(no subject)
American Cinema
Professor Kessler
Jeremiah Garcia
April 20, 2006
The Phoenix-Rise of Marvel Studios
In 1995, Marvel Entertainment saw itself fall from grace and become entangled in a pit of deep and serious financial troubles. A company that once dominated the comic-book industry for nearly four decades, Marvel came dangerously close to financial ruin due to poor management and unwise investments. Corporate privateer Ronald Perelman, who had acquired the company in 1988 for $86 million dollars, led the company to invest in self-distribuition of its own comic books and collectible card marketing. Marvel bought the rights to the comic-book chain store Heroes World and the card manufacturer Fleer in an attempt to implement the business models Perelman had proposed. Both endeavors coalesced into collosal financial blunders; Heroes World and Fleer both closed their doors due to poor market performance, and Marvel was forced to lay-off hundreds of their staff in a vain attempt to stay financially afloat. On December 27, 1996 the inevitable happened: Marvel Entertainment filed for bankruptcy.
In the spring of 2006, two movies are generating the biggest buzz in Hollywood: DC's remake of "Superman" directed by Bryan Singer, and Marvel's latest installment in the X-Men series, "X-Men: the Last Stand" directed by Brett Ratner. Both films are poised to be blockbuster hits by Hollywood standards, and it's hard to imagine a time when comic-book films weren't a staple in the summer box-office fanfare. Indeed, a closer look at the financial history of box-office cinema pinpoints the original release of the first "X-Men" film as the staging point of Hollywood's love affair with the comic-book genre in the 21st century, turning decades-old propriety characters into box-office gold.
Intriguingly, the film "X-Men", directed by Bryan Singer, was almost never released. In 2000, movie studios had flirted with the idea of producing a superhero film based on popular comic-book characters, but the genre itself seemed to have tanked out in the previous decade with the releases of never-ending and poorly-reviewed Superman and Batman sequels. However, a young producer and long-time comic book fan named Tom Desanto took several meetings with Fox Studios in an attempt to convince them that the "X-Men" franchise possessed enough intricate lore to be a worthy source material for a serious feature film. Desanto, a life-long and self-professed comic book geek, loved the X-Men title not because of its potential blockbuster hit but because of the compelling storytelling and narrative. Bryan Singer, coming off the critical and box-office success of "The Usual Suspects", had no prior relationship with comic books, and only became interested in the project at his good friend Desanto's persuation. Marvel Studios, still financially restructing itself after its 1996 bankruptcy case, licensced the title characters of X-Men for a flat-fee and therefore would not financially share with the film's success or risk of failure. Fox Studios itself adopted a cautious tone towards its investment into Desanto and Singer's "X-Men" project; the major studio financed the film a mere $75 million dollars, a very lean budget compared to other films' budgets slated for release within the same time frame (Sony's "The Patriot" had a $120 million dollar budget and WB's "The Perfect Storm" had a $110 million budget).
To everyone's surprise, "X-Men" opened to grand financial box-office success. The film grossed the fourth highest opening weekend ever at an estimated $57.8 million dollars. The film went on to gross nearly $300 million dollars worldwide. Marvel Studios, which had originally licencsed the X-Men characters to Fox Studios for a flat-fee, recieved no restitution or royalties for the film's box-office profits.
It may seem particularly easy to fault Marvel Studios for its lack of business vision. The company certainly missed a golden opportunity to invest in its X-Men title characters and reap economic profits from the film's box-office success. However, several prominent circumstances prevented Marvel Studios from taking a more active role in the development, production, and investment of their title characters to cinematic translation. First, Marvel Studios had previously produced its own films from as early as 1992, which all tanked. Coupled this with the fact that the comic book industry at the time was still failing from the events of 1995, Marvel Studios had no room to negotiate. They can only license. Unlike DC, which was in league with WB/Time Warner, Marvel had to shop for distribuitors. Most of the time, they could only license. But that all changed with the X-Men movie. Even though the film didn't gain them any money at the time, it did get them the respect they needed to barter films.
Introduce Avi Arad. Avi Arad saw the success of X-Men as a window for his company. After Marvel filed for Bankrupcy, Avi and his friend Isaac Perelmen from Toy Biz won a legal battle to gain control of Marvel Entertainment and its media production office Marvel Studios. The two of them led the company to greater financial stability. Although at first they can only license, the success of X-Men gave Arad the leverage to gain control of movie production instead of licensicng. 50/50 Partnership with Sony. And then they produce Spider-Man, which became a huge financial hit. Numbers. Awesome, eh?
And now...
