Weinsteins leave Miramax (!)

ObeyGiant · 30-03-2005 3:42pm #1

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/4392881.stm

Let the party begin!

projectmayhem · 30-03-2005 3:52pm

haha

miramax could be renamed "tarantinomax", as i'm pretty sure oul quentin will have more power then anyone in that place now

Goodshape · 30-03-2005 3:58pm

RTFA, TBH.
Looks like Tarantino's going with them...

The Weinstein Co will produce films by acclaimed directors such as Quentin Tarantino and Kevin Smith, both of whom have long working relationships with the Weinsteins.

mycroft · 30-03-2005 5:16pm

projectmayhem wrote:

haha

miramax could be renamed "tarantinomax", as i'm pretty sure oul quentin will have more power then anyone in that place now

I just finished reading down and dirty pictures, peter "easy riders and raging bulls" Biskind expose of the US film industry in the 90s, indy filmakers, and Miramax.

Bob and Harvey run miramax, and they run it with an iron fist. They're ruthless animals, who run a regieme based on terror and abuse. Tarrintino, does not call the shots in Miramax, he just has most favoured nation status, he's one of their boys. Kevin Smith is bruatlly honest, yes he's(kevin) bob and harvey's boy cause they treat him right, but they've savaged other producers, directors, actors, never mind their own staff to get where they are today.

Reading the book it's no surprise that the left they've been clashing with Eisner for years, and the final straw was Farhenheit 9/11 (which disney tried to pull) Harvey's a democrat, but they've probably been haggling over money for years.

Miramax are just another studio now.

Karl Hungus · 30-03-2005 6:27pm

Woo-hoo!

30-03-2005 6:57pm

Great news, now if only Tatintino would come up with an original idea.

mycroft · 30-03-2005 7:05pm

ObeyGiant wrote:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/4392881.stm

Let the party begin!

I'm a lil unclear why this is a cause for celebration

ObeyGiant · 30-03-2005 7:09pm

The principle of the thing. That's all.

mycroft · 30-03-2005 7:13pm

ObeyGiant wrote:

The principle of the thing. That's all.

Which principle?

Fat corporate ba*tards get lots of money?

or

Massive evil corporate hold on to "artist" subsidary, allowing them to make "oh so contraversal" arthouse fair, withot sulling their family friendly reputation?

ObeyGiant · 30-03-2005 7:17pm

More the principle that no longer will Miramax be instantly associated with sociopaths.

mycroft · 30-03-2005 7:30pm

ObeyGiant wrote:

More the principle that no longer will Miramax be instantly associated with sociopaths.

It's their company, it's always been associated with socipaths. It's named after their parents. It's not like they've been sulling the good name of Miramax, and now the reign of terror is over!

Miramax has always been run by sadistic bulls, now the sadistic bully is Eisner. It's like Poland cheering the removal of the Nazis and now the armies of Stalin have come to liberate them.

If anything things are going to get worse. Before you had the force of personalities could push aganist disney's will witness the battle over Farhenheit, without the barrier of the Weinsteins, Miramax will probably go more middle of the road, before, Eisner et all, could say "it's an independent subsidary, nothing, to do with us" when confronted with a release that is contraversal. Without the "bulk" of the Weinsteins to act as a PR mechanism, Miramax will probably shy away from dangerous subject matter. It'll be Shakespear in love, not the secretary.

The Weinsteins will retain control of the Dimension label, which has produced a raft of films aimed at teenagers and children, including the Scream franchise.

They've held onto Dimension, thats the real money maker btw.

ObeyGiant · 30-03-2005 7:49pm

mycroft wrote:

It's their company, it's always been associated with socipaths.

Erm.

Without meaning to sound rude or disrespectful - this is exactly what I said. And now that they're gone, it won't be instantly associated with those two sociopaths. The piece of trivia about it being named after their parents will be the only connection.

