Ding-dong, Schwartz is toast
I'd be lying through my teeth if I said everyone in the dysfunctional family known as New Line Cinema is sad or heartbroken over the departure of marketing president Russell Schwartz. A guy up to his neck in the mucky-muck called the news "great...a good thing for New Line." A former New Line executive said everyone in the pipeline had known for months that Schwartz was a dead man, but when told of the actual axe-falling this afternoon he responded with an effusive "wow...it finally happened!"
Variety's Dave McNary wrote that Schwartz's departure "did not come as a huge surprise...he'd been rumored to be on the way out since last year."
Until Hairspray opened and made (as of last weekend )$78.9 million, New Line's slate "had chalked up undistinguished box office results on such pics as Snakes on a Plane, The Nativity Story, The New World, Fracture, The Last Mimzy, Hoot, The Number 23, Tenacious D and the Pick of Destiny and Texas Chainsaw Mas- sacre: The Beginning," McNary wrote. "During 2006, its top performing pic was Final Destination 3 with $55 million."
Schwartz "is a very nice guy but he never had a clue about mass distribution," said a marketing veteran. "He's used to doing small art films...mass distribution is off his radar."
The former New Line exec said "the marketing over there has been broken for a while, and the talk about Schwartz being on the way out has been happening for a good five or six months. They tried to hire a couple of people to replace [Schwartz] but they couldn't make it work. There was talk at one time that he would partner up with someone and they'd both report to [New Line's distribution/marketing president and COO] Rolf Mittweg, but no one wanted to come into that situation.
Rolf Mittweg, Russell Schwartz
"The company was split" over the Schwartz situation, the former exec said. "[Production president] Toby Emmerich and his camp wanted to get rid of him, and Rolf and his gang wanted to protect him.
"They had raised expectations so high for Hairspray -- they really thought it was a $200 million movie -- and its failure to get there may be a part of what happened today. The failure of The Last Mimzy didn't help. There were people who thought Schwartz should go after the failure of Snakes on a Plane. There were some who said he should be out the door after Nativity went south. The fact that they finally stepped up and did this means they've probably got somebody in the wings to take his place."
Schwartz won't actually leave the building until the end of August, according to Variety, but where does this leave New Line's Shoot 'Em Up , which opens on 9.7? Probably unaffected. Whatever happens box-office-wise, it'll come into the market- place boosted or depleted by certain Schwartz decisions about this and that. Schwartz, after all, will be out the door only seven days before it opens, according to Variety.
Posted by Jeffrey Wells on August 6, 2007 at 5:20 PM
comment #1
Rothchild
says ...
Schwartz was awful and should have gotten the axe a long time ago.
Posted by Rothchild
at August 6, 2007 6:15 PM
comment #2
actionman
says ...
EVERYONE in the marketing department, all the way up to the assistants, should have been fired for the embarrassing and horrendous marketing job/release strategy used on The New World, still the best movie of the decade.
Posted by actionman
at August 6, 2007 6:26 PM
comment #3
Undercover Brother
says ...
"Snakes on a Plane, The Nativity Story, The New World, Fracture, The Last Mimzy, Hoot, The Number 23, Tenacious D and the Pick of Destiny and Texas Chainsaw Masscre: The Beginning"
In what universe do any of these films become break out hits? The only film with any real credibility on this list is "New World" and not even Jesus Christ could've sold that to a mass audience today. Sounds like the marketing department guy is getting canned because the studio made a crop of mediocre and/or unsellable movies.
Posted by Undercover Brother
at August 6, 2007 6:52 PM
comment #4
Jack Price
says ...
In all fairness, I thought the trailer for The New World was superb and haunting. Exactly indicative of the tone and pacing of the film itself. Remarkably true.
Where the film's marketing strategy faltered was in straining to draw comparisons to Titanic's love story in many of the print ads and TV spots. And quite frankly, this was far too cerebral of a film to catch mainstream acceptance. In many ways, glowing praise from the critical community was the film's only hope for financial salvation, and this certainly wasn't the case sadly.
