eFilmCritic Forum Index eFilmCritic
Community Forum
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Peter Jackson vs. New Line - explained

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    eFilmCritic Forum Index -> General Movie Talk
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
TheAngryJew
HBS Monkey
HBS Monkey


Joined: 12 Jul 2002
Posts: 5525
Location: Philadelphia

PostPosted: Mon Jun 27, 2005 10:41 pm    Post subject: Peter Jackson vs. New Line - explained Reply with quote

Read this rather excellent NYT article for a clear explanation as to why "corporate synergy" is a devilish thing indeed.

And then discuss. That's what message boards are for.
_________________
Scott Weinberg
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger
TheAngryJew
HBS Monkey
HBS Monkey


Joined: 12 Jul 2002
Posts: 5525
Location: Philadelphia

PostPosted: Tue Jun 28, 2005 12:56 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

And here is Slate's response to an "unnamed lawyer source" who basically called Peter Jackson a greedy pig.
_________________
Scott Weinberg
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger
Kand El
HBS Monkey
HBS Monkey


Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 1684
Location: New York

PostPosted: Tue Jun 28, 2005 8:19 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm of two minds on this- the right brain says well, having pocketed $200 million, how much more do you need? Even if taxes wherever you pay them cost you, say 70 million or so, that's still a lot of bank to pad your and your children's children's accounts. Hell, I could scare imagine what to do with 20 million much less $200- throwing it in a bank and living off interest alone... wow.

But guess what- if the studios did indeed deflate the gross revenues paid to PJ by scattering them across the Warner Empire before making contractual payments to the man who orchestrated their cash cow, then he's owed some substantial compensation and has every right to pursue that. And that's why you sign contracts on these things in the very beginning. Yes, he got to work on a life's dream, and yes, he had a great time doing it if you pay attention only to the DVD documentaries and don't think about the hundreds upon hundreds of hours he sat in a small editing room or in script meetings. Many would say he has already been handsomely compensated- but left brain says contracts were signed and deals were made to avoid this very thing, and the studio went and tried to find a loophole anyway- and if you thing $200 million is $199 million more than you need, imagine having $4 BILLION to play with.

Jackson also took the risk of committing six years of his life to these films and and making $200.00 dollars if the movie(s) tanked, by putting his money on the profits rather than the salary (and though you say "fat chance" , still... one misstep on these films is all it takes). If you take the risk and you win, you should reap full rewards. Pig indeed. The guy did the work- he did work I can't even fathom bringing this monster to the screen in full and complete detail. Pay him what you owe- that's a statement both sides of the brain can agree on.
_________________
I am L. Pete Morton.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
TheAngryJew
HBS Monkey
HBS Monkey


Joined: 12 Jul 2002
Posts: 5525
Location: Philadelphia

PostPosted: Tue Jun 28, 2005 11:46 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yeah, he pocketed about $200m, but his contract stipulates that he was due more than that. And if you think $200m is a lot, just contemplate how much WB/NL has in their coffers.

Frankly I don't care if Jackson made a BILLION dollars on these movies; if his contract states that he was due $1.8 billion, that's what he should get.

And it's not so much the actual money that I find so interesting. It's the inside baseball tactics that allow WB to give the books, the CDs, the toys, the clothes, etc., to their own affiliates.
_________________
Scott Weinberg
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger
Oz
HBS Monkey
HBS Monkey


Joined: 12 Jul 2002
Posts: 5895
Location: Vancouver, Canada

PostPosted: Tue Jun 28, 2005 12:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

That's what happens when one company dominates multiple industries. Good for him for pointing out that this happens, in a court of law of all places.

But before we assume the LOTR movies were always seen as a guaranteed profitmaker, let's not forget that the head of New Line, Mike DeLuca, was fired by Time Warner because they figured he'd risked too much of the company in making those three films at once.

And Little Nicky.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Maegs
HBS Monkey
HBS Monkey


Joined: 12 Jul 2002
Posts: 1474
Location: The Moroccan Quarter of Provo

PostPosted: Tue Jun 28, 2005 12:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

It might even be illegal if it's proved that they didn't take the higher revenue bid vs. the internal lower bid--that's a breach of fidiciary responsibility. It doesn't matter how much cash Jackson currently has, if the contractual obligations weren't met, not to sue for the remainder would be ludicrous. Let's mention the stain if Time Warner failed its fiduciary responsibilities--that would give Jackson a great case.


-M

All biz-nezz n' shiznit
_________________
One should always aim at being interesting rather than exact

-V
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address
Oz
HBS Monkey
HBS Monkey


Joined: 12 Jul 2002
Posts: 5895
Location: Vancouver, Canada

PostPosted: Tue Jun 28, 2005 1:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

In the end, you just KNOW Time Warner would be suing if Jackson owed them a hundy mill.

So, yeah. Git 'em, Pete.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Display posts from previous:   
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Post new topic   Reply to topic    eFilmCritic Forum Index -> General Movie Talk All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group