Dom Post on The Hobbit

November 28th, 2012 at 12:00 pm by David Farrar

The Dom Post editorial:

Along the way J Tolkien’s creation had to contend with trolls, goblins, giant spiders and Smaug, the dragon. Jackson has had to deal with accountants, jittery film bosses, Actors’ Equity and the Council of Trade Unions.

Bilbo returned to his hobbit hole rich and possessed of a magic ring, but his neighbours never looked at him the same way again. About him hung the unsettling aroma of adventure.

Jackson returned from his first foray to Hollywood with a clutch of Oscars for his work on The Lord of the Rings trilogy, but he too found perceptions had changed. About him hung the aroma of success. He was no longer a hometown boy made good, but a movie mogul. Hence Actors’ Equity’s attempt to use as a vehicle for settling long-running industry grievances.

A dumber strategy is difficult to imagine. The Lord of the Rings gave thousands of Kiwis a start in the film industry and became the greatest marketing tool New Zealand has possessed. Tolkien fans flocked to see the places where the story they loved was brought to life.

The Hobbit is doing the same. Over the past year, 2000 people have been employed on the three films Jackson is making from the book and work will continue for another two years.

To organise an international blacklist of the project was close to being an act of sabotage.

And it was done by an Australian union that had probably just a few dozen members in New Zealand, almost none of whom were even involved in The Hobbit. People forget that in fact the terms and conditions for The Hobbit were better than arguably any other production in NZ.

Yes, The Lord of the Rings was shot in New Zealand, yes, Jackson wanted to make the films here, yes, other potential English-speaking locations were already unionised. However, for every argument to suggest Warner Bros would have no choice but to bow to union demands, there was another to suggest it would pack up and go elsewhere.

In the end I believe Peter Jackson when he says the films were at serious risk. I do not think he is a liar. Those who argue otherwise base their arguments on speculation.

If Jackson felt Actors’ Equity was jeopardising the project, he needed to be listened to. Fortunately he was by the Government, which changed the law to ease Warner’s concerns and pumped even more public money into the project.

Some things are too important to gamble on a coin toss. New Zealand is a minor player in an industry in which tax breaks and publicly funded incentives are part of the furniture.

The choice before John Key’s Government was simple – stand on its dignity or sweeten the pot. Today’s red carpet premiere of the most eagerly anticipated movie of 2012 confirms it made the right choice. Other potential locations will be looking on in envy.

Yey the hypocrites who spent two years attacking the deal constantly, and vowing to repeal it, are now out there at the premiere. They had a choice of supporting jobs for New Zealanders or supporting a malignant Australian union, and they chose union solidarity over the best interests of New Zealand.

Tags: , ,

88 Responses to “Dom Post on The Hobbit”

  1. anonymouse (715 comments) says:

    they chose union solidarity over the best interests of New Zealand

    And the recent labour Party conference gave these same Unions a whole lot more power to determine the leader of that party…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. Hamnida (905 comments) says:

    More Right wing propaganda.

    I guess we can expect a lot of this on Kiwiblog today.

    It was proven Jackson was a liar. He said the films were at risk, but it was discovered that Warner Bros had already confirmed the films would be made in New Zealand at the time of the industrial dispute.

    http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL1104/S00081/helen-kelly-the-hobbit-dispute.htm

    I can see why you Neolibs are so sensitive about this. The Key/Hollywood/DotCom saga will end Key’s tenure as prime minister around March or April next year.

    [DPF: Okay - how bout you promise never to comment here again after April if Key is till Prime Minister then?]

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. IHStewart (388 comments) says:

    Agreed. As for todays PETA protest it is hard to get away from the idea that once again gullible kiwis are being used against NZ inc. best interests on the behest of off shore interests.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. bhudson (4,740 comments) says:

    and they chose union solidarity over the best interests of New Zealand.

    And Shearer, Robertson and King will parade down the red carpet as if they had some constructive role to play in the success of LOTR and The Hobbit.

    When the reverse is the case – they threatened an entire industry in Wellington. They put peoples’ livelihoods at risk for the sake of political ideology.

    Robertson and King, in particular, should be hanging their heads in shame. They were actively working to undermine economic growth in the region.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. bhudson (4,740 comments) says:

    This escape your attention yesterday Hamnida?

    “[Warner Bros] had sent a location scout around England and Scotland to take photos, and they literally had the script broken down to each scene, and in each scene there were pictures of the Scottish Highlands, and the forests in England… and that was to convince us we could easily just go over there and shoot the film,” he told Radio New Zealand.

