Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Businesses Movies

Amazon Buys MGM, Studio Behind James Bond, for $8.45 Billion (variety.com) 121

James Bond has a new home: Amazon and MGM announced a definitive merger agreement under which Amazon will acquire MGM for $8.45 billion. From a report: MGM, founded in 1924, complements Amazon Studios, which has primarily focused on producing TV programming, the companies said. Amazon will help "preserve MGM's heritage and catalog of films," and provide customers with greater access to these existing works, the companies said. For Amazon, snapping up MGM -- which has more than 4,000 movies and 17,000 TV shows in its catalog -- is a way to supercharge its Prime Video service with a slew of well-known entertainment properties. In addition, Amazon is anticipating being able to tap into Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer properties like the Pink Panther, Rocky, and, yes, the 007 franchises for new originals.

"The real financial value behind this deal is the treasure trove of [intellectual property] in the deep catalog that we plan to reimagine and develop together with MGM's talented team," Mike Hopkins, senior VP of Prime Video and Amazon Studios, said in announcing the deal. "It's very exciting and provides so many opportunities for high-quality storytelling." Hopkins noted that MGM productions collectively have won more than 180 Oscars and 100 Emmys. The studio has roughly 800 employees globally.

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Amazon Buys MGM, Studio Behind James Bond, for $8.45 Billion

Comments Filter:
  • by trevize42 ( 1086179 ) on Wednesday May 26, 2021 @09:47AM (#61423930)
    SG-1 please Amazon!
    • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      Oh, we can dream... They should do something with that property, but I'm not convinced Amazon will. They have a mixed record on sci-fi stuff. The Boys is going well but they cancelled The Tick.

      • Lol, Pink Panther/Rocky/007, couldn't care less for those. Yes Stargate Please!

        Funny thing, like 2-3 months ago I rewatched SG1 on Netflix, then really wanted to rewatch Atlantis and Universe, but it wasn't available to stream anywhere, legally at least. So I figured I'd buy box set with all 3 from Amazon on DVD. Haven't watched anything on DVD in many years, but looks like my masterplan has worked. I'll take all the credit :)

      • by jwhyche ( 6192 )

        The Tick never survives. There have been several attempts to bring it to tv. Never works out. It's like its cursed.

        I would love to see more StarGate. Not Universe! To me, SG-1 and SG-A are a couple of good scifi shows that have held up over the years. Others being old Star Trek, and old Doctor Who, Tom Baker era.

        I tried to watch Babylon 5 the other day. My brain just couldn't get into it. It's not bad, just didn't age well. Not true with SG-1. It was a great show that didn't take itself to

        • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

          I would have loved another five seasons of Universe.

          • by EvilSS ( 557649 )

            I would have loved another five seasons of Universe.

            I think the only hope Universe fans have is if they invent a AI that can ingest old episodes along with episodes of similar shows and create new ones digitally. So for Universe they could train it with the existing episodes of Universe along with Melrose Place to help it get the new plots correct.

            • by crow ( 16139 )

              That AI is a long ways away, but we should take it incrementally. We could easily have an AI that trains on a bunch of episodes to learn the characters, and then replaces new actors with old actors, including all their mannerisms. The next step after that is to skip needing a new actor to model them on. At that point, they can make live-action versions of things like Star Trek: The Animated Series as well as audio shows like the Big Finish Doctor Who stories (as well as reconstruct the lost episodes).

              Get

          • by jwhyche ( 6192 )

            Several things I loved about SG-1.

            The first being the light heartedness of the whole show. There where serous episodes, of course, but really the show didn't take itself to seriously. There was lots of humor and poking fun at itself in several episodes.

            The second thing I love was we where the good guys. The Stargate teams I mean. Even after we brought in the Chinese and the Russians, we where still the good guys. There was that distrust to be had between the nationalities but in the end, we where

            • Completely agree. There were no good guys in SGU. They were all either completely broken or weak. That works when you have a few characters that fit that mold but not when it's the bulk. Especially when you are expanding on a franchise like stargate

              The tone was also not fitting at all for a stargate show. If the creators wanted to try something different, they should have tried to start a new franchise.

              I'd also feel they saw the bleakness and despair of BSG and wanted to copy it to show they could writ

          • by crow ( 16139 )

            It was the weakest of the shows, but it really needed one more season to wrap up nicely. It would be nice if shows with a continuing storyline had a contract that gave them a two-hour TV movie if the series isn't renewed so that they could at least tie up the main loose ends.

          • by aitikin ( 909209 )

            I would have loved another five seasons of Universe.

            Universe just found its compelling footing for me when it got canned. Didn't help that "sy-fy" seemed to be bouncing it all over the schedule so they could air more wrestling events and my work schedule was so crazy variable. I remember watching sporadically and starting to really like the characters and then hearing news that it was cancelled.

            I felt like it had the potential to give a Battlestar feel, but, by the time it came to fruition, the powers that be had decidedly moved away from doing a new compe

        • It was a great show that didn't take itself to seriously.

          Carter! I can see my house!!!

        • I tried to watch Babylon 5 the other day. My brain just couldn't get into it. It's not bad, just didn't age well.

          The first season could be a bit rough. But the same could be said of STTNG. And it didn't age well either. I watched B5 start to finish a year ago and watched STTNG, Voyager, Enterprise and am watching DS9 currently. B5 aged better than STTNG and was a better show than DS9 in all honesty. Voyager is a bit annoying when you watch a bunch of episodes in a row as they seem to have given up on varying the technobabble. "reroute power to structural integrity" would be a good drinking game when watching it.

    • +1, with feeling!

    • No, please don't mess with Stargate SG1, because if they do they'll probably shit it up like CBS/Viacom/Paramount has done with Star Trek, and then I'd have to go strangle Bezos to death with my bare hands, having been pushed too far one too many times. :-(
      • by irving47 ( 73147 )

        Well, the good news on that is that the guy running the shows (Brad Wright) has already been working on a new series and he's in charge of it, so unless they yank the whole thing away from him, we should see more of what we like instead of Bezos PC sycophants woking it up.

    • by e3m4n ( 947977 )
      re-runs or new eps? Richard Dean Anderson is getting way too old, the farscape kid (ben browder) made for a terrible replacement, and the storyline ran its course to the point it went a couple seasons too long. Thats sort of why they went SG-atlantis, just so they could go to another galaxy and have a different set of bad guys.
      • by jwhyche ( 6192 )

        Richard Dean Anderson is getting way too old, the farscape kid (ben browder) made for a terrible replacement,

        I would like to see more SG episodes but not SG-1. That show is over, let it rest. Take the idea and attitude SG-1 and come up with a new show.

        RDA was the heart and soul of SG-1. The way he played off Christopher Judge as the straight man was perfect. Ben Browder's acting style worked great in Farscape, but didn't translate well in to SG-1. It just didn't fit in well with the rest of the cast that had been in their roles for 8 years. He had a few moments, but most of the interaction was forced i

        • by cusco ( 717999 )

          You're probably right, but at least bring back Claudia Black. She was the only reason that I ever watched 'Pitch Black', and the bastards killed her off in the first 20 minutes.

    • by crow ( 16139 )

      I think what we're most likely to get is completely new version. If they do it right, it will be awesome.

      Maybe they need to redo MacGyver first. Oh, wait, they already did that, so they have an actor. (I just found out about the new series when looking it up for this post; I hope it's not horrible.)

    • by stikves ( 127823 )

      I fear we might get more SG-Universe instead of SG-1.

      (Yes, I know some people really liked Universe, and good for them. But in the SG-1 fandom, we can at least call it divisive).

