Lord of the Rings: The Circle is Complete

Print the article

This entry was posted on 3/9/2007 2:27 AM and is filed under Fiery Todd.

It is no secret that the media, given its super huge vastness is comparatively controlled by a small number of individuals.  Now, to the conspiracy theorists out there, this article is not about them.  In fact, I’m not even going to presume that these people are evil, or uncaring, or anything that may cast them in a negative light.  However, I think it is safe to assume that they have an extremist orientation for big business and an obligation to equally minded individuals that have ocean like investments in their respective media companies.  Seeing as there is no true method of right or wrong in making piles and piles and piles of money, being evil, uncaring or any other negatives that may derive from this goal probably never actually enters into it.  Anything that gets in the way of making more or losing little is an obstacle that is either avoided or destroyed.  Such drive is easy to convert and quantify in most big business, but in the media, where profit is made on the back of subjective and artistic endeavours, not every revenue stream is so easy to predict.  Consequently, the lords of power that make all the decisions in the media become very tentative when they are presented with an investment possibility that they simply don’t “get”.  The creation of most media, at least for as long as we’ve known it, does start out with good intentions.  Throughout its history, before and after the term “pop culture” was coined, there are numerous stories of driven artists with a vision that they believe in; one that they are sure as hell ready to share with others, and in the pursuit of making money, confident that the world might be better for it.  One simple example is George Lucas and the making of the original Star Wars.  Now, George may not be as popular in the eyes of fans as he once was, but that doesn’t change the chance he took in battling movie investors while attempting to deliver Star Wars as close to what he thought it would take.  No one, not even him, could have predicted, or even thought by the time he himself saw the final cut of the film, that it would have become what it has.  Yes, he may have allowed himself to feel that the film would make back its enormous budget.  Yes, he may have imagined what kind of ripple he was about to create once people saw the special effects.  He may have even envisioned the film to very successful…but it is well documented that he never expected the response that it did get.  What is well documented is his battle to have the film completed – there were a number of moments that it was in line to be junked.  Even after it was proven that it made the world a better place, and everyone concerned made gobs of money, the fight continued on because everyone involved wanted to make even MORE money.  Like I said though, this is but one example, as George’s story had already happened hundreds of times before his movie, and hundreds of times after.  In fact, it appeared that very little was learned from the lesson of Star Wars, and with good reason I’m sure, because with every Star Wars there are thousands of failures that should be rightly deemed as such.  The reality is, is that the “formula” for success in the media is a crap shoot regardless of whether something is genuinely cool or not.  A lot of things have to come together for something as special as Star Wars to happen; luck, timing, talent, money, belief, alliances and guts all have to be on the same page eventually.  But at the center of it all it takes an artist who truly understands his subject matter and has the business savvy to make the eventual compromises less damaging.  For a long while it seemed that such a mixture had dried up.  Not only had it dried up, but it looked as if the only way the good guys were going to win, such as Tarantino, was by stumbling, almost by accident, into their success.  Then word came down that the rights to The Lord of the Rings were secured, and a movie was to be made, and the crazy bastard who was making the attempt was Peter Jackson out of New Zealand.  Now, I do consider myself a movie guru, and I knew who Jackson was before the announcement, but I had only seen The Frighteners at that point.  So, even though The Frighteners had moments of brilliance, it really didn’t know what it was supposed be, and in my eyes, not a great movie.  Given this, I was worried.  I was not worried about the special effects it would require, but I was worried whether it was going to be an honest attempt, and more importantly, was it going to be 3 films.  Then when I heard the budget was only going to be $120 million initially, I almost wrote him off there; but then I read an article where he explained that the whole thing was to be shot in New Zealand, and that in New Zealand the American funds would triple up on the local economy.  This would make the cigar chomping movie executives happy with an investment they were destined not to “get” and all 3 films could be made.  After reading this article I distinctly remember feeling all the anxiety I had over Peter Jackson suddenly lifting.  This simple budget strategy spoke volumes and I found myself supporting this guy.  When pre-production stills and previews started hitting the net, I was sold.  It was a lock.  And it proved to be so.  And although it may not have had the thunderous influence on the movie industry the way Star Wars did as a whole, it proved to Hollywood that it could take proven properties, present them as they should be, and make everyone happy – fans and money grubbers alike.  And I’m sure that George took some personal satisfaction in seeing Peter win the Oscar for his trilogy; an honour that should have been bestowed upon him back in the day if it weren’t for snobbery and jealousy.  But it took George’s slight to pave the way for Peter.  And furthermore, Peter is getting a taste of what George went through with this recent money dispute.  Peter will be making The Hobbit though.  Thank God, because if he makes another stinker like Kong, that would suck.  And while I’m on the subject, M. Knight better wake the F up too.  There’s a lot to live up too, unfortunately, when you’re one of the good guys.  This happens when you purposely raise the bar.  Ask Spielberg.                     

 

 
Trackbacks
Trackback specific URL for this entry
  • No trackbacks exist for this entry.
Comments

    • 3/9/2007 4:11 PM G. Small wrote:
      Well Todd,

      Overall a pretty good rant. I think you're a little harsh on Kong. Their were definitely some bad directorial decisions but overall it was still and enjoyable movie. But what is with the M. Knight hate from everyone?

      I rather enjoyed Lady in the Water. I thought it was a nice little urban fairy tale. But then I guess I knew going in what it was because I had seen more than a couple interviews with MKS where he repeatedly said it was not the same type of movie he had done previously. I considered it a vanity piece that he did because he knew that he could get it done now that he was a name. I suspect said name has taken such a grievous blow that we can expect his next film to have quite the signature twist at the end just to satisfy his investors.
      Reply to this
      1. 3/10/2007 1:14 AM Fiery Todd wrote:
        Ha!  Good to hear from ya Greg.

        I found Kong ponderous, like the Hulk, which is as good a comparison film for Kong as any.  The giant bug scene is spectacular, and the ending sequence is what we have come to expect from PJ, but I think the complex relationship between beauty and the beast that we see in the B&W original is completely lost.  The thought of the ice rink scene still makes me cringe.  Give Kong a giant honey pot and he could have been Winnie the Pooh.

        With respect to M. Knight, hate is a strong word.  Frustration is more like it.  I think that very few would dispute that The Village is a Twilight Zone episode stretched over an hour and half, and for the first time, his signature punch-line was figured out by just about everyone miles before the ending.  It's THAT film were all the disappointment comes from.  Lady just seems to accentuate it.  But Village still made a pile of money inspite of itself making Lady his first financial "failure".  Your totally right that his next film will be safer choice, but I would love for him to still take a chance.  His other style trait is fantasy rooted in realism - I would love to see him go completely over to one or the other.    
        Reply to this
    • 3/9/2007 10:40 PM James wrote:
      I want PJ to get The Hobbit going... but I don't think it's ever going to happen. He's had his success, and now he's not willing to bend to the will of the studios, so he's going to pay (witness the Halo shut-down... if ever there was a guaranteed money-maker...).

      New Line did something bad and doesn't want to get caught (my guess, otherwise why not PJ's accountants go through the books as SOP) and because of that, they're going to turn their backs on guaranteed cash that would come with a PJ-helmed Hobbit.

      My fear is that they fast-track it with someone else, someone less passionate for the material, just to keep their hold on the film rights.

      - JB
      Reply to this
      1. 3/10/2007 1:33 AM Fiery Todd wrote:
        Hmmmmm....I was under the impression that despite the studio using the threat of no Hobbit for PJ as leverage that their's actually a shelf life on their rights to make the picture, which would expire long before the lawyers work something out - meaning the rights default back to Saul Zaentz and he takes them to a different studio, where PJ then can direct.  I mean, I could be totally wrong here.

        However, like you said, the fear is that they jump the gun on production to retain the rights.  But hope is eternal I guess.  I doubt very highly though that whoever does direct would be less passionate considering the expectations that would rest on the project, not to mention what he/she has to live up to.  I guess that would be an interesting subject - alternative ideas for who should direct.  My first thought is Tarantino - but it will probably go to MKS.    But seriously, if I really had to choose, I would go with Peter Weir.
        Reply to this
    • 3/19/2007 11:26 AM Jon wrote:
      Paragraphs are your friend.

      Seriously, I'm interested in Iron Heroes (just bought the PDF from this site), and therefore interested in what the people who run this site think--but I'm not about to try to read that mess.
      Reply to this
      1. 3/21/2007 3:51 AM Fiery Todd wrote:

        Sheessh!  Next thing y’know, you’ll be complaining whether I’ve left “widows” or “orphans”!

         

        I have to apologize though for the lack of our forthcoming message boards, which admittedly would be a much better forum to relay any comments on Iron Heroes.  That aside, thank you for the interest and purchase.  Already having a long standing relationship with Monte and Mearls, we were very excited to be a part of the Iron Heroes product line, and since Adam was that product line for us, it’s only fitting that we’re following his lead now.  Needless to say, we’re just as excited about the possibilities of what Adam has in mind.  As you may or may not know, we’ve just recently re-launched this site, and likely the biggest reason why something like the message boards are not in place is because we’re crazy busy – that being one of the projects we’re working on now is layout and art for Adam’s Iron Heroes Player’s Companion.

         

        Incidentally, a not so shameful plug is to give Dark Harbor a try, a great campaign kick-off for Iron Heroes (written by Adam of course).

         

        Cheers!


        Reply to this
        1. 3/21/2007 9:33 PM Jon wrote:
          Not trying to bust your chops--just saying that was pretty much unreadable. I probably could've used a smiley in retrospect.

          As soon as I'm done reading the main rulebook, I'll be looking at Dark Harbor. So far I like what I've seen.
          Reply to this
    • 6/26/2008 10:09 PM bibgkzjv wrote:
      cofvokpa http://jymyquxa.com cgrwwygp fpzoqubc lfyqymgn">http://puhwpkbf.com">lfyqymgn [URL=http://bokzfppr.com]wathdite[/URL]
      Reply to this
    • 6/29/2008 7:25 AM tmlxxblv wrote:
      ismajbre http://rnbwowje.com rscmaalp yadpxktw [URL=http://kwrkdigd.com]puqpceqw[/URL] aogyleet">http://nfdtkozv.com">aogyleet
      Reply to this
    • 7/1/2008 5:06 PM gydgjctx wrote:
      hsxbbyqy">http://zgxteldp.com">hsxbbyqy hegevbjt http://difmdwzv.com zjdocovi qazbttte [URL=http://afhsogqw.com]udrkvdga[/URL]
      Reply to this
    • 7/4/2008 1:54 AM msgwrmsu wrote:
      ssdrelsc http://rnbdjbvd.com zgmdqszs rcddnxwc
      Reply to this
    • 7/4/2008 1:57 AM ozipxaxg wrote:
      abglqehc http://jzenwind.com wikfbxan bkjwrjwc
      Reply to this
    • 7/4/2008 2:00 AM jxtfumra wrote:
      zwvpswez http://ogiiqbru.com nybxijsi eopmxqjl
      Reply to this
    • 7/4/2008 2:02 AM swbxiaol wrote:
      tlunqutz http://rikstpeg.com mivllzgs svzxbpxz
      Reply to this
    Leave a comment

     Enter the above security code (required)

     Name

     Email (will not be published)

     Website

    Your comment is 0 characters limited to 3000 characters.