Talk:Studio system

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of Wikipedia:WikiProject Filmmaking, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to filmmaking. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the assessment scale.

There was more to the end of the studio system than just the ruling in United States v. Paramount Pictures, Inc.. Television was just really beginning at the time and had little to do with it then, although some would say that James Garner's fight with Warner Bros. over his Maverick contract was really the true total end of it. Bob Hope's war with Paramount earlier in the 1940s, is credited by writer Raymond Strait, at least, as the beginning of the end of its breaking down when he got raises above his contract, percentages, and a more legitimate accounting of film expenses and revenues than had previously been achieved. Rlquall 19:41, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Quite right. If you think this article is the place to go into detail on it, by all means. (PS: Your "defunct" is the mot juste!) --DCGeist 22:22, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Hi DCGeist, I'm very interested in the RKO history, I think it's not the rigth way to consider RKO defunct between 1960 and 1989. In the late eighties RKO General used his arm/brand RKO Pictures to produce or coproduce many movies: (Carbon Copy (1981) - The Border (1982) - Cat People remake (1982) - The Best Little Whorehouse in Texas (1982) - TV show Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street (1982) - D.C. Cab (1983) - Streets of Fire (1984) - Plenty (1985) - Mesmerized (1986) - Half Moon Street (1986) - Campus Man (1987) - Hot Pursuit (1987) - Hamburger Hill (1987) - The Lighthorsemen (1987). All those movies were produced under the General Tire/GenCorp management I think it's better to consider RKO "dormant" in the sixties and seventies as movies production company. Ciao GPM from Italy

You're right about a low level of production resuming in 1981. As for "dormant" vs. "defunct": as I understand it, RKO Pictures simply did not exist between 1960 and 1980--not as a producer or distributor, not as a corporate entity of any kind, no officers, nada. That's "defunct." The name, as you point out, was revived as a brand by RKO General in 1981, but there's a definitive break between that RKO Pictures and the original one. The five years in the 1990s when Hartley and Merrill produced and/or distributed nothing, but kept the corporate identity alive is a better example of a period of dormancy. Best, Dan --DCGeist 16:06, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

It's very hard to explain my point of view with my poor english, but I will try it, When General Tire bought RKO Pictures Corporation from Howard Hughes It shut down the movies production and distribution between 1957 and 1981, changed the name of the company 3 times (RKO Teleradio Pictures - RKO Teleradio - RKO General) and changed the matter of his business from movies to Radio and TV broadcasting. But it's clear the RKO company lived without break from Hughes era until the Hartley/Merrill purchase and RKO always owned all the right about the movies and trademarks of the old RKO (except the TV broadcasting rights sold out in the fifthies). Many other Hollywood Studios changed the ownership and corporate name and structure ( see Universal - Columbia - UA - MGM - Warner) the only difference is the continuity in movies productions but it is not matter of existence or not of the company. Ciao GPM

You've made your point very well, I think. It comes down to a difference of opinion on what information is most relevantly emphasized in this article. Since the article is on the "studio system" and the section in question concentrates on the fate of the "eight major studios," I think it's important to underscore the fact that there was no movie business under the RKO rubric between 1960 and 1980, no "studio" in any sense of the term--unlike all those other studios you mention. Ownership of trademarks and remake rights (all unexercised for two decades) does not a studio make. The usage note in the standard Merriam-Webster's dictionary says, "Defunct stresses cessation of active existence or operation." That seems exactly right to me in terms of any discussion of RKO as a "studio." If I may state your opinion, it is that the continued existence of a corporate structure bearing the RKO name that holds those trademarks and rights is the crucial fact. That corporate lineage is, in fact, currently reflected in the article and, of course, extensive detail can be found in the RKO article. I've changed the header in the corporate lineage section to read "RKO Pictures" as opposed to "RKO" for greater clarity. What do you think?--DCGeist 19:38, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Hi DCGeist! I agree with You about the change of the header in the corporate lineage section, but in my opinion RKO can't be called "defunct" from 1960 until 1980. For example (for a more complete and accurate information) I found there was a very little movies production and distributions in those years e.g. (The Abbott and Costello Show cartoons (1966) - Comanche blanco (1968) - Supercolpo da 7 miliardi (1966) - Kingu Kongu tai Gojira / King Kong vs Godzilla (1962) etc. I know it was quite insignificant, but the RKO corporate lineage was always uninterrupted. I still prefer RKO was "dormant". Ciao GPM

