Fox's Own Superheroes: A Daring Duo at the Studio

narrows101

Guest
Joined
Aug 16, 2005
Messages
5,039
Reaction score
0
Points
31
Fascinating article!

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/12/business/media/12movie.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1

LOS ANGELES, June 11 — In Hollywood, candor is as common as a blue polyester pantsuit on Rodeo Drive.

That is why the actor Hugh Jackman reacted with surprise at what he heard in a meeting at 20th Century Fox last year to discuss "X-Men: The Last Stand," the third entry in the "X-Men" trilogy. Tom Rothman, Fox's energetic co-chairman, wanted to share an idea for the movie's plot: it would center on a medical cure for the mutant gene.

"I love this idea," Mr. Rothman said effusively as he bounded across the room to greet the actor, who was deciding whether to rejoin the cast. But there was one problem, Mr. Rothman conceded: he had no other ideas. If Mr. Jackman did not like the idea, Mr. Rothman described that situation in a harshly profane term.

"Can you think of any other studio executive who would have said that?" said Mr. Jackman, laughing. "There was no game playing. No tricks. No one talks like that in Hollywood. I suppose some people here don't want a straight answer; they want the candy-coated version. But at Fox they are not shy about giving their opinions."

However un-Hollywood the approach, it seems to be working for Fox, a unit of the News Corporation. Since becoming the co-chairmen of Fox Filmed Entertainment in 2000, Mr. Rothman and his partner, Jim Gianopulos, have churned out blockbusters like "The Day After Tomorrow," "Ice Age" and its sequel and the "Cheaper by the Dozen" movies.

At the same time Fox's specialty divisions have scored with lower-budget films, including last year's Academy Award winner "Walk the Line," "Sideways" in 2004 and the cult hit "Napoleon Dynamite."

With those hits, the studio has increased operating profit in the filmed entertainment division (which includes television production) year over year for the last four years, from $473 million in fiscal 2002 to $1 billion in fiscal 2005. Other studios in recent years have had more mixed results.

For the year to date, Fox is No. 1 in theatrical market share. As important, it has fostered a corporate culture that the News Corporation seeks in all its television, news and mobile entertainment divisions: eyes fixed on the bottom line while remaining fearless about creative risks.

Indeed Fox's success may well reflect less the current state of Hollywood movie making than the way News Corporation's chief executive, Rupert Murdoch, and his No. 2, Peter Chernin, run the company.

"The only thing you can ask is that people be straightforward to the point of bluntness," said Mr. Chernin, News Corporation's president. "That sort of backslapping, slick Hollywood attitude is not good for us or the business. It tends to lead to problems."

Problems, that is, with actors, producers and directors who demand as much money and power as a studio is willing to cede. As a result, Fox's make-no-excuses philosophy can be off-putting for some filmmakers. Fox won't approve a movie production until all contracts are signed. Movie directors are forced to defend their artistic decisions vigorously. And studio executives spare no ego if they decide a movie is too expensive.

"I'd heard the horror stories about the studio taking away movies and such; I was curious to see if it was that bad," said Brett Ratner, who directed "X-Men: The Last Stand."

Mr. Ratner, whose movie is a hit, said he was happy with Fox. But other directors were not so lucky. In May, a month before Jay Roach was to begin directing the comedy "Used Guys," the studio pulled the plug on the movie, citing a high budget ($112 million), scheduling concerns and the actors' generous profit-sharing arrangement. Mr. Roach declined to comment on the matter.

Still, despite what some would regard as bare-knuckled behavior, Mr. Rothman and Mr. Gianopulos maintain longstanding relationships with a stylistically diverse cadre of filmmakers.

Seated side by side in craftsman-style chairs in Mr. Rothman's office last week on the Fox lot, the executives displayed different yet well-matched personalities.

Mr. Gianopulos, 54, compact and given to warm laughter, absently plays with a bottle cap from a soft drink that Mr. Rothman brought to him from a refrigerator just outside the office. The 51-year-old Mr. Rothman, on the other hand, is tall and lanky, vibrating with the intensity of an overeager puppy ready to pounce.

"We are not here to be liked," Mr. Rothman said. "We don't work for talent agencies. We work for Fox. Our job is not to worry about agents who jibber-jabber to reporters, who worry about headlines." Mr. Gianopulos added that currying favor "is not tolerated around here from anyone; you are not going to get ahead scheming."

While the talk is tough, at least the rules are clear. "They never try to stuff their ideas down your throat," said Peter Farrelly, who has directed several films for Fox. "They will let you argue your point, and if you can't back it up, they won't back down."

