Lionsgate CEO Talks Future of ‘Hunger Games’ Franchise, Starz Merger

Lionsgate's Deal With Starz Gives Studio
Courtesy of Lionsgate

Jon Feltheimer has just come from a breakfast meeting with 50 members of his theatrical distribution team. It’s one of many informal session that the Lionsgate CEO likes to hold with employees at the studio behind “The Hunger Games” and “Mad Men.” No subject is off the table, as the rank and file are invited to ask him about anything ranging from his corporate vision to his personal life.

“This is a collaborative place,” said Feltheimer. “With only 750 people doing mostly the same job that 3,000 are doing at some of the other studios, we have to have full transparency.”

Francis Lawrence, the director of three of the “Hunger Games” films, agrees that the culture at Lionsgate is unique, hailing the studio’s “boutique feel.”

“There’s a family vibe when you’re there,” he said. “There’s not a lot of red tape or rules.”

Related

Jennifer Lawrence Hunger Games Prequels

Jennifer Lawrence on ‘Hunger Games’ Prequels: ‘It’s Too Soon’

Lionsgate’s smaller size has been both an asset and a hinderance. It allows them to be more nimble and entrepreneurial, but as a publicly traded company, it’s also left them vulnerable. Its stock can rise or fall based on the fortunes of a single film — a fate that a Disney or Warner Bros., existing as cogs in sprawling media conglomerates, don’t suffer when a movie flops.

The need to get bigger has just spurred Lionsgate to take its riskiest bet. Two weeks ago, the studio closed a $4.4 billion deal for Starz, gambling that partnering with the premium cable player will help stabilize Lionsgate’s revenue streams and potentially provide it with a distribution platform for its movies and shows.

“It gives us more touch points to the consumer,” said Feltheimer in his first interview since the deal closed. “It’’s a larger marketing platform. Frankly, it gives us more places to put content.”

So far, the market has remained cool to the merger, with some Wall Street observers questioning how the acquisition improves Lionsgate’s operations.

“We think this is a deal that happened because management needed a deal to happen given poor recent financial performance and a declining share price,” Doug Creutz, a media industry analyst for Cowen & Co., wrote in a note.

Lionsgate’s stock is essentially flat and some analysts have questioned the amount of debt the studio has taken on as part of the deal. Initially, the company will shoulder a debt ratio of five to five and a half times earnings.

Michael Burns, Lionsgate’s vice-chairman, maintains that both companies will throw off enough cash to service the debt. He believes that investors’ concerns will be assuaged as more financial information is released during the approval process.

Nor does it preclude Lionsgate from making other deals, the studio’s leadership said.

“If we think a transaction is accretive, if we think there’s a smart way to finance it, we would happily do it,” said Burns.

The Starz deal may give Lionsgate greater scale, but it doesn’t rectify creative problems that the studio has in its film business. Over the past year and a half, the company has wrapped up its hugely successful “Hunger Games” franchise. But attempts to replace Katniss Everdeen with new film series have fizzled. Pictures like “Mortdecai,” a critically derided Johnny Depp comedy, and “Gods of Egypt,” a hugely expensive fantasy epic, were produced with an eye towards triggering sequels, only to collapse at the box office. Even worse, once promising series, such as “Divergent,” appear to have run out of steam.

“Like the ancient Greeks say, you suffer your way to wisdom,” said Burns. “We learned some things last year. We probably rushed a few movies.”

Both men said they believe that the upcoming slate, which features the likes of Tyler Perry’s “Boo! A Madea Halloween,” the Ryan Gosling and Emma Stone musical “La La Land,” and the Mark Walhberg drama “Deepwater Horizon” put the film division on more secure footing. They are particularly bullish on a “Power Rangers” reboot.

“We think Power Rangers is one of the world’s greatest brands and we’re going to do well by it,” said Burns.

The television business has been steadier, with Lionsgate fielding hits such as ABC’s “Nashville” and Hulu’s “Casual.” One of its greatest successes, Netflix’s “Orange is the New Black,” experienced a rare stumble last week. The prison comedy was shut out of the major Emmy categories.

“It’s ridiculous,” said Feltheimer. “ This is one of the most important shows across the globe. Somehow the calculus didn’t work this year and it was overlooked, but you can expect us to be back in a big way next year.”

Though Katniss Everdeen’s journey may have ended with “Hunger Games: Mockingjay – Part 2,” Lionsgate is looking for ways to delve deeper into the world of Panem. The company will offer up stage shows and theme park rides, and is exploring other ways to extend both the “Hunger Games” franchise and its “Twilight” series.

