Post by mctoddridesagain on Sept 2, 2005 15:13:33 GMT
Interesting:
www.syfyportal.com/article.php?id=1997
And here's the text:
'War Of The Worlds' Nightmare Continues For Pendragon
Author: Michael Simpson
Date: 08-26-2005
Source: SyFy Portal
Steven Spielberg’s “War of the Worlds” may not be everyone’s idea of how to make a movie of H.G. Wells’ famous novel. Ironically, though, it’s a low budget adaptation by Seattle-based Pendragon Pictures that has attracted the most ire. Critics called foul on director Timothy Hines even before its limited release on DVD. To make matters worse, allegations have arisen that he is conning customers of Amazon.com. Where did it all go wrong?
Pendragon’s "authentic" adaptation of the classic novel was initially greeted with glee by H.G. Wells fans. That began to fade in December, 2004, however, when the studio delayed its first theatrical trailer. Responding to hostile forum members on waroftheworldsonline.com, Hines said the trailer had been held back “in the face of the tsunami disaster.” Some international distributors had asked that he omit scenes of people drowning.
In March, 2005, Pendragon postponed the theatrical release itself, prompting more criticism. “The push back is due entirely to production," said Hines in a press release. Some forum members accused him of lying about having a distribution deal, and of exaggerating the quality of his film.
Ultimately, the movie never made it to theatres, putting Pendragon on the defensive again. Cinemas pulled out, the studio said, because they feared a backlash from Paramount. Detractors said that Hines’ picture was an abomination and he was covering it up.
Some Wells fans seem to resent Hines because they feel he misled them. For example, they have challenged his claims that roles were cast after ‘hundreds’ of hours of auditions. They point to the variable quality of the acting and the fact that Hines’ cast either knew him already or were from the Seattle area.
Other common complaints have been that soldiers in the movie wear various inappropriate uniforms, and CGI images of London’s Big Ben show it nowhere near the Houses of Parliament. Critics say these make a mockery of Hines’ claims of attention to detail. Moreover, they challenge his assertion that the special effects would be "state-of-the-art," noting that the use of animation, mattes and blue screen is often obvious.
These criticisms are relatively minor, however. Hines has also been accused of being anti-Semitic. As a strategy for subversively undermining credibility, this approach should be familiar to anyone that knows of the McCarthy witch hunts. His critics have also accused him of encouraging the public to buy his film under false pretences by faking rave reviews on Amazon.com.
When the DVD of Pendragon’s movie got a limited release in June, the general consensus among the first few reviewers on Amazon was that it was “unbelievably bad.” Since then, however, the number of four- and five-star ratings has grown rapidly. Hines’ critics are now arguing that the movie is so awful, these can’t be genuine. Ergo, Hines must be writing them himself.
It’s true that the quantity of reviews (580 at last count) already exceeds that of many older SF movies. Amazon shows which buyers post reviews under their real names, and it appears that most negative reviewers have done this. Cross-referencing those names and the writers’ locations in the White Pages, I found matches in most cases. I did the same with the few positive contributors that gave real names, with the same result. Most positive reviews, however, did not have Amazon’s ‘Real Name’ designation and the White Pages rarely produced matches with the details that were provided.
In defence of Hines, he has never claimed that his movie is a masterpiece. And even if some of the Amazon reviews are fakes, there’s no evidence that Pendragon’s people are responsible. Indeed, Hines insists that it would be a waste of their time. “Amazon accounts for less than one per cent of total sales,” he said to me.
The antipathy he has provoked makes it plausible that some reviews are the work of pranksters. There is evidence for this in recent submissions that suggest the film has a "gay" subtext. They could also be part of a semi-organised attempt to sideline Pendragon’s film. Hines told me that he was invited to the house of a Dreamworks executive in 2001, hoping that he might want to discuss a deal. Instead, Hines says, he was told that making “War of the Worlds” would be “the worst thing you could do in your life” because “people will come at you in 1000 ways.”
This theory is supported by Charles Keller, director of the American H.G. Wells Society. “There seemed to be a concerted effort to discredit Timothy Hines and Pendragon from the moment they announced completion of principal photography last September,” he said in an e-mail to me. “I saw several cases on message boards of vicious personal attacks made by Pendragon critics if someone was even perceived to be supportive of the (then) unseen film.”
To make matters worse, Hines received letters from someone claiming to be a Paramount lawyer. According to ‘Video Business’ magazine, the lawyer told Hines that his client would “vigorously enforce” its copyrights to prevent Pendragon from distributing its film in most countries of the world “until 2016."
Hines is now attempting to re-launch his film with a shortened "directors cut" of the DVD. His efforts have suffered yet another setback, however. Three planned books on the making of Pendragon’s production have been cancelled by the publisher, Retrovision. For Hines it seems that the dream of bringing Wells’ novel to the screen has become a real-life nightmare that just won’t end.
An exclusive interview with Timothy Hines will appear on SyFy Portal shortly. The "directors" cut of Pendragon’s “War of the Worlds” will be released in countries outside North America next week and in the U.S. and Canada in October
Michael Simpson is a writer and science fiction fan living in Canada.
Errs a bit too much on being easy to Hines. For example:
'In defence of Hines, he has never claimed that his movie is a masterpiece.'
Er, hello? What was Hines on about, then, when he said the film was so beautiful it made him cry? Or that the visual effects were the equal of Star Trek and The Matrix?