  • by Bigbutt ( 65939 ) on Wednesday May 26, 2021 @09:49AM (#61423946) Homepage Journal

    Well, Ted Turner bought MGM back in the 80's and sold it back but kept the IP. So I'm not sure how much IP is actually available to Amazon. Certainly anything created after 1986 I guess.

    [John]

    • by Guspaz ( 556486 )

      It's not clear to me exactly how that works. Turner supposedly bought the rights to all the pre-1986 films, but MGM still has ownership of the pre-1986 Bond films, despite them having owned them since 1981 when they bought UA.

      Between the post-1986 films, and the stuff that MGM seems to have kept in spite of the buyout, it seems to me that MGM has the lion's share of valuable MGM content.

      • Re: (Score:1, Flamebait)

        by cayenne8 ( 626475 )
        I wonder if there's any chance the new owners will stop trying to make "woke" Bond movies and bring him back closer to what he has always been as a character.
        • Re:Missing IP (Score:4, Insightful)

          by fropenn ( 1116699 ) on Wednesday May 26, 2021 @11:02AM (#61424284)
          The Bond of the movies, particularly the early Bond movies, is nothing like the Bond in the books. If you prefer the earlier Bond movies, that's fine, you are free to watch them any time you want. But modern audiences won't pay $15.50 to watch a dumb, helpless young girl be rescued over and over again by a rich, white middle-aged man. My wife doesn't want to watch that either, apparently.
          • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

            Bond used to be a male power fantasy, but he doesn't really work any more.

            • Bond used to be a male power fantasy, but he doesn't really work any more.

              That's where Movie Bond is different from Book Bond. Book Bond frequently has no idea what he's doing and no idea how he's going to do it.

              The books are, however, still pretty macho male dominant with the women as accessories. That didn't change.

              • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

                I enjoyed the BBC radio play versions, based on the books. As you say, very different to the movies.

          • I haven't read the books, but the old Bond movies certainly had style. Not only was the hero stylish, but the villains, too. Even a lot of the villain sidekicks ended up being iconic because of their style. But you can sell style only so many times before it gets old. Also, when these movies were new, our society was different. Damsel-in-distress kind of plots were acceptable, as well as female character names such as "Pussy Galore". Needless to say that didn't age well. However, if you take all this away,

      • by EvilSS ( 557649 )
        Bond's rights are more complicated than most of their other properties, being tangled up between MGM and Eon Productions. My guess would be that was the reason they were excluded from the Turner deal. Turner also probably didn't want to pony up for them. It probably would have doubled (or more) the cost of the deal to get them.
    • My IP is 192.168.0.1.
    • by e3m4n ( 947977 )
      Thats an oxymoron ;-)
  • by theshowmecanuck ( 703852 ) on Wednesday May 26, 2021 @09:53AM (#61423958) Journal
    Both Netflix and Amazon have way shittier content in Canada than in the USA because of licensing issues. Hopefully having a bigger library will give us a break north of the border. What content Amazon does produce is often (not all) really good, because they usually curate it well. Probably a good percentage higher than the Netflix throw it at the wall and see what sticks routine. But all the rest of the shit Amazon has in Canada is pretty brutal, and then for any kind of break they charge you more for their 'channels'. Just as bad as cable tv packages. I'm hoping that when the covid thing passes and more people go out again, they realize that paying for 10 streaming services is stupid and a bunch of those services die.
    • Is Canada one of those countries that says Netflix must have a certain percent of domestic production? That would certainly clobber tons of Hollywood junk just to pare it down to a mere 10x domestic production.

      • Stop Bill C-10 (Score:2, Informative)

        by Comboman ( 895500 )

        Is Canada one of those countries that says Netflix must have a certain percent of domestic production?

        Not yet, but the government is currently trying to pass just such a law (Bill C-10). It would mandate limits on non-Canadian content, tax all streaming services and even regulate social media feeds. If you are Canadian, take action now [openmedia.org]

    • by fermion ( 181285 )
      So this last bit is the key. In the long ago studios owned everything, actors, content, distribution. The US thought that was a bad idea, so broke up the studio system. The upshot for consumers is that studios had to compete on content to sell to theater and tv.

