f13.net

They better get someone really good to do it if they even bother.

Dear One Ringers,

As you know, there's been a lot of speculation about The Hobbit. We are often asked about when or if this film will ever be made. We have always responded that we would be very interested in making the film - if it were offered to us to make.

You may also be aware that Wingnut Films has bought a lawsuit against New Line, which resulted from an audit we undertook on part of the income of The Fellowship of the Ring. Our attitude with the lawsuit has always been that since it's largely based on differences of opinion about certain accounting practices, we would like an independent body - whether it be a judge, a jury, or a mediator, to look at the issues and make an unbiased ruling. We are happy to accept whatever that ruling is. In our minds, it's not much more complex than that and that's exactly why film contracts include right-to-audit clauses.

However, we have always said that we do not want to discuss The Hobbit with New Line until the lawsuit over New Line's accounting practices is resolved. This is simple common sense - you cannot be in a relationship with a film studio, making a complex, expensive movie and dealing with all the pressures and responsibilities that come with the job, while an unresolved lawsuit exists.

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.

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.

Several years ago, Mark Ordesky told us that New Line have rights to make not just The Hobbit but a second "LOTR prequel", covering the events leading up to those depicted in LOTR. Since then, we've always assumed that we would be asked to make The Hobbit and possibly this second film, back to back, as we did the original movies. We assumed that our lawsuit with the studio would come to a natural conclusion and we would then be free to discuss our ideas with the studio, get excited and jump on board. We've assumed that we would possibly get started on development and design next year, whilst filming The Lovely Bones. We even had a meeting planned with MGM executives to talk through our schedule.

However last week, Mark Ordesky called Ken and told him that New Line would no longer be requiring our services on the Hobbit and the LOTR 'prequel'. This was a courtesy call to let us know that the studio was now actively looking to hire another filmmaker for both projects.

Ordesky said that New Line has a limited time option on the film rights they have obtained from Saul Zaentz (this has never been conveyed to us before), and because we won't discuss making the movies until the lawsuit is resolved, the studio is going to have to hire another director.

Given that New Line are committed to this course of action, we felt at the very least, we owed you, the fans, a straightforward account of events as they have unfolded for us.

We have always had the greatest support from The Ringers and we are very sorry our involvement with The Hobbit has been ended in this way. Our journey into Tolkien's world started with a phone call from Ken Kamins to Harvey Weinstein in Nov 1995 and ended with a phone call from Mark Ordesky to Ken in Nov 2006. It has been a great 11 years.

This outcome is not what we anticipated or wanted, but neither do we see any positive value in bitterness and rancor. We now have no choice but to let the idea of a film of The Hobbit go and move forward with other projects.

We send our very best wishes to whomever has the privilege of making The Hobbit and look forward to seeing the film on the big screen.

Warmest regards to you all, and thanks for your incredible support over the years.

We got to go there - but not back again ...

http://film.guardian.co.uk/news/story/0,,1987929,00.html

Essentially NewLine are saying "Peter Jackson already made $250 million from those films, that's more than enough for one man, he can't see how much loot our accountants are hiding".

neither is going to agree most likely, so who is going to be the next directer?

I think what is boils down to is: New line is handling money like a major studio now, and Jackson feels like he should get money for raising New line studio to the next level of film-making.

New Line, like all the now major studios, doesn't want to let anyone know how much profit they are making from the movies, because then the people responsible might want a bigger cut. They are being cunts. The studios use accounting tricks to dick talent out of money they are entitled to.

I think what is boils down to is: New line is handling money like a major studio now, and Jackson feels like he should get money for raising New line studio to the next level of film-making.

Our attitude with the lawsuit has always been that since it's largely based on differences of opinion about certain accounting practices, we would like an independent body - whether it be a judge, a jury, or a mediator, to look at the issues and make an unbiased ruling. We are happy to accept whatever that ruling is. In our minds, it's not much more complex than that and that's exactly why film contracts include right-to-audit clauses.

Doesn't sound like it to me...

But Essentially New Line is singing the same tune,

http://film.guardian.co.uk/news/story/0,,1987929,00.html (http://film.guardian.co.uk/news/story/0,,1987929,00.html)

They say that Jackson is the greedy one.

I don't really care either way though, but if production were to lapse past the deadline MGM put on the rights then MGM might just grab Jackson again for the film anyways.  I think alot of the problems involved might be because of the time issue.  New Line really wants to prove that they are in the drivers seat of the Lord of the rings.

Why would a director care about accounting practices, he wants money, and New Line screwed him out of it, I think we can all agree on that.

*Side-note: Peter Jackson made a puppet film before Lord of the Rings, I didn't wanna post anything in the main article about it because I really don't know much about it.

I recall reading that a similar situation occured with Forrest Gump, so that they didn't have to pay the author much of hundreds of millions that the movie made.  So, he's refused to sell the rights for the sequel to them, saying that he couldn't in good conscience have a movie made that was a sequel to one that wasn't a success. 

Actually I think Jackson's prior movie was Heavenly Creature, the quaint story of a pair of NZ school girls who conspire to kill (or accidentally kill) one of their mother's who happens to want to stop their love for each other.

Prior to that was the puppet movie Meet the Feebles (not so good IMO), Brain Dead (a splatter movie to end all splatter movies) and Bad Taste (the low-budget splatter movie to end all low-budget splatter movies).

To steal the tag-line off a New Zealand soft drink - "Peter Jackson, world famous in NZ"

Damn, I like the way that guy thinks.

But Essentially New Line is singing the same tune,

http://film.guardian.co.uk/news/story/0,,1987929,00.html (http://film.guardian.co.uk/news/story/0,,1987929,00.html)

They say that Jackson is the greedy one.

I am *sure* we've had this discussion before. With the same people, saying the same stuff.

Actually I think Jackson's prior movie was Heavenly Creature, the quaint story of a pair of NZ school girls who conspire to kill (or accidentally kill) one of their mother's who happens to want to stop their love for each other.

Prior to that was the puppet movie Meet the Feebles (not so good IMO), Brain Dead (a splatter movie to end all splatter movies) and Bad Taste (the low-budget splatter movie to end all low-budget splatter movies).

To steal the tag-line off a New Zealand soft drink - "Peter Jackson, world famous in NZ"

Was Brain Dead the one with the line "I kick ass for the lord!"?

Yep, although when I saw it, it was called Dead Alive.  I actually saw Bad Taste and Dead Alive on VHS back around the time each of them came out here.  It wasn't until I looked up Peter Jackson's credits on IMDB after seeing the first two LotR movies that I found out they were all done by the same guy, which was shocking to say the least.

Yep, although when I saw it, it was called Dead Alive.  I actually saw Bad Taste and Dead Alive on VHS back around the time each of them came out here.  It wasn't until I looked up Peter Jackson's credits on IMDB after seeing the first two LotR movies that I found out they were all done by the same guy, which was shocking to say the least.