Jackson "wheee!"

email this story
read comments (53)
post a comment

According to a letter from Peter Jackson and Fran Walsh posted late last night on theonering.net, New Line Cinema has parted ways with Jackson/Walsh over a lawsuit that they had brought aainst the distributor tied to Fellowship of the Ring revenues (i.e., product licensing, "differences of opinion", etc.).

The positive-minded Jackson/Walsh had been expecting settlement on the lawsuit, which would then be followed by a deal to start work on The Hobbit plus a Lord of the Rings prequel. However, according to the letter, "last week [New Line bigwig] Mark Ordesky called Ken Kamins" -- Jackson/Walsh's manager -- "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 [Hobbit] 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 [is] 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."

What's really going on here, I believe, is a reflection of the this year's sea-change attitude among distributors and producers towards coddled, overpaid wunderkind types like Jackson -- big-name talents who get rich deals for themselves and their production companies, after which they go off and strain or exceed the budget, and then their sometimes indulgent, overlong film (i.e., King Kong) comes out and does moderately well but not well enough. Result: the wunderkind makes out like a bandit and the studio is left holding the bag.

Image-wise, Universal's King Kong experience with Jackson made him into the ultimate enfant terrible poster boy for indulgent, genius-boy tendencies. Jackson's middle name is "wheeee!" -- it's what makes him what he is. If you make a movie with Jackson, provision #1 in his contract is that he gets to go "wheeee!" all through the making of it. At the end of the day the film will be in some ways awesome/brilliant/ eye-popping and what the fans want, and in other ways indulgent, show-offy, overlong and flooded with fake-looking bullshit CG shots that "wheeee!" types love to create because fake CG shots are so deliriously comic-book "imaginative."

You may make a huge profit with a Jackson film and you may not, but one thing for sure is that he and his New Zealand pallies will make out like kings plus they'll all get to go "wheeee!" for 18 months or two years, on your dime.

I'm basically saying that New Line did a good thing here. The more Peter Jackson gets cut down and has to trim his sails and stop "wheee"-ing his way through movie-making, the better. I say this because I have never suffered so acutely in my moviegoing years...I've never felt so awful, so trapped, so stuck on Devil's Island- with-dysentery as I did while watching the Lord of the Rings trilogy and also the first 70 minutes of King Kong. I just know that the fewer "paints" Jackson has to work with, the better his films will turn out to be.

Ms. Manners is angry<< previous | next >>Smiling faces

Posted by Jeffrey Wells on November 20, 2006 at 9:09 AM

comment #1

Geoff says ...

Yes, this is great news indeed. You couldn't be more right about Peter Jackson Jeff.

Posted by Geoff at November 20, 2006 10:26 AM

comment #2

Rich S. says ...

"What's really going on here, I believe, is a reflection of the this year's sea-change attitude among distributors and producers towards coddled, overpaid wunderkind types like Jackson -- big-name talents who get rich deals for themselves and their production companies, after which they go off and strain or exceed the budget, and then their sometimes indulgent, overlong film (i.e., King Kong) comes out and does moderately well but not well enough. Result: the wunderkind makes out like a bandit and the studio is left holding the bag."

I guess this explains why WB allegedly greenlit that Bryan Singer Superman sequel. Or not.

Posted by Rich S. at November 20, 2006 10:32 AM

comment #3

storymark says ...

New Line will just end up hiring some other "wheee" type director, and will still spend several truckloads of money on the two projects.

Except now, they'll be dealing with fan-boy backlash untill opening day. It'll be Ratner directing X3 times 10.

Posted by storymark at November 20, 2006 10:33 AM

comment #4

The Movie Man says ...

I really like the LOTR movies and Jackson in general but I more or less agree with Jeff's attitude here. Jackson's King Kong was wonderful in places but the damn thing is absurdly overlong with stretches (I'm thinking of some of the material on the boat on the way to Skull Island) that are obviously expendable to even the most typical of viewers. I hope he doesn't bloat Lovely Bones, because it is a wonderful little novel, and, if Jackson uses some restraint, could be another Heavenly Creatures for him, or better

Posted by The Movie Man at November 20, 2006 10:33 AM

comment #5

christian says ...

yeah, let's get rid of these coddled artists who delivered a billion dollar oscar winning trilogy for our company. we need somebody we can exercise some control over -- like mcg. or tim story.

Posted by christian at November 20, 2006 10:36 AM

comment #6

Bart Smith says ...

"I'm basically saying that New Line did a good thing here."

So by that token, I would assume that you think Warner Brothers' decision to bring back Bryan Singer for SUPERMAN RETURNS (AGAIN) is a horrible decision...

Posted by Bart Smith at November 20, 2006 10:42 AM

comment #7

The Movie Man says ...

Don't get me wrong Christian, I'll take Jackson over those yes men any day of the week, but Jackson needs to get in touch with the 120 minute (hell 150 minutes may even suffice) story again, and learn how to nurture a script into a consistent coherent whole. Like I said, no problem with the Rings films, but Kong was so strong in places that its indulgences really put me off, an example being the really hackneyed Heart of Darkness stuff that accomplished nothing beyond pushing the film closer to the 180 minute mark.

Posted by The Movie Man at November 20, 2006 10:46 AM

comment #8

le corbeau says ...

New Line did a good thing in standing up for their right to screw Jackson on the merchandising deal?

I thought Kong was bloated, too, but I find it hard to see why that should make me pick the studio side in a fight over accounting practices.

Posted by le corbeau at November 20, 2006 10:56 AM

comment #9

L.B. says ...

Exactly, christian. I was trying to think of a way to put it and you beat me to it. So, damn you and nice job.

Posted by L.B. at November 20, 2006 11:01 AM

comment #10

Alan Cerny says ...

You have it wrong, Mr. Wells. New Line's cooked the books on the LOTR films for years. And a lot of people got shorted some serious money.

Can PJ be a bloated director? Of course he can. I watched the Extended KONG this weekend and it was too much of a good thing. But don't think for one second that a director who gave this company almost a billion dollar profit is being cut because of that. I think New Line doesn't want its book-cooking to get out. An obscene amount of money was made on the LOTR films and certain people weren't in the loop.

Posted by Alan Cerny at November 20, 2006 11:01 AM

comment #11

L.B. says ...

I'd add that I can only hope that all of our most disappointing works end up pulling in a couple hundred million in profit like KK did.

Posted by L.B. at November 20, 2006 11:04 AM

comment #12

Dixon Steele says ...

And this is a surprise?

Jackson sues New Line for cooking the books and New Line decides not to work with him on the other films...

Talk about a non-event.

Posted by Dixon Steele at November 20, 2006 11:10 AM

comment #13

actionman says ...

i am SO happy that these movies look dead

Posted by actionman at November 20, 2006 11:21 AM

comment #14

Rich S. says ...

By the way, Storymark is dead-on. That sound you hear is all the AICN fanboys sharpening their knives over The Hobbit. They could get Scorsese to direct it and it wouldn't matter. Peter Jackson is an AICN untouchable and Knowles is going to do his damnedest to Pearl Harbor this movie.

Posted by Rich S. at November 20, 2006 11:21 AM

comment #15

JWEgo says ...

Jeff
Control your hate and stupidity.
When New Line announces they reached an agreement by Christmas you will have to eat much crow.

I am your Ego and I know.

Posted by JWEgo at November 20, 2006 11:36 AM

comment #16

JD says ...

Seriously Jeff, you're smarter than this. Taking New Line's side in this argument is ridiculous. The three Lord of the Rings films made a combined $3 billion worldwide (and that doesn't include the 3 or 4 different editions of each film available on DVD). To argue that Walsh and Jackson shouldn't be appropriately compensated is ridiculous. They are the only reason New Line is still a viable company in 2006. New Line's behaviour is delusional and disloyal and they should not be commended for that. The idea that these filmmakers should just roll over and surrender their earnings to the greedy hands of New Line is absurd, no matter how you feel about the Lord of the Rings trilogy. I'm not even much of a fan, but it's crazy to spin the reality of Hollywood into this myth that studios are somehow the victims of filmmaker greed. Studios have been routinely ripping-off filmmakers ever since studios were invented. Hell, that's why they were invented in the first place.

Posted by JD at November 20, 2006 11:49 AM

comment #17

Ju-osh says ...

The LOTR films are now as identified with Jackson as they are with Tolkien in the eyes of the average movie-goer. Removing him from the prequels only sets the studio up for a critical and financial backlash. Could New Line's decision really be over an ongoing lawsuit? Since when do folks in Hollywood need to be friends (or even have a mutual respect) to work with one another if there's money to be made?

Posted by Ju-osh at November 20, 2006 11:49 AM

comment #18

christian says ...

and trust me, i loathed king kong. there wasn't one scene or shot where i felt anything but the crushing weight of a bloated script and bloated phony cg. i mean, i fuckin' prayed for kong to get shot so i could go home.

but jackson is a genuine fan and he meant well. i forgive him. but new line? the tears flow. jeff should know that in the hierachy of film history, it ain't the talent that cooks the books.

Posted by christian at November 20, 2006 11:50 AM

comment #19

dre says ...

Jeff, love your columns but your relative dislike of Peter Jackson is blinding you to the real issue here. New Line did not make some principled stance against fat-cat directors...to come to that conclusion is silly or unresearched. New Line would welcome Jackson with open arms if he dropped or settled his lawsuit. On a separate note...what Jackson is calling for is not unreasonable: 3rd party auditing on New Line's suspicious accounting work. How shamefully greedy of him.

Posted by dre at November 20, 2006 11:57 AM

comment #20

JD says ...

And you know, in the tradition of the X-Men franchise, this probably means the Brett Ratner is in negotiations with New Line right now.

Posted by JD at November 20, 2006 12:01 PM

comment #21

Midwest Doug says ...

The bummer, to me, is that the Hobbit would make a great movie and I don't trust any other director to make it well. Jeff, there's a nice parallel between the Hobbit and Iraq -- at first you think the main task is to destroy the evil dragon/dictator (Smaug/Saddam). But then when that force is gone, there's a war/near-war among the folks who were once united in being terrorized by the baddie.

Posted by Midwest Doug at November 20, 2006 12:07 PM

comment #22

Josh Massey says ...

I would absolutely love New Line to announce Brett Ratner as the "Hobbit" director, if only to hear the wailing of nerd cries from coast to coast. That would be hilarious.

Plus, I really hated the book, so why not hate the movie as well? (Come on, admit it: in the finale, Bilbo is a pussy who deserves to die).

Posted by Josh Massey at November 20, 2006 12:08 PM

comment #23

Haiku Harry says ...

Fuck the Hobbit. Nerds
are ruining movies. Give
real artists the coin!

Posted by Haiku Harry at November 20, 2006 12:10 PM

comment #24

actionman says ...

amen!

Posted by actionman at November 20, 2006 12:22 PM

comment #25

The Winchester says ...

Josh Massey: Anyone who enjoys movies should wail and cry out when Brett Ratner gets to make ANYTHING.

Posted by The Winchester at November 20, 2006 12:24 PM

comment #26

Craig Kennedy says ...

My total ennui over the prospect of a return to Middle Earth aside, the notion of Wells taking a brief timeout from the usual Oscar flogging, tracking rumors and Monday morning box office minutia to once again dig up the Peter Jackson horse and flog it a little more makes me f'ing gag.

Seriously, man, do you even REMEMBER any other tunes?

Take a vacation for chrissakes.

Posted by Craig Kennedy at November 20, 2006 12:41 PM

comment #27

Gnome de Guerre says ...

Hopefully New Line isn't using this as a bluff of some sort. Jackson's imagination failed him on LotR and he created something straight out of the collective consciousness of 20th-century RPG players instead of bringing us a new interpretation of elves, magic, and beauty. There are better choices out there. George Miller. Peter Weir. Tarsem.

Posted by Gnome de Guerre at November 20, 2006 12:46 PM

comment #28

D.Z. says ...

When I first heard of the lawsuit, I thought Jackson was being quite petty, considering New Line an unusually high risk for a subsidiary studio on a film which could have been a flop like Eragon. OTOH, from what I read a few years ago, New Line was going to be dismantled after the Aw-Oh-Hell/Time Warner merger, if it wasn't for LOTR, so they do owe Jackson for that. (Especially since no one had watched any of their tentpole films since The Mask.) Anyway, The Hobbit's a simpler story than LOTR, so I don't see how New Line can screw it up if they don't use Jackson.

Posted by D.Z. at November 20, 2006 12:49 PM

comment #29

MovieBob says ...

So this is New Line trying to play chicken with Jackson, the same as Disney threatening to produce sub-par "Toy Story" sequels to try and twist Pixar's arm, right?

And Wells... you couldn't be more transparent here. If New Line was screwing with a director you didn't inexplicably hate, you'd be railing against this.

No one outside of Jackson and company should be allowed to touch this material, they're the only ones with what it takes to pull it off.

Posted by MovieBob at November 20, 2006 12:52 PM

comment #30

Ju-osh says ...

To add on to what MovieBob said:
"Now imagine this director was Michael Mann."
Wells:
"They deserved to die and I hope they burn in hell!"

Posted by Ju-osh at November 20, 2006 1:24 PM

comment #31

nola says ...

To be honest my favorite Peter Jackson movie is Heavenly Creatures. I'm sick of all this CGI bullshit. It has no soul.

Posted by nola at November 20, 2006 1:27 PM

comment #32

DarthCorleone says ...

O.k. Some of you aren't Kong fans. That's fine. I'm not either. In fact, I more or less hated it.

However, I don't think ridiculously indulgent "wheeeeee!" Kong is the relevant source of criticism in this case. I do enjoy LOTR, and I'm willing to forgive its much less egregious indulgences. I think it's a shame that Jackson won't get the shot at helming The Hobbit, as it seems appropriate for he and his crew to be the ones to return to Middle-Earth. New Line is probably in the wrong from what I can make of it, but all this money-grubbing crap is truly just noise to me. I just want a good film version of The Hobbit, and although it's possible one could come from another director, I trust Jackson the most.

Posted by DarthCorleone at November 20, 2006 1:52 PM

comment #33

The Winchester says ...

Peter Jackson refusing to make the Hobbit because he was being strong armed into making it to settle the lawsuit is despicable?

I'm confused.

I realize Jeff will never miss an opportunity to bash Peter Jackson films (even if he called Kong a solid line drive upon first seeing it), but it definitely seems to contradict the usual "artist vs. studio" arguement that Jeff usually fights for.

Posted by The Winchester at November 20, 2006 2:33 PM

comment #34

le corbeau says ...

"Anyway, The Hobbit's a simpler story than LOTR, so I don't see how New Line can screw it up"

No, but you can see how Rankin-Bass did! On sale at Amazon now!

Posted by le corbeau at November 20, 2006 2:42 PM

comment #35

christian says ...

i always liked rankin bass' hobbit cartoon.

one, good japanese animation. two, good songs -- "where's there's a whip, there's a way"; three, orson bean did frodo's voice, so sean bean y'know...and a bitchin' dragon. for kids, there are worse choices.

Posted by christian at November 20, 2006 2:57 PM

comment #36

thedope says ...

You can diss Jackson six ways to Sunday, but at the end of the day he made LOTR into the best fantasy film that will probably ever be made, infusing CG with more heart and soul than anyone else before or since.

You can have your opinions, but in 100 years LOTR will still be the gold standard in fantasy filmmaking. You can count on it.

To say Jackson's departure is good news seems so outlandishly wrong-headed--like a smart-ass opining that Wings is better than the Beatles, or that the TV-movie version of THE SHINING really was way better than that Kubrick/Nicholson thing. Don't ask me--ask anyone on the street, smart or dumb, young or old. Jackson is the new Lucas (but so much more talented), and should not be written off so disdainfully.

Jeff's opinion is perfectly valid, but seems a tad uppity considering he thinks these are practically the worst films ever made. They're among the best, actually; even the critics agree that we will never see something like this again. This is why his comments feel like a slap in the face.

The fantasy film will never again come close to the heights it reached via Jackson and Co. New Line made sure of that.

Posted by thedope at November 20, 2006 3:02 PM

comment #37

Geoff says ...

Funny, I'm betting that in 100 years people will look back at those fantasy films and say overrated.

Posted by Geoff at November 20, 2006 3:06 PM

comment #38

breadlymoore says ...

"You can have your opinions, but in 100 years LOTR will still be the gold standard in fantasy filmmaking. You can count on it."

And you can have your opinions as well, but let's keep them in rooted in some form of reality.

Posted by breadlymoore at November 20, 2006 3:11 PM

comment #39

D.Z. says ...

thedope: The Kubrick Shining was nothing like the book, because Kubrick doesn't know how to finish a movie.

Anyway, I'll take Rankin' Bass over that Nimoy Bilbo Sketch from Laugh-In.

Posted by D.Z. at November 20, 2006 3:29 PM

comment #40

The Winchester says ...

That Nimoy Bilbo sketch is GOLD. Almost as long as the endings to Return of the King.

Posted by The Winchester at November 20, 2006 3:32 PM

comment #41

Reedyb says ...

If you read the Jackson letter, it seems like New Line wanted to use the carrot of The Hobbit to get him to settle his lawsuit.

So it comes down to who you side with, the millionaire director or the billionaire corporation?

I'm siding with the little guy. The millionaire.

Posted by Reedyb at November 20, 2006 3:49 PM

comment #42

D.Z. says ...

Reedy: Jackson would have probably made more money off of The Hobbit than he ever would through his suit. He should have just taken the bait instead of just posturing like he still had clout. When WETA production company is getting more gigs than he is, it's time for him to change his attitude.

Posted by D.Z. at November 20, 2006 4:08 PM

comment #43

The Winchester says ...

DZ- One of the points Jackson makes is that, while yes, he would have made a mint making The Hobbit, the method by which they're trying to get him to make it is not "the right way to make a movie". Love him or hate him, Jackson at least seems to not be in it for just the money.

Posted by The Winchester at November 20, 2006 4:39 PM

comment #44

D.Z. says ...

Good for him if he's not just in it for the money, but he really shouldn't have wasted an opportunity to prove a point. His fans wanted to see him do the Hobbit. They didn't care under what circumstances it happened. In a way, when it comes to The Hobbit, Jackson's a lot like Lucas has been about Indy 4.

Posted by D.Z. at November 20, 2006 4:53 PM

comment #45

L.B. says ...

One doesn't want to make a film because he no longer feels comfortable working with the studio in charge. The other is exercising his greenlight ability because the material doesn't meet his supposed standards, which have recently been called into question for good reason. One has been courting rumors and reports of his intention to make the film- intentions that were honest until litigation and bad blood turned them sour- for maybe two years now. The other has been dragging out, for over a decade now, the rumors of a film that more likely than not will never and never was going to see the light of a projector seemingly just to keep the minions chattering about Darbont's draft and Shyamalan's draft and the work Nathanson put in on it and will it be this and will it be that and on and on and on while he dicks around and screws with his beloved SW.

Sorry. Don't really see the comparison.

Posted by L.B. at November 20, 2006 7:35 PM

comment #46

D.Z. says ...

Sure, Jackson wasn't jerking people around as much about the Hobbit as Lucas was about Indy 4, but both of them looked for excuses for not doing the projects. In Jackson's case, first it was MGM owning it. Then when MGM was willing to work with him, he said he hadn't heard about it. Then he admitted he did hear about it, but claimed that New Line was holding him back, because of his lawsuit. Then he says that New Line was willing to settle the suit if he did the film. Then he claims that his artistic integrity prevents him from "selling out" in such a manner. And now he finishes off by saying that New Line just didn't care anymore, which is probably the most likely explanation for a guy who dragging his feet on the film, even though he has no major projects in the works at the moment.

Posted by D.Z. at November 20, 2006 7:55 PM

comment #47

Sean says ...

"You may make a huge profit with a Jackson film and you may not, but one thing for sure is that he and his New Zealand pallies will make out like kings."

Do you mean his crew? You object to the fact that he puts a lot of his profits into the hands of his crew who works so hard? You're weird, Jeff.

"I'm basically saying that New Line did a good thing here. The more Peter Jackson gets cut down and has to trim his sails and stop "wheee"-ing his way through movie-making, the better."

The thing is, Peter Jackson will keep working and a version of 'The Hobbit' will still be made, but it will not be as good as the version Jackson would have made, because no director good enough to pull it off would be stupid enough to voluntarily step into those shoes.

Posted by Sean at November 20, 2006 10:01 PM

comment #48

christian says ...

they could find a perfect director and writer besides jackson. i loved LOTR, mainly the heart of the movie but not the spectacle which often didn't work for me. it would be nice if jackson could go back to the hobbit, but onward. i hope new line survives somehow.

Posted by christian at November 21, 2006 12:05 AM

comment #49

le corbeau says ...

D.Z., I think you're probably right that there's no burning hurry in Jackson's mind to spend another year of his life with hobbits, but still, there's a big difference between the relatively short time in which the rights issue with The Hobbit has been smoothed out, and the decade and a half in which Spielberg and Lucas could have done Indy 4 at any time, if they cared enough to do so, which they clearly don't (not that I can blame them for that, other than, then shut up about maybe doing it already).

In any case, I wouldn't be a bit surprised if this is a bluff by New Line and the story is far from over-- what other card do they have to play against Jackson than threatening to make it without him?

Posted by le corbeau at November 21, 2006 7:25 AM

comment #50

Ian Sinclair says ...

Well, unlike Jeff Wells and some others of you, I am a member of the human race and we all loved the Lord of the Rings pictures. I would have lined up all night to see a HOBBIT picture made by Peter Jackson, but I wouldn't even rent a DVD of a version made by someone else. New Line just shot themselevs in the foot, ass and brain.

Posted by Ian Sinclair at November 21, 2006 7:55 AM

comment #51

aspiringcrackaddict says ...

DAMN Why y'all player hating on PJ? All y'all muthfuckers wanna be successes in yo whackass lives but yall can't get wit it when somebody else be shinning. Get yo shine on PJ fuck these whack as bitches. It's like sticking a mutherfucker for his papers cause he done husseled mo ends than you. Don't be a bitch cause a bitch is any mutherfucker wishing Bad for another mutherfucker cause he done did what you can't do. you is a mutherfucking bitch.

BITCHES

Posted by aspiringcrackaddict at November 21, 2006 10:25 PM

comment #52