Lunar Threads

http://wwwj.comcast.net/movies/news/ind ... itn_hobbit

Great, way to break my heart

Sure, I want to see The Hobbit turned into a film, but for all that is good and evil, I wanted to see it done by the same guy who did the LotR triligy. Is that too much to ask for?

Man, make a 3 billion dollar event, then get a boot in the ass and told to scram. Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr. Though I'm sure there is more to it than meets the eye, but really....

Yeah, there's a big fight between Jackson and the people that have the final say over the Hobbit. I don't think you'll be seeing Jackson do the Hobbit. Unfortunately.

I'm more upset over the fact almost at the bottom of the page where it reads that there won't be a "Halo" movie.

I don't know honestly. It may be for the best. If Peter Jackson approached The Hobbit in the same way he did the Lord of the Rings, it would be way entirely too dark for The Hobbit's tone.

Werefrog wrote:I don't know honestly. It may be for the best. If Peter Jackson approached The Hobbit in the same way he did the Lord of the Rings, it would be way entirely too dark for The Hobbit's tone.

Nah, remember the very beginning of The Fellowship of the Ring had plenty of light tones.

I think the Hobbit would be done damn well if Jackson did it. I think that the Hobbit had plenty of dark tones to it, Beorn turning into a bear and killing countless orcs, or even the attack of the spiders. I'm disappointed. I can see the fields surrounding Lonely Mountain now

phyco126 wrote:Nah, remember the very beginning of The Fellowship of the Ring had plenty of light tones.

Ozone wrote:I think the Hobbit would be done damn well if Jackson did it. I think that the Hobbit had plenty of dark tones to it ...

I gotta agree with both parts there... I think Jackson would do a great job with The Hobbit. And he's already proven his success with the LotR trilogy. Yeah, so it diverges from the books, but they were some incredibly good movies nevertheless.

I'm curious to hear what MGM's reasons were for looking for someone besides Jackson to do this. KF

Kizyr wrote: I gotta agree with both parts there... I think Jackson would do a great job with The Hobbit. And he's already proven his success with the LotR trilogy. Yeah, so it diverges from the books, but they were some incredibly good movies nevertheless.

I'm curious to hear what MGM's reasons were for looking for someone besides Jackson to do this. KF

This is what I heard. Apparently, Jackson's contract with MGM for making LotR stipulated that he was going to get a percentage of the gross earnings for the film -- not too unusual in and of itself. However, here's where things get messy.

Hollywood studios are notorious for not using accounting practices that would be considered legal by any other industry. Basically, they use all sorts of dirty tricks so that it looks like, on paper, that while a movie like the LotR trilogy made tons of cash, the studio actually lost money on the film. Supposedly they have enough lobbying power in government to grease the palms of whoever it takes to prevent them from being investigated on these illegal activities.

It is because of these activities that many people working in movies ask for contracts that either pay a flat fee and/or a percentage of the gross earnings (before costs) for a given movie. There have been many documented cases in the past where someone asked for a percentage of the profits, only to have the dirty Hollywood accounting practices claim that they aren't entitled to anything because they lost money on the movie, no matter how big a hit it was.

Jackson, as I said, had a contract that said he was due a cut of the gross earnings. However, he feels that MGM still used shifty accounting methods to stiff him of some of the cash. He therefore asked for an independent auditor to be assigned (I think he even said he would pay for the audit himself) to investigate MGM's books to find out if he was in fact paid what he was owed. MGM is raising the stink because A) they probably did stiff Jackson and B) any independent audit will give solid evidence as to the dirty practices of their accounting and therefore might force lawmakers to come down hard on them and their studios ala when everything hit the fan with Enron.

I'm not 100% sure if Jackson is after this solely to get what he's owed (since he still did get a ton of cash for LotR, even if he was stiffed) or to expose the bad accounting practices of the studios so no one else can get screwed or some combination of the above.

Kizyr wrote: I'm curious to hear what MGM's reasons were for looking for someone besides Jackson to do this. KF

Price. Jackson = expensive

Jackson built a strong foundation for the hobbit with the trillogy, they could hire freaking Dennis Rodman to do it and the theaters would still get flooded.

They'll just ride in the jetstream of Jackson's brilliance and make millions.

I sincerely doubt a Dennis Rodman rendition of "The Hobbit" would have movie-goers flooding the theaters. MGM better pull the stick out of their ass and put Jackson at the helm before this film becomes as bad as the animated version.

I highely doubt Tolkein Estates would allow any movie of his books to be bad. If the movie looks like it would fail, I am sure they would force MGM or New Line to pull the movie before it hits theaters. In several commentaries during the LotR movies, it was given that Tolkein Estates refused to let the books be made into movies unless it was done right, so to protect the books from humilitation or whatever. It was because of those live-action cross cartoons that caused Tolkien Estates to move in that direction of policies.

I hope that Christopher Peolini will take a similar action for his next movie, Eldest.

phyco126 wrote:I highely doubt Tolkein Estates would allow any movie of his books to be bad.

You sure about that? I know the animated flick isn't too popular. I have also seen a script for theatrical version (intended for high school productions) that butchers the ending.

Werefrog wrote:

phyco126 wrote:I highely doubt Tolkein Estates would allow any movie of his books to be bad.

You sure about that? I know the animated flick isn't too popular. I have also seen a script for theatrical version (intended for high school productions) that butchers the ending.

The animated flick is the whole reason Tolkien Estates was so hesitant about allowing a movie made of the books to begin with.