Peter Jackson passed over for The Hobbit and LOTR Prequel by New Line

Taken from an e-mail PJ sent to theonering.net:

Quote:

---

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 ...

---

I'm very upset and disgusted by this news, and rest assured I won't be seeing whatever crock they put out without Jackson at the helm. If they have any scruples WETA, McKellen, Serkis, Weaving and Howard Shore won't join either, and then the whole thing will really be revealed for the pile of crap its destined to be now. How can New Line be as treacherous as this? I mean even if you don't like the films you could clearly see the effort Jackson put into them and to not be able to conclude them is a travesty for him, his production team and every fan worldwide.

I just hope the uproar will cause New Line to change their minds before its too late.

Ah, it's going to be rubbish. And whoever picks it up knows they have no chance of ever making one as good as Jackson managed, so it will be even worse because they won't care.

A pity. The original films weren't brilliant, but they are entertaining, and alot of effort went into the visuals, and atmosphere which Jackson got pretty spot on. Without that atmosphere the film simply won't work.

the rings movies were boring as hell anyway......

3 full movies of a bunch of people walking to a volcano.....please...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ronin

the rings movies were boring as hell anyway......

3 full movies of a bunch of people walking to a volcano.....please...

---

Well that is basically the story told in the books...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ronin

the rings movies were boring as hell anyway......

3 full movies of a bunch of people walking to a volcano.....please...

---

Les goûts et les couleurs, on ne dispute pas.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

HOW DARE YOU !! BARBARIAN !! :wall:

~:cheers:

I never really like Jackson's style. Too long and overblown and it never really strikes you deep when it's supposed too.

Although it could be worse I suppose...

https://img72.imageshack.us/img72/90...thobbitcw1.jpg

With Shyamalan casting himself as the lead role.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ronin

the rings movies were boring as hell anyway......

3 full movies of a bunch of people walking to a volcano.....please...

---

I walked out halfway the first one. That was 12,50 euro wasted.
:coffeenews:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ronin

the rings movies were boring as hell anyway......

3 full movies of a bunch of people walking to a volcano.....please...

---

Yeah but it wasn't though was it, really? I mean if you're going to make a ridiculous comment you could at least try and make it plausible.

https://img79.imageshack.us/img79/75...ehobbitbl6.jpg

Hehe

At least it won't be 5 hours long.

Not that fussed. Jackson's take on LOTR was very dark, and I liked that. The Hobbit however is a kids story, and reads like one compared to LOTR. I don't know if PJ has it in him to do The Hobbit in that less dark way. There aren't many Spielbergs out there whose range of movies go from ET to Schindlers List.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Blind King of Bohemia

Yeah but it wasn't though was it, really? I mean if you're going to make a ridiculous comment you could at least try and make it plausible.

---

I don't know about Ronin, but I actually walked out because during scene after scene I just couldn't contain my laughter. It was all so - so amateurish, so ridiculously overstated and totally devoid of drama. By the time this army of black creatures (don't remember what it's called) came on screen, hampered by plastic hump-backs and a severe lack of acting capabilities (or dentistry, for that matter) my companions advised me to withdraw to the lobby and light one up, which I was only too happy to do.

I walked out half way because I couldn't stand the Hobbits accents. I guess somewhere it must be written that heroes in any fantasy film must have over the top, fruity English accents, but I just couldn't deal with the, 'Oh Gandalf! It is truly grand to see you again!' crap over and over.

Fine, give them Euro accents for a swords and shields and magic feel, but tone it down a little, for God's sake.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Proletariat

I walked out half way because I couldn't stand the Hobbits accents. I guess somewhere it must be written that heroes in any fantasy film must have over the top, fruity English accents, but I just couldn't deal with the, 'Oh Gandalf! It is truly grand to see you again!' crap over and over.

Fine, give them Euro accents for a swords and shields and magic feel, but tone it down a little, for God's sake.

---

It is that corniness that makes many children's movies so hard to stomach. It has earned Harry Potter no shortage of salacious nicknames in Dutch which I shall not reproduce here for fear of being smitten by Your Moderateness.
:bow:

I liked all three of them (I took them for what they were) and think a Hobbit movie would be fun (seeing the dragon in a similar fashion as the Balrog would be sweet), but I don’t think PJ is the only person capable of making it, just the most logical.

Hobbits couldn't have any other sorts of accents could they?

I mean you can't imagine a hobbit with a funny hat, a thin cigarette, and a deep French accent lounging around in his garden, possibly throwing things at passing ringwaithes, if he could be bothered.

I can understand why fans of the series could be upset, although having
watched the last film on tele last night, I can say I wasn't very taken with any
of the films. More so due to the pathetic nature of the two main hobbits and
certain other aspects, rather than accents in particular. To walk out of a film for
that reason alone seems ridiculous.

Perhaps now it will be toned down for you, though.

I quite enjoyed the films - i thought the acting was okay, and the battle scenes impressive, all in all good films :2thumbsup:

at the time i loved them...now not so much

i loved the films. i can see why some people would walk out because of the length, and they coudlnt stomach that(which is a lttle whacky), but because the accents were "bad", that IS totally ridiculous.

CLERKS II Tells it like it is about the rings movies
YOUTUBE Link
Warning: language

couldn´t have said it better myself :2thumbsup:

The books were rubbish where the movies were actually entertaining. They weren't, of course, top-of-the-line, but the first two were actually a notch or two above your average action movie. The third one got old halfway through that big battle near the white tower... but not as old as the books were by page two. :smash:

It wasn't the accents alone. The jarring pastel look I remember most of the scenes having coupled with a story I've never thought much of set up the accents to be the straw that broke the camel's back.

The story was written with more emphasis on the setting than a character plot or action plot, and I could never really get past that. As a movie it seemed even more silly, imho.

Anyway, I'll bid the thread adieu before I burn too many bridges by insulting such a Orgah popular film, but none of you Tolkein fanboys are ever allowed to make fun of Kevin Costner's Robin Hood if you think accents are such a minor issue in making a decent film.

Edit: AdrianII: Salacious names, eh? PM plz!11

I never quite understood why they didn't just fly the hobbits over mount doom and just threw the Ring in it. That said, I enjoyed the books a lot, and the movies too. Frodo, however, got on my nerves in all three of the movies which is a shame, since he isn't half as irritating and...feminine... in the books.

:balloon2:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Proletariat

Edit: AdrianII: Salacious names, eh? PM plz!11

---

They would suffer all too grievously in translation, mylady.
Suffice it to say that they involve the exploitation of Mr Potter's manly parts and fundament in ways that would be contrary to the spirit of childrens' amusement.
:toff:

What Kevin Costner used in Robin Hood was no accent.
'Twas an abomination unto Nuggin!

The first movie was the only good one. Frankly, the really, really, REALLY gay overtones with the hobbits got old very fast, and the lack of blood completely ruined the rest of the series. But the first was a decent, entertaining adventure movie.

The books, by the way, start out well, but they turn into the freakin' bible halfway through. it makes them unreadable.

I very much enjoyed both the books and the films. The way it looks like New Line is heading now, it seems I won't be seeing the Hobbit afterall. A shame.

Ajax

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dutch_guy

Frodo, however, got on my nerves in all three of the movies which is a shame, since he isn't half as irritating and...feminine... in the books.

---

With his squeaking and groaning! GAH! Irritating :furious3:.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zorba

Frankly, the really, really, REALLY gay overtones with the hobbits got old very fast...

---

and

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rythmic

With his squeaking and groaning! GAH! Irritating :furious3:.

---

...would be the other aspects that began to niggle away, I have to say.