Whoever told you that some people make movies not to make money was lying. Sure there may be some other fringe benefits like having a story told or just doing it for the sake of art, but the bottom line is money.
The reason why? Because eventually money is going to catch up with you. Ironicly the motto of the Metro Goldwyn Mayer Studio (known to you folks as MGM Studio) Is Ars Gratia Artis… which means “Art for Art’s Sake”
And that studio will likely be auctioned off bit by bit in the near future because they just can’t pay the bills anymore.
Several sources say they expect that MGM will essentially be auctioned off within the next few weeks. This would mean that a major, such as Time Warner, could buy the MGM-UA library while another entity might acquire the logo, and yet another deal could be made for United Artists.
This would also mean that properties owned by the Lion would also be assumed by other studios, however current deals in place will likely run their course.
MGM hasn’t done a whole lot to try to make much money either, with only Fame coming out from the studio this year, and only three titles next year (Hot Tub Time Machine and Zookeeper alongside the remake of Red Dawn)
I wonder who would even want what’s left of this fading studio. Sure there is an impressive library of films that would come with the deal, but the rights to those films would really only have value as remakes.
As sad as it is, it might be time to put the old lion down and just let it fade with peace.
Red Dawn? Really.
C .Thomas Howell were are you?
The Lions a Classic Hollywood Icon logo..
WTF?
MGM GOING BUST?
WTF?
It’s quite sad, I just finished writing an essay on MGM’s biggest film to date–Gone With The Wind–for my Film History class :-S Did you know that if you adjust the film for inflation and stuff, it’s still the biggest selling film in the US and UK?
Damn, I don’t want this one to go, I was a lil’ kid when I first saw the lion roar and I got scared. I remember my grandfather shielding me from the television :-)
Peace.
I actually hope MGM does not fade out completely, and they should not get rid of the lion trademark. Besides, it’s the one thing they could not get rid of- would another studio use it after ditching Planet Earth, a mountain with a half circle of stars or a woman with a torch? Or would Universal, Paramount and Sony keep those iconic keep what they have? They would keep them, of course.
But the big question in my mind is United Artists. Tom Cruise put effort into bringing UA back from the dead. It would be more of a shame to see UA shut down again…which I can see happening unless by some Hail Mary UA **compleletly** breaks off into a studio unconnected to MGM -or any other studio.
James Bond was MGM, it’s over at Sony now.
James Bond and Rocky, they’re MGM right?
James Bond is owned by the Broccli family and currently has a deal with Columbia Pictures, who relased the last 2 films and the current DVD & BluRay Bond back catalog. All of the Bonds have been released under the United Artist banner but not MGM. UA was bought by MGM around 1978 and subsequent Bond films were under the joint banner of MGM/UA.
Not sure who has the rights to the Rocky series. I would bet Stallone has walk away rights and can take the franchise were he wants but the back catalog may be in question.
Whoa, really? I didn’t know that, thanks for that! Damn, I always thought all MGM had to do was sell the rights to Bond and they’d be floating in cash all over again.
They’re remaking Red Dawn?