The Paula Wagner-Tom Cruise Show flops
This article was originally on a blog post platform and may be missing photos, graphics or links. See About archive blog posts.
There has been coverage everywhere about Paula Wagner leaving United Artists and lighting out for the territories (here’s a good piece from our paper). The only math anyone needs to know is this: After securing a $500-million film financing deal from Merrill Lynch to make a slate of 15 to 18 films over five years in their effort to revive the moribund UA label, Wagner and her UA partner Tom Cruise managed to release one movie in two years. To add insult to injury, the one movie, the Cruise-starring ‘Lions for Lambs,’ was a bomb. UA’s second film, the upcoming Bryan Singer-directed ‘Valkyrie,’ has bounced around on the release schedule, buffeted by all sorts of negative buzz.
What happened? People close to the situation tell me that Wagner got played by MGM chief Harry Sloan. A one-time agent and longtime Cruise confidante, Wagner is Hollywood Old School: She still thinks the business revolves around servicing movie stars. Sloan is Hollywood New School: He realizes the business is all about money, perception and gamesmanship. Having jumped at the chance to run a big-time studio, Sloan quickly realized that he’d installed himself as the admiral of a sinking ship. All his moves since have revolved around perception, since Sloan realized it would be almost impossible to get investors to sink more money into MGM unless Wall Street believed the ship was being turned around.
Whenever matters have looked dire, Sloan has bought more time with a splashy announcement. First it was bringing in Wagner and Cruise to revive UA. More recently, it was bringing in producer Mary Parent to head production at MGM. What Wagner never seemed to realize was that she was a pawn in the game. She had greenlight power and plenty of Merrill Lynch moola, but whenever Wagner tried to greenlight a movie, Sloan blocked it, either saying MGM wouldn’t distribute it or saying he didn’t believe the studio could market it. What Sloan really wanted was UA’s money, which he needs to pay for some of the movies Parent wants to make. The real tipoff was the news last week that Sloan had signed a new long-term deal at MGM. His future secure, he quickly moved to grease the skids for Wagner’s departure.
The blog world today has been full of reports about a new Sloan press release paying homage to Cruise, saying the star remains a ‘full partner in control of UA.’ That’s how much power a fading movie star like Cruise has today--he forced MGM to kiss his tuchis, but he couldn’t save his longtime partner’s job. In Hollywood, as in Washington, you learn to follow the money. And someway, somehow, you can bet most of that UA money is going to be keeping Harry Sloan’s faltering MGM empire alive.