[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
.Al Pacino Alicia Silverstone - Premiere ArtistsGwyneth Paltrow AgencyRobert Redford Robin Williams - Artists ManagementWill Smith GroupSylvester StalloneMeryl StreepTABLE 4.1 Stars by AgencySource: compiled from Screen International (1997 and 1998) and Internet Movie Database97 SHORT CUTSvirtually unshakeable stand in negotiations.For Bram Stoker's Dracula(1992), CAA packaged star Winona Ryder and director Francis FordCoppola with a script by Jim Hart.Columbia Pictures was presented withthe package as a non-negotiable entity.When CAA took on the packagingof the adaptation of Michael Crichton's best-selling novel 'Jurassic Park',the project floundered in development for an extended period of timewhile Ovitz pressured Steven Spielberg to join the agency's client list.Theproject went into production once Spielberg joined.CAA's power in packaging projects faced criticisms that the practiceunreasonably raised the price of talent.Ovitz has characteristicallyrejected such criticisms, reflecting that packaging 'is one hundred percentcorrect.CAA set the pricing standard.That was our job.we controlledthe prices in the marketplace.My theory was, if you had all that talentunder one roof, you could benefit from it' (quoted in Slater 1997: 108).While super agencies like CAA, WMA and ICM can wield power innegotiations through their size and importance, Mark Litwak (1986)suggests they can serve the interests of top stars at the expense of otherclients.For this reason, Litwak sees some performers using personalmanagers in order to receive more individual attention.Due to their central role in packaging projects, there is a tendency toassume that agencies have all the power in contemporary Hollywood.AsNicolas Kent (1991) points out, however, agencies, their clients, and thestudios remain in a situation of mutual dependency.Agencies may be themediators between talent and the studios but that position requiresbalancing the interests of all parties.Stars need the agencies to get workbut, at the same time, the agencies need to retain a high-profile client listto support their negotiating position in any individual deal.Kent arguesthat the power of the agencies in relation to stars is limited because,unlike the days when the term contract made stars the property ofstudios, stars are not bound by contract to agencies.While the role of theHollywood studios may have become more concentrated on functioning asproduction financiers, it is the studios which hold the money, and agentsare only rich and powerful to the extent that they can place clients inpackages that receive that backing.98 THE STAR SYSTEMAgencies function to mediate between the studios, which supply themoney, and the stars and other talent who supply their services.In thisrole, the most powerful agencies have achieved their status andreputation based on the art of making the deal.In the package-unitsystem, the earnings of stars are no longer constrained by the conditionsof the studio term contract.While some stars still sign multi-picture dealswith a studio, it is more usual for agencies to negotiate for the use of astar's services on a film-by-film basis.When MCA negotiated JamesStewart's contract for Winchester '73, the deal made clear the advantagesof profit participation.Since that time, the contracts of stars now regularlyinclude 'back-end' deals.Instead of taking a flat fee when a film is made,contractual agreements may see a star choosing to be paid based on afilm's performance.In the back-end deal, the star is not fully remuneratedat the time of production but only when a film is distributed in all markets.This contingent payment is based on the star participating in a percentageshare of profits.It is the industry vernacular to measure the percentageawarded to any individual participating in profits in terms of 'points' (seeCones 1992).Profit participation deals will vary depending whether payments aremade on the basis of gross receipts or net profits.Gross receipts are allmonies received by the distributor from the sale of a film in any and allmarkets.It is common now for a feature film to be sold in many markets.After an initial release in theatres, a film will appear for video rental andretail before showing on television in pay-per-view (PPV), pay subscriptionand finally 'free' windows.Any film will therefore receive income fromseveral revenue streams during its commercial life.Depending on theterms of a deal, a star may see earnings from multiple media outlets.Net profit is what remains after gross receipts reach a level at which afilm is judged to break even.However, accounting practices in Hollywoodare notoriously flexible in how 'net' is defined, with producers anddistributors claiming all kinds of expenses to make it appear that somefilms never turn a profit.Negative costs, distribution fees and expenses,interest charges, any gross participations, and studio overheads are allpaid from gross before a film can be said to have any net profit.Compared99 SHORT CUTSto net points, gross points are of greater value, and the agents of top starsnegotiate for these.Due to the artful accounting practices of the film industry, the value ofnet points has come to be discredited.When prize-winning humorist ArtBuchwald took Paramount to court in 1990 over the issue of plagiarismregarding the story for the film Coming to America (1988), the issue of netpoints came to the fore.During the case, the film's star Eddie Murphydescribed net points as 'monkey points', because they were of such littlevalue that only a monkey would accept them (see Daniels, Leedy and Sills1998).While participation deals can see stars making terrific earningsfrom the distribution of the films they appear in, the contingencies of sucharrangements mean that even if they negotiate for back-end points, manystars will still strike contracts that see they are paid some level of initialfee [ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
