Sony +MGM = No Hobbit Movie?

Did some more hunting, and cleared up some rights questions:

Tolkien sold the rights to United Artists in the 60's. UA merged with MGM in the late 70's/early 80's. That's why MGM has the distribution rights to The Hobbit.

However, UA sold the production rights to Saul Zaentz in the 70's, and these are the rights that were later sold to New Line and Peter Jackson. That's why things seem screwy.

I'm not certain yet why the distribution rights for the Hobbit are a mess, while the distribution rights to LoTR aren't. My guess is that was ironed out when the animated LoTR was done.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Ranger REG said:
Before this, I heard rumor that MGM will both finance the production AND distribution of The Hobbits...

I give up.

You keep putting an S on the end of 'Hobbit', and I'm at a complete loss as to what point you're trying to make...

Am I missing a joke?

-Hyp.
 



mojo1701 said:
What Hypersmurf is trying to point out that you incorrectly wrote the name of the book as the "Hobbits," and the name of the book is "The Hobbit."

Only sometimes, though... so it seemed at the time that he knew the title, but was deliberately calling it something else.

Like, oh, 'Priests of the Coast', for example, from people who think that 3E overpowered the cleric.

But I couldn't figure out what he was trying to imply.

Apparently, he wasn't :)

-Hyp.
 

My only worry about this (not really a worry, there are more important things in the world to worry about) is the whole distribution thing. A Hobbit movie would make alot of money but maybe not enoguh to satisfy all the cooks stirring the pot.

Part of the reason Sony got MGM was to be able to show the MGM library on various channels and release them on DVD, etc... Comcast is supposedly a minor partner in the deal, and I heard that the two plan on developing cable channels to show the library.

Anyway, since a big chunk of the money for movies is often made after its intial theatrical release, it just seems like New Line/Warner would hold out on any deal for a bigger cut of the profits. And if they dont get the deal they may just sit on the project. For like 20 years.. or until the next industry realignment.

Hey maybe George Lucas could buy the rights ;)
 
Last edited:


I very much hope not! Sorry, but between the new versions of the classic Star Wars trilogy and episodes 1 and 2 the only thing I have faith in Lucas for is that yes, he can make a worse movie than Howard the Duck.

The Auld Grump
 



Pets & Sidekicks

Remove ads

Top