Posted by Weezer234 at 68.114.197.22 on March 08, 2004 at 20:30:40:
In Reply to: i thought for one that miramax wanted to do it as posted by Weezer234 on March 08, 2004 at 20:29:52:
dont know if youve seen it, but i believe thats talked about on the lotr episode
: either one abridged movie or just two movies or something like that, and also cant really lay blame for those things, sometimes big undertakings can flop, i think the potter books though were a lot easier risk to take
:
: : I do remember hearing that Miramax passed on Lord of the Rings awhile back. And at the time, I wondered why, but could understand because of the money and the risk. But now, I'm wondering who really said "no" after all. Was it the Weinstein's "no" or...
: : In this week's Newsweek magazine, (Mar. 15) it has an article on Michael Eisner. In a little blurb it says, "(He) nixed no-brainers like 'Harry Potter' and 'The Lord of the Rings'..." and so on. So, my question is this...
: : Did the Weinstein's say "no" and Eisner just said "fine" or did Eisner say "no" and Weinstein's just nod their heads and shift in their boots? Anybody know?
: : Of course, this really doesn't matter except for the fact that I can have one more thing to hate Eisner for. Also... the thing about Harry Potter. I'm assuming it would've been produced under Walt Disney Pictures... but could Mr. Potter have possibly passed under Miramax's nose(s)?