zanotowane.pl doc.pisz.pl pdf.pisz.pl odbijak.htw.pl
.Al Pacino Alicia Silverstone - Premiere ArtistsGwyneth Paltrow AgencyRobert Redford Robin Williams - Artists ManagementWill Smith GroupSylvester StalloneMeryl StreepTABLE 4.1 Stars by AgencySource: compiled from Screen International (1997 and 1998) and Internet Movie Database97 SHORT CUTSvirtually unshakeable stand in negotiations.For Bram Stoker's Dracula(1992), CAA packaged star Winona Ryder and director Francis FordCoppola with a script by Jim Hart.Columbia Pictures was presented withthe package as a non-negotiable entity.When CAA took on the packagingof the adaptation of Michael Crichton's best-selling novel 'Jurassic Park',the project floundered in development for an extended period of timewhile Ovitz pressured Steven Spielberg to join the agency's client list.Theproject went into production once Spielberg joined.CAA's power in packaging projects faced criticisms that the practiceunreasonably raised the price of talent.Ovitz has characteristicallyrejected such criticisms, reflecting that packaging 'is one hundred percentcorrect.CAA set the pricing standard.That was our job.we controlledthe prices in the marketplace.My theory was, if you had all that talentunder one roof, you could benefit from it' (quoted in Slater 1997: 108).While super agencies like CAA, WMA and ICM can wield power innegotiations through their size and importance, Mark Litwak (1986)suggests they can serve the interests of top stars at the expense of otherclients.For this reason, Litwak sees some performers using personalmanagers in order to receive more individual attention.Due to their central role in packaging projects, there is a tendency toassume that agencies have all the power in contemporary Hollywood.AsNicolas Kent (1991) points out, however, agencies, their clients, and thestudios remain in a situation of mutual dependency.Agencies may be themediators between talent and the studios but that position requiresbalancing the interests of all parties.Stars need the agencies to get workbut, at the same time, the agencies need to retain a high-profile client listto support their negotiating position in any individual deal.Kent arguesthat the power of the agencies in relation to stars is limited because,unlike the days when the term contract made stars the property ofstudios, stars are not bound by contract to agencies.While the role of theHollywood studios may have become more concentrated on functioning asproduction financiers, it is the studios which hold the money, and agentsare only rich and powerful to the extent that they can place clients inpackages that receive that backing.98 THE STAR SYSTEMAgencies function to mediate between the studios, which supply themoney, and the stars and other talent who supply their services.In thisrole, the most powerful agencies have achieved their status andreputation based on the art of making the deal.In the package-unitsystem, the earnings of stars are no longer constrained by the conditionsof the studio term contract.While some stars still sign multi-picture dealswith a studio, it is more usual for agencies to negotiate for the use of astar's services on a film-by-film basis.When MCA negotiated JamesStewart's contract for Winchester '73, the deal made clear the advantagesof profit participation.Since that time, the contracts of stars now regularlyinclude 'back-end' deals.Instead of taking a flat fee when a film is made,contractual agreements may see a star choosing to be paid based on afilm's performance.In the back-end deal, the star is not fully remuneratedat the time of production but only when a film is distributed in all markets.This contingent payment is based on the star participating in a percentageshare of profits.It is the industry vernacular to measure the percentageawarded to any individual participating in profits in terms of 'points' (seeCones 1992).Profit participation deals will vary depending whether payments aremade on the basis of gross receipts or net profits.Gross receipts are allmonies received by the distributor from the sale of a film in any and allmarkets.It is common now for a feature film to be sold in many markets.After an initial release in theatres, a film will appear for video rental andretail before showing on television in pay-per-view (PPV), pay subscriptionand finally 'free' windows.Any film will therefore receive income fromseveral revenue streams during its commercial life.Depending on theterms of a deal, a star may see earnings from multiple media outlets.Net profit is what remains after gross receipts reach a level at which afilm is judged to break even.However, accounting practices in Hollywoodare notoriously flexible in how 'net' is defined, with producers anddistributors claiming all kinds of expenses to make it appear that somefilms never turn a profit.Negative costs, distribution fees and expenses,interest charges, any gross participations, and studio overheads are allpaid from gross before a film can be said to have any net profit.Compared99 SHORT CUTSto net points, gross points are of greater value, and the agents of top starsnegotiate for these.Due to the artful accounting practices of the film industry, the value ofnet points has come to be discredited.When prize-winning humorist ArtBuchwald took Paramount to court in 1990 over the issue of plagiarismregarding the story for the film Coming to America (1988), the issue of netpoints came to the fore.During the case, the film's star Eddie Murphydescribed net points as 'monkey points', because they were of such littlevalue that only a monkey would accept them (see Daniels, Leedy and Sills1998).While participation deals can see stars making terrific earningsfrom the distribution of the films they appear in, the contingencies of sucharrangements mean that even if they negotiate for back-end points, manystars will still strike contracts that see they are paid some level of initialfee [ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]