Jackson bids farewell to The Hobbit

He is the flamboyant director whose The Lord of the Rings trilogy picked up 17 Oscars. But Peter Jackson has been cast out of Middle Earth after a row over profits from the $4 billion-plus (£2.1 billion) franchise.

Fans of the fantasy films were dismayed by an e-mail, detailing a dispute between Jackson and the New Line film studio, which the New Zealander sent to a website devoted to matters Tolkien.

It contained explosive news that the most lucrative franchise in Hollywood history after Star Wars will return with a Lord of the Rings prequel. A big-budget version of The Hobbit is also set for production.

But Jackson, a devoted Tolkien fan who battled to bring his vision of Rings to the screen, will not be involved. The director said that he had been removed from the project by New Line. “We have 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,” Jackson’s e-mail to TheOneRing.net fansite read.

Meetings with executives were planned. But Jackson said that last week New Line called his manager to tell him that the company “would no longer be requiring our services on The Hobbit and the prequel”.

New Line was “actively looking to hire another filmmaker for both projects”. This outcome was “not what we anticipated or wanted”, he added. Jackson said New Line would not allow him to make the films unless he first dropped a lawsuit demanding a greater share of the trilogy’s profits.

Matt Dravitzki, Jackson’s assistant at Wingnut films in New Zealand, confirmed that the e-mail was genuine. New Line declined to comment last night, but industry sources said that the company was seeking alternative directors.

Jackson, who earned $200 million from the franchise, according to his lawyers, believes that he is due millions more from merchandising, video and computer games sales income.

According to the Jackson e-mail, the film company used the lure of directing two new Tolkien films as leverage to put the lawsuit to one side. He wrote: “Our manager, Ken Kamins, got a call from the co-president of New Line, 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.”

Jackson refused to tie the making of The Hobbit to a settlement of the lawsuit. He said: “Deciding to make a movie should come from the heart — it’s not a matter of business convenience.” Any compromise on his part would ensure that the Hobbit film was “doomed”.

Jackson said that his removal was due to New Line only having rights to make the new films within a limited period. Almost 40,000 fans have signed a petition urging the film-makers to sign Jackson for The Hobbit. But while they will mourn his departure from the project, the prospect of a Rings prequel remains mouthwatering.

Jackson revealed the existence of a “proposed film . . . covering the events leading up to those depicted in LOTR”. There was speculation that it could utilise the Tolkien writings compiled after his death by son Christopher, such as The Silmarillion. A large amount of background material was published in The History of Middle-earth.

But a prequel, without Jackson’s guiding hand, presents difficulties. It may not receive such a warm welcome from the New Zealand authorities, who made location filming in the country’s spectacular locations cost-effective.

The Hobbit tells how Bilbo Baggins stole from Gollum the ring battled over in the later books while on an adventure in the Misty Mountains with Gandalf and an array of dwarfs.

Jackson didn't just direct the movie, he crafted LOTR.

It was an act of love for the story and the characters, and an ultimate salute to J.R.R. Tolkien.

You don't just run across that sort of passion in the film industry, unless it involves underaged boys.

That being said, I think now that the Hobbit will be about as good as the last two (or the third) Potter films.

I mean, what the heck did they do with Dumbledore's character? The guy's become a raving old loon. I miss Richard Harrison in the role. He brought a level of dignity and "gravitas" to the character. The director in the third film wasn't so interested in setting the proper mood for the film as displaying his morbid fascination for a murderous "whomping willow" that slaughtered random birds as they flew by.

Neither of the last two Potter films conveyed the atmosphere, care or craftsmanship that the first two films brought to the screen. They were cheap immitations. "Wannabes" that failed, although they still were able to deliver a tattered summary of the actual story. That's enough to carry it among die hard fans (me included.)

So really, losing Jackson for "The Hobbit" really is a cutting blow. Too bad, but we can always treasure his work on LOTR. That will always be an eternal masterpiece of directing and secure his place in film history.

"I mean, what the heck did they do with Dumbledore's character? "

Don't even get me started. The movies have completely failed to capture the true spirit of the books, the quirky behavior and droll humor of the character of Dumbledore is gone, replaced by a stern, seemingly always angry autoritarian, whereas the actual character in the books is kind (almost too kind), soft spoken, rarely raises his voice, and almost drifts through the books in a befuddled, child-like innocence (hiding the true nature of the man). That character is Rowlings greatest creation, not Harry or the kids. Dumbledore is well written in the books, Richard Harris as Dumbledore was fantastic, the new guy is horrible.

I give them credit for making the movies, the Goblet Of Fire was an enormous book, and they manages to retain enough story to make sense, but it's too dark -even at her darkest, Rowlings still manages to have FUN. The movies are simply getting ponderous.

"It's hard to feel sorry for Mr. Jackson. Is he having a hard time living on the $200 million he's earned on the trilogy?"

I do - he earned every cent.

I doubt he's missing any meals. (Actually, he's lost a significant amount of weight, he looks good) This isn't about that.

The money was made off his work. Why should'nt he be compensated appropriately? Do artists only "deserve" enough to survive on?

"New Line made a bunch of money? I'd say that was the point of their investing nearly $300 million in the three movies."

I'd say it has more to do with them using the profits of LoTRs to fund their other failed movies, and being their usual greedy selves. Yes, they took a chance, but if they agreed to share the money in a certain way, and are now going back on that, they deserve to lose the lawsuit, and lose HARD.

Until anyone sees the books and the docs from the lawsuit, it's all speculation, but from the quotes in the story, and past experience with Hollywood, I can fully believe they are blackmailing him with the Hobbit movie and a prequel to stave off a lawsuit where he's going to prevail. NLC can surely afford the best of the best in lawyers, and that they are reacting this way speaks volumes.

"Without the enormous gamble of a huge amount of someone else's money, Peter Jackson would be unknown to most of the world."

And the key person here is Peter Jackson. Period. Without him, these movies would not exist. He had the vision. He assembled the vast army of technicians and animators and created an entire company to produce the movies. He entered into the project, which is a long, long story before NLC came into the picture, and he paid his dues, and then some.

Do you begrudge George Lucas any of the money he made? Steven Speilberg? If George Lucas had been stiffed on movie sales and merchandising, would you also say "you made enough, shaddap"? (Lucky for Lucas, he kept ALL of the merchandising, at least for the first one)

Peter Jackson delivered the goods. His lawsuit says that he has not been compensated fairly. Does he not deserve the money? He made the movies. He lived in hell for years toiling to make them happen. Would you put your life on virtual hold for 6-8 years to produce your dream? And then take less than promised and walk away?

I say, if they promised him a percentage and are'nt giving it to him, then they should have the full weight of the law thrown at them. Peter Jackson broke no laws, harmed no one, broke no rules, sacrified far beyond what most people would even consider idly, delivered a product that performed beyond anyone's wildest dreams, yet you think he's just being greedy.

Ever hear of a thing called "honor"?

This is very much like the music business, where people accuse musicians of being greedy, when the labels take over 90% of all products sold. Does an artist only "deserve" 5%? Or is it simply the business as it exists, when it's the only game in town, you gotta play to play? Yes, the record label take a chance on a musician, but it it pays off, the artist deserves at LEAST the same as the investor, not 5%. I've always found that to be repugnant. Without the artist, there is no chance being taken. It's a codependancy, that's rigged heavily and unfairly to one side.

"Greed does not look good on people."

Especially when it's NLC and it's execs who are blackmailing a talented man because they don't want to give him what he earned. If we go by past behavior of movie companies and Hollywood execs in general, I'll side against them everytime, you have not experienced greed, true, unadulterated, greasy greed until you've been in Hollywood.

"I noticed he ain't fighting over the disappointing King Kong money."

Irrelevant.

"Tolkien's heirs probably deserve a lot more of the profits than anyone."

This is the only intelligent statement you've made. If anything, I would have thought Tolkein's estate would have final say over things like this, as they are fierce about protecting J.R.R.'s work, but sadly the Hollywood weasels have final say in this.

Flatly put, I don't trust many to have the same spirit and vision that Jackson would bring to the project. To reject the people who are ready to go NOW with all of the cg, props, sets, knowledge of the material, and vision, presided over by a man who's deeply talented and has a true, respectful love of the material...over dollars, that is the real tragedy here.

If the Hobbit is made, without Jackson, I have grave doubts as to it's quality, and expect a Hollywoodified piece of schlock thats more about merchandising toys and video games than bringing a wonderful and important book to many to life.

Yet again, Hollywood fails to promote art, and instead chooses to line it's pockets. I would not be surprised to see Jackson pull out of Hollywood completely, he has the name and clout and company to go it alone from now one, ala Mel Gibson. Screw New Line Cinema.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.