Ain't It Cool News (
Movie News

Oooh, the gloves are off now. Robert Shaye strikes back at Peter Jackson, banning him from New Line!!

Ahoy, squirts! Quint here. The dirty fighting is starting between Peter Jackson and New Line. reported on an interview with Bob Shaye done by, where he rips into Jackson and says he's not welcome at New Line ever again. He points out what Jackson has been paid so far on Rings... a lot of money... but he doesn't answer why New Line refuses to allow Jackson's representatives into the books. I believe Jackson is suing over his contracted percentage on the FELLOWSHIP DVDs, but from Jackson's letter to the fans about the situation, it sounds like he just wants to make sure he's not being short changed. So, the question still remains... If New Line is sure they've fulfilled their contractual obligation to Jackson and Co, why are they fighting this? I guess now it's personal and Shaye is going to do his damndest to fast track HOBBIT, which is always a good reason to make a film. Here's hoping MGM, who still owns the North American distribution rights, puts their foot down and stops a hastily made HOBBIT movie. If they can filibuster New Line and Saul Zaentz gets the rights back, he's said he wants Jackson to do it. Even if Jackson ends up having nothing to do with a HOBBIT film, I'd still love to see it made right. Not just for the right reasons, but with the right amount of care put into the project. His blessing on the project would also open up the possibility of returning actors who wouldn't come back in this new situation at New Line. I know Ian McKellen has publicly stated that he won't return unless Jackson does. So, a clusterfuck. Hopefully the fans aren't the ones who take it up the pooper in the end, but I think that's where Mr. Shaye is taking us right now. What do you folks think? (Heads up thanks to “3-Peat Champion of King of the Mountain: Rick Rambis”)

Readers Talkback
comments powered by Disqus
    + Expand All
  • Jan. 10, 2007, 9:02 a.m. CST


    by v for vienetta

    Hmm, personally I don't want to see anyone but Jackson do the Hobbit.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 9:02 a.m. CST


    by Deus Vult

    now PJ can concentrate on that Wizrd of Oz remake from Monday.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 9:02 a.m. CST

    Rob and Petey need to cross the angry bridge

    by just pillow talk

    or else we'll get a half-assed movie that could have been so much more. Still mad about X3....

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 9:02 a.m. CST


    by Westoun

    Fingers crossed New Line lose the rights.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 9:03 a.m. CST


    by v for vienetta

    Sorry. Nearly forgot the obligatory catchphrase.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 9:03 a.m. CST

    Just Watched These Movies Again in HD on TNT...

    by Sean38

    ...and they're just BEAUTIFULLY crafted. You can argue that they're too long, but, they're like the novels that way. Just a world you want to spend time in, no matter how much time that is. To make The Hobbit, without Jackson, is simply insanity. This sounds like something out of the show Entorouge - making a movie or NOT making a movie out of pure vengence. It's like the studios are being run by children.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 9:02 a.m. CST

    I Know Who's Really Behind This...

    by MortGuffman

    Randal Graves of Leonardo, NJ. He's just doing this to piss off Elias.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 9:03 a.m. CST


    by nahdogg

    A fast tracked hobbit will be a tragic mistake the fans will get the short end of the stick and we'll end up with a cross between Willow and Reign of Fire.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 9:04 a.m. CST


    by BirdMcMonster

    Those movies made so much frickin' money. Pay him. Whatever he asks for, pay him. And then let him make the Hobbit and you'll make even more money. If Jackson doesn't direct the Hobbit, it will be a tragedy.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 9:07 a.m. CST

    FYI: Original interview at/by, not Moviehole.


    Actually, Moviehole didn't interview Bob Shaye -'s Sci Fi Wire did at...

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 9:07 a.m. CST

    Bob Shaye should pull his head out of his...

    by Frank Black

    I'm not the biggest Peter Jackson fan (HATED KING KONG, even the 1979 version was better, not visually of course but who cares,) but he loves those damn hobbits more than my nerd wife and truly brought those characters to life. New Line is cutting its own throat because fans will revolt.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 9:09 a.m. CST

    Not All That Surprising

    by TheBigDogg

    If someone sued me and I thought I was in the right, they could go and shite. That would be the end of it. I have no idea who is in the right and who is in the wrong here and there isn't enough info for any of us to make that judgement. Oh and... someone, eh, gotta eat...or something.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 9:08 a.m. CST

    We need to stop putting PJ on such a pedestal

    by Movietool

    Yes, the LotR movies were great, but not so great that Peter Jackson should be the only person allowed to touch the IP. Does no one else deserve a crack at Tolkien without PJs "blessing?" Is Ian McKellan the ONLY guy capable of playing Gandalf? What a bunch of nonsense. Oh, and Shaye is suddenly betraying us fans? Wasn't he the one who made this whole thing possible by taking an ENORMOUS leap of geeky faith and allowing a relatively unknown director to take on the biggest fantasy franchise in history? I guess it's all about "what have you done for me lately."

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 9:11 a.m. CST

    Jackson deserves the money

    by The Motts

    Shaye's interview makes it seem that the only reason Jackson doesn't deserve the money he is seeking is that he's already been paid a lot of money. Well, if Jackson had a contract and he is owed money then he should be given that money, regardless of how much he's been paid already. It's true New Line took the chance and financed these films, and I'm grateful for that, but they should realize that without Jackson there is no shot that Weta, Ian McKellen, Hugo Weaving or others involved in LOTR will be in The Hobbit, which would be a real disappointment. New Line is being foolish, and I hoped that this would be resolved for the fans' sake, but it doesn't look like it will be. Let's hope the right lapse so Zaentz can get Jackson and team back on board.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 9:12 a.m. CST


    by BizarroJerry

    Fucking rich people getting mad at other rich people... waaah! waaahh!

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 9:14 a.m. CST

    Ian mckellan gotta eat

    by artie langes nut

    Come on, you all know what Ian Mckellan gotta ear

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 9:15 a.m. CST

    Oh, Hollywood

    by Ribbons

    Quint summed it up pretty accurately when he said that we're the ones who are going to take it up the pooper as a result of this protracted, public dick-measuring contest. Possibly New Line as well, if the final product totally blows, but they're still likely to pocket a pretty sum of money. And to be honest, Jackson deserves a lot of the blame as well, although I'd still rather see him make or sanction the movie than see New Line fasttrack the thing. I'm counting on you, Saul Zaentz.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 9:16 a.m. CST

    How longbefore

    by artie langes nut

    Harry has some animation posted in the upper right of a naked Peter Jackson rolling around on a bed of 100 dollar bills? How about that site Hobbit fans

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 9:16 a.m. CST

    Shaye - irrelevant since FREDDY 3: DREAM WARRIOR

    by Spacesheik

    Shaye is sooo 1987 its not funny

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 9:14 a.m. CST

    Yes Mckellan is Gandalf

    by nahdogg

    No one else should play Gandalf and it would be rediculous to throw away the production design of the first LOTR films. Just give us the Hobbit with PJ and then let someone else do a Similrillion Trilogy with new talent.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 9:14 a.m. CST

    Stephen Summers is available

    by just pillow talk

    There will just be a lot of mummies running around middle-earth.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 9:18 a.m. CST


    by artie langes nut

    That was tbe best sequel Where the DREAM WARRIORS DONT WANT TO DREAM NO MORE....Seriously that was the one with the medium Arquette in it, I liked that one

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 9:18 a.m. CST


    by Deus Vult

    I always knew it was superior to anything having to do with taint. worst of all, "gotta eat" works on so many more levels, hence its superiority. alright boys, I'm back to the drawing board to devise something equally as clever...mwa-hahahahahaaaaaaaaaaa!

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 9:22 a.m. CST

    The amount of money PJ made from King Kong

    by Shigeru

    added to the $250 million Shaye says he made off the Rings movies... well what the fuck, man? Your net worth is in the HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS, why do DVD profit sharing from ONE of the THREE movies matter anymore? When most of the world is depressingly impoverished, it's hard to justify.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 9:26 a.m. CST


    by PoweredUpPacman

    Someone oughtta put this horse out of it's freakin' misery. For good.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 9:27 a.m. CST

    In All Seriousness...

    by MortGuffman

    I've often found that studio execs who blacklist a director who netted record grosses for your studio, but of all-time in general, usually end up shitcanned pretty quickly. I don't know anything about the situation other than what is reported, but I really think that Robert Shaye is an idiot for saying that Peter Jackson is not welcomed at New Line.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 9:29 a.m. CST

    Who cares? Where's Part 2 of the Cameron interview?

    by kwisatzhaderach

    AVATAR pisses all over The Hobbit.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 9:28 a.m. CST

    Shaye is Nuts!

    by Scarbro

    Shaye is being a bully and the typical Hollywood-type who will put himself before the film. If you've got nothing to hide then let the man see the books. Afterall, he did make you a billion dollars with his fims.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 9:31 a.m. CST

    Poop shoot. Hahahahaha!

    by kinghenryVIII

    Love that phrase. Cornucopia of shit-ter! Plethora of backyard! Fuckin' chubby hobbit's. I hate pissing contests.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 9:29 a.m. CST

    Shaye sounds like a pricksmoking asshole

    by Doctor_Sin

    "If New Line is sure they've fulfilled their contractual obligation to Jackson and Co, why are they fighting this?" Exact-a-mundo.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 9:30 a.m. CST

    it'll have to be a long piss, since it's so far off...

    by just pillow talk

    plus the one ring is in his possession, so back off Avatar!

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 9:31 a.m. CST

    Good call Shaye

    by RodneyOz

    Like THIS won't backfire on you incredibly badly. Way to taint a project before a foot of film has even rolled.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 9:33 a.m. CST

    ill watch,but wont pay

    by presidentevil

    ill pay for another movie and go see the hobbit if jackson isnt on bored....even if i have to pay for an electric boogaloo sequel

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 9:34 a.m. CST


    by presidentevil


  • Jan. 10, 2007, 9:34 a.m. CST

    Jackson is overrated

    by Gorrister

    Personally, I think Jackson is full of himself. Jackson is a GOOD director, but he's not a GREAT director. Other than how he treated the title character, King Kong wasn't that great of a movie. Even elements of LOTR had problems with it, especially where he decided he was a better writer than Tolkien and decided to make serious changes to the story. (If it wasn't for the internet-based 'fan revolution', we would have seen "Arwen: Warrior Princess" at Helms Deep.) Jackson needs to get over himself. Like I said, Jackson is a good director, but he's not as good as he likes to think he is.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 9:38 a.m. CST

    Heavenly Creatures is Jackson's best film.

    by kwisatzhaderach

    Small = better.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 9:40 a.m. CST

    Hobbit: The Last Stand

    by blindambition238

    you know thats what itll come to

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 9:40 a.m. CST

    New Line

    by porterdsgn

    is starting to fuck with the wrong nerds!

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 9:41 a.m. CST

    that shaye dick...

    by Buzzsawlenny

    is gonna get Canned so fast his nuts will finally drop

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 9:42 a.m. CST

    Joel Schumacher!!!!!!

    by presidentevil

    how 'bout 'dat!!!..oh yeah...put bruce campbell in it... his participation in 2 of the highest grossing (possibly 3!) movies of all time so far almost clinches box-office nirvana

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 9:43 a.m. CST

    Heavenly Creatures is a great movie

    by Gorrister

    I find that most directors put out their best stuff when they are struggling to make a name for themselves. They are forced to prove themselves to studios and audiences, so they put a lot of thought into their movies. When they are suddenly famous and in demand, the quality of their work slips because they start thinking "now I can make whatever I want" (anyone remember a director named George Lucas?). They get arogant and lazy. They presume the same folks who swarmed their last film will swarm their next film just cause it has his name on it. And they are partly right! Look at all the Talkbackers who are saying things like "Hobbit will suck without Jackson" or "Only Ian can play Gandalf". That's a load of crap. Any good director can make a good movie with The Hobbit. And, believe it or not, Ian is NOT the only actor who has ever played Gandalf on the big screen. And McKellen will NOT be the last actor to portray him.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 9:44 a.m. CST

    Gotta Eat's Gotta Eat!

    by jack-torrance


  • Jan. 10, 2007, 9:47 a.m. CST

    Lebron-yeah you right!

    by Deus Vult

    Two things fellas-Lebron, I'll take your sound advice.<p>As for this topic, has anyone ever thought about the possibility that this is PURE SPIN?!? seriously, how else could new line and PJ keep all of dorkdom interested in the hobbit when both new line and PJ have other stuff going on right now? this is the perfect way! its no different than the hype of internal arguing and royalty battles prior to the 1st/2nd/3rd season of seinfeld coming out on dvd. they blew that shit up like a car bomb and when it came out it sold like afgahni poppies. so RELAX everybody, new line knows there's no hobbit w/o PJ and he knows it too. most of all, there's NO hobbit w/o PJ from what I remember Saul Zaents (sp) saying.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 9:46 a.m. CST

    Hulk Hogan as Gandolf

    by Bob_Loblaw_Jr

    You will not pass Brother!!

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 9:53 a.m. CST

    I'd actually prefer someone else direct.

    by rev_skarekroe

    Someone with a lighter touch. I suspect Jackson's "Hobbit" would be too portentious and dark. However, if you can't have McKellan, Weaving, possibly Bloom and Tyler, WETA, and the old Bag End sets without him then he needs to be on board.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 9:53 a.m. CST

    Jackson at Newline == Flames on Optimus!

    by Squashua

    And Nips on the Batsuit!

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 9:56 a.m. CST

    Also, if Zaentz still has any say...

    by rev_skarekroe ain't getting done without Jackson. Not that Zaentz cares about the art or anything - he's just the sort of old-school Hollywood type who knows that while a fast-tracked "Hobbit" movie with a bunch of scabs will make a quick buck, the LONG-TERM money's in a Jackson version.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 9:55 a.m. CST

    New Line is Gay

    by Itchy

    I love watching billionaries squabble about millions. C'Mon New Line - you know and I know that no one but Jackson is directing The Hobbit, so shut the fark up and work something out. This is as gay as the Disney-Pixar fight that - SURPRISE - ended up with Pixar continuing to work with Disney. You bitches know a good thing when you see it, and you're not going to piss away all the goodwill and investment in the franchise over an accounting spat. So shut the hell up and just get the movie made. Oh - and cast Rosie O'Donnell as the voice of Smaug and Donald Trump as Thorin Oakenshield.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 10:03 a.m. CST

    WOW. How did it come to this?!

    by Mr. Nice Gaius

    This is really becoming quite bizarre. Whatever the outcome of this debacle (i.e. choice of director, etc.), one thing is for sure - it stands a good chance of TAINTing the finished product.<P>Here is my theory about why this is even happening in the first place:<P>Bob Shaye = Ringw(b)earer9.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 10:03 a.m. CST

    Hey Movietool...

    by Nachokoolaid

    You said: Q1. Does no one else deserve a crack at Tolkien without PJs "blessing?" Q2:Is Ian McKellan the ONLY guy capable of playing Gandalf? A1: Maybe A2: Yes

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 10:08 a.m. CST

    Fighting over money not creativity

    by Darth Fart

    If Peter has been paid a lot of money, then let bygones be bygones. Life's too short to be suing. Money will buy you a week in Hollywood but creativity will pay you a lifetime.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 10:08 a.m. CST

    Dead Alive - jacksons best film BY FAR!

    by kinghenryVIII

    Baby dead thing at the playground? Lunch sceene with the mothers face falling apart! The humor thru out! Classic. Got it right next to Slither and the Evil Dead movies. IMO the Lord of the Rings, yet awsome, had some serious snooze value ridden thru out. C'mon geeks - let thre bashing begin, but I did love those movies but there was also some serious lagging going on. I know in the books (I read them in High School) they did a fair amount of walking, but they bored the shit out of me in parts. Went to the potty, did a #2, drove to Wawa, came back, and still missed nothing. But I own the Extended Editions (for a sick day from work) so who am I to say?

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 10:08 a.m. CST

    How can you SUE someone and stay friendly with them?

    by Ringwearer9

    It just doesn't happen. Just as when you ask your neighbor nicely, could he please keep his dog from digging in his lawn, you stay friends with him, whereas if you call the police, you become hard enemies. Jackson's a self absorbed, selfish goon. Again, if he really cared about making THE HOBBIT he'd have settled the lawsuit by rolling it into the new deal to make THE HOBBIT, just like they wanted him to. That means he didn't care about making THE HOBBIT that much, or he'd have jumped at the chance to make millions more and make a movie that he loves. Well, he didn't want to. Again, why do you think a Peter Jackson film of the Hobbit will NOT be "half-assed" since that's the way he feels about it?

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 10:11 a.m. CST

    Fuck you, Shaye. And fuck New Line.

    by Dannychico

    This is so clearly bogus. They're scamming PJ. Let him into the books you stupid fucks. He turned you into something besides a third-rate horror studio.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 10:14 a.m. CST

    Well, this seems like a bit of an overreaction...

    by Childe Roland

    ...on New Line's part, but I have to say the dirty fighting started with Jackson's letter to the fans, trying to get them all riled against the "evil, greedy studio" when he's the one demanding, like Delroy Lindo in Get Shorty "Open your books! Let me see a number with however many zeros behind it." There is no all good or all bad guy in this equation, just a couple of money-motivated hotheads with more pride than passion. Personally, I think moving forward with another director is the best thing that could happen, especially given Jackson's fundamental misunderstanding of the source material (in the Hobbit, as demonstrated by his interviews on the subject...he got the Rings books, essentially, but they're very different animals). It must be rough, though, to be giant children who can ban each other from each other's sand boxes and make sure that one's best friends won't play with the other unless they all play a certain way.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 10:16 a.m. CST

    Sounds like Bob Shaye/New Line...

    by Trancer

    need to get their head out of their ass. If Jackson just wants to see the books to verify he's not getting screwed, WTF are they having a hissy fit over? Jackson gave New Line a license to print money. They need to just suck it up and stop acting like 5 year olds.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 10:17 a.m. CST

    I think it will all fall apart

    by droxford

    I think New Line won't cave in. I think Jackson won't cave in. The rights will expire. The LOTR actors won't participate. The movie won't be made for a long time, and when it is made, it will be done by a different production co. with a different cast and a different director.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 10:18 a.m. CST

    Aaand... let the masturbatory defense of Hackson begin!

    by JackPumpkinhead

    "Oooh, his vision of LotR is so wonderful and creative! That hack Tolkien and that other hack Alan Lee should thank Peter for making them famous!", "King Kong was so great! It was better than the original! It should have been 8 hours long!", "Peter, make Halo!", "Peter is the best director who ever lived and he should take over Star Wars", blahblahblah. Congratulations to Mr. Shaye for having a spine, an own opinion that he's not afraid to speak out... and a big brass pair! (Of guts, of course. What else?)

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 10:19 a.m. CST

    Jackson LOST money with KING KONG !!!!!

    by Ringwearer9

    So his success with LOTR has, rightly, been interpreted by the studio as TOLKIEN related. Remember the old adage about a film needing to make 3 times it's production budget to turn a profit? Well, 200 million pluse for King Kong means it needed to make 600 million. Guesss what, it didn't, not even worldwide. That means that New Line, despite being screwed by Jackson's bloated epic monkey movie, still wanted to give him a chance with PROVEN material, and Jackson just spit at them. Shaye won't be "shitcanned" for cutting off relations with Jackson, because King Kong is still fresh in their minds, and Jackson should be bowing and scraping and apologizing to them, and offering to cut his director's fee for THE HOBBIT to make up for Kong. Instead, he's suing them over a petty amount of the DVD sales! What a greedy little asshole Jackson is.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 10:20 a.m. CST

    the fate is in the hands of ugly petty men, apparently

    by Freakemovie

    From everything I've read on this topic, it sounds like Jackson's a decent guy who knows what he's talking about, and New Line is mishandling the entire thing. Really though, we'll never know which is more true. The point is that a small handful of people now have the fate of the Hobbit in their hands, and they seem very happy to make it for all the wrong reasons. Like Quint said, hopefully reasonable folks can stop this before it gets farther out of hand (hopefully from those at MGM who've said they fully believe in Jackson).

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 10:20 a.m. CST


    by Barron34

    It is just foolishness from a business perspective to attempt to make a HOBBIT movie without Jackson's involvement. Sure, a good director could make a good movie out of the book, but you are rolling the dice with an unknown quantity. Jackson and his people are proven commodities, and the hardcore fans will revolt without Jackson and company on board. The smart thing for New Line to do is to find a mediator to make nice between them and Jackson and get the deal done. A Jackson made HOBBIT is pretty close to a surefire thing, and that is uncommon in the movie biz. So, I think Shaye is being a bit foolish here. To whoever said that directors often get lazy and arrogant after they get rich and successful, yes, that is often true in many success stories, but the thing about Jackson and his people is that they sincerely love Middle-Earth and will at least make a real effort with the HOBBIT, and they have had proven success three times over with LOTR. New Line risks getting an inferior product if they risk the HOBBIT on another filmmaker, in my opinion, in addition to alienating fans of the LOTR movies. They should get a mediator and resolve these business issues with Jackson and move ahead with the HOBBIT. That is the smart business move.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 10:24 a.m. CST



    PJ is the best thing to happen to that studio EVER. They should be licking PJs taint.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 10:25 a.m. CST

    New Line made Blade....

    by Kizeesh

    And blade 2, and Blade Trini... Oh I see....

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 10:25 a.m. CST


    by Quint

    You do realize New Line had nothing to do with King Kong, right? That was Universal. And KONG made $550 million in BO, sold $100 million in DVDs the first day the theatrical cut was on sale and that's not counting the tie-in dollars (Chase Bank, chips, sodas, etc), toys or other merchandise. I'm tired of people saying a $550 million grossing film is a flop... but at least it's people that don't even know what studio made it.<BR><BR>You can justify an opinion on the movie, but don't try make your opinion fact. I hate that X3 was a big success, but that's a fact. What is questionable is whether the franchise can continue. I give most of the credit for X3's BO take to having a great X2. We'll see what X4 does... Great. Now I'm sidetracked.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 10:25 a.m. CST

    Kong made over 500 million worldwide

    by Freakemovie

    ...and had a buget of what, 200 or 220 or something. Plus marketing...but there's also DVD sales. Ringwearer, I always thought the line about a film needing to make three times its budget to turn a profit was a critique on studios always mishandling profits. But to be honest I don't the facts about the topic well enough. I always thought Kong's budget seemed a little high, although the studio was more than happy to throw money at him at that point.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 10:28 a.m. CST

    Jackson is overrrated

    by cooke

    You guys make PJ into one of the great directors. Shock, he isn't. It's amazing he could control all 3 movies simultaneously, but at what cost? The shot continuity thoughout all the movies are pieced together from shots filmed months and months apart.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 10:28 a.m. CST

    Shaking my got damn head


    Shaye is a shithead...

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 10:27 a.m. CST

    by the way

    by Freakemovie

    I didn't even think about that, but that's a good point Quint, the whole point is moot since it was Universal.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 10:33 a.m. CST

    Universal, Shmuniversal. KING KONG LOST MONEY.

    by Ringwearer9

    When you have to wait for DVD sales to finally make a profit, you realize that your Golden Boy director isn't that Golden anymore. And NEW LINE can look at Kong's box office and realize this about Jackson even if it was UNIVERSAL that felt the disappointment most keenly. Jackson lost his credibility with KING KONG, and lost that magic aura of being King Midas of the Movies forever.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 10:33 a.m. CST

    so sad that he Shaye has to act like this

    by Russman

    Pay the man his money and go out and make more $ with him. It's so simple and so easy. The people in this biz are such babies and assholes. It's pretty disgusting when you think about it.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 10:34 a.m. CST

    Jackson not welcome at New Line? They are so dumb

    by performingmonkey

    Jackson fucking MADE New Line in recent years. Sure, they took the gamble by hiring him to make three movies simultaneously, but fucking hell he DELIVERED for them and now they seem to be giving him the big FU just because he wants what he's owed. They are crazy. If they think everyone will flock to The Hobbit no matter what they are wrong. People only blindly flock to generic action flicks and CG kids movies, this won't happen with The Hobbit without Jackson. I think LOTR is almost like a running joke with the general audience now, despite the acclaim at the time and the fact that there ARE so many fans. ROTK left many general moviegoers never wanting to be in that universe for another minute.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 10:36 a.m. CST

    jesus christ, ringwearer9 you are lame!

    by forgo10en

    Saying that you know plain shit, would be too much. I am not sure if you suck in math or in common knowledge about movie industry. Both ways, go home!

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 10:38 a.m. CST

    How the HELL do you blacklist someone...

    by Zarles

    ...who has earned your company a billion dollars and an assload of Oscars? True Hollywood chutzpah.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 10:39 a.m. CST

    I think I know the real reason...

    by Quint

    why Bob Shaye doesn't want to give in to Jackson... Anybody remember the lawsuit over Coming To America royalties? That lawsuit forced the books to be opened and when they were, the studio was forced to pay not only the person who brought up the lawsuit, but everybody they were shortchanging, including some $25 million to Eddie Murphy, who had nothing to do with the suit.<BR><BR>I'm thinking New Line's out more that what they owe Jackson if the books are opened.<BR><BR>Also, one more thing for Ringwearer. Can you point out to me the dollar amount Jackson is suing for? That he's being such a greedy prick about? It might be hard because, as I understand it, he's not suing New Line for any money. He's just trying to get the books opened because his accountants think New Line is stiffing him on his contracted percentage. So there goes greedy Jackson suing for no money. Of course, if my theory is correct, New Line will do everything they can to keep those books from being opened.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 10:40 a.m. CST

    Is everyone overlooking this fact....

    by rollnstns

    Where the hell is the outrage that Leonard Nimoy has not been contacted to perform the "Bilbo Baggins" Title Track?????? Spock Gotta Eat!!

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 10:40 a.m. CST


    by Barron34

    Yes, the Lord of the Rings movie succeeded because of Tolkien, but also because of Jackson, who basically succeeded in bringing the Lord of the Rings alive on film, even though some Tolkein fans take exception to that, in varying degrees. The Lord of the Rings could have been very poorly adapted to film, and that would have been an artistic and commercial catastophe. Jackson basically succeeded at a monumental and difficult task, and should be given due credit, in my opinion. But the greatest of the Lord of the Rings begins with Tolkein, not Jackson. The difference regarding KING KONG is that the world was basically waiting for a great (or at least good) LORD OF THE RINGS movie, whereas very few people were waiting for a KING KONG remake, other than Jackson himself. There was no massive built-in fanbase for a KING KONG movie as there was with the generations that grew up loving Tolkein's work. The KING KONG was essentially a very expensive pet project of Jackson's that did not have the market to justify its expense. This does not detract from the fact that Jackson and his people were intregral to the successful adaptation of Tolkein's work to film. Such a task could easily have resulted in absolute failure. While some hardcore Tolkein fans do not like the films at all, most book fans feel that the films effectively achieved the adaptation of the books to film, with some caveats. And that was far from guaranteed. Jackson and company pulled off one of the biggest coups in film history, first by simply getting th films made, and second by doing them to general acclaim. So, it would be a mistake to think that LORD OF THE RINGS succeeded as a film trilogy simply because of Tolkein. It also succeeded because of Jackson. I think it would be ill-advised to make another Tolkein film like the HOBBIT so soon after the success of LORD OF THE RINGS without Jackson's creative involvelment. Yes, in the future there will probably be other Tolkein films without Jackson and company, with other filmmakers and other casts, but that should probably be later than sooner. New Line would be smart to make nice with Jackson and get a HOBBIT film that is consistent with the LORD OF THE RINGS films.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 10:40 a.m. CST


    by Fat Chooch

    Someone had to say it...

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 10:41 a.m. CST

    According to empire magazine...

    by emeraldboy

    What really angered new line was Peter Jackson's snubbing of New line's 40th anniversary.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 10:41 a.m. CST

    Oh, and Quint, how much profit did KING KONG make?

    by Ringwearer9

    It was 220 production budget, which means, roughly, it needed to make more than 660 to make a profit. You say it made 550 million worldwide, plus 100 million in DVD sales. That's 650 million, which means it LOST 10 million for Universal. Now, I don't know whether Peter's multimillion director's fee is part of the production budget, but if it isn't, there goes more millions down the tube. Now, let's say Jackson took care of 20 million of the production costs, making Universal's need only 600 million, then there's a measly 50 million profit, minus the director's fee, and only after DVD sales come in. It isn't something they should be hugely grateful for, and it's such a poor performance on money spent that it justifies Shaye's attituded, and I doubt he's going to be "shitcanned" with KONG as the most recent performance rating for Jackson.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 10:43 a.m. CST

    Quint, you do realize,

    by beastie

    that the majority of the people who never read the X-Men comics, loved X3, right? So, it didn't hurt the franchise much, if at all. To someone like me, who's never read an X-Men book, it was pretty much a continuation of X2. And I'm not a Ratner fan at all. Anyway, I want Guillermo del Toro to direct The Hobbit, after seeing Pan's Labyrinth. I think he would either equal or better Jackson's vision. Alas, after Newline dropping Hellboy (it was Newline right?), I doubt he has a great relationship with the studio, as well.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 10:43 a.m. CST


    by Russman

    remember he asked to look at the books first. When NL dissed him then he sued. You may not know this but studios are always pulling fast ones on actors and directors and producers. ALWAYS! It's just natural to mistrust the studios. Even the guys who made Blair Witch Project had to knuckle up for a moment when Lions Gate started whispering about not paying them the contractual % of the gross that was in the contract - due to marketing and distribution expenses. I'm not going to say that every poor little artist is an innocent flower working hard to make a good product for the man - but I do know that in the history of this business it's always some limp dicked bastard finding some way to screw over the people who actually did the work to make him money. Is it limp dick's right to screw them over - sure, this is America and that's capitalism - but is it a good and healthy way to run a business that is based on relationships - I'd vote no.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 10:45 a.m. CST

    Screw X4 Quint, what about the Wolverine film?

    by Prague23

    Isn't WB doing the Wolverine spin off before X4? And is there any news about that? Theatrical release date? Anything?