Posted by Jack Price
at August 6, 2007 7:01 PM
comment #5
insidah
says ...
Please, if you build it, they will come.
"It" meaning a decent fucking movie. Which New Line hasn't made in years.
Posted by insidah
at August 6, 2007 7:14 PM
comment #6
Wrecktum
says ...
It's not the marketing. It's the movies. A shit slate of films can't be sold by the best in the business.
Posted by Wrecktum
at August 6, 2007 7:16 PM
comment #7
dobbsy
says ...
Shaye and Schwartz go back almost 40 years, back to "Reefer Madness" when they were both young pups fooling around, trying to make careers in marketing and distribution. Which led them into separate careers and then joined careers that span the modern history of indie and foreign language cinema in America. Lots of water under that bridge and I think that story is WAY MORE INTERESTING than all the shit-slinging and name-calling that too-often passes for journalism.
Posted by dobbsy
at August 6, 2007 7:35 PM
comment #8
Ian Sinclair
says ...
New Line, a jumped-up exploitation outfit, got lucky with Peter Jackson's The Lord of the Rings. If Robert Shaye had any grace he would quit and let Jackson make the surest moneymaker in the history of the world "The Hobbit." As he won't quit, fire his irresponsible, oblivious and ignorant ass.
Posted by Ian Sinclair
at August 6, 2007 7:58 PM
comment #9
christian
says ...
yeah, if only they had sold THE LAST MIMZY properly...
Posted by christian
at August 6, 2007 7:59 PM
comment #10
Mike Schaefer
says ...
"He's used to doing small art films."
And yet he didn't know what to do with "Little Children" either.
Posted by Mike Schaefer
at August 6, 2007 8:01 PM
comment #11
bmcintire
says ...
I was suckered into LITTLE CHILDREN by the brilliant trailer (and admittedly the cast), but hugely disappointed by the misfire that was the actual film. Same for THE NEW WORLD, though that was less disappointing than just "meh." All the marketing in the world couldn't get me to go see HAIRSPRAY, however, so my particular jury is still out on that one.
Posted by bmcintire
at August 6, 2007 8:47 PM
comment #12
erniesouchak
says ...
Malick films are hard to market, but it seemed like "New World" opened in a hell of a lot more theaters than "Little Children."
Posted by erniesouchak
at August 6, 2007 9:01 PM
comment #13
BurmaShave
says ...
Were they themselves really throwing around the 200 million number? That's bringing Poland dangerously closer to official shill territory.
Posted by BurmaShave
at August 6, 2007 11:57 PM
comment #14
MilkMan
says ...
The New World is not pretentious, but the people who love it are.
Posted by MilkMan
at August 7, 2007 6:37 AM
comment #15
Joel
says ...
Chicago, the most popular musical in terms of box office dollars in something like 40 years, won five Oscars and made $170 million, and they thought Hairspray would make $200 million?
I'd say they're lucky they don't have another Producers on their hands. I haven't seen Hairspray but it looks like fun. They should be happy with the $120 million domestic they'll wring out of it. It will do well on video too, I'm sure.
Posted by Joel
at August 7, 2007 7:06 AM
comment #16
buckzollo
says ...
I 100% agree about not 'wanting' to see HAIRSPRAY, but see it I did (for free of course) and I literally found myself unable to contain a huge grin through much of the flick. It was FUN!
Does this mean I am gay? just kidding. (rhetorical) Did Schwartz miss an opportunity to make this hit even bigger?
Posted by buckzollo
at August 7, 2007 7:07 AM
comment #17
Craig Kennedy
says ...
I was going to argue with you MilkMan, but then I realized what you're saying doesn't even really make sense. You were just kidding, right?
Also, I'm in rare agreement with Actionman, though I don't think you can really blame anyone for being unable to get New World across to a bigger audience.
Posted by Craig Kennedy
at August 7, 2007 9:25 AM