Last year, for instance, Jim Ward, the president of LucasArts and the person responsible for marketing George Lucas's "Star Wars" movies, which are distributed by Fox, was troubled when Fox announced it would release Ridley Scott's epic "Kingdom of Heaven" nine days before the release of "Star Wars: Revenge of the Sith." His concern was that "Kingdom of Heaven" would hurt ticket sales for the opening weekend of "Star Wars."

Mr. Ward confronted Mr. Gianopulos about moving "Kingdom" to another date. In the past, Mr. Ward said, Fox would have acquiesced to Mr. Lucas's requests. But Mr. Gianopulos refused, sticking by Mr. Scott.

"I didn't like it," Mr. Ward said, "but I had to respect it." In the end "Kingdom of Heaven" was no threat to "Star Wars," which brought in $380 million at the domestic box office.

There are plenty of stories in Hollywood about coequal executives plotting to push each other out. But Mr. Rothman and Mr. Gianopulos, both lawyers, do not seem headed in that direction. Mr. Rothman, who has worked at Fox for 12 years developing movies, oversees much of the studio's creative efforts. Mr. Gianopulos, a longtime international theatrical executive, also handles movies, but is active in exploring new technologies.

To ensure that enterprising executives (or agents and managers) do not try to pit the two against each other, the men instituted the "chairman's rule": if one of the two makes a decision, the other agrees no matter what. Of course that does not bar them from sparring with each other.
"O.K., I admit it. I didn't understand 'The Day After Tomorrow,' " Mr. Rothman said, referring to the blockbuster about global warming that brought in $187 million at the domestic box office in 2004. "That was Jim's call and we had a big fight over it."

"Come on," Mr. Gianopulos shouted. "I like that kind of movie!"
"I had a question about how to make it look fresh and original, and if we could execute in time," Mr. Rothman said. "But he was totally enthusiastic."
"I beat him into submission," Mr. Gianopulos said, laughing.

"It wasn't that I yielded; I was happily persuaded," Mr. Rothman countered.

Indeed persuasion, or more likely fiery debate, seems to be the way to get a movie made at Fox.

"Walk the Line" was rejected by every studio in Hollywood before Elizabeth Gabler, another Fox executive, lobbied her bosses to make it, at the low cost of $29 million. It brought in $120 million in the United States.

More recently, Mr. Rothman and Mr. Gianopulos were flummoxed over whether Rogue, a character in "X-Men," should give her beau a passionate kiss at the movie's end or simply hold his hand. The two executives screened the movie for their daughters as well as the studio's female marketing executives, and the hand holding prevailed. "The kissing was all about sex, and we didn't want that," said Mr. Gianopulos, grimacing.

Oddly, these are the same executives who backed the Farrelly brothers movie "There's Something About Mary," which showed a woman using semen as hair gel and a man getting his penis caught in his zipper. "I like the fact that decisions aren't easy," Mr. Rothman said. "I like to talk through the issues before they get done, working things over."

Mr. Rothman's probing, though, can be grating, filmmakers and former Fox staff members said. And his tendency to raise his voice when he gets worked up takes getting used to.

"It's no secret that it took a long time for Tom and I to work things out," said Baz Luhrmann, who has been making films for Fox since 1993, including the critically acclaimed "Moulin Rouge," and continues to do so. "There are a lot of Tomisms. He'll say 'It's not exactly my first day.' "

Mr. Rothman insisted that his reactions are never personal, that he is just trying to make the best movie. The director Bryan Singer, who upset Mr. Rothman when he dropped out of the third "X-Men" movie despite a scheduled release this past Memorial Day weekend, described it this way. "I call it a Hollywood moment," he said.

Mr. Rothman had picked Mr. Singer to direct the first "X-Men," and together they shepherded the first two hit movies onto the screen. But as Mr. Singer was negotiating to direct the third "X-Men: The Last Stand" in July 2004, Warner Brothers gave him the offer of directing "Superman Returns." Mr. Singer jumped at the chance and, without first talking to Mr. Rothman, accepted the job.

"If I had done it openly, Tom would have driven to my house and we would have talked about it until sunrise," said Mr. Singer, who still considers Mr. Rothman a friend.

Rumors swirled that Mr. Singer was banned from the Fox lot.

Mr. Rothman, who confirmed Mr. Singer's account of the break, said Mr. Singer had not been banned from the lot, but conceded that the director's leaving was a "personal disappointment." For nearly a year and a half the two did not talk.

Skeptics predicted the franchise was doomed. Mr. Rothman and his team then revised the "X-Men" script and hired Mr. Ratner to direct. And one day earlier this year, Mr. Singer said, he got a phone call from Mr. Rothman asking him to "bury the hatchet" over lunch at Prego.