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 10:47 a.m. CST

    Brett Ratner's The Hobbit

    by Mgmax

    On July 4... short people got a reason to live.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 10:47 a.m. CST

    The New Line/ Jackson debacle

    by jimmy rabbitte

    While it may be possible for someone else to do a good job of making a film of The Hobbit; there's no way to tell who it could be or how they'd be able to do it. We've got to give credit where it's due. P.J. and his team did a great job with LOTR (let's not forget that Best Picture Academy Award for Return of the King). The real problem now is New Line wants to rush their film into production out of spite for Jackson. The only thing likely to result from that is a poorly made and probably incoherent film, that will pale in comparison to the very trilogy of films it is supposed to seamlessly match. A total disaster, the Suits are cheating the fans out of what should be a great film.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 10:47 a.m. CST

    Quint, why would Jackson do that to his friends?

    by Ringwearer9

    If New Line stands to lose terribly if their books are opened, why would Jackson insist on it? Why is he such a holy insister on "proper accounting practices"? Does he love the IRS or something? If the only way New Line can stay afloat is by cheating on their accounting .... hey, that's how they managed to finance Lord of the Rings in the first place, and catapult Jackson to fame and fortune. It's a pretty nasty trick to pull on a company that has done well by you, to stab them in their financial and reputational guts, pretending it's just the "principle of the thing".

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 10:48 a.m. CST

    Say what you want

    by purplemonkeydw

    There's already a good Hobbit film, and it's a cartoon. It's what got me into the books, and I loved it growing up. It's not bad on the whole...ok...I could do without the 'Greatest Adventure' being sung by some dude sitting on a washing machine during the spin cycle...

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 10:53 a.m. CST

    LOL @ Ringwearer

    by Ribbons

    I love how Quint totally blows away your theory of "greedy, greedy Jackson" and instead of just shutting up or even acknowledging the touche, you plough ahead with some such crap about how much net money 'King Kong' made for Universal. Which is barely even tangentially related to what this article is about in the first place. Not to mention the fact that nobody takes your opinions on Peter Jackson seriously in the first place. He's the only thing you ever talk about -- ever -- because you're some deranged Tolkienite who's become obsessed with the man for "ruining" Tolkien's books. So surprise surprise, you think that Jackson is wrong in every conceivable way on this matter. In other news, the sky is blue.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 10:56 a.m. CST


    by Ribbons

    It appears that you just hadn't read his post before you wrote your initial response, but your rebuttal to the whole "business fraud" proposal is possibly even more hilarious.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 10:55 a.m. CST

    I see

    by Quint

    Ringwearer has ignored any aspect where I've proven him wrong and is still beating on the Kong budget. Did it underperform? Yes, it did. But you're a fool if you think Universal is hurting because of it. That $100 million in DVDs was just day 1, not counting all the rest of the DVDs sold and the EE. You do realize that when you see Kong's picture on a Pringles can that Pringles paid Universal to do that, right? So every tie-in has millions attached to it. So do Toy licenses. <BR><BR>Kong was not the runaway success that Rings was, but it's not a flop.<BR><BR>Ringwearer is right about one thing, though. Shaye won't be shitcanned. He IS New Line cinema. He might be cutting his nose off to spite his face right now and that might get Time/Warner upset at him down the road (but that'll happen when audiences can't recognize the characters or world they love in a rushed film or when New Line loses the rights and gets to make zero on a Hobbit film), but he's not going anywhere anytime soon.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 10:55 a.m. CST

    McG's The Hobbit

    by ScreamingPenis

    a bunch of multi-millionaires fighting over more millions. who cares? bring in someone who will work hard. bring in someone who has directed music videos. bring in someone who has directed Charlies Angels!!! McG is the answer. you know it. after this depressing Jackson-New Line debacle, this project needs fast-paced action sequences and clever showmanship with catchy pop tunes.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 10:56 a.m. CST

    King Kong Box Office

    by Gorrister

    I'm the furthest thing from a Jackson defender, but those of you who say Kong lost money are only looking at half the picture. True, in the United States, Kong barely made enough money to pay the expense of making the movie. However, Kong is MUCH better overseas, bringing in well over $300 million in ticket sales to add to the over $200 million in US ticket sales. So, in other words, the US audience pretty much paid the expense and everything that came in from overseas was mostly profit. Personally, I think Kong was as slow, drawn-out, boring movie.....but worse movies have gone on to greater success.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 10:57 a.m. CST

    Christ, Here We Go Again

    by Mr. Winston

    The lack of knowledge about anything actually involving the film industry or how it works on this board is consistently staggering. Today we find no exception. <br> <br> 1. Bob Shaye is not going to get "shitcanned"; he's still running the company he started, what, like 30-some-odd years ago? Even if WB wanted to pull the plug on him they wouldn't. <br> <br> 2. KING KONG probably didn't win Peter Jackson many new fans that he didn't have already, but it also didn't lose many either. Either way, no one gives a fuck what kind of business KK did in relation to LOTR. I can't believe anyone is even stupid enough to suggest that. <br> <br> 3. Ideally, it would be nice to see Peter back to direct THE HOBBIT, but it doesn't look like it's going to happen. It's too bad, but it's not the end of the world, and it doesn't fucking guarantee a flop. In the plethora of oft-sought directors in Hollywood, Peter Jackson, I'm sorry to tell the drooling fanophiles, is middle-of-the-pack. Strictly. So let's not pretend this film can't come off without him, because it obviously could. What if Raimi DID want to direct? What if some other high-profile director wanted to hop into the chair? Speilberg? Cameron? Lucas? Singer? del Toro? What if Zack Snyder wanted to take a shot? Is any of that realistic? I certainly don't think so, but you never know with this town. What if STARDUST comes off incredibly well and Matthew Vaughn wants in? What if Favreau expresses interest? All of you pretending to shit your pants right now would flip immediately and be on another bandwagon just so you'd have something to eventually gripe about again. Can't we move past the fucking bellyaching and the fake idea that Jackson has the keys to Heaven? <br> <br> 4. All that said, there are less than 5,000 people in the known world that would actually boycott THE HOBBIT if Jackson wasn't directing. And guess what? Teh studios couldn't give a fuck about you. At the end of the day this movie will make hundreds of millions no matter what, and that's all they care about. All the nerdery in the world won't be enough to stop the train once it gets going, because the movies are made to play to people who don't know any better, not to you clowns, who think you know too much. <br> <br> 5. I hope to Christ New Line doesn't rush through this one. A 2009 timeline (I think, I'd have to check on that but I'm pretty sure that's when the rights revert) gives them two years to get into production. That's more than enough time to do it the right way; if they suddenly make an announcement that they're going to start shooting in December I think I'll have an aneurysm. All three LOTR films were highly enjoyable, and if they're smart about it not having Jackson onboard won't highjack that.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 11 a.m. CST

    I can do this all day

    by Quint

    But I really don't want to. Let me just ask Ringwearer one more thing... Why is it Jackson betraying his "friend" when he's asking them to live up to their end of a bargain. He did what he was contracted to do, but he's the greedy, evil friend for forcing them to do the same? How is not New Line being the shitty friend? I don't understand that logic.<BR><BR>Jackson is being stubborn. That's true. But if I thought a studio owed me millions and is acting shady, you better believe I'd be doing the same thing.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 11:04 a.m. CST


    by Mr. Winston

    Nail-hitting on the head with COMING TO AMERICA - that's a landmark with this kind of thing and the reason you now HAVE to sue a studio if you want to be sure about the accounting. <br> <br> I originally thought that this was something of a He Said/She Said argument until I started examining this more - it looks for all the world like New Line is just trying to hide something. <br> <br> Anyway, the whole situation sucks, but this kind of shit goes on every day - it just usually doesn't make it out into the open.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 11:06 a.m. CST

    you know, Mr. Winston is pretty smart

    by Deus Vult

    see now his post is the kind of post I think about writing, but then I fear I might be wasting my time typing it if no one reads it. then where would I be? oh, wait...I think I know as I'm typing this one...nuts

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 11:08 a.m. CST

    This is Disgusting. Period.

    by SydBarretsMyDad

    Jackson didnt write the books, but he sure as shit made the movies that we all identify with now. Someone else making them is unacceptable. Should someone else have been allowed to make a Star Wars Prequel Trilogy? ......wait....on second though....

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 11:09 a.m. CST

    Rich vs. Rich?

    by casinoskunk

    for those of you that are talking about how the rich people should stop fighting with rich people and that they are both just a couple of cry babies, you have to realize that Peter Jackson has Weta to pay. Weta Workshop and Weta Digital are his companies. His companies that produced thousands of man hours to help create these films. Peter Jackson was promised a certain percentage and feels that he did not get that percentage. I have a feeling that Peter Jackson is not doing this out of greeed, but of Gratitude for those people that work for his companies. Peter Jackson is just trying to run his business and New Line is, in his opinion, is giving him the short end of the stick. i would hate to see the hobbit turned into a huge steaming pile of Erongon, but i would like to see New Line see the errors of their ways, if it does come to that.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 11:10 a.m. CST


    by Deus Vult

    how can I get one of those awesome black background/white letter deals for my posts? do I need to live in austin? seriously! I lived there for a semester while interning at the comptroller's office back when it was John Sharp running the place. nice guy.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 11:11 a.m. CST

    This is really......

    by eric haislar

    getting out of hand! They are fighting like babies WAAAAAAAA!

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 11:15 a.m. CST

    What I find surprising about this is...

    by CrichtonAstronut

    that between Peter Jackson, the creative talent who has recently come into Big Hollywood Business, and Robert Shayne cheif executive of New Line Cinema. Jackson in his letter to the fans sounds responsible business man looking for an indepedent body to give imbiased rulling. And Shayne in his interview sounds like an angry child, who will never--ever--ever with let that man work at New Line as long as he's there. If I had stock in New Line I'd selling now based solely Shayne's lack of professionalism. At he was quoted "$100 million or $50 million, or whatever he's suig us for." "...whatever he's suing?" He doesn't know what the case is about and he's going on this diatribe. Sounds he's the one taking bad council. And by the way, does that statement even sound an adult, let alone a man in a position of great responsibility. Somebody with his kind of job really should weigh their words a lot more carefully, especially to the press. Forget the legalisims or the Hobbit, this guy is just screwed up and his immaturity is a serious threat to anyone who owns stock in New Line. And I always thought it was the artists who were supposed to be tempramental.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 11:17 a.m. CST

    NEW LINE without Jackson on the Hobbit is Eragon.

    by riskebiz

    I think it's biggest hooey ever and anyone in the business from directors to stars ought to stay away from any offers New Line makes to do the Hobbit without Peter Jackson. That greedy suit there at New Line sucks the big one and ought to know better and there should be a consequence for what he is doing to Jackson. I think it's guaranteed that the Hobbit will get universal bad publicity for this and the box office will show it. Smart one, a$$holes.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 11:18 a.m. CST

    Peter Jackson: Still the best ever!!! Fuck Bob Shaye

    by where_are_quints_hobbit_set_reports

    and fuck all you haters. Maybe you sniveling farts are on New Line's pay roll, otherwise hard to imagine anyone else taking the side of BOB SHAYE, ARROGANT AND OBSOLETE STUDIO SUIT over that of Peter Jackson. <p> Anyone who doesn't think the LOTR films and the team who made them, esp. the director, were the best thing since sliced bread is retarded and should fuck off!

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 11:18 a.m. CST

    Mr. Winston

    by Barron34

    I don't think anyone is arguing that a HOBBIT movie made with someone other than Jackson wouldn't make money (at least I'm not arguing that). What I am saying is that Jackson and company are the only one to successfully portray Middle-Earth on film, and that it is somewhat foolish for New Line to sour their relationship with Jackson, who is pretty much a sure thing when it comes to Tolkein on film, whereas trying to put together another filmmaking team for THE HOBBIT could be a crapshoot. And yes, while it would be interesting to see a Del Toro version of THE HOBBIT, I think that the general audience will notice if THE HOBBIT is visually and tonally different from the LORD OF THE RINGS films, with different actors portraying Gandalf, Elrond, etc. And, there is no guarantee that New Line will land a Del Toro to direct. So, general audiences might not like a different flavor of Tolkein on film. In addition, hardcore LOTR film fans will not appreciate the change. I think that the LOTR fandom is much larger and more widespread than you imply. It is not just genre film geeks like the people on this site. It includes the wider Tolkein fan-base, old and new. In any case, in a business as unpredictable as the film business, it is usally wise to stick with what works, and we know that Jackson's version of Middle-Earth works, definitely in the commercial sense. So, while New Line might make money off of a HOBBIT film, they probably will not do as well as if they stuck with Jackson and made a film that is of a piece with the LOTR films. Just my opinion.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 11:19 a.m. CST

    Quint, Apparently Jackson's pal Ordesky told him ...

    by Ringwearer9

    ... that it was impossible to resolve these things in the film business by suing directly. Jackson is on record saying that Ordesky told him that the way to resolve it would be to roll whatever Jackson thought he was owed into the new deal to make THE HOBBIT. Jackson deliberately went public with that private phone conversation between him and Ordesky, which seems in very bad taste. You know it would be incredibly bad business for them to just open up their books and let Blabbermouth Jackson tell everyone what was in there, encouraging more lawsuits by other parties. They wanted to to it in a friendly way, out of the public eye, and Jackson insisted on manipulating the fan base and his Internet contacts (AICN and TheOneRing most prominently) to make him look like a principled saint, and New Line as unreasonable bastards, when the more realistic scenario is that he just didn't want to make the Hobbit, thought he could get a better deal with another company greedy for the LOTR profits, and is deliberately antagonizing New Line because he just doesn't care whether he does business with them again, and doesn't mind screwing them because he feels he can go elsewhere. Any studio that does business with him in the future better watch their backs.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 11:21 a.m. CST

    who cares if jackson has made a quarter of a billion

    by BEARison Ford

    does that automatically mean he's not entitled to the other moneys that are owed to him? just because he's rich already? that's some fucked up logic if you ask me. i wonder if robert shaye would refuse to pay me 10 bucks if he already paid me 100. of course there's two sides to every coin and i'm sure there's more to this story than meets the eye.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 11:25 a.m. CST

    LOL "Bob Shaye = Ringw(b)earer9."

    by finky089

    whata tool

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 11:25 a.m. CST

    One Thing Is For Certain...

    by chuknowz

    This whole debacle will take up 2 of the 4 discs in telling, on the Hobbit SE DVD set when it comes.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 11:27 a.m. CST

    They're all the same - rich, egotistical bastards

    by Moa Kaka

    Producers, actors, directors, they're all rich self-centered assholes. Even our "heroes" like PJ. I don't care when rich conceited people argue with each other or sue each other. May the man with the best lawyer win. Now, if someone was giving Paul Newman shit, then I would care. The only truly talented, classy man left in Hollywood.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 11:25 a.m. CST

    Peter Jackson's 2 wives Gotta Eat his Taint

    by DOGSOUP

    Fran and Phillipa threeway every fucking night. OPEN THE BOOKS NEW LINE!!!!

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 11:28 a.m. CST

    David Goyer should direct HOBBIT ...

    by forgo10en

    as he had already driven cool Blade franchise to the ground. Hiring guy who writes movies to direct just becouse he "saw" how the first two were made is like letting a plummer do an open heart surgery just becouse he is a fan of ER.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 11:28 a.m. CST

    Bob Shaye

    by Judge Dredds Dirty Undies

    Isn't fit to sniff Peter Jacksons taint.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 11:29 a.m. CST


    by Arch Nemesis

    ...regarding the topic you and ringwearer have been vollying back and forth, I'm not in the business so I don't know. His point was that a $220 mil budget needed $660 mil just to break even; but doesn't the $220 mil they spent cover all the costs, including director fees etc.? And if that's the case then isn't the profit enormous, since a $330 mil profit is just the beginning excluding aforementioned additional dvd sales etc.?

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 11:30 a.m. CST

    I liked Pirates 2 better also

    by Gorrister

    I can nickpick Dead Man's Chest with the best of them, but I do think it was a lot better than the first movie. My biggest gripe is the the character of Elizabeth was almost completley useless for most of the picture. She didn't serve any real purpose until towards the end. I think, if they tried harder, they could have made her more important to the story....or, failing that, reduce her on-screen time.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 11:30 a.m. CST


    by Mr. Winston

    Believe it or not, I'm actually agreeing with almost everything you said. In fact I think it's a rather scary proposition to lose Jackson - not because Jackson is the end-all, be-all of directors, but because they lose WETA in the process. And THAT is going to be something difficult to overcome. But my point is that it CAN be overcome. <br> <br> And, in fact, I think a lot of people ARE trying to argue that the film can't be profitable and can't be made well without Jackson, which I think is ridiculous. Do I really think New Line can convince a huge name like Speilberg or Lucas to helm the film? Of course not. But they took a chance with an up-and-comer in Jackson, and if someone convinced them they can do an equal (even if the tone or look is a little different), class job, would it really be that crazy to give them a shot? <br> <br> And trust me, I know the LOTR fandom well runs deep and true. It's not even up for debate. But if the film gets made without many of those fans - really, seriously now - are going to stay home and boycott this? Very, very few. After that, people in Middle America probably aren't going to notice much of a difference - if it's done well - if anything at all. If they just slap some shit together and don't bother with quality, then I'm with you - it'll tank. But it'll tank on quality, not on the director (or lack thereof).

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 11:33 a.m. CST

    Arch Nemesis ... Where do you get 330 million profit?

    by Ringwearer9


  • Jan. 10, 2007, 11:37 a.m. CST

    Oh and...

    by chuknowz

    they'll have to re-do and re-release the original LOTR DVD sets with all the 'chummy" Oderesky appearances omitted.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 11:37 a.m. CST

    I love PJ Movies, but...

    by Gil Brooks

    ...apparently his (and his people) business practices are pretty well known for being bad and unethical. Sorry, but if this was like Marvel's Civil War, my little banner would say "I'm with New Line".

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 11:38 a.m. CST

    Creative Accounting

    by Barron34

    All of Hollywood operates on creative accounting, and Jackson seems to want to operate on an above-board basis. Perhaps he should have just made a "friendly" (ie, shady) deal with New Line, agree to drop his lawsuit for additional monies in THE HOBBIT deal, and just make the movie. But he didn't. I believe that some people honestly can not operate on a level other than that of being above-board and honest, and maybe Jackson sincerely is that way. Hollywood studios are notoriously reluctant to open their books, as others have pointed out, since so much of their business does depend upon a certain amount of "creative accounting". I suppose I can understand both sides here a bit. Shaye feels that New Line took a big chance on Jackson when he was far from a sure thing, and that Jackson got rich and famous as a result, and should not be looking a gift horse in the mouth and rocking the boat by requesting an audit of their books (to mix metaphors). Jackson, on the other hand, suspects he might not be receiving money he is contractually due to recieve, and so perhaps feels deceived and cheated. Thus the business relationship has soured, and everyone is suffering for it: Jackson, New Line, and the fans. My suggestion: find some neutral party in Hollywood known to both Shaye and Jackson to step in and act as a mediator to smooth this over and try to get both parties back to the table and to come to an accomodation. New Line should want to make this movie with Jackson and vice versa, and it is better for both business and the fans if this happens. Just an idea.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 11:42 a.m. CST


    by Massage...Bored

    Its easy folks, we boycott any hastily made Hobbit-drivel that comes out of New Line. I, frankly, won't see a Hobbit film that PJ hasn't crafted. But if it is crafted by PJ, you'd better belive I'll pay to see it five or six times in the theatre. New Line, you fools! You are missing out on soooooo much capital that its not even funny.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 11:42 a.m. CST

    its amazing how different the tones of these talkbacks

    by Deus Vult

    are based on the story or news topics. for instance, when we read about the faux wizard of oz remake dear ol' pj is directing, we talked happily and as a team about how wonderful judy "dorothy" garland's taint (perenium) would be in the new movie, provided it wasn't GCI of course. needless to say it was wonderful<p>this one however is perhaps one of the most vile I've seen in quite some time. in fact, I can't remember the last talkback where an AICN editor had three posts to his own story or people were attacking each other with such ferocity<p>relevance you ask? RELAX! its not like you're settling some great debate here. there's no question that New Line isn't reading these posts or cares about how the AICN perceives them to be. also, not unlike lucas or speilburg or whoever, PJ's work made millions, far more than the combined wealth of everyone reading this site from its inception to today (barring stallone and cameron of course, provided jimmy reads it anyway) and in a capitalist economic system, that's all that matters boys: not your quality of work, but the quantity of dollars it generates.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 11:44 a.m. CST

    Why Jackson is wrong for the Hobbit

    by DufusyteII

    PJ wanted to have Sauron battle Aragon hand to hand at the end of ROTK; PJ was so keen on this (idiotic) idea that he even filmed the sequence, which you can learn from the bonus disks.<br><br>And PJ was also so keen on the (idiotic) idea of Arwen fighting at Helms Deep that they even filmed that as well (also in the Bonus material).<br><br>And PJ was so keen on having Saruman die impaled on a wheel, that he not only filmed it but stuck it into the Extended Edition.<br><br>The point is that PJ had alot of very very bad ideas about LOTR which could have totally spoiled the films, and he was so keen on these bad ideas that he came within inches of actually implementing them, and it was only the fans who held him back.<br><br>The problem is that now PJ is so confident that he does not allow himself to be hled back by fans nor by anyone else, hence the venomous Kong05 which snidely mocks everyone PJ deals with, from studio execs, to actors, to the military, to everything in sight without restraint. Kong05 is like a giant flip off to the entire film industry. It even mocks the original Kong, which is quite surprizing but undeniable.<br><br>Hobbit is a children's adventure story and PJ cannot make a children's film (similar to Potter, Narnia, etc). Even King Kong was not suitable for child audiences under PJ's direction.<br><br>If PJ wanted to make the Hobbit, he could have made it while his lawsuit is in progress (New Line was agreeable to this), or accepted an out of court settlement (New Line offered this). PJ has been acting like a giant ape out of control, and no one can meet his demands.<br><br>I hope that someone (else) will do a fine job on the Hobbit! It scares me to think what (idiotic) ideas PJ and friends would put into the story; their stated intention to make it a grown up LOTR prequel totally misses the mark to begin with. Maybe they will have Arwen slay the dragon, or have Sauron appear like a 50 foot giant, or impale Smaug on a spiked wheel.<br><br>The Scouring of the Shire is the true conclusion of the LOTR story, which has the narrative arc: Paradise in the Shire, Paradise lost in the Shire due to the unselltling presence of the Ring, Paradise restored to the Shire through the valiant efforts of the hobbits, culminating in the Scouring of the Shire. J. R. R. Tolkien is a hobbit at heart, and Tolkien's focus is always on the Shire as the heart of the plot. The travels to Rohan and Gondor are just diversions for the hobbits and for Tolkien. PJ totally missed this point, and PJ is more concerned about the world of men than the world of the hobbits. PJ did not include a Scouring of the Shire because PJ's vision is not Shire-centric, i.e., not hobbit-centric. For PJ, the story ends when the world of men is safe (victory of Gondor). PJ really does not care what's up at the Shire. But for J. R. R. Tolkien, the story is only complete with the victory of the Shire, which was a more important skirmish than the entire war at Gondor/Mordor.<br><br>The point is that PJ does not have a hobbit focus. Indeed, making The Hobbit into a LOTR Prequel will once again take the focus away from the hobbits and place the focus on the human/elven characters. Just say NO to this.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 11:49 a.m. CST

    Barron, It's very clear Jackson's being cheated

    by jimmy_009

    "Perhaps he should have just made a "friendly" (ie, shady) deal with New Line, agree to drop his lawsuit for additional monies in THE HOBBIT deal, and just make the movie. But he didn't." Then who's to say they wouldn't pull the same stunt on him when he made them ass loads of cash on the Hobbit? "Well, we won't pay you what we owe you, but we'll let you make another picture with us." P. Jackson shouldn't fall for that kind of deal, because he'll basically keep getting screwed over. I can't imagine why New Line wouldnt show it's book to P.J. unless they have something to hide. My guess is they'll get what's coming to them when their Hobbit movie get's a thumbs down and P.J.'s lawyers get him his money anyways. New Line tanks. End of story.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 11:55 a.m. CST

    I don't know, Uwe Boll's pretty overrated too...

    by Ribbons think you know how bad his movies are, until you see them and they turn out to be even worse than you could have possibly imagined...

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 11:56 a.m. CST

    Any Accountants Here?

    by DarfurOnTheRocks

    The idea that you just open your books to anyone is a joke. And I also find the anti-New Line sentiment that permeates the story to be ridiculous. As for The Hobbit, let us once again clarify that the universe is not Jackson's, but rather Tolkien's. This idea that only Jackson can do Tolkien is ridiculous. Get someone who is hungry, not a chap that simultaneously claims to love the universe and then shakes the studio, who committed a large chuck of money on LOTR, for more cash.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 11:56 a.m. CST

    This won't be a problem for future Matrix movies.

    by Some Dude

    Audience lack of interest might be, though.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, noon CST

    Sauron is Behind all of this!!!!!!

    by DarfurOnTheRocks

    Look how he turned New Line and Peter Jackson against each other!!!! Ever since PJ won that Oscar, there has been that gleam in his eye...

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 12:04 p.m. CST

    v for vienetta = awesome

    by misnomer


  • Jan. 10, 2007, 12:03 p.m. CST

    NEW LINE will have a head start on THE HOBBIT ...

    by Ringwearer9

    ... which MEANS that if Jackson wants to compete with his own "authentically Jacksonized" Hobbit, he'll be at least a year behind, 2 years if New Line starts right away. WHICH MEANS that of the two versions, New Line's is the one most LIKELY to NOT be rushed, to be a QUALITY production. If Jackson waits 2 years and then does it right (not likely, lots of shoddiness in ROTK and KING KONG)he still loses because the majority of moviegoers will already have seen New Line's version, and won't be much in the mood for another, even if it's stuffed with cameo insertions for actors from Jackson's LOTR. And if Jackson rushed THE HOBBIT into production to beat New Line's to market, it's going to necessarily be shoddy and rushed. I know which film I'm going to boycott ... Jackson's, because I'm boycotting any filmmaker who makes the Hobbit only if he gets the millions he's owed, not because he truly loves the story. That, of course, might be true of New Line's new director, but I'm willing to give that guy a chance. Jackson has proven himself to be a gigantically uninterested in Tolkien other than as an opportunity for his effect company to show off... if it hadn't been for his wife and Boyens being fans of the books, he'd have turned into an All-Orcs-All-The-Time shitfest, and tried as hard as he could to do that.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 12:05 p.m. CST


    by Mr. Winston

    ...What in the bloody fuck are you talking about? Jackson can't compete with New Line on a simultaneous project that he doesn't have the rights to. In what world do you live that you could possibly have concocted this scenario?

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 12:08 p.m. CST

    BringingSexyBack: You Are Right....

    by DarfurOnTheRocks

    Yeah, I see your point. But if that was the case, wouldn't it be an open and shut case to gain access to the books? Just wondering?

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 12:08 p.m. CST

    Guillermo Del Toro for "Hobbit"

    by Christopher3

    New Line still likes him, right?

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 12:10 p.m. CST

    Ringwearer9, take it like a man

    by Talkbacker with no name

    you have once again been proved wrong on every level! I tihink you enjoy being the most hated talkbacker of all time. Well done, egghead. <P>I think it will be a real shame to lose Jackson. I for one really like this 'rings' world and would nothing more than to see his Hobbit movie...but it's not over yet, let's not forget MGM are the ones here who can do something about it (if they haven't started already on getting full control some how).

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 12:10 p.m. CST

    Dear Mr Winston,

    by Talkbacker with no name

    you have a problem with Del Toro's Pan fantasy movie (it's fantasy whatever you say) but would be quite happy for him to do the hobbit? Looks like you have just made my pwning by you the other day void. hehe thanks!

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 12:13 p.m. CST


    by FluffyUnbound

    LOTR explicitly does not end with "paradise restored". Frankly, the entire point of the Scouring and of Frodo's departure is that "sometimes you have to give things up, to lose them, so that others may keep them". The end of LOTR is bittersweet, and the bitter part of it is the entire point of the story. To Tolkien all change was loss and the best we could hope for was to minimize that loss and pass on what we could. The Shire and Middle Earth are not the same at the end of the story, and everything in the appendices makes that clear, and only adds to the tone of loss at the end of the narrative. And while "The Hobbit" is in some ways a children's story [the Rankin-Bass version makes that clear] it doesn't read as exclusively a children's story. The narrative voice is very light and airy, but if you look at the actual events of the story [and looking is what we're going to be doing in a film version, after all] it's practically a horror film. The bit with the trolls is comic relief, naturally, but the other sections - the capture by the goblins, a better-fed Gollum on his own ground, the spiders of Mirkwood, Smaug, the Battle of Five Armies - wouldn't exactly be "My Little Pony" if shot on film and not animated.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 12:18 p.m. CST

    Jackson saved New Line.

    by Russman

    How easy people forget.... When AOL bought Time Warner (which owned New Line at the time), the executives were gonna shut New Line down. It was only after they saw how cheap Rings was going to be, after factoring in the credits and exchange rate, that they opted to keep it around and see how the movies were going to do. So Jackson saved that company.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 12:17 p.m. CST

    Stallone to direct Lord of the Rings IV: The Beginning

    by kirttrik

    Coming this December 2007. Every Journey has a Beginning where the journey begins. To walk you have to step. Peter O'toole as Gandalf. Stallone as Bilbo Baggins. and introducing Jim Carrey as the magical Gullum. This holiday... experience the power...of the beginning... of the ONE RING! Written and Directed by Sylvester Stallone Produced by Robert Shaye Associate Producer: Ringwearer9 aka:goofydouche Get ready to experience AAAWWWESOME! (Theatrical poster tag line.)

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 12:19 p.m. CST

    Mr. Winston, You are Correct !

    by Ringwearer9

    I was imagining the rights being available again come their expiration, even if there was an ongoing production by the previous holder of those rights. Does starting production LATE (just before rights expire) extend those rights for as long as the production and marketing of the DVDs takes? If that's the case, New Line wins again, because Jackson is shut out of making his version for a few years after the rights expire. That means, sets deteriorate, original teams turn over (Jackson said on Kong that it was a rush to make use of LOTR's effects team anyway, before they naturally drifted away or changed) and actors lose their loyalty and get hopelessly involved in other projects. If New Line just plays it cool, and doesn't get all superstitious about the Jackson Golden Touch, they stand to really clean up with a Hobbit movie. If they'd stuck with Jackson, we'd have gotten the King Kong treatment of the Hobbit. As a lover of that book, it's the last thing I want to see.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 12:20 p.m. CST

    Mr. Winston

    by Barron34

    Fair enough. I'm glad that you basically agree with my prior post. I likewise agree with most of what you have said prior. But give Jackson a chance to prove himself beyond LOTR. I think in the long run, if he can produce other films that stand up well in his post-LOTR resume, he might prove that he is more than just the guy who managed to make the LORD OF THE RINGS films. Even that is obviously enough to earn him his place in Hollywood history, but the question now is, does he have staying power and can he make good or even great films beyond LOTR. I think Jackson might prove that he can, in the long run. That is if he does not retreat into a Lucas-like self-imposed exile from the mainstream of movie-making. <p>My personal feeling about Lucas was that he simply should have kept making Star Wars movies after RETURN OF THE JEDI, interspersing them with other non-Star Wars films, thus keeping his hand directly in the filmmaking process. By the time he returned to the Star Wars universe, too much had changed and too much time had gone by, in my opinion. But, that is another matter...<p>

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 12:23 p.m. CST

    But is PJ "untouchable?"

    by Movietool

    I wonder if, given his current clout, PJ would have pushed through the "Warrior Princess" Arwen at Helm's Deep instead of capitulating to the fans. If PJ didn't have LotR behind him - maybe someone could have talked him out of some of the more tedious and ridiculous aspects of "King Kong" (the bronto-stampede and the whole Jimmy go-nowhere "Heart of Darkness" sub-plot spring to mind. "Untouchable" directors like PJ and George Lucas can lead to very bad movies. In the end, I'm a little more interested to see a newcomer take a crack at The Hobbit than let PJ go willy-nilly on it, as King Kong leads me to believe he would.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 12:22 p.m. CST

    Russman, TOLKIEN Saved New Line.

    by Ringwearer9

    In spite of Peter Jackson and his crappy taste in Zombie effects.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 12:24 p.m. CST

    Not a big fan of Jackson

    by ewokstew

    or any of the LOTR movies. I'm not saying they weren't technically well done. I just ain't in to it. Honestly, the only real fond memories I've had of the whole LOTR universe was the animated one they did when I was a wee lad. I'd watch that again before any of the LOTR flicks. Just my opinion, though.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 12:23 p.m. CST

    Dear Talkbacker with no name

    by Mr. Winston

    1. No matter what you claim, PAN'S is still only about 15% fantasy film. <br> <br> 2. I can't believe you just tried to use the term "pwning" seriously. Do you have any idea what an incredible level of douchebaggery you've just reached? I will never, for the life of me, understand you Internet Huggers. <br> <br> 3. Point out to me where I said that I personally want to see del Toro take over THE HOBBIT. Please. Because, as you well know, that's not what I said at all. What I was doing was simply making the point that, if he wanted to take over the film, Jackson Nation would immediately trip over themselves to dump ol' Peter and hop on the GDT bandwagon. Even you're smart enough to have intuited that. <br> <br> Frankly, though, I'd be more than happy to partake in GDT's version of THE HOBBIT. He's a great director, as I emoted in the PAN'S thread. He's just a shitty writer. So as long as he sticks with just the directing and isn't allowed anywhere near the screenplay, that's cool with me.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 12:27 p.m. CST

    Indiana Jones and the Raiders of Peter Jackson's Taint

    by Forestal

    Featuring Bob Shaye as the wacky sidekick.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 12:29 p.m. CST

    Guys, enough with all the stupid talkback sayings.

    by brokentusk

    It's really fucking annoying trying to have a discussion and seeing a million "so-and-so GOTTA EAT!" It's enough. As for this article, Robert Shaye can lick my balls. Really, nothing was said in the article that hasn't been known already, but to repeat myself for the Nth time, New Line's greed will only bring them troubles.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 12:29 p.m. CST


    by Mr. Winston

    I'm with you - if this whole lawsuit thing hadn't come up I think I would have been puzzled and upset if New Line had tried to go on without Jackson. In theory he absolutely deserves a chance to make THE HOBBIT, but practically it doesn't seem like that's going to be a reality. My only point was that the lack of Jackson doesn't negate the possibility of a quality film, especially if New Line can bring another accomplished director onboard. Even though I'm not his biggest fan ever, I'd still rather see PJ complete the series than it be given to someone else; the problem is that the reality of the situation sort of makes that a moot point, especially from the business perspective. <br> <br> My contention with Lucas will always be that he got so caught up in the CGI aspect of the STAR WARS films that he either forgot how to work with real people and practical sets or decided to just phone in the "directing" of the material.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 12:32 p.m. CST

    Man, I LOVE it when AICN does a PJ story.

    by Mr. Nice Gaius

    Because when they ring that dinner bell, Ringwearer9 (like a starving, mangy mutt) comes a runnin'.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 12:34 p.m. CST

    Thank you, Nice Gaius.

    by Ringwearer9

    Stay close behind me, and I'll drop you some chicken bones.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 12:37 p.m. CST

    I just read Robert Shaye's comment.

    by brokentusk

    What an ungrateful son of a bitch. It's almost as if he said, "Sure the guy made some good movies, but whatever." Hello you moron! The guy made you more money than your studio had ever seen before! He guaranteed your studio a place in film history! He won numerous Oscars for your studio! If he wants to check that he isn't owed some money, re-assure him that he isn't! I feel sick just thinking about the unfairness going on here.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 12:36 p.m. CST


    by Barron34

    I basically agree with your viewpoint and with the concept that principles, contracts, and above-board business practices SHOULD be the norm.. What I was trying to point out, perhaps not so successfully, is that Hollywood does not generally operate in this manner, and that maybe half a loaf is better than none. DEals in Hollywood are more about leverage than principle, unfortunately, and I was just pointing out that Jackson probably COULD have come to some accomodation where he got more money out of New Line, and gone on to direct THE HOBBIT, without completing his lawsuit and getting a look at New Line's books. I am not saying that this is the way it SHOULD be, but am saying that it is the way it generally IS. In one sense, I applaud Jackson for sticking to his guns, but in another sense, as a film fan, I regret that he did not just take a deal and direct THE HOBBIT. I am basically pro-Jackson, but in the post you refer to, I was trying also to see it from the studio's side, insofar as they have one. My ultimate point was that both sides could benefit from a mediator. My own interest in the matter is that I would just like to see the film, preferably directed by Jackson.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 12:39 p.m. CST


    by Mr. Nice Gaius

    Aww, charity. That's nice.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 12:39 p.m. CST

    Dearest Mr. Winston,

    by Talkbacker with no name

    "use the term "pwning" seriously"? I'm far from serious, I just thought that was how smartarse TB's like you talked to each other? I was just trying to communicate with you on a level I thought you would respect and I did admit you out did me in a battle of the minds (even if english is not my first language and still I don't agree with anything your said). You know, we might have been friends in a fantasy life. You just need a big hug! Oh come here you silly billy.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 12:42 p.m. CST

    Quint, I AM an X-Men comic fan...

    by ejcarter9

    ...or was... but I loved the HELL out of X3. Loved it loved it LOVED IT! So fuck all you haters. I mean that in the nicest way possible.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 12:42 p.m. CST

    Mr Winston me old mate,

    by Talkbacker with no name

    For the record Lucas has never been able to work with real people...i'm not havign a go before you crush me, just saying. Now where's that hug?

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 12:45 p.m. CST

    Stupid executives

    by beelkay

    They're always fouling things up.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 12:46 p.m. CST

    Ringwearer9 to adapt Lord of the Rings IV: IT BEGINS

    by kirttrik

    Coming this December 2007. Every Journey has a Beginning where the journey begins. To walk you have to step. Peter O'toole as Gandalf. Stallone as Bilbo Baggins. and introducing Jim Carrey as the magical Gullum. This holiday... experience the power...of the beginning... of the ONE RING! Directed by Sylvester Stallone. Produced by Robert Shaw. Adapted for the screen by Ringwearer9 aka:goofydouche and Sylvester Stallone. "Get ready to experience AAAWWWESOME!" (Theatrical poster tag line.)

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 12:49 p.m. CST

    BSB, Thanks for Clearing that Up

    by DarfurOnTheRocks

    Isn't it always interesting that when there is an accounting "error" is almost always favours big business?!!!

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 12:51 p.m. CST

    Fuck Peter Jackson.

    by C Legion

    You PJ nuts make out like it's his world, bollocks, it's Tolkiens, and I for one would like to see someone else have a crack at it. Jackson worked hard and made some decent films, they have some great elements but also some awful ones (including much of the acting). New Line put their arses on the line for an "unknown" director and they paid him handsomely, I would have thought the greedy bastard would be happy with the 100's of millions he's already made.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 12:50 p.m. CST


    by Mr. Winston

    I don't know, I think I'd disagree. If we're sticking to STAR WARS specifically, you can point to a lot of good performances in the first three films. But in the second go-round...everyone sucks. I'll give a pass to Liam Neeson and Ewan McGregor in PHANTOM MENACE, but when you make the idiotic decision to cast Hayden Christiansen, one of the worst working actors on the planet, and when even McGregor and Natalie Portman blow in the final two episodes...I think your head is stuck way too far into a computer.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 12:51 p.m. CST

    I love Ringwearer9

    by DerLanghaarige

    Doesn'T matter how much I bitch about Tarantino, I know that HE is around and makes me look good with his pointless Anti-Jackson-bullshit.<br> He is like Kevin Federline. Just in this world to make us losers look good.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 12:56 p.m. CST

    Better Directors, better choices.

    by Calico Pete

    There are many directors who, creatively, could've done a better job than Jackson. George Miller. Peter Weir. Julie Taymor. I could go on... could they have handled the logistics of this massive endeavor? Jackson did a good job in that he shot 3 giant, technically complicated, expensive, movies w/o going severely over-schedule, over-budget, killing himself, becoming sick over the stress, etc. But he's not the only one who could handled these mechanics. <br><br> If these other directors had made the films (or if any of them make the Hobbit), they'd open our eyes to the wonders of the story rather than the mechanics of it. <br><br> As for the cast... as for the effects... as for all the other stuff you mention. Please. Elijah Wood? Frak, man. Gollum looked more realistic than him. I would have been less surprised to hear Wood had CG eyes than I was about Davy Jones' eyes in POTC2. And as for Gollum... I liked him in the 1st movie, but didn't like how they changed his look for 2. His acting was over-the-top mugging. If you watch ILM's Hulk, which came out around the same time as Two Towers, you'll much more subtle acting from a CG characteroid, IMHO.<br><br> And as for Gandalf... here is my genius but controversial recommendation: Al Pacino. Wait, don't dismiss. Picture those eyes of his in Gandalf makeup. Give him the hat, the nose, the white hair. Those wild eyes are still hunting you from their perch. Add to that his acting abilities (goes without saying he can do the basics: a British accent and dropping the Pacino-isms, he's an actor fer chrissakes... check out "Looking For Richard"). Imagine, in other words, someone looking like Gandalf. Cake, right? There's makeup and wardrobe for that. (Remember the degree of physical transformation behind Dustin Hoffman's Hook, Danny DeVito's Penguin, and many other examples?) <br><br>Now imagine you give that hypothetical someone Pacino's eyes. They can be haunted. They can be fiery. The can twinkle. They are behind one of the most powerful gazes in Hollywood. Now couple all of that with brilliant acting ability. Who is this hypothetical creature you're left with? Al Pacino. And no, he would not give us "Pacino's Gandalf(tm)", Scarface/Gandalf, not a parody, which is what most people of limited imagination picture. No. He's as much a chameleon as any other actor. He'd inhabit the character, and give us Gandalf, proper! BTW I'm not saying I didn't like McKellan. I'm just saying you can also succeed by making creative, NON-obvious choices, and you'd be all the more amazing for it. Jackson is not known for non-obvious, even among his biggest fans. <br><br>As a test... answer me this: If you read nothing else in this post, answer me this: In terms of Jackson's choices, what delightfully surprised you the most about the LOTR films when you saw them? For me, shots and moments here and there, for example the scene where Gandalf whispered to the moth in Saruman's tower, or the way the ringwraiths moved, or the quiet moments in Moria before the storm. Something about these was refreshing and unexpected. But most pieces of those films were "as expected". The look, the battles, the emotional beats of the acting. It's as if being told the story of the books, in vivid detail, but by an average storyteller with an average imagination. Yeah, you get the story, you see the sights, but you're not touched by genius. It's someone showing you a slide show about their family trip to middle earth rather than you going there yourself. And don't start the Silver Surfer type argument of "what do you expect a silver guy on a surfboard to look like?!" "What do you expect an elf stabbing an orc to look like?" There are many ways to say "I love you," for example. There are moments in movies where those words echo predictably and moments where they punch you in the stomach. In the former case, you don't need the director. You can shut your eyes and plug your ears and you won't miss anything your imagination can't fill in exactly or better. In the latter, the director did his job.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 12:57 p.m. CST

    OMG no PJ on The Hobbit!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    by MrJJonz

    How will we cope. Could we persuade the whole world to boycott the movie?? Orrr - (now this is a stretch of the imagination so bear with me) - hope that New Line get a decent director to do the Hobbit rather like when they took a gamble on Jackson doing LOTR. <P>Remember people PJ is not a god. Personally I enjoyed LOTR but would mind something new in The Hobbit

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 1 p.m. CST

    true about the prequels, Mr. W

    by Talkbacker with no name

    but I think the performances in the trilogy are more to do with the actors than with George. Look at the making of on the star wars DVD. Carrie, Ford and Hamill all joke about Luca's style of directing them (was it "faster more intense"?). <p>Back off ringbearer9! Winston and I are just patching up our differences and he doesn't want to be your friend! you MW?

