|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
N.E. Brigand
Half-elven
Feb 13 2008, 7:15pm
Post #151 of 342
(14518 views)
Shortcut
|
At least, based on Modtheow's report from the Q&A at Tolkien 2005, it seems that Priscilla Tolkien had seen at least the film of Fellowship.
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
We're discussing The Lord of the Rings in the Reading Room, Oct. 15, 2007 - Mar. 22, 2009!
Join us Feb. 11-17 for "The Ring Goes South".
|
|
|
hanshotfirst1138
The Shire
Feb 13 2008, 7:58pm
Post #152 of 342
(14470 views)
Shortcut
|
|
You'd think that they'd have learned.
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
And with our luck, this could mean a delay for The Hobbit and maybe even cost us del Toro. Really, you'd think that New Line would have learned the last two times they did this :rolleyes:.
Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and good with ketchup.
|
|
|
Oden
Rivendell
Feb 13 2008, 8:45pm
Post #153 of 342
(14473 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Just jumping in the middle of this
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
but I find the different viewpoints interesting. Although I think that all parties involved should get what is owed them legally, I fear a delay because of certain actors that may not be around in years to come. I am speaking specifically of those "return" actors who are getting along in years...you know who I am speaking of.
If a delay happens, I hope we don't loose these actors.
|
|
|
Sunflower
Valinor
Feb 13 2008, 8:50pm
Post #154 of 342
(14472 views)
Shortcut
|
Look, let me state it again, I do NOT hate CT or the Estate. It's just that the TIMING of this whole thing has me suspicious of their motives.
You state that it would be a good thing that the Estate got back the rights, so we could have the Tolkien family's "full blessing" to make the best Hobbit adaptation possible. But as several people have posted on here regarding CT and Priscilla's apparent attitude toward the films (Priscilla never saw them in a theater either, apparently, and makes you think that they went out of their way to rent them on a DVD, once the heat of media pressure was off? ) I have a hard time believing that they want any more adaptations to be made. That statement of CT's that NE Brigand referred to, dated December 10, 2001, that indicated that CT did not "disapprove" of the impending LOTR films (sight unseen by the world at that point), did not sound to me like a willingness to change his opinion and give them some grudging respect. It sounded to me like a bleated mea culpa, a polite nothing for the media who were pressuring him for a statement. Spoken like the gentleman he is, of course; but still, a statement forced under pressure. And not an indication of what he really felt. As to any statements made AFTER the film's release, we have not heard one peep. Sure, he isn't expected to give any, but all indications are that he has not changed his opinion one iota.
And neither, it seems, has the Elder Echelon of the Tolkien family, who are the ones in control of this whole thing. Probably, anyway. Who was the one younger member of the family who spoke out in support of the films, and was disinherited soon after? The Family could simply have censured him in some way about making public statements of such a nature, if that was all he did wrong. But no, he was cast out. I'm sure they had some sort of private quarrel going on, we have no idea. God only knows. But you can bet that the films must have a been part of it. But the timing of that occurrence, too, makes me skeptical.
As to Zaentz being an "ally" I did not mean in literal terms. I merely was trying to say that there seemed to me to be no apparent reason to brand him as an adversary in a lawsuit, either, IF this was a lawsuit about money, rather then one about getting the rights back. CT has indicated it is both. Or it seems to be. Both his timing and his methods seem to be duplicious--he is using Art to get Mammon, and versa vice.
As to your opinions about CT.....yes, yes, we should thank him for all that he has given us, etc etc. Of course I agree. But he is NOT his father. And he is not God.
I often wonder what his father would have thought of his attitude toward the films, if he had been alive. It seems to me his father was a LOT more open-minded. Again, I must refer, ad nauseum, to JRR statement about adaptations, music, art, etc etc. CT it seems to me, is acting as if Homer should be available only in print, and that anything else is pollution. His father would have been the first one to remind him that Homer began as a series of oral histories, and that in the Middle Ages, the spoken word was looked upon with more trust than a mere scroll on paper, which could be re-written. (a weird attitude, but if you think about it, it makes sense.) Should we really believe that JRR on his deathbed, gave to CT a sacred admonition to have the books be pre-eminent? ANd to get back the film rights at all cost, b/c he regretted ever selling them? Maybe he despised his father for selling them, no matter how cash-strapped the family was? Maybe he hated his father's doing that. His attitude mystifies me.