So again, hooray!

mycroft wrote:

Miramax has always been run by sadistic bulls, now the sadistic bully is Eisner. It's like Poland cheering the removal of the Nazis and now the armies of Stalin have come to liberate them.

Well, not quite, since Eisner is out in September (hence the reason I wasn't even thinking of him when I mentioned by the "associated with"), to be replaced by Iger. By all accounts, Iger is set to be a pretty good boss, with the his teeth cut in revitalising ABC (he's more or less responsible for bringing us Desperate Housewives - controversial content for ABC) and, more importantly, with the ability to turn off his ego when it comes to business.

But still, time will tell.

mycroft · 31-03-2005 12:32am

ObeyGiant wrote:

Erm.

Without meaning to sound rude or disrespectful - this is exactly what I said. And now that they're gone, it won't be instantly associated with those two sociopaths. The piece of trivia about it being named after their parents will be the only connection.

So again, hooray!

But as I point out, it's not going to be a better company, and if the name has always been associated with them I'm a lil unclear, why are you happy? The company has always has this tarnish on it, so the name is always being tarnished, I'm a lil unclear, have you held the miramax name is some kind of esteem they didn't deserve

Well, not quite, since Eisner is out in September (hence the reason I wasn't even thinking of him when I mentioned by the "associated with"), to be replaced by Iger. By all accounts, Iger is set to be a pretty good boss, with the his teeth cut in revitalising ABC (he's more or less responsible for bringing us Desperate Housewives - controversial content for ABC) and, more importantly, with the ability to turn off his ego when it comes to business.

But still, time will tell.

And it already is

The board's decision to appoint Mr Eisner's number two, Bob Iger, on Sunday was met with complaints about the selection process and doubts about Mr Iger's ability to tackle large strategic issues facing the company, which owns movie studios, the ABC television channel and theme parks.

Dissident shareholders said the appointment was "rigged".

from here

http://film.guardian.co.uk/news/story/0,12589,1438117,00.html

Personality aside, desperate housewives is peton place with more cleavage, theres no evidence that as Eisner's bitch he won't deviate from the status quo.

So basically we have the wealthy miramix boyz with a new company and a fat page check to inflict their will on us, and another Eisner esque assh*ole ensuring the blandness of the disney attitude

In the words of requiem for a dream "double penetration"!

Agent Orange · 31-03-2005 9:42am

ObeyGiant wrote:

More the principle that no longer will Miramax be instantly associated with sociopaths.

In what way are the Weinsteins sociopaths?

ObeyGiant · 31-03-2005 10:32am

mycroft wrote:

But as I point out, it's not going to be a better company

I never said it would be. I simply said there would be no more association with the Weinsteins (origin of the name excluded).

This is going around in circles.

mycroft wrote:

from here

http://film.guardian.co.uk/news/story/0,12589,1438117,00.html

From what I've read of this, the main cause for concern comes from the fact that the new CEO wasn't appointed from outside the Disney corporation, not from Iger's personality. Many of the shareholders hoped to appoint someone externally (Meg Whitman, CEO of eBay was listed as one of the potential candidates) rather than from inside the Disney Corporation, to try to 'revitalise' the role and give it a shot of fresh blood.

mycroft wrote:

Personality aside, desperate housewives is peton place with more cleavage

It's important to remember that ABC is still considered a deeply conservative channel, and regardless of how tame the content might appear to us, raised on years of things far worse than this, Desperate Housewives has still drawn a whole lot of controversy in the US. On another channel, it's doubtful there would have been such an outcry.

mycroft wrote:

and another Eisner esque assh*ole ensuring the blandness of the disney attitude

Well, that's entirely unfair to Iger. He is apparently nothing like Eisner (the article you quoted even says as much), and is said to have even complained himself about how difficult Eisner was as a boss. The very fact that he's trying to restore the Disney/Pixar partnership should at least be evidence enough that it's worth giving him the benefit of the doubt.