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 1:08 p.m. CST

    Calico Pete

    by Mr. Winston

    You just made me fall out of my chair laughing, even if that wasn't your intent. Still, you've convinced me, and now I'm drawing a line in the sand - I will boycott THE HOBBIT, no matter who the director is, if Al Pacino is not cast as Gandalf. <br> <br> The unintentional comedy that could result from this is incalculable. I have a feeling that it could be every bit as fantastic as Darrel Hammond impersonating Richard Dreyfuss when he auditioned for the role of C3PO in an SNL skit circa 1997.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 1:17 p.m. CST

    Peter Jackson gotta eat, Too Soon...

    by boba_rob

    F*** Michael Bay, Bomb in Ribcage, Sexiest Tomboy Beanpole, Bringing Sexy Back, Dick in a Box...Am I missing any??

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 1:19 p.m. CST

    Jackson is suing New Line for at least $100 million

    by Ye Not Guilty

    It's not correct to say that Jackson isn't suing for any money. His lawyers have said Jackson is suing for at least $100 million, maybe more. There was an article about it in the New York Times called "The Lawsuit of the Rings" which explained much of the issues and claims and defenses of each party. So, sure, if I were PJ and I believed New Line was cheating me of at least $100 million, I would for sure sue. On the other hand, if I were a New Line CEO, and my accountants and attorneys advised me that Peter Jackson had absolutely received every dime he was contractually entitled to recieve, then I would act exactly as New Line is doing in this case. It's hard top say which party is in the wrong here, and who is being greedy. Ultimately, both parties will probably opt to settle rather than continue litigating, and we'll never find out the truth.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 1:19 p.m. CST

    Studio would have to work real hard to fuck up Hobbit

    by Reelheed

    Its a classic kids book and should make a great film with or without Peter Jackson. Its a shame money has caused such a problem but fat cats need to stay fat. God lord imagine if someone misplaced a few hundred thousand bucks of your cash.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 1:23 p.m. CST

    But BringingSexy, Can't Jackson sue AFTER the Hobbit?

    by Ringwearer9

    Is there a statute of limitations? Wouldn't making the Hobbit bring even more money into his coffers, help Wingnut and WETA reinvest in employees and projects and development? And then, LATER, when Jackson's star is falling and he doesn't see the need to play ball with Hollywood, he could sue, when murdering his own reputation as a team player wasn't an issue. It makes me wonder if Jackson doesn't know his star is falling, which is why he feels he has nothing to lose by this lawsuit, and everything to gain.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 1:23 p.m. CST

    Peter is one of the stars

    by abovo

    Doing the movie without Peter Jackson is like doing Indy 4 without Spielberg or a Godfather movie without Francis Ford Coppola. At a certain point, the director can become one of the stars, although unseen.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 1:26 p.m. CST

    question for people who are glad to get rid of jackson

    by Talkbacker with no name

    and you happy that all the major cast memebers will follow him? Are you sure you are happy for it to be recast? ...i'm not :(

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 1:28 p.m. CST

    Lord of the Rings V: Hobbit in Space

    by kirttrik

    Coming this December 2007. Every Journey has a Beginning where the journey begins. To walk you have to step. AL PACINO as Gandalf. STALLONE as Bilbo Baggins. and introducing JIM CARREY as the magical Gullum. This holiday... experience the power...of the beginning... of the ONE RING! Directed by Sylvester Stallone. Produced by Robert Shaw. Adapted for the screen by Ringwearer9 aka:goofydouche and Sylvester Stallone. "This Summer, it Gets even AAAWWWESOMER!" (Theatrical poster tag line even though it's going to be released in Dec.)

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 1:29 p.m. CST

    As for Star Wars, I blame Rick McCallum

    by Doctor_Sin

    He got almost as much on-air interview time as Lucas. Lucas was just as much a victim of his own marketing machine as he was perpetrator thereof.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 1:30 p.m. CST

    Oh, and Steve Sansweet too.

    by Doctor_Sin

    He got in the mix in 96 and lookee, lookee.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 1:31 p.m. CST

    New Line owes me quite a bit of money as well

    by SpyGuy


  • Jan. 10, 2007, 1:32 p.m. CST

    Shia Labeouf and Tommy Lee Jones as Bilbo and Gandalf..

    by Darth_Inedible

    Ratner can direct. Cheap it out a little on the production side and you're guarenteed a nice profit.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 1:32 p.m. CST

    Talkbacker, what's to miss?

    by Ringwearer9

    Gandalf is basically a beard, bushy eyrbrows, a big hat, grey robes. Elrond could do with looking a little less like he's got a retreating hairline(isn't being half elvish, half Numenorean good for something?). We can't have Ian Holme as Bilbo, because he's too old to play young Bilbo. Gimli wasn't in THE HOBBIT, so he doesn't need to be there. Gandalf and Elrond are the only constants, and as I said, both are easily replaced, or even improved on. And I suspect Ian McKellan could be enticed with a slightly larger wad of cash than he got for LOTR.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 1:35 p.m. CST


    by Mr. Winston

    New Line did LOST IN SPACE? Ouch. For all these years I thought these Matt LeBlanc starring vehicles were part of a strange coma. I know you're angry, Spyguy, but damn...don't you have to admit that you kinda deserve what you got for going to see that in the first place?

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 1:38 p.m. CST

    Have one actor play every role:

    by mrfan


  • Jan. 10, 2007, 1:40 p.m. CST

    how i've missed all this

    by BendersShinyAss

    guys, this has been the most enjoyable read in months. actually, not since kong. The simple truth is - everyone has shit that stinks, and whatever jackson thinks he will win, his victory will be bitter. and THAT alone makes for a dubious filmmaker. You know, Cameron made his films spaced out and nicely apart. he didn't jump in with Terminator 3 or True lies 2. the man works off his gut. Jackson does not. he was in control of some amazingly talented artists for lord of the rings AND King Kong..... BUT, those films are put together so badly. there is no structure in any of his films. none that can be defined. and don't use the based on books or previous property.... there are things he could have done to make those films even better. no. 1 time management.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 1:38 p.m. CST

    Get M. Knight to direct...

    by Darth_Inedible

    Bilbo returns from the Lonely Mountain with the ring only to discover that Middle Earth was all a lie, and that he's been living in a giant Tolkien-themed amusement park in Central Florida.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 1:43 p.m. CST

    I love most of Jackson's films...

    by Sledge Hammer

    ...but I still think he's being a greedy and egotistical prick over this, and shares at least as much blame for the whole situation as Bob Shaye/Newline does, you know, the only people who trusted and believed in Jackson's vision in the first place, and who ponied up even more money and a whole extra film than he originally asked for (films that, if they had failed, would have destroyed the studio). Films that personally made Jackson over a quarter of a billion dollars so far, not to mention the fact that a huge part of the budget of said films went into basically building/massively expanding Jackson's very own production studio and fx house, which post LOTR is now state of the art and raking in the J man huge wads of cash from other outside projects. <p>So, scorecheck, by being the only ones to take a chance on Jackson's Rings they helped gain him an a-list film career, including worldwide name recognition and star power, numerous oscars, his own state of the art studio and filmmaking facilities, and over a quarter of a billion dollars, with more flowing his way even now. Yeah, poor bastard, I can see how he feels utterly fucked over by the only guys who would support him and were willing to take a shot on him.<p> But yeah, apparently Jackson wanted even more and decided he had been shortchanged somehow, and so what did he do? Did they do a sit down and try to work shit out, or smarter still, just let the lawyers handle it in a businesslike manner. No. He tried to pull a public blackmail game on this situation so that, with the weight of the fans behind him, he could have his cake and eat it too, thinking he could force Newline's hand, making out like a banshee and get the job as Hobbit-meister all in one, but Shaye stared that fucker down and didn't budge an inch, so the plan backfired, despite the blind devotion of so many Jacksonphiles. And now the whole situation is royally fucked for both parties probably beyond any sort of equitable compromise. And why? Because of ego and greed. Again, I'm sure on both sides, but Jackson's side is the more obvious of the two, and seems the least grateful. <p>I mean I'm sure Newline aint all squeaky clean in this either, but fact is no company will just 'open the books' for any reason short of a legally enforced one, it's corporate policy 101 and just plain bad for business no matter what the results or how you cut things. Have they got things to hide? They're a big corporate machine, so I'm sure they do, but two wrongs don't make for happy campers on either side. What a supreme clusterfuck. <p>I just hope whoever they get to do the Hobbit is up to the task of delivering a quality film, or it's just gonna be Star Wars Prequel time plus ten. And who needs that shit, I ask ya?

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 1:41 p.m. CST

    harry's animated gif

    by Doctor_Sin

    Man, as he slides down the pole, and the lit pole turns dark as Harry passes, it looks like the H-Man is leaving a trail of Dirty Sanchez all over that thing.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 1:46 p.m. CST

    Ringwearer9, sorry i should have made it clear...

    by Talkbacker with no name

    that was question for all people...apart from you

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 1:47 p.m. CST

    Coming July, 4th 2009. Every

    by kirttrik

    Coming July, 4th 2009. Every Journey has a conitinuation where the journey continues. To walk you sometmes want to run. AL PACINO as Gandalf. STALLONE as Bilbo Baggins. and introducing JIM CARREY as the magical Gullum. This Summer... experience the RADICALNESS...of the conitnuing saga... of the ONE RING! Directed by McG. Produced by Robert Shaw. Adapted for the screen by Ringwearer9 aka:goofydouche and Sylvester Stallone. "This Summer, it Gets even AAAWWWESOMER!" (Theatrical poster tag line.)

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 1:48 p.m. CST

    Lord of the RingsVI: Hobbits in the Hood

    by kirttrik

    Coming July, 4th 2009. Every Journey has a conitinuation where the journey continues. To walk you sometmes want to run. AL PACINO as Gandalf. STALLONE as Bilbo Baggins. and introducing JIM CARREY as the magical Gullum. This Summer... experience the RADICALNESS...of the conitnuing saga... of the ONE RING! Directed by McG. Produced by Robert Shaw. Adapted for the screen by Ringwearer9 aka:goofydouche and Sylvester Stallone. "This Summer, it Gets even AAAWWWESOMER!" (Theatrical poster tag line.)

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 1:51 p.m. CST

    kirttrik - They already made Ringy's version of LOTR.

    by Mr. Nice Gaius

    It was called, "Eragon".

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 1:52 p.m. CST

    Making a movie out of spite?

    by skycrapper

    Man this just confirms that Hollywood and New Line is run by a bunch of 4th graders. Get ready people for McG's Hobbit.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 1:51 p.m. CST

    Hobbits in the Hood is gonna KICK ASS

    by kirttrik

    Thank god for visionary artisans like Robert Shawe. This films gonna take some of the wind out of Avatars sails. Shit Yeah!

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 1:54 p.m. CST

    Eragon was totally phuck'n sweat!

    by kirttrik

    Actually, wait. I couldn't even make it through the preview.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 1:56 p.m. CST

    Talkbacker, too late.

    by Ringwearer9

    No backsies.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 2 p.m. CST

    Talkbacker with no name

    by MrJJonz

    I don't know The Hobbit but how many charcters from The Hobbit follow through to LOTR in the same form?

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 2:02 p.m. CST

    Twisted Panties

    by Still Crazy

    I would like to see PJ make this movie, but seems like he's gonna have to wait until the rights revert back to Saul. Newline is telling PJ get bent. Pretty sure PJ ain't making the Hobbit under NL. Maybe sometime in the future, but not now. BTW if I had a quarter of a billion dollars, I'd probably be happier than a pig in shit. But then again thats just me. I can understand PJ wanting to know the accounting, but in the big whole picture of the real I mean seriously, is this what life is really about? It's sort of sad to see ubber PJ fanboys defending him like he is god, must not have anything better to do in life except jerk off with PJ. Some of PJ's other films...meh not so good. Some pretty good. Kong was just alright, no biggie. Hell another director could do a good job too. I am not going to get my panties in a twist just because almighty PJ won't have the chance to direct The Hobbit yet. I would bet Tolkien is rolling in his grave, either way. He didn't get a quarter billion dollars and the story is his to begin with.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 2:03 p.m. CST

    QUINT : Once the Rights Expire, can another start?

    by Ringwearer9

    Even if the previous rights holder is in production? Or do the rights revert, and can be sold, immediately, even if the previous rights holder is entitled to finish their project? Is there a real possibility of two competing Hobbit movies? If there is, New Line will win, with it's head start, and if it doesn't skimp on quality, whereas if Jackson rushes it,(which he'll have to if he has to wait for the rights to be available) his will definitly have to skimp on quality to get out first and cash in on consumer hunger for The Hobbit. If he takes a long time, to do it right, he'll still be too late as most consumers will have seen the other one first, and be all Hobbited out.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 2:04 p.m. CST

    What the FUCK

    by kirttrik

    "No backsies", what the FUCK is that? Jesus FUCK'N christ. Stallone would be ashamed.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 2:06 p.m. CST

    Hobbited out

    by Still Crazy

    Not if he waits 20 years. PJ is no Lucas when it comes to business sense, that's for damn sure.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 2:06 p.m. CST

    Midget actors...

    by spumpkin

    PJ or no, gotta have 'em if they expect me to take The Hobbit seriously.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 2:11 p.m. CST

    Verne Troyer needs work

    by just pillow talk

    unless he wants to be a police office that is, then his time available will be drastically cut.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 2:11 p.m. CST

    Kirttrick, I know Stallone would be ashamed of you ...

    by Ringwearer9

    ... but what would he think of me?

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 2:14 p.m. CST

    The only cast member I would miss...

    by C Legion

    is Ian McKellen, who was excellent as Gandalf, but even then I would be happy to see John Hurt take his place.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 2:15 p.m. CST

    in the battle of 2 Movies Jackson would win.

    by kirttrik

    You say he would have to rush to production but your forgetting 1 thing. He spent 10 years fleshing out the world, it's production art, and feel. Also he has the cast and the reputation. New Line would have to redo what has already been done but in a new way, and they wouldn't have the gestation period to do it in with the quick release schedule. I know you'll be first in line to the Paul W.S. Anderson fiasco, but me and the rest of the world would wait for the real movie. It would be like Transformers vs. the Go-Bots, Transformers win.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 2:16 p.m. CST

    Um, he'd be ashamed.

    by kirttrik

    Yeah, Stallone would totally kick your ass.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 2:21 p.m. CST

    Stallone for Gandalf.

    by C Legion

    Yo, Bilbo!

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 2:23 p.m. CST

    Doesn't Bother Me

    by Mentok

    I think I would actually prefer to see someone else make the Hobbit. I liked the Rings trilogy well enough, and own the DVDs, but King Kong was crap. No one wants to say it, but it's true. It had great elements, but it was just not a good movie. It really needed a lot more editing. It sounds to me like Jackson is believing his own hype.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 2:22 p.m. CST

    is Transformers still directed by Michael Bay?

    by just pillow talk

    If so, who is directing Go-Bots? If its Cameron, then I think even the little red moped would kick prime's ass in that one.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 2:27 p.m. CST

    Poor old AICN

    by Finklestone

    All those years you spent sucking Peter Jackson's cock just so you could get a few inside scoops on LotR, and now it looks like you might have to start over again fom scratch with a new director. Start brushing your teeth, guys!