Sorry if this speculation regarding the family offends anyone. I am not trying to offend anybody. I'm just trying to make sense of all this, and wishing I could have been a fly on the wall in so many places. And you don't have to drag out the NARF banner....(as someone said yesterday)....my collection of Tolkien works is just as dog-eared as yours, and will eventually fall just as apart with use too:).
Yes, I have the utmost respect, sympathy, etc for CT< but at this point, The Estate's lack of HONESTY about its motives makes me cynical. I'd feel a lot better if they came out with a statement as to whether or not they were going to allow more films to be made. Of course, such a statement should be voluntary. And NOW is not the time,with the suit going on. But I have a nasty feeling that the only way we'd ever heard from them is if Warner's actualy tries to go ahead with the Hobbit.
It is painful, I know, to see your decades of hard work superceded (albiet temporarily, though I am not so sure of that, in a global sense) by a series of films. I could understand that attitude. But I hope CT understands and appreciates that PJ took almost a decade of his life to make those too. It was not any easier than the task he had set upon, to edit and re-write and release his father's works. Sorry if this statement offends the book purists on here, and yes, I am not a PJ worshipper et al. And OF COURSE they don't owe the filmmakers anything, they don't even owe them even a whisper of public acknowledgement. It isn't their obligation; they don't have any obligation at all.
(This post was edited by Sunflower on Feb 13 2008, 8:59pm)
|
|
|
Sunflower
Valinor
Feb 13 2008, 9:10pm
Post #155 of 342
(14514 views)
Shortcut
|
|
You CANNOT....be freaking....SERIOUS.
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Who was it who made a cartoon about this yesterday? I think we need another.
Forget the Oscars, the end of the Strike, the SAG...oh my God. Forget the Oscar pools you may be having. We should be taking bets on when we're going to hear the official NL LIquidation Announcement. They should just shoot this dying animal and put it out of its misery.
This is beyond EPIC by this point. This may be without modern precident. More epic than Heaven's Gate and UA maybe?
One thing is for sure: After Shaye and Lynne, I'd hate to be Warner's new CEO, Jeff Bewkes, right now. 
(This post was edited by Sunflower on Feb 13 2008, 9:15pm)
|
|
|
grammaboodawg
Immortal
Feb 13 2008, 9:32pm
Post #156 of 342
(14445 views)
Shortcut
|
That is the one reality that should influence everyone's dancing around these legal issues and delays. If these 2 films are going to be done with an effort to maintain and continue the look and feel of LotR, then enough time has been wasted already. By the time they start filming in late 2009 (their original/most recent target), it will have been 10 years since principle photography began in 1999. While the players we're the most concerned with weren't involved until early 2000, give or take a few months doesn't really warrant argument, imho.
I'm getting long in the tooth myself, and time takes on a whole new meaning as the seasons flash by. Some things warrant the opportunity to rise above marketing/lawsuits/and attitudes. All of Jackson's adaptations being realized, to me, falls into that category. They're part of filmic history... and something that will be held up as an example of classic filmmaking both in production and quality.
 
Trust him... The Hobbit is coming!
"Barney Snow was here." ~Hug like a hobbit!~ "In my heaven..."
TORn's Observations Lists
|
|
|
AinurOlorin
Half-elven
Feb 13 2008, 9:36pm
Post #157 of 342
(14445 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Mayber Mordor can wait 20 years. . . I don't want to wait 20 minutes! lol
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Yet I agree with him on one thing. . . Drop New Line. Time Warner is the parent company, let them strip New Line of all Hobbit privelage, and continue forward with the film as scheduled, and leave New Line to pay up to Christopher and Company, even if it means handing over the entirety of what's left of the company.
"Hear me, hounds of Sauron, Gandalf is here! Fly if you value your foul skins, I will shrivel you from tail to snout if you step within this circle!"
"Do not be to eager to deal out death in judgement. Even the very wise cannot see all ends."
|
|
|
Altaira
Superuser
Feb 13 2008, 9:45pm
Post #158 of 342
(14448 views)
Shortcut
|
I made the same mistake at first. Look at the date on the Variety article. It's from December, and was already discussed in a thread here on Main.
*hands Sunflower a paper bag* Take some deep breaths! 
Koru: Maori symbol representing a fern frond as it opens. The koru reaches towards the light, striving for perfection, encouraging new, positive beginnings.
"Life can't be all work and no TORn" -- jflower
"I take a moment to fervently hope that the camaradarie and just plain old fun I found at TORn will never end" -- LOTR_nutcase
TORn Calendar
|
|
|
Ainu Laire
Tol Eressea
Feb 13 2008, 10:28pm
Post #159 of 342
(14469 views)
Shortcut
|
That comment was not towards you, but Tolkien Forever. Sorry that you got that interpretation, friend!
My LJ
My art site
|
|
|
Ainu Laire
Tol Eressea
Feb 13 2008, 10:51pm
Post #160 of 342
(14427 views)
Shortcut
|
Me and my 'l33t art skillz' with paint ;)
Thankfully it *was* an old article, so I'll leave Stick Figure Cartoon Part 2 for when we get more news about this interesting affair between NL and everyone xD
My LJ
My art site
|
|
|
fryguy34167
The Shire
Feb 13 2008, 11:40pm
Post #161 of 342
(14426 views)
Shortcut
|
Nice analogy, however, instead of thinking of it like an apartment manager being responsible for paying rent to a landlord should a tennent fail to make payments, think of it in terms of if you sublet and apartment to someone else and they fail to make payments of rent to the landlord. see where i am headed now? you, the assignor, have signed over the right to rent the apartment to the assignee. this, however, does not release you from your responsibility to pay the landlord should your assignee default on his obligation to you.
As to contracts, they are fairly easy to void for the most part. In this case, Zaentz like felt that it was more profitable for him to leave things in tact and try and get paid than to void the contract for reasons of non-performance. Your point about failure to perform leading to financial sanctions rather than recision is true up until a point. That point being unless one side wants out of the contract. In that case should there be a material breach of contract, of which non payment of the amount owed would certainly constitute such a material breach, Voiding the contract would certainly be at the discretion of the injured party. So here we have a case of party C in breach of its obligation to party B to pay party A. Party C (New Line) was obligated to party B (Zaentz) by contract with party B to pay A (TE). Again, merely speculation, but party C's breach or shall we say non-performance of its obligation to pay party A would also put party B in breach of its contract with party A.
The above was simply to illustrate my ideas for how the TE could wind up getting the rights back to the films and how they may not end up going back to Zaentz. I have never stated that this would be exactly what will happen with any certainty, but I do believe that this is what TE's lawyers will attempt to argue. This based upon the fact that I feel that TE first priority is a recovery of control over their father's creations as opposed to cash which I do not really think they need.
And yes I do have experience with contracts. I cannot speculate however one what the going rate for an assignment of film rights was in the late 1960's. By today's standards, if you look at what Rowlng got for Harry Potter I would say that it is indeed a very poor contract.
|
|
|
Sunflower
Valinor
Feb 13 2008, 11:42pm
Post #162 of 342
(14428 views)
Shortcut
|
LOl Altaira....
an airsickness bag, to be sure.
I feel like one of the Losties, right after crawling out of the plane....
We're stranded on the Island now, and we need to find that water source, quick!
