Update on the Hobbit film

From TORn, first this:


Word from a reliable source indicates that Sam Raimi has been approached to direct THE HOBBIT. Since Peter Jackson's (Middle-)earth shattering news that he is off the project, it seems the Spider-Man director may step into his place. Raimi was born on October 23rd, 1959 in Royal Oak, Michigan. His first big hit was 'The Evil Dead' but he really gained cult status with 'Evil Dead II'. It is his amazing work on the Spider-Man series that has propelled Raimi to the mainstream. His latest film 'Spider-Man 3' is due out this May.


Now this:


Saul Zaentz On The Hobbit

Saul Zaentz, the owner of Tolkien Enterprises, and ultimate holder of the film rights to The Hobbit and Lord of the Rings was very recently interviewed about the Hobbit and Peter Jackson's involvement.

The interview has since been posted on German Rings site Elbenwald. You can read it here.

It's in German, so here's a translation of his comments.


Q: What is with the long anticipated Hobbit-adaption?

A: It will definitely be shot by Peter Jackson. The question is only when. He wants to shoot another movie first. Next year the Hobbit-rights will fall back to my company. I suppose that Peter will wait because he knows that he will make the best deal with us. And he is fed up with the studios: to get his profit share on the rings trilogy he had to sue New Line. With us in contrast he knows that he will be paid fairly and artistically supported without reservation.

---

So, in Zaentz's opinion, it's a big game of chicken - who'll blink first, you might say. His comments do put all of this in an interesting perspective. New Line's all shirty about what they want, but the ones with the power to hold things up are saying, "No, we want PJ to direct." And they can hold things up long enough that New Line will no longer have a say.


As for the director choice, that would be interesting. Sam Raimi's pretty damn good, and he has a feel for character. I wonder what production company they'd be going with, however. If he could work with Weta, then I think we could have something worth doing. Since it is another book by the same author, having a different director working with the same production and design team would actually have a lot of potential, at least in my opinion.

What do you think?

Thoughts on the Hobbit

I was reading the message board over at TORn, where they're nattering about l'affaire Hobbit, and I just realized something about that Saul Zaentz quote (see my last post).

The first time I read it, it sounded like he was talking about New Line being backed into a corner and having to deal with Peter in order to get him to make the film before the rights ran out. But you know, there's a different way to read his words. He could just as well mean that New Line could certainly go ahead and make a Hobbit movie without Peter, but that the rights will revert to MGM in a year regardless, and that's when MGM would finance Peter's film.

After all, it wouldn't be the first time that two films on the same or similar themes were released fairly close to each other. The example that comes to mind first is the two adaptations of Les Liaisons Dangereuses, Dangerous Liaisons with John Malkovich, and Valmont with Colin Firth (for my money, much the better of the two). Hollywood does that sort of thing a lot, and the fact that Peter would be working on the MGM version would automatically give it both more cachet and a built-in audience. And if MGM does declare, at some point, that they're gonna start production on Peter's Hobbit in 2007, all the people who worked on PJ's LOTR are going to go with him - Weta, the actors, everybody.

If MGM is smart, they'll just sit calmly and watch the fray. Then if New Line announces the production with another director, MGM should move to announce their competing production, slated to start rolling a year later. Even with the time offset, it would still turn out well for them in the long run, I think.