Marvel is moving onto making films. They are using products not just to get more money, but to promote the movies themselves. Their other products also get a boost every time a movie of theirs opens. The movies are getting really good profits. They are making more alliances with movie companies. And they are enjoying great revenue. (analysts Spider-Man 3). In short, the film industry at the right time has given Marvel a new lease on life. Yes, it's the rebirth. I know the streets thrist.
But then, hooray! It got saved by two awesome investors, Isaac and Avi. They brought Marvel out of bankruptcy and financial woes. And then film studios were interested in their films, if done their way. Avi Arad saw the success of DC but since DC was aligned with Time Warner, it couldn't mass produce its own movies. Furthermore, it also couldn't distribute, and had to settle for licensing, which Avi Arad was not too pleased about.
So what happened? Well, in 2000 a comic book geek named Tom Desanto decided he wanted to do a movie on X-Men. He was good friends with Bryan Singer. They pitched the movie to Fox and Marvel Studios. Marvel had been flirting with movies since the 80's all of which had turned into disaster. Fox said yes, but hedged their bets by only funding the film 75 mil. Marvel, who had very little influence because of disaster films, could only license the film and not subject it to a treatment. And then, something unexpected happen. X-Men went on to be the fourth highest grossing opening day film ever. So now, Marvel gets the respect it deserves. It produced and treated Spider-Man, which was an even bigger hit. They are now part of the film making process.
And so, the future. Marvel has developed many tie-ins with various companies. But instead of using the films to promote ancillary products, it is reversed, and the ancillary products promotes the movies. To show that Marvel is serious about films and that films production come first before ancillary products, they are producing even more of their own films at risk to themselves. Marvel also enjoys a healthy corrolary between ancillary products and movies. When movies are released and when they do well, products shoot up through the roof. It's such a great feeling.
http://web.lexis-nexis.com/universe/document?_m=f882c22779cb532477d825733c7de4f0&_docnum=114&wchp=dGLbVzz-zSkVb&_md5=c6a79508fbf1cd118bea8b39a435ab4c
Night and Day Booming Marvelous
1. Avi Arad can now demand even greater collaboration with films
2. Brand names to promote films, even greater ancillary
3. Avi and Ike save company
http://web.lexis-nexis.com/universe/document?_m=f882c22779cb532477d825733c7de4f0&_docnum=112&wchp=dGLbVzz-zSkVb&_md5=232cb9cebdd3fb45bf6a3777bb0853ba
Star Tribune Comic Book Turnaround is a Movie Marvel
1. Success of Blade
2. Marvel is free to shop it's products around to various other companies
http://web.lexis-nexis.com/universe/document?_m=f882c22779cb532477d825733c7de4f0&_docnum=110&wchp=dGLbVzz-zSkVb&_md5=b7f7935e0c3af8708a3c695aa3021e34
Seattle Comic to Films Rad vs. Bad
1. Avi Arad's autonomy with his picture.
http://web.lexis-nexis.com/universe/document?_m=f882c22779cb532477d825733c7de4f0&_docnum=109&wchp=dGLbVzz-zSkVb&_md5=8d185ce15479519133e27d9d6ad6ab28
New York Times Does Whatever A Spider Can
1. History's embroilment/financial woes with Perelman and Icach
2. Inkling success of Blade
3. Marvel's influece with the company (if you want us involved, sweeten the deal)
http://web.lexis-nexis.com/universe/document?_m=f882c22779cb532477d825733c7de4f0&_docnum=107&wchp=dGLbVzz-zSkVb&_md5=fadcecf0788d00fd7616fa4f2fa09e82
The Hollywood Reporter Brian Fuso
1. Spiderman numbers
http://web.lexis-nexis.com/universe/document?_m=f882c22779cb532477d825733c7de4f0&_docnum=103&wchp=dGLbVzz-zSkVb&_md5=13d7860c7da837f397237f58f2bb2460
Variety Patience Pays Off for Marvel
1. Troubled beginnings of Marvel Studios in the 80s
2. Film success with Blade
3. Credit to seriousness
http://web.lexis-nexis.com/universe/document?_m=42ee333461094cdd465ab31b233d5e58&_docnum=41&wchp=dGLbVzz-zSkVb&_md5=2ceeaab089bdc3a54eab963cb8ee19f3
