Boxoffice-June.1989

tain date. Here's what I love the most
about [Landmark co-founder Steve] Gilula
and his gang: when a Hght bulb goes
out somewhere, they get crazy."
Alive Films is counting on virtually
the exact opposite strategy to ensure its
survival in the wake of the shakeout.
While Heritage is diversifying into exhibition,
Alive is scaling back its distribution
operation. Enlarging on a pre-existing
arrangement to produce a series of
modestly budgeted horror films directed
by John Carpenter and Wes Craven for
distribution by Universal, Alive cochaimian
Shep Gordon has announced
that Universal will now release all of
Alive's productions whose budgets exceed
$6 million.
"We're going to use the Universal
apparatus to get our systems into the
marketplace," says Gordon. "The
amount of films that we will release will
be very limited to a very few pieces,
probably pickups. And we still wanted
to keep the spirit of independent distribution
alive and have the opportunity to
maybe produce one a year that we
thought was worthwhile, but that
wouldn't necessarily fit into a studio
system."
In Shaye's opinion, "It's an interesting
permutation. I think it's smart for any
particular company to figure out a strategy
where they can take advantage of
other facilities that are around, like we
are with our home video distributor,
which is RCA, Columbia, or with our
television distributor, which is Columbia
television, because we don't have the
distribution facilities to do it ourselves.
If they think their product fits Universal's
distribution system, then it makes
good sense for them."
Hemdale's John Daly sounds a cautionaiy
note, however. He recently
voided a similar three-year deal he had
cut with Tri-Star for the distribution of
Hemdale's pictures. "It was so difficult,"
Daly explains, "so time-consuming
having to tiy to work through another
company on films that we believed
in. Yes, they were wonderful people.
Shep Gordon, Alive Films
They had strong connections to the cinemas.
But they also had their own program
of films."
Heritage's Steloff sees such alliances
with the major studios as a necessary if
problematic element in the future of
distribution. "There were days when the
studios would throw you out the window
if you mentioned the word 'partner,' or
'co-production.' You got that look: 'L's.'
Us? What are you talking about?' Probably
now that the herd is being cut,
you're going to see an awful lot of consolidation.
I only know that, when
somebody else gets the pencil, it gets
very difficult finding profits."
In spite of skepticism from his peers,
Gordon remains sanguine about his deepening
association with Universal.
"Once we've basically decided on what
project we're going to do, we're free to
go make our pictures. I don't foresee
any huge problems. There's some input
the studios can give us which could be
Robert Shaye, New Line Cinema
worthwhile. I think you'll see more and
more of the independents hooking up to
the majors for distribution. It wdll become
not unlike the Amazon, with a lot
of tributaries."
Even if Daly did repent of the plan to
hitch his wagon to Tri-Star, he's not
unalterably opposed to partnership on
general principles. He just prefers to
join up with partners nearer his own
size. "We've got a couple of interesting
plans to carry out," Daly says. "There
may be a little bit of joint venturing that
will take place. I think some of the independents
wi\] probably find a way of
talking to each other, and instead of
making pictures at 52 million or S3 million,
perhaps a couple of independents
will make a picture for 88 million, which
will have a bigger chance in the world
markets.
"I certainly see no reason why, as
long as you both jointly want to make
the picture and you're in harmony on
the film, one shouldn't share worldwide
markets and make a picture. The majors
have done it successfully by joining
John Daly, Hemdale
together to distribute in the foreign
market, so I don't see any reason why
independents can't link up to make a
program of pictures."
SteloflF sees a reason. "The big thing
that's kept most of us from doing it," he
says, "is the ego of the independent
entrepreneurs. When one independent
talks with the other, eventually somebody
has to say, 'Who's going to nm this
thing, this consolidation of power?' And
you stare at each other."
Rather than stare each other down
until their ribs begin to show, the
remaining independents may have to
put their egos on hold. Even Robert
Shaye admits that, if "A Nightmare on
Elm Street" hadn't come along when it
did, "Maybe we would have merged
with somebody else."
Shaye's New Line represents a third
response to the continuing shakeout
among the independents, the tack all
the other companies would gladly take
if they only could. As Steloff laments,
"We don't have that great franchise picture.
We don't have Freddy."
Freddy is Freddy Knieger, the character
created by Wes Craven and played
by Robert Englimd and thanked heaven
for by everyone at New Line Cinema.
Freddy is an ingenious personification
of everything that made "Invasion of
the Body Snatchers" such a classic of
insomniac terror. Mainly though, Freddy
is, to paraphrase New Line's promotional
copy, the bastard son of 1,000
maniacs that laid the golden egg.
Thanks to Freddy, whose fourth sequel
will go head-to-head with the majors'
big gims on Aug. 1 1 this summer -— historically
a season for independents to
lay low — New Line's "priman' focus of
business is the producing of our o\vn
movies," Shaye says. "It shifted after
the 'Elm Streets' and our public offering,
when our bank facilities finally
established that we had enough money
to do it.
Before, virtually all of the films
that we had were pickups — just distribution,
because that was the only thing
we could afford to do. It was mostly for-