(still have faith it is out there....as long as it doesn't take another 2 yrs to "get off the Island.,...."
|
|
|
overlithe64
Rivendell
Feb 13 2008, 11:45pm
Post #163 of 342
(14420 views)
Shortcut
|
As I said...I'm not a purist by any standard...But when you sell the rights to your work..you kinda lose the right to complain about others interpretation of said works. Personally I didn't like some of the changes made for the film...others I applauded, but it had nothing to do with being a purist...it was just my personal vision clashing with PJs.....
Everyone who reads or watches LOTR is affected by it, not all the same...but affected none-the-less. People interpret based on where they come from, emotionally spiritually ect. I personally watch Frodo board the ship at the havens and cry because I can see him going to find peace and healing before he finally dies....Someone I work with saw him die...I believe Elijah thought the crossing was Frodo's death as well....So intent aside, you cannot stop people from seeing what they will see...or creating what it is they saw as the interpretation.
|
|
|
orcbane
Gondor
Feb 13 2008, 11:46pm
Post #164 of 342
(14439 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Go to court, while making the movies.
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
I feel they should go to court and battle it out there...but go ahead and make the movies now. If the Estate wins the case and big money, NL will have made the $ from proceeds of The Hobbit to pay them, if the Estate case is weak or loses, they do not stop the movies from being made.
I thought Zaentz already sued NL (and won or got a settlement) once before for Lotr. This is Zaentz's 2nd suit I think ?.
An Ent juggling spikey things ?
|
|
|
MrCere
Sr. Staff
Feb 13 2008, 11:49pm
Post #165 of 342
(14441 views)
Shortcut
|
This part makes it seem likely,
" “I would rather not discuss the films.” She did not find the Black Riders remotely frightening in the film."
I wish there was an exact quote of course but this is really an excellent report. Thanks for sharing it!
The cake is a lie
The cake is a lie
The cake is a lie
The cake is a lie
The cake is a lie
|
|
|
fryguy34167
The Shire
Feb 13 2008, 11:57pm
Post #167 of 342
(14428 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Continuing to film while litigation is underway
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
I do not see this as a possibility. 2 reasons would be that the plaintiffs in this case have asked for the court to halt production while it is in litigation and that the amount required to produce these films is enormous. Too much of a financial risk for the studio to be able to underwrite without knowing first if they will prevail in court.
|
|
|
Sunflower
Valinor
Feb 13 2008, 11:59pm
Post #168 of 342
(14419 views)
Shortcut
|
WHY they are so desperate all of a sudden to get the rights back, after having had a decade to try?
Call me disrespectful, but I DO think the Estate should make unequivocally clear to the global public, once this legal business is over, whether or not they would ever sanction the making of any more films. Are they going to allow the Hobbit to go forward or not? And they'd better have a very good excuse, if they decide no. There's too much at stake. There can't be all this hemming and hawing around, because we are not likely to ever see this divine constellation of artistic talent,that is lining up, for a LONG LONG time. Yes or no? It's not too much to ask. It's the waiting that is agonizing. A straightforward answer I can live with.
And if there's any indication that the answer is no (and at some point they will be hopefully pressured for a reply) they'd better be prepared for a huge public relations problem. Some fans out there might be even more upset than I am.
|
|
|
MrCere
Sr. Staff
Feb 14 2008, 12:00am
Post #169 of 342
(14431 views)
Shortcut
|
An independent film financed by really, really rich Tollkienites might be able to do it. Should I start passing around the hat? 
The cake is a lie
The cake is a lie
The cake is a lie
The cake is a lie
The cake is a lie
|
|
|
stormcrow20
Gondor
Feb 14 2008, 12:03am
Post #170 of 342
(14435 views)
Shortcut
|
I'm not worried about it, as long as this....(*thinking of a clean word*)....problem is settled in as timely a manner as possible.
Ian McKellen and Christopher Lee are both in good health and still working. Cate Blanchett is Elven enough that she won't show age for quite a while. It's doubtful Andy Serkis' voice will change much, and, well, they can always use CGI and scotch tape on Hugo Weaving.....