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/entertainment/film/8002142/Misunderstanding-in-Hobbit-spat

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. Elaycee (4,392 comments) says:

    Hamfisted:

    It was proven Jackson was a liar. He said the films were at risk, but it was discovered that Warner Bros had already confirmed the films would be made in New Zealand at the time of the industrial dispute.

    And then to support this moronic belief, Hambone provides a link to….. an OPINION PIECE by HELEN KELLY!

    Whaaaat? Kelly was one of the bloody instigators of the global boycott and yet Hamfisted wants to use this as ‘evidence’ to support his / her argument that Sir Peter J somehow told lies?

    Thanks for confirming the obvious, Hamnida – you are nothing more than a complete sock puppet.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. Lance (2,655 comments) says:

    The leftist Hobbit haters are in quick. Must be a sore point that the unions have been shown to be at odds with what normal Kiwi’s think.

    Who to believe … Helen Kelly or Sir Peter Jackson?

    Bra hahahaha

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. ross69 (3,652 comments) says:

    > there was another [argument] to suggest it would pack up and go elsewhere

    Except that argument was put forward by those blissfully unaware of the facts, among them those with a pathological hatred of unions. Their views are not worth a pinch of shit.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. The Bin Man (6 comments) says:

    Truth newspaper will pay cash for photos of any Hobbit Hypocrites on the red carpet tonight.

    For more on this buy Truth tomorrow.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. queenstfarmer (782 comments) says:

    Hamnida thinks it was “proven” Jackson was a liar, because Helen Kelly said he was.

    Comedy gold! Too funny.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. sparky (235 comments) says:

    Hypocrites is not a strong enough word. Who in there right mind would believe Helen Kelly, the union troll.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. RightNow (6,994 comments) says:

    and in chimes ross69 with his bilious lies.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. Monique Watson (1,062 comments) says:

    Hamnida, that first link is hilarious. It is basically left wingers circle jerking left wing journalists. It hurt my eyes. Can you just cut and paste the proof where the studios had committed to NZ already.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. Paulus (2,627 comments) says:

    I hope that those lining the red carpet verbally let Shearer, Robertson and King know what they think of their hypocracy

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. scrubone (3,099 comments) says:

    I can see why you Neolibs are so sensitive about this. The Key/Hollywood/DotCom saga will end Key’s tenure as prime minister around March or April next year.

    This is cleary good news, has anyone told John Key?

    I suspect Obama will last slightly longer, but not by much.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. RF (1,396 comments) says:

    Ham Bone the Hobbit Hater.. Jesus H Christ you are one sick and sorry unit. Typical lefty sad sack green with envy.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. RRM (9,917 comments) says:

    There are many problems with citing Helen Kelly’s claims as evidence of anyone else’s dishonesty, Hamnida…

    … but the greatest of these problems is that Helen Kelly and the CTU were proven liars in their statements around the Ports of Auckland strikes.

    HELEN KELLY LIED about the pay rates and conditions of the striking wharfies, and these lies were exposed by a published report by auditors.

    HELEN KELLY LIED that the pickets wee not keeping truckies out of the port, and these lies were exposed by Stuff footage. (STUFF, for christsakes… not even a serious investigative journalist!)

    So HELEN KELLY IS A PROVEN LIAR Hamnida. The dishonest mouthpiece of a dishonest organisation.

    So only an indoctrinated true believer in the unionist’s struggle, or someone completely ignorant of the facts, would have any time for an opinion piece by Helen Kelly about anyone else’s dishonesty.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. Dean Papa (784 comments) says:

    heh …poor, predictable DPF, still relentlessly hammering the point. But I reckon, deep down, DPF might just be racked with uncertainty, and even a little anguish. Because, despite all this toadying and faces being pressed firmly up against Sir Jacko’s royal arse, I suspect that there are a few pangs of doubt flickering away in DPF’s enormous brain. Maybe, just maybe, Sir Jacko and his bros at Warners really have taken New Zealand for a ride after all? Playing NZers off against each other does appear to be a rather simple tactic, and so easy to implement, given that NZ is such a very small nation, with a somewhat insecure population, so very easily whipped up into a state of hysteria. The vast majority of posters to Kiwiblog being a case in point. It’s not a nice feeling is it, to have been manipulated by others? And it was so easy too, wasn’t it. Sir Jacko only had to start the ball rolling, step aside and watch as NZers turned on each other. The prospect of the evil Ocker union, trying to sabotage the NZ film industry, no doubt motivated as they were by jealousy, is just so damned appealing to those unwashed Kiwi masses. And poor helpless Sir Jacko, close to tears certainly made for quite a sight. It couldn’t fail, could it? And wasn’t it great to see Kiwis turn on each other. Poor Robyn Malcolm, Jennifer Ward-Lealand, didn’t have a chance, really, did they? When riled, the Kiwi has a vicious mouth on him, that’s for sure. It’s little wonder bullying is such a problem when you have this ugly mob mentality lying just below the surface!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. Keeping Stock (10,339 comments) says:

    Here’s my quote to trump your St Helen Kelly one Hamnida:

    The chief executive of a leading production company says the MEAA’s call for a boycott of The Hobbit films is based on “duplicitous and inaccurate” claims.

    South Pacific Pictures chief executive John Barnett also believes it to be untrue that McKellen, one of the stars of Lord of the Rings, supports any boycott.

    “Last night, he [Sir Ian McKellen] was quoted in the UK saying that the problem with the stage in the UK is that young stage actors were too greedy and want too much money. I don’t think he is a supporter of what they are up to,” Barnett told Close Up.

    “The MEAA has been struck off the register (of NZ incorporated societies) for failing to file any reports in the last three years, which is one reason that the production company can’t enter into any agreement with it,” Barnett said.

    He describes the MEAA as ineffective and greedy.

    “In the three years they have been here, they have not created one job and have not improved anyone’s working condition one bit,” Barnett said.

    http://tvnz.co.nz/entertainment-news/plot-thickens-over-hobbit-production-troubles-3801832

    The Dom-Post is right on the money when its editorial described the MEAA/NZ Actors’ Equity/CTU/Helen Kelly as dumb. They were essentially cutting off their noses to spite their faces. Thank goodness that the Government came through and the movies were made here, and those who don’t regard Sir Peter Jackson as a traitor or too big for his boots will applaud him this afternoon.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. RightNow (6,994 comments) says:

    pap:
    something lacking solid value or substance

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. gravedodger (1,566 comments) says:

    @ Elayce 12 22, Very harsh on sock puppets, “lamb chop” was a very credible commenter.for Sherry Lewis

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. dime (9,972 comments) says:

    The economic benefits of the Hobbit movies are huge to this country.

    I know its hard for the lefties to wrap their head around it because it is a business deal.

    So the government basically refunded the GST paid on the movies. As far as I’m aware the didn’t refund the PAYE the 2000 employees paid?

    The boost is tourism dollars from this will be huge. These are great times.

    Its funny how lefties have no big picture concept.

    Full disclosure: I cant stand the LOTR movies. I went to the first one the day it opened and left half way through. I eventually saw them on dvd cause the HOT young chick i was dating loved them so i bit the bullet and watched. Now I’m depressed, what a hot little thing i let get away! Anyway, the chances of me seeing the hobbit movies is pretty freakin slim! the only thing im interested in is how 48 fps will look. but im not sitting through 3 hours of walking midgets to find out.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. Nookin (3,341 comments) says:

    gd
    Shari Lewies, I think you meant.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. dime (9,972 comments) says:

    As for the Labour MP’s going to the premiere – BAHAHAHAAHAHA doesnt that just sum them up nicely? go on about how they love the poor, hate the rich blah blah but as soon as they get an invite to a flash function they are first to reply!

    ya know all the sacks of shit leftys here would love to go tonight too. just sad.

    and then theres annette king. she was freakin hilarious on ZB this morning. tried to preempt the hobbit thing but came off looking like a LIAR.

    My fav bit – king telling us how labour subsidised peter jackson first!!! 3 minues later “tell us stephen, why do national subsidise movies but not other industries? for the “worker” out there”. Not sure why joyce didnt just say – well what was your rationale when you started with lotr annette?

    she takes credit for LOTR then bags National for doing what they did. Sad sad sad

    anyway. the left are just sad wannabes that will never really make it :)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. RRM (9,917 comments) says:

    dime – as I said yesterday, I hope the tv cameras are rolling when the Labour trio rock up to introduce themselves to their host Sir Peter Jackson:

    Labour: Hi Peter! Nice party mate. We’re the cnuts who tried to sabotage your business and make this whole thing fall over. No hard feelings though eh?

    Jackson: GET OUT.

    Although I suspect Jackson will be far too gracious to stoop to anything like that…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. Elaycee (4,392 comments) says:

    gravedodger:

    @ Elayce 12 22, Very harsh on sock puppets, “lamb chop” was a very credible commenter.for Sherry Lewis

    Ouch. You are correct. Mea culpa.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lamb_Chop_(puppet)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. Hamnida (905 comments) says:

    The facts remain unchanged – Jackson said filming the Hobbit in NZ was at risk when Warner Bros had already confirmed it would be filmed here.

    That is a LIE. Jackson is a LIAR.

    It’s good night for John Key when the DotCom case hits Court.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. bhudson (4,740 comments) says:

    @Hamnida,

    You are correct – the facts remain unchanged.

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/entertainment/film/8002142/Misunderstanding-in-Hobbit-spat

    The filming was at risk and Kelly and co (including you) are trying to revise history to suit their purpose.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  29. RightNow (6,994 comments) says:

    Ha ha hamnida, you wish. You assert without evidence.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  30. queenstfarmer (782 comments) says:

    It’s good night for John Key when the DotCom case hits Court.

    Will it be good night for you, just on the offchance are wrong?

    PS still waiting for you to say whether you’ve filed a police complaint about the animal cruelty you say you are aware of, or whether you’re going to just do nothing.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  31. Hamnida (905 comments) says:

    queenstfarmer – Disturbing that a farmer thinks animal cruelty is OK.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  32. Hamnida (905 comments) says:

    Q: Why did Peter Jackson have a bowl of shit at his wedding?

    A: To keep the flies off the groom.

    [DPF: Okay you have lost it. 50 demerits]

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  33. wat dabney (3,756 comments) says:

    In order to continue lining their own pockets, troughing union leaders would throw workers under the bus.

    Nothing new there then.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  34. bhudson (4,740 comments) says:

    @Hamnida,

    You really are just a nasty little piece of work.

    Are your views representative of those on the Left?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  35. sparky (235 comments) says:

    Hamnida, I have just been reading your comments. You are one very sick nutter. The only flies around here will be landing on you.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  36. dime (9,972 comments) says:

    Peter Jackson: “hey hamnida, was wondering if i could fly you down to wellington for the premiere of the hobbit? ill send my plane”

    Hamnida *so excited he can barely hold the phone* “SIR PETER!!! GODBLESS YOU!!! whos dick do i have to suck???”

    you knows its true hammy. you would fold in a heart beat.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  37. Elaycee (4,392 comments) says:

    @Hamfisted: Is it a quiet day at the union today? Nothing better to do than parrot the jaundiced views of Ms Kelly?

    But you’re sure getting yourself in a tizz… has a big black Tibetan Yak Hound been around to your place and humped your rubber duck?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  38. queenstfarmer (782 comments) says:

    queenstfarmer – Disturbing that a farmer thinks animal cruelty is OK.

    No, I don’t. But you must do, if you have information about animal cruelty (as you claim) yet do nothing about it. So I’m sure you will make your complaint, won’t you? Or will you just… do nothing?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  39. RF (1,396 comments) says:

    Hey. Hobbit Hater Ham Bone. I have been checking out your followers. Shit mate with friends such as those you do not need enemies. Guess you need to hang out with your troll mates down in the caves as the day light will be hard on your pink eyes.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  40. Steve (North Shore) (4,561 comments) says:

    Hamnida should go and sit on the naughty mat and stop playing with his dick.

    Of shit, I forgot, don’t feed the trolls

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  41. mikenmild (11,247 comments) says:

    The bit about the subsidies equating to the extra GST from the production spending could use fact checking. From memory, a Treasury evaluation of the subsidies over the past 10-12 years was very equivocal.
    Hamnida is a bit of a dick. The filming was never really at risk except that Warners wanted to screw extra money out of someone to compensate for the exchange rate changes. Luckily, the union chumps offered themselves as convenient scapegoats.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  42. RightNow (6,994 comments) says:

    Mikey: “subsidies equating to the extra GST from the production spending could use fact checking. From memory, a Treasury evaluation of the subsidies over the past 10-12 years was very equivocal.”
    Yes, I agree, let’s break it down to pre-2008 and post-2008 and have a determination over whether Key’s government or Clark’s government was better or worse on this shall we? Why beat around the bush any longer eh?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  43. mikenmild (11,247 comments) says:

    Yes, let’s do that – both governments have been eager to suck up to a fashionable industry.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  44. RightNow (6,994 comments) says:

    Cool, you find the data and I’ll split it out.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  45. Warren Murray (311 comments) says:

    Tv 3 reported that the additional cost of retaining the hobbit was about $31m, or 50 % more than the subsidy that they would have been entitled to, plus the legislation to clarify the employment status of film workers. It only came about because Helen Kelly and her mates overplayed their hand. Every time i see that woman i think “she almost cost the country the opportunity to make a $600 million film, plus whatever other revenue any other films and associated spin off benefits may attract.

