home
***
CD-ROM
|
disk
|
FTP
|
other
***
search
/
TIME: Almanac 1995
/
TIME Almanac 1995.iso
/
time
/
012290
/
0122207.000
< prev
next >
Wrap
Text File
|
1994-03-25
|
4KB
|
91 lines
<text id=90TT0199>
<title>
Jan. 22, 1990: He's Got Their Number, Almost
</title>
<history>
TIME--The Weekly Newsmagazine--1990
Jan. 22, 1990 A Murder In Boston
</history>
<article>
<source>Time Magazine</source>
<hdr>
BUSINESS, Page 50
He's Got Their Number, Almost
</hdr>
<body>
<p>A writer scores against a studio, but where's the money?
</p>
<p> "I'd hire the devil himself as a writer if he gave me a good
story."
</p>
<p>-- Sam Goldwyn
</p>
<p> Movie moguls crave good scripts, but they hate to pay for
them. So goes the age-old gripe among disgruntled Hollywood
screenwriters, but it took an outsider like columnist Art
Buchwald to put the allegation to the test. In a star-studded
courtroom drama, Buchwald cast a bright light on the
machinations of Hollywood's power brokers. Last week a Los
Angeles judge ruled that Paramount Pictures used Buchwald's
script proposal as the basis for its 1988 blockbuster Coming to
America and failed to pay him accordingly. Paramount plans to
appeal.
</p>
<p> The dispute goes back to 1983, when Paramount agreed to buy
the rights to Buchwald's proposal It's a Crude, Crude World,
a tale of an African royal who ventures to the U.S. and falls
in love in a Washington ghetto. Paramount renamed it King for
a Day and began developing it as a vehicle for Eddie Murphy,
but abandoned the project two years later, having paid Buchwald
a total of $17,500.
</p>
<p> Murphy then wrote a story outline called The Quest, about
a black prince searching for true love, which eventually became
Coming to America. Buchwald went to see the picture while
vacationing on Martha's Vineyard, and was struck by its
similarity to his proposal. Murphy, who received screen credit
as the creator of the story, testified in a written deposition
last month that he conceived the idea for the film in the wake
of a painful romantic breakup. But Judge Harvey Schneider ruled
that the parallels were substantial and that Paramount and
Murphy had known about Buchwald's original story, although he
stressed that his verdict was in no way meant to "disparage
the creative talent" of Murphy.
</p>
<p> For Buchwald, the hard part will be getting the money he
thinks he has coming to him. Judge Schneider ordered the studio
to pay $250,000 to Buchwald and Alain Bernheim, who was
originally scheduled to produce the film. In the next phase of
the trial, Buchwald and Bernheim will try to establish a dollar
figure for the 19% of the net profits promised them in the 1983
contract. Trouble is, the studio claims that while the movie
took in more than $300 million at the box office, it has made
no net earnings--at least according to the arcane accounting
of Hollywood.
</p>
<p> It will be up to Buchwald and his lawyer to find the profit.
Joked Buchwald: "We suspect it's in Gloria Swanson's dressing
room." Of the $300 million gross, half was kept by theaters
showing the film. The rest went for shooting the picture (one
cost estimate: $40 million), distribution fees charged by
Paramount ($50 million), studio overhead ($5 million), film
prints and promotion ($15 million), Murphy's salary ($8
million) and other expenses.
</p>
<p> One sizable outlay was probably Murphy's guaranteed piece
of the box-office take, which was calculated as a percentage
of the gross and may have exceeded $15 million. Hollywood's
megastars demand a slice of the gross because they know that
most films will never pay any earnings to holders of net-profit
percentages, which Murphy has derided as "monkey points."
Before Buchwald's case is over, Hollywood neophytes may get a
first-class education in how the power players operate.
</p>
<p>By Jeanne McDowell/Los Angeles.
</p>
</body>
</article>
</text>