      We are back to the studio system in streaming. Although it started off innocently enough with Hulu, each studio now wants consumers to pay individually for their content. No one is going to sell to each other. So for Amazon not to die it has to

      • by EvilSS ( 557649 )
        The Paramount degree (recently vacated) covered film for quite a while and never covered all studios (only those party to it, the old majors). Some of the issues it addressed I don't see being a problem today. I doubt any major studio wants to be in the theater business in 2021. It's not exactly a growth market like it was back in then. The distribution issues, well, we already see those from Disney (not a party to the decree) even before it was rescinded. One thing it did was set limits on bundling requi
    • by Rhipf ( 525263 )

      I wouldn't count on this improving the situation. Part of the reason that Netfix/Amazon don't have the same content in Canada is that there is Canadian broadcaster that already holds the exclusive rights to that content. I guess the purchase of MGM will increase Amazon offerings in Canada that doesn't have a distribution deal in place though (but I would assume that is a rather limited amount of the MGM content).

    • by e3m4n ( 947977 )
      well CBS all access 'died' but it came back as Paramount+ at the exact same shitty price. It needs to be bundled.
  • by AndyKron ( 937105 ) on Wednesday May 26, 2021 @09:54AM (#61423972)
    It would be funny if people stopped watching movies now that we have real life clips of people doing incredibly stupid things to watch. And cats.
    • by Tablizer ( 95088 )

      if people stopped watching movies now that we have real life clips of people doing incredibly stupid things

      Shit, you found my selfies!

  • "The name's Bezos, Jeff Bezos."

    • by GoTeam ( 5042081 ) on Wednesday May 26, 2021 @10:07AM (#61424016)
      I'm pretty sure Bezos would the primary antagonist in a Bond film...
      • by 14erCleaner ( 745600 ) <FourteenerCleaner@yahoo.com> on Wednesday May 26, 2021 @11:41AM (#61424464) Homepage Journal
        He's already building his space fleet, and he's got the yacht and the hot helicopter-pilot girlfriend. All he needs is a secret base inside a volcano...
        • by necro81 ( 917438 )

          I'm pretty sure Bezos would the primary antagonist in a Bond film...

          He's already building his space fleet, and he's got the yacht and the hot helicopter-pilot girlfriend. All he needs is a secret base inside a volcano...

          What's to say he doesn't already? After all, it is a secret base.

        • He's already building his space fleet, and he's got the yacht and the hot helicopter-pilot girlfriend. All he needs is a secret base inside a volcano...

          Well, there is a comparison to be made between New Shepherd [spacenews.com] and Dr Evil's rocket.

        • And then there's his recent demand for $10 Billion from the US government [slashdot.org]. He'd really hate to see all those rockets shoot for the moon and fall well short, say in DC, NYC, Boston, etc...
      • I'm pretty sure Bezos would the primary antagonist in a Bond film...

        It would be hilarious if Jeff Bezos started overruling the producers and writers on future Bond films.

        "This guy you've cast as the villain, he's obviously just misunderstood! Can you make him more likable, maybe give him an Asian reporter girlfriend? And in the end he should win against Bond."

        • Idk man, his escape rocket is just going to land about 20 feet from where it started.

          But if Mr. Bean plays James Bond and Mike Myers plays Jeff Bezos, then I'm all for it.

      • by e3m4n ( 947977 )
        he's already a chrome-dome, just give him a cat with a diamond studded collar, have him pet it obsessively, and make him say "I'll get you gadget..." thats about what I think of his acting abilities.
  • This is where the real covid stimulus went. Trillions and trillions. We should claim equity. If we did, Wall Street would truly be public.

  • ... before James Bond, and Heaven-knows-how-many other IPs, go to live behind a potential streaming-only paywall.

