Peter Jackson nearly lost the 'Ring'

chans, why is it that everytime you post it's either about a. the ratings of movies, or b. Harvey Weinstein.

Did Weinstein demand that you get a PG-13 on your last film?

Don't do that, it's silly.

I'm just curious.

I was aware of Jackson's troubles getting the film made with Miramax, but I had no idea that Weinstein had John Madden waiting in the wings to direct if Jackson backed down.

What an amazing success story.

John Madden? Right...

If thats true then Weinstein is a bigger cunt than I ever thought he was.

Well, luckily Jackson got it and it paid off handsomely both financially and artistically. Jackson's troubles with the weinstein's have been well documented so this is no real surprise, John Madden as a backup director is interesting though.

It doesn't really help the weinsteins image though, I'm sure they must've felt gutted when it hit like an A-Bomb, although they did get executive producer credit.

Isn't all this information already on the Extended Edition special features? Apart from possibly the option of Madden as replacement director, this is nothing new.

While it's tempting to make Harvey Weinstein the big baddie here, I don't think it's applicable at all.

Wasn't part of the LOTR hype beforehand on what a big risk New Line was taking by hiring such an unproven director and giving him whatever he needed? Weinstein simply didn't take as big a risk as New Line did. NEWSFLASH: He's a businessman before anything else. What do you expect?

Besides, according to EW's cover story this week on the fall of Miramax, Weinstein was handcuffed by Disney on this issue and many others, where Weinstein wanted to take more financial risks, but was cut off at the knees by his parent company's risk-averse funding strategy. Disney/Miramax got burned by this time and time again.

Micah's right... but Weinstein is still an evil fuckwit.

Carl's post of wisdom version 19.8.

Interestingly enough in "Disneywars" the current bestseller about the Eisner regime at Disney, Weinstein claims he wanted to go ahead on the two film LOTR project but was overruled by Eisner. Take it for what it is worth, since IMHO Weinstein and Eisner are two evil fuckwits fighting each other.

I don't think he fared too bad. He got something like 3% of the overall gross, IIRC.

uhh, NO

I've heard nothing but nightmares about dealing with the Weinstein Brothers. I tell you this, I am an unproven director working on my first indie feature at this moment. If I had the opportunity to work with Miramax I would say no, no matter how much they offered me. As sure as I sit here writing this now, I would never EVER work with those people. You can own the world entire but without love you are nothing.

BUT...

Miramax has been somewhat reshaped, and the Weinsteins are out as they move headquarters from New York to Burbank California. The Weinsteins will pursue another venture in film distribution and aquisition.

The MOUSE has lots of power, and I'm sure Harvey and Bob were corrupted by it, coerced by it's evil sway...it calls to them...my precious... Disney/Miramax does some good things in a bad way. They are the Wal-Mart of movie houses. Everybody wants to see stuff they make, but nobody wants to work with them or under them.

It's too easy to dismiss the Weinsteins as evil fuckwits. Bad decisions or no, they gave a lot of filmmakers some opportunities to put their visions out there.

Why? Because they are?

And gave actors and actresses like Ben Affleck and Paltrow way too many jobs they didn't deserve.

Sure Miramax made some great films and for that they should be applauded but they did a lot of crappy things that should have been loudly scourned.

They were a bloated company in so many ways and frankly their treatment of asian films alone makes them scum.

What, exactly, have they done that's so crappy? Honestly, I want to know.

Everyone says the Weinsteins are such bad guys. Explain how that is.

And you can say what you want about the LOTR thing, but the fact is it didn't happen for which we can be thankful.

SHAKESPEARE IN LOVE?

Terrific movie. Got anything else?

Expanding upon what Fett said... more specifically, the shark-like tactics which they used to essentially BUY the Oscar for SIL. They invented the now-standard practice of spending millions of dollars to promote films for awards... and TRASHING the competition. They pretty much single-handedly ruined the Academy Awards forever, because now it's just a fucking joke.

Oh, and they are also blatantly anti-Catholic.

Just two things off the top of my head.

the art of buying international films and then sitting on them solely so other studios don't have a chance to release them.

Then, if they do finally decide to release them, they hack the shit out of them to make them more "palatable for american audiences."

This is the same company that unleashed "sex lies and videotape" on the world, but thinks audiences wouldn't know how to handle an uncut "Shaolin Soccer?"

Those are pretty crappy decisions. I'm sure there's others but they're not popping up.

Those decisions DON'T cancel out the positives they're responsible for, though. But there are some definite shitty moves they made.

I don't know whether this is true or not, but:

That's true, and there are tons of anecdotal stories like that involving the Hutt brothers.

I forgot about that. That basically killed any chance I had of seeing SHAOLIN SOCCER on the big screen in its original format.

And yeah, the SIL comment was semi-humorous, along Carl's lines. But I'm not a fan of the film. And Paltrow, Oscar-winning actress?

The tactic of "buying" the Oscar has been going on long before Miramax. It's just been done a lot more openly in recent years. The Golden Globes, for example, have been bought and sold pretty much since the beginning, with the studio gift packages sent out every year. Don't kid yourself - whoring out for Oscars has been done for a long, long time.

And anti-Catholic? I never heard that. I mean, Kevin Smith's still Catholic, right?

Dogma has little to do with it, though it's hardly a point in their favor in that regard.

But not to the extent that these fuckers have perfected.

All that stuff about FRIDA I can actually believe, but I still don't know how that makes them worse than any other Hollywood producer out there. They didn't invent the phrase "You'll never work in this town again!", you know.

The shit about sitting on the Asian movies, that I can agree with. But I also think the word's out in Asia not to deal with those guys, too, since they seem to be going to Sony Classics.

http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000255/

Thats a laundry list of shitty movies most of them from Disney/Miramax/Dimension.

