The Indies’ Fat Tuesday

No one could argue with the contention that 1996 was the year of the independent film. But what is up for debate is how the major studios will respond, if at all, to being overwhelmed by the independents in the Oscars race this year.

As the nominations for the 69th annual Academy Awards were announced Tuesday, and independently made movies continued to receive the lion’s share of acclaim--19 nominations in the top five categories to the studios’ six--Hollywood executives generally agreed that the dearth of award nods within the studio system would not alter their policies to concentrate on “event” blockbusters.

“I think the studios all feel kind of badly for about six weeks. They feel real badly on the day of the Oscars because they’re not going or they’re watching it at some party,” said producer Brian Grazer, who along with his partner, Ron Howard, makes mostly big-budget mainstream pictures.

“But I think that’s fleeting,” Grazer said. “Two weeks later they’re back to making high-concept movies with big movie stars.”

Sure, Oscars are prestigious, but the ultimate prestige is still striking it big at the box office, both domestically and overseas. And event pictures--like “Independence Day,” “Twister” and “Mission: Impossible”--generate hundreds of millions of dollars worldwide.

“While the studios would like to win Academy Awards and be honored for greatness, the bottom line of the studios is, and always has been, making money,” said Tom Pollock, chairman of the board of trustees of the American Film Institute and former head of Universal Pictures. “The goal, of course, is to make money while making great films, but if you have a choice between making money and making great films, it’s ‘Show me the money.’ ”

This focus is likely only to intensify, since most of the studios are owned by large multi-pronged corporations that also support other entertainment divisions. Indeed, this year audiences will have even more event pictures to choose from than last year.

“Hits drive the business,” Grazer said, “and that’s the way it’s going to continue, in my humble opinion.”

Executives at the independent studios agree. “I don’t think anything’s going to change,” said Russell Schwartz, president of Gramercy Pictures, whose films received 10 Oscar nominations. “I’m sure [the big studios] would have liked more Oscars, but those are not the kind of movies they want to make now. The studios are not diversifying like they were and there’s a big hole--that’s what we’re taking advantage of.”

“As long as it requires this much money to make a film and market a film and operate a business, the primary focus of the studios is going to continue to be mainstream, big-event filmmaking,” said Joe Roth, chairman of Walt Disney Studios.

*

In fact, a trend that began four years ago when Disney acquired Miramax seems to be continuing, as many of the major studios are forming or buying art-house divisions to market and release smaller, independently made films. Some in Hollywood believe this lets the big studios have it both ways.

“It’s fashionable to say there’s antagonism between independents and studios,” said Harvey Weinstein, co-chairman of Miramax. “But studios are in the business of making big event movies, and it’s actually more conservative for them to make those big movies. So they’ve left a piece of the real estate to the independents to follow projects that are a little riskier, less star-driven, more writer-oriented. As a result we can coexist peacefully.”

Disney owns Miramax Pictures, whose films received 20 Oscar nominations and is the most successful of the smaller specialized movie companies. And 20th Century Fox has Fox Searchlight, Sony created the Sony Classics division and Warner Bros. now owns Fine Line Features, whose releases received seven nominations. Other studios, like Paramount and Universal, have been aggressively seeking to form or acquire their own art-house divisions, and October Films, the independent distributor responsible for “Secrets & Lies” and “Breaking the Waves” is reported to be in discussions with several studios.

“The trend will continue to be to co-opt those businesses,” Roth said. “The studios can provide the financial wherewithal and outlets for those independent films.”

It is the studio blockbusters that, in a sense, bankroll the arty independents.

“Studios have to have big movies to make those smaller movies,” said Tom Sherak, chairman of the 20th Century Fox domestic film group. “You have to have movies that do very well for studios to be able to afford a [Fox] Searchlight.”

Some studio executives said that studios need to delegate to their art-house divisions the tough job of ferreting out the gems among the growing number of independent films.

“Generally studios are not as aggressive about acquisitions [of independent films]--they’re usually a little bit behind the eight-ball,” said Robert Friedman, vice chairman of the Paramount Motion Picture Group. “They’re not as attuned to the buzz. It’s hard to compete with the Harveys [Weinstein, co-chairman of Miramax] and Sonys of the world who have people spending 24 hours a day on this.”

*

In addition, approaching films from the independents’ more intimate perspective may also prove an asset for the bigger studios.

“I think it’s sort of a wake-up call for the studios to adopt the philosophy of the process of independent movie-making,” said Milos Forman, the Oscar-nominated director of “The People vs. Larry Flynt,” which was made by Columbia. “This would mean that films wouldn’t be made by committee, but a few individuals.”

Film executives--both those from the smaller art-house film companies and the major studios--agree that awards and nominations are more valuable to independent films than to the big studio movies.

“You always see the most dramatic jump on the independent films rather than on the big studio films that have gotten a lot of Oscar heat. . . . I don’t know that a best picture nomination for ‘Ransom’ would have added $10 [million] or $20 million. But it would have told Mel Gibson that the studio knows how to market it. It would be more about appeasing the stars in the big pictures than about the box office.”

