Cool News
Peter Jackson Officially Off THE HOBBIT?!
Harry here... Just got home from an evening out and got slapped with this news. WOW. I love New Line. I have a great relationship with many of the folks there at the Studio and honestly... I can't fathom this decision. I suppose it follows the same line of thinking that brought us MASK & DUMB & DUMBER sequels without the original talent, and I fear that in the end we'll see similar results. I can't imagine who they would want to go with or risk a series that already has brought in a Billion dollars each. It just doesn't make any sense. This is pretty much the surest way to fuck up the easiest 2 Billion dollar decision that any studio has ever blown. Unbelievable.
Hey, everyone. ”Moriarty” here.
We just got this heads-up from Michael Regina, the editor of the mighty-fine Tolkien fansite, The One Ring, and I think it pretty much speaks for itself.
I’ll just say that New Line will no doubt encounter a wave of resistance from fandom that will be difficult to overcome. I know that a big part of the reason I felt LORD OF THE RINGS worked overall was because of the creative team that brought it to the screen, and trying to do it without them is a dangerous proposition indeed:
Moments ago we received this email from Peter Jackson and his crew down in New Zealand, take a look.
It does not bode well for THE HOBBIT.
-
+ Expand All
-
and in sumation, FUCK.
-
oh no!
-
Talk about stupid decisions...
-
Fucking pricks steal money from PJ, refuse to have their records audited, then try to blackmail him. I hope the Hobbit sucks balls and tanks.
-
I don't know how much the money involved with this audit amounts to, but I can't imagine it's worth all this.
-
The LOTR movies weren't that good. Up yours Hobbit fans.
-
Simmons, stunning. Absolutely brilliant. You mean to say we go ahead with something we know will suck? Astonishing. You're promoted.
-
Though I'd rather see a film about the children of Hurin than a live action Hobbit.
-
That Uwe Boll has been brought in to make the movie.
-
...to declare the end of Middle Earth as we know it.
-
Just give PJ and Fran have their audit...even if you end up owing them some money it won't be nearly as much as a two-part HOBBIT film would make in worldwide boxoffice, DVD sales, merchandising, TV rights, etc. If you want to be rich and make your shareholdrs and bosses happy, make this movie with PJ at the helm. Any other HOBBIT movie would suck balls.
-
That's completely retarded...I really feel bad for whoever gets the job on the off chance that they'll actually do well, but will be hated anyway. I recently finished watching all the appendicies on the extended DVDs for the second time, and all that work that went into it...just won't be duplicated. Unbelievable.
-
New Line has been adding a $2 upcharge to every ticket sold for their movies. Theater owners can't charge more for this, so that means that they make no profit at all on the ticket prices. No other studio (including New Line's parent company) does this.
Greedy bastards. -
Fuck New Line. They want to slaughter the golden goose, so be it - I'll glad oblige by staying home.
-
Shame that probably doesn't change anything about this monumentally stupid decision.
-
No. That's not true! THATS IMPOSSIBLE!!! NOOOOOOAHHOOOO!!!!NOOO!!!!!!!
-
Goddamn bureaucratic fucking fuckers and their assfucking shitheaded idiotic numbnutted fucktarded egos. I mean... FUCK!
-
Without Wingnut, PJ and crew I doubt I will be able to make my self get excited about this. I can imagine that any of the cast from PJ's LOTR will be excited about this either. I hope everyone tells New Line to take a piss. And even more, I hope they listen to the fans. So here is a fan saying FUCK YOU NEW LINE!
-
...fuck the fucking fuckers.
-
these days, blockbuster films are such a crapshoot that essentially turning away someone who can pull off quality big budge films succesfully is sheer idiocy............New Line Seals their own fate, because peter has been "the greater part of the strength native to them at the beginning"
-
Just a fool's hope.
-
First the Halo movie crumbles, now the Hobbit is being wrestled away by the Studios... goes to show, in this business you can't be too successful, and not still get fucked over by the studio system.
-
Now Michael Bay can finally be brought on to "fix" this francise. MCMLXXVI rejoice!!
-
The fans aren't going to stand for this. I just got done watching the LOTR movies over this weekend, and started jonesing for a Hobbit movie again (my fave novel) and I come online to this nonsense. Giving PJ the reigns again is a done deal, license to print money. No giving it to him, some new guy's gotta start from scratch and it's going to be some spit out Hollywood bullshit that'll try to grab some cash using the name alone. FUCK YOU NEWLINE!!!!!!!! ALL YOU WERE WAS FUCKING FREDDY KREUGER SEQUELS BEFORE PJ AND LOTR!!!! YOU ARE STABBING YOURSELVES IN THE BACK AND FUCKING OVER THE FANS!! ASSHOLES!!!
-
And let this fucking lawsuit be "resolved"...
-
Brett Ratner just sat up, his Spidey Sense tingling like crazy.
-
Believe me, New Line may say they are "out" to other directors, but it's all to make PJ buckle. The fact is, the star of The Hobbit is Bilbo znd Gollum -- there is no way in hell that Andy Serkis will play Gollum w/o PJ and w/o Serkis, this movie will be a surefire bomb. His Gollum is what we all are expecting and want to see in The Hobbit and trying another actor in a role that was created so specifically will not work. PJ was smart to come out with his "explanation" and I expect a resolution of their dispute quickly since New Line can't risk 100's of millions on The Hobbit (which is linked to LOTR) and have the fans rebel against it. It's such a bad move to try to make the movies w/o PJ that only a Hollwyood studio could be dumb enough to try it....still, I don't think they will risk a tentpole franchise over accounting differences. This isn't over.
-
Yes, his work on LOTR was good, but King Kong was not so much. Maybe its time for Jackson to step away from Middle Earth and let somebody else take a crack at it.
-
Give Pete Jackson his fucking money!!!! Don't fuck this up for us. Do it for the children!!!!!
-
that one of the best trilogies of our time looked like getting so close to becoming two of the best trilogies of our time... are we gonna have to go through the nervousness about the filmmakers pulling it off again? Why can't we just get to relax and look forward to a movie for once. Why new line why!? Between this and the son of the mask New Line has made two of the worst decisions this century. And they started out so wel.....
-
This is very depressing news. Very depressing but honestly, not surprising. Yet another example of capitalism and greed stifling creativity (and ultimately joy). Man this sucks. I'll tell you though... Jackson is the man. I just posted the other day on how much respect I have for him and his crew. Hey, Peter... if you're reading this- hold your head man. You'll always get mad love and props from real fans. Peace. Now, I just hope whoever gets to make these films will do a decent job. But honestly, I'm not optimistic. What Jackson and his team created with LOTR was special and timeless. I just don't see someone else coming in and duplicating the magic in that arena/ world that Jackson and Co did. Peace.
-
i'd personally rather see jackson work on new projects anyway. with the LOTR trilogy and king kong already under his belt, he has the potential to be his generation's spielberg.
-
PJ will make the movie. He is just using his leverage. New Line tried to do the same, but PJ smacked them in the face and unleashed the fans.
-
You really think anyone's gonna go see "The Hobbit" with a totally different director, different Gandalf, different Gollum and when they make the prequel part of the back-to-back (an idea that I still think sorta sucks ass, just make The Hobbit and be done with it) a different Aragorn, different Legolas, different Elrond, different Saruman?
Right.
Because I bet you anything NONE of the other actors will return without Peter at the helm. And I bet Peter KNOWS this. The public probably won't go for these flicks sans Jackson and crew, so he potentially has them pretty much over a barrel if they want decent product with which to make money. Especially if this letter creates as many ripples in the pond that it might once the entertainment sites, magazines, and news services pick this up. The negative publicity and genuine disappointment with the studio should be pretty large
If it's negotiation, it's pretty shrewd negotiation. Whether it WORKS, who knows. It could be just baldfaced honesty and that's that
What this really makes me wonder is just HOW MUCH MONEY New Line screwed Jackson over that they're willing to flush something as sure-fire as "The Hobbit" instead of just paying him what they're supposed to. -
Damn you michael bay.
In all seriousness this is really monumentally unfortunate, not least of all because another director is going to be given a chance by fans of LOTR. -
Can I just say that the management of New Line are fucking inept? Stupid motherfuckers. Fucking cocksuckers and carpet munchers. Oh well, New Line will take it in the ass when Uwe Boll signs on and the movie makes about $50 in the theaters.
-
Let's face it, the only way to faithfully adapt The Hobbit would be to make one film. Yes, just ONE film. But no, the whores at MGM and New Line want to milk it for two movies (which inevitably would have become a trilogy at some point). They'd scrimp unused shit from the LOTR appendices, Unfinished Tales, The Silmarillion, Tolkien's notes, etc, etc, load it up with filler and serve it to us as a prequel trilogy. Does anybody really want to see Tolkien's masterpiece bastardized like that? With the potential profits at stake, there's no way the studios would remain faithful to this short, simple novel with just one movie like they should. If you think Lucas sold out with the Star Wars prequels, just wait and see how LOTR is going to get raped.
-
Fucking fuckers.
-
they go and pull this shit. If every fan who wants to see a PJ Hobbit wrote, not emailed, a letter asking them to settle things and wait for the man to do his thing someone might listen. There must be, what? Several million of us? You just have to pray that they haven't put the guy off. Come on New Line, you have the money to spare. I'd rather wait 10 years to see one 3 hour Hobbit movie By Peter Jackson, than have it done and released in 2008 by someone like Brett Ratner.
-
shut yer red pie-hole- if capitalism had anything to with New Line's decicion, they would have given Peter jackson what he wanted and allowed him & his crew to deliver a movie that would have easily made the studio a profit several times over. Give credit for shitty, stupid decisions where they are due- assholes with bad ideas. I can't imagine who else they could find to succesfully adapt the Hobbit- maybe Ralph Bashki?
-
I'd like to say that I'd definitely boycott both movies if New Line makes them without Jackson, but really it depends on how faithful they are to Jackson's vision of Middle Earth and if they use the same actors, etc. Still, I can't imagine that anyone else would be as succesful as Jackson and co.
-
FUCK PRIDE! New Line upper enchelon hoe heads are gonna roll on this one.
-
For the love of Middle Earth, don't let it be Brett Ratner! I will chain myself to New Line's gates if they try to pull an X3.
-
I couldn't imagine anyone other than PJ doing the Hobbit, but can't help but agree with a couple above posters that it should be one movie. Trying to stretch it further would make it like the last two matrix movies. ewww.
-
Peter Jackson MADE New Line. The house that Freddy Build was all but dead before this. Figures. The last time New Line fucked us this hrd was when they pulled out of the Twin Peaks DVD with David Lynch's Deleted Scenes in 2001.
Eat Shit New Line. I'm done with your crap.
-
Anybody have an address for New Line so we can write and complain?
-
Obviously everyone wants to make money on this venture, from PJ to New Line. But my comment was only to show how greed (obviously at play if there is an irreconcilable dispute over money between PJ and New Line) will presumably get in the way of us (the fans) seeing a Jackson version of The Hobbit. You are right playahatersball for citing "stupid decisions" being made in this situation. I only ask what is the source of these stupid decisions? Obviously it's over money. It's greed. It's greed when despite all the money made (and to be made) fair settlements can't be arranged. So yeah capitalism- an accumulation policy that fights over wealth and subordinates everything else (in this case a Jackson version of The Hobbit) for the sake of profit motive. That's my point. Again, I (maybe ignorantly and prematurely) side with Jackson over New Line. PJ is my boy and shrewed business tactic or not (i.e.- he really is getting screwed), I hope he gets his fair share of whatever.
-
...Jackson may or may not end up at the helm. But this announcement, and the phone call that New Line was going to seek other directors both represent negotiating tactics. Here are the three most likely eventual outcomes, in order: 1. A deal is struck and Jackson directs. 2. The film(s) are not made in the immediate future. 3. Someone else is brought on board to make them. Cause for concern here, but not panic. Mmmm...maybe somehwere in between those two.
-
"Peter Jackson Officially Off the Habit" at first.
Rampant heroin abuse would probably explain why he went from looking like Guillermo del Toro to Nick Cave (after not sleeping for a month) in about a week.
But Mori's right, not just Jackson, but the whole of Weta breathed live into those Rings flicks, life that I don't think anyone, even IL&M, would be able to match. -
I'd like to see what PJ and co. can do with the Hobbit, but if they can't make it work I'd still like to see it done by someone else, even with a completely different cast. However, as much as I like all things LOTR, the Hobbit should only be made into ONE movie. Make The Silmarillion or some of the others after, but the Hobbit would be lame if they split it into two movies.
-
Nov 20, 2006 12:22:58 AM CST
Call me optimistic, but don't get despondent JUST yet..
by greatwhitenoise
...this sounds like a bit of playing chicken to me. Each of these guys have leverage in this deal -- New Line has the rights to make the film, PJ has the creative team and the fanbase behind him. This looks to me like PJ mobilizing the fans behind him and creating pressure on New Line, knowing that any Hobbit without Wingnut involved will suffer from fatally evil buzz from Day 1. Good move by PJ; I'd do the same. And let's face it; there's too much in it for all of them (whether it's money, creative passion, seeing the full vision on screen, etc.) for them NOT to sort this out one way or another. It's a no-brainer. Look at Spider-Man -- took them ten years to get everything settled, but by God they got it done in the end. Granted, it cost them James Cameron's involvement in the meantime, but he didn't have the existing cred behind him on the project that PJ has here, which is exactly what PJ is banking on by unleashing fandom on New Line in this way. So before you drive Sting through your own hearts, let's wait and see what this move produces in the way of further dialogue among all concerned. It would amaze me in their collective idiocy if they didn't ultimately solve this. Stay tuned.
-
http://www.newline.com/contactus.shtml
The only link I could find to contact them. -
if I read it correctly, they'd do a Hobbit and then a prequel on the events leading up to the Fellowship movie ... which is gay. if anything, do the creation of the rings and origin of Sauron or something remotely interesting.
-
If they make a good Hobbit, people will go see it, reguardless of who directs it. Infact, even if it is horrible and Peter Jackson goes around bad mouthing it, it will probably still make all its money back opening weekend, and they'll make money selling it to cable before it even comes out and they'll package it in yet another Lord of the Rings fancy DVD set and make even more money. The story is all there, and the story is better than Lord of the Rings, so it would be hard to fuck up. Bilbo is better than Frodo. More trolls and less Orlando. A super cool dragon. Whats not to like? The idea that only Peter Jackson could handle this is insane. Why they'd have to do something ridiculous and split it into multiple movies to ruin something this easy.
-
The studio cannnot possibly be this stupid. These execs need to be axed if they are going to let a billion dollar franchise get fucked like this. They owe it to thier fuckin shareholders (not to mention the fans) to get this Hobbit movie(s) made.
-
I would like The Hobbit to be its own film. Continuity is out anyway since Bilbo is the main character and he won't be played by Ian Holm. And Gollum should be absolutely terrifying in The Hobbit, not the goofy non-human sidekick he is in LOTR where he comes VERY close to being a Jar Jar Binks in too many scenes. And I hate to break it to all the people who think that The Hobbit is a license to print money, but it probably won't do really well no matter who makes it and how good it is. It will do decent box-office, but nothing spectacular. There is a reason that Peter Jackson and company bulked up the Aragorn and Arwen romance for the trilogy. That pulled in a lot of people who normally wouldn't have gone.
-
And someone is definitely playing hardball.This Michael Lynne sounds like an absolute studio dickhead. Way to go genius! I guess you thought weaseling a shady deal on top of a lawsuit was somehow conducive to this franchise?! Brilliant!!! And I always had my little doubts about Mark Ordesky after watching the LOTR DVD commentaries. I'm sure he's just the messenger; a pawn for the studio in this silly fiasco. But come on. This reeks of studio muscle and a rush to create "product".You know, if they plow forward with this, I hope they at least hire a director & crew as passionate about the material as PJ, Wingnut, and WETA. Hell, maybe WETA would even let them use all the sets and props they've kept in storage.Hey New Line, you do know that right? I mean, there is a reason why they kept all that stuff in storage you studio fuckheads. Duh!!!
-
That's a job for Ted Kaczynski. They are a bunch greedy fucks. No different then the leaders of the world who torture people and leave them to rot. You could swap the fucks at New Line with the worst DICtators of the world and there would be no difference. It's like that in most businesses world wide. That's how the system works. Are you surprised, really?
-
What a funny name, baggins. Sounds like a bagel shop.
-
Nov 20, 2006 12:43:04 AM CST
The one and ONLY reason LOTR worked is cause of Jackson
by industrykiller!
ANd Im not some "everything Jackson does is perfect!" fanboy. But adapting those films is a monulmental task and by the grace of God alone Jackson pulled it off. If anything is adapted well it's not usually because the original content was so good. You know whoever ends up directing it will either cheaply ape his style or come up with something entirely mediocre on their own but I will bet any amount of money that it isn't good. If they make it without him they can expect big returns opening weekend then a sharp dropoff thereafter. There simply isn't another non big name (Jackson, SPielberg, Zemeckis) director out there talented enough to do a big fantasy film justice. Just look at what an abortion Eragon looks like it'll be.
-
....Star Wars prequels. Newline did you a favor. You've delivered one of the best trilogies ever. Walk away on top. Leave Middle Earth already. Besides, James Cameron is on your ass. If he delivers with Project 880(Avatar) and Battle Angel Alita, he'll make the battle in the LOTR trilogies look like lame. Lates.
-
...would you be thinking, perhaps, of Hayden Christensen as the callow young maia who becomes Sauron? I'm sorry. I'm very, very, very sorry. It just popped into my head. Again, sorry.
-
...The Hobbit is NOT getting made because of some accounting dispute between some greedy motherfuckers? Looks to me New Line AND Jackson just flushed about 50 gallons of credibility down the drain. Not that I care. Just leave at the LOTR movies (wich fucking ruled!) and be done with that. You know what? Maybe someone should actually try to conceive an original idea for a new movie! Or is that just the booze talking?
-
Damn you Michael Bay
-
Un-fucking-believable!
-
Damn you Michael Bay
-
I loved Jackson's LOTR films, sure, so did eveyrone. But maybe this is a blessing in disguise. Bear with me: There are many very talented directors out there who might also be fans of PJ and continue the style he created. After all, when PJ was originally set as director, a lot of people doubted him. But we gave him a chance, and he pulled it off. Maybe we should give the next guy a chance. The work is half done anyway--the actor choices, the theme, pacing, style, etc. Take for example Jonathan Mostow. He followed James Cameron's style when making Terminator 3 pretty damn well, even seemlessly. Sure, T3's story was questionable, but in The Hobbit, the story is already there. So long as the new director is faithful to PJ as PJ was to Tolkien, what do we really have to worry about? And, seriously, I know this sounds blasphemous, but the writing in PJ's LOTR was actually rather weak, and often was just "best of Tolkien" rather than making for believable story flow that was based on and in turn directed the behavior of the characters. Also, key scenes of cinema were wasted (mostly in Return of the King, such as Gandalf and the Witch King standing off at the gates and Frodo and Sam disguised as Orcs--these scenes were far more dramatic in the books and even in the Ranklin/Bass cartoon). Maybe whoever takes over will do things better than they would be otherwise. As for the actors? Is there amongst them a loyalty to PJ stronger than their desire for their own careers? After all, when doing reshoots for ROTK, they all lobbied to be in Kong, but only one was given that ticket. Maybe business is business, and they'll return to Middle-earth with or without Jackson. Or, has anyone considered how blasphemous it would have been in 1998 to say George Lucas should NOT have been involved in the Star Wars prequels? Now, everyone wishes he was indeed not involved, and that someone else had indeed taken over. Again, is PJ not being involved a blessing in disguise? Or, maybe, this entire letter and PJ's being outcast is an elaborate ruse by New Line to weigh fan interest . . .
-
...if they grant an audit to PJ and co. that might incite an accountant stampede to the doorstep of every filmmaker who might have an axe to grind.
But then again, for all I know these sorts of audits might happen all the time in Hollywoodland, and its just the Box Office of this particular property that's causing the problem.
Any accountants out there shed some light? -
Peter Jackson now has my full respect. I'm sorry but this fucking sucks. "Deciding to make a movie should come from the heart". Respect. "Michael Lynne said we would stand to make much more money if we tied the lawsuit and the movie deal together and this may well be true, but it's still the worst reason in the world to agree to make a film." Respect 10 fold. "Given that New Line are committed to this course of action, we felt at the very least, we owed you, the fans, a straightforward account of events as they have unfolded for us." Respect 100 fold. Peter Jackson loves us all and wanted to make this movie for us. New Line hates Peter Jackson and wants our money and gives two shits and a fuck about us...just our money. So I propose we DON'T SEE THIS MOVIE. We can certainly teach them a lesson if they invest all this time and money in a non Peter Jackson Hobbit and IT FAILS UTTERLY. Fuck you New Line, fuck you up your stupid asses.
-
...Uwe Boll gets more projects off the ground than Peter Jackson.
-
Which soulless studio hack will shit all over PJ's legacy?
1) Brett Ratner
2) Rob Cohen
3) Paul Anderson
4) John Moore -
Natural breaking point after the escape from the Misty Mountains via EagleAir, Gandalf leaves the Dwarves at the edge of Mirkwood. (They'd probably need to leave out the character of Beorn, kinda like Tom Bombadil) Mournful, forboding end to the first film as they look into the forest. Movie #2 starts with the party entering Mirkwood, Gandalf has his meeting with the White Council (Saruman, Galadriel, Radagast, and whoever else)
Easy, especially if they amp up the escape from the goblins a bit. -
his films are gripping!
gripping my shit!!!!
he's the only man who can properly fuck this thing up and destroy any chance of making any more tolkien movies, his track record in this field is impeccable. -
So The Hobbit won't contain Jackson's trademark stilted dialog, dull Shakespearean acting and never-ending endings? What a blow!
-
-in the first place. From his interviews with Quint and a few others I've read, he kinda skipped around the "Hobbit" question a bit. I know he says in that email "I was up for it but I ain't gonna be no fink for the man daddi-o!" (that might be paraphrasing), but it sounds pretty bogus to me. That WAS an e-mail sent to OneRing.net after all; so him saying "I don't wanna make yo' damn movie", would be like a clown saying, "Bug off kid, I don't feel like blowing ANOTHER fucking doggie balloon today". His decision to cut-off ties with the studio seemed less like one of those fits of righteous indignation things, and more like him getting rid of the Lord of the Rings albatross.
-
you know you wanna see it!
-
It does. It sucks to high holy hell.
BORING BORING BORING..
The Frighteners was a great film. -
They would've given PJ the 20 million he felt that he was owed over year ago prior to filing the lawsuit.
-
petition? or is that pretty pointless...
-
Than DOGSOUP telling us to "BOYCOTT HOBBIT".
-
It'd be greatly admirable if Mr. Jackson made The Hobbit, but in his inteview with Quint, it was made fairly clear PJ's already mapped out his film schedule for the next 3 years and pre through to post production for The Hobbit will be a minimum 3 year commitment. Plus PJ hasn't yet resolved his New Line lawsuit and even if he resolved it next week, his upfront 8 figure asking price and backend profit percentage request, will be unviable to both MGM and New Line. While they'll still film in in NZ, New Line don't have to use Weta (and probably won't) for the film's special FX ; there's plenty of other interested companies available.
-
Its not like we gonna miss anything...what? SNAKES ON THE PLANE 2? RUSH HOUR III? fuck 'em..
-
Sure there ARE other filmmakers and I'm not even a LOTR fan but this greedy and moronic move will hurt your takings. i guess you'll have to chaarge cinema owners $5 per ticket now you bloodsuckers.
-
come on, Scott Speedman as Lion-O
-
ROTK was overrated, King Kong was absolute shite... the guy needs to train a new editor from scratch before he goes back to making big budget films. Should take six years, by which time this lawsuit will be dead.
-
...this film boycotted. And if the directors who are offered this have any fucking solidarity or brains, each one of them will flat out refuse to make it on these grounds. I have absolutely no interest in seeing a film of the Hobbit. I will only see Peter Jackson's The Hobbit. Do New Line really think that McKellen, Holm, and the others would even consider doing this without their beloved PJ? I think not. And do we really want another actor to play Gandalf? Dumb question. So, New Line: the 'directors studio'- consider yourselves lower in my estimations than even Fox. You better sort this out. Remember the last time you made a fantasy without PJ? The steaming shitpile that was Dungeons & Drgaons. The Hobbit deserves better, we deserve better, and PJ CERTAINLY deserves better. And one more thing. Fuck you New Line, you backstabbing bunch of movie-fucking suits. Die.
-
that is a lot of film to sit through when you hate them......must have sucked to have sat through rotk knowing how much you would hate it after you already sat through 6 hours of films you hated already...anyway....jackson was never on this project so he can hardly be off it. New Line will get some cheaper easier to push around guy to make this film you watch...
-
This is a typical move. New Line's lawyers are trying to force PJ & Co. to the bargaining table in order to get the lawsuit settled. If PJ had turned around and said, "OK, we'll play ball," I bet that alleged time limit on the rights would have disappeared. But PJ made the right choice, so now New Line has to stick to their decision and anger all the fans. Fire your lawyers, New Line... they did you a disservice by advising you to piss off your customers.
-
I couldn't be happier. Jackson gave two shits about LOTR when he was making it, and now all he cares about is his money grubbing lawsuit. I read that right, didn't I? They wanted to roll his lawsuit problem into the new deal to make the Hobbit, if he only agreed to start on it soon, before their rights ran out? And Hackson deliberately decided NOT to resolve it that way? What's this bullshit about the "right frame of mind" to make the Hobbit? If he loved the idea of making the Hobbit, how could some money differences change that? Either he wanted to do it or he didn't. And he didn't. Well, good riddance.
-
It's a no brainer, Jackson had to be onboard, irrespective of how much moula or control he needs; it's a gravy train with biscuit wheels with him at the helm. In making that play, New Line have pissed off most of their target market and fucked up the continuityl; they'll have to recruit A list talent with the same reverence and passion for Tolkien's work as Jackson et Al. Talk about pissing on your chips!
-
damn you studio loopleheaded cocksuckers!!!!
-
...such as Ian Mckellen, Ian Holm and Andy Serkis not signing on without PJ, but what about fucking WETA? The Hobbit would not work without WETA. They know this shit through and through. No other effects team could even come close. Nah, I don't think this shit is over. Not to mention the massive public backlash, try to go ahead without PJ and the movie will be sunk before it ever even gets off the ground. Internet nerds wield hefty power. New Line will settle.
-
Nobody really loves Peter Jackson that much. And The Hobbit will look better if it's totally recast anyway. Nobody wants Ian Holm as YOUNG Bilbo. Sir Ian McKellan didn't dump the Magneto role because Brett Ratner directed the last X-Men movie. Unbunch your panties, the lot of you. Or, you know, just go read the book.
-
Peter Jackson and Co. are a bunch of hacks. Long live Tolkien!
-
...and I thought Fox's initial greenlighting of that AvP2 script was the worst studio decision in recent history. I'm simply staggered at the stupidity and greed of New Line in this matter. It reminds me of those funny/sad Candid Camera bits where a person sits kids down in front of a plate with a juicy chocolate chip cookie on it and tells them that if they don't eat the cookie for a few minutes while he's away, they'll get ten cookies when he comes back. Almost invariably the kids can't resist the single, tangible cookie as opposed to the promise of ten similar cookies in the near future if a bit of restraint and vision is employed. Still, there are at least two positive things to look forward to in regard to this debacle: 1) numerous hilarious and ass-ripping talkbacks in the future -- not least of all the one where we all do the AvP2 dance on the first script review ("Philbrick! What does this talking-back guy mean by "choad-masticating asshat"?"), and 2) more mind-boggling posts from Jackson hater par excellence, ringbearer9 (oops! looks like he's already started -- with a truly splendid piece of spin, complete with a new definition of greed vis-á-vis creativity.)