I'm sorry, GPM, but it looks like we'll just have to disagree. No one denies that a company called RKO General existed during the years in question and was in the TV business, but that has nothing to do with being a movie studio. It seems absolutely clear to me that RKO Pictures, the movie studio, was defunct. I'll address each of the examples you raise. The first, whose secondary producer is "RKO-Jomar Productions," behind Hanna-Barbera, is obviously a TV series. The second and third were foreign-language movies (Spanish and Italian, respectively); RKO was involved in neither their production nor their theatrical release--they were distributed in dubbed versions by RKO General on American TV. As for the last, RKO General, as "King Kong" rightsholder, licensed the Japanese producers to use the character and received a fee and screen credit in return. Not only do none of these activities qualify a business as a movie studio, none of them were even done under the rubric of "RKO Pictures." Even the one that qualifies as a TV production, RKO General seems minimally involved in at best--"RKO-Jomar" AFTER Hanna-Barbera. It looks like it might be just another rights deal. Could you find out the details on that?

Believe me, I care just as much about RKO as you. If you'll remember, before I started working on the English-language version of the "studio system" article, there was no mention of RKO at all. Similarly, before I started working on the "RKO Pictures" article, there was a considerable amount of erroneous information in it, which I've corrected. (By the way, the Italian version of the RKO article, which I was hoping you were being diligent about, still erroneously states that Pathé was part of the original RKO. Please correct that, would you? If you have any questions, please refer to my clearly cited sources in the English-language version.) I'm continuing to work regularly on both articles. Again, if you read either article, the corporate lineage is clear. For now, let's leave the language as it is. (If you've been working on an Italian-language version of the studio system article, we can leave that one as it is for now, too.) I've made my case; you've made yours. Let's wait for some disinterested parties to weigh in and see if we can reach a consensus. Best, Dan--DCGeist 04:11, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] RKO - Wesray - William E. Simon

It needs more clarity. When GenCorp sold RKO Pictures, Inc. it was purchased by Wesray and some of RKO Pictures's managers, but Mr. William E. Simon never bought RKO Pictures from Wesray, simply because William E. Simon was the co-founder and owner of Wesray Corporation. At least probably, Wesray (and therefore William E. Simon) became the major stakeholder among the owners of RKO Pictures, and then Wesray/William E. Simon and Ray Chambers sold RKO Pictures, Inc. to Hartley and Merrill.

Let's see if I can put this all together properly:

RKO was purchased by Wesray Capital (controlled by William E. Simon and Ray Chambers) in 1987 and was merged with their Six Flags operations. Over the course of 1990-91, Wesray (i.e., Simon and Chambers) split RKO off again and sold it to Merrill and Hartley.

Is that correct, according to your best information?--DCGeist 16:27, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

I'm sure Mr. William E. Simon was co-founder and owner of LBO Wesray Capital (according to an interview of Merrill, Bill Simon had left Wesray before the negotiation was in progress), RKO Pictures was a Wesray company linked with Six Flags (in the same time Six Flags was a Wesray company and it's still possible to find traces of RKO/Six Flags Entertainment, Inc. [1]), but I'm still searching better source about this argument. I found a quite interesting interview of Dina Merrill but it's available only as google cache page, She also talks about the negotiation among Bill Simon, Ted Hartley and Ray Chambers. Let me know if You find helpful this page. DINA MERRILL on Mrs. Johnson

According to the Dina Merrill interview it's possible to suppose (1)William E. Simon - one of the major stockholders of RKO, and (2)Ray Chambers - one of the owners of RKO Pictures, Inc. through his Wesray company

Thanks for your very very good job on RKO page :)

That's an excellent source, the Merrill interview (and OK that it's only available cached--as long as it's accessible, it's good); I found a way to work some info from it into the RKO piece. I confess I wasn't too interested in the latter-day RKO Pictures to begin with, but it's clearly a fascinating bit of corporate history. Your diligent research has made our article the best available source on or--I believe--off the web for information on this complex topic.--DCGeist 05:45, 14 August 2006 (UTC)