"Good Morning!"
|
|
|
Sunflower
Valinor
Feb 14 2008, 12:03am
Post #171 of 342
(14457 views)
Shortcut
|
Well, what was PJ supposed to do? Have them "go nuclear" like Galadriel did? This one just baffles me. IMO, they were the most frightening he could have made them and have the films remain PG.
I think that quote was just her finding something nice and polite to complain about. I can think of far worse. (Ainu and Gandalf''s missing spells:)
Edit: for Stormcrow:
After 85, "good health" is relative term. NEVER assume anyone at that age will stay in as good health in 3-6 months. Not everyone can be Strom Thurmond. It's even more relative if this thing stretches on another 2-3+ yrs. You don't want the poor guy wheeled to the set and propped up on a bunch of pillows delivering his lines. At the White Council he should be striding back and forth, turning to face various members there, making vigorous gestures. It ties in artistically to the vigorous man from the Trilogy.
Artistic nitpicking, I know, and I am sure CL would *want* to be wheeled to the set if this was filmed 2010 or 2011.and his health had slowed down. He's so enthusiastc about Tolkine that he's try for the part on his deathbed. But there's a limit
(This post was edited by Sunflower on Feb 14 2008, 12:10am)
|
|
|
ShadoFaxs
Rivendell
Feb 14 2008, 12:03am
Post #172 of 342
(14436 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Law suits here, law suits there, law suits everywhere...business as usual...
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
It's Zaentz's second suit. The first is in arbitration...this one is in relation to that...see above posts.
I think TE's suit is like almost all lawsuits...it's really all about the $$$. The request to the court to assign the rights back to TE is typical of suits, just a stick to beat up on the defendent NL. A VERY big stick. Still, I see mucho legal wrangling before that unlikely scenario would ever happen.
Saul Zaentz is know for being one of the canniest, toughest, smartest people in Hollyweird. I will eat this post if he doesn't have the rights as tightly protected as legal contracts can make them. I would be surprised as heck if TE regains the rights. But they will hopefully get at least some of the moeny owed to them.
But it does IMO make it more likely that TE will get some kind of resolution more quickly than not, because NL is under the gun to make the movies. This sort of thing goes on all the tme.
The question, IMO, is how much pressure will TW bring to bear on NL to get the issues cleaned up to the point production can begin. NL in bankruptcy, NL without the revenues from TH, won't bnefit the plaintiffs.
BTW, I believe there have been several artists who went to war and got their $$ from the studios - James Garner for one, and David Duchovny for another (his to the tune of $20 mil).
|
|
|
fryguy34167
The Shire
Feb 14 2008, 12:16am
Post #173 of 342
(14406 views)
Shortcut
|
Ok Sunflower. I am happy to hear that you do not hate CT and the estate. What I fail to understand is why their motives make any difference. I do not think their has ever been any doubt as to what their motives are, to get what they are contractually owed, 7.5% of the gross and to recover control of their father's works. I think both these motives are very reasonable. The estate has not shown any subterfuge in my opinion or any dishonesty regarding their motives. What they are seeking is part of public record now in the form of a court filing with the superior court in LA.
I believe that your concerns are more related to if the estate recovers the rights to control Tolkien's works that a movie will never be made at all. I actually am of the school of thought that a movie would indeed still get made, however it would be with CT having a great deal of say in any adaptations or changes to the story line. This in my opinion, would be a very good thing, as PJ and his partner Fran took way too many liberties with the script in the LOTR. PJ made a fine movie, no argument there. PJ did not however create the definitive LOTR films. Those are still out there waiting to be made by a better director who will have the proper understanding of and respect for Tolkien's work. (Yes I am an admitted purist and proud of it.)