-
...for new talkbackers with unfamiliar names who suddenly show up encouraging us to restrain ourselves, not jump to conclusions and give New Line a chance.
-
Nov 20, 2006 3:26:27 AM CST
You're all missing the point: It's about the TIME LIMIT
by triumph poops!
Everyone is pouncing on New Line and saying "How can you screw over Jackson?! Why would you make THE HOBBIT without him?! Why would you throw away the money he could bring you!"...but that's just the point. New Line DOES want to be whores and they DO want the movie that a LOTR prequel could bring them, but the clock is ticking on them. Jackson himself noted in his email (quote) "Ordesky said that New Line has a LIMITED TIME OPTION on the film rights they have obtained from Saul Zaentz." THAT'S why they're moving ahead so quickly. New Line wants to get this out ASAP and collect a quick billion dollars worldwide from salivating LOTR fans and cash the checks BEFORE their option runs out. And in pure business terms, as others in the Talkback have noted, if it means proceeding without Jackson and just going on the strength of the property alone -- ala doing X3 with Ratner and not waiting for Singer -- then that's what they'll do. From a business standpoint, I can see how New Line is banking on THE HOBBIT, as a property, being a stronger lure overall than Jackson's name being attached to the project. I don't like the idea...frankly I think it blows...but I will also say this. Those of you who came out of the woodwork and defended Ratner so vigorously for what he did with X3 might want to reconsider what someone new might bring to Middle Earth by taking on THE HOBBIT...
-
...that New Line will have a Superman II-like rebellion. We're pretty sure that actors from LOTR who have characters that appear in The Hobbit will side with Peter Jackson and refuse to be in it. It'll be disappointing if they take the money...
-
...OR SHOULD I SAY DOCPAZUZU!!!?!? That's RIGHT, I know your true identity, an-- oh. Oh, wait. You *are* DocPazuzu. Carry on then.
-
And the award for Most Ironic Post Ever goes to...
-
... about those sure to appear new pro New Line talkbackers. And I too can't wait to read sure to come hilarious talkbacks. This morning and afternoon are going to be some good reading, hehehe.
-
Jackson is drumming up fan ire, in order to play the stronger card against Ordesky, who thought that throwing Jackson off of the project would put Jackson back in his place regarding the lawsuit.
Remember that Ordesky has NOTHING to do with the success of LOTR. It was Bill Mechanic who was the genius who made LOTR happen there. Of course, he was removed BEFORE LOTR made New Line a fortune, ahem.
-
Ordesky, if you knew what was good for movies, and what made money for New Line, you'd be...well BILL MECHANIC.
-
Nov 20, 2006 3:57:43 AM CST
3 words WHY they don't want an audit: COMING TO AMERICA
by triumph poops!
Why doesn't New Line -- or any Hollywood studio -- ever want to see a REAL audit done? 3 words for you: COMING TO AMERICA (the old Eddie Murphy African prince comedy).
Back when it was made, humor columnist Art Buchwald sued Paramount, claiming they had actually stolen the idea for the movie from a submission he had turned over to them under a first look deal HE currently had with the studio. The court agreed with Buchwald and said damages were due, at which point Paramount turned around and tried to claim the standard cop-out plea: namely, the movie had never turned a profit so they COULDN'T pay any damages. Laughably, Paramount claimed this despite the fact, as Buchwald's attornies showed, that the studio had actually taken out expensive trade ads (in Variety, for example) BRAGGING about the movie's profits. The Judge agreed and ordered Paramount to bring in their accounting ledgers for the film so that everyone could fairly see just "what" studio accounting was like...at which point the laugh fest began.
Right away, on Day One, the Judge discovered such stupifying things as Eddie Murphy stopping by a McDonalds near the film shoot and running up a SEVERAL THOUSAND DOLLAR TAB when he decided to play generous, rich movie star and bought food not only for the giant entourage he currently had about him, but by likewise telling the McDonald's manager to give out free food to anyone locally who wanted it that day. Sure, such a gesture made Murphy look like a good guy and a "nice star" buying food for everyone for a day -- the problem was, Murphy DIDN'T pay out of his own pocket. He simply passed the buck and said "The studio will cover it"...at which point Paramount decided Murphy's multi-thousand dollar burger pit stop should be counted AGAINST the production costs of the movie.
Buchwald's attornies immediately pointed to this and wondered aloud how ANY Hollywood movie could EVER break even (or post a profit) if studios were allowed to write-off such frivolous things against the actual cost of making a film. Going by this whacked out example of creative accounting, the Judge agreed and was likewise curious just "what" Paramount was backcharging against the costs of ANY of its productions...
...At which point -- what a shock! -- Paramount's legal team quickly drew up one mighty check and settled out of court with Buchwald, thus allowing them to not only sweep COMING TO AMERICA under the rug, but also sweep ALL of its accounting practices back under the rug as well. -
Please FOX, we don't want to lose AVATAR and BATTLE ANGEL now too...with THE HOBBIT and HALO gone for now it seems those are the only giant tentpoles to look forward to.
-
dumbest fucking decisio never made.
and michael jackson is a child perv. -
Fuck The Hobbit, AVATAR is on the way!!!! Hire Terry Gilliam to make The Hobbit!
-
Serkis wouldn't make it without Jackson. Jackson will make The Hobbit, or it will not be made...
-
McKellen, Weaving, and Serkis. Other than them, every other part has to be cast anew. I know PJ had spoken of sneaking in Aragorn and Gimli, but that wasn't in the book anyway. McKellen would do it if the script is good...out of sheer love of the character. And as someone pointed out he did do X-3. He wouldn't turn it down if it had good team behind it. Weaving has what amounts to cameo, he's be down for a few days work and a paycheck. Serkis would probably feel the most loyalty to Jackson, but I'm sure they could convince him to at the very least supply the voice...which I would guess would be all that he'd be willing to do. I agree with some of the posters here that Jackson probably just wanted to quit while he was ahead. Now that he has Kong out of the way I'm guessing he wants to move onto more serious non-fantasy stuff and show that his Oscar wasn't just a fluke. It's probably a wise choice on his part. I would imagine as well that as a fan, Peter would like to just sit down and WATCH a middle-earth movie for once and enjoy it like the rest of us. Hell, he might even encourage the actors to take the parts with his blessing just to ensure the movie is something he would like to see himself. Also, don't be surprised if WETA gets involved despite this not being a Wingnut film. They're a special FX house for hire just like ILM and they're not gonna turn down a job...especially now that HALO is semi-on-hold. And of course New Line will shoot in NZ cuz it's cheaper...though I would prefer if they shot some of it in Europe (I missed the green moss and mist in the LOTR movies. The kind you only get in places like England) I'm willing to give it a chance for now.
-
I want casting news, an official release date, concept art, even a teaser website with a title logo! I have faith that AVATAR can be as if not more groundbreaking than the original Star Wars, The Matrix, or LOTR trilogy. Bring it the fuck on!
-
You don't devote a decade of your life to something as an artist unless you truly have a deep passion for it. I hasten to remind you that when PJ went in to pitch LOTR, his biggest project to date had been The Frighteners, something of a box office disappointment. He sold the only thing he had that other more successful filmmakers didn't have - his passion for the story and his desire to do it right. If I recall correctly, Tolkien's heirs had felt burnt once or twice and THEY had to be sold on PJ, by PJ, as well. And yeah, artists like PJ may actually be temperamental enough that an ongoing legal dispute would muddy the creative waters for them. Or look at it this way. If you went to the market, and they shortchanged you, and they KNOW they shortchanged you, and when you complain, instead of offering you your money they gave a discount coupon for the amount they shortchanged you, which is only good if you spend an additional $500, would you consider that a fair deal? Would you shop there again?
-
Basically, going by the COMING TO AMERICA incident...and going by so many other stories like it...I'm sure Jackson KNOWS something fishy was going on with the LOTR accounting practices behind his back, and thus IS due substantial money ranging in the MILLIONS. And let's face it, that's nothing to sneeze at. Hell, who wouldn't be totally pissed off if you were literally due MILLIONS UPON MILLIONS all due to an accounting scam? Much like the COMING TO AMERICA studio accounting system, I can just see it now: some New Line execs decide to redo their offices at top flight prices or decide to take some trips or do anything else they want to spend some money on, but since they conveniently did it WHILE Lord of the Rings was in production AND since they could now technically point to some slight managerial oversight regarding some slight aspect of the films, the studio greedily wrings its hands and decides to back-bill ALL of those behind the scenes costs against the actual films themselves (and not against the operating costs of the studio) and thus conveniently shave all that money off Jackson's hard earned royalties. So I say good for Jackson for taking up the good fight. Anyone who works out here in Hollywood KNOWS how full of crap the accounting systems are. So anyone like Jackson who can shed light on the truly insane things that are allowed to happen out here has all my support completely. So take it to them, Peter. I would have loved to see you do THE HOBBIT simply to ensure a cohesive creative vision -- not to mention the THE HOBBIT is actually my favorite of the Tolkein books, so I really want to see it done right -- but if you got shafted on your money, then stick it to them where it hurts the most. Namely in court and in the wallet!
-
And BTW - are ANY of the people who had the testicular fortitude to roll the dice with PJ more than a decade ago for three films at an average of more than $90m a pop, before anyone even knew if the first film would turn a dime's profit, even at New Line now?
-
This couldn't be a worse situation for this film. or maybe it could. I willing to believe that the studio can find someone capable of making the movie the fans all hope. Fantasy films seem to be impossible for most people to do well (eragon for instance looks shockingly bad) and so the choice of director is basically going to be what makes this film sink or swim. GET IT RIGHT.
-
I mentioned James Cameron and Avatar earlier, before Rindain got everybody all worked up, just to tell Jackson that his effects in LOTR and KK will be destroyed if Cameron pulls of what he wants to do with AVATAR. If you've read the treatment, you know what i'm refering to. Oddly, Cameron was inspired to return to features after he saw The Return of the King. ROTK showed him that the technology was there for him to make AVATAR. He's using WETA. Jackson must be seening the concept art and animatics. He will own your ass, Jackson. Sorry, but Cameron inspired me to want to make films. He delivers something new everytime. I will admit that the dialogue in Titanic is painful at times. Lates.
-
Jackson spent every penny of his cinematic capital on King Kong. That monstrocity didn't even come close to expectations. Because of this, I have said I wouldn't be surprised if Jackson gets passed over for The Hobbit. Don't get me wrong, I like Jackson. Unfortunatley, he's developed "Lucas Syndrome", meaning he thinks he can now do no wrong with a movie. It's a terrible disease to catch and few filmmakers ever recover from it.
-
Entertainment Film Distributors and the Irish Cinema owners Ward anderson have been locked in a row. So what does this mean? it means if you live in dun loaghaire or anywhere in ireland that has either a cinplex cinema or ominplex cinema or a IMC cinema, you will not be able to see any newline movie, why? EFD 15 months terminated its deal with Ward Anderson and it also effects DVD releases as well. AS a regualr film goer Newline can go jump in a lake.
-
"Yes. Yes. Fuck you, too."
-
Damn you New Line
-
...the power of the Tolkien Estate is mighty. If they don't sanction it you may find The Hobbit on hold for much longer than you anticipate. The key to this is the second/third prequel which would surely have to be approved by the family. I would say watch this space but from the sound of things Fran and Peter have had enough of New Line's shenanigans. I mean who wants to get back in bed with a whore only to find in the morning that they've taken your watch and wallet..? Personally, i would love to see the pair of them work on at least one of the forthcoming movies in the Bond franchise what with MGM/Sony relations being good, if not great. And i'm sure Ms.Brocolli would love to have them aboard. Is Peter a Bond lover..? I never asked him but i sure would be interested in the answer. If all else fails he can just call up 'The Boys' and make Bad Taste II for the kind of dosh he would have spent with New Line refitting Bilbo's Baggend bathroom.
-
PJ will helm the Hobbit. New Line playing games but dont realise how it really works down here in New Zealand. "Deciding to make a movie should come from the heart - it's not a matter of business convenience". Untill you can understand and appreciate that, your screwed.
-
Now that New Line have officially pissed off every fan of their MASSIVE franchise, they've pretty much doomed themselves. I'm not sure which director would want to put this amount of pressure on themselves either, I sure wouldn't.
-
fuck.
-
do you really think New Line gives a flying fuck if a few fanboys suddenly boycott their movies? I hate to say it but New Line execs aren't going to read this talkback and change their minds. The fact is, these kind of movies arent made for the fans. Movies are made to entertain the general public. You know, the people who dont masterbate to the extra bonus features on the re-released dvds. The same people that have lives and dont spend every waking moment pretending to be fucking Gandorf in their basements. Keep in mind, these movies may be catered to its die hard fans, but by and large, this movie will be made with or without the approval of the guys who dress up as Frodo and wait in line for a week to see it opening night. So before you stop kissing your Arwen dolls and crucify me, let me just say, ah fuck it, shut the fuck up you blubbering babies. Who gives a fuck if Peter Jackson doesnt direct this movie? Have you ever thought for a second that maybe this series has worn out its welcome? And lets get back to PJ for a second. The fucking world is not going to end if he doesnt direct this thing. Too fucking bad if your childhood fantasies of seeing a Hobbit movie are crumbled by the shittiness that it may come to be. Grow the fuck up and get over it. Porch Monkeys. Hey its ok, Im taking it back.
-
This really is the difference between making a billion dollars, and three hundred million dollars - and that's a big difference. This is the difference between pissing off every fan of the franchise YOU built, and risk ruining one of the greatest film universes of ALL TIME. Don't you want to win another Oscar? Don't you want to make the fans happy? Don't you WANT more money? I don't understand your actions at all, I'm just at a loss here. Reconsider, or face a backlash like you've never seen before. You think the TRANSFORMERS fans are pissed right now? Just wait until some other director starts messing around with this franchise. Just wait...
-
Jackson is leveraging the fan base against New Line. That's why this email was sent to TheOneRing.net, because Jackson wants to make the Hobbit (and the buckets of money it would generate), and he doesn't want New Line to get away with just dumping the project on somebody else and blaming him for it. It's not over yet.
-
Without PJ, the likelyhood of landing the core actors is far diminished. R.I.P. Hobbit.
-
I'm suprised as hell... Fuck New Line right up their stupid asses.. Fools...
-
Now, I dont often post talkback... but when I see some talkbacker acting all higher-and-mightier than every other talkbacker and then descending into the same negative trashtalk that most talkbackers use - I've gotta say something. Cut the hypocricital bullshit, asshole. And dont undermine the sort of benefit that both Peter Jackson and the fantase had on the LOTR films. The studio going forward with these films regardless of the talent involved is purely a money decision. Jackson wanting to do it but take the time to properly work things out is an artistic deicision. And when it comes down to it, which of those would you rather side with?
-
It does really suck. But I think at this point there might be too much baggage for everyone anyway. It's probably time for a new director. I mean think about it: the same director on a total of up to about 6 films?? Last time I saw that happen it was the Star Wars series and we know how that turned out. I'm not saying I wouldn't want Jackson back. I guess I'm just trying to see the positive in this. I do hope they get Ian McKellan to play Gandalf again. And something I think is tragic is that PJ's special effects company will likely be out of the project now.
-
as being sadly similar to Dungeons & Dragons the movie, DragonHeart 2, and the latest Uwe Boll movie? And since I don't have time to read all these posts, I can trust that someone has already suggested Boll to head this Hobbit production?
-
Well said. And to answer your question, I would side with neither. Dont give me that "artistic" bullshit. Peter Jackson didnt direct these movies to be artistic. He may have had a passion for Tolkien but lets face it, he wanted to make money. If Fellowship tanked, I seriously doubt he would have directed the second. Why? Because regardless of how passionate you are to making a film, why make it when it isnt going to make a dime?
-
Let's not jump to conclusions this early... give NewLine a chance; they know what they're doing. Remember - NO-ONE is irreplacable...
-
THE HOBBIT can only be made if New Line and MGM come to some kind fo agreement. So what would happen if MGM decides to a)shun New Line until either New Line settles the lawsuit and lets Jackson on board, or b) wait until New Line's limited time option runs out, at which point I'd assume New Line's portion of the rights would be available to the highest bidder. If Jackson has both MGM and the fans on his side he might win this battle...
-
Your credibility might be elevated somewhat if you could point to other talkbacks in which you have taken part in the past, because right now you look, sound and smell like something other than pure talkbacker.
-
This is what happens when you have business people involved in making decisions in a creative field. Hollywood is so fucked up. An average person or casual movie fan is calling the fuck up with this movie way before its even made. We can all see this why cant they?!
-
the lord of the rings was such a unique movie, not just for what appeared on screen, but for the behind the scenes story that we all know and love. thanks to the extended editions, we all felt like we were part of the journey of making these films. the crew are as much characters in this story as anything tolkien wrote, and thats why so many people feel hurt about this. as fans we've NEVER been so close to the making of a movie (apart from maybe king kong.) Theres no way Serkis will take the job without Peter, not after 4 films together. and we the fans, will miss the crew... we'll miss the story of how you make an epic... without the crew, you simply cant do a sequel/prequel, because if you lose the crew, you lose the spirit of the film. yes you can replace it, but it will never be the same.
-
Are you fucking kidding me? So I am less credible because I dont haunt aintitcool.com? I'm sorry I have a fucking job. A shitty job, yes, but a job. Wipe the sand out of your pussy. Must hurt you "regulars" to have someone who posts twice a year make you fucking cry and spoon each other.
-
.... I think the debacle that was 'snakes on a plane' proved that having fandom onboard has very little to do with financial success.
-
A historic drop from the top of the ladder...right down to the very bottom rung (and that bottom rung has severe woodworm)…all of this with only one outrageous decision based on chronic greed and momentous stupidity….Shame on you all.
The fans made you very rich…and you’ve well and truly bitten them in the arse end.
Unfortunately, I fear that the sum of money offered to the cast will be the deciding factor to their return…However, we will soon see that when you break up a beautiful partnership and bring in strangers…you’re more than pissing into the wind of good sense.
-
Thank you! I agree... 110%! It's so easy for us to criticize the people who we think are the bad guys, but the bottom line is that New Line was faced with some tough financial decisions to make and are doing the best they can to deliver the best product possible. Just give them a chance, 'Rings'-fans, they'll find someone just as good or better than Jackson.
-
SEE: my post above from earlier. However, if "yournextpresident" is right then I stand, if you will, with PJ. If I'm right, then I wish the new team good luck. And fpuk99....I don't think Snakes ever had any "serious" support....at least the same kind of LOTR-level support anyway. Different case altogether. People created Snakes photoshop-joke pics and so forth. But there were never any real hard-core fan-sites like One-Ring feverously devoted to it.
-
Don't be delusional, this is a decition based purely on money and release dates. It's the equivelant of Fox hiring Ratner to make a rushed X3 instead of waiting for Singer. And we all know how that turned out.
-
Thanks for proving my point.
-
That's not true, you're just an as-yet-undetermined new-director-of-The Hobbit hater!
-
..."If Fellowship tanked, I seriously doubt he would have directed the second"... Err, Jackson directed all three films at the same time. Any body even remotely appreciative of the film would know this. Why do you post comments on something you dont know about? If the first one 'tanked'... then he would still have had his name on all three. He DID it out of passion. And he had bollocks the size of Pluto to do it. I love PJ. Forever. You hear me Peter Jackson? I love you. xxx
-
I thought Peter Jackson came across as arrogant in that email. As much as I enjoyed the LOTR trilogy, King Kong was a bloated pile of crap. LOTR had it's flaws and some scenes that will jar me out of the immersion everytime (Orlando f'n Bloom skating down the flight of stairs on a shield for one!). The only thing the hobbit would suffer for is capturing the same look and feel, but even that would be replicated over time. And lastly every single person here would still go and see it/buy the dvd jackson or not!
-
No matter who directs, what script it has, who stars, having the name - The Hobbit will make the film money. However, without Peter Jackson, it probably won't make AS MUCH money. If New Line just pays Jackson what he says they owe him, I'm guessing, with his name attatched to the film, it will make at least that much more money opening weekend. And then they should consider subsequent weekends and DVD sales. If they make a terrible version, or even one that doesn't quite match up to LOTR, the word-of-mouth and repeated viewings will not be there like they would if Jackson directed.
-
Man, that Hollywood. Not an original idea in their collective head. I did like the animated version as a kid (it got me interested in actually reading the books - remember when movies got you interested in reading? I'm old...)
-
the Hobbit won't be four hours long with seven different endings. Seriously, folks, someone else could take the reins and do a good job. they could also do a shitty job. It REMAINS TO BE SEEN. PJ did a pretty tepid job with King Kong, so everything he touches ain't gold. And why would New Line tap a guy who has an outstanding lawsuit against them? Show Business IS a business folks, if you want artistic integrity you stick to $500,000 indie films. Sad but true. deal with it.
-
This deal cheered me up! I hope it helps all of you!
NO BUT SERSIOUSLY FUCK! THIS IS BULLSHIT -
This is not the kind of news I need to start my week.
-
I think this boils down to ego. The studio execs don’t want a director telling them what to do. Plus we all know studios routinely lie about profits. Look at the Crow movies which have never paid a dime to creator James O’Barr even though they routinely make a profit and continue to be a staple of the straight to video market.
-
To me the most important thing is that we get a quality Hobbit film. I don't give a rat's dick who directs it as long as it's good. Furthermore you guys who hope that the Ians jump ship with Jackson are fools. Peter's pocketbook is full and I don't give a damn about any of the individuals involved because what I'll remember is that DVD on my shelf years later in hopes that it's worthy of being there.
-
Oh Shit...does this mean Brett Ratner gets to direct The Hobbit?? I just know how studios think...
-
of making this without Jackson. New Line just give the man the money you owe him, that he made for you, and then nab him for this. New Line are idiots to pass up an opportunity to get him back because they are squabbling about money they wouldn't have without Jackson.
-
Fucking Retards.
I'm not seeing Rush Hour 3 for this! -
I think we should all flood their e-mails from their Contact Us.
Together we can stand tall and proud. We are dorks and we will be heard!!!!! -
he will turn a simple and straight forward 200 page story into a 4 hour long emotionless wankfest. I think it is an acceptable idea and people who disagree with New Lines decision need to stop turning PJ into a martyr of Geekdom and stop pretending that no one else could ever possibly tell this story as well, if not better than he. GeeWiz, people. Relax the fuck up.
-
But he is a great Middle Earth director.
He knows his Hobbits. And he knows how to direct them and their fucking ego!!!
Who else will convince Smeagol to come back for a new film. That slithery fuck!! -
Sure, he wanted to make money - everyone does, but he didn't know that these films would be raking in the money. I mean, seriously - if anything he was taking the biggest gamble of his life. If the films turned out to be DUNGEONS AND DRAGONS quality, he would be ruined forever. I hate it when people think they know the real story and everyone else is just totally ignorant and naive. As someone mentioned above, this decision can in no way be defended. It just can't. Giving this film to another director is just too big a gamble now, sure it COULD turn out to be a great film, but it there is the biggest possibility of it in no way resembling THE LORD OF THE RINGS films, which is what everyone wants. They're doing this out of impatience and greed - and, like X3, they'll make some money, but at the cost of a quality film.
-
You might want to reread THE HOBBIT if you don't remember him...
-
Nov 20, 2006 8:34:33 AM CST
ZombieSolutions, Weta Workshop is co-owned by...
by talkbacker with no name
...friends and colleagues Richard Taylor, Tania Rodger, Peter Jackson and Jamie Selkirk.
-
Whore's some of 'em may well be, I'm sure the so called actor's 'fellowship' of the LOTR (allegiances) will be tested when the casting director comes a calling for the Hobbit. The only obvous choice would be for Mckellen to reprise, though I'm sure there would be an uproar from the geek masses if new faces/vox replaced the likes of Elrond and Gollum (the only other characters that come to mind who appear in the Hobbit, FYI yup I 've read the books thanks, maybe you should ;-). Deffo Bilbo should be a new face, James Mcavoy would be cool. My bug-bear, and the gist of my initial posting is that Jackson won't be on board, and it worries me (and most of the talkbackers if the postings are anything to go by) that we're going to get the short shrift on a lack lustre director and an inferior bookend to the series. I'm a fan of Jackson's, evidently you're not, but fair play to your opinion, maybe some wunderkind director will surprise us all.
-
MELODRAMA:"a work, e.g. a film or play, characterized by crude emotional appeal and by the predominance of plot and action over characterization"
Search your feelings, you know it to be true...
Still, made alot of people happy, didn't it? And better than nothing at all, wasn't it?
What i would like to see is an anime series or live action trilogy of the Shannara series by Terry Brooks. And apart from the great art etc involved in bringing the world to life, like all great mythology(which the LOTR films were not) it should contain eosteric points of view, not easily ignored in the rush to the cash till. -
at least, that what Boyens said last year about King Kong, that he was so good that every other Director would just 'up and quit' after seeing it. Here we are a year later.... and i don't think anyone has quit.... as for the Hobbit.... WHO CARES?
-
...run by absolute morons? Given the amount of money PJ and crew made for New Line, they should have bent over backwards to get the audit done and handled everything honorably. But no, people have to act like children. It's all about who pissed off who and the $5 they can save. Artistic integrity is therefore thrown out the window.
-
No one's saying he's Fellini. No one's saying he's like the best director since ever and that nobody else is capable of making good films compared to him. The reason I'm concerned about this is because of the depth of production design and work that went into the making of the LotR series. It is theoretically possible for another talented filmmaker to step in and tell an emotional and/or entertaining story given the same material, but I'm afraid it's gonna end up looking like 'Eragon' (a.k.a. not good).
-
Length and all, I loved that movie. The only thing I could have done without was the ice-skating scene. Otherwise that was one of my favorite adventure movies of recent years.
-
Typical corporate posturing. PJ wants to get paid, so does New Line, and everyone knows they want him for this project. Come on. Greasy fanboys will kick and scream and New Line will 'cave' to fan pressure and everyone will congratulate themselves on being true to the source material when they are doing anything but. It might be nice to see a new face, the Hobbit is nowhere near as dark as the trilogy in terms of the books, so why not try a new approach? It won't happen though.
-
so this is about money. wow. isn't that sad. Jackson didn't want to talk about the projects until his lawsuits were resolved. So basically, this director that everyone claims is just 'a big fan' is actually just another money grubbing corporate type posing as a nice kiwi bloke. the system infects everyone. why did we think Jackson would be any different. Maybe if he had said "i want to make these films, and i KNOW we will resolve this lawsuit. Line were drawn on both sides.
-
to another company Entertainment Film Distributors who then decided to pull the rites from Irelands largest cinema group Ward Anderson, tells me that this company is run by idiots. Why did du luca leave. Cause he saw the retards taking over? that is why.
-
Hobbit. Who cares?
-
PJ did not fail at all with King Kong. That was a great movie. I loved it and will own the extended release.
Fuck all you haters! Hater punks marry hater bitches and have hater kids! You all will never go away so stew in your own hell.
Peter Jackson purely loved LOTR. And to not have him do the Hobbit would be a crime. LOTR was not nearly long enough. -
he'd rock. -.-
-
"Jackson directed all three films at the same time. Any body even remotely appreciative of the film would know this." You are correct sir, I DO NOT remotely appreciate the films so I guess I have an excuse. So whats yours? For what? For being the lunch lady cunt licker you are, thats what. However, you are absolutely correct and I stand corrected. But for the love of god, will you people stop saying he did the movies out of passion already. Because that was not his sole reason for doing them. Helen Keller could have seen the money to be made on this series. Forgive me if I'm wrong but seriously how many people who read the books prior to the films dream of one day seeing LOTR in the theater? I cant answer for myself because I never read the books. I didnt even read the back of the Hobbit until 2000. Peter Jackson cashed in on all those people. Because he knew there were people out there that wanted to see a LOTR movie. Yes, he was passionate about the films, I wont argue that. But to fucking say that is the only reason he made them is fucking bullshit because he knew there was a shit load of money to be made. It all comes down to the fucking money.
-
Nov 20, 2006 9:50:38 AM CST
We Have A quaint yet apt saying over here in Britain...
by ra ra rasputin
"What A Bunch Of Twats". Sums New Line Up Nicely I Think. They Obviously never watched the X-MEN 3 Which Was An Amazing Piece Of High Speed Shit Off A Stick.
-
I have been jonsing for the Hobbit like a crack head since the extended edition of ROTK came out.
I can watch these movied all day and nothing else. Dammit it PJ does not put together a 2-part Hobbit. He's the only guy for the job. Shit. Shit. Shit!!!! -
This is a two way street we're talking about here. That said New Line are being stingy and shady.
-
It is never just one side's fault. Both should just get over it and make the fucking movie!!!
-
... "King Kong"!
-
Do you have even slightest inkling of how stupid you make yourself sound? You're attempting to use your vast ignorance of both the films and the books as some sort of strength in your weak debating efforts. The less you know, the louder you scream and the more vulgar you become. How's that working out for you?
-
Quite well thanks. Is my vulgarity offending you? Thats a shame. Please explain to me why my vast ignorance is getting your panties all in a bunch.
-
and my advice is dont bother, I tried to when I was getting to the bottom the Newline/imc business. Bunch of twats is quite correct. First Wesley Snipes, then the EFD business and Jackson is suing them, it cant to good to be Newline exec these days.
-
I'm still dissappointed... I hope they can come to an agreement here...
-
My panties are just fine. In fact, I find your pitiful ranting quite amusing. And no, vulgarity doesn't bother me but the gradual increase of its use in your posts is hilarious. As for your ignorance bugging me -- don't take it personally, "Gandorf". I'm annoyed (and vaguely disgusted) by all its forms, but never so much as when it's used as a battering ram by cretins trying to make a point by yelling louder and more obnoxiously than everyone else.
-
The reason he sent an email to the kids at One Ring was to drum up righteous fanboy furor to protect what he sees as his property. The LOTR movies were great, but it isn't his property. New Line executives aren't morons. They're not going to let Uwe Boll, or Brett Ratner, or god knows who else ruin their chance at amassing another vast fortune. I'd love to see another person's take on the Hobbit (and, presumably, a 'filler' film), as long as there's as much attention to detail and adherence to the original material as there was with LOTR. if there's anything that King Kong has showed us, it's that while Peter Jackson has a great deal of visual flair and creativity, he's no auteur genius. Rather than trying to drum up the angry mob, he should be passing the reigns on with dignity. (...self absorbed, bad dialogue writing asshole!)
-
Jackson and his team made the movies out of passion. You admit you don't 'remotely appreciate the films' and show you don't have much knowledge on the subject to enter into the debate on any level!
Could you get some overtime at your shitty job please? The less you post here the better really.
-
While on the one hand I'd love to see a Hobbit that fits flawlessly in terms of visuals and thematics with the trilogy, on the other hand I wasn't a huge fan of Petey's plan to bulk up the Hobbit with a bunch of trilogy baggage. In a perfect world, Petey would tackle this, with WETA, and make a fairly straightforward, kid-friendly adaptation that could serve as a cinematic stepping stone to his trilogy for future generations (much as The Hobbit was a great introduction to Middle Earth for grade schoolers who later lost themeselves in Tolkein's literary world). And in this world, we'd get the best of both as surely Petey would release an expanded edition containing all of the trilogy-focused material he wanted to insert into the narrative. But I won't scream about this being the apocalypse until I see who else they're looking at for The Hobbit. As someone above said, there are other directors out there.
-
New Line Cinema
116 N. Robertson Blvd. Ste. 200
Los Angeles, CA 90048 -
looking at the New Line email address schema I tried Mark.Ordesky@newline.com
-
Will Shore, McKellan and Serkis return if Jackson is excluded? And I'm guessing no WETA either, which is a travesty. The only potential upside (for some people, not me) is that the film will arrive sooner rather than later. As I suggest, this isn't necessarily a good thing.
-
I'm sure much like Halo he asked for way too much money and didn't get it. I know it's easy to demonize the studios but the man was probably asking for like 25 mil, plus a huge return profit so you can't blame them for making that decision. blame money hungry Peter Jackson. plus would you work with someone that sued for oer 100 mil. after you gave the chance to make a movie that propelled their career?
-
Don't you need to get back to your crappy job now?
Midget_King: Screw you guys, you panty-wearing panty people. Oh yeah, FUCK! -
PJ's basic requirement is that they settle his lawsuit before he makes the Hobbit. Since the lawsuit cannot be settled so quickly (audit conducted and adjudicated by a Third Party, as PJ envisions), and since the time window for the rights to make the Hobbit is ticking, there is no way to meet PJ's demands in time, and thus the studio has no way to bring PJ on board. The studio wants PJ to make the Hobbit, and called PJ's manager with their best offer (make the Hobbit, with the lawsuit rolled in), but PJ said no. The ball has been in PJ's court, and PJ has effectively ruled himself out by making too many requirements. Considering PJ's demands, and the expiring window on the rights to make the Hobbit, the only way the studio could meet PJ's demands would be if the Studio immediately settled PJ's lawsuit out of court with PJ, handing him over as many millions as PJ arbitrarily says he thinks he is owed. That is a pretty unreasonable scenario.PS: the Hobbit is a children's story, and the film should retain that spirit - playful youth adventure, akin to the first Potter movie. From interviews it appears PJ wants to make the Hobbit a story about grown up humans, bringing in all the LOTR folk - the wrong direction imho. Bring in Christopher Columbus (or perhaps someone from Pirates of the Carib - which also captures the playful adventurous tone of the Hobbit).
-
Doc-I must admit I find it flattering that find my posts even somewhat amusing. And the Gandorf thing was totally for the purpose to have someone call me out on. The fact is, I couldn’t give a rats ass about this topic. And yes of course my arguments are weak. The weaker the argument, the more ridiculous the post becomes. I post here simply to see how far people will go to prove me wrong. I am however, extremely saddened that people cant admit that Peter Jackson didn’t direct the movies for the money. I AM NOT arguing whether or not he was passionate about his work or his passion for the books or anything else having to do with passion. I have already said I wont argue that point. But to flat out say that the thought that these movies would making ass loads of money never crossed Peter Jackson's mind is fucking insane. Its fucking Hollywood. Anyone who honestly says that Hollywood isn’t full of greedy ass pirates can get back to their gay porn shoot.
-
While I don't like the way the studios are handling this and while I agree with Jackson that a lawsuit is no way to start a film project, I'm not too terribly disapointed with this news. I very much appreciated the Jackson/Walsh/Boyens interpretation of the LORD OF THE RINGS. I'm more interested in seeing someone elses interpretation of THE HOBBIT. Jackson has this thing for history and action sequences and over-the-top editing. THE HOBBIT is more or less a children's story, or at least it has the heart of a children's story at its base. It's a faery tale. Jackson has said on more than one occasion that he doesn't like taking that angle with Tolkien. He wants to make these films as if they actually trully happened. The idea is commendable and in a way suitable for LOTR, but this approach is not all the way to go with THE HOBBIT. THE HOBBIT is an adventure story set in the world of goblins and dragons. It cannot be heavy-handed and plodding like RINGS. There should be no sense of impending doom. If I had my way, I wouldn't at all tie the films together. THE HOBBIT happened 100 yrs prior to RINGS. There was really no sense of Sauron or Sarumon in the world. The threat was very much limited to what's going on around one single hobbit and his adventures abroad. I mean sure, there's a shift in power from the orcs to the dwarves/elves/men in the Lonely Mountain region, but since Jackson doesn't even mention this area in RINGS it's not really relevant. And even then, it's more about the dwarves than anybody. And it's a return to power/tradition. There's no deeper purpose like the "rise of man" such as there is in RINGS. The shire is exactly the same when Bilbo returns as it is when he leaves. I don't know...I might be the only one, but I'm curious to see what someone else would do with the property. Maybe someone like say Ridley Scott. Can you imagine how good LEGEND could have been with a solid script. Speaking of which, whoever gets on board with this needs to adhere more to the original work more than Jackson did. There's plenty of humor in THE HOBBIT without adding dwarf tossing jokes. I'm a fan of Peter Jackson, but I'd rather see him getting back to low budget zombie films and more personal things instead of these great big studio picures. The only thing I'll miss in here for sure is the personal work WETA did and the landscapes of NZ. Maybe as far as design though, they can hire Nasmith and the Hildebrandt brothers as consultants as there interpretations are more magical and fantastic than Lee which is what you need for THE HOBBIT.
-
Nov 20, 2006 10:30:30 AM CST
"Don't you need to get back to your crappy job now?"
by the midget_king
Get off the keyboard kid and leave this shit to the adults.
-
After reading PJ's previous comments about how he would deal with The Hobbit, I'm willing to give somebody else the benefit of the doubt. I think the directing and especially the "script" (if you could call it that) of LotR was the worst part of the trilogy. The sets, costumes, props, special effects, score, sound, and acting were all fantastic. I think that PJ has a lot in common with Lucas in that he's gotten to take a lot of credit for other people's genius. Hopefully whoever does The Hobbit will be able to keep the continuity in terms of the look of the movie (and bring back McKellen) while capturing the unique feel of The Hobbit. In fact, if The Hobbit is done right, then a lot of people who love LotR will hate it, and a lot of people who hated LotR will love it.
-
Judging from his past remarks about how he wanted to Lord-of-the-ringify the Hobbit I'm quite comfortable with Jackson not being involved. If he wasn't happy with the tone of the Hobbit well that's to goddmaned bad and he can move to the back of the bus. Let's bring in someone who knows how to treat sophisticated kids lit like Alphonso and get on with it. Jackson has done his bit but those people who think that the Kiwis are the be all and end all of this need to lay down the crack pipe.
-
And you expect anyone here to listen to you? F*ck off already.
-
Jackson rules. I'd rather watch movies by him about exciting new character and worlds. LOTR kicked ass, but I would like to see him move on and do something new.
-
Hey, I'm out of school for the Thanksgiving holiday and thought I'd talk to another 12 year old! Dumbass...
-
Yeah you're right. He should've done them for free. In fact, he should've paid for it himself and given all the money to charity. That's what any true film maker would have done. They wouldn't have minded getting four hours of sleep every night for free, but Jackson clearly did it for the money. He obviously held the final prints until literally the last second because he knew the unparalleled hype wouldn't be enough to make tons of money: all that hard work and lack of sleep and self-imposed pressure was for the cash despite a guaranteed fortune anyway. All that work for the fans, including the tons of documentaries and interviews and video diaries and direct comms with the fan site was for the cash that he might not have earned otherwise. It shouldn't have been made unless a director volunteered to do it for free, funding it with their money earned from stacking shelves. The same applies to any film ever made. I mean, these greedy bastards are doing this like a business.
-
Nov 20, 2006 10:43:04 AM CST
DufusyteII, New Line's offer is attempted blackmail!
by talkbacker with no name
Why do you think Peter sent a letter to a fansite in the first place?
It's quite simple (as Jackson says in the letter) that if an audit is done (now this is the IMPORTANT part people are missing) they will be "happy to accept whatever that ruling is". The fact New Line won't even consider the audit is very suspect indeed. I'm surprised anyone would even have to point out to you what a stupid thing it is to join an outstanding court case with a movie deal! -
Nov 20, 2006 10:50:07 AM CST
Midget King is only here for one reason it seems...
by talkbacker with no name
and that's to be a great big cave troll!
-
I pronounced Bilbo as Dildo. My teachers had to correct me constantly while giving me funny looks. Little did I realize what I was saying........
-
I would love to see some fresh blood give a new spin on Tolkien's great mythology. I'd personally go for Michael Winterbottom as he's a genius who can tackle any film genre he wants and still end up with a masterpiece. (Elves spouting improvised dialogue? Steve Coogan as Gandalf? Yes please!) Anyone suggest any other directors that could fill Mr Jackson's boots?
-
Darth Thoth. Capitalism is the reason you have a LOTR film trilogy in the first place. Capitalism is the reason you can sit behind that keyboard and type what you’re typing. Hippie communes don’t make films. Honestly knee jerk reactions setting capitalism equal to greed is just uneducated nonsense. PRIDE is the reason we’re not going to see a hobbit film. This is all about ego and who’s going to flinch first.
-
Pandamaster? Well put. Flawed, after obviously not reading my posts, but well put. Never once did I even remotely imply that PJ is some sort of a douche bag for not doing the movies for free. Hell, I'm glad he made the money. I was simply trying to get across that the motivation for the films was not solely on his passion. Money played a part also. I'm not knocking the man for cashing in on LOTR, I'm pointing out that if there wasn’t money to be made, he might have been less inclined to make them. I am sure someone out there is passionate about a live action Jem movie or a claymation Go-Bots movie, (don’t read into this and think its me) but there is no audience for it, no one would actually pay to see Lindsey Lohan play Jem, so no one will touch that fucking idea. Although if someone out there does, they owe me 20 bucks. Simply put, money is a huge motivation for make a movie. Nothing wrong with it, I’m just waiting for someone to admit PJ's passion wasn’t the only thing motivating him. After that, I will stop all this jibber jabber and stop posting.
-
Another reason why you can't make THE HOBBIT with the same heavy-handedness as you did with RINGS... The ring itself. In RINGS, the actual ring is an enigma. It weighs down everything. It has a voice, it has an influence, it has an entire perception of the world around it. In THE HOBBIT, the ring is a magic ring. It makes you invisible. That's it. My god, can you imagine watching half a 3 plus hour movie in ring world? Everything blurred, smudged and shaky. The audience would be throwing up in their popcorn. In THE HOBBIT, the ring is about as innocent as the hobbit himself. It takes time for it to get a grip on you. That was something that Jackson didn't explain very well in his trilogy. Frodo was supposed to possess the ring for like 30 odd years before he starts out on the road to Mordor. This was all passed over in the movies. Also cast-wise... Elves should look more different than they are portrayed in the RINGS movies. They are not just blond, girly-looking, GQ models. They should be more other-wordly. Maybe there's a film trick that can be done to make them look more stretched and alien-looking.
-
This sucks serious Gollum nuts. Does New Line not realize that they just canned the few people who could have made this well?
-
Seriously, after all the fan bitching about X3, it still kicked the hell out of the summer box office. The general movie-going public doesn't know and/or doesn't care about stuff like this. They'll go "Oh, a new Lord of the Rings movie? We should go" and that's it. No moral compass, no interest in filmmakers, nothing.
-
on this Fellowship audit; conditonal upon contacting to direct the Hobbit and swallowing a bit of pride. Unless, the deal New Line have offered in this regard shortchanges Jackson in some respect, who knows?
-
Nov 20, 2006 11:14:52 AM CST
Talkbackers who thing PJ's LOTR trilogy is no good...
by pwnedbystallone
SUCK. COCK. BY. CHOICE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1
-
This sucks. I do have hope that eventually all involved will come to their senses. But no Jackson probably means no McKellen Gandalf and no Serkis Gollum etc...., which is equally disappointing. McKellen stepping back into Gandalf the Grey would have been wonderful.
-
Boycott "Tenacious D in The Pick Of Destiny" from New Line, making them know full well that it is their Hobbit/Jackson decision that is spurring the boycott. You won't be missing much anyway.
-
So help me god I will make it a point to download it only so you never see one fucking red cent of my money.
-
But after that bloated, badly-cast, overlong epic, I'm glad that someone else will have the chance to take a crack at The Hobbit. Boycott? Over what? How has New Line acted badly here? What, they should let the option expire on an extremely valuable property because PJ won't be directing. Is Peter Jackson the ONLY guy in the world who we trust with Tolkien? Give me a break. I loved the Rings movies but they were far from perfect, and even had serious mis-steps in my eyes (Aragorn being portrayed as unsure of himself in ANY way, for instance). I'll happily see a non-PJ Hobbit. He's not the only freaking talented director in the world.
-
I'm assuming this is somethiing of a bully move from New Line to try to get Jackson to discuss the Hobbit with them, but I have a feeling they just screwed everyone over: Jackson and Co., the fans, and most notably themselves. Ugh...why do lawsuits have to take so friggin long?
-
...New Line doucebags! Say what you will 'bout Kong(I happened to like it, btw) but the LOTR fims were pure brilliance! I'd line up to watch a PJ and crew's four-hour movie about the elves in Rivendell raking up the leaves if they made it.
D-bag New Line jackasses! -
Nov 20, 2006 11:51:06 AM CST
The Midget_King if you think real film makers...
by talkbacker with no name
...like Jackson do it to make tons of money you are a complete fucking idiot! Nobody chooses filmmaking as a way to become a millionaire.
I'm glad you will not be posting again as you are nothing but a trouble making troll. If you don't have a love for film (or even a basic knowledge of it) get the fuck out! ...has he gone yet? -
They'll just bring in Ratner.
-
Jim Wynorsky? Fred Olen Ray? Albert Pyun? Let the Gods decide...
-
I'm shocked. The thing is, I wouldn't mind a new director so much if PJ and co. were still producing and writing. But to have an entirely new creative team??? How on Earth is anyone else going to tackle such a project and keep the tone of the original trilogy and get it right? And without Weta to do the makeup and effects?? And possibly without Ian McKellan or Andy Serkis??? Honestly, if they cast anyone else as Gandalf or Gollum that's pretty much blasphemy, and can only be compared poorly to what came before.
-
Can't disagree with you there... LOTR wasn't that good. Really, but I'm sorry, K. Smith told it well when he said it's basically a couple of guys walking in a forest with a ring, being badly chased by freaking orcs... The longest movie I ever fell asleep to... When I can sleep twice on one movie and not miss a beat... God.. The books were great, I din't expect Peter Jackson to do wonders, but damn... Could've been two movie instead or three with that storyline. And King Kong, for GOD'S SAKE!!! What a fu*ing disaster... I'm so happy I didn't pay to see it... Badly cast with Jack Black (C'mon give him a stupid role and he'll do fine but a serious one...) That was the worst effects ever when they were running with edinosaurs, Jurassic Park was more believable and it was made like 10 years agos... He should take a break from directing for a while get is shit togheter and take on a small project, he's way too burnt out... Hell when you give Singer a call to help out directing your movie, because you're passing out every ten minutes you gotta be in trouble... And enough of the Rings.. they made it.. It's enough, if I have to see H Woods little puppy who got beaten with a stick look again .. my god... This actor has the range of a banana peel... the sorry look, and the happy sorry look... do something with those eyebrows, make them do something else than look sorry geeezzzzz... When he was angry, he looked like I would've slapped him in the face and he would've started again with the weak puppy eyes... I say trash the Hobbits for 10 years, then do it... Try at least to build up some hype...
-
.. exactly... let Jackson produce it, but don't let him touch anything for a couple of year.. get his head straight...
-
frankly, PJ and Fran should suck it up and begin talks despite the lawsuit. If truly all they want is a neutral third party decision on the FOTR accounting, then it shouldn't preclude ongoing talks about future projects. This is disingenuous and it means there's something else going on they're not talking about. I see 2 possibilities about that: 1. They think New Line's accounting is unnacceptable (for whatever reason) and if the court doesn't agree, they will not do business with New Line again; 2. This is a resonse designed to generate fan outcry which PJ and Fran hope will bring New Line back to the table - kind of a standoff, each is waiting for the other to blink.
-
...hoping that this email is proved to be a hoax. Still, no? Damn it!
-
Then maybe New Line will see what a dead end this is and just bail on it. Then again, they will probably charge headlong right into production. Fuck continuity, fuck vision right New Line?
-
Nov 20, 2006 12:28:02 PM CST
Call, Write, Email New Line! Here's contact info:
by don diego de la vega
New Line Cinema
888 7th Avenue
New York, NY 10106-2599
Phone 212.649.4900
General comment form:
http://www.newline.com/contactus.shtml
Robert K. Shaye & Michael Lynne
Co-Chairmen and Co-CEOs
New Line Cinema Corporation
888 7th Avenue
New York, NY 10106
-
Peter Jackson has no understanding of Tolkien's works and sucks as a moving pictures director. He should work for Disney or better take over the taping of the Teletubbies. So whatever the reason that would keep his ass off the Hobbit's back I like it! Зачот! Дайте два!
-
Did Ringw(b)earer9 just give you a huge BJ to make you type that ridiculous post? What an idiot.
-
it's actually kinda sad that Jackson is using his fans this way. it's all about money. if he really wanted to do The Hobbit he'd have signed up by now. New Line and Saul Zaentz are gonna get most of the proceeds from the film with or without Jackson.
-
Your brilliant! Ya, PJ and other directors don't care about 'artistry'...just money. We all know it's such a piece of cake to become a successful director.
-
Fucks up so many projects, don't it just?
-
dumbdumbdumbdumbdumbdumbdumbdumbdumbdumbdumbdumbdumbdumbdumbdumbdumbdumbdumbdumbbdumbdumbdumbdumbdumbdumbdumbbdumbdumbdumbdumbdumbdumbdumb
-
Take out the lube people because this is going to be a particularly unpleasant ride. I heard Ratner is already signed with WS Anderson for the second flick. Tell me, friends, WHEN DID NEW LINE THE WISE ABANDON REASON FOR MADNESS????!?!?!?!?!??!?!!??!?? On second thoughts............is Peter about to have his ass handed to him on a plate? Is he going to be severely pwned in the a-hole harder than a horny hooker by a better director? I recently saw ROTK again and I honestly think some of it is really bad. He ruined Aragorn's story, he ruined Frodo and Sam's story and made it too cheesy, he used slow motion far too much. The Two Towers was a much better movie. Could another director hand him his ass, spit in his face and murder his hamsters?
-
As if this movie needs to be fucking made in the first place...
-
Man, what a bunch of stupid arseholes they are over at New Line. No doubt they'll hand this project over to some fucking muppet who's only done music vids and TV commercials. I hope all the original cast refuse to be involved.
-
Well, he's going to be finished on Transformers soon, so he'll be looking for a new franchise to fuck up completely. Beware!!!
-
...The original Star Wars trilogy had a different director come on board for The Empire Strikes Back. Regardless of how people think of the new ones, people regard A New Hope as a great film and The Empire Srikes Back as just as great or better.
There is still hope. There are plenty of talented directors out there who respect Jackson's vision and would want to emmulate that vision as much as possible. I already expect The Hobbit to feel somewhat different from LOTR, so this might work.
Saying that, PJ was still my first choice. -
Damn it already
-
was a joke..I can't believe there are still people who thought that was real...anyway.
-
They wanna make the movie now! Not wait ten maybe fifteen years for PJ to decide to finally make this movie. Let's get it going already. I don't care about PJ's other projects. Just make The damn Hobbit. I wanna feel the magic of LOTR just one more time!
-
Nov 20, 2006 1:44:31 PM CST
The Hobbit without Jackson? Then NEW LINE are washed up
by alucardvsdracula
Obviously there are plans afoot to go back to a two-bit video distribution company who specialize in low budget slasher movies. Elm Street 20 it is then, yipee. WHAT A COMPLETE BUNCH OF FUCKING RETARDS. IT BEGGERS BELIEF IT TRUELY DOES.
-
for me is the lack of continuity in the films now....it won't fell like it is part of the same set of films...i have a feeling this isn't played out yet....it does seem to be a bit of poker being played here...
-
This terrible news has effected by lower regions in such a way i haven't been able to wank all day.
Here is the list for the directors. I got it off a mate who was fisting ordesky's wife and found it tucked away just behind her clit. As we all know Ordesky believed it safe there as even here doesn't venture up there much. He prefers to get on his knees and rim a nice man instead.
-
...only the braindead (see what I did there?) could really fancy the idea of Jackson et al fashioning The Hobbit into LOTR: The Phantom Menace. After all their fine talk of respecting the spirit and intention of Tolkien when adapting LOTR (which to their credit they did), does it really seem like a respectful act to turn this lovely little tale into a bombastic three hour epic? The tone is vastly different between The Hobbit and LOTR... I hate to put it like this, but if Peter Jackson does get to do The Hobbit (and I'm 99% sure he will - this is just sabre rattling), he will basically rape the text and turn it into something unrecognisable. I'm sorry Peter...
-
Directed by Michael Bay or Uwe Boll. Cinematic Genius brought to you by New Line Cinema!
-
The list (I have had to clean the menstural fluid off it first)
Anton Fuqua: A talentless director who would know doubt cast Sidney Poitier as Gandalf, Gary Coleman as Gollum and Denzil Washington as Bilbo. In another words, a shit film with black bastards aplenty
Michael Winner: Plans to dig up that old cunt Bronson for Gandalf. Bilbo's Mother and sisters are attacked and gangraped by Moria Orcs at the start of the film and are then shit on by the leader. This sets up a dramatic ending when gandlaf sexually molests smaug and skull fucks Bilbo. He then hides the ring up an infant frodo when he rapes him at the close of the film -
I blame Ian McKellen for all of this. Maybe if he had done the decent thing and blew the whole motley crew at New Line this might have been prevented.
-
Doesn't he have enough fuckin money? Sure, New Line is rich too, that is why they wanted to settle the lawsuit. Instead Jackson wants to drag this out in court so he can get his audit. I agree with posters who say Jackson didn't truly want to make this movie. He wants to make King Kong and Lovely Bones and some ridiculous dragon film. New Line knows they can't wait forever, Ian McKellen is old, they want to make this happen, and jackson has one excuse after another delaying it. This sucks because even if a different director makes a good movie, the tone and style will be missing. But I have to blame Jackson, because by his own account, New Line wanted to settle, the settlement would give him more money if he agreed to do The Hobbit than if he pursued his lawsuit further. His logic that it is somehow impossible to settle a suit if there is a condition that he supposedly is willing to fulfill anyways makes no sense unless he did not truly want to make The Hobbit. Furthermore if we accept his argument that he couldn't agree to settle, why not just make the movie and ignore the lawsuit? Isn't he a professional? Can't he get a film made and let his lawyers and accountants handle the suit? That also doesn't make sense. If I was the head of New Line and I had basically begged Jackson to make the movie and offered to settle and heard Jackson's answer then I would conclude that Jackson doesn't really want to make the Hobbit, that he is just acting like he might as leverage in order to string me along and get the most money out of his lawsuit possible.
-
and the backlash is actually substantive and threatening enough that they sort their shit out.
-
Snot. maybe it's the nasal honk.
-
Actually, Fox did'nt want to wait for Joss Whedon, who they approached first to replace Singer as the director for X3. He declined because he needed a year to redo the script, but Fox was abdamant on releasing it in 2006 as opposed to waiting until 2007, thus leading to hiring Ratner, who at the time was free due to script revisions for Rush Hour 3.
-
whilst technically competent films, Peter Jackson did, irrationally and inexplicably, turn the Hobbits in the LOTR field wandering festivals into latent homosexuals. LOTR was, if you will, a pre-emptive "mini-Brokeback Mountain", with huge fields boring the audience senseless instead of Heath Ledger mincing around. many of you may very well be aroused by the idea of Peter Jackson having another crack at the dwarf-wannabees, in particular that chap who posted earlier complaining about his inability to masturbate. I for one am delighted to learn that this film is not getting made by PJ. if i wanted to see homosexual midgets running around with gay abandon, i would consult a shop which deals in the more specialised types of films for the more discerning gentleman.
-
and i quote : "The only thing I could have done without was the ice-skating scene.". you don't perhaps think that 90 minutes on a boat, with Adrian Brody rocking side to side and Jack Black looking like the twat he is, could have benefitted from a bit less directorial artistic wanking and a bit more editing?
-
I also hope nobody from the LOTR films shows up in this.... dumb dumb dumb dumb... damn...
-
The only Gay reference was the scene on the special edition in the deleted section when in the Fellowship when the Prcs are torturing Gollum in Minas Morgul you see them anally assaulting him with a black rider orally penertrating poor Smeagol.
Even so i wank over it -
WHAT THE HELL IS WRONG WITH NEW LINE, I WILL NOT SEE THIS FILM, EVEN IF IT DIRECTED MY STEVEN SPIELBERG, I WILL NOT SEE THIS UNLESS PETER JACKSON IS INVOLVED!!!
-
I don't think I've seen a bad movie from that guy.
-
by 90 minutes on the boat you mean the 30 minutes right?;)
-
Christopher Nolan's Batman was lame.
-
The Hobbit is not even intellectually on the same level as the Rings books so the more they can do to separate a film version from the near perfect LOTR movies is fine by me. The Hobbit is pretty much a dumbed down kids version of everything that Tolken later did a better job retelling and refining in the Rings books. So much of the Hobbit on film would feel and look like such a retread of what we have already seen in the Rings movie that I honestly can’t even believe Jackson would even entertain the idea of a film version and waste his time with it. I know it is a story that is very beloved by millions but if it were a crucial part of the LOTR saga Jackson and new line would have done it first to begin with. I don’t really gives a rats ass if The Hobbit is ever put to film but if it ever is I hope it is 100% separate from the rings movies as it should be. They should get the cat that directed the Narnia flick to do the Hobbit because the book is far more in that kind of tone than what Jackson has already established as the cinematic look for the Rings books.
I would much rather see Peter return to his Horror roots for his next project. -
This will go down as one of the stupidest decisions in Hollywood history -- if not _the_ stupidest. (And with all due respect, Moriarty... "a big part of the reason LOTR worked overall"??? How about _the_ reason?)
-
Yeesh, this talkback is about as streched out to uselessness as my ex's cooze.
-
Trust me. If New Line chooses to also respond publicly and point fingers, this is going to get really nasty, really fast. I have lost some of my respect for Jackson.
-
Settling a lawsuit IS a terrible reason to make a movie; plus it's a bully move on behalf of New Line. Jackson and his people gave almost seven full years of their life to the LOTR films, and they do deserve every penny that they were promised, and if they have any reason to think otherwise they have every right to an audit. Studios trying to get away with paying people less than they're owed, especially in the case of large properties like this, is about as new as New Coke. And it's unfortunate that the wronged party has to be made to look like a litigious prick, but it's the studio's fault for letting it get to that point and being willing to piss off the person who has made them more money than pretty much the entire rest of their properties put together.
-
And rightly fucking derserved!! Only the most ridiculous fucking debacle in recent history. Jesus H Christ - come on Newline! You guys fuckers showed the whole industry how to be a real studio, that gives a shit about source material, creative freedom, and most importantly the fans. PJ gets a lot of credit for revolutionizing the way the fanbase is now involved in the process, but he couldn't have done that without the studio's support. Please, for fuck's sake, pull your fingers out of your asses and dont ruin this for everyone, yourselves included. LotR saved your studio - don't forget that!
-
jackson not being abused across the boards for once.this was a total bully move by new line...of course jackson stands to make more money doing the hobbit than he does in some court case but it is the principle of it. studios do this shit all the time..cooking books.
-
No. I liked the boat stuff. As for the Jack Black comment, there is no real way to answer that other than I enjoyed his performance.
-
Jackson did very well in visualising LOTR, middle earth and all that . . but that visualisation fr the genral look and feel to the film is out there. I'm not saying any old hack of a director can step in and copy this but there are many talented directors out there who could make a decent film from the hobbit. A couple of them may also have the passion that Jackwson has. They would also input their own vision on this rather than just repeating what has been seen previously in LOTR.
Always remembers studios will make films that see as making money. They do not give a damn about doing something for the fans which is why they will always try to squeeze another dollar from a franchise, which is why I will probably see the hobbit no matter who makes it. Hell I saw X3 knowing how bad it would be and it didn't disappoint in the crap stakes. It's why I will see Hulk 2. It's why I slow down when there has been a car accident. Curiosity is a killer -
Lets face it, Jackson did not understand the books. He made three "action" movies with out thoughtfullness with over the top sentimentality with manufactured romantic subplots.
Peter Jackson is a crappy film maker who would not know subtlety if it painted itself purple and sang in a shrill voice "subtlety is here again!"
I now have hope for "The Hobbit" -
Are people in Hollywood actually trying to not make money? Goddamn this is dumb.
-
If Howard Shore does the music for the Hobbit, all will be well. Maybe with PJ out of the way, Shore can score the Hobbit with peace of mind.
-
He's always on hand to save a doomed franchise when the original visionary has been dumped by some greedy, seething, petty corporate suits. Right? How dare a filmmaker want to get what's in their contract? Contracts are just a bunch of words and lines to sign on, why should Hollywood have to honour them? At least, why should they start now? God, but Hollywood studios make me a ashamed to be a jew...
-
Disappointing news.
I would've liked Jackson to do this movie so that it would have the same feel as the other three.
Unfortunately, it will likely still be successful because the general public won't care who's directing.
-
...concerning a Hobbit movie as being, by necessity, a retread of the Rings movies' themes and such. The Hobbit takes place a century before the Rings trilogy. It's a different time in Middle Earth. For one, there are still dragons. For another, magic is far more integral in the fabric of the universe (or at least overtly so). Remember, by the time of TFOTR, Gandalf is essentially just an eccentric old firecracker peddler as far as anyone knows. In the time of The Hobbit, he's a wandering wizard of some renown and fearful respect (to peoples other than the elves). There is still open hostility between the elves and the dwarves. Trolls wander the countryside instead of being relegated to the deepest, darkest tunnels. Spiders talk (as opposed to just being menacing blobs of hair, legs and poison). Goblins (rather than Orcs or Half-orcs) are the armies of darkness. Men are kind of a joke (except for Bard, who rises above his station as a miserable tub-thumping Lake Man). It's a much more fanciful story than the very historical feeling and ever-so-serious Rings trilogy. That alone makes it worth doing. And let's not forget that battle of five fucking armies. How cool would that be to see on the screen?
-
Nov 20, 2006 3:52:16 PM CST
"Hollywood studios make me a ashamed to be a jew"
by talkbacker with no name
Paralyser-pro, think that's the funniest line in a talkback i've ever read. hehehehe and the best TB name!
-
Nov 20, 2006 3:56:32 PM CST
Someone brought up a good point re the Tolkien estate.
by orbots commander
If New Line's proposed THE HOBBIT doesn't have their blessing, this movie is dead in the water. The one-two punch of no PJ and no Tolkien family backing will strangle this flick in its cradle.
-
The reason to make a movie is to get it made. If a settlement is what is necessary to make the movie happen then you make the settlement happen. New Line wasn't saying the settlement was required to make the movie, they were simply saying they had to make the movie soon. If I was this Ordesky guy and I was hearing Jackson's statements I would conclude that I was being strung along and that Jackson had no genuine interest in doing the Hobbit, that he was only dangling that carrot as leverage in getting his audit. New Line could agree to the audit, but that would potentially take too long to resolve before New Line's rights expire and at the end of that they would only have Jackson's word that he would then direct Hobbit. How do they know that after they have waited god knows how long for the audit that Jackson would then shoot Hobbit? Especially since he refuses to guarantee that he will make a movie after a lawsuit is resolved. If I was Ordesky I would say to myself either I wait so long for someone who won't commit to a project that I probably lose the opportunity to make the project, or I make the project with someone else now.
-
My memory of this may be a bit fuzzy but, I don't think it matters what the Tolkien Estate thinks if they no longer hold the film rights. I certainly don't remember Christopher Tolkien giving his "blessing" to PJ's LOTR. The fact that the movies were made anyway is proof that it wouldn't have made a difference.
-
I dont know whether to be hurt or laugh at being called a troll more than once in my life. It goes to show you that people like Talkbacker with no name is still stuck in his D & D days, waiting for that magic sword to do 1d6 damage. Why cant you people simply admit that money is a factor when movies are made? This whole films are directed solely on artistry nonsense has gotten old. Look at fucking Anderson and how he fucks up everything he touches. He attempted to cash in on the many many people dying to see an Alien vs Predator movie. Do you honestly believe his passion for both franchises drove him to direct that? Fuck no, he did it thinking he could make a shit load of money off fans anxiously wanting to see such a movie. If he was passionate about it, he wouldnt have shit on the continuety of both franchises. And to tell me people dont set out to make mad cash as directors is bullshit. People have bills. Passion doesnt pay bills. Money does. And if you people are so sick of me commenting, dont answer my fucking posts. Besides, its not nice to talk to trolls! Fags.
-
Do you mind sharing with us how it was that "Jackson did not understand the books"?!And anyone claiming that LOTR is "gay porn" or a "pre-emptive mini-Brokeback Mountain" is a repressed, closet homosexual trying foolishly to disguise their own self-hate.Case closed. End of fucking story. Do. Not. Debate. Me. On. This.
-
Maybe we can get a well paced 2 hour movie of a 2 hour story instead of 3 hours of boredom.
-
What the hell?!? Just settle the damn law suit if you're concerned about the timing! So I hope the other parties are under contract (WETA, actors, etc.) or this is really gonna suck! You gotta AT LEAST have Peter and company write the thing! This sucks big time! Why are studios so stupid?
-
Not to mention a few other posters. We've all read Jackson's past comments about LOTRing The Hobbit, completely ignoring the tone and content of the original source material. Yeah, I do love the LOTR movies and slight directorial mistakes aside, have found them to be very, very good, but PJ doesnt seem to want to make the Hobbit, but rather, LOTR part 0. Remember, PJ wants to show the white council's ousting of the necromancer, Legolas helping Bilbo, an Aragorn and Eowyn cameo, and G-d knows what else. I'm sorry, but the Hobbit is a fantastic and excellently written children's story, and its tone should reflect this. Anywho, thats my whole take on this: judging by his past comments, PJ seems all wrong for this project. The director should respect his source material and its no fault of whomever is chosen to direct The Hobbit that the film won't line up with PJ's interpretation of LOTR. After all, it was Jackson's derivations from text that resulted in a Donald DuckISH Gollum and tornado effects whenever someone wears the ring.
-
as november 20th - the greatest day in ringwearers life...where for art thou oh wise ringy
-
Here is one problem with your premise: are you actually trying to equate Peter Jackson with Paul W.S. Anderson?Here is another: are you actually trying to say that NO movie is made for passionate artistic reasons?
-
Jackson turned it down because he didn't accept that making the movie was a good enough reason to settle his suit, which is why I'm convinced that he isn't really into making Hobbit. Notice how he says he was willing to make it but was waiting for NL to call. Is his phone broken? I think his pride is more at work here than his intergrity.
-
When I'm directly quoting something someone said earlier, you betcha.
-
This just doesn't make any sense. If he didnt' want to make it, why post an open letter (basically) saying he wanted to make it but they pulled him off? Why not just openly say he didn't want to make it? Why not say he wanted to produce but find another director like on Halo? At least he'd have some say in the movie. Whatever, fifteen minuets later and I'm already over it. I remember when Peter Jackson was first announced as the LOTR director how angry I was. Who the hell was this guy? But it turned out OK, so I guess lightning could strike twice and they find someone good to take his place... As long as everyone is treating the source material with some respect we'll be ok. It could be worse, I'll save my ire for when they announce the replacement, if it's Ratner or Boll!
-
Nov 20, 2006 5:04:57 PM CST
The Midget_King you trolling, homophobic idiot!
by talkbacker with no name
Don't you ever compare Anderson to Jackson again, you nasty little troll! And secondly, if you carry on talking that homophobic shit at us you will not last long here. You have a voice on this talkback and this is how you use it? tut tut silly boy.
-
I'm glad to see some support for New Line here (and no, I'm not an executive in disguise). PJ brought fantasy to the forefront in cinema. Good for him. But "The Hobbit" is thematically very different. Let someone else make it, instead of trying to "correct" the timeless material by artificially bending it towards LOTR. I say have Terry Gilliam direct it. He is at the same time both child-friendly but edgy, exactly how Professor Tolkien wanted The Hobbit to be--British fairytale telling is NOT Disney. Tolkien hated Disney's Snow White because it sugar coated things too much. Gilliam would be perfect! On a completely different note, um, I do have to question New Line's business sense in short-changing their golden boy in any way, if only for the fan-backlash (forget the money, piss off your fans and you're dead). It kind of reminds me how wCw died. Then again, they were also owned by AOL Time Warner, weren't there?
-
email them too - go to www.newline.com, to the corporate tag, then FAQ then still got a question at the end and email them!!
I've just read the email from Peter Jackson regarding New Line's removing him and his production team from the Hobbit - thought i'd add my opinion to the hopefully huge amounts of mail you're getting regarding this terrible news.
You're making a big mistake. If you want to make history, you know, the kind that 50 years from now people will still be buying box sets of and copies on whatever format we'll be getting our films on then - make the hobbit with peter jackson and his team and in new zealand.
If you want to make a cheap buck that no true fan will go and see, annoy some very powerful people with regard to the very loyal cast from the LOTR franchise (do you honestly think they'll be that interested in appearing in future newline projects now they know how much you shafted Peter Jackson?) and make a film that'll be a footnote to the other films and be a 'oh they also made the hobbit - but it was rubbish, i wouldn't bother' then go ahead but you'll make less money i guarentee it.
Whats so wrong with what PJ and team have asked for, if they've got a 'audit' clause in the contract then give them the audit - what are you afraid of? Is it so unreasonable to want to solve the legal issues before discussing terms for Hobbit? I bet you this will end up costing you far more than the law suit would. Peter doesn't seem (from the email) to want to just settle, he wants someone independent to take a look at the figures... i just don't see the harm.
I'm not a die hard LOTR fan and to be honest didn't like hobbit on first read. However i was looking forward to seeing Peter and team's version and would've seen it several times - not to mention being a completist i'd have got the new extended trilogy boxset with the hobbit added.... now, i don't think i'll intentionly see a new line film again.
Fans are loyal - we can talk up or talk down a film - and boy if you thought snakes on a plane was made largely 'by the fans enthusiasm' then you're going to be shocked to see what the internet community can do to a film it hates. Bring someone else, other actors, take it out of NZ and you're going to have a dudd film - a turkey. When placed against the original trilogy, the film will be laughably amature and be just like comparing the 70s cartoon 1/2 finished lord of the rings... a joke.
I would rethink my plans if i were you but then again i wouldn't have made the texas chainsaw massacre bad remake films you guys did so maybe you're just not that bright.
Lisa
x
-
Come on Bob Shaye. PJ made you a player, and a fortube. Trust PJ and pay up.
-
LOTR WASN'T FUCKING LONG ENOUGH??? I love them as much as the next nerd, but I don't Peter Jackson's bearded ass touching anything again until he hires a fucking editor that will get me out of the fucking theater in under two and half hours.
-
fuckin fuck I'm so fuckin pissed off
-
Hey, it could happen.
-
fuckfuckfuck
-
no fucking way. have you seen tideland. the guy has lost his fucking mind. there is no way new line are going to risk their baby with him. I bet ratner is the way they are thinking...X men 3 for all the crap it got still made coin and that is all that matters at the end of the day. I can't wait to read the feedback the day he is announced
-
Nov 20, 2006 6:10:41 PM CST
If no PJ then good alternate director favorites are:
by orbots commander
Alfonso Cuaron, Peter Weir, Ridley Scott or Guillermo del Toro. That's the prestige director route. New Line could possibly go hacky and hire Brett Ratner or Joel Schumacher to direct THE HOBBIT.
-
[[[You can E-mail New Line at http://www.newline.com/contactus.shtml]]]
I'm writing to complain that Peter Jackson and company have been told their services will not be available for The Hobbit.
Now, don't get me wrong. While I'm an avid Lord of the Rings fan, I'm not fanatical to the point that I don't believe that only Jackson and company can do it justice.
However...
I really wish that people from New Line and Peter Jackson can sit down and work out your differences over the issue of profits. There were LOTS of profits from the LOTR movies/DVDs to go around. Given Jackson's extremely meticulous nature, and the fact that there are been plenty of lawsuits over movie profits in the past, I would not be at all surprised that Jackson is at least partially right in his lawsuit.
I think it is very sad and very wrong to veto this project for Jackson and company.
By making movies like the LOTR movies, New Line has shown that it can make fine movies, and not just junk movies like The Core and Snakes on a Plane.
Even if New Line isn't directly involved with The Hobbit, many movie fans will never forget (and may not forgive) that it was New Line that prevented Jackson's involvement with The Hobbit. Because you know and I know, The Hobbit will be made. But will it be the best Hobbit that it could be? Without Jackson and Weta's involvement, probably not.
Laurie Mann
Pittsburgh, PA -
someone REALLY doesn't want these accounts audited... they must be in it right up to their neck if they stand to lose more from that than they'd stand to make from a Jackson Hobbitreally - EVERYONE can see that Jackson's Hobbit is a licence to print money. if i were a New Line shareholder, i'd be wanting a word with someone...
-
Really, how would singing elves and a well-spoken dragon and a trio of cockney trolls fit in with Jackson's gritty vision of Middle-Earth? Not that I wouldn't love to find out! Bring him back, idiots!
-
I mean, Newline should certainly have mentioned the deadline they were under before abruptly cutting off negotiations (kinda a key point there no?)…. But by the same token this whole line of logic: “In our minds (settling the lawsuit) is not the right reason to make a film and if a film of The Hobbit went ahead on this basis, it would be “doomed” (even though PJ would make more $ that way) just strikes me as bullshit. I mean, is PJ actually saying that if they tied a settlement and making a new film together, then by default the only reason he would be making the hobbit would be to settle? Supposedly he was already excited to make the flick, so who the hell cares if they tie in a settlement than banks him more cash to boot….sorry, but that’s a load of crap….and a rather transparent one.
-
most studio execs like to exert their power over players like Peter Jackson. Most people who run studios are talentless hacks who are envious of those who have the skills and passion to make an actual movie.
Making THE HOBBIT in this decade without Peter Jackson is akin to making INDIANA JONES without Spielberg or Harrison Ford (and we'd all be happier without George there screwing up Darabont's script!!!!)
I'm willing to bet the ASSOCIATED PRESS reports on Jackson's email and post on ONERING within 48 hours....
-
SHUT UP! 50 Years ago you were all hanging upside down from a tree with a cork up your stupid asses!
-
Does this go "LOTR-prequel" or go stand alone film? As many here have pointed out, The Hobbit is a completely different tale with a completetly different tone. Reading some of PJ's thoughts about it, and therefore one wonders how much he would have changed it to make it fit with his existing films. It seems that he did indeed intend to "LOTR" them up if you will and it's hard to say whether or not this would have been a good idea. Few here have pondered the notion that PJ may have have been setting himself up for a fall akin to Lucas and his prequels. As one poster above mentioned, the whole "talking ring/blurry-horror show world of the of the ring won't fly in The Hobbit...it just makes you invisible....from a story-telling stand-point anyway (I always wondered how PJ intended to handle that) However, PJ & co. did set the bar for middle-earth looks-wise, music-wise, and cast-wise, Even if if the new team went with a totally fresh aproach, any film-makers would end emulating the style even if only by accident. Especially since they would be based on works by the same author (even the two Dune movies have many similarties in costumes & sets etc.) Basically, it should to look and sound pretty much like the other movies. It's not really something you can "reboot" even if you tried...and they shouldn't they try. Afterall, it's still New-Line, so it's would technically be thought of as part of the "franchise" (at least in the mindsof average movie-goers) especially coming out so close to the other movies. So, yeah, you wanna try and get WETA involved (and yes, they WILL do it even for a non-Wingnut Hobbit film. They aren't stupid, they'll gladly take New-Line's money for their services)both on FX and design. Howard Shore isn't gonna turn down a job unless he has a conflict. Now, the style as I said, should definitely be duplicated. Tone is something else altogether. You either change The Hobbit to suit a "LOTR-tone" or you change the tone to suit The Hobbit. If you manage to snag the three actors you need. (or even one) then that sets the film further toward establishing it as part of the "LOTR-franchise" But, this isn't LOTR...even with PJ at the helm it isn't. And trying to make it so could have well been a mistake (even with PJ) So, the fine line that needs to be walked is... it can't be a total reboot ala Batman-Begins, but at the same time it probably shouldn't be a full-on prequel, but at he same time it needs to feel like it's part of the canon. Tough, tough, tough. The answer may be in the Casino Royale approach. It's still very much a Bond flick (with Judi Dench back too!) but yet totally different. A reboot without being a reboot. It's still the same series unlike BB, but stands as the potential to be it's own series in way. The Dench angle should also be kept in mind if they score the original actors. McKellen should almost play Gandalf like a different character (in some ways, he is) if he's in it. So there you have it...a stand alone movie, yet still semi-part of the whole picture. A fresh new take, yet not a total dismisal of what came before. To pull off such an incredible balancing act will require a very, very skilled director though.
-
I would rather have the guy who made FOTR than anyone else make The Hobbit….but the last 2 LOTRs became progressively more silly (especially action wise) culminating in the his last endeavor – as the action in Kong was outright stupid. Admittedly the actors (especially Ian) might not come back without PJ, and there don’t seem to be many great directors around to replace him left… but I’m not as upset as I would have been a few years ago by this news. Hopefully they’ll stick with New Zealand over some ridiculous Green screen…. Gotta give PJ credit for that one…
-
I hate it when I miss typos.
-
and as one person pointed out Howard Shore is the key so he should do the music.
-
Peter Jackson would NEVER EVER EVER come out and say he doesn't want to make the Hobbit because that would piss off all his fanboys and girls. I honestly don't think he does want to make it, and would rather move on to other things. BUT he's never going to come out and say that. So this public denouncement of New Line is a classic way to spin the buzz to reflect Jackson in the more positive light. He struck first, against a big, supposedly dirty corporation, therefore people are on his side. I hope New Line sticks to their guns, and when the audit finally takes place they find out that Wingnut actually owes THEM money for going so over schedule and over budget! Ha. (Just kidding, I don't really want that either... but I do find it funny that the supposedly lovey-dovey film-making process of the LOTR films was not all puppies and ice cream like they made us believe... I knew it was too good to be true)
-
for the Hobbit. Just saw Pan's Labyrinth and it is INTENSE and AWESOME. I'll go start a petition: GDT for the Hobbit, fuck yeah!!1!1!! (I DETEST online petitions, and those of you actually taking the time to write to New Line, I feel bad for you. They're probably just going to gather all the letters and have a nice weenie and marshmallow roast with your precious words. Because they are corporate bastards after all.)
-
fuck I'm choking own my own rage here
only kiwis can pull off the hobbit -
Are you serious? Can you confirm that/who are you?
-
Jeezus fuckin' Christmas. You didn't really try that hard to make NO SENSE WHATSOEVER did you???!!! Come on dude. You can do better than that.Cunt.
-
Capitalism is what made LOTR happen in the FIRST PLACE genius. Blowing The Hobbit for a pennies on the dollar Audit by bringing in the wrong person (as it appears is your position here) to direct is simply bad business. ..sorta like socialism- either way it ain’t “capitalism” (Which is the best economic system there is by the way… but that’d probably take too long to explain to you).
-
I'm genuinely upset to read this. I'm not interested in seeing somebody elses "vision" of this world. Just, bleh.
-
You guys are aware that Gollum was a 3D model, right? They remade Yoda, I think the technology exists for another FX shop to duplicate Gollum exactly, and there is a line of voice impersonators a mile long. Most of them suck but they could grab any good voice actor and you'd never know the difference. King Kong was so godawful PJ lost a lot of leverage, and look how successful the recent Harry Potter films have been under new direction (and a new Dumbledore). Just make it one movie and everyone take a deep breath.
-
What is Peter Jackson doing next? I would really like to see something from him that is really scaled back again. The Hobbit would have sucked anyway, you cannot recreate the magic that was Lord of the Rings.
-
But if they shoot in NZ it would seem natural to hire WETA. And I'm sure they wouldn't have much trouble aquiring Serkis' services for Gollum's voice at least. McKellen? Uh...two words LAST STAND. Weaving...if he was willing to do those two shitty Matrix movies...I'll leave it at that.
-
I think it more interesting whether producer Barrie Osbourne will be involved. He also directed some of the best sequences in the movies. Its to be hoped some involvement by PJ and weta will happen. But I have no issue if another director takes the helm. Its kind of like being antsy about how TESB would turn out after Lucas dropped his dir's chair but I think things will end up fine and certainly wont be out of sync with the LOTR movies in tone and style. Id love to see PJ be an exec prod for sure tho.
-
I don't know who you are Mr. Phart. But the more I read up on Softley, the less far-fetched your claim seems.
-
Let's hope not.
-
I think Phartegod is supposed to be Don Murphy or one of his "stooges".Anyone?
-
Call me crazy, but I think in this situation an outpouring of fan support much actually help. If you can please sign the Hobbit petition at http://www.petitiononline.com/hobnow/petition.html
This cannot stand unchallenged! -
The name's Post. 1st Post. BADA BADAAAAAAA BADADAAA!
-
There are alot of pieces that fit together when you look at "Inkheart"
Google and IMDB the guy (along with Inkheart). At that very least phart had a nice guess there. Btw Orbots, I didn't see K-Pax, but I thought Backbeat ruled. I kinda dug Skeleton Key too -
it is a pretty random name to use if it is not fact...wow.
-
I've read all of PharteGod's posts, and I've come to the conclusion that he's Thrall- the guy who kept on posting with "insider info" every time a Harry-as-producer article came up.
You said yourself that Softley had that Krueger/John Carpenter of Mars/Harry connection, so that's probably reason enough for Thrall Murphy to try and get us all in a lather. -
I wouldn't be bummed at all. I probably even preferred Backbeat to HELP!
-
So, if it is true, then you can probably count him in voice at least.
-
King Kong (1933)- laid the groundwork & an icon
The Son of Kong- a more down-to-earth where son of Kong is more humanistic, like a curious animal, Carl Denham makes friends w/ him is warm-hearted
King Kong vs. Godzilla- trilogy goess out a-blazin w/ Kong hooked on some jungle juice going toe-to-toe in a vicious struggle w/ another King, King of the Monsters, Godzilla
-
Listen folks, my comments were not to debate capitalism vs. socialism (even though I advocate the latter). That debate is irrelevant for this conversation. My point was just to draw attention to an inherent shortcoming within capitalism. Let's be real, the movie biz is about making money. But it's also about art (or should be). And it's a give and take- balancing out the artists' visions/ work and the responsibilities/ desires of the studio (i.e.- budget constraints, money returns, etc.). My point was that whenever the profit motive is present it compromises (to whatever degree) the freedom of art, human rights, whatever. When your desire for the profit motive causes you to do stupid things (like New Line did) what this equates to is greed. So in this case, as a result of New Line's greed art will be compromised because Jackson and Co. are now off the project. That's my point. My initial mention of capitalism was not really to start some debate over its utility but rather to highlight an inherent shortcoming/ burden within it. Bottom line is that it's a profit motive system that when unchecked facilitates greed. I see that many of y'all have jumped on my use of the word. In retrospect I probably should've just left it out because my main focus was not to debate capitalism vs. some other economic system. Now if some of y'all want to debate capitalism vs. socialism... we can do that. What's really good? But again, the point of my initial comment(s) weren't to do that so reread them again.
