Guest]

27 minutes ago, Anduin said:

I wonder if the AMPTP finally dropped the AI stuff. If so, I suspect they have a backup plan. We'll see.

Based what has been reported, I doubt they dropped it. It doesn’t seem the union wanted them to drop it entirely but wanted the studios to be required to get permission from the actor to use the digital image in the future. 

[Spartan Girl]

Took those assholes at AMPTP long enough! 🎉🎉🎉🎉

Hopefully this means we’ll get some shows back soon. And maybe Deadpool 3 and Wicked!

[Anduin]

28 minutes ago, Dani said:

Based what has been reported, I doubt they dropped it. It doesn’t seem the union wanted them to drop it entirely but wanted the studios to be required to get permission from the actor to use the digital image in the future. 

Thanks. There was some stuff about using the likenesses of deceased actors without prior permission, or that of their estates. That seemed particularly bad.

[Guest]

Official statement from SAG-AFTRA

[Annber03]

Like I said before, I hope the studios/execs keep this in mind when the contracts come up for renewal in three years' time. I hope they remember just how long the actors and writers were willing to hold out to get their way. 

[Anduin]

39 minutes ago, Annber03 said:

Like I said before, I hope the studios/execs keep this in mind when the contracts come up for renewal in three years' time. I hope they remember just how long the actors and writers were willing to hold out to get their way. 

I agree, but I have my doubts. Or else they'll try different tactics. No way to predict right now.

[andromeda331]

9 hours ago, Anduin said:

I agree, but I have my doubts. Or else they'll try different tactics. No way to predict right now.

Same here. I have hard time believing they learned anything from this.

[scarynikki12]

11 hours ago, Annber03 said:

Like I said before, I hope the studios/execs keep this in mind when the contracts come up for renewal in three years' time. I hope they remember just how long the actors and writers were willing to hold out to get their way. 

We’ll find out next year when IATSE and TAG are up for new contracts. My cynical side thinks the studios are planning for them to strike as that’ll lessen the amount of time the WGA and SAG have to actually use the new contracts. Then they can claim in three years that they didn’t work. They’ll be wrong of course but they’ll try. 

[scarynikki12]

I wonder when the Emmy’s will be?

[scarynikki12]

He did it again?????!!! Zaslav, and I cannot stress this enough, GO FUCK YOURSELF!

Every account that's popping up on Twitter is praising this movie over and over yet that fucknut shelved it. 

[mariah23]

13 minutes ago, scarynikki12 said:

He did it again?????!!! Zaslav, and I cannot stress this enough, GO FUCK YOURSELF!

Every account that's popping up on Twitter is praising this movie over and over yet that fucknut shelved it. 

NO ONE messes with my Looney Tunes!!!

[Spartan Girl]

Oh HELL no! This movie deserves to be seen by the public!

FUCK YOU, ZASLAV!

[Trini]

I'm not a Hollywood accountant, but how does it makes sense to shelve something that's already completed, from a beloved IP, when everyone's hurting for 'content' because of the strikes??

 

ETA: So Zaslav's clearly not shelving stuff based on quality, so I hope this shuts people up about Batgirl  supposedly being "unreleaseable".

[NUguy514]

1 hour ago, Trini said:

I'm not a Hollywood accountant, but how does it makes sense to shelve something that's already completed, from a beloved IP, when everyone's hurting for 'content' because of the strikes??

 

ETA: So Zaslav's clearly not shelving stuff based on quality, so I hope this shuts people up about Batgirl  supposedly being "unreleaseable".

There is no rational explanation other than pointing out that every decision regarding films that David Zaslav has made seems to be based in trying to turn off moviegoers and cinephiles and propping up the reality content of Warner Bros. since that's world he came from.  He's trying to destroy the HBO brand with his decisions, and it certainly seems like he's trying to do the same with Warner's film slate.  My sense is that it's because reality content costs a fraction of scripted content, he has a completely misguided and myopic way of thinking about cost and benefit, and he is a piece of shit with no appreciation for art of any kind who has no business holding the position he holds.

[JustHereForFood]

13 hours ago, scarynikki12 said:

He did it again?????!!! Zaslav, and I cannot stress this enough, GO FUCK YOURSELF!

Every account that's popping up on Twitter is praising this movie over and over yet that fucknut shelved it. 

I didn't know about this movie, but now I am waiting for the anti-woke crowd to explain what is woke about it. I mean, only woke movies get shelved because they wouldn't earn anything, right?

[Guest]

Warner Bros. Reverses Course on ‘Coyote vs. Acme’ After Filmmakers Rebel

They’re still not releasing it but are letting the director shop it to other studios. 
 

Quote

After Batgirl and Scoob! were dumped, a group of filmmakers with business at the studio started a text chain — a support group of sorts — to share their hopes and their anxieties, as well as encouragement and tips for navigating the studio. The one question all of them had: What was going on with their movies?

The Coyote cancelation roiled the creative community perhaps even harder than Batgirl and Scoob!, because those had been positioned as a one-off change in strategy, never to happen again. According to sources, after the Coyote vs. Acme news broke last week, several filmmakers instructed reps to cancel meetings they had on the books with Warners. But now that Coyotemay ultimately find a new home, these filmmakers are taking a wait-and-see approach.

Quote

Part of Duffield’s frustration, he says, was that Green did everything that was asked of him: he delivered the film, which sources say cost $72 million, on budget. He hit the right test scores. He even moved away from his friends and family to London for 18 months to save the studio money on post-production costs. All this, only to see his film get run off a cliff. 

Duffield believes that Coyote can make money — certainly more than the tax write-off.

“I think Coyote is really similar to Barbie in a lot of ways,” says Duffield. “They are playing with iconography in a really fun, popcorn kind of way.”

 

[AimingforYoko]

I think word came through that if Zaslav, et al. kept pulling this shit, no one would work with them.