Lions Gate, Frugal and Fearless, Eyes Bigger Prey

I recently got an e-mail from a Rob Zombie fan, asking what had happened to “House of 1000 Corpses,” a horror film Zombie made that Universal Pictures refused to release, saying it was too blood-drenched and disturbing. Let’s see, who would have the 411 on a movie too scary for the studio that co-financed “Hannibal”? My first call was to Tom Ortenberg, president of Lions Gate Films Releasing. Had he by any chance heard anything about the film? “I’m going to screen it this week,” he said.

Lions Gate hasn’t picked up the film--at least not yet. But in today’s increasingly conservative, corporatized Hollywood, Lions Gate is one of the few remaining film companies that hasn’t lost its nerve when it comes to backing movies that offend, titillate and outrage. Operating out of a suite of offices in a faceless Marina del Rey building next to a dog park (“A lot of our meetings start late because people invariably get lost coming here,” Ortenberg says), Lions Gate doesn’t have the resources or clout of Fox Searchlight, Fine Line or any of the other art-house divisions owned by giant media conglomerates. But it has something maverick filmmakers appreciate: the willingness to stand behind movies that deal with controversial material.

“They don’t back down from anything,” says Scott Mosier, producer of “Dogma,” Kevin Smith’s 1999 Catholic Church satire that Lions Gate picked up after Miramax got cold feet about releasing it. “We had a great experience with them. They’re a lot like Miramax before it got so big. They’re really hungry and aggressive and not afraid of taking chances.”

“American Psycho,” the 2000 film version of Bret Easton Ellis’ novel about a yuppie serial killer, was too hot for other film buyers to handle. Lions Gate not only bought it, the company also made so much money on it that it’s producing a sequel. When renowned documentarian Errol Morris showed up at the 1999 Sundance Film Festival with “Mr. Death,” a film about a Holocaust-denying death chamber repairman, he had only one buyer: Lions Gate.

The same thing happened at Cannes last year with “Amores Perros.” Most distributors couldn’t stomach the brutal dog-fighting scenes. Lions Gate acquired the film, which became an Oscar-nominated critics’ darling. Lions Gate also recently put out Larry Clark’s “Bully,” a drama teeming with teen sex and violence.

“I have my problems with how little money they put into marketing the movie,” says Clark, whose previous film, “Kids,” had caused a storm of controversy. “But I give them props for letting me make the movie I wanted to make. Nobody ever asked me to compromise anything.”

Lions Gate’s biggest gamble is still to come. On Aug. 31, it’s rolling out “O,” a contemporary version of “Othello” that sat on the shelf at Miramax for nearly two years, despite the presence of teen box-office heavyweights Julia Stiles and Josh Hartnett. Concerned that the film’s explicit sex and violence would get the studio into a political firefight, Miramax sold the movie to Lions Gate this spring just weeks after the filmmakers sued Miramax for not releasing the film. (Miramax sold the film’s domestic rights to Lions Gate shortly before reaching a settlement with the filmmakers.)

For Lions Gate, the film is a test of a new high-risk growth strategy that could make the Canadian-owned company a media darling or send it into a crash-and-burn spiral. The company is opening the movie on 1,500 screens, its widest release ever. It’s not only a signal of a new era at Lions Gate, it also marks a new era in the embattled independent film business, which has been plagued by money woes, escalating marketing costs, reduced ancillary income and a scarcity of box-office hits.

To put it bluntly: Independents have never been in worse shape. The Shooting Gallery, which put out “Croupier,” is out of business. Since “The Blair Witch Project,” Artisan has had a string of flops and lost a number of key executives. In recent months several other companies have had staff cutbacks and top executive departures.

Lions Gate has not escaped unscathed. Since it acquired Trimark Pictures last year, two key executives, Jeff Sackman and Mark Urman, have left the company, with former Sony Television President Jon Feltheimer taking over as head of its Lions Gate Entertainment parent company. Many in the industry believe the company will eventually be sold or merged. In June, the trades reported that Artisan had made an offer to buy Lions Gate--and that Lions Gate had in turn made a bid to buy Artisan.