-
Rare, valuable and something that the business of Hollywood will never understand. However great movies cannot be made without it. It is a paradox. Peter & Fran not only have that integrity as filmmakers, but also a human beings... I believe whatever film projects they choose to do will be great and I hope their fans stand by them. How can those New Line folks be so stupid? Oh, yeah, they worship the almighty $ above all else.
-
It's not that hard. The "blurred" world Frodo saw when he put on the Ring was there because, as Gandalf said, the "Ring had awoken". During the events of The Hobbit (and hell, even during the beginning of FOTR) the Ring is still "asleep", rather dormant, for Bilbo puts it on and off without any fright. Perhaps the "other world" is just black and white at that time. As for casting, you really don't need Andy Serkis. He established the voice, but tons of voice-actors could play the part, and Gollum himself is animated. For LOTR cameos, John Rhys-Davies could simply play Gimli's father Gloin or maybe even Thorin himself, and Orlando could have an appearance as Legolas, because Legolas is, after all, immortal (living thousands of years) and the son of the King of Mirkwood where a good deal of action in The Hobbit takes place. Finally, how do you portray the creatures? The Trolls are seen early on, so their comical argument is just lead-in for the audience, helping set the tone (think Jack Sparrow arriving at the dock in POTC 1, thus telling the audience who did not yet quite know what theme to expect that it's okay to laugh). Smaug talks a lot, but he does it like Saruman, or like a vampire would, calculating, trying to get you to reveal information. Smaug is the culmination of fear, hearing about him for so long and then finally seeing him--the Dragon plays off that fear. I think it would be very intense to have Smaug talk at length, getting you to lower your guard, like in the Jungle Book. Anyway, these are the solutions to the oft-debated problems. Now just get a director who is worth a damn (I recommend Matt Vancil of Dead Gentlemen Productions) and go make us our beloved movie!
-
I love The Hobbit for what it is, and I've read the whole thing aloud to my two young daughters. It's just a very slight, whimsical tale. I don't see it as part of LOTR, really - yes, Bilbo finds the ring and you meet Gollum, but nothing else in the book has anything to do with what comes later. It doesn't have any of the thematic weight of LOTR. Discussions with PJ had him talking about fleshing it out and adding a bunch of crap about Sauron's rise to power. (Sauron isn't really in The Hobbit at all aside from Gandalf's references to an evil Neuromancer. Everyone needs an evil Neuromancer.) I'm not sure I'd want to see a padded-out, adult-ized Hobbit, let alone one broken into two movies or - heaven forbid - a trilogy.
Still, PJ should be the one to do it, and most fans would love it. I would certainly rather see PJ's Hobbit than, say, Brett Ratner's Hobbit, but I've never been particularly excited about it. -
Jesus
-
Again, my comments weren't about capitalism vs. socialism. Reread my statements. One of my points though was that capitalism left unchecked leads to greed. That's pretty straightforward if you really think about it. But anyways, regarding socialism let me break a few things down real quick. There has never been a true socialist state in the modern world. That's the problem- socialism has always been miscast and misrepresented. So called "socialist" and "communist" countries have not been real examples of true socialism. Look at the Soviet Union during the Cold War era for example. It may have called itself communist but it really was state run capitalism. Cuba has tried valiently to move towards socialism but yes, we acknowledge their shortcomings and in particular their state repression of dissent for example. China is a joke. Etc. and so on and so forth. So again, there has not been a true socialist state in the modern era. Don't mistake the true spirit of socialism that argues that production should be for the benefit of all people. That's true democracy. The socialist tradition has been "independent thinking" against the ideological hegemony of capitalism in the world. Now let's look at capitalism. It's not that it encourages creativity any more than socialism. That's false. Socialism doesn't say get rid of the great production (art, resources, etc.) that capitalism generates. But it says that production (and especially when these things concern social welfare services like medicine, education, decent wage jobs, etc.) should not be exploited by the few at the peril of the many. I would respond to your points more directly but honestly I don't see the points (if any) you are trying to make my friend. I'm not going to put you on blast simply b/c it's obvious that you have mis identified my promotion of socialism as uncritical support for so-called socialist states. So instead of getting all vexed and ready to cuss me out, how about you go read a book or visit wikipedia or something and READ on what's real instead of what's put out there by the powers that be that want to keep the system the way it is. I'll be up for awhile so feel free to post something else and I'll write back. One love.
-
capitalism and bolshevism are equally bad, one just is direct while the other just rots society subtely inside out, of course i'd expect you to ferociously defend capitalism as you were brought up, fed, lubricated in it in perfect order, but money really does hurt creative art. it's understandable you don't understand it it because you're looking at it from the inside of the very capitalistic structure, a spawn of it, a perfect drone to it, whether you accept or deny it, bling bling m i rite?
-
It's amazing to me that there are so many here with vehement opinions that are so uneducated. Let's lay this out for you people.
Is New Line probably screwing Jackson out of some money? It sure as hell seems like it - but that fight's with Accounting, Distribution and Marketing, not Development. It's well-known around town that Emmerich's (President of Production) running this studio's shit into the ground, but this one isn't his call. Is Jackson being a little bit unreasonable with his motives for not starting a movie under the cloak of a lawsuit? It sure as hell seems like it. New Line is saying, "We want to do this movie with you, but we are going to make it even if you're not involved." Think about it as if you were running a studio: you have a project that's basically guaranteed to make you at least $100 million all-told (and probably a lot more). You want the director who's already delivered, but there are circumstances beyond your control preventing that. So you toss off the film and just tell everyone, "We don't want to make this without so-and-so because it won't be aesthetically congruent and because we don't want to piss off a bunch of whining douches on the Internet." Well, congrats, you're out a lot of money and you're a moron without a job.
It's two sides pissing right at each other, and neither is righteous. It's all ego and posturing for the papers, but behind the scenes this is probably a much different story. In fact, Ordesky has been good friends for years and it's widely known that he was responsible for pushing Jackson through the door as director. Both sides owe the other a great deal here. The fact that he was the one who called Jackson to tell him seems like it was a friend giving another friend the courtesy of the straight news.
As it falls, the studio still has way more power on this issue than Jackson, and he's shooting himself in the foot by not attempting to be more amicable here - even if New Line is cheating him out of money, which they likely are (how to resolve that situation is a whole 'nother animal). But let's face the facts. If Jackson doesn't write, the script for THE HOBBIT (as compared to the LOTR Triology) will probably be better than it would have been. If he doesn't direct it's really something that doesn't matter; his direction was neither here nor there when it came to the quality of the finished product. If he doesn't produce and help with the creative development, that's a big problem. They need him on this. All the same, THE HOBBIT will make money - a ton of money - with or without Jackson's involvement. Because studios are a business and not an art institute, and if you're complaining about that you've got a lot to learn about the world. If you want guaranteed art turn on IFC at 4:00AM. Much as you want them to be, the movies aren't made for the hardcore fans - they're made to play to the person who has to pick which movie they want to see on the way to the box office. And most of the people who saw LOTR know fuck-all about Peter Jackson, WETA, Andy Serkis or Mark Ordesky. And you know what? They don't care either. This is sort of a joke of a studio right now but they're doing right for their shareholders by attempting to go through with this film, not stupid for ditching Jackson. -
Yackbacker, speaking of gay stufuf, Did PJ interlace the movies w/ a layer of homoesxuality? Gay hobbits? Curious wizards? Who knows but the films did come off flaming though, the love between Frodo and Sam, when Frodo wakes up at the end of ROTK and says in orgasmic ecstacy "Saaaamm...." and Sam looks on with a grin like "yeah i liked the pounding too hon"; it doesn't help that Ian McKlellen (however the fuckyou pronounnce his last namme) is gay, maybe he projected a gay aura around him while seeming noble and wise, who knows maybe one of those late nights when all the hobbits are sleeping he eyes them menacingly "i'm gonna go medieval on one of those midgets" and scurries off for his gimp costume. IS Smeagol a masochist gay rapist? I foresee film cineasts in the future prying open the gay subtext more and more...
-
Wow, I think back to that first time I walked out of the theater after seeing Fellowship. It blew me AWAY. I was shell shocked. And really over the course of the following years anticipating and enjoying a new Rings movie... wow those were just great times. Really one of the heights of fandom. That craze really only comes around a generation, really. I mean look at the original Star Wars trilogy. Look at Rings. Of course there are other and better movies out there but for me at least, those movies brought out the utmost of film geek love for me. What power. Wow, I love those movies.
-
Kong was a disappointment but Jackson earned legend status from me off the strength of Rings. No question about it.
-
that would be the death of me.
-
Good night everyone. God bless.
-
1st bitch tried to take my PS3 while I carried it over to the Best Buy checkout. I was all like yea right try dat bitch and he was like aw hell naw don't shoot me man. POP. 2nd bitch tried to take my PS3 when I was loading it into my civic. I was all like YEA TRY DAT BITCH and he was all oh please don't shoot me. BAM. 3rd bitch tried to follow me home but he didn't make it past the 1st stoplight if you know what I mean.
-
You're puerile, schoolyard insults are about as effective and amusing as your obvious homophobia and rightwing lunatic rantings. So, let me spell it out for you one more time so that there is no further confusion:U R A C.U.N.T.Any further questions can be addressed to your mom. She says I talk in my sleep.
-
Awww, BSB. You disappoint me. I can't believe you brought up the "Brokeback Mountain" reference especially after you outed yourself in Vern's TB. Come on! Brokeback? BROKEBACK???!!! ;)
-
all I can say is fucking morons
-
new line thats is are the morons why do this, no one will do tolkein justice as PJ can
-
You stand to make a LOT of money on "The Hobbit" and it's potential sequel. Far more than anything you stand to lose over accounting differences with Peter Jackson. Even if you don't care about the movies or the fans, you owe it to your stockholders to do these movies with Peter Jackson, because the profit you'll see as a result will far outweigh any concessions you'll have to give to settle your lawsuit with him. You're legally bound to do whatever will make the most money for your stockholders, and there really isn't any question that settling your lawsuit with Jackson's production company and making these movies with him is what's in the best interest of your stockholders. So as a fan of the LOTR Trilogy, I'm asking you to please just be as greedy as possible, but be *smart* greedy, not stupid greedy.
-
if new line have cooked the books and screwed jackson out of money they are legally obliged to give him why should he just accept their deal and then potentially have them do it again...lets face it..they more than likely have.plus this is not a very smart studio ..remember they totally missed the fact that the world was laughing at them for snakes on a plane ..not with them.they actually started to believe they had a hug ehit on their hands when all the hype was born out of how fucking stupid the film sounded. and lets not forget their proud tradition of moving on with sequels without any of the original makers on board....this could wind up being The Hobbit and Hobbiterer...what was their last hit film. like giant hit film?? and what do they have in their catalogue that has given them as much kudos and "class" as LOTR did?? goldmember?? house party 4??I really think they are idiots. I also believe jackson will wind up doing it and they are both playing hardball for now.
-
All those shootings and stabbings, then I read someone used a chain and a tire iron as weapons, a chain and tire iron!?! Were they leather-clad in assless chaps w/ red molhawks too? With all those ski-mask robbers i'm sure one of them wore a hockey mask, "so you want to take the ps3 out of the store and into your home? what a puny plan."
-
Nov 21, 2006 2:54:28 AM CST
New Line probably stands to lose more than people guess
by frodofraggins
I don't think it's accurate to assume that New Line will only lose $$ to Peter for the LOTR movies. An audit could reveal all of the shady accounting practices they utilize and bring up a shitload of lawsuits from other parties working for them. I think this is FAR more complicated than people are making it out to be. It sounds like Peter wants New Line to be shown to have used ILLEGAL accounting practices. And he may be trying to use his leverage to accomplish something much bigger than jsut recouping lost revenue he is due.
-
The only two stories "before" LOTR are The Silmarillion and The Hobbit. What the Hell are they thinking NOT involving Peter and Fran?
-
...attacks capitalism as much as communism is because he's a Nazi fuck. He's hinted at his Third Reich sympathies in several talkbacks. Hell, even using the term "bolshevism" is a tip-off, as it's the preferred term used by right-wing extremists trying to distance national socialism from Marxist socialism.
-
..will officially suck. I am thinking it won't ever go into production or else thinsg would be falling into place. Now that Jackson has been shown the door...the chance sof this film being made are slim.
-
Communism is fucking shit. The concept is wank and i'll be damned if i'm sharing my wealth with tramps and winos and other cunts to lazy to find work.
Peter Jackson and his minions need to launch an all out assualt on New Line Studios and skull bang the man responsible and then gangrape Ian Mckellen and then slash his throat so this never happens again -
For anyone who doesn't know what's going on with Peter Jackson's issues with Newline, here's a great article about how studios manipulate their sales figures and cheat artists: http://tinyurl.com/y66pjf
-
..if you don't like what other people are doing to a film don't go and see it. Simple as that. Get your own money together and make your own film if you are that mad about things.
-
For a reason. He gotta a better deal at universal. Dont be suprised if Universal gets its hands on The hobbit.
-
Its like those people who moan on endlessly about the state of politics. My Message: join a fucking political part.
-
comes a fantasy adventure like you never seen ...THE HOBBIT ! Summer 2007.
: ( -
Maybe if Ordesky's mother had done the decent thing and poured vodka into her mouth around his birth and then peeled back her flaps with a crowbar and dragged the foetus out with a rusty coathanger this debacle could have been avoided.
On another note, do you reckon Mrs Jackson is good in bed? -
... Jackson is such a beautifully hateable troll, a man who smeared his feces all over one of the most beloved stories of the 20th Century, got 200 million in undeserved trust to smear his feces all over a classic monster movie from the 1930's, and now is so spoiled and full of himself he expects to be given 200 million budgets every time out, and wants to see the books of any company he works with. What a backstabbing fucker Jackson is. His pal Ordesky tries to give him the low down, and let him know a nice amicable way to resolve the dispute, and Jackson takes that private phone conversation public, in order to try and force New Line to settle the dispute fast. It was a dirty trick, and I hope he's forced to eat it and gets sent back to Kiwiland to squat in the dirt and drink cheap wine. And that goes for his drunken wife and drunken next door neighbor as well.
-
Go fuck your mother you daft cunt. Jackson can do what he likes. He can dig up Tolkiens corpse and sexually assault it if he wants to.
We all wish you would die and have a cheap funeral. The choice of the death being beaten to near death and then raped and then have your throat slashed -
So much for continuity. I just don't know what to think about this other than it's the second bit of sad news for me personally within one week. Say what you may about Jackson and Weta, the love and care they put into LoTR will not be matched by anyone else. Another sad day indeed...
-
...it'll still make ass-loads of cash even if it does suck, X-Men 3 proved that.
But the people who are all "zomg Jackson did it for the cash, he sucks" need to pull their heads out of their asses. He did a great job on the movies, they're better than anything you fags could make, and...yeah...I think I'll go there, you're all jealous. Go back to jizzing all over your freaking books. -
Yes, you are reading right
-
Nov 21, 2006 7:50:45 AM CST
They could get Uwe Boll to do it and it'll see a profit
by rev_skarekroe
Because it's the name "The Hobbit" that's going to put asses in the seats. And (and this is the thing that film geeks so often forget) the Hollywood studios care ONLY about making a profit. The actual quality of a film is immaterial to the suits in charge.
-
...vs. capitalism" debate has to do with The Hobbit, but Bilbo Fett's rant made me feel the need to remind him that socialism is not communism. Communism as practiced in, say, Cuba, is a perversion of a lot of the sound and "perfect world" principles that socialism is based on (much as our democracy (really a republic) has become a perversion of the ideas it represents. That's the trouble with ideologies. You introduce people into the mix and we invariably fuck them all up. But the point is, your criticisms of socialism and its effect on art/creativity are pretty worthless when you consider that you're referrijng to communism and obviously have no frame of reference for true socialism. Don't feel bad, though. That makes you just like about 90% of Americans who find it easier to fear that which they don't understand.
-
No really.
-
This talkback is still going strong ... I'm impressed ... keep it going fanboys ... entertain me!!
-
How lucky we were that we got the LOTR movies in the first place. Or how it could have been just TWO movies and not THREE. Despite New Line screwing up royally right now, they are the ones that bet on the LOTR horse when no one else would, and THAT still gives them some credibility with me. That being said - Ordesky, you're being an idiot. When did you stop liking money?
-
The final two final Harry potter films.
-
New line is owned by the WB. IN May WB released POsiedon and it sank to the bottom of BO Briney. It may well be that WB are turning their back on Big budget filmmaking. I know Harry Potter and all that. Think of how much it is going to cost to bring one hobbit movie to the screen, let alone two. We all have to accept that what lucas said during the summer is true, the days of the bid budget blockbusters is coming to an end. That is also Why Fox and Universal Pulled out of Halo. Rupert Murdoch said he regretted Dividing Titanic in two with Paramount. Studios are beoming much more cautious about making in off 200 million dollar movies.
-
When Lucas visited his old friend Scorsese in Italy. He looked at the vast studio set for Gangs of New York and he realised then and there that the old hollywood stdio way of making flims was dying. I Think Lucas has been thinking this for a while, hence his comments this summer. regadless of what this site thinks of him when lucas speaks people listen. IN the UK they are showing into the West by the berg, which is pretty boring but it looks like a mini-film.
-
Bilbo finds the ring in the cave of Smaug the dragon. That is why the film will never ever be made. Smaug the Dragon has to look like smaug the dragon.
-
See. No matter what, with the name "The Hobbit", this movie will make money. However, the better the quality of the film, the longer the continued success will last. Before New Line makes a shitty version (which even without Jackson isn't a guarantee) they need to think of word of mouth and DVD sales. Now, The Hobbit may cost $100 - $150 million dollars to make, which it will no doubt make back in the first two opening weekends. Then it will sell decently on DVD. But they could make the profits soar if the film is good. It will stay at the top of the box office for weeks maybe even a month and may be the biggest DVD of all time if the film is as great as the LOTR trilogy.
-
who talked about Coming to America got it 100% right. No studio is going to open their books for an audit. I am sure they want around it by giving Jackson x amount as a sign on bonus or something for The Hobbit, so they can fit it into their yearly budget, and not have it just hanging out there.
-
Nov 21, 2006 10:43:14 AM CST
"Bilbo finds the ring in the cave of Smaug the dragon"
by mr. nice gaius
WHAT? Ummm, no. I think you need to go back and reread the book, emeraldboy.
-
This is all wank, lets just all agree that Mark Ordesky's mother's minge should rot out from within and we can end this discussion now.
-
moment of silence....
-
... you're right. And this further illustrates that there's sometimes a point at which certain creative types assume they have more leverage than they actually possess. As Jackson doesn’t seem willing to reciprocate the financial risk that New Line did for him--- on more than one occasion--- and he doesn't own the rights to Tolkien’s characters this, in retrospect, should've been predictable. Furthermore, most of us know that the Hobbit has already been done (albeit not in live-action format), so much of the groundwork has already been laid. At the end of the day, most of us are replaceable at our jobs. Those of us who actually *have* jobs, that is. The good thing about Jackson is that he loves his job, will work again (when he FEELS like it), and has millions of dollars to count in the interim. Considering this, I don't see where there exists much fodder for a New Line hate-fest.
-
...the dragon (or at least I htink that's how it's spelled) and it's buried with Thorin near the end of The Hobbit. The ring is wagered by Gollum in their riddling contest (in the first edition of the book) or found shortly before said contest (a revision by Tolkein after the concept of The One Ring as an evil and possessive thing was more well conceived).
-
there really is nothing else to say is there?
-
You said it CherryValance. ALtman was probably the greatest living filmmaker. And New Line are fucking idiots.
-
Actually, there is one more thing CherryValance: harysuxafatone is a big ol' sloppy, roastbeef curtain-style cunt. Sorry, but that needs to be included in the list.
-
Altman was shit and i'm glad he's dead
-
"I had to shoot 3 people to get my PS3"
BEST. POST. EVER. -
tehe. who gives a shit. everyone is still gonna be a multi-millionaire in the end: New Line, PJ, Saul Zaentz, Ian McKellan, and Hulk Hogan. and they all lived happily every after. the end.
-
less hobbit on hobbit loving.
just kidding, dont flame me, but seriously, peter jackson's greedy ass asking for the world for halo percentages and now this audit crap. just take the mofo'in deal pj. settle the lawsuit with the clause of making the movie.
and as far as making the hobbit into 2 parts, fkin A homes. and then a mini prequel to flesh out a new trilogy sounds bloody brillant.
some one make this happen. andy (gollum) has been known to work with directors that dont have the intials PJ, and Sir Ian Gay Gandolf is as much of a whore as everyone else is in hollywood. why would he get self righteous over jackson getting bounced, but not stand up when the Rat destroyed X-Men...
bottom line, actors are whores and will work where paid. f jackson. f walsh, & f new line for not making thier minds up sooner, JUST MAKE THE GAWDDAMN MOVIE -
I know I'm either going to die of horrendous piles or burn in hell (or both) but the comments were fair and subjective, and next time you're opinion is valued I won't fucking ask for it. There are far more pressing matters at hand than that old cancer, namely getting PJ back on this film before some other cunt fucks it up.
-
Dork Tower comic on Peter Jackson and The Hobbit. (Well said!!!!)
http://archive.gamespy.com/comics/dorktower/archive.asp?nextform=viewcomic&id=1200 -
Dear New Line and Creativer Executives, It with deep regret I write this letter but I am afraid a certain decision you have made has lead me to this. There is a series of films that I have grown up on and love with all my heart.They were cutural events - phenomenons the world over. You were responsible for these films being made and for that I thank you for a very rash stupdi decision you have made. I recently read an article that Kid and Play from the House Party series are currently shopping a reunion project and that so far they have had no takers. I am assuming you must have been on their list of potential studios as you have had such a long history with this pair and that you have turned them down. For shame new line .... for shame. I have no choice but to boycott all new line movies and affiliated companies. My cousin is doing the same thing. Yours Trudy Stifecark
-
FUCK PETER JACKSON AND FRAN WALSH. They're greedy bastards anyways and they completely misinterpreted the text in the second and third books opting instead for huge battle scenes taking up hours and ignoring the dialogue from the books. I'd rather see a fresh face for the hobbit movie... and maybe they might actually make it what its supposed to be A CHILDREN'S MOVIE!!!... this bullshit about making more huge battle scenes and adding on stuff about sauruman and sauron in the hobbit is completely ridiculous. People dont give a shit about huge battle scenes anymore. We saw that with the failures that were Alexander, and Troy. People want character development, story, intrigue and awe. So good riddance to the greedy bastards that are Peter Jackson and Fran Walsh co. I hope you all realize that that letter is only giving one side of the story and that is their story. It just shows what kind of dicks they are to send a letter to the one ring and Michael Vagina (the only correspondence they sent in god knows how long) so they can get all the fans careening to their side putting up petitions and bs. I for one would like to see a change in The hobbit. I dont want to see another Lord of the Rings.
-
Now with TinyURL: http://tinyurl.com/y768a8
-
I don't know if this has been covered or not, but does ownership of the WETA material and designs play a role in this? I'm with the camp that says as long as you have McKellen, Weaving (preferably Serkis, but not essential - at that point Gollum is a different character), and some continuity in production design, another director will be fine with this. It's really just fan loyalty that's causing all this backlash. And to the dumbass homophobic comments by Exeter and others: read the freakin' book, dude. Sam and Frodo's relationship was based on soldier/officer loyalty in the WWI trenches where they would sacrifice their lives for each other. It's not a gay thing, morons. But I know any activity between men that's not slapping high fives must be gay, right? Grow up.
-
it seems like a hiding to nothing to argue any point here, so i will gladly accept that the boat bit of King Kong was "only" 30 minutes long. it still dragged out and made one's arse numb was more the point. as for the comments about how it is perfectly acceptable to be sexually aroused by those hobbits or whatever they are, i have no problem with that - wank away. it's just that THERE WAS NO BLATANT HOMOSEXUAL OVERTONES IN THE ORIGINAL LORD OF THE RINGS NOVELS. for some inexplicable reason, PJ made fine adaptations of very average novels, but out of the blue decided to create two quasi-homoerotic relationships in the film. the main one was between that Wood actor and that twat that was in 24, and the second, less obvious one was between those two midgets that hung around with the trees. there was no reason to bring Brokeback Mountain qualities to the film as that was never in the novels. by all means, make as many Ginger Beer films as you want, in particular that lad who posts "as a future filmmaker it is my responsibility to......", but just don't go putting Perry Como overtones to each and every film made.
-
I think I've figured your sorry ass out:You really want to kiss me, don't you?
-
you are so clever. the way you changed that guys last name to vagina...hilarious stuff.are you a comedian? because you should be as I am still laughing now. in fact that might be the cleverest thing i have seen on these boards and that's saying something as these boards are a sanctuary for the bright and intelligent. I hope brett ratner gets given the hobbit, just for you, and we get charlie sheen as the randy young bilbo baggins...and chris tucker as a wise cracking elve.
-
Hey wake up - show business is a business. It sounds like niether side has much of a choice. PJ apparentely feels that he has been screwed over by New Line and understandably doesn't want to do any further business with them until this gets resolved, while New Line has a limited time option to get the movie made and is unable to wait until the litigation gets resolved. New Line is part of a giant conglomerate, and if it caves on this to get PJ under the fold, it could theoretically be sued by its share holders. Besides while the LOTR was everything any fan could have wished for, a movie of "The Hobbit" feels anticlimatic to me and maybe it wouldn't be such a bad idea if someone with a different vision took a shot. As for who is right or wrong on the issue - it is natural to assume PJ is right and the big bad conglomerate is wrong, but none of us have sufficient facts to know one way or the other, so lighten up.
-
...oohhh that hurt. Very articulate Bilbofett. Tolkein would have been proud.
-
You really believe that "limited time option" bullcrap? And if you read carefully, all PJ wants is an audit done, and if it ends up that he's not owed money, then he's cool with it and will get back to business. New Line not allowing it just makes them look guilty, especially since they are trying to get around it by enticing him onboard and to forget all about that pesky lawsuit.
-
1) bilbo fett- yesterday we had a spirited debate but at the end of the day we can still be cool. Thanks for the link on how to contact MGM, Sony, and NL. I think we both stand in agreement in being outraged over this situation and both want Jackson on The Hobbit. So good looks for that link. Peace. 2) Slappy Jones- Where did you hear this info about a House Party reunion? Oh my goodness that would be the greatest! If they could duplicate the magic from the first film we may have a classic on our hands. PLEASE tell me where I can find any more info on this. Thanks! Peace!
