Hunting in Hollywood

The packaging model pioneered by CAA was originally designed to market the TV shows they held.

In the 1970s, when CAA was newly established, it faced oppression from its former boss, WMA, and had few artists under its wing. To quickly find work for their clients and avoid the dissolution of their fledgling company, CAA President Michael Ovitz and others took a novel approach. They grouped all suitable artists under good scripts and sold the package to various TV networks.

This break from the traditional model of selecting actors and then customizing scripts for them turned out to be a success, and it gradually expanded into movie production.

In 1982, CAA's movie package project "Tootsie" was a box office hit, securing the second place in North America's annual box office rankings (with "E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial" in first place), firmly establishing the packaging mechanism as CAA's core operational model.

As CAA grew stronger, so did the number of top stars under its management. The agency became increasingly dominant in Hollywood. Not only did they demand higher pay for their stars, but they also took commissions from the overall project budgets. This effectively circumvented the regulations prohibiting talent agencies from entering the production field, pushing up the production costs of TV programs.

Therefore, Hollywood's major production companies began to dread this project operation model that continually carved out their own rights and profits.

As an established talent agency nearly a century old, WMA had realized the threat posed by CAA's new operational model years earlier. However, due to its deeply ingrained conservative approach and a lack of cooperation among its agents, WMA did not keep pace.

It wasn't until the death of two core executives earlier this year, which caused turmoil and led to the departure of many top stars, that WMA finally woke up.

Then, Simon Westeros' "The Butterfly Effect," under the push of Jonathan Friedman, coincidentally became WMA's first packaging project presented to Hollywood studios.

Although many top stars had left recently, WMA's scale still far surpassed that of CAA.

CAA, as the fastest rising talent agency in recent years, still had just over fifty agents and had only recently reached a client count of 600. In contrast, WMA, with over one hundred eighty agents, had a roster of more than 3000 artists.

CAA's packaging mechanism had already been perceived as a threat by the studios. If the largest talent agency in Hollywood also shifted to this operational model, it would be easy to see how the major film companies would become increasingly passive in film production.

Concerned about this, although "The Butterfly Effect" was well-received by many studio executives, a week had passed—a typical timeframe for a response from film companies—yet none of the major studios had given a clear reply.

It was now mid-July.

In downtown Hollywood at the Paramount headquarters, it was Tuesday afternoon.

Thanks to the summer blockbusters "Top Gun" and "Ferris Bueller's Day Off" being huge successes, Paramount President Sidney Ganis was feeling triumphant, as the company had finally cleared the clouds of the past few years when high-ranking executives like Barry Diller, Michael Eisner, and Jeffrey Katzenberg had left one after another.

Affected by the frequent departure of senior executives, Paramount's best-performing film last year, "Witness," had grossed only $68 million. Many media outlets ridiculed Paramount's parent company, Gulf + Western Chairman Martin Davis, for foolishly driving away executives like Barry Diller, predicting a bleak future for Paramount.

Now revitalized, the irascible Martin Davis was no longer micromanaging his executives, promising easier times ahead.

Enthusiastically welcoming Jonathan Friedman, who had come for a visit, Sidney Ganis and his secretary served coffee as they exchanged pleasantries before getting down to business. "Joe, to be frank, Paramount really wants 'The Butterfly Effect' script, but we find it hard to accept the complete package offered by WMA."

This was not Jonathan Friedman's first visit of the day; he had just been to Warner Bros. Hearing Sidney Ganis and Warner Bros. President Ed Molin utter nearly identical statements confirmed for Jonathan Friedman that the major Hollywood studios had definitely colluded against "The Butterfly Effect."

However, on the surface, Jonathan Friedman still calmly responded, "Sid, you must see that this is an excellent project, and WMA has offered the best creative team we could assemble."

"No, I don't think so," Sidney Ganis shook his head. "Take Brian De Palma; he's messed up two big-budget films in a row. It's hard for Paramount to trust him with this movie."

Jonathan Friedman countered, "Sid, Brian's last two films indeed didn't perform spectacularly at the box office, but it's not fair to say he messed up. Besides, the failure at the box office isn't entirely his fault. Take 'Wise Guys'

 at the beginning of the year; MGM not only scheduled this film during the unpopular April period but also provided it with only 300 screens. Despite this, the film still managed to earn $8.5 million, which is sufficient to prove Brian's capability. Plus, 'The Butterfly Effect' is exactly the type of movie Brian excels in."

Sidney Ganis took a sip of his coffee, shrugged, and said, "Well, even so, the $2 million director's fee WMA is asking is too high. Paramount can only pay up to $1 million. And about that screenwriter..."

As he spoke, Sidney Ganis set down his coffee cup, stood up, took a document from his desk, and returned to the sofa in the sitting area, handing the document to Jonathan, "Simon Westeros, right? Clearly an inexperienced newcomer. So, we can't accept a $200,000 script fee either, that's too high. At most $100,000 for two scripts—$80,000 for 'The Butterfly Effect' and $20,000 as a down payment for the option on 'Final Destination.' Heh, it took some effort to find this writer's scripts through the Screenwriters Guild; there's another script, but its quality is so poor it hardly counts as a story. As for 'Final Destination,' though it's just an outline, the idea is indeed good. Additionally, these are one-time buyout prices. Simon Westeros isn't a guild member, so Paramount doesn't need to pay him residuals for video and TV broadcast rights under the guild's standard agreement."

Jonathan Friedman silently flipped through the document in his hands, feeling a clear sense of malice in Sidney Ganis's terms.

Yet, as Sidney Ganis finished speaking, Jonathan Friedman couldn't help but ask, "So, Sid, what about the male lead? What do you think of Matthew?"

Sidney Ganis's face lit up with an inscrutable smile, nodding almost immediately, "With 'Ferris Bueller's Day Off' doing so well at the box office, we'd of course be happy to continue working with Matthew. $5 million is a bit high, but he's worth that price."

Hearing this, Jonathan Friedman finally confirmed that Paramount was targeting him, the initiator of WMA's first packaging project, and even trying to use these tactics to sabotage the entire project.

After all, both Brian De Palma and Simon Westeros were his clients, and their combined fees didn't even amount to half of Matthew Broderick's. Paramount's nitpicking over their fees, yet swiftly agreeing to Matthew's hefty $5 million offer, was clearly an attempt to stir discord within WMA.