Or no Hobbits at all...

[alatar]

Not to takes sides, but I'm not sure why the Estate would not want more films to be made. Surely the glory and fame of Peter Jackson's films has died, or at least has waned, and so for the Estate, another go at the movies can only increase books sales and cash flow (whether or however they get a cut) - as the other movies obviously did.

[Sauron the White]

Alatar ... my statement that the Estate may not want additional films made is based on many posts here and on other sites where people of a Purist stripe keep saying the films should not have been made and do not want the others made either.

[alatar]

Maybe I'm misunderstanding things. This thread, which I've been reading, has had lots of talk about the Estate getting their due. In cash. Why then wouldn't they want more?

[Boromir88]

Alatar ... my statement that the Estate may not want additional films made is based on many posts here and on other sites where people of a Purist stripe keep saying the films should not have been made and do not want the others made either.~Sauron the White

They may not want movies to be made at all, but they aren't trying to block The Hobbit from being made, they are trying to block New Line from making it. Quite understandable, if New Line didn't honor the contract, you wouldn't want those figure fudgers involved in The Hobbit where they can "forget" to pay your proper due yet again.

[William Cloud Hicklin]

22. Under the 1969 agreements, United Artists obtained the right, among other things, to make films based on the Literary Works and agreed, among other things, to pay [Tolkien and his publishers] a total of 7.5% of the "Gross Receipts" from any films based upon the Literary Works after a contractually-defined "Artificial Payment Level" is reached (hereinafter referred to as the "Gross Receipts Participation" or "Participation"). The 1969 Agreements expressly define "Gross Receipts" to include "all moneys derived by the distributor of the photoplay" less certain defined "off-the-top" expenses. The 1969 Agreements define the "Artificial Payment Level" as that point at which the "Gross Receipts" exceed 2.6 times the defined "final cost of production of the photoplay," plus certain other defined costs.

The repeated use of defined implies that each of these terms is defined within the four corners of the contract.

Allegations of New Line financial shenanigans tomorrow.

[Sauron the White]

Well it looks like we are closer to having more information.

The 1969 Agreements expressly define "Gross Receipts" to include "all moneys derived by the distributor of the photoplay" less certain defined "off-the-top" expenses.

So based on this clause, is money taken in by a theater showing LOTR but not sent to NL part of the gross receipts?

And hopefully we will see those definitions of expenses.

Sadly - or happily, I will be gone from the electronic world for one week so will catch up on my return.

[William Cloud Hicklin]

So based on this clause, is money taken in by a theater showing LOTR but not sent to NL part of the gross receipts?

No.


Unfortunately the original contracts were not appended to the Complaint (grr- here they'd have to be); so unless and until they're filed with the Court we're still in the dark as to the actual contract language.