ROTTEN TOMATOES: MGM Chief Chats About "Terminator 4" and "The Hobbit"

MGM Chief Chats About "Terminator 4" and "The Hobbit"

by Scott Weinberg | October 26, 2006

Discuss Article | Blog Article | Email To A Friend

MGM head honcho Rick Sands was recently cornered at a ShowEast event, and he used the opportunity to drop a few nuggets of information on a pair of MGM's Wish List projects: Looks like he's trying to get "Terminator 4" off the ground (sans Ahnold)... oh, and a pair of movies based on something called "The Hobbit."

From ComingSoon.net & The Hollywood Reporter: "Sands is packaging the fourth "Terminator" film -- it will be titled "Terminator blah blah, not Four," Sands joked -- with a new star likely to fill the Arnold Schwarzenegger role. "It's like the 'Batman' or 'Superman' franchise in that it lends itself to having different actors in the roles," he said.

Sands is in talks with New Line Cinema to get the rights to produce two prequel films to "The Lord of the Rings" series, based on J.R.R. Tolkien's "The Hobbit," he said.

Other projects he mentioned include a sequel to "The Thomas Crown Affair," set to star Pierce Brosnan, and a remake of "Dirty Rotten Scoundrels."

Related Items

Movie:	Dirty Rotten Scoundrels
	The Hobbit
	The Terminator
	Thomas Crown Affair, The
	The Lord of the Rings: The Motion Picture Trilogy
Celeb:	Pierce Brosnan
	Arnold Schwarzenegger

(1-20 of 21 posts) | Reply

Now it's dark writes:
on Oct 26 2006 09:42 AM

Michael Bay for The Hobbit!

(Reply to this)

FireflyFan4evr writes:
on Oct 26 2006 11:13 AM

In reply to this comment (#847315)
I sure hope you are joking about that. And if you aren't, well, I sure hope nobody listens to you.

(Reply to this)

rustdog writes:
on Oct 26 2006 11:16 AM

Two films for the Hobbit. Isn't there a pretty good half hour cartoon that covers the same material. Can you really make two movies. Oh and Jon Cena as the terminator...... oh shit.

(Reply to this)

Ciaranmv writes:
on Oct 26 2006 11:34 AM

I like the Hobbit, but it is nowhere near as epic or powerful as the three LOTR books. And what's up with making two Hobbit movies? Two-parter?

(Reply to this)

WiseGuy writes:
on Oct 26 2006 11:36 AM

There shouldn't be any remake of Dirty Rotten Scoundrels! That film was a comic masterpiece and there is no way they are going to top it. They should just scrap that idea immediately. In regards to the T4 news, why the hell make a T4 if you can't get Schwarzenegger. Arnold Schwarzenegger is THE Terminator and to cast anyone else in that role is just wrong.

EDIT: What we really need is a ROBOCOP VS TERMINATOR movie starring Arnold Schwarzenegger and Peter Weller. I bet there's a lot of people out there eagerly anticipating such a film.

(Reply to this)

tyler8186 writes:
on Oct 26 2006 11:44 AM

2 movies?
suckage

(Reply to this)

synergyred writes:
on Oct 26 2006 12:07 PM

I agree. I have no idea why they're going to make 2 hobit movies. Maybeit will just have a RotK length movie that gets split up into two seperate ones.

(Reply to this)

Reeven writes:
on Oct 26 2006 12:55 PM

Wow, thats what, 5 movies announced and not 1 original film among them.

(Reply to this)

aconline writes:
on Oct 26 2006 01:03 PM

They are going to take my idea for Harry Potter and split the movie into 2 so that storylines are not lost, so that characters are not undeveloped. Plus, they will make $600 million instead of just $300 million. Stupid? I think not.

T4, sure why not. T3 didn't make budget in the box office. They got too sure of themselves. Without Arnold, could be good, could suck the royal big one.

Thomas Crown 2? Not without Brosnan and Leary!

(Reply to this)

dagreenman18 writes:
on Oct 26 2006 02:23 PM

just say that peater jackson is involved with the Hobbit and im in. as for T4, ill wait till i see more.

(Reply to this)

Missileman writes:
on Oct 26 2006 06:33 PM

Having read the Hobbit a number of times, I don't think it would be difficult to get two films out of it, there is certainly a lot of content. IMO more than could be comfortably shown in 90 minutes. (But when did PJ make his last 90 minute film) :)

Dirty Rotten Scoundrels hasnt yet sufficiently dated, why re-make it and just who are you going to get to play the parts? Adam Sandler? *shudder*

Maybe Jim Carrey could pull off one of the con man roles.

