Everyone Seems to Have a Theory About Ovitz

Never has someone not taking a job in Hollywood created so much buzz.

But when you’re talking about the industry’s most powerful player--Michael Ovitz--walking away from a reported $250-million package to run a major entertainment corporation--MCA--you’re not just talking about any old guy in any old gig.

Naturally, everyone in the business, from studio executives to rival agents to producers, took great pleasure engaging in Monday morning--in this case Tuesday morning--quarterbacking.

“I knew all along he wouldn’t do it,” was one typical response of many sources who less than 48 hours earlier were utterly convinced that Ovitz was about to close the deal, or had already closed the deal, to leave Creative Artists Agency, the business he had built over the past 20 years to take the reins of MCA.

“I’ve thought all along that he would hold out for the Gerry Levin job at Time Warner,” was another oft-heard quote on Tuesday--out of the same mouths that had pooh-poohed that scenario previously.

For many there was disappointment, particularly from rivals and those who believe Ovitz has accumulated too much power at CAA. “Everyone’s really depressed,” said one prominent agent. “Every person I know--every agent, studio executive, lawyer and business manager--wanted the reign of terror to be over.”

Ovitz, as usual, was silent.

Many industry insiders said they were still in shock that the deal fell apart in the eleventh hour. Negotiations for a deal that has been in the works for the past two months came to a dead halt about 2 a.m. Monday, when representatives for Ovitz and Edgar Bronfman Jr., chairman of MCA’s new owner, Seagram Co., couldn’t come to terms.

People in the community were divided about whether it was a good or bad thing that Ovitz wasn’t going to land at MCA. Everyone had a theory about why the deal collapsed.

“I think it’s the same situation that happened six years ago when Ovitz turned down Sony,” said one studio head. “The man didn’t want to be an agent anymore. An opportunity arose and he had deep ambivalent feelings--he got cold feet--over authority. Given that, he pushed an impossible financial deal, and you can’t make a deal with someone who doesn’t want to make a deal. The only difference was that one [the Sony deal] was done in private, the other [MCA] in public.”

Like many others, the studio chief believes the deal broke down not over money but over the human factor.

“I think it was completely emotional,” he said. “At the end of the day, to have to report to someone scared him off.”

Another source said: “Ovitz just wasn’t prepared to do it. The question is why did it take so long to figure that out?”

Naturally, someone had a theory about that.

“He wanted to be asked to the party and RSVP ‘No thank-you,’ ” suggested one senior executive. “By doing that, he’s able to be perceived as someone who was desperately sought after but unable to be landed. . . . Part of his strategy was to get the big bang out of the article in Newsweek,” which ran a cover story on Ovitz this week.

The source added: “He wanted the noise and he got it. The reality is he’s never going to leave [CAA], and I think he’s a doofus for not doing it. He’s almost 50 and he should have taken the risk.”

More than one source suggested that if anyone was tarnished by the collapse of negotiations, it is Ovitz. “I don’t know why he would put himself through this entire exercise, and orchestrate an exit strategy, and appear on the cover of Newsweek, then get cold feet,” said one producer. “It’s bizarre.”

Of course, there was lots of now-what talk. Who would Bronfman go after for the MCA job after being turned down by his first two choices, Barry Diller and Ovitz? The usual-suspects list was led by Warner Bros. co-Chairman Terry Semel, Diller and former Disney TV head Rich Frank.

At MCA on Tuesday, Bronfman had a lunch meeting with about 20 senior executives, where for the first time he acknowledged that he had pursued Ovitz.

According to one executive there, Bronfman said, “I did try to make a deal with Mike and I wasn’t able to make it work.” As far as other potential candidates are concerned, Bronfman said there was no Plan B.

Bronfman said he plans to spend a lot of time in Hollywood, working with outgoing MCA Chairman Lew Wasserman and outgoing President Sidney Sheinberg and each division head, to get to know the business.

“So when I make a choice [about management], which I hope will be sooner rather than later,” Bronfman told those at the meeting, “I can make it with greater knowledge of what the company needs.”

Both Wasserman and Sheinberg spoke briefly at the lunch.

In a phone interview later in the day, Sheinberg said, “I don’t think there’s any timetable that’s quick.”

Many MCA executives, particularly Wasserman and Sheinberg, had bristled at Bronfman’s choice in Ovitz, reportedly furious that Ovitz had kept the talks with Seagram about the company’s sale secret from them and then, in effect, maneuvered them out of jobs.

Bronfman is already showing he is immersed in MCA’s business. He is receiving weekend box office totals on Sunday. He recently viewed an early, longer version of the mega-budget film “Waterworld.” While praising the film, he also said he thought it was too long, sources said. Universal was planning to cut it anyway and has trimmed about 20 minutes or so.

In an interview last week with The Times, Bronfman said he is looking for a home in Los Angeles because he expects to spend considerable time here and doesn’t want to spend it in hotels.

*

Times staff writer James Bates contributed to this column.