Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [mythsoc] Re: To Hobbit or not To Hobbit?

Expand Messages
  • David Bratman
    ... Um - what _are_ those ghastly things? Is that bird-lizard thing supposed to be Smaug? And what about the grinning shapeless whatever with the bird feet?
    Message 1 of 13 , Feb 12, 2008
    • 0 Attachment
      Merlin DeTardo <emptyD@...> wrote:

      >Deitch's site includes a few images that Jiri Trnka had prepared for
      >a full-length version that was never made.

      Um - what _are_ those ghastly things? Is that bird-lizard thing supposed to be Smaug? And what about the grinning shapeless whatever with the bird feet? Is it an orc? Gollum? A Ringwraith imported from LOTR? Beorn halfway through changing shape?
    • WendellWag@aol.com
      Excuse me if I m replying to the wrong person. I can t figure out who s saying what here. I wish people would be more careful in showing what is being
      Message 2 of 13 , Feb 13, 2008
      • 0 Attachment
        Excuse me if I'm replying to the wrong person. I can't figure out who's
        saying what here. I wish people would be more careful in showing what is being
        quoted and who said it.

        In a message dated 2/12/2008 11:37:47 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
        solicitr@... writes:

        Back around the time Film I came out either The Economist
        or The Financial Times reported that Tolkien got a
        percentage above a certain sum, on top of IIRC $250,000 US-
        which meant he only realised $10,000, the other 96% going
        to the Inland Revenue.
        What does Film I mean? Does this mean the first of the Jackson films? The
        top income rate in the U.K. is 40% and hasn't been 96% since at least the
        1970's. Is this talking about the money paid to Tolkien in 1968 when he sold
        the film rights to the books? According to everything I've read before,
        Tolkien got about $250,000 and didn't get any future percentages.

        Wendell Wagner





        **************The year's hottest artists on the red carpet at the Grammy
        Awards. Go to AOL Music.
        (http://music.aol.com/grammys?NCID=aolcmp00300000002565)


        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • William Cloud Hicklin
        ... of the Jackson films? The ... been 96% since at least the ... Tolkien in 1968 when he sold ... everything I ve read before, ... future percentages.
        Message 3 of 13 , Feb 13, 2008
        • 0 Attachment
          --- In mythsoc@yahoogroups.com, WendellWag@...
          wrote:

          > What does Film I mean? Does this mean the first
          of the Jackson films? The
          > top income rate in the U.K. is 40% and hasn't
          been 96% since at least the
          > 1970's. Is this talking about the money paid to
          Tolkien in 1968 when he sold
          > the film rights to the books? According to
          everything I've read before,
          > Tolkien got about $250,000 and didn't get any
          future percentages.
          >


          By Film I I meant The Fellowship of the Ring, so the story
          appeared at the end of '01 or early '02. The top tax rate
          was indeed 96% in 1969, when JRRT sold the rights to UA,
          and so it's correct in a way to assert he got either a)
          $250,000 or b) $10,000. Both have been reported.

          Anyway, six years ago the press, quoting someone from
          HarperCollins, confirmed that there was a percentage deal
          in the contract.
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.