-
PJ says he wishes the new Hobbit film well, even if he is not involved in making it. Therefore there is no reason for the original actors/actresses from lotr to boycott out of loyalty to PJ (not that they would boycott for him anyway).If you want to know how PJ thinks of himself, see Kong05, and know that the Jack Black character is autobiographical, just like it was for Merrian Cooper's Kong33. PJ sees himself as a crafty director who "craps on the crappers", i.e., he is more crafty than the crafty studio execs (at least in his own mind).One example of this was shooting all three lotr films at the same time: he did this to guarantee that all three films would be made, even if the first one did poorly at the box office. PJ wanted to avoid being cancelled after one movie, like Bakshi was.After ROTK swept the oscars, PJ had ultimate clout to do whatever he wanted in movieland. He used his clout to make an overly-long self indulgent, satirical studio mocking lampoon of King Kong, which most people recognize as a very disappointing film, even though it did make alot of money based on the momentum of the lotr and Kong legacies. Kong05 is like Lucas' Jar-Jar filled Episode I, which also made alot of money and was largely hated. It is said that Lucas WAS UNAWARE that people hated Episode I until he was doing interviews promoting Episode II. Lucas thought Episode I had been well received based on box office returns. Now PJ is in the same position: he has flatterers around him telling him he is still the greatest thing in movieland, and the returns on Kong05 convince him this is true. What he fails to realize is that he SQUANDERED ALL HIS CLOUT with the disappointing Kong05. After Kong05, PJ is still negotiating as though he had great clout, but all the deals are falling through because studios have seen how bad his films can be when he has free rein. Therefore Halo fell through, and now the Hobbit is falling through, because PJ is making big demands but the studios are saying he is not worth the money.What saved the LOTR films is that the fans made sure PJ stuck close to the books. He wanted to have a Xena Arwen, and all kinds of changes, but the fans vociferously demanded fidelity to the books, and we won. It was fear of the fans that kept PJ honest. But in all other non-lotr films, PJ has resorted to his typical wise alec satirical film making style that has limited appeal, mainly appealing to juveniles and readers of national lampoon. Fear of the fans kept PJ honest, but now that he enjoys success, he has lost all fear of the fans or fear of anyone else, and his unbridled satire flows freely like a bitter poison in his films. PJ has a kind of snide and bitter view of the world, and unfortunately this comes out all too clearly. Also, this kind of "mean-spirited satire" has a very limited niche appeal, and created a cult following with his early films, but does not translate into broad box office appeal.
-
I've seen you around, but you shhould lower your temper and act more civilized. I say bolshevism instead of communism because all those fucksticks who took Marx's vision and applied the label to themselves, USSR, Red China, Cuba are not Communism, they're just fucking dictatorships like the Nazis. How the fuck are you calling me a nazi ? fuck those racist shits, you can call yourself Communist, a National Socialist which the Nazis did, but they're all are just dictatorships with pretty names masking their reality, nothing more. It reminds me of the eastern Soviet bloc of Germany that called themselves "The People' Democratic Republic" and other self-indulgent nonsense, i believe North Korea does it too. Capitalism just runs on a human depravity, greed, but since it won over all those dictatorships it's vehemently implanted in a large chunk of Earth's populous sadly. Marxism however hasn't been implemented, because the name was stolen and depraved by all those bolsheviks. It's funny how when one sees the ills of both dictatorships-capitalism is called a nazi. Go read Karl Marx's books for some englightenment.
-
Maybe you should read the book, dude. Jackson didn't add anything that wasn't part of Tolkien's tone. People were making a stink about homoerotic subtext in that relationship for years before the movie. Tolkien scholars have debunked that time and time again. And frankly, if you want to see gay subtext anywhere, have at it. Maybe you should wonder why that is. But I bet neither Jackson nor Tolkien intended it.
-
Peter doesn't surround himself with 'Yes men/women', he is actually very level headed IMHO. Was Kong perfect? No, and look who you have saying that, ME of all people. But many many MANY fans think his work on LOTR and his vision of Middle-earth is amazing...and want him to do The Hobbit.
Personally I think this whole New Line business has soured his attitude for it and he won't even do it if NL does a 180 on him.
My attitude is to wait and see how this effects NL's stance on it..and I will be personally heading the 'Give The Hobbit to PJ' march if that is needed and/or wanted by all parties involved..I know for sure the fans want it!
Michael Regina
Editor in Chief/Segment Producer
PH: 514.947.5221
http://www.TheOneRing.net
http://www.KongisKing.net
http://www.TheOneLion.net
http://whatisthedavincicode.blogspot.com/ -
is on the aint it cool boards. the hate reaches such ridiculous levels that it is quite obvious these are people who hated it before it was even made because if you think KING KONG is seriously the worst film ever made then i can only guess you have only ever seen 2 films in your life. one of them was kong and the other was raiders of the lost ark. Half the shit on here is just that - shit. I don't think you guys believ half of it.sure there are some folks who were genuinely disappointed but as you haters like to claim the only people who care about jackson are internet nerds..well the only people who hate him and kong this much are internet nerds. kong was not as reviled out in the real world as you make it seem...it received good reviews and made money. I forgot that it was meant to cure cancer so in that case I guess it failed but seriously if you think jackson is in trouble career wise you are dreaming.if singer can get a second superman film jackson has no problems...you don't go from having three of the biggest films of all time to following it up with a seen as a disappointment but still makes 500 million ww to having no career. the halo comparisons are stupid. he wasn't directing it.if he was it would probably still be happening.
-
in read in some magazine that kid and play are getting back together to make a new film....kid has been doing stand up and play went born again but now they be back boooo-yyyyeeeee
-
Hey, thanks for chiming in here. Earlier in this TB, I said that it looked like PJ and NL were playing hardball and that the whole situation "reeks of studio muscle and a rush to create "product". Are you inclined to believe that this is the case as well?Everyone agrees that "The Hobbit" is a veritable cash-cow. However, this seems to be the main motivating factor in New Line's stance = get a movie made before we lose the rights and our chance to make a fortune (continuity and the lawsuit be damned).
-
LOTR is the closest to the Spielberg ET/Raiders, Donner Superman, Lucas/Kershner SW magic that first turned many of us geeks on as kids that has come along for a long, long time. Jackson is a genius any films in Middle Earth not directed by him just are not worth seeing. The book is good, but VERY overated. The films are the real deal. Simple.
-
Good lookin on the Kid N Play info slappy jones. It's on! One of the greatest rap duos ever. Lyrics, dance moves, hype beats, new styles, charisma, acting chops... they had it all!
-
...if you're calling Jackson's movies "The Real Deal." Jackson and Co. did an excellent job of dumbing down the texts just enough to mass market them without sacrificing the tone and spirit of the overall story, but he by no means surpassed the source material on any level. He simply made the fantasy world more accessible (and acceptable) to least common denominator types without pissing off too many of the die hard and long-established fans of the fiction. The SPider Man movies did essentially the same thing for that source material, but I would never say they somehow elevated either the character or the concept beyond the comics that spawned him. Different take...easier to get into for noobs...but by no means a replacement for the original experience. And Jackson's Hobbit as described would not live up to what achieved in the Rings movies because it would sacrifice the tone and spirit of the original book (you know...the one that started it all?). So, unless Petey's open to rethinking his position on the lawsuit AND on how he would make the movie if given a chance, we all got off very fortunate with this turn of events. Bring on another director who "gets" this specific source material and isn't primarily concerned with further legitimizing his adaptation of its sequels (or replacing the book entirely as you seem to believe movies are meant to).
-
For the most part, I agree with your sentiments. However, I think there has been a rush to judgement as to how PJ might adapt "The Hobbit". I see no reason to believe that he would not "get" the source material on this one despite some of the ideas he has floated around.I think once a script started to materialize, the tone of the book would remain intact just as much as it ultimately did in LOTR. In fact, I'd be willing to say that "The Hobbit" is probably more to PJ's sensibilities than LOTR. Just look as some of the lighter moments he inserted in the EE DVDs particulary with respect to Hobbiton. While I certainly believe there is a need for some serious foreshadowing, I have no reason (at this point) to think he would have the wrong take on this decidely "lighter" story.And for the record, I'm against the idea of a second film based on the Silmarillion, appendices, notes, etc. As big a Tolkien fan as I am, that's got disaster written all over it.
-
Sorry for the error. Geez.
-
NG, I'm afraid I have to disagree. There is absolutely no need for *foreshadowing* in an adaptation of the Hobbit. There was none there before and need not be now. Just as with the Lord of the Rings the Hobbit certainly is rife with the sense of a larger world outside the boundaries of our story but to impose some kind of linkage between it and the Rings would be a waste of time. The only people who are so hot and bothered by this are 'One Ring' style obsessives who seem to have bought into the necessity of hinting at all the funky shit that's going on in Middle Earth. It would serve absolutely no purpose beyond giving those self same obsessives tingly feelings in their naughty bits. I'm a massive Tolkien nerd but insisting on this kind of causal connective tissue is utterly daffy.
-
I can understand that view. But I think we have to also keep in mind that this movie (once completed) will not have followed the order the books were published. Had the film of "The Hobbit" been made before LOTR, it would make perfect sense. Now, I'm not advocating an overwhelming sense of dread or foreboding. Just some clever acknowledgement and foreshadowing of the significance of the Ring. Even the Rankin & Bass cartoon pulled that off. Cheers.
-
So there are a ton of good points here. But I'm going back to my one simple gripe, asthetics. I do not want somebody elses "vision" of this world. It doesn't matter how many of the original cast and crew are brought back. NONE of the people that worked on these films would EVER tell you that they were working with anybodies creative vision other than Peter's. If a different director makes this film(s) it WILL look different. And I'm not interested in having a world that I've fallen completely in love with over the last five years mucked about with and made to look different. I waited 20 plus years for these films and the joy I felt at someone getting even CLOSE to what I saw in my head while reading is undescribeable with the vocabulary at my disposal. I will, in fact, have nothing to do with it unless ALL the original cast return and ALL the original cast swear on their LOTR trilogies that this film(s) rocks middle-earth like no other. And it is NOTHING like the HP movies. Those movies are so tightly controlled by JK and WB that NOTHING happens unless they give the OK. There are tiny elements that are different in each film, with Alfonso clearly going farthest down the "individuality" path (and maybe that's why he's not been back). But the sets don't change. The school doesn't change. The art direction doesn't change. The set decorating doesn't change. Gah! I'm bummed! lol
-
Just read it last year and I think it could form the basis of a great hbo or movie series. The movies so far done have an historical bent to them (PJ said as much in interviews). It would be cool to see a full history of middle earth protrayed through film with episodic stories from the various ages of middle earth...
The down side being that Chris Tolkien controls some of the material and is averse to making movies out of them... Tho recent games coming from EA (Rise of the Witch King set 1000 years before LOTR story) using Saul Zentz copyright seem to indicate that the range of who owns what rights isnt too clear... -
I'd love to see PARTS of the Silmarillion filmed. But I've always felt that parts of it are rather dry, with no movement. And some of it gets downright muddled and confusing (and this is from someone whose read all of Christopher's historical/research texts numerous times). I would be overjoyed to see something of the creation of the Aniur, and then something of the creation of the world through the song of the Ainur. But immediately after that, and through-out the rest of the book, I just can't imagine large portions ever being filmed. There are some great high-adventure sections. Some intrigue, some revenge, some love and some tragedy. But a lot of it reads like the book of Genesis. Names and places, names and places, names and places.
-
Dear Mr. Winston: You say "It's amazing to me that there are so many here with vehement opinions that are so uneducated". Yet you appear equally "educated" by the content of your own post.
You say "Is New Line probably screwing Jackson out of some money? It sure as hell seems like it". Well, no one knows for sure if they are or not, but Jackson doesn't strike me as the kind of man who would be compelled to file a frivolous lawsuit against the company he worked with successfully
for 7 years. Let’s not forget that this is the studio that had to be forced to fork over bonuses to its lead actors, even AFTER the enormous success of the first two movies. This is the same studio that has recently issued repeat versions of the films along with a mere 5 hours (out of 80 hours available) of new "behind the scenes" footage. Don't get me wrong, New Line has every right to make money, but how they choose to make money says a lot about them and their sense of fair play.
You say “but that fight's with Accounting, Distribution and Marketing, not Development.” Huh? Have you ever worked at a Studio? Do you actually believe that any of these divisions operate autonomously? It is all one company, Winston. Shaye and Lynne are in charge, and they answer to WB. The fight is with Shaye and Lynne, who used to be Jackson's friends. I suppose if someone smacks you, you would say "oh, that was only his hand that slapped me, I’m still happy to do business with his foot." I hope you are not in management.
You say "Is Jackson being a little bit unreasonable with his motives for not starting a movie under the cloak of a lawsuit? It sure as hell seems like it." Huh? Why would it seem un-reasonable to refrain from entering into business with someone you feel has cheated you? Have YOU ever agreed to do business with someone you feel certain has cheated you? If so, tell me where you work so I can steer clear of you.
You say "Think about it as if you were running a studio: you have a project that's basically guaranteed to make you at least $100 million all-told (and probably a lot more). You want the director who's already delivered, but there are circumstances beyond your control preventing that." Um, Mr. Winston, if you were running a studio, the circumstances of a former business partner suing you for money owed (real or imagined) is not a circumstance "beyond your control". You ARE in control of it. You may choose to act or choose
not to act, but if you are running a studio, you have the power. That is Peter’s point. He’s not saying he’ll never work with them again. He’s saying he will work with them once they have cleared up the issue of the owed money. I can’t fathom what you feel is "un-reasonable" about that? New Line could settle this lawsuit in a heartbeat if they wanted to. Or they could stop stalling and instruct their lawyers to get the case before a judge. New Line is anything but powerless in this situation.
You say "It's two sides pissing right at each other, and neither is righteous." Well, I do not agree. I don’t KNOW the truth of this any more than you do, but I am basing my opinion on the actions
and history of New Line and Peter Jackson that I am aware of. Jackson is not extorting them. He is asking for a judgement, because he has already tried all other means at his disposal to get New Line to do the right thing about the DVD sales of Fellowship. I’m sure New Line is holding back because they can – they definitely have more power than Jackson.
Let’s not forget that New Line was on the verge of collapse before they gambled on Jackson. Jackson
delivered in a way none of them really foresaw. New Line hoped for a successful film – Jackson gave them not only that, but in triplicate, and got them Oscars, too. LOTR saved New Line, whether they remember that or not. New Line deserved to be rewarded for their gamble and they have been, over and over again. They should have found a way to be fair to this man above all.
Peter Jackson is neither a dummy nor an innocent. But there is a reason he does not live or work in Hollywood and I believe it’s because he believes in fair play. I believe he has shown it over and over in word and deed. Whereas, New Line (Shaye and Lynne) have shown themselves to be typical Hollywood players, happy to take credit when things go right but quick to be stingy with their good luck, even with their friends.
Jackson has less power than they do, so I believe that’s why he’s turned to the fans, as a last attempt to make New Line see the light. I doubt New Line will listen. They will probably make The Hobbit and I’m sure it will make money, but without Peter, Fran and most importantly, without WETA, I doubt it will make anywhere near its potential.
But let’s not forget there is another player in this, still. MGM. It’s not going to ONLY be New Line’s call. There could be a few acts yet to play.
"You say" As it falls, the studio still has way more power on this issue than Jackson". Yes, I do agree with you on this. You say "and he's (Peter) shooting himself in the foot by not attempting to be more amicable here - even if New Line is cheating him out of money, which they likely are" Even if? Smack your head with your palm a second –He believes they ARE cheating him out of money! That is the WHOLE POINT. I’d like to know WHO among us is able to be "amicable" to someone who we feel is cheating us? And if one is able, what is the point? Cheating is the opposite of being amicable. Only a denizen of Hollywood, where fairness is unknown and cheating is a virtue could someone actually propose that the way to counter cheating is to appear amicable.
You say "(how to resolve that situation is a whole 'nother animal)." No, Mr. Winston. It is the ISSUE. And for those worrying that poor New Line will have to have its accounting processes audited – well, if they are dirty, why is OK to let them continue? Isn’t this "look the other way" attitude part of what led to Anderson and Enron imploding and screwing a lot of working class people out of their salaries? Given what we learned in the Art Buchwald case years ago it is no stretch of the imagination to learn that Studios tend to cook their books – especially where the DVD market is concerned, and THAT is the essence of Jackson’s lawsuit (the DVD sales of Fellowship). If they are not dirty but they just don’t want to spend the time on an involved lawsuit, then New Line can settle. Cases are settled every day. I agree the Studio has a strong incentive not to encourage other lawsuits but that is also an argument to settle.
P.S. Thank you, TaraLivesOn for the link. I hope the “plants” read it.
Hello Michael Regina. Thanks for stopping by. I agree with your take on this development and, like my friend morGoth, it makes me very sad.
I don’t think the LOTR films are perfect or that Peter is a saint, but I can imagine how it must grate on him that New Line would behave this way.
-
It's pure and simple.
-
If you feel that Jackson shouldn't direct the hobbit, i suggest you suck my cock :)
-
Nov 21, 2006 11:35:07 PM CST
The average fan goer could well be turned off by this.
by awesomebillfunk
While many on here will complain bitterly, a lot will still go see a hobbit film regardless of who makes it, the average film goer on the other hand, might be very turned off by the lack of Peter Jackson involvement. To the average he is as synonymous to all things middle earth as much as tolkien is.
-
Anyone who spends as much energy as you do claiming that the Nazis "got a bad rap" is by definition a Nazi sympathizer. I call 'em like I see 'em. You Nazi fuck.
-
...look on the bright side at least we know PJ can't pull a "King Kong" with this one.
-
Nuff said.
-
what a low life
-
Nov 22, 2006 1:33:57 AM CST
PJ isn't the only LOTR fan in the world
by canadian cricket team fanclub
As much as I respect Peter Jackson, who said he can monopolise Middle Earth? It'd be nice to see consistent vision in the LOTR-verse, but there are many many other talented directors who are capable of bringing the Hobbit to the bigscreen. Now's their chance. That being said, New Line are a bunch of assholes who tried to blackmail Wingnut. I hope they suffer for it. PJ saved New Line from financial ruin with LOTR. I really feel for PJ, but idealism only gets you so far in Hollywood where everyone's waiting for the moment to put a knife in your back. Move on PJ -- Temeraire, Lovely Bones, Good Omens (Gilliam should not be allowed near a camera again after Brothers Grimm), so many film options.
-
Doc's friend's teacher's cousin was once slapped on the face with a German bondage glove at a Berlin nightclub. So Exeter, even if you yourself aren't yet aware of your inner-Gestapo, Paz is an expert on the matter so I think it's best to rely on his superior judgement.
-
Though your post is incredibly long, you missed my point entirely. No part of a studio is autonomous from another, but the way movies are developed, greenlighted and produced - as you appear to understand but for some reason are unwilling to recognize - are entirely different. My point being that Jackson's beef is not with the Development staff at New Line; they neither control nor dictate protocol of the Accounting, Marketing or Distribution departments, and in fact these units of any studio are almost constantly at war. Actually, I think I was rather obvious in pointing out that both sides have legitimate animosity towards each other. I don't know how much MORE obvious I can be than to say, "...neither side is righteous". Either way, I still have an opinion on the matter, and just because it runs contrary to the blithering detritus here doesn't discount it or make me a shill.
More to the point: on these Talkbacks - as I was trying to make people understand - people seem to have assumed that the Development staff of New Line that dropped the ball in this case. Notice I didn't bring up Shaye and Lynne - I brought up the fact that the people who actually DEVELOP these films (specifically Ordesky, who's mentioned in the letter and made to be a villain, it seems) aren't involved in all the ancillary activities of the lawsuit or the after-effects of a film's release. And I brought up that fact because I work in Development, and have worked for varying studios for almost ten years now, and I've seen how we can be caught up in the chaos of such an element - and how unjustified it is.
In fact, were I a myopic Yes-Man, I might try to infer that you, elanor, were a plant for Wingnut. And it might make sense, considering that you devoted about an hour and a half to write a protracted paragraph which says all the same things I said but attempts to blame me for bias.
But I'm not rash enough nor careless enough to bother with something like that. Rather, I'll choose to think that you either didn't read my post fully or weren't smart enough to understand it. -
I won't be supporting this if it's made by someone else. - This has been a very disappointing end to a wonderful cinematic story. Peter Jackson & Co's work on LOTR has been THE biggest filmaking event in recent years. What a poor way to treat the people who made it happen. Shame on you, New Line.
-
All for the love of a woman - the reason King Kong played like a Spielberg mini-series on the depression at the start and why TLOTR trilogy was not nearly as bawdy as it could have been.
He needs to find teh Braindead/Bad Taste director in him again and quick! -
All of your posts are shit and too fucking long. I can't read past the first sentence because I didn't get that far in school, I was too busy blowing teachers for dinner money.
-
.. than doing the Hobbit. Obviously he doesn't look at it as a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity. He wants his money. They didn't pay him the money he wants. Tying the settlement of the lawsuit to making the Hobbit would be the "wrong reason" for making the Hobbit, he says. THAT MEANS HE HAS NO REAL DESIRE TO MAKE THE HOBBIT! If he had, it would exist independent of how the lawsuit was settled! Tying the settlement to his agreeing to make the Hobbit wouldn't be a big deal IF HE ALREADY WANTED TO MAKE THE HOBBIT! So, that being established, Why the FUCK do all of you WANT Jackson to make the Hobbit? People who don't want to do something generally do a shitty job of it if they actually end up doing it. You are all lobbying for a shitty version of the Hobbit, BY JACKSON'S OWN ADMISSION as to his feelings about it!
-
Did your parents make you watch Holocaust and Yom Kippur War documentaries? You poor bastard.
-
Bring in Michael Bay!
-
What do you think? A good choice i think. Yes he has man tits and a huge bulbous belly and several chins but i think the Taig hits it right on the head.
Is it a good choice? Does anyone care or give a shit? Does anyone believe for one second that anyone would cast the fat useless cunt? -
PJ *is* surrounded by the biggest flatterer of them all: Phillipa "After they see Kong05 all the other directors should just give up" Boyens. I'm sure Boyens is whispering in PJ's ear like his personal Wormtongue, "Kong was great...you are the king of movieland...make whatever demands you want...all the other directors have given up..."For those who want PJ to make the Hobbit, send a petition to PJ stating, "PJ please accept NewLines offered settlement and make the Hobbit!" Hi elanor, New Line cannot drop the suit because they did not initiate the suit. The best NL can do is make a generous offer to PJ and ask him to settle out of court. NL already did this, and PJ said no - he wants it to go through the court system and have a third party adjudicate etc. The ball has been in PJ's court all along, and he keeps refusing to accept a settlement, or to make the Hobbit while the case is in progress. He has effectively ruled himself out. That's why you need to send the petition to PJ instead of to NL: NL has done all they can, it's PJ who has to agree to make the Hobbit before the rights expire. And in regard to the case, he either has to make the movie while the case is still in progress (which he says he will not do), or he has to accept an out of court settlement from NL (which was offered by NL, but which PJ rejected).
-
then everything you say is absolutely true. If it's all about more honest accounting in Hollywood, and Jackson getting the millions he's owed, then fine. It's not about good stories, or good movies, but about getting rich. Fine, if you are fan of other people getting rich. Me, I'd like to see some new, eager, artistically hungry director, who doesn't care if he's paid millions, but just wants the chance to do the best version of THE HOBBIT he can. If Jackson wants to go the George Lucas route, focusing on the financial side of film-making, let him. You can't manage both sides of the film making process. Either you are watching the books, or making good movies. I hope he gets to win his lawsuit, and that we never get to see another slo-mo-hobbit-massacre, or another zombie-orc. A Jackson inspired Smaug would look horrible, and I hate to see what he'd do to the Mirkwood elves or Laketown (probably make them all repulsive by closeups of them eating tomatoes messily).
-
I undertstand it's about business in Hollywood but, no movie in my mind deserves to be fought over more emphatically for it's artistry and effect. I believe for this tale to be completed properly, Peter Jackson MUST helm this and the prequel (which was an even a bigger dissappointment upon knowing they were planning one in addition aaarrrgh!) The time and prep work to get another director up to speed would be fatal and would impede production and would produce a derrivative product in my mind. I have no doubt that another talented director can take this project but, it's not ONLY about the product here that is being sold. It's the spirit of the people that were involved in the LOTR films. Hell, I watch the extras on all my LOTR DVDs (Yes I own all sets) more than I watch the movies because the tale behind making these movies are larger in part because of the artistry these people have shown. I truly believe that I would not have enjoyed these films as much if such a collabrative grouping was not available.
-
He said he never bothered to read the books just prior to making the movies. According to a new biography on him, he claims he was inspired to read the books after seeing Bakshi's movie, but it took him ages to "plow through it". His co-writers WERE fans, but anytime you see something really stupid in the movies, it's Jackson's idea, like the "Dwarf Tossing" jokes, or Legolas surfing things. As others have noted in this talkback, Jackson-like stupidity got worse after the first movie, got even worse in KING KONG, so I think the trend shows that Jackson is getting full of himself, and thinks his "Dwarf Tossing", Zombie-gore loving, arrows in elephants eyes appreciating self is what peole loved, not the fact that it was based on Tolkien. So, many people credit Jackson with whatever was loyal to Tolkien in the movies, but they are crediting him blindly. Jackson's a crude, stupid jackass, and needs to be kept away from anything that demands a sense of poetry, subtlety, beauty, because he hasn't got a smidgen of it as part of his makeup.
-
Quote: " If it's all about more honest accounting in Hollywood, and Jackson getting the millions he's owed, then fine."Dude! If you worked on a project for 11 years and made cinematic history while pleasing MILLIONS of fans worldwide only to find out that you and your company may have gotten shafted $100 million bucks...don't you think you'd want a little fairplay???Then again, whenever I read statements of yours like this: "closeups of them eating tomatoes messily" - I have to remind myself who I'm talking to.
-
Sure they will probably be leaving a few extra millions of dollars on the table, but htey will still make well over $100 million profit on the Hobbit film, if not many times that. I applaud Peter Jackson for sticking to his guns on this one. He sure doesn't need the money and I'm glad he is not playing ball with these corporate assholes.
-
I'm glad cos the lord of the rings is a load of shit, now win a date with tad Hamilton, i think we'll all agree , that is one of the greatest films of the decade
-
...the one that posted a billion times of how he hates King Kong '05 before it even came out. And then he went and saw it, not once, but TWICE?
-
hey guys you gotta check out this link, its awesome http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0335559/quotes
-
Yes sir, he is one and the very same. Nice memory pull on that, btw.
-
I rented the extended DVD and listened to the commentary. I am no chancy fly-by-night hater, IAmLegolas. I hate with dedication.
-
Thanks for exposing yourself as a troll. Good day to you, sir.
-
...Exeter being defended by SepKu and Ringy, I mean. The fact is that in virtually every talkback I've seen Exeter post in, he brings up the "bad rap" the Nazis got and on at least one occasion expressed his admiration for armies with no remorse or pity -- no matter who they kill. Exeter is a Nazi wanker (literally), pure and simple.
-
Why do the people who care so much about the f'king book care who directs the films anyway? Nothing by anybody will ever live up to your 'precious'.
It's overated and is often cited in this country as a favourite book of people who, frankly, don't seem to read that many books.
The fact of the matter is that the vision and imagination you have of the book in your own head is just that, and could never be turned into a movie, not even by yourselves with a squillion $$$.
I want more Peter Jackson films, set in a the Middle Earth that he established by interpreting the books. If you have a problem with Jackson then don't watch the movies, ignore the fact of how well they have been recieved both artistically and commercially, and go back to the Games Workshop or wherever you hang out. I cannot believe we now seem to have a Peter Jackson LOTR backlash. Such is the fragility, fickle nature, and hurd like mentality of some geeks opinions.
Off to watch the extended cut of King Kong now.
Jackson rules, despite what bitter geeks in death metal t shirts think
See ya.
-
... can be found here bright as day: http://tinyurl.com/y2ln2nI don't believe he ever explained his intent with this either.
-
Lord of the Rings was 50% amazing, 50% badly directed and acted guff - hello The Grey Havens ending.
-
For your tireless efforts in the archives.
-
The book Lord of the Rings is overrated? Idiot.
-
What's the matter? You get banned and you come back all bitter with my name? We'll see how long that lasts...