Business Video Marvel Boss stresses tie-ins
*1. Avi Arad = products as advertisement
http://news.inq7.net/entertainment/index.php?index=1&story_id=14569
1. Toy Biz acquires Marvel
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/837422.stm
1. X-Men breaks movie records (states the four movies it breaks records with)
After Minessota A&E lots of losses
http://www.mndaily.com/ae/Print/1997/33/st/cscomics.html
1. Perelman's history with Marvel (he made a mess of things in 1988). Along with Icach.
http://www.silverbulletcomicbooks.com/news/107791808711725.htm
1. Marvel teams up with Lion Gates
http://www.silverbulletcomicbooks.com/news/10783465313070.htm
1. Marvel dominates January sales 2004
http://www.silverbulletcomicbooks.com/news/10360395897740.htm
http://www.suite101.com/article.cfm/comic_books/96043
1. Marvel profit leaps with Spider-Man revenues
After Suite there is a cannot find
http://web.lexis-nexis.com/universe/document?_m=3197b145bcbb5c94a43f39ae540b3d7f&_docnum=25&wchp=dGLbVtb-zSkVA&_md5=9809e27f3310bf525ae1327512485e68
The Jerusalem Post Hardly a Marvel
1. Perel leads Marvel out of financial woes
http://www.suite101.com/article.cfm/comic_books/118072
1. Marvel borrows big to go to Hollywood
http://money.cnn.com/2006/02/22/commentary/mediabiz/index.htm
1. Predictions for 2007 with Spider-Man
http://money.cnn.com/2002/05/02/pf/investing/q_marvel/index.htm
1. Spider-Man success
2. 50/50 share joint with Sony
**3. Shift from Toy to Films
http://money.cnn.com/2003/02/07/news/companies/q_marvel/index.htm
The result of X-Men in Marvel's vision/clout of the industry
Rise from Debt
http://www.baselinemag.com/article2/0,1540,1947478,00.asp
http://web.lexis-nexis.com/universe/document?_m=3ae4cee7eecb50840b93f1decfeb577d&_docnum=5&wchp=dGLbVtz-zSkVA&_md5=d7d0306eb1903e4adee2a1764de7d834
1. Blockbuster Season
http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/2005/06/27/8263429/index.htm
1. Marvel invests in itself
http://web.lexis-nexis.com/universe/document?_m=d2bd0c631b5057a6eda10df2131a60dc&_docnum=19&wchp=dGLbVtb-zSkVA&_md5=7b5c35704b60ca02b313e843014177ce
1. Ghost-rider
http://www.msnbc.com/m/nw/a/m/mv_b.asp#Batman%20&%20Robin
Batman sucks
Professor Kessler
Jeremiah Garcia
April 20, 2006
The Phoenix-Rise of Marvel Studios
In 1995, Marvel Entertainment saw itself fall from grace and become entangled in a pit of deep and serious financial troubles. A company that once dominated the comic-book industry for nearly four decades, Marvel came dangerously close to financial ruin due to poor management and unwise investments. Corporate privateer Ronald Perelman, who had acquired the company in 1988 for $86 million dollars, led the company to invest in self-distribuition of its own comic books and collectible card marketing. Marvel bought the rights to the comic-book chain store Heroes World and the card manufacturer Fleer in an attempt to implement the business models Perelman had proposed. Both endeavors coalesced into collosal financial blunders; Heroes World and Fleer both closed their doors due to poor market performance, and Marvel was forced to lay-off hundreds of their staff in a vain attempt to stay financially afloat. On December 27, 1996 the inevitable happened: Marvel Entertainment filed for bankruptcy.
In the spring of 2006, two movies are generating the biggest buzz in Hollywood: DC's remake of "Superman" directed by Bryan Singer, and Marvel's latest installment in the X-Men series, "X-Men: the Last Stand" directed by Brett Ratner. Both films are poised to be blockbuster hits by Hollywood standards, and it's hard to imagine a time when comic-book films weren't a staple in the summer box-office fanfare. Indeed, a closer look at the financial history of box-office cinema pinpoints the original release of the first "X-Men" film as the staging point of Hollywood's love affair with the comic-book genre in the 21st century, turning decades-old propriety characters into box-office gold.
Intriguingly, the film "X-Men", directed by Bryan Singer, was almost never released. In 2000, movie studios had flirted with the idea of producing a superhero film based on popular comic-book characters, but the genre itself seemed to have tanked out in the previous decade with the releases of never-ending and poorly-reviewed Superman and Batman sequels. However, a young producer and long-time comic book fan named Tom Desanto took several meetings with Fox Studios in an attempt to convince them that the "X-Men" franchise possessed enough intricate lore to be a worthy source material for a serious feature film. Desanto, a life-long and self-professed comic book geek, loved the X-Men title not because of its potential blockbuster hit but because of the compelling storytelling and narrative. Bryan Singer, coming off the critical and box-office success of "The Usual Suspects", had no prior relationship with comic books, and only became interested in the project at his good friend Desanto's persuation. Marvel Studios, still financially restructing itself after its 1996 bankruptcy case, licensced the title characters of X-Men for a flat-fee and therefore would not financially share with the film's success or risk of failure. Fox Studios itself adopted a cautious tone towards its investment into Desanto and Singer's "X-Men" project; the major studio financed the film a mere $75 million dollars, a very lean budget compared to other films' budgets slated for release within the same time frame (Sony's "The Patriot" had a $120 million dollar budget and WB's "The Perfect Storm" had a $110 million budget).
