Dimension

AwallaceUNC · Post by **AwallaceUNC** » Fri Apr 16, 2004 12:12 am

Is Dimension a subsidiary of Touchstone or Miramax? Or does it stand alone?

-Aaron

MickeyMousePal · Post by **MickeyMousePal** » Fri Apr 16, 2004 12:43 am

I'm not sure but I think Dimension Film is under Miramax Films. Dimension Film and Miramax Films are merge together. But Mirarmax is the top boss.
Touchstone is a different company.

But all three are under Buena Vista and Disney Company.

I'm not 100% sure.

Loomis · Post by **Loomis** » Fri Apr 16, 2004 1:48 am

If you go to the old www.dimensionfilms.com/ site, it redirects you automatically to the Miramax site...

So yes - the former is a subsidiary of the latter. I think it was created specifcally to specialize in horror or science fiction films (films that might require R or higher ratings). It was an attempt for Disney to distance themselves from the more "violent" films.

In other words...
Dimension is the genre division of Miramax.

goofystitch · Post by **goofystitch** » Fri Apr 16, 2004 9:36 am

I find the history of Dimension pretty interesting. They did start out as mostly horror, until "Spy Kids." I wonder why Miramax didn't move this to their label. I am assuming that Miramax has the same power over Dimension that Disney has over Touchstone and Hollywood Pictures, which is the ability to switch movies around labels. Miramax seems to really want to get into the family entertainment business, (They just released "Ella Enchanted" and the DTV "Tom Thumb and Thumbelina) so why didn't they release the hugely succesful Spy Kids films?

disneyfella · Post by **disneyfella** » Fri Apr 16, 2004 10:38 am

the creator of the spy kids films, robert rodriguez, did all of his from dusk till dawn films with dimension films. my guess is that he said the only way he's making these movies would be if he gets to work with the studio he knows so well. i dunno.

2099net · Post by **2099net** » Fri Apr 16, 2004 1:16 pm

I think its actually that Dimension was set up to seperate Miramax's artsy Oscar® friendly films from trashy, popcorn only flicks.

I think Dimension has the home of the Spy Kids movies because they wouldn't really fit with Miramax's image. (That said, Comic Book: The Movie was Miramax and is even more "trashy").

Just Myself · Post by **Just Myself** » Fri Apr 16, 2004 2:19 pm

goofystitch wrote:Miramax seems to really want to get into the family entertainment business, (They just released "Ella Enchanted" and the DTV "Tom Thumb and Thumbelina) so why didn't they release the hugely succesful Spy Kids films?

They also released Bionicle: Mask of Light, which obviously was popular because it's spawning two sequels, with one of them being a theatrical release.

Back to Dimension. I think Quentin Tarintino's films should be Dimesion, since Dimension is mainly for the very dark and violent Disney films, and since Tarintino's films are probably the most violent Disney films out there, they should be Dimension.

Speaking of which, what were the first Touchstone, Miramax and Dimension films?

Captain Hook · Post by **Captain Hook** » Fri Apr 16, 2004 2:19 pm

2099net wrote:I think its actually that Dimension was set up to seperate Miramax's artsy Oscar® friendly films from trashy, popcorn only flicks.

I think Dimension has the home of the Spy Kids movies because they wouldn't really fit with Miramax's image. (That said, Comic Book: The Movie was Miramax and is even more "trashy").

Ella Enchanted was a popcorn only flick, in my humble opinion, and will NEVER be an artsy film. Also, what about Kill Bill? That didn't seem too much like an Oscar® award winning film from what I've heard about it.

So here's my question for you all. What benefits does Disney get from having Miramax when they don't really own them? Is it like Pixar where they get profits and distribution rights? And, quite frankly, how does Buena Vista fit into the picture?

2099net · Post by **2099net** » Fri Apr 16, 2004 3:06 pm

The benefit is Disney invested in ownership of a successful company, and continues to benefit financially from their films.

Miramax benefits as they got a lump sum do develop their business plus under the terms of the investment, complete artistic control and a share of the company's profits. They needed to money to expand to meet their ambitions.

You'll see numerous stories these days about Miramax wanting to go independent from Disney and, while some people may blame Eisner, the real reason is, like Pixar, they've benefited from Disney's money and now have enough money of their own to survive without Disney.

goofystitch · Post by **goofystitch** » Fri Apr 16, 2004 4:12 pm

Secret Disney Man wrote:

Back to Dimension. I think Quentin Tarintino's films should be Dimesion, since Dimension is mainly for the very dark and violent Disney films, and since Tarintino's films are probably the most violent Disney films out there, they should be Dimension.

I know that Tarentino's films are pretty violent, but they are also artsy. I just got back from seeing "Kill Bill vol. 2" and it was pretty violent, but the movie is filmed in an artsy and unique way, almost like a kung-fu western.