Of course, for Mr. Rothman and Mr. Gianopulos, the un-Hollywood story is having the perfect Hollywood ending. "X-Men: The Last Stand" was released on Memorial Day weekend as Mr. Rothman had wanted, and raked in $122 million — the biggest opening ever for a movie released over that holiday period.

As of last Friday, "X-Men" was the No. 2 movie this year, bringing in $185 million domestically according to the studio and Nielsen EDI, which tracks box office figures. And No. 1? Another Fox hit, the animated "Ice Age: The Meltdown" with $194 million.
 
So, the executives were making the decisions on storytelling with this film?

And that's why we got The Last Stand in the form that it came in. Pathetic.
 
J.Howlett said:
So, the executives were making the decisions on storytelling with this film?

And that's why we got The Last Stand in the form that it came in. Pathetic.

You are constantly surprised that higher powers have influence.

Don't expect creative freedom and artistic endeavour to succeed above all else.

Join us in the real world!
 
Oh, I know how it is. You don't have to remind me of that. But with this particular picture, it's clear that the top executives didn't know what the hell they were doing....
 
J.Howlett said:
So, the executives were making the decisions on storytelling with this film?

And that's why we got The Last Stand in the form that it came in. Pathetic.

Hey I enjoyed The Last Stand and clearly the majority of the audience aren't comic book fanboys. Thank God because they could never support a film by there own. However I do agree there should be a give and take on both sides by the fans and the studios trying to get a product suitable for the mass audiences without turning the fans off. I think many people were die hard Ratner haters from the beginning and would never give this film a chance. From the moment some of you entered the theatre your mind was set on hating it and you couldn't wait to get back to the message boards to complain. Each scene some of you watched was not to enjoy the film but to pick it apart. That is what's sad.
 
J.Howlett said:
Oh, I know how it is. You don't have to remind me of that. But with this particular picture, it's clear that the top executives didn't know what the hell they were doing....

They rarely do know what they are doing. These are the people who didn't want Daredevil to be blind.

But mistakes can be made at every level. Some appalling Superman scripts have been written over the years, making Lex Luthor a Kryptonian for instance...
 
And I thought that I could not like Fox'x X3 even more...this is the nail in the coffin..LOL...
 
narrows101 said:
More recently, Mr. Rothman and Mr. Gianopulos were flummoxed over whether Rogue, a character in "X-Men," should give her beau a passionate kiss at the movie's end or simply hold his hand. The two executives screened the movie for their daughters as well as the studio's female marketing executives, and the hand holding prevailed. "The kissing was all about sex, and we didn't want that," said Mr. Gianopulos, grimacing.
WTF?! Why do they have the power to harp over little points like this. Keep these guys AWAY from the creative decisions PLEASE!

f&%k Rothman, f%&k Fox!
 
Farren said:
WTF?! Why do they have the power to harp over little points like this. Keep these guys AWAY from the creative decisions PLEASE!

f&%k Rothman, f%&k Fox!

Yeah, even though they're right about that decision, they really shouldnt be that involved.
 
Perhaps if FOX didn't butcher "Kingdom of Heaven", it would've made a ton of money.:rolleyes:

Rothman's a businessman. He has no real idea about what makes a quality film.:down
 
Advanced Dark said:
Hey I enjoyed The Last Stand and clearly the majority of the audience aren't comic book fanboys. Thank God because they could never support a film by there own. However I do agree there should be a give and take on both sides by the fans and the studios trying to get a product suitable for the mass audiences without turning the fans off. I think many people were die hard Ratner haters from the beginning and would never give this film a chance. From the moment some of you entered the theatre your mind was set on hating it and you couldn't wait to get back to the message boards to complain. Each scene some of you watched was not to enjoy the film but to pick it apart. That is what's sad.

That's the best post I've read in a very long time. Very true but also very sad. I pity the fanboy who couldn't enjoy X3 simply because they're a Ratner hater or too big of a Cyclops fan.

"More recently, Mr. Rothman and Mr. Gianopulos were flummoxed over whether Rogue, a character in "X-Men," should give her beau a passionate kiss at the movie's end or simply hold his hand. The two executives screened the movie for their daughters as well as the studio's female marketing executives, and the hand holding prevailed. "The kissing was all about sex, and we didn't want that," said Mr. Gianopulos, grimacing."

I was wondering why they didn't kiss.
 
This thread is actually doing better than I had expected... :p

-TNC
 
YJ1 said:
"More recently, Mr. Rothman and Mr. Gianopulos were flummoxed over whether Rogue, a character in "X-Men," should give her beau a passionate kiss at the movie's end or simply hold his hand. The two executives screened the movie for their daughters as well as the studio's female marketing executives, and the hand holding prevailed. "The kissing was all about sex, and we didn't want that," said Mr. Gianopulos, grimacing."

