Del Toro Quits 'The Hobbit'

[Inziladun]

Originally Posted by morwen edhelwen

So, does anyone here think the film is going to be made or not? Opinions?
-Morwen

Oh, I'm pretty sure they'll find a way to get it done. It's been in the planning stages for too long, and they know what a money-maker it has the potential to be.

[davem]

Seems like MGM are clinging on to TH like grim death - even letting Bond go hang http://www.kansascity.com/2010/06/03...risis-hit.html but... wanting to get it done isn't the same thing as actually getting it done ("It is easier to shout stop than to do it" as someone once said. There isn't money out there to throw at movie making & its not certain that an 'adult' Hobbit (ie one aimed at the same audience as the LotR movies) would work - Tolkien tried rewriting TH in 1960 in the style of LotR & gave up after a couple of chapters. A more adult TH risks sacrificing the charm of the original & replacing it with a lot of (3D) sfx.

Add to that the chunk of money New Line has recently had to pay out to the Tolkien Trust for its creative accounting scam on the LotR movies (my thread here http://forum.barrowdowns.com/showthread.php?t=16566) - which may or may not be a one-off payment to the Trust - & I'd say it wasn't all that certain we'll see a TH movie in the very near future (I seriously doubt 2012 is likely now).

[Mithalwen]

Do the movie rights have a shelf life? Book copyright expires eventually though there are ways to extend it so surely you can't have film rights in perpetuity? I am sure there will be a Hobbit film sometime but I really wish that it wouldn't involve Jackson. They are reshowing the films on TV at the moment and I have watched bits (somehow can never quite settle to rewatch all the way through) and while I fully admit that they aren't at their best on a midsize domestic screen, the CGI hasn't aged well IMO. And I still can't see Jackson's elves, Gollum or even dwarves translating particularly well or McKellen's Gandalf. He paints with too broad a brush... So I woud hope for some combination of circumstances that would mean that someone else got a free hand. But I suppose they have gone so far with Jackson...

[Mister Underhill]

Well, IANAL applies here, but it looks to me like The Hobbit will head into the public domain sometime around 2032, which is really no time at all from an Elvish point of view. Although it should be noted, that's the original version of the story, before the ring became the Ring. The second edition was published in 1951, I believe, so 1951 + 95 years equals around the time when I will be relocating to a far green shore, so...

It looks like you're stuck with Jackson for a while.

[Mister Underhill]

Hmm... double-posting again. Twice in one thread. But this fascinating story continues to develop. Here's an article from trade-favorite blog Deadline Hollywood, speculating that Jackson may already be walking back the earlier reported comment from his manager that he would definitely not direct The Hobbit:

Originally Posted by Deadline Hollywood

When Guillermo del Toro vacated the directing chair on two installments of The Hobbit, the prospect of Peter Jackson taking over was labeled a near impossibility by his camp. That seemed to be contradicted a day later by Jackson's own comments to a New Zealand newspaper when he said "If that’s what I have to do to protect Warner Brothers’ investment, then obviously that’s one angle which I’ll explore.” Is Jackson easing his way into the job? According to his manager, Ken Kamins, nothing has changed. Jackson's film commitments are real, though he hasn't told us yet what they are, and Kamins maintains efforts are underway in New Zealand right now to find another director who'll keep the project on track to start production in late 2010 or early 2011.

Per Kamins: "When Peter says that directing himself is one angle he'd explore if he had to, that means, if we can't find another director who is right for the films that everyone can agree on, and, if at that time, the other studios involved in his other projects would relieve him of his obligations.'"

I will be surprised if Jackson doesn't direct, it solves too many problems for it not to happen. He co-wrote the films and is fully staked creatively. Based on the job he did on The Lord of the Rings, nobody does Middle Earth better and it would be daunting to try. Many of the big directors who could pull it off are booked, like Alfonso Cuaron (the 3D space film Gravity with Robert Downey Jr.) Bryan Singer (directing Jack the Giant Killer early next year and producing X-Men: First Class this fall) or Sam Raimi (World of Warcraft, plus why would he want to re-engage when MGM/New Line originally chose del Toro over him?). If they enlist a hot newcomer for such a gargantuan creative task, Jackson would be so tied up in a mentoring role that he might as well direct himself.

Interesting analysis, especially the info about top directing prospects who are already booked. It does make sense for Jackson to step in if he doesn't want to set pre-production back months as a new director gets up to speed and puts his own stamp on things, but the big question that the article doesn't address is that MGM's cash flow problems are still unresolved.

In a way I almost have a morbid curiosity about how Jackson would handle TH at this point. Has he grown in the intervening decade? I thought there was some nice stuff in Kong where he was forced to rely on letting the actors (even a heavily CGI-ified actor) tell the story with looks and some subtle nuance (for Jackson anyway) rather than on-the-nose dialogue. Will some maturity and restraint reveal itself? How has working with Del Toro on the project for a couple of years affected his take?

Ultimately I agree with davem that a 2012 release date is looking increasingly unlikely, but it's fun to speculate.

As a bonus, here's an interview with Del Toro given prior to his departure from TH. In it, he talks at length about his view of what a producer's role should and should not be. I suspect that if Jackson's view wasn't pretty close to Del Toro's, GDT wouldn't have hung in there for two years.

[PrinceOfTheHalflings]

Originally Posted by Mithalwen

Do the movie rights have a shelf life? (

A good question.

Usually movie rights are only sold for a limited period - with a "use it or lose it" clause. If the movie is not made within the specified period then the rights revert to the original owner.

Tolkien famously sold the movie (and merchandising) rights to TH and TLOTR in the late sixties. Forever. In return he got a lump sum of cash and a % of any future movie profits. This agreement is still in effect, but the rights themselves were resold to a fellow called Saul Zaentz in 1976 for a large sum. Zaentz then licensed out the rights to TLOTR to New Line Cinema for (I think) 8 years. During that time New Line were allowed to make films based on TLOTR, issue merchandise, publish tie-in books and use the character names and other trademarks in certain contexts.

There is a slight complication - when the rights were resold to Zaentz in 1976, the distribution rights to TH remained with the previous owners (for reasons that are not entirely clear). So Warner Bros currently own the rights to make TH, but MGM own the rights to distribute the movie. Confusing? You Bet! Complicated? Well, with MGM totally broke, yes.

The rights to make the movie will eventually revert to Zaentz, but MGM will still own the distribution rights, so the problem will still exist. However Warner Bros (or should I say their parent company Time Warner) are currently trying to buy MGM - if this is successful then I would say problem solved.

[Folwren]

This might sound ridiculous, since to my knowledge he has never done anything like a fantasy or sci-fi movie, but what if Peter Wier did it? He does a good job of making a movie in the spirit of the story from which he is basing it, without adding a lot of unrealistic parts, or crazy, out of the way lines. But he's not done any of this type of movie, as I said.

[Mister Underhill]

Peter Weir's name was frequently brought up in speculative lists even in the original director search. Based on his resume, I never quite got why he was so often suggested. I have a sneaking feeling that it's based mainly on the fact that he was one of the first to employ Billy Boyd after LotR.

I think Weir is an interesting director, but I would judge the odds of him getting involved with The Hobbit as extremely slim. He does films for grown-ups, complete with smoldering sexuality, ambiguity, and restrained understatement -- all qualities which aren't really in the Peter Jackson playbook. Besides, I've never seen that sense of humor and whimsy from him that I think a director really needs to have to do credit to Tolkien's novel. Also, Weir's more of an artist than a gun-for-hire (Green Card notwithstanding). He'd definitely be the type of guy who would want to make the project his own if he were to come on to it.

You know whose name I'm surprised I've never seen on any of these lists, especially the original search? Brad Silberling. I thought he did a fine job with the Lemony Snicket movie. I thought that should have been a bigger hit, but I guess it had a particular sort of humor which might not have translated well overseas. And now, well, let's face it, the crime against cinema known as Land of the Lost has probably relegated him to the B- or C-list for the foreseeable future. You don't want that stink on The Hobbit.

[Morthoron]

Originally Posted by Mister Underhill

You know whose name I'm surprised I've never seen on any of these lists, especially the original search? Brad Silberling. I thought he did a fine job with the Lemony Snicket movie. I thought that should have been a bigger hit, but I guess it had a particular sort of humor which might not have translated well overseas. And now, well, let's face it, the crime against cinema known as Land of the Lost has probably relegated him to the B- or C-list for the foreseeable future. You don't want that stink on The Hobbit.

But wasn't Peter Jackson a B or C list director prior to the filming of LotR? I seem to recall saying 'Who?' when a friend told me PJ was named as LotR director. The friend then rattled off a few movies that PJ had directed, and I again replied 'Who?'

Honestly, it would appear to me that the Lord of the Rings movies were Jackson's shining moment, because I have not been enamored of his projects prior or since. King Kong? Meh...I prefer the 1933 black & white classic. PJ offered nothing new to the film. And 'Lovely Bones'? Again, nothing really to get all worked up about. I certainly wouldn't go out and buy the DVD for my collection. I saw it on cable and have no interest in seeing it again.

Oh, and I really enjoyed Lemony Snicket, but you are right, Silberling should be consigned to the ninth circle of cinema hell for Land of the Lost.

[Mithalwen]

Originally Posted by Mister Underhill

Peter Weir's name was frequently brought up in speculative lists even in the original director search. Based on his resume, I never quite got why he was so often suggested. I have a sneaking feeling that it's based mainly on the fact that he was one of the first to employ Billy Boyd after LotR.

I think Weir is an interesting director, but I would judge the odds of him getting involved with The Hobbit as extremely slim. He does films for grown-ups, complete with smoldering sexuality, ambiguity, and restrained understatement -- all qualities which aren't really in the Peter Jackson playbook. Besides, I've never seen that sense of humor and whimsy from him that I think a director really needs to have to do credit to Tolkien's novel. Also, Weir's more of an artist than a gun-for-hire (Green Card notwithstanding). He'd definitely be the type of guy who would want to make the project his own if he were to come on to it.

I am one of the Peter Weir advocates but nothing to do with Billy Boyd, I just love his films but to be honest I think I really would have wanted him to do the Rings or something form the Silmarilllion - I can really see him handling Tuor, Idril and Maeglin in Gondolin brilliantly. He really understands the tension of enclosed societies and I can only dream of the more sophisticated LOTR he might have produced. This is the man whose director's cut of Picnic at Hanging Rock is shorter than the released version! Ah well ....