ObeyGiant · 31-03-2005 10:38am

Agent Orange wrote:

In what way are the Weinsteins sociopaths?

Well, that's my armchair psychologist's opinion, based on reading about the various tantrums and other antisocial behaviour by the Weinsteins (particularly Harvey) in Biskind's book.

mycroft · 31-03-2005 12:15pm

Agent Orange wrote:

In what way are the Weinsteins sociopaths?

Sociopathic might be a tad extreme, but vicious bullies, lacking basic qualities of humanity when dealing with underlings or business rivals. Tails of actual assault aganist journalists, intimidation, tantrums, mental anguish, and rampant egomania are abound.

I never said it would be. I simply said there would be no more association with the Weinsteins (origin of the name excluded).

This is going around in circles.

I know I cant see what you're getting excited about. Disney have their arthouse section which they'll shove even further down the middle of the road. And two horrible assh*les are even richer. You've just added some talsmantic reverance to a name that didn't mean much in the first place, and ain't going to get much better after this gem of news.

Well, that's entirely unfair to Iger. He is apparently nothing like Eisner (the article you quoted even says as much), and is said to have even complained himself about how difficult Eisner was as a boss. The very fact that he's trying to restore the Disney/Pixar partnership should at least be evidence enough that it's worth giving him the benefit of the doubt.

Yes I can see how disney's alying animation wing's cozing up to a massive cash generating company like Pixar is an altrustic, and artistic thing....

Ajos · 02-04-2005 7:22pm

I don't see why this is such good news either. Miramax wasn't an influential and successful indie production and distribution company despite the Weinsteins, but because of them. It will no longer be associated with "sociopaths", but it will also no longer really be Miramax.

ObeyGiant · 05-04-2005 10:18am

You guys must be amazing at parties.

mycroft · 05-04-2005 11:07am

ObeyGiant wrote:

You guys must be amazing at parties.

Well considering this thread is your excuse for a party;

ObeyGiant wrote:

Let the party begin!

I think we'd be the life and soul of whatever crazy shindig you throw.

ObeyGiant · 05-04-2005 11:20am

You don't need an excuse to have a party, bro.
Just somewhere to have it.

Oh, and lots of booze helps too.

mycroft · 05-04-2005 11:26am

ObeyGiant wrote:

You don't need an excuse to have a party, bro.
Just somewhere to have it.

Oh, and lots of booze helps too.

BOOM

ObeyGiant "What was that?"

Mycroft "What was what?"

ObeyGiant "That huge boom?"

Mycroft "Oh That, huge boom. That was my point's sonic boom, as it flew far above your head"

Ajos · 05-04-2005 12:29pm

ObeyGiant wrote:

You guys must be amazing at parties.

Well, I wouldn't say I was amazing, but I hold my own.

Who am I kidding? I am amazing!

mycroft · 06-04-2005 12:07am

Ajos wrote:

Well, I wouldn't say I was amazing, but I hold my own.

Who am I kidding? I am amazing!

And you do throw a well cool party.

Finger food and everything mind, none of your muck mind.

Lougarden · 09-11-2017 4:28am

mycroft wrote: »

I just finished reading down and dirty pictures, peter "easy riders and raging bulls" Biskind expose of the US film industry in the 90s, indy filmakers, and Miramax.

Bob and Harvey run miramax, and they run it with an iron fist. They're ruthless animals, who run a regieme based on terror and abuse. Tarrintino, does not call the shots in Miramax, he just has most favoured nation status, he's one of their boys. Kevin Smith is bruatlly honest, yes he's(kevin) bob and harvey's boy cause they treat him right, but they've savaged other producers, directors, actors, never mind their own staff to get where they are today.

Reading the book it's no surprise that the left they've been clashing with Eisner for years, and the final straw was Farhenheit 9/11 (which disney tried to pull) Harvey's a democrat, but they've probably been haggling over money for years.

Miramax are just another studio now.

.

Weinsteins leave Miramax (!)

Comments