I was wondering why they didn't kiss.

And I gotta agree with them (speaking as a female)...I think the hand-holding works better than a kiss. It was just that one little simple thing she was never able to do.
 
J.Howlett said:
So, the executives were making the decisions on storytelling with this film?

And that's why we got The Last Stand in the form that it came in. Pathetic.


that is what i got from it as well as RATNER saying he was happy with them


Mr. Ratner, whose movie is a hit, said he was happy with Fox.


and them REALLY WANTING SINGER! they know..... they know
 
YJ1 said:
That's the best post I've read in a very long time. Very true but also very sad. I pity the fanboy who couldn't enjoy X3 simply because they're a Ratner hater or too big of a Cyclops fan.

"More recently, Mr. Rothman and Mr. Gianopulos were flummoxed over whether Rogue, a character in "X-Men," should give her beau a passionate kiss at the movie's end or simply hold his hand. The two executives screened the movie for their daughters as well as the studio's female marketing executives, and the hand holding prevailed. "The kissing was all about sex, and we didn't want that," said Mr. Gianopulos, grimacing."

I was wondering why they didn't kiss.

You make the best ignorant statements can we be friends :) Edit- im basing this not only on this post but other posts of yours ive read so don't give me that crap that this comment wasn't ment for everyone

You and like 3 other moron keep thinking that ppl disliked this movie because of Ratner and Cyclops wow is it really that hard to believe that ppl had a problem with the movie for so many other good reasons that have been posted before. :o

if you respond it proves that your ego is bigger than your brain and can't let something go so go on and respond. I can't get over the movie perhaps but ppl like you can't get over us. :D
 
That was a new york times article? I thought they were professional journalists there, what's with this Mr. crap. I thought it was customary just to refer to people by last name (or do I not know anything) it sounds really juvenile to me.

like these two guys, talk about morons. And that whole thing about Star Wars was funny. It's mind boggling how much control they have.

sucks to be an X men fan.
 
gambitfire said:
You and like 3 other moron keep thinking that ppl disliked this movie because of Ratner and Cyclops wow is it really that hard to believe that ppl had a problem with the movie for so many other good reasons that have been posted before. :o

True, this movie sucked as a whole, I had no prob with Ratner before seeing the crappy movie that killed the trilogy.

I pity the user who could enjoy X3 simply because the big explosions made him giddy :rolleyes:
 
fallenAngel said:
That was a new york times article? I thought they were professional journalists there, what's with this Mr. crap. I thought it was customary just to refer to people by last name (or do I not know anything) it sounds really juvenile to me.

The NY Time has always used "Mr." or "Ms.", etc in their interviews.
 
I guess they should give a writing credit to Tom Rothman as well.

And it's good to know that because he thought the cure was so brilliant, the Phoenix plotline was reduced to a mutilated sub-plot.

I hope X4 isn't made until Rothman is fired because the next 10 Fox movies bomb. Then they'll actually have to work on their creative direction, like Paramount.
 
Advanced Dark said:
Hey I enjoyed The Last Stand and clearly the majority of the audience aren't comic book fanboys. Thank God because they could never support a film by there own. However I do agree there should be a give and take on both sides by the fans and the studios trying to get a product suitable for the mass audiences without turning the fans off. I think many people were die hard Ratner haters from the beginning and would never give this film a chance. From the moment some of you entered the theatre your mind was set on hating it and you couldn't wait to get back to the message boards to complain. Each scene some of you watched was not to enjoy the film but to pick it apart. That is what's sad.

That exactly how I felt. I enjoyed the movie and even though im a big fan of the comics I was happy with the movie. I felt that people were being really nitpicky about certian things. Also as a female I was glad they didnt go the Scott and Jean route with the Phoenix Saga. I dont want to see that. And to add, when it came to who should be blamed I was thinking some seem to forget that the person who provides the money has the final say. If im providing the money for a product then im gonna have say so on how its made.

I dont know about Rothman getting fired, cuz if the studio is making money... then who is really going to care? Besides fans.
 
fallenAngel said:
That was a new york times article? I thought they were professional journalists there, what's with this Mr. crap. I thought it was customary just to refer to people by last name (or do I not know anything) it sounds really juvenile to me.

*shrug* It sounds polite to me.

Eh, this confirms what we all suspected anyway. I think they still turned out a pretty good film. I don't like the portrayal of Singer's departure, as it seems a little slanted toward FOX. Actually, the whole article is practically going down on Rothman. Weird. I didn't think he was too well liked within the industry.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Members online

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
201,153
Messages
21,907,336
Members
45,704
Latest member
BMD
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"