Skip to comments.Peter Jackson Running Into Union Trouble on 'The Hobbit'
Posted on 09/28/2010 6:25:25 AM PDT by Immerito
You can be forgiven for being skeptical that "The Hobbit" will ever be made. Back in October 2007, Entertainment Weekly announced on its cover that Peter Jackson would be putting together a prequel to his "Lord of the Rings" films based on the J. R. R. Tolkien book series. Since then, everything has gone wrong: Jackson sued New Line over the rights to the film; the Tolkien family then sued them as well; MGM, one of the two studios planning to distribute the film, ran into the money woes (which are also holding up the James Bond films); Guillermo Del Toro, who was supposed to direct, worked with Jackson for two years before dropping out last May and handing the reins back to him. With Jackson taking over, and Ian McKellen, Andy Serkis and Hugo Weaving signed on to reprise their roles, the film was expected to finally be back on schedule. Related: Another blockbuster movie sequel declared 'dead' after troubles
But now Jackson has a more serious problem: The International Federation of Actors, along with the Screen Actors Guild, is discouraging actors to work on the film because of the non-union labor in New Zealand. This is serious business for SAG: Essentially, actors who work on the film, like McKellen and Weaving, would be in violation of the union's bylaws and subject to expulsion from the union. The Hollywood Reporter notes just how rare it is for SAG to be so strident about a big-studio picture.
Jackson isn't happy about it, according to BBC News:
(Excerpt) Read more at movies.yahoo.com ...
Ah. So the union is pissed that people might work outside the union and cost union jobs. So to fix that, they force the film to stop, thus preventing anyone from earning a living - including union. Bottom line, no union jobs. That’s kind of like changing spark plugs once you’ve blown a hole in the side of the engine block.
Ooooooh, didn’t know ents, orks and hobbits were members of a union!
How very Sauran of them!
(I’m really not a LOTR expert - I just stayed at a Holiday Inn last night....)
Why don’t unions have to compete just like companies? Wouldn’t that be nice?
I’m hoping that McKellan, Weaving and any other of the main actors who are union will tell their union to pound sand on this one so that they don’t loose their jobs.
But we will see how this goes. Hopefully, after this muddle is worked out, Jackson won’t treat the story line of “The Hobbit” the same way he treated the story of The Lord of the Rings.
Gandalf, Gollum and Elrond, respectively
Ian McKellen is an uber-lib
Gollum is a CGI character and can be played by anyone
Elrond is a much younger character in the Hobbit and can be played by someone else
Screw em. Screw em all. On with the movie Mr. Jackson.
“Elrond is a much younger character in the Hobbit and can be played by someone else”
I wouldn’t say *much* younger; he is a half-elf, after all, and sixty years to an elf is less time in its reckoning than it is for a human.
Yea, but nobody can make Elrond SOUND like Hugo Weaving. That guy’s voice is a mischevious musical instrument.
Considering that Elrond is well over 2,000 years old, I agree that 60 years is not “much older” at all.
Right. 5960 or so instead of 6000.
That's gonna make a big difference.
Same applies to Gandalf, Arwen, etc.
Elrond is 2000 years old?
He doesn’t look a day over 1990.
Yep, although hopefully Arwen won’t make an appearance in the Hobbit movie; she is supposed to be in Lothlorien at the time.
We’ll see if Legolas makes a cameo appearance in the Mirkwood scenes.
Up to the time of Frodo's arrival in Rivendell:
"About the birthdate of Elros and Elrond theres some errors and ill try to explain them here: according to Lr.`Later Annals of Beleriand., entry 397` The first Age ended with the departure of Eonwe from Beleriand back to Aman the year 597. Same place; entry 325; Elrond was born while Earendil was at sea between the years 525 and 529 ( Elros had not yet emerged into the stories but it is later statet they were twins and the point that he had not yet emerged doesent matter here.) so Elros must have been born at the same time as Elrond; between 525 and 529. In Ut.`The line of Elros, Kings of Numenor` it is told Elros was born 58 years before F.A. ended ( Which was in 597 according to Lr.) and then Elros and Elrond should have been born in F.A.539. I chose to stick with the Annals of Beleriand."
The F.A. ended at 597 making Elrond at that time between 68-72 years old.
The S.A. lasted 3441 years.
And that year Frodo arrived at Rivendell in the T.A. is 3018.
Doing the math Elrond is, drum roll please, between:
6527-6531 years old at the time of The Lord of the Rings.
Film Actors Guild?
Ian McKellen boasted of desecrating hotel bibles because of his stance on homosexuality against the biblical writings on it.
Why didn’t President Obama condemn his activities as he did the pastor who threatened to burn a koran? At least the pastor was vandalizing someone else’s property.
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.