Friday, 25 September 2009


In the Hollywoodland jungle, the mighty Hollywoodland jungle, will Leo the Lion finally sleep? I've several times expressed my skepticism through comments on Nikki Finke's website after reading recent optimistic stories about the struggling studio.

But now it seems that Kimberly Shaw's famous line before the explosion of the 1416, Melrose Place (« It's not what it looks like... It's worse ») applies to the MGM situation, according to a piece from She Who Must Be Read written yesterday (

During a conference between MGM and its bondholders (in the present case I love this word... "Bondholders") Leo's masters asked the latter $20 million in short-term cash flow to cover overhead, and an additional $150 million to get through the end of year and continue funding its projects, and to start Peter Jackson's The Hobbit. But apparently the bondholders answered something like "er, well, thanks... but no thanks" (and we can suppose this is the pre-watershed version).

One of Nikki's sources used the B word (Bankruptcy). Itte missa est? Not quite for the moment as MGM now has to formally to ask for forbearance, and its bondholders to formally respond. But should it happen the king of the jungle would lose the jewel of its crown: the 007 franchise. What new home for Bond then? Sony, behind the two Daniel Craig movies before the implosion of the partnership with MGM (1), or 20th Century Fox - distributor of Die Another Day in 2002?

Many eminent analysts hope for a restructuring of MGM. But why? For more remakes in the wake of Fame (2), Red Dawn or Poltergeist? In February I wrote: « We all love the MGM brand, we owe Leo part of our interest for cinema. But with all the respect due to these three letters, today's MGM means the Bournish Bond franchise, the library and remakes of glorious MGM entries (Rollerball, The Taking of Pelham 123... Please watch the originals first!) »


« So you lived to die another day... » (James Bond)

See also:

(2) +,0,5583318.story

No comments: