ONTD

9:07 am - 04/23/2012

Disney Boss Rich Ross Steps Down After "John Carter" Failure

Rich Ross' exit as Disney film chief reflects the high cost of inexperience and failure to surround himself with knowledgeable aides, observers say. It also raises doubts about CEO Robert A. Iger's ability to modernize the studio.



Walt Disney Studios film chief Rich Ross' abrupt departure Friday comes at a difficult time for one of the largest, oldest and most successful of Hollywood's historic entertainment companies.

It has also called into question Walt Disney Co. Chairman and Chief Executive Robert A. Iger's ambitious attempt to modernize the 89-year-old studio by placing a TV executive in charge of his film division and accelerates uncertainty at a time when all entertainment companies are struggling to come to terms with a dying DVD business and long-term declines in movie ticket sales.

Dismissed after less than three years in the top movie job, Ross leaves a legacy of costly box-office flops, including last year's "Mars Needs Moms" and the recent Martian adventure film "John Carter," for which Disney plans to take a $200-million write-down — one of the largest losses in movie history.


Iger's loss of confidence in his handpicked film chairman suggests that he may have overreached in his attempt to set a new course for Disney's movie division and miscalculated Ross' ability to make the transition from television to film.

Industry observers said that Ross, a former Disney Channel executive, never effectively adapted to the world of film. He all but conceded as much in his resignation email to staff Friday, acknowledging that the chairman's job was not "the right professional fit."

"It's hard to make that transition — there's a steep learning curve," said veteran film and television producer Jerry Bruckheimer, who is responsible for Disney's very successful "Pirates of the Caribbean" franchise and the upcoming Johnny Depp Western "Lone Ranger."

To run a film division, he said, "You have to get people off their couches and go spend 12 bucks to go to a movie. With the Disney Cable Channel it is easy to do — people just turn on their TVs."



When Iger picked him to run the film studio in October 2009, Ross was charged with remaking it for the 21st century realities of an industry challenged to adapt to new forms of digital distribution that deliver lower profit margins.

Ross set about eliminating jobs, cutting overhead and reducing the number of films Disney releases each year. He placed increased emphasis on established entertainment brands Marvel and Pixar, which the company had paid billions to bring into the Disney family. The Iger-Ross game plan was to make big, ambitious films with the potential to create a cultural tsunami that would spawn sequels, theme park rides, merchandise sales and spinoff television shows.

But in shaking up the studio, Ross removed seasoned film executives — who could have helped him learn the intricacies of the industry — and brought in outsiders
, such as New York ad agency executive MT Carney, as head of marketing, ostensibly to inject the venerable Burbank studio with new ideas and approaches.

As a result, Ross put few films into production. There are just three Disney live-action movies this year that did not come from Pixar, Marvel and DreamWorks Studios, whose films the studio distributes.

This failure to surround himself with strong people who knew the business contributed to Ross' undoing, say people in the industry with knowledge of the situation. Agents, managers and filmmakers perceived him as lacking a fundamental understanding of the film business.

That inexperience was reflected at the box office. Although the company continued to make money with "Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides" and "Alice in Wonderland," both of which grossed more than $1 billion worldwide, Ross presided over two terribly costly flops. The $150-million 3-D animated 2011 release "Mars Needs Moms" grossed just $39 million worldwide and ended with a $100-million write-down for Disney; "John Carter," a live-action adventure tale which cost at least $350 million to make and market, has grossed $269 million worldwide.

"There are real problems in Disney's core content business — Disney studios and ABC — that are still both troubled, and Iger hasn't fixed them," said Laura Martin, senior media analyst at Needham & Co. "You can't let an executive lose $200 million or $300 million on his watch and not fire him. If Iger loses another $200 million, his job could be on the line."

The Carter debacle was damaging beyond its financial toll on the company, say people with knowledge of the situation.

Ross spoke negatively about the film, according to people familiar with the situation but not authorized to discuss it publicly. Ross sought to blame Pixar Animation Studios for the "John Carter" debacle, they said
. That prompted key Pixar executives to turn against Ross, whose abundance of self-confidence and abrasive style had alienated many within the studio. It set the stage for Iger to remove the studio chief from his post, say people familiar with the matter.

Iger sought to take the high road Friday, lauding Ross for his contributions to the company.

"For more than a decade, Rich Ross' creative instincts, business acumen and personal integrity have driven results in key businesses for Disney, redefining success in kids and family entertainment and launching franchises that generate value across our entire company," Iger said in a statement. "His vision and leadership opened doors for Disney around the world, making our brand part of daily life for millions of people."

Ross' exit came without a clear successor in place, signaling a highly unusual era of instability at the studio.

Iger has told certain individuals who do business with the company that he has not made a decision about Ross' replacement, and did not indicate an urgency about doing so. In the meantime, Iger will rely on his production head, Sean Bailey, and president, Alan Bergman, to oversee the studio.

Investors are unlikely to be concerned with the latest executive shake-up at the movie studio, which is a relatively small contributor to Disney's bottom line. But the misstep is a mark against Iger, who is expected to report the company's second-quarter earnings results May 8.

"As CEO, Iger makes a lot of decisions and most have been successful and he's guided the company very well over the years," said veteran media analyst Hal Vogel.

"But this is one unpleasant mistake. When the failure comes it's spectacular — it feeds back on his decision to change the leadership of the company. I can't object to shaking things up and taking risks. But not all risks work out."
source
Page 1 of 5
<<[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] >>
galagooo 23rd-Apr-2012 04:04 pm (UTC)
Thought that said Rick Ross was the Disney boss for a second there.
fantastical00 23rd-Apr-2012 04:15 pm (UTC)
lol me too.
yamcha 23rd-Apr-2012 04:22 pm (UTC)
As did I.
trinigren 23rd-Apr-2012 04:31 pm (UTC)
Well that would have explained what exactly he's the boss of.
youbeboy 23rd-Apr-2012 06:38 pm (UTC)
Me too.
spoiled_water 23rd-Apr-2012 04:05 pm (UTC)


This photo is really unsettling for some reason.
neverletgo 23rd-Apr-2012 04:08 pm (UTC)
Yikes. o_O
wits 23rd-Apr-2012 04:13 pm (UTC)
besides the fact ashley tisdale is 27 and hangs out with a bunch of 18 year olds?
spoiled_water 23rd-Apr-2012 04:14 pm (UTC)
Omg she is?? LOL
andthenwevomit 23rd-Apr-2012 04:17 pm (UTC)
27??
one_hoopy_frood 23rd-Apr-2012 04:22 pm (UTC)
I have always side-eyed her for that tbh
discotherapyx 23rd-Apr-2012 04:36 pm (UTC)
ngl i thought that was j-woww
audrey_za 23rd-Apr-2012 04:41 pm (UTC)
... wasn't aware having younger friends is somehow a problem for others. Wth.
sandvich 23rd-Apr-2012 04:06 pm (UTC)
Oop @ him.
derrobitch 23rd-Apr-2012 04:07 pm (UTC)
oop!!!!!!
andres01234 23rd-Apr-2012 04:17 pm (UTC)
DOLAN <3
yamcha 23rd-Apr-2012 04:23 pm (UTC)
IA Dolan!
snuffyqui45 23rd-Apr-2012 04:07 pm (UTC)
A lot of Disney people deserve to be fired tbh.

That marketing campaign was a disas-tuh.
derrobitch 23rd-Apr-2012 04:09 pm (UTC)
yes, they can start with all the pedos
snuffyqui45 23rd-Apr-2012 04:15 pm (UTC)
Or can't decide on a title so you give it a name that sounds like it's about a small town football coach or some shit.
indignantindigo 23rd-Apr-2012 04:17 pm (UTC)
Actually a LOT of people who saw the movie loved it. I think they screwed up by totally mismarketing it entirely.
ts231 23rd-Apr-2012 05:23 pm (UTC)
exactly, the marketing for john carter was a hot ass mess. thankfully they fired the head of marketing (who also wasn't experienced in film) in january, but stanton/whoever was involved in the naming of the film should have known it was dumb to make such a generic title to broaden their audience. it may have (debatably) worked for tangled, but at least people knew what that movie was about.
interpol15 23rd-Apr-2012 06:36 pm (UTC)
I loved the movie, and am a huge fan of the books, which have had such great affects on much of modern scifi, but dear god, I had no goddamn idea that the movie even existed until about a month before release.

They could have done so much better.
bliting 23rd-Apr-2012 04:07 pm (UTC)
Image and video hosting by TinyPic
destructo_ray 23rd-Apr-2012 04:09 pm (UTC)
MTE, Senor Bale.
satin999 23rd-Apr-2012 04:10 pm (UTC)
a+
snuffyqui45 23rd-Apr-2012 04:11 pm (UTC)
LOL MTE
keziah42 23rd-Apr-2012 04:24 pm (UTC)
This always has my dying, it's the funniest thing.
ghostsaddle 23rd-Apr-2012 04:35 pm (UTC)
i love this gif more and more every time i see it
audrey_za 23rd-Apr-2012 04:41 pm (UTC)
Pretty much!
loveackshuly 23rd-Apr-2012 04:45 pm (UTC)
Perfect.
youbeboy 23rd-Apr-2012 06:39 pm (UTC)
This gif always makes me laugh.
neverletgo 23rd-Apr-2012 04:09 pm (UTC)
FAILLL.

satin999 23rd-Apr-2012 04:10 pm (UTC)
d'aww
neverletgo 23rd-Apr-2012 04:21 pm (UTC)
Poor lil' qt pie!
chuckisfuckis 23rd-Apr-2012 04:20 pm (UTC)
OMG!! Let me hug that puppy D:
iamglory 23rd-Apr-2012 04:33 pm (UTC)
That poor dog put EVERYTHING they had into to try to make that jump!
ghostsaddle 23rd-Apr-2012 04:36 pm (UTC)
awwww babbyyyy
cuzilubb 23rd-Apr-2012 04:44 pm (UTC)
lol Awwww why puppy, whyyy? You ain't no Collie.
spillvegas 23rd-Apr-2012 04:10 pm (UTC)
they seriously need to hire some people like us who can accurately predict flops

like right when the trailer for this came out we were all saying flop
spoiled_water 23rd-Apr-2012 04:12 pm (UTC)
iawtc
cscgrl4life 23rd-Apr-2012 04:12 pm (UTC)
We need to be in the pitch meetings because who honestly thought this would be a marketable and good idea for Disney?
nuravecunt 23rd-Apr-2012 04:13 pm (UTC)
mte. it looked like another Prince of Persia. both flopped.
snuffyqui45 23rd-Apr-2012 04:13 pm (UTC)
Seriously.

We should've been there to tell them about that flop-ass title.
inboots 23rd-Apr-2012 04:18 pm (UTC)
conversely, a considerable amount of us were also saying "flop" about the hunger games

and thor
winonaforever 23rd-Apr-2012 04:24 pm (UTC)
Mte. Ontd doesn't have a good track record to predict flops at all.
chikntetrazzini 23rd-Apr-2012 04:45 pm (UTC)
I didn't see a single person on ONTD call The Hunger Games a flop before it came out.
demented_21 23rd-Apr-2012 04:50 pm (UTC)
tbh a lot of people "predict" flops because of stan-related reasons, they don't mean it. I think when ONTD is objective (like for John Carter, because no1curr about that movie or its stars) it's pretty spot on.
ellaellaeheheh 23rd-Apr-2012 06:37 pm (UTC)
and avatar
loosedefense 24th-Apr-2012 05:17 pm (UTC)
wat? Everyone knew The Hunger Games was going to smash. It had a book that was a massive hit with the YA crowd just like Harry Potter and Twilight. There was no way in hell it was going to fail.

Thor deserved to flop though. People just went to see it because they knew they had to to keep up with the Avengers hype.
andres01234 23rd-Apr-2012 04:19 pm (UTC)
ONTD needs to be in charge of Disney
vainandbitter 23rd-Apr-2012 04:19 pm (UTC)
Idk many of us thought Avatar would flop and I think Spiderman looks like it should fail
iamglory 23rd-Apr-2012 04:34 pm (UTC)
IAWTC
spacebound09 23rd-Apr-2012 04:46 pm (UTC)
people here predict everything to flop tho (unless it's a small award-baity movie)
xpirate_queenx 23rd-Apr-2012 05:16 pm (UTC)
I've often considered Disney Marketing Exec as a serious career choice. I bet Walt is spinning in his grave over what they've done to his company and name.
redleigh86 23rd-Apr-2012 06:59 pm (UTC)
No kidding. They should poll movie theater employees too (at least those who've worked at a movie theater for years), because after just a couple of years I (and my coworkers and managers) were able to accurately predict every flop, hit, and mediocre film, and about how much they would make and how long they'd stay in theaters. Seriously, the newbies who started there would always be amazed by the accuracy: "you're all like oracles or something!"

No, we just see the patterns and demographics that, apparently, executives ignore :/

Granted that sort of thing can be applied to a number of industries, but still lol
electrozombie 24th-Apr-2012 02:46 pm (UTC)
ia
wits 23rd-Apr-2012 04:12 pm (UTC)
maybe they should stop making movies about mars
dropdeadpirate 23rd-Apr-2012 04:16 pm (UTC)
ia
diamond_dust06 23rd-Apr-2012 04:19 pm (UTC)
Haha, mte.
andthenwevomit 23rd-Apr-2012 04:21 pm (UTC)
LOL right?

but bow to Mars Attacks!
awwwpeas 25th-Apr-2012 03:23 am (UTC)
haha yes!
iamglory 23rd-Apr-2012 04:34 pm (UTC)
ALL OF THIS!!! Mars needs Moms was horrific!
swiirl 23rd-Apr-2012 04:13 pm (UTC)
im sorry if this is a stupid question.. but. if hes the boss of the whole company then.. who gets to fire him? *genuinely pondering*
snuffyqui45 23rd-Apr-2012 04:14 pm (UTC)
Shareholders?

