Borgnine said:Really? Seems to me it's money in the bank just on the strength of the original films. I mean they clearly didn't decide to split the Hobbit in to 2 films for purely artistic reasons.
Lawsuit Might Stop The Hobbit
By Dave Gonzales on July 17, 2009
If there's one thing I learned from the way Lord Of The Rings was released by New Line, it's that New Line's accountant were either incredibly dumb or some of the most evil people on the planet.
Peter Jackson himself sued New Line in 2005 for under-paying him on The Fellowship of The Ring. In 2007, Jackson settled for an undisclosed amount. Saul Zaentz, a producer who once owned film rights to the LOTR story also sued New Line over his share of the receipts and settled in 2005 for $168 million.
And this was all before Warner Bros. sucked up the studio.
Once again it's legal mumbo-jumbo time on Latino Review. Let's begin!
- In 1969 J.R.R. Tolkien sold the film rights to his work to United Artists for $250,000 and 7.5% of the gross after a studio recoups their expense. That much is known. The Tolkien Heirs and their charity group The Tolkien Trust also insist that the original contract let Tolkien revoke the rights to additional films in the event of a breach of contract.
- MGM bought out United Artists, absorbing the rights and keeping international distribution rights on the film while selling production rights to New Line, who hired Peter Jackson, etc.
- The Lord Of The Rings films gross an estimated $6 billion dollars (to date). New Line gets sucked up into Warner Bros. The Tolkien Heirs know that after the studio re-couped 2.6x their production budget, the estate is entitled to 7.5%.
- Time Warner doesn't pay out, so the Tolkien estate sues for $220 million dollars. The studio says the original contract is vague, so they're only going to hand over 20% of home video sales (because home video wasn't invented) instead of the 100% the Tolkiens are seeking. Studio lawyers also say that for some lawyer-ish reason, the Tolkiens are only entitled to 2.5%, not 7.5% of revenues from The Two Towers and The Return Of The King.
- The Tolkiens are pissed, settlement talks go south and the suit will go in front of a jury in October of this year in the Los Angeles Superior Court.
Got it? Sort of?
Here's the nitty gritty: Time Warner thinks that with some "Hollywood accounting" and a few pithy legal fees, they can avoid paying out $220 million dollars. It's unlikely that this case will cost that much in man-power. Warners is a big studio and is good with the lawyering.
The Tolkiens, on the other hand, are pissed. So pissed, in fact, that if the original contract is upheld, they will halt the production and/or release of Guillermo Del Toro's two Hobbit films by pulling the rights all-together.
Warners obviously doesn't want that to happen, because they are looking at a pay day estimated around $4 billion if those two films are made.
Interestingly enough, if the Tolkiens do win and pull the rights from Warners, they would be free to sell those rights under a more modern contract. And get this: You know who owns the publishing rights to Tolkiens work?
NewsCorp.
Damn 20th Century Fox has an in.
Stay tuned, entertainment law fans.
Empire spoke with John Rhys-Davies about possibly returning to playing a dwarf in The Hobbit. Not as Gimli, but as Gimli's father, Gloin. John ain't having it though:
"I've already been asked and to be honest with you, I wouldn't. I have already completely ruled it out. There's a sentimental part of me that would love to be involved again. Really I am not sure my face can take that sort of punishment any more."
So not even a small cameo?
"Why would you want to do it if it was just a couple of shots? When you've been 1 of 1, why would you want to be 1 of 13?"
Scullibundo said:http://www.latinoreview.com/news/jo...ough-of-middle-earth-thank-you-very-much-8416
John-Rhys Davies refuses to join The Hobbit.
Movie 2 isnt the pre-LOTR thing anymore. They decided to split the hobbit in two and get rid of the bridge film idea.WyndhamPrice said:I think they were either going to maybe use him to play Gloin or use him in movie 2 where they'll probably work in as many cameos as they can from LOTR.
WyndhamPrice said:I do wish Christopher Lee was younger so we could have him do Saruman again when Gandalf visits the White Council. He said he's too old to travel to New Zealand. Hopefully he'll get to be Smaug's voice.
Bit-Bit said:They need to call James Cameron and get him to let them use his CG team to work a younger computer generated Ian Holm. Shoot it like the first 40 minutes of Curious Case of Benjamin Button. Somebody else's head with Ian Holm's younger cg face.
It's not even like Ian Holm has it in him to do a 360 day shoot which is what the hobbit will be. He is a very old man. CGI changes or not you can't make him actually young enough to handle such a long shoot. He is nearly EIGHTY. No one that age can play the lead in back to back year long shoot of a epic movie. It's absurd to even contemplate.PhoenixDark said:James Cameron can keep his disappointing CGI to himself. I like what Jackson and Del Toro will do with WETA, CG and puppet wise
Cheebs said:It's not even like Ian Holm has it in him to do a 360 day shoot which is what the hobbit will be. He is a very old man. CGI changes or not you can't make him actually young enough to handle such a long shoot. He is nearly EIGHTY. No one that age can play the lead in back to back year long shoot of a epic movie. It's absurd to even contemplate.
"I think the script, because I have read it, plays very much to Guillermo's strengths, as I've seen them." So spake Gandalf! He also says that this time the script was very specifically written to his strengths as the character. "As Peter has said, they loved writing Gandalf [for The Hobbit] because they knew who they were writing him for," he told SciFi Wire. "There are a lot of characters in The Hobbit including, crucially, Bilbo, and they don't know who's going to play Bilbo. So it's extremely attractive that this part has been written for me. The other Gandalf was written for, well, just as Gandalf. There's lots for me to enjoy, in all sorts of ways. And I couldn't be happier. But I'm sworn to secrecy. I'm not to say anything at all about the script."
beelzebozo said:i love mckellen as gandalf. i love peter jackson. i love how "authentic" the LOTR trilogy felt. and i think THE HOBBIT is stronger, more enjoyable--and thankfully a bit more whimsical--source material from which to work.
beelzebozo said:story over on chud with ian mckellen talking about this
and it sounds awesome
i love mckellen as gandalf. i love peter jackson. i love how "authentic" the LOTR trilogy felt. and i think THE HOBBIT is stronger, more enjoyable--and thankfully a bit more whimsical--source material from which to work.
this shit is ooooon
Ceres said:Peter Jackson comes from New Zealand says to me: Sir Ian, I want you to be Gandalf the Wizard. And I said to him: You are aware that I am not really a wizard?
CENOBITE said:Wow, wasn't this guy on the original OFFICE show? Wow, even tho I do like Tennant... this guy looks perfect for the part!
Cheebs said:It's not even like Ian Holm has it in him to do a 360 day shoot which is what the hobbit will be. He is a very old man. CGI changes or not you can't make him actually young enough to handle such a long shoot. He is nearly EIGHTY. No one that age can play the lead in back to back year long shoot of a epic movie. It's absurd to even contemplate.
Teh Hamburglar said:2) Weird molester look