    As someone who prefers to own my media, whether digital or tangible, and who'd rather support creators than pirate ... I really hope people start realizing the value of ownership before opportunities to own* films, music, shows, etc. go away entirely.

    *or, for the pedantic, "opportunities to license media for private home viewing/listening"

  • by crow ( 16139 ) on Wednesday May 26, 2021 @10:15AM (#61424058) Homepage Journal

    My fear is that if they get enough content to be really compelling, they may create a separate Prime Video subscription just like they did with Prime Music. I like this as a side benefit to our Prime membership, but I don't know that we would pay extra for the video content.

    • Agree. It's not just getting the content, but the money they've sunk into it that they need to get a return on.

  • by jfdavis668 ( 1414919 ) on Wednesday May 26, 2021 @10:20AM (#61424076)
    Still working on how to get it to smile.
  • Amazon has anti-trust still hanging over this so this deal is not a slam dunk yet.

    • by nadass ( 3963991 )

      Amazon has anti-trust still hanging over this so this deal is not a slam dunk yet.

      That's called "regulatory approval" which is a bucket term for conditions outside of every board's control, and is one of several considerations which must be met for the contract to be fully executed. The ink is drying, the terms are agreed upon, and thus is considered finalized. This is how contracts work.

      • by nadass ( 3963991 )
        Similarly, the finalized contract traditionally contains "break-up" clauses, sometimes punitive in nature. In other words, if either party re-negs... BOOM, penalty fee. If the govs places too many (or too many specific) conditions for approval (like spinning off an existing business, or excluding certain content), then BOOM, penalty fee. If MGM entertains a third-party's bid efforts (like a Saudi prince or the Chinese gov't cutting a fat cheque) and tells AMZ "no longer interested"... BOOM, penalty fee.
  • When internet based subscription streaming required hard to obtain technical expertise and infrastructure, the competitive edge went to Netflix, Amazon, and Google. The content creators and owners were content to license their content and get paid that way. But now Disney and Warner and the rest are standing up their own services and using their content libraries as the selling point. That left Netflix, Amazon, and Google with lower quality content that no one was rushing to fork over $15 a month to have

  • Great, but what we all really want to know is if this means we'll get new Stargate shows and movies!

  • I'm predicting the next Bond villain will be Elon Tusk (credit to "Rick and Morty").
  • James Bond was fun in the 60s. Now it's, er, rather dated. So, who cares? More reboots of reboots of reboots?

  • Bond is part owned by EON Productions [eon.co.uk], which actually have the right to make the films. MGM joint owns the copyrights.

    Wonder what happens to agreements with EON in this?
    • by PPH ( 736903 )

      MGM joint owns the copyrights.

      I.e. the distribution rights. Which is just to say that you have to cut MGM (and now Amazon) in on any deal to show Bond movies. Sort of like the way the mob owns certain regional markets.

      Sounds like a perfect fit for Amazon's business model.

      • by mccalli ( 323026 )
        Agreed but it also means Amazon/MGM can't act independently. They're going to need to come to an agreement with EON, something that given the values being talked about I imagine they already have done. Am curious as to what it might be though, there's no mention of anything that I can find.
  • by rsilvergun ( 571051 ) on Wednesday May 26, 2021 @12:33PM (#61424722)
    All this industry consolidation?
  • Amazon is at its best when isn't plowing old ground. The Man In The High Castle. The Underground Railroad. There are classics of the science fiction and fantasy genres that have never made it to film or video and deserve an airing. But there is something to said for trying something new. I have no desire to remain trapped in a time loop forever being drawn back into the world of Star Trek, Star Wars, Stargate and Dr Who.
  • Engulf and devour .. it's obviously an alien invasion .. they're already here! you're next [youtube.com]

"If it's not loud, it doesn't work!" -- Blank Reg, from "Max Headroom"

Working...