They can force people out. At least that's what Batman taught me.
wits 23rd-Apr-2012 04:15 pm (UTC)
bob iger is technically in charge of him, as he is the co-chairman and ceo

like rich ross was the film chief, but iger is the president of the whole company

Edited at 2012-04-23 04:16 pm (UTC)
morganzola 23rd-Apr-2012 04:16 pm (UTC)
Unless you own your company outright like a small business, there are things put in place to prevent a collapse of business such as a board of directors, investors having a say because of their stock in the company, etc.
iamglory 23rd-Apr-2012 04:36 pm (UTC)
He was just in charge of their film development department. Plus it was shareholders. You really need to watch Y&R to understand a corporate world...it's how i learned so much. I'm not sure if this is sarcasm or not.
cickiz 23rd-Apr-2012 04:51 pm (UTC)
lol i totally understand this comment
awwwpeas 25th-Apr-2012 03:25 am (UTC)
lol i haven't thoiught about that way but you're right! all the random business knowledge i had growing up was probably from watching y&r! oh newman enterprises and jabot cosmetics! you made wanting to be a businesslady so glamourous and sexy :)
black_swan87 23rd-Apr-2012 04:15 pm (UTC)
i wonder how far into the production of a terrible movie do they know it's terrible
iamglory 23rd-Apr-2012 04:36 pm (UTC)
Sadly, I don't think to execs know until money comes in. I would know by the time I read the script!
victory_goddess 23rd-Apr-2012 05:53 pm (UTC)
A lot sooner than they let on to, but plenty of shitty movies still do well at the box office.
dropdeadpirate 23rd-Apr-2012 04:15 pm (UTC)
Bring back vmk tbh. >:[
semalina 23rd-Apr-2012 04:16 pm (UTC)
what the hell was this movie? am i too old to know who the hell john cater is?
indignantindigo 23rd-Apr-2012 04:20 pm (UTC)
Too young.*

He's a character from novels that were written in the 1900s. My dad and grandfather read them.
semalina 23rd-Apr-2012 04:33 pm (UTC)
obviously didn't stand the test of time lol
sekhmet2 23rd-Apr-2012 04:22 pm (UTC)
Probably too young; it was based on an Edgar Rice Burroughs book written back in the early 1900s, and I think maybe had some comic books based on it too. Not sure of all the details, but it's an old story.

Edited at 2012-04-23 04:23 pm (UTC)
makahakat 23rd-Apr-2012 04:54 pm (UTC)
its apparently credited with being the granddaddy of sci-fi genre stuff. tbh when i watched the movie i saw a whole lot of shit that various sci-fi and fantasy series took from it. didnt realize until then though cause i never knew wtf john carter was. so i guess it spawned a bunch of stuff but got swallowed up by its predecessors
letmypidgeonsgo 23rd-Apr-2012 08:02 pm (UTC)
I still don't have the slightest idea what that was about.
one_hoopy_frood 23rd-Apr-2012 04:16 pm (UTC)
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
andres01234 23rd-Apr-2012 04:17 pm (UTC)
Here's an idea... GO BACK TO 2D ANIMATION YOU FUCKERS! And stop with all the "if the lead is a princess then it's going to flop" shit!
kissoffools 23rd-Apr-2012 04:27 pm (UTC)
I don't understand the idea that women/girls won't pay money for media created for them. Um, hello, Twilight?! (Not that Twilight is quality by any means, but it really should prove that if you've got a female fanbase backing you, you're unstoppable.) Besides, look how much princess merch has been sold over the years. Ridiculous to think that it isn't marketable so long as it's good quality.
bellonia 23rd-Apr-2012 04:51 pm (UTC)
Someone posted the top ten grossing films (Idr the timeline, if it was of all time with inflation or without inflation), and it was like four Harry Potter movies, three of the Twilight films, and the Hunger Games.
mickeymouse 23rd-Apr-2012 04:41 pm (UTC)
iawtc
xpirate_queenx 23rd-Apr-2012 05:19 pm (UTC)
They need someone in charge who understands Walt Disney's creed of not ballsing it up by trying too hard appeal to a certain demographic. Just tell a story and entertain. If you build it, they will come etc etc
anolinde 23rd-Apr-2012 09:38 pm (UTC)
+10000000000000
sandstorm 23rd-Apr-2012 09:53 pm (UTC)
I thought they were planning to make more 2D movies every three years or so?

I don't recall how well Winnie the Pooh did, but PATF was apparently a commercial sleeper (& Not that good).
Page 1 of 5
<<[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] >>
This page was loaded May 22nd 2013, 12:30 pm GMT.