Friday, Jul 25, 2008
Don't mess with the Big Mouse: Disney's Eisner pays back archnemesis Katzenberg by whacking Dreamworks pilot.
May 19, 1999 | The other shoe has dropped. And it's not a little one. It was just a matter of when -- not if -- chairman Michael Eisner would get even with nemesis Jeffrey Katzenberg for suing the Walt Disney Co. After all, headlines were made when Katzenberg's attorney forced Eisner to concede on the witness stand earlier this month that, yes, he did say about his former employee, "I think I hate the little midget."
Now Eisner's humiliation is going to cost Katzenberg big-time. Since this is the week when the six major television networks present their fall schedules to media buyers with all the appropriate fanfare, most Hollywood TV producers, executives and agents gathered together in this city's most expensive hotels, restaurants and watering holes usually find themselves knee-deep in the alphabet business (CBS, NBC, ABC, WB, UPN, FOX) with little time to focus on anything but their own fortunes. (Except for Drew Carey, the sitcom star who warmed up the crowd of advertisers and press at ABC's presentation in the New Amsterdam Theater Tuesday afternoon by daring to mention the ongoing trial. "I want to help Michael Eisner," Carey said, feigning sincerity. "So, in his defense, I saw Jeff Katzenberg at the 'Star Wars' premiere, and he is short.") Even so, they are buzzing about ABC's controversial decision not to pick up the pilot of what was considered a "sure thing" to make the 1999-2000 lineup: "Sugar Hill," a sitcom produced by veteran Gary David Goldberg and starring Oscar nominee Charlie Sheen.
First and foremost, the show was rumored to be good. (The Hollywood Reporter noted on May 13 -- four days before Disney pulled the plug -- that "Sugar Hill" was "getting high fives" at ABC.) It also had an impressive pedigree: Not only did Goldberg of "Family Ties" and "Brooklyn Bridge" fame have a huge ABC hit already with "Spin City" and was overdue for some strokes, but this was to be Sheen's small screen turn at a time when network TV is in dire need of star power to better compete with cable. Further cementing the show's near-certain prospects, ABC would have to pay a hefty financial penalty if the sitcom didn't get at least a midseason pickup.
So what earned Eisner's personal ire? "Sugar Hill" is produced by Dreamworks; Katzenberg is co-founder of that company. And Disney owns ABC. Reason enough, informed sources say, that "Sugar Hill" is now DOA at ABC.
It's understandable that Eisner would hit back at Katzenberg where it would hurt the most -- in the wallet -- since that is precisely where Katzenberg is targeting Disney. Talk about payback. On the one hand, Katzenberg in his lawsuit is demanding $500 million from the Mouse House for what he claims is an unpaid incentive bonus. On the other, his studio stands to lose that sum since a hit show on a major network can fetch as much as $500 million if it runs long enough to go into syndication. All month, there has been considerable eyebrow-raising around Hollywood about the fact that Katzenberg vs. Walt Disney Co. went to court just when ABC was deciding its fall schedule. And, as the trial descended into much-anticipated nastiness, a joke made the rounds that the Fox network now had enough footage for its latest TV special, "When Moguls Attack!"
By the end of this development season, it became clear that Dreamworks already had two shows locked in the ABC lineup: one of the network's biggest building-block hits, "Spin City," as well as one of its newest critic-pleasers, "It's like, you know ..." But Dreamworks also had several pilots in contention.
Usually, in the cutthroat world of high-risk, high-reward network TV, success breeds success. So, on the surface, Dreamworks could have expected a proverbial pat on the head from ABC. Instead, it got a knockout punch. "It's an interesting dynamic, to put it mildly," one veteran TV producer with ties to ABC noted dryly.
It's also no secret that, with ABC still lagging behind NBC, CBS and occasionally even Fox in household numbers or desirable demographics, Eisner has been personally involved in every aspect of network programming, including screening every pilot. (In fact, Eisner himself, who started as a 24-year-old junior executive at the network and rose to be a senior vice president before leaping to feature films, is known to joke that he has a sitcom viewpoint that hasn't changed since "Happy Days.") For that reason, Eisner would have come under considerable fire if he tried to take his revenge on Dreamworks by, say, suddenly canceling "Spin City" or even "It's like, you know ..." But networks pass with impunity on pilots all the time, including some that spew cash as easily as an ATM. (In fact, ABC has a history of doing that. Even before it was bought by Disney, the network said no to "The Cosby Show" and then again to "Third Rock From the Sun." Both shows went on to become big hits on NBC.) Especially these days, when the emphasis by parent companies like Disney or General Electric is on in-house or sister studio production at ABC and NBC: In other words, they want to keep the money inside the family.
In an ideal world, the network would take a hit from any source, even -- gulp! -- Katzenberg. But that's NOT how it works in Hollywood, a town known as much for the incestuousness of its professional relationships as it is for the vitriol of its personal feuds. Only a naif would think it wasn't a little easier in this case for Eisner to urge or even order ABC to pass on a Dreamworks sitcom.
A Disney spokesman denied any linkage. "That is an absurd premise. Nobody does things to spite themselves," said John Dreyer, Disney's head of corporate communications. "There is a harsh reality in this business," argues a senior Disney executive, "that no matter whatever is played out among people, the bottom line is if there is a hit show you really believe in, you'll take it because it means you'll make money."
Oh, by the way, did we mention their voices were gleeful?
Get Salon in your mailbox!