They held Hero for 2 years. They gave shitty limited releases to some of the best movies over the past 10 years... Spirited Away, Princess Mononoke, Shaolin Soccer, Equilibrium, Infernal Affairs theres more where that came from.

They still have never released Tsui Hark's Legend of Zu (Aka Zu Warriors).

He fucked with Scorsese on Gangs of New York. And made Marty chop the film up killing key character scenes.

nevermind, i'm not in the fucking mood for this.

Nordling, I think the fact that you like most of their movies is coloring your opinion here. Personally, I think Miramax as a film studio was indeed responsible for a lot of great films... some experimental, ground-breaking ones at that. But it is clearly obvious that the Weinsteins are not good guys. Just open your eyes and notice that they are far from beloved by their peers in Hollywood. Only their circle of "talent" (Paltrow, Affleck, Kevin Smith, et al) has shown them loyalty and stood by them through everything. And with the success they've had as a studio, that says a lot.

Fuck them.

I liked your original post better.

Every studio out there has dropped the ball on something or other. I think Miramax just gets a lot more attention for crappy decisions than others. As far as the Asian films go, they dropped the ball, yes. But honestly, I think those films would have never made the money we all would have liked them to make, and we know it. Maybe EQUILIBRIUM. But we should be thankful that those Asian films got released at all. Now as far as the editing of those films go, yeah, that's really shitty. They should release those films as is without jacking with them. But let's be honest, they were never going to make a lot of money. CROUCHING TIGER HIDDEN DRAGON was a fluke.

They may have fucked with Scorsese on GANGS. I don't like GANGS much myself, and I can't decide whether it's Scorsese's or Miramax's fault. If Scorsese had made it clear that GANGS isn't the movie he wanted to make, I'd agree. But he's always said on the record that GANGS was his baby creatively.

Hey, but that's not what you asked, though. You asked us to name crappy things they've done. That's some crappy stuff. And there's a LOT of Hollywood producers out there that don't threaten to kick the shit out of the composer over audience response cards. And Sony Classics getting NEWER movies doesn't really help that the movies Miramax has already picked up are pretty much fucked as far as american exhibition goes. Once again, this is the company that brought us Reservoir Dogs, The Crying Game...but they don't think we can handle some asian filmmaking without it being chopped to shit?

And those movies would have profited just fine. They probably wouldn't have made over 50 mil in most cases, (factoring in syndication and dvd distribution) but considering they're picking up those movies for a mil or two at most, a 50 mil return on those investments is MORE than fine. Definitely a better investment than buying it and then spiting other film companies who WOULD like to try and make money on them, or chopping the holy fuck out of them to better appeal to an audience they seem to hold more and more in contempt the higher profile they get.

I don't really get the whole "Anti-Catholic" thing, though. I wouldn't stick that anywhere near the top of a list of things the Weinsteins have fucked up over the last 10 years. And I'm a catholic. Lapsed, a little, but still, I think I'd still be able to recognize when they're throwing a dart at Catholicism, whether or not that dart stings me. And I can't think of a single thing off the top of my head that makes them anti-catholic.

I disagree quite strongly there. Sure some stuff would be hard to turn a profit on notably the Anime which is hard to market and promote. However Hero, Infernal Affairs and Shaolin Soccer easily could have made bank with the right people promoting them and getting them released. Sony has done a fine job and will continue to show how things should be done.

I didn't like Gangs either but I do believe the film would have worked better knowing more about the characters. I maintain that film got butchered and Scorsese just won't say anything about it because of how powerful the Bro's are.

Oh and this http://indyweek.com/durham/2004-04-28/movie2.html

Be careful referencing Biskind. He's a fun read, but he's not necessarily the most accurate storyteller. Nor does he care to be, from what I can tell.

I think the jury's still out on Sony. Sure, they gave quick releases to HOUSE OF FLYING DAGGERS and KUNG FU HUSTLE, but HOUSE didn't make as much money as I think it could have, and I'm righteously pissed that KUNG FU HUSTLE got an R here in the States when I wouldn't have any problems letting kids see that cartoon of a movie. It's a live-action Looney Tunes and it gets an R. I'd show it to my 6 year old.

He's Martin Scorsese. He can work whereever he wants, I think. He shouldn't have to worry about not getting work. At the very least, the people at Dreamworks would bend over backwards to make him happy.

Again Nord I think Marty's true vision was compromised and I don't see how anyone can justify that.

To Fatboy well I thought i'd spice it up a bit.

I agree that they fucked with the movie. I just think that Marty should come out and say so and not worry about being studio blackballed. He underestimates what people in Hollywood think about him, at least the creative minds in Hollywood.

I'm in total agreement with you. The man should have had the balls to come out and say something.

I know that the internet is synonymous to hyperbole, but only in a warped, parallel unverse Shaolin Soccer and Equilibrium are considered to be among the best films of thew past decade...

I'll have to do some digging, but Weinstein has made statements that were not so thinly-veiled. And then there is the fact that every time they produced a film that dealt with Catholicism in any way, it was done in a NEGATIVE light.

Let me state that I personally feel that "The Magdelene Sisters" is a very good film and that The Catholic League is, most times, nustso. But here that make a good point:

If you don't understand how good these films are within their genres thats not my problem. They both were effective and deserved better thats my point.

I mean these guys helped get Finding Neverland a nomination over something like say Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind.

These are some of the other films they have pushed to the Academy that didn't deserve it.

Cold Mountain
The Cider House Rules
The Shipping News
Chocolat

EQUILIBRIUM I can agree with, SHAOLIN SOCCER... there's no measuring how amazing that movie is. It's pure entertainment, and I can't think of anything anyone's produced recently that's come close to how fun it is.