I think this case is more likely because CT will recognize that pandora's box has been opened, the genie is out of the bottle. FIlms have already been made, whether he likes the idea of his father's works being on film or not. Based upon what I have seen from CT, I think he would rather have his vision of his father's works out there on film as the definitive version as opposed to what we have seen so far.
|
|
|
Sunflower
Valinor
Feb 14 2008, 12:21am
Post #174 of 342
(14418 views)
Shortcut
|
According to Kristen Thompson's blog link to the New Yorker (?) profile of new Warner's CEO Jeff Bewkes, he is already under enormous pressure to bring up Warner's stock price. The quote I remember from that article is someone saying that if they were Jeff Bewkes right now, "IMO, he should shoot himself. " YOu can bet that this came from the planet Zoltar, for Bewkes. The last thing he needed was further litigation that strikes at the heart of his hopes for re-invigorating Warner's.
(I know that seems like a funny word to use, but that's what the article made it seem like.)
An interesting side-note is that HarperCollins is owned by Warner's rival News Corp. Which the article said has recently supplanted Warner's as the worlds biggest media conglom. You don't think that Fox, confident of the TE winning the suit, decided to get in a little additional dig at its rival through HarperCollins?
PS. For Fryguy.
Well, I guess we'll just have to wait and see. I am a bit famous for being a Skeptic here. This is just one more thing to be VERY skeptical about. But, to each their own . But the new films are not being directed by PJ, nor written either. They should feel more comfortable with Del Toro at the helm.
And in that case, if you start referring to artistic control by the Estate, my post about having a personal "minder" oversee the writing of the script and being on the set would not be offensive. It would indicate what IMO would be an unrealistic level of artistic control that not even Jo Rowling has with the HP films. They have made many changes that she has not been able to stop.
(This post was edited by Sunflower on Feb 14 2008, 12:29am)
|
|
|
ShadoFaxs
Rivendell
Feb 14 2008, 12:32am
Post #175 of 342
(14407 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Cuz the estate wants their profit participation,
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
...and they're fed up with NL's stonewalling and therefore angry enough to ask for more...just to drive the point home doncha know.
BTW, I still suspect those are empty threats. But it does indicate how rancorous the situation is. Remember, the publishers are in this too, everyone's looking for their $$$.
Meanwhile, the estate isn't making any announcements about Hobbit movies because they can't.
The estate doesn' t control the rights to the films - for now at least, and likely for the forseeable future. Those rights still reside with Tolkien Enterprises unless a judge orders otherwise. It would be pure specualtion on their part to make any pronouncements on movies they don't have rights to hold or resell.
I have a web acquaintence who was formerly a Hollywood entertainment lawyer. He frequently posts over at the Patrick O'brien forum so I headed over there just minutes ago to see if "Max Trainer" (a nom de pen) had posted about this topic.
Indeed he had, in answer to a question regarding the suit's mention of 7.5% of gross...FWIW here's what he said:
"The film rights were aquired by UA back in the '60s then sold outright to Tolkien Enterprises (a.k.a Saul Zaentz).
I've looked at enough contracts from that era to say that it is highly unlikely that an author got an uncapped gross points bump. More typical was a set price plus a bump based on a percentage of film budget not income stream. Not impossible, just highly unlikely.
"Saul already had his lawsuit with New Line over his percentage participation. I assure all that Saul will get every dime that is coming to him. But Saul, easily one of the cagier bas**rds in the Biz, didn't have a pure gross deal with New Line. Since we know that ....Saul owned the film rights outright when he began the New Line negotiation I find it very hard to believe that he allowed himself to be placed in a position where he was behind the 30 year old author deal on profit participation.
"QED the author's [JRRT/TE] deal isn't for pure gross but some sort of adjusted or formulae gross aka net.
Hope this wasn't too convoluted. Short of actually reviewing a copy of the agreement it's the best sort of inferential guess I can come up with. "
So there's a guess of the contratural structure from a guy in the biz, or fomerly in the biz. Max thinks this will end with "NL writing a very big check".
Finally, I don't think TE is overly concerned about Hobbit or LOTR movie fan reaction - I've seen very little evidence so far. They are concerned with revenues owed to them, whatever that sum might be, and rightly so.
|
|
|
|
|
thankyou....well met...
[