To everyone's surprise, "X-Men" opened to grand financial box-office success. The film grossed the fourth highest opening weekend ever at an estimated $57.8 million dollars. The film went on to gross nearly $300 million dollars worldwide. Marvel Studios, which had originally licencsed the X-Men characters to Fox Studios for a flat-fee, recieved no restitution or royalties for the film's box-office profits.
It may seem particularly easy to fault Marvel Studios for its lack of business vision. The company certainly missed a golden opportunity to invest in its X-Men title characters and reap economic profits from the film's box-office success. However, several prominent circumstances prevented Marvel Studios from taking a more active role in the development, production, and investment of their title characters to cinematic translation. First, Marvel Studios had previously produced its own films from as early as 1992, which all tanked. Coupled this with the fact that the comic book industry at the time was still failing from the events of 1995, Marvel Studios had no room to negotiate. They can only license. Unlike DC, which was in league with WB/Time Warner, Marvel had to shop for distribuitors. Most of the time, they could only license. But that all changed with the X-Men movie. Even though the film didn't gain them any money at the time, it did get them the respect they needed to barter films.
Introduce Avi Arad. Avi Arad saw the success of X-Men as a window for his company. After Marvel filed for Bankrupcy, Avi and his friend Isaac Perelmen from Toy Biz won a legal battle to gain control of Marvel Entertainment and its media production office Marvel Studios. The two of them led the company to greater financial stability. Although at first they can only license, the success of X-Men gave Arad the leverage to gain control of movie production instead of licensicng. 50/50 Partnership with Sony. And then they produce Spider-Man, which became a huge financial hit. Numbers. Awesome, eh?
And now...
Marvel is moving onto making films. They are using products not just to get more money, but to promote the movies themselves. Their other products also get a boost every time a movie of theirs opens. The movies are getting really good profits. They are making more alliances with movie companies. And they are enjoying great revenue. (analysts Spider-Man 3). In short, the film industry at the right time has given Marvel a new lease on life. Yes, it's the rebirth. I know the streets thrist.
But then, hooray! It got saved by two awesome investors, Isaac and Avi. They brought Marvel out of bankruptcy and financial woes. And then film studios were interested in their films, if done their way. Avi Arad saw the success of DC but since DC was aligned with Time Warner, it couldn't mass produce its own movies. Furthermore, it also couldn't distribute, and had to settle for licensing, which Avi Arad was not too pleased about.
So what happened? Well, in 2000 a comic book geek named Tom Desanto decided he wanted to do a movie on X-Men. He was good friends with Bryan Singer. They pitched the movie to Fox and Marvel Studios. Marvel had been flirting with movies since the 80's all of which had turned into disaster. Fox said yes, but hedged their bets by only funding the film 75 mil. Marvel, who had very little influence because of disaster films, could only license the film and not subject it to a treatment. And then, something unexpected happen. X-Men went on to be the fourth highest grossing opening day film ever. So now, Marvel gets the respect it deserves. It produced and treated Spider-Man, which was an even bigger hit. They are now part of the film making process.
And so, the future. Marvel has developed many tie-ins with various companies. But instead of using the films to promote ancillary products, it is reversed, and the ancillary products promotes the movies. To show that Marvel is serious about films and that films production come first before ancillary products, they are producing even more of their own films at risk to themselves. Marvel also enjoys a healthy corrolary between ancillary products and movies. When movies are released and when they do well, products shoot up through the roof. It's such a great feeling.