(Reply to this)

Now it's dark writes:
on Oct 26 2006 08:07 PM

The Hobbit is short, but it's almost pure action.

(Reply to this)

fizzypulp writes:
on Oct 27 2006 04:27 AM

Although it was meant to be read on its own - the fact that what happens in the Hobbit is the whole reason for LOTR then it can be classed as a pre-quel. It is totally irelevant that the word had not been invented then. Its one of those great books that can be read on its own or as part of a series.
I think they should stick to doing one movie - there are plenty of bits that can be missed out i.e. the trolls sitting out till sunrise scene - great story but not releavnt to the story as a whole.

(Reply to this)

Cozz writes:
on Oct 27 2006 05:07 AM

Two movies for 'The Hobbit'? I certainly hope so. Hollywood frowns on any theater movie over 2.5-3 hours and no way can a quality Hobbit be made in only 3 hours without cutting out a lot of cool scenes. Who cares if they call it a pre-quel or a ham sandwich as long as it gets made and gets made really well. Im wondering who should play the younger Bilbo?

T4 - who can sound as robotic as Arnold can?

(Reply to this)

Majesty writes:
on Oct 27 2006 06:11 AM

The Hobbit? Yes please. Peter Jackson? No please. He already butchered LoTR.

There is enough material in The Hobbit to consider 2 movies. Even if those movies only last 90-120 minutes each, it should be quite enough. WB already made a 75 minutes comic of The Hobbit in 1977 (which was really good and very like the book. There was no changes like a psychotic Galadriel or a crazy Balrog).

Anyway, New Line said once they want to bring back the characters from LoTR... Now, it's been a while since I read the Hobbit, but as far as I can remember, the only characters that can be back are Gandalf and Gollum.

Peter Jackson, for the love of Tolkien, stay away from The Hobbit and let someone REALLY make good movies out of that great story!

(Reply to this)

hello_goodbye writes:
on Oct 27 2006 09:50 AM

In reply to this comment (#847329)
Elrond was also in the hobbit and Sauraman (sorry for that being spelt wrong) is spoken about could easily be brought in due to this if they wanted too.

(Reply to this)

Now it's dark writes:
on Oct 27 2006 12:59 PM

In reply to this comment (#847327)
Yes but the 3 trolls were in FotR, so I doubt they'll cut them out.

(Reply to this)

fizzypulp writes:
on Oct 28 2006 03:35 AM

In reply to this comment (#847329)
er for some strange reason im thinking that Bilbo was in both the Hobbit and LOTR triligy (well FOTR and ROTK)!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

(Reply to this)

misfitfilms writes:
on Oct 30 2006 07:52 AM

[b]rick sands, you and your cronies SUCK...[/b]
i blame the sad state of the industry on people like rick sands. why are these the people allowed to greenlight pictures!? first, and i'd like to thank wiseguy for his comment, you cannot and should not remake "dirty rotten scoundrels" - it is a comedic masterpiece and should be loved for what it is. remakes, remakes, remakes!!! you studio executives make me sick! (i also hate that i cannot use explecitives on this forum) innundating us, the lovers of film and filmmaking, with such disgusting displays of unoriginal film projects, and they actually believe that they are creative. studio execs like rick sands need to be ousted for their pompous management of the film industry. even as poorly executed as terminator 3 was, they still warrant a fourth film...without schwarzenegger in the title role? again, it's the poor judgment of film industry mba-degree holders (that's what the hollywood suits are, no matter what they say) without a creative bone in their collective bodies. i cannot wait for the revolution in cinema when prospective film projects are not subjected to the ideas of dimwitted industry fools like rick sands.

(Reply to this)

Crenshaw writes:
on Oct 30 2006 08:24 AM

[b]Two Hobbit movies is actually just perfect[/b]
Just got done reading this to my kids, so it's fresh in my mind. I can see 2 hobbit movies with NO problem. The Hobbit is PACKED with content. The 1st film could take Bilbo and the dwarves through Mirkwood, and end just as the barrel-bound crew has escaped the Elven King and are floating down the river. Bilbo spots the Lonely Mountain for the first time and Fade to Black. Film #2 can then spend a decent amount of time in character development (making Bard more interesting), dealing with Smaug and the politics that set up the Battle of Five Armies. There is easily 2 movies in there. I hope they do it, because that will do it right.

(Reply to this)