    NZ was bloody lucky that WB only asked for $31m!

    I also have to say that if the $90 – $100m is like some kind of GST trade off, it seems a very elegant solution and i tip my hat to whoever came up with that. Generally, exporters dont pay GST, although they can claim the GST on their costs and isnt the film an export? If the films are worth $600m, the GST would be between $78- $90m, depending on whether the starting figure is GST incl or excl. Perhaps WB would have got that anyway and someone is using the extra subsidy to beat Helen Kelly with, well she deserves everything she gets.

    Hate that woman

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  46. mikenmild (11,247 comments) says:

    You could start from this:
    http://werewolf.co.nz/2011/02/identity-crisis-hits-the-big-screen/

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  47. mikenmild (11,247 comments) says:

    Or this:
    http://www.iscr.org.nz/f390,10883/jvb_110208_GOV_AT_THE_BIDDING_TABLE.pdf

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  48. mikenmild (11,247 comments) says:

    And this guy seems quite well-informed:
    http://vfxsoldier.wordpress.com/2012/10/24/the-accelerating-subsidy-war/

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  49. RightNow (6,994 comments) says:

    No real meat in the first link

    Second link:

    “4.2 Movie subsidies
    One important sector where New Zealand has been successful in attracting foreign
    projects is in the screen productions industry. Most (in)famously, the filming of the
    Lord of the Rings trilogy not only put the New Zealand industry on the map, but also
    generated very large tax breaks for New Line Cinema—estimated in the $300-400
    million range by the OECD. “

    So $100-$133 million per movie for LOTR trilogy…

    The third link also links to here: http://vfxsoldier.wordpress.com/2010/10/25/new-zealand-casualties-of-the-film-subsidy-war/, which has more meat in it, and disproves the lies of people like Ha ha hamnida and dean pap

    “The Real Reason The Hobbit Will Leave NZ

    There are two reasons The Hobbit may not be filmed in New Zealand and they really have nothing to do with this labor dispute. I mean really, Warner Bros. has made many movies with many laborers that have collective bargaining agreements.

    In fact many of the workers who are a part of various guilds have their respective agreements met even when they go film in non-union areas like New Zealand.

    The real reason The Hobbit may go to places like Canada, Ireland, Scotland, and the Czech Republic is:

    1)Huge government subsidies offered by each country to do the production there.
    2)Currency fluctuations that make it cheaper to shoot outside the US.

    New Zealand Subsidies Are Dwarfed By Other Desperate Countries

    New Zealand has benefited from a subsidy where a producer can get a 15% kickback from whatever production costs occur in New Zealand. The subsidy was much larger back when the Rings trilogies were made in New Zealand because of a loophole. How much did the government give to New Line Cinemas to create the 3 Lord Of The Rings films?

    In 2003, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development criticised New Zealand’s government for providing a subsidy or tax loophole worth an estimated $300m to $400m for the three Lord of the Rings films, a loophole later closed.

    While New Zealand has since tightened the size of their film subsidy, other countries and states have come to the table to throw even larger amounts of money away.

    The UK is offering 20%, New Mexico 25%, Canada 35%, Michigan 42%. What’s interesting is that independent studies have shown that there has been little economic spillover from these kinds of subsidies and they have taken a toll governments that have lost a lot of money on such investments.”

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  50. mikenmild (11,247 comments) says:

    Oh, I forgot – you are interested in pre- and post-2008 for some reason. Who knows (or cares)? DPF is best at that kind of tomfoolery – see his laughable ‘analysis’ on ‘Health and Safety last week.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  51. ross69 (3,652 comments) says:

    > Thank goodness that the Government came through and the movies were made here

    Hmmm the movies were always going to be made here. But Warners must surely be delighted that John Key behaved liked the craven politician we know him to be. Have you ever seen a PM bend over more quickly? No wonder Warners are asking for more handouts from the government…how long before Key drops his trousers again?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  52. bhudson (4,740 comments) says:

    the movies were always going to be made here.

    Well, no ross69…

    “[Warner Bros] had sent a location scout around England and Scotland to take photos, and they literally had the script broken down to each scene, and in each scene there were pictures of the Scottish Highlands, and the forests in England… and that was to convince us we could easily just go over there and shoot the film,” he told Radio New Zealand.

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/entertainment/film/8002142/Misunderstanding-in-Hobbit-spat

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  53. RightNow (6,994 comments) says:

    Haha I know mikey, you should try and change the subject, you’re the best at that kind of tomfoolery…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  54. RightNow (6,994 comments) says:

    ross69, you should try reading more:

    The real reason The Hobbit may go to places like Canada, Ireland, Scotland, and the Czech Republic is:

    1)Huge government subsidies offered by each country to do the production there.
    2)Currency fluctuations that make it cheaper to shoot outside the US.

    And perhaps you could comment on the fact the LOTR trilogy got $300-$400 million in subsidies and tell us why it was ok for Helen to do that at $100-$133million per film but not ok for Key to ok $65-$85 million for the Hobbit?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  55. mikenmild (11,247 comments) says:

    So film subsidies, good or bad? Or only good depending on who is in government? Changing the labour laws for the convenience of one industry – good or bad?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  56. RightNow (6,994 comments) says:

    Why don’t you answer this question mikey:
    … the LOTR trilogy got $300-$400 million in subsidies – tell us why it was ok for Helen to do that at $100-$133million per film but not ok for Key to ok $65-$85 million for the Hobbit?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  57. ross69 (3,652 comments) says:

    > Every time i see that woman i think she almost cost the country the opportunity to make a $600 million film

    It must be a full moon. WTF it actually is…that explains things.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  58. ross69 (3,652 comments) says:

    > Well, no ross69

    Well, yes actually. It’s funny how you miss the part out where Jackson suggests they films were always going to be made here…could you be any more dishonest?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  59. RightNow (6,994 comments) says:

    “It must be a full moon. WTF it actually is…that explains things.”
    Like your howling?

    Answer my question:
    the LOTR trilogy got $300-$400 million in subsidies – tell us why it was ok for Helen to do that at $100-$133million per film but not ok for Key to ok $65-$85 million for the Hobbit?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  60. mikenmild (11,247 comments) says:

    I’m not sure I’m up to that kind of analysis. The Treasury seems to have been firmly against film subsidies all along. I’m glad that all the films have been made here, but I’d hesitate before saying they were good investments of taxpayer cash. If I had to answer your question without researching the numbers (and of course I don’t coz you’re not the boos of me), I’d say that the less spent the better, but that’s without quantifying the benefits.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  61. bhudson (4,740 comments) says:

    ross69,

    It’s funny how you miss the part out where Jackson suggests they films were always going to be made here

    Where, in that article, not a Heleln Kelly op ed, does it say that?

    You are the one trying to revise history ross69

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  62. ross69 (3,652 comments) says:

    “The real reason The Hobbit may go to places like Canada, Ireland, Scotland, and the Czech Republic is: 1)Huge government subsidies offered by each country to do the production there. 2)Currency fluctuations that make it cheaper to shoot outside the US.”

    So when Jackson said the dispute with the unions could cause the Hobbit to go offshore, he was lying through his teeth? Why couldn’t you have admitted that earlier instead of buggering around?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  63. RightNow (6,994 comments) says:

    “If I had to answer your question without researching the numbers (and of course I don’t coz you’re not the boos of me)…”
    What is patently obvious from your commenting career at Kiwiblog is that you can never back up your assertions with evidence.
    It’s just who you are, but you should understand that we all know it. We know you know we know too.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  64. RightNow (6,994 comments) says:

    “So when Jackson said the dispute with the unions could cause the Hobbit to go offshore, he was lying through his teeth? ”

    Nice try, but there are other references (as mentioned several times to you previously in this very thread) that show the studios were very real about their threat to move the production due to increased risk. Those reasons I quoted were from one source, and not exclusive.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  65. mikenmild (11,247 comments) says:

    You can’t be that wedded to simplicity can you? Let’s see – would the Hobbit have been filmed here (or even filmed at all) if LOTR had not been filmed here? Would LOTR have been filmed here without subsidies? What was the level of subsidy required in each case to ensure that the respective films were made here?
    Those a just a few of the questions you might need to resolve before coming up with the magic answers. Ten you might get on to the opportunity costs of the respective investment, given the plethora of other things each government could have chosen to subsidise. Start to see the difficulty?
    If you want to make a case for 1999-2008 was bad but 2008-2012 was good, you might find some clearer cases. Luckily (or unluckily, depending on your point of view), NZ government rarely diverge radically from the policies of their predecessors.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  66. ross69 (3,652 comments) says:

    “The sky is falling, the sky is falling”

    http://tvnz.co.nz/breakfast-news/breakfast-friday-october-22-3848618/video

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  67. RightNow (6,994 comments) says:

    mikey, I didn’t have a problem with the subsidies LOTR got, why should I have a problem with us getting the Hobbit filmed here at even better value?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  68. ross69 (3,652 comments) says:

    > the studios were very real about their threat to move the production due to increased risk

    The studios were very real about how much they’d invested in pre-production. They weren’t going to throw that investment away. But manufacturing a crisis certainly proved profitable as the PM dropped his trousers in record time.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  69. RightNow (6,994 comments) says:

    “But manufacturing a crisis certainly proved profitable as the PM dropped his trousers in record time.”