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 2:26 p.m. CST

    Kirrtrick, Me and Stallone would take turns ....

    by Ringwearer9

    ...kicking your ass, and then go out for sushi.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 2:27 p.m. CST

    Stallone as Gandalf, as Bilbo, and Gullum in

    by kirttrik


  • Jan. 10, 2007, 2:29 p.m. CST

    I'm rubber, you are glue...

    by kirttrik

    what bounces off me sticks to you, fucknut.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 2:36 p.m. CST

    James McAvoy for Bilbo!

    by KillaKane

    I'll say it again, he's perfect for the role, got the look and the acting chops. Props to PJ for sticking it to Shaye, I'm sure once the books are opened on this, he'll be caught out. Hope New Line miss the option deadline and this reverts back to Zaentz, it's a property that should'nt be rushed and deserves a respectable pre-prod phase.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 2:39 p.m. CST

    Kirttrick ...

    by Ringwearer9

    I know you're a fucknut, but what am I?

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 2:48 p.m. CST

    Go New Line!

    by Finklestone

    It will be worth sitting through a shitty non-Jackson directed version of The Hobbit just to watch the geeks go into meltdown.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 2:51 p.m. CST


    by Talkbacker with no name

    Gandalf, Bilbo, Elrond and Gollum.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 2:55 p.m. CST

    What must New Line do to meet the "option deadline"?

    by Ringwearer9

    Do they simply officially commit, by informing Zaentz that they have officially committed to the project, giving them a certain amount of time to make the film, even if they announce it on the last day before options expire?

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 2:57 p.m. CST

    Not a massive amount of casting problems

    by MrJJonz

    Bilbo would need replacing as this is set in the past. Gollum was different also in The Hobbit (seems to be from what I gather in LOTR). Gandalf and Elrond may or may not return depending on who directed and if they didn't then I think for a seperate film with a new vision from a new director then I think I could accept 2 new castings. As long as all the above ie director and cast are done with great respect to the source material I just can't see that the casting problem is a problem

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 3:05 p.m. CST


    by Talkbacker with no name

    Not even gollum? Would be a shame to lose Andy Serkis's voice (and motion capture)

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 3:06 p.m. CST

    Let's get some perspective on this

    by gingeracrockford

    First of all I also think that New Line have behaved like idiots over this, however I'm also desperate to see a Hobbit film with or without Jackson, and I'm resigned to the fact that it's going to be without. Realistically the choice is between a New Line Hobbit soon, without Jackson (McKellen may or may not be involved, as far as I know he has NOT actually said he wouldn't do it without PJ, merely that he was disappointed by the decision and that it was "hard to imagine" any other director doing as good a job, however if they get a substitute who he regards as acceptable there's every chance he'll return, especially as he's said he doesn't want to see anyone else play Gandalf as he's made the role his own), or alternatively an MGM Hobbit in a few years time, probably still without PJ as his schedule is BOUND to be full by then whether he wants to do it or not. PJ didn't create Middle Earth, Tolkien did, so I don't feel we are yet in a position to judge whether PJ is the "only" person who is capable of directing the Hobbit.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 3:19 p.m. CST

    Read the book

    by Still Crazy

    What book? There's a book? Holy hell why didn't anyone say something. Are you telling me some guy with the name JRRT wrote books about this stuff? Without him there would be none of it. I bet his estate got even less than PJ did, and PJ helped in that rape.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 3:23 p.m. CST

    Get Paul W.S. Anderson to direct the Hobbit.

    by riskebiz

    Or Uwe Boll. That should just about suit Robert Shaye, wouldn't it? I mean ... why pay Peter Jackson what he's owed and get the man to complete the story that was one of the great "unfilmable" stories that was filmed brilliantly? Naw.. just get Paul W.S. Anderson or Uwe Boll and get whatever minimal box-office you can out of something with great potential just to be a prick.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 3:26 p.m. CST


    by Quint

    My understanding, Ringwearer, is that a project has to be officially in production to keep the rights from reverting. I don't think it's possible for the rights to a project to revert back when it's production, but I'm no lawyer. And I know that complicated deals are often made, with different possibilities at each stage of production. But I don't know what New Line's contract is with Hobbit, just that they say their option on the story runs out in 2009.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 3:32 p.m. CST

    Little Children

    by CherryValance

    from what I understand New Line botched their own Oscar chances with that film by not promoting it or releasing it properly. So who needs them honestly? They obviously don't know what they're doing since they all said that PJ saved New Line in the first place. Let them make a shitty Hobbit movie and embarrass themselves with it. I sure as hell won't be seeing it. I'm with PJ all the way.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 3:32 p.m. CST

    Too many lawyers are involved for this to work out

    by ScreamingPenis

    Lawyers don't give a shit about getting a movie made or what the fans think. They need to get themselves and their client the biggest award/settlement possible. Jackson's lawyers don't get more money if he gets to direct The Hobbit. (The opposite is probably true, since the director's compensation would be part of a smaller settlement.) In fact, the money at stake from the messed up royalties is probably greater or comparable to The Hobbit payday, thus Jackson has no incentive to make a quick settlement. Same with NEW LINE. The cost of a settlement is greater than any extra cash they could make with Jackson at the helm. They stand a better chance at winning through litigation. Pete's extra chip is whatever sentimental attachment his fans attach to his directorial skills. Honestly, since he's already used us as leverage in this mess (which only a short time ago was an "accounting matter), I could give a rat's ass if he gets paid.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 3:35 p.m. CST

    LotR casting

    by Movietool

    was VERY good, but I still say Sean Bean would have been a better Aragorn. Ian McKellan was the only casting choice I'd consider nearly "perfect." But if you don't think John Hurt, Alan Rickman, Peter O'Toole, Charles Dance, Derek Jacobi or Liam Neeson might have a reasonable shot at pulling off that role, then you clearly think Ian McKellan is the only good actor working today.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 3:40 p.m. CST

    BringingSexy, Jackson gains from loyalty to New Line.

    by Ringwearer9

    You said "But all indications from New Line are that they are untrustworthy business partners. So why would he helm a project to make them MORE money and be cheated yet again?" Because he's also going to be making more money HIMSELF. Seeing the glass as half-empty is stupid. Plus, Jackson can prove to the world that he actually is a guy who cares more about Tolkien's books than about money. Which wouldn't be true, but it would be smart public relations. "This is common business sense, can you understand that?" Except, if Jackson doesn't get to make the movie, he loses ALL the profits he could have made, if he cared about making them. He also loses the opportunity to make films with other studios who now distrust his willingness to sue and drag them into the mud after a successful project comes through. It's just dumb. It's like Jackson is imagining all of Hollywood is full of entirely aboveboard business practices, and NewLine is the only rotten apple that he must take a principled stand against. Well, he didn't have to take that stand, and he'll probably LOSE money in the long run because of it. Nothing smart about what he's doing at all. As Shaye said, he was being incredibly arrogant, and ungrateful. He got 10 percent of the royalties from those movies! 10 percent! On top of the 5 percent they had to pay to Miramax for buying the property off of them. They made him incredibly rich, and money is all he seems to care about now. He doesn't care about making the Hobbit, or keeping a reputation as a team player, just accounting. I'd say he's a fool, or just so arrogant that he thinks he can go it alone without any studio's help. Well, look for Jackson's Phantom Menace, coming soon to a theatre near you, because that's what happens when arrogant filmmaker's go it alone.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 3:47 p.m. CST

    What a studio not paying up an artist?

    by hallmitchell

    Oh my god they would never do that. A studio not honouring a contract. Next thing we know the Weinstein brothers won't be paying up either. What's the world coming to.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 3:48 p.m. CST

    Thanks, Quint. What's an "official" production, though?

    by Ringwearer9

    I'd love to know the actual details.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 3:58 p.m. CST


    by Talkbacker with no name

    Don't think anyone is saying that. I just want to see Ian McKellan as Gandalf again. It's not like changing Jennifer in back to the future part 2!

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 4:06 p.m. CST

    Great talkback Quint

    by hallmitchell

    No film director is as important to a nation as Peter Jackson is to New Zealand.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 4:07 p.m. CST

    Bilbo has a beer and CHEETS on his wife....

    by Ultron ver 2.0

    going oldschool on that one, yo.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 4:17 p.m. CST


    by CherryValance

    You're right. It's totally apparent in the article that Shaye thinks that since Peter has so much money already that he should just shut up. And he's basically calling Peter naive for thinking that he'd give a shit if they were ripping Peter off. I mean he practically admits doing it, if you read between the lines. PJ's just not bending over for them. That's his major crime.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 4:28 p.m. CST

    CherryValance, I think you misinterpret.

    by Ringwearer9

    I think he's saying that the amount being sued for is so small, in the minds of NewLine and the huge conglomerate that owns it, that it isn't WORTH keeping from Jackson, if Jackson is truly entitled to it. He's claiming that NewLine is taking a stand on principle, and that Jackson is being petty and unreasonable.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 4:47 p.m. CST

    KONG sold $100 million in DVDs the first day

    by BannedOnTheRun

    Problem is, Peter Jackson bought them all.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 4:58 p.m. CST

    A PJ Directed Hobbit = Taint

    by monorail77

    but a non PJ directed Hobbit may also = Taint. Sad about this lawsuit, though. PJ used to think Miramax fucked him over LOTR. Now its New Line. I wonder how he feels about Universal?

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 5:02 p.m. CST

    Questions that need answering

    by Still Crazy

    Has PJ even read the books yet? Does Shaye even know who Tolkien is? Does anyone care about the freakin story? Is it all about money? If it is all about money then to hell with them both.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 5:06 p.m. CST

    Never seen LotR...

    by Darkman

    (yeah, yeah, I don't belong here...), but this sounds idiotic. The films have earned New Line more money, Oscars and acclaim than they've ever seen...or WILL see. If this is true, someone (initials R.S.) has some serious boot-licking to do.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 5:12 p.m. CST

    $100 million in DVD sales = 50 or 60 million in Profit

    by Ringwearer9

    Which isn't small change, but I wish people would stop acting like Sales = Profit. They have to share those sales with the RETAILERS.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 5:15 p.m. CST


    by Quint

    Juicy, flaky, gross, smelly, jelly-like, chewy, diseased, hairy, repugnant TAINT!<BR><BR>Happy?<BR><BR>Ringwearer, official production would mean film rolling, I believe. I don't think pre-production counts in order to keep the rights to a project from reverting. Maybe someone who knows a little more about the legal side of filmmaking will clarify... That's my understanding, but like I said in a previous talkback I'm no lawyer.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 5:20 p.m. CST

    D&D3: The Hobbit

    by the_shogun_gunslinger

    ...cuz guess what New Line...thats what ur gonna get. i'm not a HUGE jackson fan Rings films were good, Dead Alive is amazing and i even enjoyed Kong the first time...but i will say this, the man knows his LOTR shit...but whatever..hire whoever you want. just dont be suprised when people dont go see a film starring Vince Vaugn as Gandalf and Dakota Fanning as Bilbo as diected bt Renny Harlin

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 5:36 p.m. CST

    I'm For A Hobbit Movie Without Jackson

    by DarthDooku

    Why does Peter Jackson need to make this movie? It's not like George Lucas or Steven Spielberg with Star Wars and Indiana Jones. They created those franchises. "The Lord of the Rings" has been around for a while, "The Hobbit" even longer. And just because Jackson has one vision of the movie doesn't mean that it's the best vision. Personally, i thought the movies were good, but filmed a bit boring. If he made it just a tad more interesting, it could've been really great. Instead, we got a good, slow movie. So let another director have a shot at filming Middle-Earth. Who knows, it may even be better.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 5:49 p.m. CST

    Quick! Somebody call Rosie and Trump!!!

    by W3bzpinn3r

    Lets start a huge free-for-all! The Don vs The Dyke vs The Hobbit vs The Kiwi vs Suits vs The Fans.... God... it would be glorious carnage! That would be a Pay Per View special actually worth the fee.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 6:31 p.m. CST

    If anyone in the UK has bought empire this month

    by emeraldboy

    there is an excellent potted history of how the deal between newline and wingnut films unravelled. I cannot believe that jackson did not have a legal expert to sit down with and go through his contract. That just seems odd that he re-read the contract and is now suing Newline. He seems to be really naieve. He has principles and he doesnt seem to care about business side of things.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 6:32 p.m. CST

    I won't say TAINT

    by CherryValance


  • Jan. 10, 2007, 6:37 p.m. CST

    There was always going to be one winner in this

    by emeraldboy

    Newline cinema. Peter Jackson got hired to do a job. All told Newline raked in 3 billion worth of revenue. Once the job was Jacksons service were no longer required. This deal that jackson signed sounds like it was signed when jackson was drunk or was put under huge pressure.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 7:10 p.m. CST

    Even if New Line settled with PJ,he's now too expensive

    by Greg7007

    New Line had a very lousy year in 2006, but should bounce back in 2007 with Rush Hour 3 and the film of the first His Dark Materials book trilogy. The fanboys just have to accept the harsh reality that even if New Line settle their dispute with Jackson (which they definitely won't), he's now too expensive to make The Hobbit for them, as he'd understandably want at least $US 20 mill upfront and probably 20 % of the film's cinema and DVD profits, which is just too much, not unless Saul Zaentz (who individually made even more from ther 3 LOTR films than even Jackson did) was quite happy to pay PJ those prices.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 8:33 p.m. CST

    They could go with a story from the Similariton...

    by warp11

    Pass it off as from Tolkien, market it, it would still make money. err, proably won't be good though. Fuck, I would love to see the Witch King kick ass though.....

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 8:33 p.m. CST


    by wackybantha


  • Jan. 10, 2007, 8:45 p.m. CST


    by morGoth

    What's that, a Feanorian laxative?

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 10:01 p.m. CST

    The Silmarillion as a movie

    by NoHubris

    If anyone could pull off a film on The Silmarillion, it's Peter Jackson and company. Wouldn't that alter the context of the HOBBIT film should THE SILMARILLION movie come out around the same time?

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 10:24 p.m. CST

    A Silmarillion movie would only work if....

    by Doctor_Sin

    they intermittently, at points of importance, cut away to show some D&D players rolling D20s - with the plot being the results of their rolls.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 11:01 p.m. CST

    A Silmarillion film would only work if

    by Fried Gold

    Marillion are allowed to do the score.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 11:07 p.m. CST

    Re:Shayne was quoted "$100 million or $50 million

    by Mace Tofu

    $100 million or $50 million? So these are the #'s Robert thinks Jackson was shorted ( I wonder if those figures come from New Line lol as Peter didn't put a # on the lawsuit). When your paycheck is shorted that much (20-40% of what Peter was paid) having your Boss tell you you have been paid plenty so go away is just not right. Hell , when the HD DVDs come out is Jackson to be cut out because " hey look how much we paid him already why should we pay him more even though we have a contract to give him X% of DVD sales but we didn't know we would sell this many so it seems unfair for us to give him anymore money ever! It's MINE! MINE! MY MONEY! HA HA MONEY! DROOOOL....MONEY! 2 for you, 3 for me... 1 for you, 4 for me...0 for you, 5 for me .... MONEY!!!