“I would say that there’s no big franchise that any studio has that they’re not trying to look at prequels, sequels, spinoffs, some version of that,” said Feltheimer. “We think that there’s a great piece of IP with Hunger Games. It’s a great world.”

Adds Burns, “Great brands like this go on and on.”

Filed Under:

Want to read more articles like this one? SUBSCRIBE TO VARIETY TODAY.
Post A Comment 6

Leave a Reply

6 Comments

Comments are moderated. They may be edited for clarity and reprinting in whole or in part in Variety publications.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

  1. Sydney says:

    On the one hand, I’m not surprised that they decided to forego a theatrical release for Ascendant. To me, the series has been a cheap, flimsy Hunger Games ripoff from day one. I was mildly interested in the first film due to the Hogwarts-esque “Ooh, which faction are you?” gimmick. But then I literally laughed my way through, picking out all the THG parallels, counterparts, and similarities. I couldn’t wait to see how much worse it could get in Insurgent, and lo & behold, I was not disappointed. Now I’m actually kind of excited to see what a mess Allegiant is that they were driven to give up on it like this.

    From what I understand, though, Allegiant DID end the story where the books did–save for one major occurrence. Ascendant is some tacked-on extension for some reason, to which they’re now committed…guess the reason is simply that Harry Potter & The Hunger Games (undisputed “YA” kings) set a “one-more-movie-than-book” precedent. (And Twilight did that too, right? I can’t understand why that was so successful, but whatever.) Point here was, maybe Ascendant as a TV movie will be a graceful enough bow-out, since most people probably won’t even be aware that there’s supposed to be a fourth installment to it anyways? Maybe? The series is still embarrassing, but to look on the bright side…

    What surprises me is the “spinoff” series. Who exactly do they imagine is going to have the slightest interest in a series set in the “Divergent world” (aka dystopian Chicago??) Apparently the author’s written some shorter novellas connected to the original trilogy, from other characters’ perspectives…is that the source of this idea? Because I would’ve probably advised going through with the TV-movie Ascendant, and letting Divergent die with as much dignity as it can have at this point.

    Because what Roth did is similar to what I’d love to have Collins (THG’s author) do. Suzanne…have a look at Rowling…and you were insanely prolific writing all that Little Bear, Clarissa, Clifford, Gregor the Overlander, etc., etc., etc., prior to THG. ;) I love that Lionsgate is going in the Harry Potter direction–stage show (planned but stalled due to the theater not being built), theme park, intended sequel/prequel/spin-off eventually. They just recently bought Starz; I’d been wondering when they’d do some sort of merger(s) like that, and it could help open up other options aside from just more feature films. Netflix or another channel would probably have more potential viewers, though. And I just don’t want them to try and rush into anything, desperate as they might feel (they already auctioned off all the HG props, costumes, and set pieces…)

    I’ve got no interest in Twilight; made it through the books and the first movie. That was all, brother. But hey, I can’t begrudge them wanting to continue their other lucrative teen-based franchise.

  2. Dunstan says:

    I saw the first “Hunger Games” movie and that was more than enough; a huge repetitious bore. I’m glad I didn’t waste time on the sequels.

    Give this pathetic project a rest. A long one.

  3. Tony Pastrel says:

    I did not like the fourth Hunger Games movie. But I’d be down for seeing more movies set in that world.

  4. DougW says:

    They have an obligation to properly wrap-up the Divergent series with the fourth theatrical film and the original cast. There was very little promotion for “Ascendant” – I think the cast did about a third as much as with the earlier films, here and around the world. Trim the budget, and do more promotion for the finale. But a scheme to end on TV is a non-starter and should be out of the question.

    • Eunice says:

      I agree with you DougW. The studio’s poor promotions tanked the Allegiant movie ticket sales, not the movie itself. Just going from multiple red carpet premieres for the first two movies around the world to only one in NY illustrates how poorly the promotions were for Allegient. I wouldn’t be surprised if that was the plan all along – to blame poor ticket sales so they could beef up their Starz line up. I hope they do the right thing by the fans and complete the final movie.

    • Dunstan says:

      Doug, the last “Divergent” was just more of the same crap. I guarantee there will be no Shailene Woodley in any other version. She’s a good actress; that series did nothing to advance her career.

More Biz News from Variety

Loading