The Hobbit Trilogy Discussion Thread

[mjbethancourt]

Originally Posted by SonOfTorah

I personally wish Christopher Tolkien as long and healthy life as he may have, and wish no ill on him simply because he won't sell the film rights to his father's literary works. Anyone who hopes that the guy will 'pop his cloggs' as you guys say needs to first and foremost get a life and then get some help! Some fanboys can be supremely unpleasant in their obsession with film. It reminds me of some cretinous dweeb that wanted Blade Runner financier Jerry Perenchio to 'drop dead of old age so they can release a better version of Blade Runner.'

Absolutely disgusting.

... and anyway, there's no guarantee that the next heir-in-line would feel any differently than CT.

Originally Posted by GreenScar

English is not Pat's first language.

I like P@t_Mtl's "less-than-perfect" English. I always understand what he's trying to say anyway, and imperfections are the spice of humanity.
... at least he can type in his second language; I know if I tried to make a post in German or Spanish, it would take me all night.

Is it bad that every time I read one of his posts, I imagine it in a heavy French-Canuck accent?

[Witch King of Angmar]

English is not my native language either and P@t_Mtl's english is very good, alteast way better than mine.





On-topic:

Who is mightier? Thorin or Gimli(Son of Gloin)?

[mjbethancourt]

Originally Posted by Witch King of Angmar

On-topic:

Who is mightier? Thorin or Gimli(Son of Gloin)?

Gimli: Thorin is all hot-air, Gimli is the real thing.

[Batman1980]

Originally Posted by mjbethancourt

Gimli: Thorin is all hot-air, Gimli is the real thing.

Thorin has more power politically, he's like a king of his people, Gimli would be like a battlefield leader I guess.

[mjbethancourt]

Originally Posted by Gandalf Stormcrow

Thorin has more power politically, he's like a king of his people, Gimli would be like a battlefield leader I guess.

I was taking it to mean "mightier" in a practical sense, not a political one. I don't really think of a king without a kingdom as being very mighty, he's all office and title, with nothing to back it up. Gimli fought many battles and kicked some butt; Thorin had one battle and got mortally broken, and had to eat his big words.

[radagast]

Originally Posted by GreenScar

English is not Pat's first language.

I realize is was a typo. Just having a little fun...

In regards to American English, it's a maddening language for non-native speakers to learn. It breaks its own rules far too often. Of course that's because it is heavily unfluenced by so many other languages.

[radagast]

Originally Posted by Witch King of Angmar

English is not my native language either and P@t_Mtl's english is very good, alteast way better than mine.





On-topic:

Who is mightier? Thorin or Gimli(Son of Gloin)?

Depends on what constitues "mighty". Thorin had the authority as a leader, but Gimli was a battle-hardened dwarf who could kick-ass as good as his friend Legolas (remember their contest in keeping number of slain orcs).

I would have hated to be Gimli's grandfather Groin. Imagine the jokes other dwarves made about his name.

[Josh]

Del Toro in talks to do video games? I know exactly why he left The Hobbit

[Batman1980]

Originally Posted by radagast

Depends on what constitues "mighty". Thorin had the authority as a leader, but Gimli was a battle-hardened dwarf who could kick-ass as good as his friend Legolas (remember their contest in keeping number of slain orcs).

I would have hated to be Gimli's grandfather Groin. Imagine the jokes other dwarves made about his name.

Pretty sure he meant to name the guy Gloin or something else and corrected it with the name he gave the guy's son.

[mjbethancourt]

Originally Posted by SonOfTorah

Yes indeed. Tolkien sold the rights to Zaentz for a period of 40 years, in 1969. Roll forward to 2009 and time was running out. Know what this means?

If The Hobbit get's cancelled, there is zero chance it will ever be made as a film until Christopher Tolkien passes away. C Tolkien hated the idea of motion pictures based on his father's work.

Just checked it out, and Zaentz obtained those rights in 1976, (from a third party, as Tolkien himself died several years earlier). His rights are not set to expire in 2009. It was New Line who was about to lose their rights back to Zaentz a few years ago, and Zaentz used it as leverage in a lawsuit against them over the B.S. accounting practices that got Bob Shaye canned and the New Line division fully merged into WB. WB used their money and power to resolve the situation (temporarily), paying off Jackson, Zaentz, and the other aggrieved parties, and working out a mutual deal with MGM. It's been WB doing all the work and spending all the money from the start.

[TheWildWhelk]

I stand corrected, MJ. So if this present production of The Hobbit folds and ceases production, i.e is canned by Warner until the MGM situation is resolved, can Warner mount the film again or do the film rights revert back to someone else, being Zaentz or whomever?

[mjbethancourt]

Originally Posted by SonOfTorah

I stand corrected, MJ. So if this present production of The Hobbit folds and ceases production, i.e is canned by Warner until the MGM situation is resolved, can Warner mount the film again or do the film rights revert back to someone else, being Zaentz or whomever?

I don't know... I would imagine that the fact that they were going ahead with it indicates that they had worked out all of the rights hang-ups for the time being. Zaentz is a businessman, if there's a buyer for the rights, he will sell (or rather, lease) them, if he hasn't already. He made a ton of money on LotR, (he gets a piece of all the merchandising, too).

It also looks like there is a glimmer of hope on the MGM issue: it seems management has just enough power to file for bankruptcy once the current moratorium expires in September, and Spyglass is setting themselves up to clean up the mess in that event. The debtholders will almost certainly sue to stop it, but they will probably finally lose that round, you can't keep somebody a hostage forever, even when $Billions are at stake. Once done, Spyglass would probably be eager to get a return on the investment, and pushing ahead with 'The Hobbit' is the obvious place to start.

[Duffy12]

- update -

mgm plans emerge, possible ‘hobbit’ progress


august 19th, 2010

variety and the hollywood reporter are reporting progress on the mgm debt situation that has famously kept two ‘hobbit’ films progressing and have stalled a greenlight on the films for years now.

Thr details the plans to make the nearly $4 billion dissapear here while the variety story here details a wednesday conference call involving debt holders. A lot of things need to fall into place but both stories indicate a september 15 deadline is being respected, which a source told torn would be met, unlike previous deadlines which have previously been extended. Thanks to friend kristin thompson for the heads up on the variety article.

.

exclusive: Spyglass' plan to erase mgm debt

$4 billion to be converted into lender equity after restructure

by carl diorio

aug 18, 2010, 06:22 pm et

updated: Aug 18, 2010, 09:59 pm et

it's the case of the disappearing $4 billion.

The long-awaited final chapter in the mgm restructuring saga will feature a magic act to be staged in u.s. Bankruptcy court. The trick: Making the lion's massive debt load completely vanish.

Mgm's spyglass entertainment-led reorganization will feature no further equity investment in the lion but simply shift all ownership from current owners to a group of 100-plus studio lenders. A loan syndication by a large group of banks eventually would be staged to provide $500 million or so in new operating capital.

That latter element could prove elusive, given current market conditions. But at least some in the lenders group may agree to dig deeper so mgm can progress and prosper; j.p. Morgan leads a steering committee of the studio's largest lenders.

Conventional wisdom has been that the studio would keep about $1 billion in debt on its books after a restructuring and require additional equity investment, even after locking into an arrangement with spyglass co-toppers gary barber and roger birnbaum. But with the exec duo in final talks on a deal to combine mgm and spyglass, a plan has emerged to turn all of mgm debt into lender equity.

As a result, the studio will forego seeking additional equity investment, lest the lenders group see their ownership stakes diluted. Cerberus capital-owned spyglass will get almost 5% equity in mgm as part of its deal.

Anchorage, highland, davidson kempner and solis -- all hedge funds -- hold 35% of mgm's publicly traded debt. A decision to file the restructuring plan as a prepackaged bankruptcy reorg must be approved by 51% of all lenders and a group representing two-thirds of the amount owed.

Current mgm owners include providence equity, tpg capital, sony, comcast, dlj merchant and quadrangle. All likely would see their equity positions in the studio wiped out in a restructuring.

Those working on the mgm restructuring expect to put the plan to a vote by lenders soon after labor day, with a bankruptcy filing later next month. A reorganization could be completed by november or december.

The lenders group held a conference call with management and others on wednesday to hear details of the spyglass-led reorg plan. But with august vacations preoccupying many in all the relevant camps, progress has been relatively minimal since the spyglass deal advanced to final negotiations this month.

.

spyglass chiefs ready to lead mgm



spyglass chiefs ready to lead mgm

proposal pushed ahead to put barber, birnbaum in charge

a proposal to put spyglass toppers' gary barber and roger birnbaum in charge of mgm pushed ahead wednesday as their plan for restoring the lion's roar was presented to all of the studio's debtors during a conference call.

Barber and birnbaum have been holding discussions with mgm's leading creditors, which include anchorage advisors and highland capital. Wednesday's conference call looped in more than 100 creditors, who must endorse the plan.

Those knowledgeable with the talks say birnbaum and barber would take over after mgm goes through a pre-packaged bankruptcy. The creditors would absolve much of the studio's $4 billion in debt and take a majority equity stake in the company, along with providing a certain amount of working capital.

A major component of the plan would likely include shuttering mgm's distribution operation, which would reduce overhead substantially. Instead, birnbaum and barber would strike a theatrical distribution deal with another major.

A leading candidate is paramount, with whom the duo have formed a close relationship, partnering on the rebooted "star trek" franchise, "g.i. Joe: Rise of the cobra" and "dinner for schmucks," according to insiders.(daily variety, aug. 13).

Mgm also would move aggressively into television.

Par -- which has been making fewer movies -- could accommodate the release of mgm titles, while other studios might have a tougher time.

Mgm's most lucrative film property is the james bond franchise. It's also a partner with warner bros. On "the hobbit" films, which remain in limbo. Warners has domestic distribution.

Management and lenders are expected to attempt to get the spyglass deal done by the sept. 15 forbearance expiration.

Lenders have agreed six times to forgive debt payments since last september.

The studio was put up for sale in november.

.

[mjbethancourt]

Hard to judge if that news is good or not, but at least it's news; at least it looks like we may know pretty soon whether 'The Hobbit' is going to be canned or not.

I note they mentioned that the deal includes ending MGM's business as a distributor. It's hard to tell how that impacts 'The Hobbit', considering that foreign-market distribution was their only financial stake in the project. That could remove them entirely as joint-investors, and I don't know if that kills any hope of cooperative spirit from their partner, WB, or if it simplifies the matter by cutting them out of the responsibility entirely, leaving them as nothing more than rights-licensors to WB.

At least there is a chance it will all be cleared up before Jackson's year-end deadline.

[Grand Bob]

...in the meantime, Ian McKellen isn't getting any younger.

[jtwise]

Originally Posted by Grand Bob

...in the meantime, Ian McKellen isn't getting any younger.

I know, this worries me

[Batman1980]

Originally Posted by Grand Bob

...in the meantime, Ian McKellen isn't getting any younger.

You calling me old? He's not THAT old yet but I wouldn't blame him if he made himself unavailable for these movies in the near future.

[mjbethancourt]

Originally Posted by Gandalf Stormcrow

You calling me old? He's not THAT old yet but I wouldn't blame him if he made himself unavailable for these movies in the near future.

I think he's said that he's out if they don't get shooting scheduled by year's end.

[Batman1980]

Originally Posted by mjbethancourt

I think he's said that he's out if they don't get shooting scheduled by year's end.

Well I'm out then, me and real Gandalf. The chances of me seeing these movies if McKellen is out drop to about 10%, especially with all the other crap going on involving these movies.

[Diesel]

I'm honestly surprised this project is still kicking at all with all the crap its been through.

They need some resolution to this mess otherwise known as MGM soon, hopefully that stuff pans out and we get the movies made....and James Bond!