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 11:22 p.m. CST

    you know whats going to happen

    by BendersShinyAss

    Jacksons going to get his money and he's never going to work inhollywood ever again. he'll be a BIG indi producer from new zealand. He's pissing in the big pond now, being an outsider who has gotten himself somewhat pissed off at the dealings of hollywood. the truth is guys, new line wouldn't be the only studeo cooking the books - that said, i think other studios would be somewhat curious about this state of affairs - and there would be a real hesitation in the future to work with someone like jackson again. the mans a loud mouth. I'm not saying what new line did was right. there's nothing worse than being screwed out of your hard earned cash.... but lets not be feeble here - Jackson is nothing unique on the list here. in hollywoods eyes, he's a trouble maker.

  • Jan. 10, 2007, 11:36 p.m. CST

    The cool part will be when NEW LINE puts out a BOXSET

    by Mace Tofu

    of the 4 Films ( Peter's 3 LOTR + NL's HOBBIT) on DVD & HDDVD & BLUERAY & DVHS & iTunes ( iPhone & iTV & iPod & iMac). $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$...

  • Jan. 11, 2007, 12:21 a.m. CST

    JRR's older kids refuse to sell Silmarillion rights

    by Greg7007

    You'll have to wait till all of JRR's older kids die off to see Silmarillion made, as they control any film rights and currently refuse to sell them. Their own kids might be more negotiable.

  • Jan. 11, 2007, 12:23 a.m. CST

    "A Silmarillion movie would work if" TBers

    by NoHubris

    You guys are funny.

  • Jan. 11, 2007, 12:47 a.m. CST

    A Silmarillion movie would only work if...

    by NoHubris could witness Silmarillion in action, after Silmarillion read above post about Silmarillion kids.

  • Jan. 11, 2007, 12:54 a.m. CST

    Chris Nolan could do a decent job with the Hobbit

    by J-Dizzle

    He saved the Batman franchise, why not Hobbit?

  • Jan. 11, 2007, 1:33 a.m. CST


    by wanna_bannana

    Never have a seen such brilliant writing! The way it drew me in...the way it touched my cold barely beating was...wonderful. I think i might be able to help you out getting it made into a film. Now keep in mind you are my friend...and as such i am required to help you out and give you advice to make the best film possible , but i think with my help it will be exactly what the public is hungry for..after all you will need to appeal to a larger demographic. P.J Empties His Bowels (Part VI) ~Enter the Bowl~ ~rough screenplay idea~ okay now picture this... All of a sudden his soft murmurs of pleasure are replaced by a girlish squeel of excrutiating pain. The realization that this is no mere nine coil steamer, quickly replaces his anticipation to pinch one off, with a hard cold fear! He grips both sides of the toilet.. but the look on his face clearly indicates that the cool feel of the porceline on his fingers is doing little to calm him, all he can do is grip and squeese...grip and squeese. As he screams and squeeses out what feels to be the last of the obstruction, P.J is rocketed forward into the bathtub with such violent force that he rips the shower curtains clean off! He gets up quickly, rubbing his sore red hiney, while staring at the hideously deformed monstrosity as it rises from the toilet. He scruntches his nose like he just got a whiff of bad poonie, Never has he smelt a stench like this... it opens its mouth to devour him, its breath reeks of a thousand bad films. P.J stands in horror as Uwe Boll advances on him, but ole petey is not about to go down without a fight. Pete ducks low under Uwe's deadly bitch slap, and grabs his copy of the hobbit bringing it up and driving it into Bolls stomach, causing him to regurgitate Christian Slaters dead career. Pete then grabs the toilet plunger and finishes Uwe off. P.J stands over his dead body watching it ooze into the floorboards as the souls of Ray Liotta,Jason Stratham and Tara Reid are freed. So anyways, thats just a rough idea, but it can be tweaked, we can cast Ed begley Jr as Uwe boll and Tom Cruise as Peter Jackson, now i am thinking, we will need lots of "CGI" to pull of Uwe boll, so that means money...but since a movie like this is right in Don Murphy's zone , i am sure it would not be a problem getting him aboard, but we need to change the name of the movie to "Transformers" i know it has nothing to do with giant robots..but we can throw some in here and there, as well as at the end of the movie, and it will make millions!! it will be more about "the human story" and PJ and his battle with Uwe, but we will leak photos on the net of the robots, and show mostly the robots in the trailer. No one will be the wiser untill the movie comes out...and by then...we will be rich!! ha!

  • Jan. 11, 2007, 1:38 a.m. CST


    by Snikkar124

    How can enyone love an x-men film were both collossus and the juggernaut(bitch) are present,AND NEVER TRADE BLOWS!!!

  • Jan. 11, 2007, 3:52 a.m. CST

    Bob Shaye greenlights shit like The Man,

    by DirkD13"

    Cellular and Codename: The Cleaner, obviously a man who considers these worthy of public consumption has clearly lost his mojo. I hope New Line lose The Hobbit and it gets made elsewhere. I'm no fan of LOTR (that type of fantasy just isn't my thing), but the movies are excellently made and the film-going public deserve a fitting Hobbit movie, whoever makes it.

  • Jan. 11, 2007, 4:56 a.m. CST

    Peter jacksons gotta eat! No im serious.......

    by knifeandfork

    The man needs to eat someting, he looks starved to death. Please, if you love jackson, please send wingnut films just £2 a month so he can buy a curry or something .Oh and robert shaye is a dick.

  • Jan. 11, 2007, 5:20 a.m. CST

    yeah but the point is...

    by Seven Seas

    the script for Kong was so weak. I saw Braindead one rainy lunch time in fifth form, put me off my mince and cheese for life.

  • Jan. 11, 2007, 6:25 a.m. CST

    A sad day for all concerned...

    by workshed

    ...that it should come to this after the hard work by all concerned is ridiculous. New Line, if they have nothing to hide, should open the accounts on Rings as soon as posssible. On the other hand, perhaps this was a cunning ploy on behalf of Jackson/Zaentz to let the time option on the rights slip. Let's hope, if New Line do decide to push ahead, that they get someone who understands the concerns of those who grew up reading and loving The Hobbit and don't do a dump on the whole series. I doubt that the Tolkien family will let that happen anyway as their stranglehold over the books continues to this day and, let's face it, they love PJ. Personally, i would love to see what Mr.Del Toro could conjure up though he seems to have a pretty full slate (way past New Line's deadline).

  • Jan. 11, 2007, 6:28 a.m. CST


    by whatever57

    Bob Shaye is TOTALLY correct on this. Jackson signed a LEGAL CONTRACT with New Line and should NOT have signed if WETA didn't *originally* agree to the terms. Do you see Alfonso Cuarón, Mike Newell or Chris Columbus doing the same trick since they directed ROWLING'S work ?

  • Jan. 11, 2007, 6:33 a.m. CST


    by DocPazuzu

    Hmmm, don't recall seeing you in TB before.

  • Jan. 11, 2007, 6:59 a.m. CST

    Peter Jackson Vs New Line....(new line get over it..)

    by DevilDog2007

    okay well here we go. New Line has had issues out the buttcake for eons now...and now they want to fight with the man who brought them the most financial success they've ever had yes everrrr as well as the reputation that came with the success of the trilogy. The reality of it is Peter Jackson deserves his fair share and has a right to oversee that that is done and done fairly..and if new line is so freakin' sure that they've paid his dues then they have nothing to worry about prove it and let it go. They can't possibly believe that getting someone else to direct and new actors portraying the roles would be a smart decision. Imagine if that's what happened to the Star Wars Trilogy can you say "failure". It's absolutely ridiculous and in this day & age people (fans) of film really pay attention to which company is releasing which fiim and which director is attached to Lionsgate which now has the reputation of releasing risky more adult fare than in the past and we expect that from them, same from Miramax (mostly). It's a shame that big movie business can be like this. LET IT GO...SHOW HIM THE PAPERS THAT PROVE YOU"VE DONE YOUR PART HE'LL LET IT GO (I'm sure) and they can move the fuck on...

  • Jan. 11, 2007, 8:23 a.m. CST

    Very insightful post, Bender.

    by Childe Roland

    Seriously, while I don't think anyone's saying Jackson doesn't have the right to ask to see the books (although it's bad form) or to sue to see them if his request is denied, New Line and any other studio in Hollywood also have every right not to work with him in the future based on that behavior. And Jackson is not a white knight in this scenario. He wants his money and he was willing to use the fans of his previous films to get it by throwing the "scare" of a non-Jackson directed Hobbit at them. Frankly, I am positive that fans who believe Jackson is the only director who can or should make the Hobbit are fans of Jackson's movies (who may have actually read the trilogy) but they don't know The Hobbit at all. Which is fine. Neither does Jackson. Moving the film forward with another director is the best thing that could have happened for fans of the Hobbit. If New Line has to pull a Dumbledore and replace Sir Ian, that's fine. And does anyone think Weaving was the best actor to play Elrond in the first place? Those are the ONLY two live-action characters (aside from Bilbo, who would've needed to be recast anyway) who need to appear in the Hobbit from the trilogy. And Gollum spends the whole of his time in The Hobbit in deep shadow. Any visual discrepancies for his character not attributable to the difference in his age could be easily concealed and I personally know four people who can do the voice (and would do so for peanuts). So let PJ take his toys and his boys and go home. The movie can and will be made without him. New Line is acting well within its rights (even if they are acting shady) and in the same manner I suspect I would if someone sued me. Would you invite a litigious person with a personal mad-on for you back to work with you or into your home? I'd advise against it.

  • Jan. 11, 2007, 9:56 a.m. CST

    whatever57 = that's an incredible strawman!!!

    by Mr. Nice Gaius

    Gee, do you think it might be because Cuaron, Newell, and Columbus haven't been fucked on their DVD royalties?!<P>Yet.

  • Jan. 11, 2007, 1:02 p.m. CST

    Peter Jackson is a SNEAKY, LYING WEASEL

    by Ringwearer9

    Look at this original article on, where Jackson sent his letter explaining the situation.<br><br>(edit out the AICN inserted space after you paste it into your browser)<br>Let me point out a specific admission by Jackson.<p>"We have also said that we do not want to tie settlement of the lawsuit to making a film of The Hobbit. In other words, we would have to agree to make The Hobbit as a condition of New Line settling our lawsuit. In our minds this 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. Deciding to make a movie should come from the heart - it's not a matter of business convenience. When you agree to make a film, you're taking on a massive commitment and you need to be driven by an absolute passion to want to get the story on screen. It's that passion, and passion alone, that gives the movie its imagination and heart. To us it is not a cold-blooded business decision."<p> A couple of months ago there was a flurry of Hobbit news in the media. MGM, who own a portion of the film rights in The Hobbit, publicly stated they wanted to make the film with us. It was a little weird at the time because nobody from New Line had ever spoken to us about making a film of The Hobbit and the media had some fun with that. Within a week or two of those stories, our Manager Ken Kamins got a call from the co-president of New Line Cinema, Michael Lynne, who in essence told Ken that the way to settle the lawsuit was to get a commitment from us to make the Hobbit, because "that's how these things are done". 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."<p> NOTE what Jackson says. "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". Jackson ADMITS that he would make more money if he stopped trying to embarrass New Line with a lawsuit. Why isn't this an acceptable compromise for him? Why does he HAVE to settle the lawsuit prior to to allowing himself to get all excited about the film? Elsewhere in that letter he says that he had never been told, (prior to being informed he would no longer be director on the Hobbit and the LOTR prequel), that there was a limited time option on the rights to The Hobbit. Since Jackson's stated reasons for NOT taking a deal "It would the the wrong reason for making a movie" come across as so phony (he goes on about the heart and passion one needs for a movie, that making a smart business decision like rolling the lawsuit into the contract would spoil ... won't signing the contract before making the movies also spoil it?) seem like such transparent lies, it means, to me, that Jackson is probably lying about his real reasons for refusing the offer, and continuing with the lawsuit. Jackson probably DID know about the limited time option on the rights for LOTR. If he didn't know, Mr. Zaentz was probably reminding him, and wooing him with dreams of bigger paychecks than New Line seemed willing to give Jackson. So what is the lawsuit REALLY about, if it isn't about more money for Jackson than he'd get from continuing the lawsuit? He is Deliberately stalling, and antagonizing New Line, on the gamble that New Line will not be able to replace him and WETA, that the rights will revert to Zaentz, and he'll get an even bigger wad of money (he imagines), in line with the big wad of money he got for the underperforming King Kong. (This is what's driving his ego now ... he won't deal with anyone who won't pay him his overinflated sense of worth based on what he got for that Bomb). It's all Phony. Jackson's explanation that resolving the lawsuit would ruin the Purity of his film-making is transparently false (what, did he refuse a bigger payday for King Kong on that basis?) so I don't believe ANYTHING he says, and none of you should either.

  • Jan. 11, 2007, 2:27 p.m. CST

    Well, this guy's basically screwed...

    by SpacePhil

    Given Jackson's reasonable-sounding response, Shayhe comes across as a complete asshole. And I generally agree with Herc - the central issue here isn't money. Studios have always used "creative accounting" when it comes to royalties, and everyone's simply put up for it for years. As for Shaye - well, I'm betting his stockholders are taking notes...

  • Jan. 11, 2007, 2:31 p.m. CST

    Yeesh, Ringwearer, who pissed in your Cheerios?

    by SpacePhil

    Seriously, man, lay off the Red Bull. Also, as I've said before, have you considered that maybe Jackson, as a professional, has some interest in ending the "creative accounting" practices Hollywood loves? If that's his purpose, I can't say I'm against him...

  • Jan. 11, 2007, 2:40 p.m. CST

    I think Ringwearer9 should keep a copy of that long pos

    by just pillow talk

    so that it can be pasted in future Peter Jackson/LOTR talkbacks. In fact, just post it to all future AICN talkbacks. Your voice needs to be heard! By chance, do you sing at campfires with Stooopider?

  • Jan. 11, 2007, 11:51 p.m. CST

    Unfinished Tales

    by omon ra

    Screw hobbit and Silmarillion would be impossible. Jackson could have shot at Unfinished Tales.

  • Jan. 12, 2007, 3:19 a.m. CST

    jackson not allowed at new line???

    by slappy jones

    he must be so upset..that counts him out of snakes on a plane party 5.....dumb and dumberererer,...son of the masks son....he has really lost out the chance to make some fine films there..he must be weeping...

  • Jan. 12, 2007, 3 p.m. CST

    Unfinished Tails

    by Still Crazy

    I don't think Zantz owns those rights, I think that the Tolkien Estate still owns them. And dealing with Christopher is like dealing with a rabid toy poodle.

  • Feb. 21, 2007, 4:31 p.m. CST


    by JayGBardo

    Shaye says they paid him $250 million dollars and, what does that imply...that ought to be enough? He never denied they owed him money...he just says they've "paid" him that much and the implication is that Jackson should be grateful. Contracts don't work that way. They state what you get and what you don't get...especially at this level. It's hard to side with New Line in this instance...the fair thing is to examine the contract, the books, and the accounts. JG