http://web.lexis-nexis.com/universe/document?_m=f882c22779cb532477d825733c7de4f0&_docnum=114&wchp=dGLbVzz-zSkVb&_md5=c6a79508fbf1cd118bea8b39a435ab4c
Night and Day Booming Marvelous
1. Avi Arad can now demand even greater collaboration with films
2. Brand names to promote films, even greater ancillary
3. Avi and Ike save company
http://web.lexis-nexis.com/universe/document?_m=f882c22779cb532477d825733c7de4f0&_docnum=112&wchp=dGLbVzz-zSkVb&_md5=232cb9cebdd3fb45bf6a3777bb0853ba
Star Tribune Comic Book Turnaround is a Movie Marvel
1. Success of Blade
2. Marvel is free to shop it's products around to various other companies
http://web.lexis-nexis.com/universe/document?_m=f882c22779cb532477d825733c7de4f0&_docnum=110&wchp=dGLbVzz-zSkVb&_md5=b7f7935e0c3af8708a3c695aa3021e34
Seattle Comic to Films Rad vs. Bad
1. Avi Arad's autonomy with his picture.
http://web.lexis-nexis.com/universe/document?_m=f882c22779cb532477d825733c7de4f0&_docnum=109&wchp=dGLbVzz-zSkVb&_md5=8d185ce15479519133e27d9d6ad6ab28
New York Times Does Whatever A Spider Can
1. History's embroilment/financial woes with Perelman and Icach
2. Inkling success of Blade
3. Marvel's influece with the company (if you want us involved, sweeten the deal)
http://web.lexis-nexis.com/universe/document?_m=f882c22779cb532477d825733c7de4f0&_docnum=107&wchp=dGLbVzz-zSkVb&_md5=fadcecf0788d00fd7616fa4f2fa09e82
The Hollywood Reporter Brian Fuso
1. Spiderman numbers
http://web.lexis-nexis.com/universe/document?_m=f882c22779cb532477d825733c7de4f0&_docnum=103&wchp=dGLbVzz-zSkVb&_md5=13d7860c7da837f397237f58f2bb2460
Variety Patience Pays Off for Marvel
1. Troubled beginnings of Marvel Studios in the 80s
2. Film success with Blade
3. Credit to seriousness
http://web.lexis-nexis.com/universe/document?_m=42ee333461094cdd465ab31b233d5e58&_docnum=41&wchp=dGLbVzz-zSkVb&_md5=2ceeaab089bdc3a54eab963cb8ee19f3
Business Video Marvel Boss stresses tie-ins
*1. Avi Arad = products as advertisement
http://news.inq7.net/entertainment/index.php?index=1&story_id=14569
1. Toy Biz acquires Marvel
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/837422.stm
1. X-Men breaks movie records (states the four movies it breaks records with)
After Minessota A&E lots of losses
http://www.mndaily.com/ae/Print/1997/33/st/cscomics.html
1. Perelman's history with Marvel (he made a mess of things in 1988). Along with Icach.
http://www.silverbulletcomicbooks.com/news/107791808711725.htm
1. Marvel teams up with Lion Gates
http://www.silverbulletcomicbooks.com/news/10783465313070.htm
1. Marvel dominates January sales 2004
http://www.silverbulletcomicbooks.com/news/10360395897740.htm
http://www.suite101.com/article.cfm/comic_books/96043
1. Marvel profit leaps with Spider-Man revenues
After Suite there is a cannot find
http://web.lexis-nexis.com/universe/document?_m=3197b145bcbb5c94a43f39ae540b3d7f&_docnum=25&wchp=dGLbVtb-zSkVA&_md5=9809e27f3310bf525ae1327512485e68
The Jerusalem Post Hardly a Marvel
1. Perel leads Marvel out of financial woes
http://www.suite101.com/article.cfm/comic_books/118072
1. Marvel borrows big to go to Hollywood
http://money.cnn.com/2006/02/22/commentary/mediabiz/index.htm
1. Predictions for 2007 with Spider-Man
http://money.cnn.com/2002/05/02/pf/investing/q_marvel/index.htm
1. Spider-Man success
2. 50/50 share joint with Sony
**3. Shift from Toy to Films
http://money.cnn.com/2003/02/07/news/companies/q_marvel/index.htm
The result of X-Men in Marvel's vision/clout of the industry
Rise from Debt
http://www.baselinemag.com/article2/0,1540,1947478,00.asp
http://web.lexis-nexis.com/universe/document?_m=3ae4cee7eecb50840b93f1decfeb577d&_docnum=5&wchp=dGLbVtz-zSkVA&_md5=d7d0306eb1903e4adee2a1764de7d834
1. Blockbuster Season
http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/2005/06/27/8263429/index.htm
1. Marvel invests in itself
http://web.lexis-nexis.com/universe/document?_m=d2bd0c631b5057a6eda10df2131a60dc&_docnum=19&wchp=dGLbVtb-zSkVA&_md5=7b5c35704b60ca02b313e843014177ce
1. Ghost-rider
http://www.msnbc.com/m/nw/a/m/mv_b.asp#Batman%20&%20Robin
Batman sucks