Neither deal was consummated, but both companies have valuable video libraries that are attractive investments in today’s DVD-fueled marketplace. Lions Gate feature films get all the media attention--it has earned Oscar nominations for such pictures as “Gods and Monsters,” “Shadow of the Vampire” and “Affliction”--but its home entertainment wing accounts for about 70% of the company’s profits.

Convinced that Lions Gate must escape the art-house ghetto, Ortenberg will supplement the company’s upscale fare with four wide-release pictures each year, starting with “O.” In October, Lions Gate will release “The Wash,” a hip-hop comedy starring Snoop Dogg and Dr. Dre, on roughly 1,200 screens. The company will do another wide release early next year with “Frailty,” a film directed by Bill Paxton that stars Paxton and Matthew McConaughey.

“We have to grow to survive and control our own destiny,” says Ortenberg, 41, who joined Lions Gate in 1996 after stints in sales and marketing at Columbia Pictures and Hemdale Films. “The art-house world has become too stagnant. If you’re going to increase your revenues and attract capital, you have to make films that have more of a potential upside.”

Lions Gate got a $200-million influx of new capital last summer from a consortium of banks that will allow the company to finance more films itself. In the past, 90% of the company’s films were film festival-type acquisitions. In 2002, roughly half of its slate will be in-house productions. “O” will be a key test of its ability to compete in the big leagues. The film’s release date has raised eyebrows, since Labor Day is traditionally the worst moviegoing weekend of the year.

Ortenberg believes Labor Day’s graveyard reputation is an example of self-fulfilling prophecy, because no one has ever put a strong movie on the date. With most colleges back in session by then, Lions Gate will have campus screenings the week before the film’s release. The company is also putting fold-up “O” posters in college newspaper orientation editions on hundreds of campuses. “The Labor Day issue is a myth,” Ortenberg says. “People claimed fall was a terrible time for movies until ‘Fatal Attraction’ was a hit there.”

Not every filmmaker has been enamored by Lions Gate’s marketing support. “Bully’s” Clark complains that the company “bought zero TV, didn’t have billboards or street posters and the newspaper ads were like 2 by 2 inches.” Director Robert Greenwald, who made “Steal This Movie” with Lions Gate, says the company did a lot of valuable grass-roots screenings for the film, adding, “We had our share of differences over how to publicize it, but at least they were always up front with me.”

“Gods and Monsters” director Bill Condon says Lions Gate was always open to ideas. Condon didn’t like the original Lions Gate trailer for his film and had a friend re-cut it. “Instead of being upset, they said, ‘You’re right--your trailer is better. We’ll use it.’ Most distributors treat filmmakers as babies or annoyances, but they were always willing to hear my ideas.”

Lions Gate is especially good at stretching a dollar. The most expensive movie Lions Gate has made is “Frailty,” which cost around $15 million. Most of its movies are either inexpensive acquisitions or self-financed films in the $5-million to $8-million range. Major studios spend $1 million just to cut a movie trailer. Lions Gate has a trailer budget ceiling of $50,000. The company also cuts corners on its print media campaigns. It rarely buys newspaper ads Monday through Thursday on the assumption that most people aren’t making weekend moviegoing plans in the middle of the week. “If we have a movie that grosses $15 million,” Ortenberg says, “we’re always in profit.”

Because Lions Gate is willing to take risks, it often gets films at a bargain. After the critical success of “Amores Perros,” everyone wants to make a film with director Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu. But when the film played Cannes last year, no one would touch it; Lions Gate picked it up for nothing. Frugality starts at the top. Ortenberg gets his hair cut at Fantastic Sam’s in Santa Monica. On his last visit he noticed the shop raised its price a dollar to $13.95. If the rate goes up again, they might lose a loyal customer.

When you’re the little guy in a big bruising business like Hollywood, every dollar counts. Lions Gate releases many of its edgier art-house films without a rating. One reason is because the company prefers a film’s being unrated to its being labeled NC-17. But another reason is that the Motion Picture Assn. of America charges companies a fee to rate a movie.

“Even if it’s only $5,000,” says Ortenberg, “why pay that to the MPAA when that could be our entire newspaper ad campaign in San Francisco?”

*

“The Big Picture” runs every Tuesday in Calendar. If you have questions, ideas or criticism, e-mail them to patrick.goldstein@latimes.com.