Grazer, the producer of “Ransom,” agreed.

“I think ‘Ransom’ is a real well-executed genre picture that’s going to do above $400 million worldwide and I don’t know how much more you can do,” Grazer said.

And never, the independents say, underestimate the power of word of mouth.

“The Oscar business and the Golden Globe business is exactly that: a business,” said Jonathan Weisgal, executive vice president of Fine Line Features. “They’re tools to help us promote our specialized films. . . . On ‘Shine’ the marketing plan incorporated the whole device of winning Golden Globe Awards, Oscar nominations, the critics’ awards. We released this film in November because we wanted to be on as many Top 10 lists as possible.”

But the science of marketing is ultimately more clear-cut than the mercurial nature of audience taste. It’s certainly a safer bet for studios to go with a special-effects-laden movie with marketing tie-ins than it is to take a chance on something more risky.

“Studios don’t choose to make bad films, but they have a much better feeling about what they can market than about what’s really good,” Pollock said. “The kind of film we’re talking about has to be good to work. The bad version of ‘Cuckoo’s Nest’ nobody goes to see. The bad version of ‘Twister’ sells because you can market the concept.”

Independent films may be the current flavor du jour, but in the cyclical world of Hollywood, the pendulum could swing back to studio films at awards’ time.

Those associated with independent films point out that it’s their very difference from the Hollywood norm that defines them. If they become simply a fad, they fear, the films could lose their edge.

“I hope independent films don’t suddenly get turned into a genre,” said Geoffrey Rush, who was nominated for a best actor Oscar for his role in “Shine,” which earned seven nominations.

“It’s the spikiness and the uncertainties and the fundamental principles of how and why they’re made that make for the interesting results,” Rush said. “If people start to over-analyze and dissect it, they’re probably going to fall flat on their face. It’s just great to know that audiences are going to see them.”

(BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC)

How They Stack Up

Here are the major awards and nominations already gathered by the Oscar nominess in the top eight categories:

*

Best Picture

The English Patient: Golden Globe winner

Fargo: N.Y. Film Critics winner

Jerry Maquire

Secrets& Lies: L.A. Film Critics winner

Shine

*

Best Director

Anthony Minghella: DGA Award nominee

Joel Coen: DGA Award nominee

Milos Forman: Golden Globe winner

Mike Leigh: L.A. Film Critics winner, DGA Award nominee

Scott Hicks: DGA Award nominee

*

Best Actor

Tom Cruise: Golden Globe winner, SAG Award nominee

Ralph Fiennes: SAG Award nominee

Woody Harrelson: SAG Award nominee

Geoffrey Rush: Golden Globe winner, L.A. Film Critics winner, N.Y. Film Critics winner, SAG Award nominee

Billy Bob Thornton: SAG Award nominee

*

Best Actress

Brenda Blethyn: Golden Globe winner, L.A. Film Critics winner, SAG Award nominee

Diane Keaton: SAG Award nominee

Frances McDormand: SAG Award nominee

Kristin Scott Thomas: SAG Award nominee

Emily Watson: Nat. Society of Film Critics winner, N.Y. Film Critics winner

*

Best Supporting Actor

Cuba Gooding Jr.: SAG Award nominee

William H. Macy: SAG Award nominee

Armin Mueller-Stahl

Edward Norton: Golden Globe winner, L.A. Film Critics winner

James Woods

*

Best Supporting Actress

Joan Allen

Lauren Bacall: Golden Globe winner, SAG Award nominee

Juliette Binoche: SAG Award nominee

Barbara Hershey: Nat. Society of Film Critics winner, L.A. Film Critics winner

Marianne Jean-Baptiste

*

Best Original Screenplay

Fargo: L.A. Film Critics winner, WGA Award nominee

Jerry Maguire: WGA Award nominee

Lone Star: WGA Award nominee

Secrets& Lies: WGA Award nominee

Shine: WGA Award nominee

*

Best Adapted Screenplay

The Crucible

The English Patient: WGA Award nominee

Hamlet

Sling Blade: WGA Award nominee

Trainspotting: WGA Award nominee

Researched by SUSAN KING / Los Angeles Times

(BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC)

Oscar Nominations by Distributor

How they fared, studio by studio:

Miramax*: 20

Sony: 18

Buena Vista (Disney): 10

Gramercy: 10

20th Century Fox: 7

Fine Line Features: 7

October Films: 6

Warner Bros.**: 6

Universal***: 5

Paramount: 4

Dream Works SKG: 1

MGM / UA: 1

Orion Pictures: 1

Samuel Goldwyn Co.: 1

*: Miramax is a subsidiary of Buena Vista

**: Warner Bros. and Universal shared two nominations for “Twister” which they distributed jointly.

* THE MAIN NEWS REPORT

An overview of the Oscar nominations, with reaction from the chosen few. A1