    What did Helen drop to get LOTR filmed here?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  70. RightNow (6,994 comments) says:

    Come on ross, answer the questions. Don’t you have an answer?

    “the LOTR trilogy got $300-$400 million in subsidies – tell us why it was ok for Helen to do that at $100-$133million per film but not ok for Key to ok $65-$85 million for the Hobbit?”

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  71. OneTrack (3,092 comments) says:

    ross69 – what is this blind faith you gave that the evil movie moguls wouldn’t have just pulled the plug and headed off overseas if they thought that the unions were going to put their movie at risk. You say they are only in it for the money. It was already going to be cheaper in east europe. But, I guess you need to believe what you need to believe. The alternative isn’t a very good look is it.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  72. mikenmild (11,247 comments) says:

    If LOTR had never been made here, would we have missed it? Hypotheticals are very amusing. Rational analysis tends to cast doubt on the efficacy of subsidies.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  73. OneTrack (3,092 comments) says:

    RightNow – You know as well as everybody else, “It’s ok when the left does it” because they have higher goals than us prols.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  74. RightNow (6,994 comments) says:

    Oh come on mikey, provide some evidence for your ‘rational analysis’.
    Refer http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2012/11/dom_post_on_the_hobbit.html#comment-1054143

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  75. mikenmild (11,247 comments) says:

    As posted above:
    http://vfxsoldier.wordpress.com/2012/10/24/the-accelerating-subsidy-war/

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  76. RightNow (6,994 comments) says:

    OneTrack – I have to say ross69 (and Ha ha hamnida) actually give the left a bad name.
    But it’s funny, especially given Ha ha hamnida’s infamous assertion that liberals have higher IQ’s than conservatives, and his subsequent inability to win an argument on facts. I’ve caught ross69 out lying many a time, and he either tries to divert or just never answers. He won’t answer my questions tonight in any satisfactory manner, he’ll divert or just quit.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  77. RightNow (6,994 comments) says:

    mikey, I’ve read that link and the link off it (per one of my above comments), but I find neither of them to offer a bottom line accounting of the benefit or otherwise of having these films in NZ. All I see from you is speculation, find the treasury figures you allude to here for example:
    http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2012/11/dom_post_on_the_hobbit.html#comment-1054077

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  78. ross69 (3,652 comments) says:

    > It was already going to be cheaper in east europe.

    Hmmm if that were true, why weren’t the films made there? Why wasn’t the LOTR trilogy made there?

    “Warner and MGM have together spent about $45 million on preproduction for “The Hobbit,” including script fees, visual effects work, set preparations and casting meetings, according to two people familiar with the matter.” That’s a lot of money to throw away, especially when more than $100 million had to be paid to the estate of JRR Tolkein.

    http://flcenterlitarts.wordpress.com/2010/10/04/can-peter-jackson-save-the-hobbit-from-those-nasty-orcs-er-actors/

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  79. ross69 (3,652 comments) says:

    http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/entertainmentnewsbuzz/2010/10/the-hobbit-finally-close-to-getting-greenlight-from-warner-bros-new-line-and-mgm.html

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  80. RightNow (6,994 comments) says:

    Both of those links go to show that without Peter Jackson the films would not have been made in NZ.

    Thanks ross :)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  81. mikenmild (11,247 comments) says:

    Sorry RN, you got me. All I can find is this hostile MED response:
    http://www.med.govt.nz/sectors-industries/screen-industry/pdf-docs-library/Film%20industry%20assistance%20information%20for%20meeting%20with%20Treasury%20-71%20kB%20PDF.pdf

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  82. ross69 (3,652 comments) says:

    > Both of those links go to show that without Peter Jackson the films would not have been made in NZ

    WTF? Del Toro was slated to direct the films…in New Zealand. But because of production delays – not related to any union dispute – he quit. The fact remains that producers had invested a lot in pre-production and were never going to throw that investment away, especially when they had to cough up a lot of money to the estate of Tolkein.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  83. thedavincimode (6,759 comments) says:

