Serving animals in HOBBIT film

[William Cloud Hicklin]

Perhaps you believe that the upper classes or the better people have more rights and should get more benefits than us uncouth mouth breathers? If so, I have no sympathy with that elitist attitude.

Then let's use another example: if an impoverished HIV-positive mother in Africa finds she cannot possibly care for another baby, and then a wealthy Hollywood celebrity offers to buy -er - "pay an adoption fee for" her child, and in her desperation she accepts: is that really voluntary?

You can pick any analogy or hypothetical you like: people in financial distress find themselves forced -yes, forced- to hock or sell prized possessions thay would not willingly part with.

Some indication of Tolkien's desperation can be seen from the terms, or rather the absent terms- he retained no creative control, or assurances of "art;" nor was he able to include the permanent ban on sale to Disney he wanted; nor really was there much Cash: although UA paid $250,000, Tolkien only received 10 grand, the rest (96%) being taxed away: and of course the 10k he realized went to pay the original taxes.

Moreover, his recorded statement at the time reinforces the essential point- Tolkien didn't *want* movies made of his books.

[Sauron the White]

WCH - I do not want to get nailed again for being off topic. But it seems like many internet discussions, this would come down to a definition of things like "Coercion... voluntary .... force" and those other things key to the discussion.

I simply see Tolkien as absolutely no different than any other person in the world who has wants and needs and has a reason to obtain cash to satisfy them. I see ones tax obligation as no different than ones food bill, utilities, or clothing bills. Its all on the side of the accounting ledger labeled as EXPENSES.

We could argue all day as to if JRRT wanted movies made of his books. There is one simple fact here which stands above the others in this discussion. JRRT did indeed sell the film rights under very broad conditions which turned out not to be very favorable to him. He did what he did and nobody held Lucca Brazi's gun to his head.

What I do find interesting is that you quote a figure of $250,000.00 paid to JRRT. That is the highest estimate I have seen. I find it quite interesting that Saul Zaentz was able to purchase these rights for $10,000.00 (I think that is the right figure - anyone have a different one?) a relatively short time later. Maybe the idea took hold that the movies were unfilmable and Zaeltz got himself one of the best deals since the purchase of Manhattan island.

[William Cloud Hicklin]

Zaentz has indeed boasted that his purchase of the Tolkien rights was a bargain which has profited him greatly. Shortly after the projected John Boorman version fizzled out, UA was bought out by TransAmerica, which promptly fired most of its executives, including those behind the Tolkien deal. New management regarded the LR and Hobbit rights as wasted money, and were happy to unload them for whatever they could get.

The traditional figure for Tolkien's sale for years has been $10,000. However, about the time FR came out, the Times of London reported that the true contract price was $250,000 (actually they reported 103,000 pounds.)

Both 'traditions' are correct. A quarter-million is what UA paid, and 10 grand is what Tolkien got- the difference going to HM Government.


*******

Tolkien's attitude can be illustrated as well by an account of his seeing a school stage production of The Hobbit in Oxford which he had given permission for (without seeing the script). He apparently enjoyed himself greatly and smiled broadly when his own dialogue and incidents were enacted; but scowled and muttered under his breath at deviation and 'invention.'

[Lord Halsar]

By God! This thread has certainly gotten off topic in more places than I can list!