-
please because if you have then I believe that officially makes you the saddest person on the planet. Do you go on about this to your friends outside of these boards?you have watched his films more then anyone I know.. and these are long films...you have memorised the commentaries and now you are quoting from his fucking biography. i know this is a cliche line to use but you really need to get a life ringwearer....you really do. Life is way to short to hang on to all this fucking hate you have. take a breathe and go outside. I love the fact that the only live action film you are going to see of the books you love so much are jacksons. that makes me so happy. it makes me as happy as it makes you mad.we are like ying and yang. Now I only want jackson ot get the hobbit jsut so I can picture you as the news is announced. it makes me laugh. you make me laugh.you are hilarious yet at the same time very very sad.
-
Gosh, I do love a mystery!
-
the backlash always happens to things and people that get to big. People can't stand to see people succeed and when they get to be too successful and have too much of what everyone else would like to have we turn on them like savages. it was always going yo happen.
-
Bono Luthor, it's not how great/not great an author Tolkien was...it's-the-story. As one of those "people who care so much about the f'king book," I was delighted that Jackson managed to pull off what was considered by many to be an unfilmable book. Do I like all of his additions and fabrications? No and I mostly even agree with Orso..., erm, I mean Ringbearer9 about those additions but he got the heart of the story spot on (Scouring of the Shire aside). And to further disappoint you, I've read many other books besides those written by Tolkien yet LoTR remains my favorite work of fiction. IT'S-THE-STORY...is that really so hard to comprehend? I hope Jackson DOES make the Hobbit but I'm not going to slice my wrist open if he doesn't.
-
...please don't view the opinions of a poster like Ringbearer9 as being representative of some tidal wave of Jackson backlash. Only the utter die-hard "not like the book!" literalist, and they are a distinct minority, hate Jackson's LoTR. The rest of us still give PJ a big thumbs up. I do agree with you about nothing matching each persons vision in their head but isn't that to be expected with any adaptation? PJ made a movie, not a Classic's Illustrated comic book.
-
Don't get me wrong, I'm not growing anti-Jackson, but I am starting to resent the whole "boycott" attitude. I mean, people are acting as if PJ himself wrote the fuckn' books or something....like, anything middle-earth is somehow "his".
From a continuity perspective, it would be good to have him back, ie. it would be cool if The Hobbit movie(s) could sit along-side LOTR on my DVD-shelf and feel like the same saga. The only way I'd want it to be a seperate film entirely is if it's ten years from now, and a completely different studio. It's important to keep in mind however, as one AICN poster put it, that Jackson was kinda kept in line by the fans.
Remember Xena-Arwen? If PJ were to go into this feeling as though he has 100% support from fans and the studio, there is a danger that he could take that as free licence to do whatever he wants, and pull a Lucas.
From the continuity perspective I mentioned earlier, Lucas made three films that were almost less StarWarsian than his previous three. While the prequels had alot going for them I don't really think of them in the same way I do OT. There's a seperation there...OT---PT. They don't really feel right being in the same box.
Of course, they were made several years apart, which begs the question (and this might be an interesting discussion in it's own right)..."How different (aside from FX) would the prequels have been if Lucas had started making them in the late 80's or even the early 90's?" Instead of when he did choose to make them... ie Not so long after the originals. Would they have been better or pretty much the same? Was it the time difference, or was it free-reign and the feeling that he could do no wrong that enabled Lucas to make movies that were ok, but not as great as OT?
Of course Jackson can't afford to wait as long if he wants to keep some of his original actors, but could he still fall into a similar trap if he is led to believe that he is the undisputed middle-earth-master?
Remember, it would have most likely been considered blasphemy to have suggested in 1997 that someone other than Lucas write and direct TPM. Now we almost think it should have been taken out of his hands....and SW is HIS CREATION no less! But then again, there are obvious reasons why Jackson is, without a doubt, the best man for the job. I mean, he certainly earned the right to be the #1 choice to direct more Tolkien movies. LOTR was a fucking absolute classic and three Oscar-nods in a row for a fantasy film is no small feat. He most definitely deserves the benefit of the doubt. And the un-flinching support for him is understandble to say the least, at this point. -
please take my comments as they are intended by the way...your dedication to hate has my highest respect deep down. you amaze me.
-
...and bring the haters and fools out of the woodwork too. You know who you are.
-
I'm just checking but it sounds as if a Hobbit movie will be made back to back with a 'Tolkien derived' LOTR prequel-gap-filler movie even without PJ as the studio isn't going to pass up on two movies right? This was the studios suggestion not PJ's from what I understand of the various interviews...So we're getting two (if not 3 films) regardless of quality or artistic choice.
-
I think he would do an amazing job - Last King Of Scotland is a classic and will sweep the Oscars - mark my words.
Then you'll all be clamouring for him to take the reins. He would be able to attract the A-List too. He is, after all, the grandson of Emeric Pressburger and if he only got 50% of that man's brain inherited then LET HIM MAKE ANYTHING HE WANTS TO - ESPECIALLY THE HOBBIT. -
...it's posteriori.
-
I just posted a big Hobbit news update, take a look
Yes, I am pro-Jackson...but this makes for rather interesting news...
http://www.theonering.net/perl/newsview/8/1163993546
Michael Regina
Editor in Chief/Segment Producer
PH: 514.947.5221
http://www.TheOneRing.net
http://www.KongisKing.net
http://www.TheOneLion.net
http://whatisthedavincicode.blogspot.com/
-
cos that is pretty big news...I wonder if he will do it? not going to spoil your news - people will have to visit your site to read it... oh and that link doesn't work by the way
-
The forum added a space to my link..no idea why.
The news is 100% reliable that he was approached, if he takes it? who knows.
I am a BIG fan of his, but I'd still like PJ to direct...more news soon!
Michael Regina
Editor in Chief/Segment Producer
PH: 514.947.5221
http://www.TheOneRing.net
http://www.KongisKing.net
http://www.TheOneLion.nethttp://whatisthedavincicode.blogspot.com/
-
I wonder if he will do it...step from one giant franchise into another. wow.....
-
PJ has ruled himself out and NL won't not make it before deadline. So let them, let them make the mistake! And then once the fools have made the mistake...and made a flop, PJ can re-imagine it in a few years, bring back the original cast and Weta to make the ultimate remake. Why not, movies are getting remade with shorter and shorter windows all of the time! Stuff you New Line, it will be crap without the Jack!
-
I'm not sure I buy it. I have a feeling it would be less of a "name-director" But, in a way (funny enough) "Army of Darkeness" had kind of a LOTR-feel to it...despite being shot in what looked like the deserts of California. He has a Jackson-esque style, so he would be a good choice continuity-wise.
-
When I first saw a Peter Jackson movie, back in 1995 (Dead Alive), I've noticed a lot of similarities to Sam's directing style, especially Sam's patented "Evil Dead cam" technique (re: hi-speed zooming camera shots through the forest; quick zoom-ins to objects). Is Sam even a fan of the books? He has enough money and clout where he doesn't have to be a director-for-hire anymore.
-
in fact i think that sounds awful
-
My thoughts in THE ZONE:
"In addition to their careers, (types of movies etc.) they also have very similar camera-movements/actual directing-style. Also, when it comes to look and feel in the fantasy genre, Army of Darkness has a surprisingly LOTR vibe to it. I think if WETA remains on board, a Raimi-directed Hobbit would have a very Jacksonian-feel to it.
As far as camp, PJ had that problem too, and Raimi kinda grew up a bit on the last Spidey-flick I think."
Slappy: I thought that at first too, but the more I think about Raimi, the more I warmed to the idea. -
With a new director, how casting plays out is going to be very interesting.
-
I find it hard to get upset about this news for the reason others have mentioned: King Kong. While it would be nice to have all five books done with consistent cast and production designs, The Hobbit and The Simarillion are robust enough to stand alone. So... ehhh.
-
Even if Jackson culled from Tolkein's notes, I think making more than one movie is a mistake. While, I would like to see Jackson seen this thing to the end, it would be interesting to see another director take the reins, particularly because The Hobbit has such a different tone. Chris Columbus maybe? Spielberg? There are plenty who might be able to capture that childlike wonder, rather than the sword and sorcery of the trilogy.
-
for the record I loved kong...more than LOTR. but why are people saying things like "lotr was fluke kong proved that" - why not look at it more that kong was the anomaly. you know what I mean. it was his dream film. the one he to get out of system...wasn't hook speilbergs like dream film. What I am trying to say is regardless of what you think of kong jackson proved his worth on LOTR unless you happen to be ringwearer where all jackson did was spark of a life long obsession to study everything the guy does for the rest of his life. anyway I really believe that jackson should do the hobbit. I don't like the idea of raimi doing it one bit. I don't think he has the right ...I wish I had a better word but i guess "sensibility" for it. I personally don't think he would do it anyway. I think it has way too much baggage for someone decent to step in....you have to follow up three of the most successful films of all time. universally loved for the most part and I think only a hack out to prove himself or an unknown would have the nerve to do it. Raimi has clout to do whatever he wants and I can't see him taking this on. I hope not anyway as I still have hope the jackson thing can be sorted and he gets to do it. bring on lovely bones in the meantime
-
Seriously now. I think I'd like to see another team tackle the subject matter. Just watched batman begins. That film is aging badly
-
And do they really need to be back-to-back? If they hold off on the second---just do it like a normal two film cycle---then by that time maybe the audit stuff will be out of the way, and Jackson will have cleared his plate of some of his other projects? They could go more child-like in tone for The Hobbit, and bring Jackson back for LOTR-bridge film. Or if they don't get Jackson, then it might still be interesting to have two directors anyway...even if they do end up doing them back-to-back/at the same time. Maybe Columbus AND Raimi? Or Raimi AND Jackson? Or if they split The Hobbit in two, along with a third LOTR-bridge film (thus making another trilogy) They could go back-to-back on the first two films, and stall for time waiting for PJ on the third. Shit, they could even have three directors....ok, I know I'm starting to sound ridiculous, but hey...I'm just trying to think outside the bun.
-
Let's hear it for the Lion!! This ain't over -- check it out: http://www.rottentomatoes.com/news/comments/?entryid=381433
-
Wooo! I love the internet. Haha! I betcha PJ will make these films.
-
"Yesterday, the "Lord of the Rings" director told TheOneRing.net that New Line have removed him from the project. The filmmaker’s statement also reiterated in detail his stance on "The Hobbit" -- that he is not willing to have a serious conversation about directing the film until his ongoing lawsuit with New Line over what he considers improper accounting practices over "LOTR" profits is settled.
New Line's given reason for proceeding sans Jackson is that the studio's rights to the pic are about to expire, and seeing as the lawsuit with Jackson isn't moving ahead, well, the message was that New Line is.
An MGM spokesperson tells Variety today that they're going to fight for Jackson. The spokesperson states, "The matter of Peter Jackson directing 'The Hobbit' films is far from closed."
Woohoo! Flex that copyright muscle, MGM! (For the record, New Line has the production rights for "The Hobbit" and a second LOTR prequel, yet for some convoluted reason from years back, MGM owns the distribution rights for a Hobbit flick. Fingers crossed!)" -
All that's wrong with your link is that there was a space after the .com/ It works likes this http://www.rottentomatoes.com/news/comments/?entryid=381433 Guess I should have pointed that out before you posted the story. Heh.
-
Now I get it... the site must be inserting the space to keep the thread from stretching. Huh. That's cool, actually. But that's why it didn't work.
-
I think any big name director is probably going to keep their distance just because they know if things resolve they'll be bumped for jackson anyway, regardless of how much of their life they waste on prep. Isn't Sam Raimi starting on filming Terry Pratchett's series of young witch novels next? Wee Free men isn't it?
-
Yeah, well.
-
Awww shit... TOM CRUISE AND MGM TO THE RESCUE!
-
First, I’m sorry to say I don’t think there is any news in that MGM "article". MGM was quoted in Tuesday’s Variety confirming that they had been discussing directing
"the Hobbit" with PJ but that his deal to do so was "far from closed". I believe it is inaccurate to spin this phrase to mean that MGM is "going to fight for Jackson". Don’t get me wrong, I hope they do (if only to tweak New Line for their bad faith) but I don’t know that they can "veto" New Line on choice of director.
XXX XXX XXX XXX (paragraph break)
And now on to Mr. Winston: Dear sir. I will take your word for it if you say you are not a plant.
XXX XXX XXX
Yes, my post was long and I do apologize for not knowing how to retain the paragraphs I created in composition. That makes reading my post extremely difficult. But I didn’t miss your point at all. I just disagree.
XXX XXX XXX
You seem to think you’re being fair by saying "neither side is righteous". That tells me that you and I have different definitions of "fair".
XXX XXX XXX
It may be true that at YOUR company the different departments are at war and can claim to be innocent of whatever unfair practices may be committed by the other but that has no bearing on THIS case. In THIS case, PJ did direct business with Ordesky, Shaye and Lynne. He considered them friends. They gave him every reason to believe they were friends. Some time after a certain enormous success, PJ came to suspect that neither he nor his company was receiving his fair contractual share of monies from sales of Fellowship DVD. He brought it to the attention of Ordesky, Shaye and Lynne. I am not privy to their responses but it is clear that none of them helped their "friend" PJ. Therefore he felt he had no other recourse than to file suit for breach of contract. This means he is fighting with is former friends. Now, Shaye and Lynne are saying
"even though we are fighting, let’s pretend we’re not and make
another enormous movie (or two) together." PJ is not good at being that two-faced. He says, "let’s end the fight first, then maybe we can make a movie together again." They said "we have to decide now, so if that's how you feel, we're getting someone else.".
XXX XXX XXX
I know you didn’t bring up Shaye and Lynne. Perhaps you did not know they had all been friends. I never called Ordesky a villain. He had the closest relationship to PJ and, perhaps to his credit, offered to be the one to make such an unpleasant call.
XXX XXX XXX
To say that those who develop films "aren't involved in all the ancillary activities of the lawsuit or the after-effects of a film's release" is no doubt true, but that doesn’t matter. PJ is not talking to the development guys. He’s talking to Shaye and Lynne. And, anyway, the people in development at New Line SHOULD know that the director who saved the whole studio is being shafted, (or at least that he FEELS he’s being shafted) and it OUGHT TO MATTER. Apparently it doesn’t. That’s what bugs PJ, and if it were me, it would bug me, too. It appears that it doesn’t bug you.
XXX XXX XXX
I hope I never learn what you mean by "I've seen how we can be caught up in the chaos of such an element - and how unjustified it is". But I do thank you for telling me (sort of) where you work so I can avoid going there.
XXX XXX XXX
What you seem not to be able to comprehend, Mr. Winston, is that the fight is about fairness. Alas, it seems PJ has lost the fight, but I don't blame him for being unwilling to go back to work with people he feels have cheated him. Although it makes me sad, I choose to look at it in an optimistic way – that this will free him up to make many other movies.
XXX XXX XXX
Thank you Mr Nice Gaius and Bringsexyback for your sensible posts. Sometimes I feel so alone……heh heh.
XXX XXX XXX
Hello Dufy – it sure has been a while, no? I see you have not changed your spots. But I never said New Line could "drop" the suit. I said they could "settle" the suit. They still can. As for what PJ "refused", do you know what amount New Line offered? -
But putting the lawsuit aside for a second, it sounded like PJ was at least a few years away from doing The Hobbit regardless. It will be interesting see if MGM pushes...will that force Jackson to flat-out turn them down (hope not)...or at least turn down doing it in the near-future (and if so, does MGM wait?) Was PJ's letter a call to arms for fans, or just a friendly heads-up for fans? I sure don't know, I guess we'll see.
-
First of all, you make it look as if you know Peter Jackson and all of his intimate, personal motivations. If that's the case then you can't possibly be viewed as an unbiased voice in this matter; if it's not true then you're speaking completely on conjecture.
I'm comfortable with anyone who wants to "blame" the whole fiasco on Shaye and Lynne to do so - all in all, they have the final say in what gets made and what doesn't. But they're not part of the development staff, as you were so apt to mention...so what is your point here?
That in mind, you CAN'T blame the development staff for going ahead with this film. First of all, they're being told that this film is going to be made; to refuse to help make it is tantamount to insubordination. Because that's what producers do. And if you have a directive coming from the top on down and you want to keep your job, you do what you're told. In a similar sense, even if you think the Powers That Be are complete dicks, they still have an obligation to go forward with a time-sensitive project. -
btw I don't mean to suggest that PJ's letter was deceptive in any way, or that he's somehow afraid to come clean with his true feelings. But perhaps The Hobbit is something that, while in the back of his mind he'd like to get to.. it's just not something he's in a hurry to do. I get the impression that like Lucas and SW in the mid-80's, he wouldn't mind doing it, but he needs an extended break from middle-earth. I don't know the guy so I could be dead-wrong of course. But it is possible that he may not have yet come to terms with his desire. Shit, if his thoughts on "The Scouring of the Shire" chapter are any indication, he may not even really like "The Hobbit". One conclusion that can definitely be drawn from the letter is that Peter is someone who doesn't want to be pressured into making a film. Should he be waited on? Absolutely! He's earned it. All studio-pressure and rights-deadlines aside however, lets look at the realities of waiting a few more years. Providing nobody dies...McKellen is at an age where he'll pretty much look the same in ten years, especially once he's under the hat, make-up and beard. Serkis...like Frank Oz, and with all the computer-scanning/motion-capture already done on him you could probably get away with just his voice. Plus Gollum is pretty much in the shadows/has a much smaller part. Shore is a shoe-in. The only real question mark is Weaving. Being a slow/non aging half-elf, and the fact that the movie takes place many years before the events of LOTR you might not have a big window with him. Maybe he ages great and will look exactly the same even 10 years from now. Who knows? But it would be a shame if they re-cast him just cuz he looked "too old"...of course that didn't stop the producers of RED DRAGON, so maybe it wouldn't matter anyway. Of course there's the Lucas-time question I posed earlier...does time help Peter Jackson, or will him being nudged into it despite his reservations, help or hurt the film(s)?
-
Bruce Campbell as BARD? Ted Raimi as DORI? Liam Neeson as BEORN? Sam Raimi as the various voices of the SPIDERS (ala him doing the voices for The Evil Dead)..."Let's get the hell outta here!"
-
Willem Dafoe as GOLLUM? Gene Hackman as GANDALF? And how's Raimi going to cameo his 1973 yellow Oldsmobile Delta 88 automobile????
-
Tobe McGuire as Bilbo? Liam Neeson as Thorin?
-
the man can direct, but I dont really see why he'd be interested in a kids movie about midgets. I doubt he'll take it. And honestly, I really really really don't think Jackson wants to do the hobbit.....otherwise, well....he would have done it first surely? Plus the idea of loading the hobbit with pre-LOTR stuff really sucked pj. Whats wrong with a 2 hour movie, thats tightly written and is something for the kids....I for one dont want to see a 2-movie hobbit....completely unnecessary. And I'm sure Ian McKellen will play gandalf again if approached. It'd be nice if weta did the fx, but even if they didnt...the palette of the hobbit was much smaller anyhow...I dont think it'll be the end all as people are suggesting. The Hobbit,stylistically different from LOTR? Maybe only one movie? Good. *i'm not anti-jackson btw-loved tt especially....but if he doesnt want to do it...he doesnt want to do it.*
-
but it supposedy comes from a "very reliable" source (not knocking anybody with the quotes & all) But if Raimi were tot take it you gotta wonder if PJ himself wouldn't realease a statement like "Shut the fuck fan-boys, I wanna see 'Raimi's The Hobbit' NOW!!!" He might even give him a call sreaming "DO IT! DO IT! DO IT! You can have all the shit we have in storage...NOW BITCH!" Fuck, I don't know.
-
Saul Zaentz, the owner of Tolkien Enterprises, and ultimate holder of the film rights to The Hobbit and Lord of the Rings was very recently interviewed about the Hobbit and Peter Jackson's involvement.
The interview has since been posted on German Rings site Elbenwald. You can read it here.
It's in German, so here's a translation of his comments.
Q: What is with the long anticipated Hobbit-adaption?
A: It will definitely be shot by Peter Jackson. The question is only when. He wants to shoot another movie first. Next year the Hobbit-rights will fall back to my company. I suppose that Peter will wait because he knows that he will make the best deal with us. And he is fed up with the studios: to get his profit share on the rings trilogy he had to sue New Line. With us in contrast he knows that he will be paid fairly and artistically supported without reservation. -
I think thats the only way to sum up this wank situation.
-
I do not claim to know PJ’s
"intimate, personal motivations". But, as I said in my first post, I am basing my opinion on the history
of actions and words by both Peter Jackson and New Line. I happen to have closely followed the historic details of this project (and I mean
closely!) since 1997 because A. I find it fascinating and B. LOTR is my favorite book.XXX XXX XXX XXX
I never claimed to be un-biased. I am definitely pro-Jackson. That doesn’t mean I am incapable of seeing and understanding New Line’s
points and motivations as well.
XXX XXX XXX XXX
You say "they're not part of the development staff...so what is your point here?" I never said Shaye and Lynne were staff. I said they are decision-makers;
"Deciders" if you will, LOL. They decide how development spends its time and money.XXX XXX XXX XXX
You say "you CAN'T blame the development staff for going ahead with this film." Mr. Winston, are you trying to put words in my mouth? Please. I am not blaming ANYONE for "going ahead" with "The Hobbit." You are misinterpreting my words. XXX XXX XXX XXX You say "if you think the Powers That Be are complete dicks, they still have an obligation to go forward with a time-sensitive project." In my opinion, they have an obligation
to deal fairly with their business partners. It seems particularly odious to me that the man they have NOT dealt fairly with is the one whose creative leadership is singularly responsible for saving their jobs and turning on the faucet of money flowing to them. You are right that I think the Powers That Be (Shaye and Lynne) are complete dicks. I didn’t used to think this. I used to praise them as genius risk-takers whose brazen chutzpah gave us three glorious LOTR movies. -
and you can tell. I wouldnt be suprised if Newline is put up for sale.
-
the company.
-
it'll never happen, especially with their secret weapon.......................
Mortal Kombat 3! -
Very intersting comments about Jackson and the rights.
-
they can still make "the son of the mask's son"
-
those crazy cats!
-
Nov 23, 2006 4:15:40 PM CST
Jackson to direct hobbit petition...if interested....
by talkbacker with no name
http://www.petitiononline.com/hobnow/petition.html
-
I really enjoyed the LOTR films, but I heavily disliked the 'reworking' (or minimalizing) of certain characters (Gimli, Faramir, Denethor)...there were orcs that got better characterization! I simply do not trust PJ/F/P to actually do justice to the Hobbit as a story. We'd get 20 minutes of Dwarven Fart Humour, followed by Elves/CGIollum, Spider fights, more Elves, More Farting, some Dragon, and then Blood Blood Blood....possibly concluding with a Thorin/Fart death scene.
-
A tepid adaptation of a great book? An unwatchable remake of a classic film? Maybe a "daring and visionary" adaptation of a game with 50+ viewers automatically interested in seeing it? Or will he actually try to CREATE something this time? Oh, wait, he already did. And it was called "Bad Taste" and "The Frighteners", and it wasn't pretty. I wonder if dumboys will ever stop ejaculating over this master of mediocrity, even after he releases "Silmarillion XVIV: The Super Extended Adam Sandler Version"?
-
in lotr...at all. jesus the hate has even lead to people making shit up now.and the create something argument is fucking lame. does that mean jaws doesn't count? the godfather? the terminator??? and say what you will about kong ... lotr...but just leave bad taste out of it!!!that is
-
What is this sudden hate from people on PJ and his films...? Well I gues maybe not sudden, but anyone who calls the LOTR films 'bad' has not watched them without wanting them to be bad. They have excellent parts and they have not so great parts, rushed bits, clumsy bits, but just as many or more incredibly well made sections! Same goes for Kong, just saw the EE yesterday, and seriously, it's a fucking brilliant film. it could do without 10 minutes or so in the beginning, but besides that, most other films pale in comparison. And don't get me started on the VFX... the 'bad' FX in that movie are better than most good VFX in many other films. They just stand out more because Kong himself is so extraordinarily amazing. I'm not sure that PJ would have done the Hobbit the way it is written, but I'm certain it would have been a good film, expertly made whatever path it took. Here's hoping MGM and Saul Zentz (spelling?) get PJ to do it after all!
-
the hate on here gets so ridiculous it is hard to take seriously. it get so personal and so over the top that it is clearly about more than jacksons films...- anyone who says kong is the worst film ever made is lying. and they know it. people who express genuine disappointment or say they really didn't like it thats fair enough but the guys who say "it was the fucking worst thing ever made and made my eyes piss burning urine" are just a waste of time because they are lying. or they haven't seen many films because there are much much worse films out there than kong. I happen to think kong is great and the reason there is a backlash is because of LOTR success. it isn't cool to like jackson on the message boards anymore so everyone jumps on him. the funny thing is you can guarantee most of these pricks will be there opening day to see whatever he does next. especially ringwearer and he hates him the most. these guys are ridiculous.go through any thread and it is always 10% over the top fanboy love ....20% reasonable debate (positive and negative) and 70% hate filled horseshit. I love it though or i wouldn't come back so much
-
Interns at New Line? Bitter Star Wars fans that quietly waited in the wings all these years, looking for the first chink in PJ's armor? Ringwearer9 with multiple accounts?
-
hahahaha that sounds about right
-
I need not hide behind pseudonymns. But the genuine hate of other people makes me truly happy. Join us, slappy. You know our hate to be true, while the fawning love for Jackson is but the shallow love for Jackson's momentary and fleeting success, and avarice for his temporary windfall of millions. In years to come, you will be embarassed to call yourself a lover of the King Kong ice skating scene.
-
... hope that the new verison will not fu** up the studios. They invested way too much money in securing the rights and services of Spielberg, why make part 2?? We got it, the little robot will never die and will always freak out if his "mommy" disapears from his life. They really need to get thinking before this stuff gets out and actually gets made and ... and.. Oh! Peter Jackson off of Hobbits... Oh ok.. So.. what's wrong with that..?? Ithink Donkey Kon.. Oups King Kong was not a great movie, they got a huge budget and what did they do? Effects that could not match up to Jurassic Park that was made over 10 years ago? I mean anyone who loved the movie should watch it again when they're running with the dinosaurs (which was just fu**ing boring) at one point I'm waiting to see a close-up of any actor running towards me while the scene and dinosaurs are running from right to left on the screen... I mean I did not believe for on minute that the gorilla could be there, and the effects were reponsible for that. I HATED with a passion Superman Returns, but I gotta say that the majority of the effects were incredible compared to King Kong. Basically the story was way too "deja vu" they didn't even try to do something remotely different to get us hooked on it. I felt like it was a incredible amount of wasted time and money. Hobbits not being made is probably what's going to save the Rings franchise. I mean.. Over 6 hours of walking on film .. god it was painfull... I actually watched Rings 1 and 3 without seeing 2 at the theatre and to tell you the truth it was way less painfull, I discovered 2 when it was released on dvd, and I basically told myself that I had done a good thing not spending over 20$ at the theatre to see it. The one thing I can give them, the effect in Rings were great. He should've done half of those effects with King Kong. now .. back to A.I.... I was more sadenned by the little freaking teddy bear being stuck all those years with the little robot kid than the kid not finding his mommy... oh god the pain...
-
you said 'every TB he brings up nazi sympathies' time to take off the tin-foil hat, i said in that TB you posted a link "anyone think the nazis have gotten a bad rap?" out of the blue in a TB that had nothing to do w/ it,then you said "Exeter are you joking on that or not " and i never replied because i forgot about that TB, well now i'm replying: Yes it was a joke. The fact that you took that seriously says more about the urgency of your paranoic ailment than me, saying every TB i post that in, you are seeing pink elephants silly boy, and your crack-pot vendetta makes you look like the s sad sack you are. So chill out like everyone else is pointing out,and forget about that slap that german broad gave you in a nightclub or whatever other gutters you creep around. Oh and fuck that b-movie director who chose to tackle Tolkien's work.