So, let the bun fight commence...
www.syfyportal.com/article.php?id=1997
And here's the text:
'War Of The Worlds' Nightmare Continues For Pendragon
Author: Michael Simpson
Date: 08-26-2005
Source: SyFy Portal
Steven Spielberg’s “War of the Worlds” may not be everyone’s idea of how to make a movie of H.G. Wells’ famous novel. Ironically, though, it’s a low budget adaptation by Seattle-based Pendragon Pictures that has attracted the most ire. Critics called foul on director Timothy Hines even before its limited release on DVD. To make matters worse, allegations have arisen that he is conning customers of Amazon.com. Where did it all go wrong?
Pendragon’s "authentic" adaptation of the classic novel was initially greeted with glee by H.G. Wells fans. That began to fade in December, 2004, however, when the studio delayed its first theatrical trailer. Responding to hostile forum members on waroftheworldsonline.com, Hines said the trailer had been held back “in the face of the tsunami disaster.” Some international distributors had asked that he omit scenes of people drowning.
In March, 2005, Pendragon postponed the theatrical release itself, prompting more criticism. “The push back is due entirely to production," said Hines in a press release. Some forum members accused him of lying about having a distribution deal, and of exaggerating the quality of his film.
Ultimately, the movie never made it to theatres, putting Pendragon on the defensive again. Cinemas pulled out, the studio said, because they feared a backlash from Paramount. Detractors said that Hines’ picture was an abomination and he was covering it up.
Some Wells fans seem to resent Hines because they feel he misled them. For example, they have challenged his claims that roles were cast after ‘hundreds’ of hours of auditions. They point to the variable quality of the acting and the fact that Hines’ cast either knew him already or were from the Seattle area.
Other common complaints have been that soldiers in the movie wear various inappropriate uniforms, and CGI images of London’s Big Ben show it nowhere near the Houses of Parliament. Critics say these make a mockery of Hines’ claims of attention to detail. Moreover, they challenge his assertion that the special effects would be "state-of-the-art," noting that the use of animation, mattes and blue screen is often obvious.
These criticisms are relatively minor, however. Hines has also been accused of being anti-Semitic. As a strategy for subversively undermining credibility, this approach should be familiar to anyone that knows of the McCarthy witch hunts. His critics have also accused him of encouraging the public to buy his film under false pretences by faking rave reviews on Amazon.com.
When the DVD of Pendragon’s movie got a limited release in June, the general consensus among the first few reviewers on Amazon was that it was “unbelievably bad.” Since then, however, the number of four- and five-star ratings has grown rapidly. Hines’ critics are now arguing that the movie is so awful, these can’t be genuine. Ergo, Hines must be writing them himself.
It’s true that the quantity of reviews (580 at last count) already exceeds that of many older SF movies. Amazon shows which buyers post reviews under their real names, and it appears that most negative reviewers have done this. Cross-referencing those names and the writers’ locations in the White Pages, I found matches in most cases. I did the same with the few positive contributors that gave real names, with the same result. Most positive reviews, however, did not have Amazon’s ‘Real Name’ designation and the White Pages rarely produced matches with the details that were provided.
In defence of Hines, he has never claimed that his movie is a masterpiece. And even if some of the Amazon reviews are fakes, there’s no evidence that Pendragon’s people are responsible. Indeed, Hines insists that it would be a waste of their time. “Amazon accounts for less than one per cent of total sales,” he said to me.
The antipathy he has provoked makes it plausible that some reviews are the work of pranksters. There is evidence for this in recent submissions that suggest the film has a "gay" subtext. They could also be part of a semi-organised attempt to sideline Pendragon’s film. Hines told me that he was invited to the house of a Dreamworks executive in 2001, hoping that he might want to discuss a deal. Instead, Hines says, he was told that making “War of the Worlds” would be “the worst thing you could do in your life” because “people will come at you in 1000 ways.”
This theory is supported by Charles Keller, director of the American H.G. Wells Society. “There seemed to be a concerted effort to discredit Timothy Hines and Pendragon from the moment they announced completion of principal photography last September,” he said in an e-mail to me. “I saw several cases on message boards of vicious personal attacks made by Pendragon critics if someone was even perceived to be supportive of the (then) unseen film.”
To make matters worse, Hines received letters from someone claiming to be a Paramount lawyer. According to ‘Video Business’ magazine, the lawyer told Hines that his client would “vigorously enforce” its copyrights to prevent Pendragon from distributing its film in most countries of the world “until 2016."
Hines is now attempting to re-launch his film with a shortened "directors cut" of the DVD. His efforts have suffered yet another setback, however. Three planned books on the making of Pendragon’s production have been cancelled by the publisher, Retrovision. For Hines it seems that the dream of bringing Wells’ novel to the screen has become a real-life nightmare that just won’t end.
An exclusive interview with Timothy Hines will appear on SyFy Portal shortly. The "directors" cut of Pendragon’s “War of the Worlds” will be released in countries outside North America next week and in the U.S. and Canada in October
Michael Simpson is a writer and science fiction fan living in Canada.
Errs a bit too much on being easy to Hines. For example:
'In defence of Hines, he has never claimed that his movie is a masterpiece.'
Er, hello? What was Hines on about, then, when he said the film was so beautiful it made him cry? Or that the visual effects were the equal of Star Trek and The Matrix?
So, let the bun fight commence...