    Countries have been using tax laws to compete for foreign business since Adam was a boy. They compete for foreign tax dollars as well as foreign business by establishing concessionary tax systems that are designed to atttract foreign investment. There is nothing unusual in this – it is commonplace. NZ has a long and proud history of playing this game; not just in the movie business. We have probably been susbtantially more conservative in this game than many other contries

    So there is nothing unusual in this. The ranters and hand-wringers who talk about selling our sovereignty or grizzling about subsidies are either being disingenuous or are completely naive about the reality of global business and fiscal policy. They are also unprincipled in that what happens globally is actually what happens domestically when we enact preferential tax and subsidy treatment for different categories of citizens. Prefering one class of citizen is simply discrimination against another. Oh, but that’s OK, because it’s “fair” and “reasonable” and “equitable” or satisfies the preferred citizens’ “rights” …

    ross69

    You are full of shit. Kindly fuck off.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  84. ross69 (3,652 comments) says:

    > The ranters and hand-wringers who talk about selling our sovereignty or grizzling about subsidies

    It’s the Right that moan about subsidies, but I’m sure you knew that. You only have to listen to the idiotic comments complaining about Labour’s hosuing policy, all from the Right complaining about the government’s decision to subsidise affordable homes. But subsidising highly profitable movies is OK it seems.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  85. mikenmild (11,247 comments) says:

    DVM
    I largely agree; but I call bullshit when there are claims that some subsidies for films were better because they cost less overall and try to relate that to the governing terms of different political parties.
    Sure, we try to get businesses to work here. Economic rationalists have argued that we should do that in a neutral way rather than make special concessions for particular industries or specific projects. That way lies the Nelson cotton mill, think big, yacht making in Auckland, etc, etc. Apart from anything else – these sorts of projects inevitably become politicised.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  86. thedavincimode (6,759 comments) says:

    ross69

    You clearly don’t understand the point that I was making but then I wouldn’t expect you to. Your take on this is constrained by a nineteenth century class struggle. I’ve had a union rep like you. It was never about me; it was about the class struggle: them and us. And irrespective of what was in my interests, the only thing that counted was perpetuating that “struggle” with maximum bitterness and mistrust that reflected an embittered outlook forged by bad employers that allowed no room to good employers (mine).

    You are clinging to your imagined motivation of Warners like a rat to driftwood. Anyone here who has worked and lived in different countries at a senior level or who has had any involvement with multi-national organisations and the way they operate in a global economy in which countries compete with each other for tax and business would know that it is entirely plausible that Warners have taken their business elsewhere for reasons that in reality had nothing to do with this film in isolation.

    You talk glibly of “subsidies”, yet you refuse to acknowledge what what they mean in this context, or that we have historically “subsidised” foreign investment in order to attract foreign investment. You have a very over-inflated view of NZ’s relevance to the rest of the world. You need to understand something. We are fuck all and virtually irrelevant.

    Your point about about housing subsidies is remarkable for the stupidity that it reveals. That is a hard subsidy. It takes money from citizen X and gives it to citizen Y. Concessional taxation of a NZ film production that occurs here and brings economic benefit here that would not otherwise arise, is nothing like the subsidies that we provide at a domestic level, including your bullshit slum-building policy. Even more so having regard to the fact that all the profits come from the global marketing and franchising of the film which occurs elsewhere and is taxed elsewhere.

    But there we are. You have succeeded in getting me to waste my time by responding to you – a futile and pointless act. Hence my earlier and more efficient suggestion that you are full of shit and should fuck off.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  87. queenstfarmer (782 comments) says:

    This thread is a good encapsulation of the issue. A tiny minority of far-left, fringe unionists – in this case Ross69 and mikenmild – embarrased at the utter rejection of their militant, obsolete ideology by not only workers but the vast majority of New Zealanders who think the LOTR films are a great success for the country, so are reduced to claiming Peter Jackson is a liar and part of some diabolical conspiracy, and desperately googling for any similarly-disaffected blogger’s post as “evidence”.

    So, who to believe about film-making: Ross69 and mikey, or Sir Peter Jackson?

    The fringe unionists were even hoping that rain would ruin the red-carpet premiere, which just goes to show how bitter and ideological they are. I wonder if they can watch the films without feeling sick in their stomachs, thinking about how badly they have been shown up by all this?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  88. Lance (2,655 comments) says:

    mikenmild thinks it wouldn’t have made any difference if LOTR was made here.

    You should get your Labour party overlords to use that on their next election billboards.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote