President of Paramount Pictures’ Motion Picture Group (MPG) Emma Watts has resigned from her position in the wake of the departure of CEO Jim Gianopulos and other executives.
Emma Watts was instrumental in rebuilding Paramount, following the downfall of the studio in 2017. The tasks she did were second only to Mr. Gianopulos, and she was touted as the replacement of the CEO once he resigns. In 2020, she was appointed as the overseer of Transformers & G.I. Joe Live Action Movie Franchises.
Jump to the present day. ViacomCBS Chairman Shari Redstone surprised the entire company by naming Brian Robbins as the new CEO of Paramount Pictures. After what is reportedly a heated discussion, Emma Watts stepped down from her position which was quickly filled not by one, but two heads for the Motion Picture Group. Mike Ireland & Daria Cercek will now lead MPG as co-presidents.
At the time of her departure, Emma Watts was catering to Transformers: Rise Of The Beasts, Sonic The Hedgehog 2, Dungeons & Dragons among others.
Mike Ireland & Daria Cercek is to look after the Transformers Live Action Movie Franchise as successors of Emma Watts.
The new CEO Brian Robbins stated the following:
“Paramount also benefited greatly from the deep talents of Emma Watts who, among so many accomplishments, helped build a terrific team at the studio, facilitated overall deals with top-tier talent including John Krasinski and Ryan Reynolds, and shepherded a number of exciting upcoming projects including the latest film in the Star Trek franchise, the newest Transformers film, and a star-studded Dungeons & Dragons adaptation. We wish her nothing but success in her future.”
TFW2005 attended the Goldman Sachs 30th Annual Communacopia Conference to learn more about Paramount’s future plans. Bob Bakish, the President and CEO of ViacomCBS, stated that in the future Paramount will send low-budget movies directly to streaming (Paramount+ service) while kids/family-friendly movies will see ‘day and day release’ (theatrical and streaming at the same time). Big budget movies will see theatrical release followed by a short window (45 days as opposed to 90 days) to their home release. However, Mr. Bakish stated that such plans may change in the future.
WolverineDragon
TF Hot Rod
And she is totally allowed to have that opinion. Even if I may disagree with some of her points. But regardless this thread has gotten off topic. I apologize for somewhat starting the whole SW talk.
Monari
Many attribute the timelessness of the OT to her editing. Apart from George, she's probably the only other person on the planet who objectively has the credentials to say what a good or bad Star Wars product is.
FORT MAXie
Dang you must like Sharpshot because only a sadist would be willing to take that task on, i hope things get better.
Rodimus Prime
I never said either that they made all or the majority of the money from ticket sales, nor did I mention anything about Rose Tico. TLJ merchandise sold so poorly in general that the ROS stuff was severely cut back. Even with things like Mando, they flooded the market and a lot of it ended up being discounted, if you paid attention.
I'm not some weirdo who thinks that "Kennedy is totally getting fired, guys!" I just happen to not ignore the fact that merchandise is not something that is pure profit, and it costs money to produce the stuff. You don't seem to understand how much a billion PROFIT is. Disney only makes about 25 billion in profits each year, and that is the entire company. Star Wars has more costs than the initial price tag. The park, for example, had to be built from the ground up, and it was originally designed to be Tattooine, and had to be redone at least once. The main attraction was broken a lot, and cost a lot of money to gix and adapt to make it work. The same is true for a lot of the stuff that they made. I'm not even getting into the whole opportunity cost or that it is being investigated for inflating revenue.
I don't see the point of continuing this discussion if you are just going to give rebuttals to arguments that were never made and ignore basic financial reasoning. Disney has not lost money on SW, but the profit is not the enormous amount you seem to think it is.
GizmoTron
But I'm not moving the goalposts, you just don't seem to know what field you're playing on. Because they have recouped the cost and have "gotten out of the red" despite your claims. By, again, being continuously profitable in the entire franchise, not just what they got from back at the box office (although 4 of the movies not called "Solo" still did in fact make them some money). Yes, not by the ST movies alone, and they've moved on to new projects, but that's irrelevant to the big picture as the strength of the franchise and the money it generates doesn't live and die on ticket sales and clearanced Rose action figures alone.
Well she has the right to her criticism and I don't necessarily disagree with it, but to be fair she hasn't really been an "absolute authority" in Star Wars or with Lucas for a very long time.
TheSoundwave
Honestly, I thought Marcia Lucas' statements on the ST came across as very un-authoritative and felt more like a gut reaction to her favorite characters dying than a fully-formed analysis. Which isn't to say her opinions are invalid, I just wouldn't take them as some sort of "proof" that the movies are bad. To me it's essentially the same thing as Christopher Nolan loving Michael Bay movies. Just a filmmaker voicing their opinions on something they enjoy or didn't enjoy.
I personally don't love the ST , but at the end of the day art is pretty subjective. And the "magic of Star Wars" is different for everyone. A lot of people did feel the magic of Star Wars in the ST. For me TFA and TLJ have moments that capture a little bit of the magic (TFA more than TLJ). TROS is the only Disney Star Wars movie that was a total dud for me.
Monari
Not looking to start a fight here, but when an absolute authority like Marcia Lucas says you've fucked up Star Wars, you've done fucked up.
Rodimus Prime
PARAMOUNT SHAKE-UP: EMMA WATTS RESIGNS, NEWS SO BORING PEOPLE DISCUSS STAR WARS INSTEAD
WolverineDragon
Someone needs to change the title of this thread to Star Wars discussion!
Rodimus Prime
Why do you keep moving goalposts? I never said that it is not profitable. I said that they have not recouped the cost of purchasing it. Disney can take years to recoup and it will never bat an eye. The fact is that the ST has been a massive disappointment and that is why we have the change in direction.
GizmoTron
Box office revenue alone has not now or ever be what made the franchise profitable, although all but Solo were still considered profitable. And one slower year with some TLJ and Solo toys hasn't exactly put a stop to the presence of Star Wars in the toy aisles, just ask Hasbro. Stuff is still selling. Not to mention shirts, hats, cups, coffee mugs, backpacks, Halloween costumes, etc., etc.
…which is irrelevant because it all still generates merchandise revenue, whether it's a product that has BB-8 or Baby Yoda on it they still make money from it. The money also continues to come in beyond the box office with Blu-Ray sales, and the fact that they're not actually going to stop making Star Wars like ever, so they are going to keep making money from it. Whether or not you care for the direction of the post-Disney Lusasfilms purchase, bottom line is they've made back their investment and then some.
Rodimus Prime
Their merchandise has been very disappointing, to the point where they are now almost entirely focusing on PT and OT eras, along with Mando. Heck, they have even been forced to bring out a bunch of the Legends stuff and dust it iff because it sells better than the new works. In the end, SW is a space opera about hope and good triumphing over evil. Having the original heroes end up as total failures was never going to go over well.
Prime17
Disney-Lucasfilm Deal Part XI: Disney Will Make A 107% Return on the Lucasfilm Acquisition (And Other Conclusions) – Entertainment Strategy Guy
Apparently, this person tried to crunch all the numbers with what they could approximate from revenue sources online. According to them, Disney did make an overall profit or at least will soon with some caveats. It’s probably about as successful as Disney’s purchase of Pixar which was $7.4 Billion (Pixar’s probably more because of merchandise). Merchandising and park revenue are probably the bigger juggernauts of money (and the main reason Disney bought these companies in the first place).
Fox is the more interesting question on whether that will pay off.
Rodimus Prime
The films have only made 1.8 billion in profit. Considering the abysmal toy sales, the park's poor performance even prior to covid etc. there's no way that they made back the additional 2.7 billion "a while ago."
GizmoTron
I didn't really like the ST, either, but they're not in the "red", Disney already made back that 4.5 billion that they paid George a while ago.
Rodimal Rodimus
Kinda late for that reply since I already did after that comment of mine.
I Am James
It's honestly the worst movie I've watched in years. And I've watched like 60+ films this year.
FORT MAXie
I guess you did not watch Snake Eyes don't blame you many did not.
Rodimus Prime
My kingdom for an optimistic rating.