-
but i guess i have to repeat what's already been said higher up. I call the governments of the Warsaw Pact nations, Cuba, Red Asia 'bolsheviks' and not 'communnists' like everyone else has been familiar with this past century, is because those putrid dictatorships spat on Karl Marx's vision and stole his name of his ideal society and placed it on themmselves. Any of this 'social' bullshit tag-on is more self-masturbation to make themselves feel righteous in whatever they were trying to accomplish, and the term communism has been so damaged and defamed, even more so in this capitalistic-run society, that i don't even use Communism, instead i use Marxism. The Nazis was just another name of a dictatorship nothing new. Dictatorships are bad (in case you didn't know), and Capitalism too (you most likely didn't know that either).
-
Seriously, Doc, that was pretty fucking messed up, taking a silly, obviously IRONIC post about the Nazis being picked on, (how could you honestly take that one seriously? Are you retarded?) and then reposting your stupid Nazi-under-every-rock conclusion so that everyone could see you were a nutcase. And, Nice Gaius, you were doing so well! Why do you want to be known as Ratfinkus again? But there you are, like a little bug-eating Renfield to the Dracula that is Pazuzu, as he sucks the life out of every talkback with his shrill, humorless accusations of thought crime. And you HELP the fucker, by searching the archives for him, "Oh yes, he's been naughty, punish him teacher!" Ratfinkus, you need to just STOP. Forget DocPazuzu, and try to hang out with decent, non-tinfoil-hat wearing people. Then maybe people will start to like you.
-
yours is a hate i do not deny. I know you to be true. I believe in your hate thoroughly and I have never denied my admiration of your dedication. But to the guy above who hated all three lotr films yet still sat through them all I will never understand people who say they hated all of them yet watched them all. that is just crazy..if you didn't like fotr why on earth would you think you would like the other 2. same crew, same cast...all one production. very strange..and the whole kevin smith "all they did is walk" schtick..come on now. but i agree with you about A.I. awful awful film....
-
Why did I watch them all... Well easy response... I'm a sucker for pain... I sat thru the whole A.I. because I kept saying to myself there has to be something in here that will make all of this worth it! What will it be?!?! Must be the ending!... And for that I was slapped with some of the worst endings I had ever seen before... I got it good.. As for Rings, well, one of my good buddies is a freak of the damn thing, so I saw the first one said to myself "blah.. won't see the seconf one..." Second came along and I passed, but my buddy was all "Oh shit you missed one hel of a good movie!!! Fuck it was incredible!!!!" so third one came along and I got suckered to go see it, ok ok .. I admit the big battle was cool, but I did mention that the effects were great. but as far as the rest I mean it was kinda getting on my nerves with the damn "Mister Froddo can I lick your ass?" with the other hobbit (What's is name Sam Gangi or something...) And E. Woods I woulld've slapped the shit out of him if I were P. Jackson to get him to do another face for crying out loud, the beaten up puppy look pissed me off, everything that happens to this guy in this trilogy and all he can do his the little eyebrow thing, my god can you get a worst actor? I would've changed the book and get him to be pushed off the cliff with the ring at the end just to get the "YEAH THEY KILLED THE LITTLE FU**ER!!!" out of the audience. The second movie, like I said my friend said "you didn't like the third one because you didn't see the second one!!" And again I'm a sucker for pain so I decided to listened to it hoping to see something to make me realize that this was a great trilogy. I should've just listened to the little voices and watched something else... I can't say that the other actors were bad or anything like that, no, they were good playing thoses roles, E Woods and the "Sam" (you know the guy who played Rudy) are the two only characters that I would've at least killed off in the first movie. If you're about to change something that is in the book, then why not make them fight for the ring, make that Sam character hooked on the ring too... All three of them bitch slapping themselves into the volcanic slew would've made a hell of an ending!! Mouahaahahhaahah!!!..
-
The fact is that you've repeated that so-called "joke" so many times and in so many different permutations (not to mention your professed admiration for SS-style units) that you're not fooling anyone. Your fawning over the Axis forces is revolting, to put it mildly. You're not fooling anyone.
-
Aren't you the guy who defended the murder of the Israeli athletes in Munich?
-
Get over yourselves you pious dorks.
As a huge Tolkien fan, I liked PJ's interpretation and am thankful for all his hard work. However, I am not one of those idiots who confused PJ for Tolkien and grossly overrated those movies.
I won't lose a wink of sleep knowing the man who gave me boardsliding, oliphant surfing elves, a moronic Gimli, cheeseball 80's action one liners, horrible sequences that weren't in the books, all of TTT, King Kong, etc. isn't making The Hobbit. -
...like a little bug-eating Renfield to the Dracula that is Pazuzu, as he sucks the life out of every talkback with his shrill, humorless accusations of thought crime." ..... That really, REALLY made me laugh. Funniest post of the week, no competition. Also, I'm oddly flattered at having the same type of colorful invective heaped upon me as you normally reserve for Peter Jackson and Steven Spielberg. Thanks, Ringy.
-
If you want to read Ringy's infamous and now classic King Kong "review", post your e-mail addresses and I'll hook you up.
-
"do you all think the nazis have gotten a bad rap? and if not why? i mean they just wanted the zionist puppeteer parasites out of their weak post-ww1 economy is that so bad? i mean their aryan racism and all was obviously stepping the line, maniacal & sadistic, and they should've gone after the actual zionists selectively, i've seen jews who are against the zionist societies too, they shouldd have worked together wtih everyone to oust the parasites, the same ones who ussd up early 20th century england, the same ones who moved into imperial germany, and are now controlling the USA, pulling all the strings," ....... http://tinyurl.com/jfj46
-
ComingSoon reports that Sam Raimi has been offered The Hobbit. Fucking hell.
-
Mend my ways? How so? It just so happens the I actually remembered a TB where Exeter said something that was inline with DocPaz's accusation. If you can't stomach the idea of me posting the link to such a strange and unsettling question as posed by Exeter, than there is no help for you.
-
I can only wonder how things could degenerate to this. Of course, we all know what "this" is. My fellow talkback posters... the original logline for this thread is simply not “news.” Peter Jackson was not contracted for a film rendition of another Tolkien story. Considering that his net worth is estimated at $180 million, and that there are other capable filmmakers out there, I can't see this as legitimately making New Line a lightning rod for the vexations that I've seen. Allegedly, this is all tied to Jackson’s lawsuit against New Line (e.g. all about money). Whatever the case, most of us who aren't outraged by the recent turn of events aren't "Jackson Haters," we're simply people who believe that he's replaceable. We'll eventually find out if we're right... as we'll eventually find out if his lawsuit has merit. Still… talkbackers cussin’ out each other? People arguing about Nazi sympathizing? Posters dismissing the real-life death of Robert Altman? No disrespect, but I just don’t think this topic is worth such vitriol.
-
No disrespect but, is this you first post ever on AICN??? Where have you been?
-
Paul Zaentz (spelling?) has said that Jackson will definately direct The Hobbit and the prequel. I believe the IMDb, but not sure if I believe Paul Zaentz.
-
...about Ringy's post, MNG, is when he's trying to give you advice on how to make people "start to like you." This from one of the singularly most despised and reviled talkbackers in AICN history. That's pure comedy gold.
-
I hope you enjoy your stay.
-
... even though I first joined circa 1998 :-). I know how things can get "heated" around here, but this talkback seemed to fly off on a tangent that'll eventually make it land in the Shire. MNG... I should've clarified what I meant. The cuss'-outs (a number of which
I've also experienced) don't surprise me. It's just the notion of posters swearing at each other over the fact that *Peter Jackson* isn't having his way (considering that his online statement is what sparked all of this). If some of us were getting a cut of the dollars at stake, or debating over an actual film project that exists, I'd at least understand. Considering the number of AICN posters who wish to be a part of the entertainment industry, I'm a little surprised that more of these talkbacks aren't geared towards online collaborative endeavors. I personally could give you 3 different models that could work on AICN... -
Even funnier though, I think I'm rather well liked around here. ;) Oh, I've got a story for you in the Zone if you want to hear it.
-
I think I know what you were getting at...I was just ribbing you a little bit. So, what are these 3 models?
-
so me hating a secret society amounts to me liking the nazis? zionissts=/=jews. massive amounts of jews fought for imperial germanny in ww1, a jew recommended hitler for his only medal in the trenches which he treasured and that sniveling hypocrite knew and never acknoledged it And i've replied to your question was it a joke or not saying it was. the fact you actually had to ask me that is fucking insane out of anyone in that TB, creepy. btw you seemed a lot more open in choices when you said in that same TB "bringing up the same weird train of thought. Is it some sort of sublime attempt at humor or something you really believe? If the former, then I apologize. If the latter, then feel free to jam a machete or two as far as you can into any one of your bodily orifices." well mr. hypocrite, where's my fucking apology?
-
You've never posted anything even remotely "ironic" in the talkbacks, yet you want us to suddenly believe that in THAT particular matter you're being "ironic" or making a "joke". Your cretinous and repellant nature is compounded by your apparent belief in a "secret" zionist "society" which has toppled nations and is currently ruling the United States. I suppose you believe in the Protocols as well. Apology? You can kiss my ass, tool.
-
...the only crime you're accusing the Nazis of is going after the "wrong" Jews. I guess that's progress for someone whose Sven Hassel paperbacks are glued shut with dried semen.
-
...lay it on me. I won't be able to read it right now as I'm off to other engagements, but I will check it out in the morning. Cheers.
-
First one: suggest a general topic to be used in a subsequent montage (i.e. Marvel Super heroes). Have talkback posters submit a 3 second clip that they produce, and have a site primary arrange the final product. One talkback poster could provide original music. Currently bootleg montages along these lines can get +20,000 hits on YouTube. Second: choose a public domain classic and, if a talkback poster works with Shockwave, assign them a segment to animate (using certain common backgrounds, etc.). Modify the story to incorporate narration, so that one of this site's primaries narrates the resulting sequence, and post this on YouTube. There are a number of classic works that would work in such a style. I'll hold off on the third idea (which involves more variables, such as chat rooms and other tools) as this post has gotten too long... but this is merely scratching the surface here...
-
Anyone see the fan-made trailer for the Hobbit that went around shortly after ROTK premiered? It used LOTR music and scenes of Bilbo and Gandalf and Gollum intersperesed with footage from Dragonslayer. It was overwrought, melodramatic and dark. And that it essentially the kind of movie Jacson says he wants to make, in order to tie it into the LOTR movies. And if that's the case, then I don't want him to make the Hobbit. It's the wrong tone, pure and simple. Of course New Line are being money grubbing tight-assed evil greedy bastards. Of course Jackson is being stubborn and just as greedy and not really taking fans wished into account as he claims. Out of everything that has been said here, the only thing I truly agree with is that Alfonso Cuaron would do an amazing job with this material. A few more words: someone needs to find a solution to ZombieSolutions, cause he's a dick. I see DufusyteII is still whacked-out of his skull and completely misinterpreting everything he sees. Probably still wants Loreena McKennit to re-do the music to LOTR. Someone needs to shoot barndoor in the head. Midget_King needs to die from ass-cancer. RingbwearerOrson isn't even amusing anymore, he's just sad, and lonely, and hopefully puts an end to his useless existence soon. Uhm... that's about it.
-
That's definitely an interesting proposal and one that's got a bit of potential. The best place for the AICN community to share ideas like this is probably The Zone (link above). There you can probably generate like-minded interest and keep everyone in touch via a moderated forum. If you're interested, it's a good place to start. Cheers.mortsleam - I don't think we've seen you around these parts in quite some time.
-
Aliens didn't need Ridley. Harry Potter doesn't need the same director. Neither does the Hobbit. It will be FAR FAR more exciting if Peter Jackson is NOT working on this. The whole world doesn't revolve around Feebles/Frighteners/Brain Dead bullshit. TOLKIEN is the talent NOT PETER JACKSON. Peter Jackson substituted his name where Tolkiens should be and everyone believed the popularity was due to Pete. IT ISN'T. WAKE UP !!!!
-
We already know how you characterize zionists. The words you used were, I believe, "worse than nazis". As for what Exeter and Finkelstein have said or not said, and that I've "put words in his mouth" -- show me one instance in that interview with Finkelstein where he claims that zionists have toppled all the countries Exeter mentioned or that they are in fact controlling the United States. As for Finkelstein himself, anyone who calls Simon Wiesenthal a "heartless and immoral crook" is an asshole. By the way, I love how you mentioned that it felt like you were back in the WTC talkback. Would that be the same talkback brokedick was active in? You know, the guy you claim never to have heard of before you showed up in the talkbacks?
-
http://tinyurl.com/yeda3v
-
"may or may not have posted before".... Actually, it's pretty clear exactly what he has posted before..... "Accusing everyone here of being Nazi-sympathizers".... Nope, it's just Exeter..... "self-professed TB police".... No, I have never professed to be a TB policeman -- although you did accuse me of it before when you were brokedick.
-
no one forgot about tolkien being the creator of rings. no one. the films were never billed as peter jacksons lord of the rings...always as JRR Tolkiens...jackson just received the credit he should have for turning what were considered unfilmable books into 3 hugely successful films.did he change the text..yes..if the books were filmed word for word would they be fucking boring? yes...in fact the copuncil of elrond if filmed page for page would have been an entire film in itself....no one is claiming jackson invented it or took credit for inventing. but i think he probably had a small hand in the success of the FILMS. and if anyone could have made them successful just because of the books then bakshis version would be considered a cinema great and he never would have been cut off at the kness - we would have seen the second film....if anything jacksons films introduced a whole new generation of people to the books who may have never read them otherwise. no one ever forgot or failed to credit tolkien ....not once.
-
This substitution was ESSENTIAL for PJ to go from the yet another box office failure (The Frighteners) into Tolkien impersonator (look how quickly he dropped the bare foot, long haired look after production). He never mentioned Tolkien hardly ever during production, a toal avoidance. There was always a debate if he could do a good job and he did a pretty good job even though the grading sucked and TT has some horrible FX shots during Isengard. The Hobbit and Silmarillion can be done better. PJ is really not that good of a director or he would have had more success on his own material: which invariably bombs. PJ's success largely depends on taking talent, using them and attempting to destroy them, then replacing them with weaker people who take credit: so people don't get power from the material, like he did. The relationship with New Line is typical and is only the most recent example. Look at how how Howard Shore was replaced. Look at how Allan Lee was shoved aside in production after all his art work was used. Look at what happened to Charlie Mcklellan (who was interviewed here) or Mark Stetson, who sat next to PJ for the entire trilogy and then was shoved aside for 3 academy awards, and only got one because he complained.....or many, many other people. PJ is actually a vampire. You think he is a fat hobbit. He isn't. He is a backstabber. It is great these books are hitting the screen, but the success of Potter sequels shows that a coherent cinematic vision of a great book series can have a variety of directors and STILL BE superb and coherent. Did you ever see Dr Strangelove ? There is a character in it: TJ KONG who goes down with a bomb. The future isn't at WETA. Well done to New Line for standing up to this meglomaniac that was created from Tolkien's talent.
-
if PJ shoots The Hobbit as he has threatened he will, with excavation of various appendices and fleshing out of LOTR backstory, will it warrant the title "JRR Tolkein's The Hobbit"? a slight misrepresentation you would think...
-
First off, thanks for such a fun talkback to read. The back and forth is very entertaining...
To post about the topic, I am sad that PJ might not make the Hobbit. I think he did a great job on the LOTR and I would hate to be the diretor that replaces him and the standard for which he has already set. The only director cocky enough might be a young newbie or a bad one at best.
Exeter, we all work for money because that is what we need to survive in the world. However, when one has a job that they are passionate about, then it becomes fullfilling in more ways than just about the money. You might not know about that since you seem to dislike your job. -
The domestic failure (an industry flop of a huge scale) of King Kong (2005) proved to New Line, the Studios and the rest of the film industry that people WILL NOT GO TO A PETER JACKSON FILM SIMPLY BECAUSE PJ DIRECTS. THAT IS A FACT. People went to LOTR because it had a pre-existing fan base. I remember a few years ago when these talkbacks were screaming for Connery and Gilliam, now you have been served something different, all you want is that. WAKE UP. Give me something fresh. If it is done like Potter it will be JUST AS SUCCESSFUL. FACT.
-
The domestic failure (aka an industry flop of a huge scale) of King Kong (2005) proved to New Line, the Studios and the rest of the film industry that people WILL NOT GO TO A PETER JACKSON FILM SIMPLY BECAUSE PJ DIRECTS IT. THAT IS A FACT. People went to LOTR because it had a pre-existing fan base. I remember a few years ago when these talkbacks were screaming for Connery and Gilliam, now you have been served something different, all you want is that. WAKE UP. Give me something fresh. If it is done like Potter it will be JUST AS SUCCESSFUL. FACT.
-
It was NOT a commercial failure. FACT.
-
Don't believe me ? How about George Lucas. Here is a quote.
"The market forces that exist today make it unrealistic to spend $200 million on a movie," said Lucas, a near-billionaire from his feverishly franchised outer-space epics. "Those movies can't make their money back anymore. Look at what happened with 'King Kong.'" - George Lucas
http://tinyurl.com/fq7pv
Here is a reminder :
What's happened? Peter Jackson's "King Kong" — a three-hour, $300 million extravaganza that wowed advance screening audiences — is a catastrophe in the making.
On Thursday, Kong's take was a measly $6,295,755 — off $3.5M from Wednesday's weak $9,755,745 opening day. Kong ranks now as the 21st best Wednesday opening ever — a dubious distinction.
Something is certainly wrong. It could be the movie's daunting length, or even a slow middle section that would have benefited from cutting. The leads are all solid actors — Naomi Watts, Adrien Brody, Jack Black — but none of them is a star attraction. That might be the trouble, but I doubt it.
In fact, Kong seems like a no-brainer. Great special effects, and a main character — the ape — that is more three-dimensional than a lot of humans in movies this winter.
But there's some kind of snafu, and if Universal doesn't figure it out shortly, "King Kong" could turn into a king-sized headache.
One stumbling block to a bigger take may be that you simply cannot take young children to see this movie. It is way too intense. So my advice: get a sitter. Jackson's movie is a smart three-hour video game/fun house/theme park.
http://tinyurl.com/9z2vh
More ?
"King Kong," the movie its distributor claimed would "eclispe Titanic's box office total," may have only one thing in common with "Titanic" - a swift sinking. "King Kong" opened Wednesday to a dreadful debut, earning just over $9 million. That wasn't even enough to put Kong on the list of Top 20 Movies of all time opening on a Wednesday. "Catch Me If You Can" earned more money, four years ago, on its Wednesday debut. Universal, with its haughty publicists, can try to spin "Kong's" meager earnings any which way they want, now, trying to say, "it's a three hour movie and can only earn so much in a day." The truth is, "King Kong" is neither the next "Lord of the Rings," nor the next Peter Jackson blockbuster, both of which Universal was hoping for. In fact, in its first weekend, "King Kong" earned only $50 million. FYI - "Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King," a movie more than a half hour longer than "King Kong," earned $34 million in its first day, a Wednesday.
http://tinyurl.com/y6awe9
Final Statistics:
Domestic: $218,080,025
Production Budget: $207 m
Worldwide: $549,347,960
http://tinyurl.com/ktt6c
This kind of film could destroy a studio. -
Is it true that king kong use to sexually molest the dead V rexes before eating them
-
Is it true that king kong use to sexually molest the dead V rexes before eating them?
-
Having participated in all those old LoTR TB's, I don't remember "these talkbacks (were) screaming for Connery and Gilliam." Yeah, they were mentioned a few times but mostly in the "Not them!" vein, as I recall. Are you vying for Ringbearer's slot or something? Face it, people are expecting Jackson to helm the Hobbit...Silmarillion backstory/ Kong over indulgence or nowt. **Careful TomBodet, you're slipping back into Goatzinger mode {[:^)
-
"Show me what PJ brought to lotr that was new, and you will find only blunders and glaring mis-steps." The lotr films were great to the extent that they portrayed Tolkien's great story; all the glaring mis-steps were what was introduced by PJ and company.As noted, PJ's true spirit, when he does a film based on his own material, is oddball sicko stuff. What kept lotr on track was his righteous fear of the fans, which kept him in line. On Kong05 he lost that fear, and injected a sicko Denham05 who ruined the film. Even Harry Knowles, who praises everything PJ does in order to stay in close relation to PJ, had to mention that he "prefered the original Denham to Denham05." This is a magnificent understatement which Harry understated so he will not dare offend PJ. But what Harry really meant to say is "The Denham05 entirely ruins the film," which is also my sentiment.If PJ does the Hobbit, he will inject more of his sicko, bitter, mocking, snide lampoonish satire. Rather than being a sincere children's adventure story, like Potter or Narnia, it will be a snide warped bitter lampoon like Kong05 was.For the record, I still think McKennitt would have done some great vocal work in the lotr films, or at least the closing song while the credits roll; she would have been a natural; I even think she might have been a better Galadriel than Blanchett was. Here again, Galadriel is a Good character, but somehow PJ is very uncomfortable with goodness, and so he transformed her into a rather frightening quasi-witch. PJ is much more at home portraying evil and wickedness than at portraying goodness. The Hobbit is a film about goodness and full of childlike good characters, and PJ is very uncomfortable filming good characters. Note that PJ also turned good Faramir into a villain for most of his screen time. Bombadill was completely excluded, and I think PJ would exclude alot of the original Hobbit material because he is just confounded by goodness and does not know how to film it.J. R. R. Tolkien, in one interview, when asked about his inspiration for the dwarves, said that the dwarves were reminiscent of the Jews, in that they were somewhat secretive hoarders of treasure. This is what J.R.R. Tolkien said, so don't blame me for it. Anyway, in the lotr films Gimli is clearly portrayed as Celtic, but I hope in the Hobbit the dwarves will be closer to Tolkien's vision, i.e. more inspired by jewish motiffs than by celtic motiffs.elanor, as further demonstration of how nice a guy I am, I will let you in on a secret, that to make a paragraph you have to include the html tag (br)(br) but instead of () use the "greater than" and "less than" symbols.Childrens films make alot of money. Kong05 would have grossed more if it were less gross and more child viewable. The Hobbit should definitely be accessible to a child audience. PJ is totally incapable of making a film accessible to children.
-
http://tinyurl.com/y2wmvg Just cough it up NL
-
"It was a sharp struggle, but worth it, " said one. "What nasty thick skins they have to be sure, but I'll wager there is good juice inside." "Aye, they'll make fine eating, when they're hung a bit, " said another. "Don't hang 'em too long," said a third. "They're not as fat as they might be. Been feeding none to well of late, I should guess." "Kill 'em I say," hissed a fourth; "kill 'em now and hang 'em dead for a while." "They're dead now, I'll warrant," said the first.
-
...the MGM folks sound downright upbeat!
-
They do sound that way don't they? Hope we get some more news soon. Anyway....cheers
-
Saul Zaentz Sues Over English Patient
Claims Miramax owes him profit cash
Source: The Hollywood Reporter
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Producer Saul Zaentz is not a man to be trifled with. And it’s clear that he can hold on to a grudge like a dog with a particularly beloved bone.
At least where an allegedly missing payday is involved. You see, Saul has just launched a $20 million lawsuit against Disney and Miramax, claiming that the companies failed to share profits from 1996’s The English Patient.
"Like Enron, Tyco and WorldCom, Miramax has used fraudulent and unfair accounting and business practices to deprive Saul Zaentz Co. of its profit participation," reads part of the suit. Apparently, Zaentz helped finance the movie in return for profit participation. As is common with big studio films, Miramax claimed that the film didn’t recoup its costs because the advertising budget was so high. But Zaentz, with this lawsuit, isn’t buying it. He claims the film cost $35 million to make and has earned more than $100 million in profit.
The case will continue.
-
five fold. one Casting. two Changes to the narrative structure of the film. three The addition of characters that served no purpose at all. Four Jackson and walsh bizzare decision to change Captain Jack Driscoll into a play wright and finally Jackson thinking that he is the new spielberg turning the movie in Jurassic Park.
-
Dustin hoffman said the following thing on Parkinson....(I may misquote)
"Bond is an assasin, he kills people, that is his job, he beds and bonks the ladies and doesnt care". That is bond. Hoffman said this because it was one of the roles that as a young actor he would have loved to have played. -
Dustin hoffman said the following thing on Parkinson....(I may misquote)
"Bond is an assasin, he kills people, that is his job, he beds and bonks the ladies and doesnt care". That is bond. Hoffman said this because it was one of the roles that as a young actor he would have loved to have played. -
Peter Jackson did a good and attentive job of directing a Great work. End of story. He is not the new Tolkien, he is not Eru the One, and he is not a pre-requisite for anything and everything set in the epic long ago of this Middle-Earth. George Lucas created Star Wars and Jim Henson created cult classics like Labryinth, and those stories could not have been done without their creator/directors., LOTR has been a widely beloved masterpiece since before Peter was born. Who even knew who Peter was before this? I nearly had a stroke when I learned that THe Frightners director was doing LOTR. All LOTR required was for a director not to fuck it up. And Peter did a good job of not fucking it up. Were there errors. Uh, yeah. Gandalf's lightning and fire, one of his trademarks in the book (if there are any who can see in this storm, I at least am revealed. I have all but written 'Gandalf is here' in words that can be read from Rivendell to the mouth of Anduin.") is almost entirely absent, the end of ROTK does too little with the elves passage, and then there is the business of Denethor getting kicked into the fire by Shadowfax. . . no palantir by the way. Anyway, Jackson did great, but the films were at their best in the places where he stayed true to Tolkien. There are a number of talented directors from Ford Copalla, to Ron Howard, to Ridely Scott and Wolfgang Petersen, who have shown through their own previous projects (Willow, Legend, the original Neverending Story [the only good one in that series]) that they all have an affinity for Tolkien's works. Also, the Hobbit is related to the Lord of The Rings, but not identical to it. The approach must be as thorough, but the end result should not be quite as somber. A fresh perspective could work well, if the passion and skill are present.
-
theres no reason. he's gay like space is black. it just is...
Readers Talkback
User Login
Top Talkbacks
- To Commemorate The 3D Release Of STAR WARS EPISODE I: THE PHANTOM MENACE, George Lucas Wants You To Know...Greedo Shoots First!! -- 435 total posts 435 posts
- There's a STAR TREK video game that is going to lead into JJ's STAR TREK 2 apparently... -- 88 total posts 88 posts
- AVENGERS enemy revealed as pink boardgame pieces... You might suffer some form of elation... SPOILERS!!! -- 86 total posts 80 posts
- Rest In Peace Bethesda’s Adam Adamowicz -- 76 total posts 76 posts
- The Sensorties Revisit The Friday Docback (And Still Smell)!! DOCTOR WHO Story #7 Again, The Coming Of Season/Series 7, And More!! -- 69 total posts 69 posts
- Quint travels to Barsoom and visits the John Carter set!!! -- 127 total posts 62 posts
- SPACE 2099!! -- 159 total posts 61 posts
- Friday Brings SWEEPS DAY NINE!! Gab Here About Tonight’s FRINGE!! Plus Einstein on TIM, Wiig On PORTLANDIA, MAHER, CLONE, GIFTED, GRIMM, SPARTACUS, SUPERNATURAL, GOLD RUSH And More!! -- 88 total posts 60 posts
- Wanna smell like the Hulk? What about Cap? Consider yourself a Thunder God or a unisex God of Mischief? -- 58 total posts 57 posts
- Ridley Scott's Next Will Be Cormac McCarthy's THE COUNSELOR! -- 50 total posts 50 posts