AwallaceUNC · Post by **AwallaceUNC** » Fri Apr 16, 2004 5:19 pm

Secret Disney Man wrote:
Speaking of which, what were the first Touchstone, Miramax and Dimension films?

Not sure about the other 2, but I believe Touchstone's first was "Splash."

Can Disney switch movies from the Miramax label as well? It seems like Miramax is a bit more independent than the others.

Also, why did Disney make both Touchstone and Hollywood? What's the point of having 2?

-Aaron

Loomis · Post by **Loomis** » Fri Apr 16, 2004 8:08 pm

goofystitch wrote:Secret Disney Man wrote:

Back to Dimension. I think Quentin Tarintino's films should be Dimesion, since Dimension is mainly for the very dark and violent Disney films, and since Tarintino's films are probably the most violent Disney films out there, they should be Dimension.
I know that Tarentino's films are pretty violent, but they are also artsy. I just got back from seeing "Kill Bill vol. 2" and it was pretty violent, but the movie is filmed in an artsy and unique way, almost like a kung-fu western.

I think this is just indicative of the fact that there is less of a distinction now between "arthouse" and "mainstream" than there was when Miramax was first started.

Maybe there is more so in the US, but certainly here there is very little distinction. We do have a few "arthouse cinemas", but really - I think audiences will go to whatever looks good.

2099net · Post by **2099net** » Sat Apr 17, 2004 3:25 am

awallaceunc wrote:
Secret Disney Man wrote:
Speaking of which, what were the first Touchstone, Miramax and Dimension films?
Not sure about the other 2, but I believe Touchstone's first was "Splash."

Can Disney switch movies from the Miramax label as well? It seems like Miramax is a bit more independent than the others.

No Miramax is completely independent. In fact, the Wienstiens may still own 51% of the company giving them control.

awallaceunc wrote:Also, why did Disney make both Touchstone and Hollywood? What's the point of having 2?

I think Hollywood was set up after Touchstone specifically for Aracnophobia, so initially it may have had something to do with the co-production with Steven Speilberg's Amblin Entertainment initially.

AwallaceUNC · Post by **AwallaceUNC** » Sat Apr 17, 2004 11:48 am

Thanks, Net.

2099net wrote: No Miramax is completely independent. In fact, the Wienstiens may still own 51% of the company giving them control.

I keep hearing "Eisner should fire Wienstien," would he be able to do that, then. I've even read speculation about it in newspapers and what not, and they always refer to it as "Disney-Miramax" which leads me to think maybe Disney owns 50 or 51% but Miramax still has some sort of independence stipulation or something. Just speculation, though, as I really don't know for sure.

-Aaron

2099net · Post by **2099net** » Sat Apr 17, 2004 12:43 pm

Well, if you want the long version:

http://film.guardian.co.uk/Feature_Stor ... 85,00.html

Two months after the Oscars, in May 1993, Disney paid a reported $60 million for the company. It was a deal which made the Weinsteins rich men and left them in control of the business, with, supposedly, an unprecedented degree of autonomy.

I notice the word "supposedly" in there. But as far as I know, the deal was Disney would buy Miramax as an ongoing concern and not have any ability to dictate policy to Miramax.

Miramax now releases about 30 films a year in the US. In Britain, Disney's Buena Vista company has distribution rights, but seems unable to keep up. Miramax has just concluded a deal with Film Four, giving Miramax a second outlet and Film Four some prestige American products.

I find the above quote interesting. Buena Visa cannot keep up? Of course, it's a few years old now.

also check out:

Harvey Weinstein Biography
http://www.hollywood.com/celebs/bio/celeb/1676133

Bob Weinstein Biography
http://www.hollywood.com/celebs/bio/celeb/1674117

The Weinstein Brothers
http://slate.msn.com/id/1874/

AwallaceUNC · Post by **AwallaceUNC** » Sat Apr 17, 2004 1:20 pm

GREAT info! Thanks a lot, and even those excerpts clear up a lot... I'll get to reading up on these. Thanks.

-Aaron

Disney Guru · Post by **Disney Guru** » Sat Apr 17, 2004 1:58 pm

Yeah thanks you guys I was interested in that to.

You guys are all grrrrrrrrrrrrand!

Keep up the good work ya'll.

Captain Hook · Post by **Captain Hook** » Sat Apr 17, 2004 4:13 pm

Wow, you guys are so smart, I feel dumb! Anyway, thanks for all the information, I think it's finally becoming clear the relationships between the company!

Disney Guru · Post by **Disney Guru** » Sat Apr 17, 2004 4:58 pm

Yes whenever you have a problem come on down to Ultimate Disney and we will try to help you as much as we can!

DVDizzy Forum

Latest Movie Reviews

🎬 DVDizzy Top Stories️️

Dimension

Dimension

Info

DIMENSIONS