Video Ezy: Force of Hobbits
August 17, 2002

Orlando is on the cover of the current issue of Australia's Video Ezy Magazine. Check out the LOTR article:

The Lord of the Rings producer Barrie M Osborne and executive producer Mark Ordesky discuss one of the most ambitious projects in the history of film.

The Lord of the Rings is without a doubt one of the most ambitiously mounted projects in the history of film. First of all, how did you both get involved in the project, and secondly, what made you believe you could actually pull off something that thousands of people said couldn't be done?
MO: We got involved in July of '98 when Peter Jackson and Fran Walsh came to Los Angeles seeking finance for the movie, and New Line, and Bob Shaye the Chairman of New Line in particular, had the vision to propose making three films of the story of the trilogy rather than just the two films that Peter was hoping to make. And then we were lucky enough to entice Barrie Osborne to come on board the movie not too long after that, though I'll throw it to Barrie for that.
BO: I was actually doing The Matrix in Sydney and I had heard that the movie was moving from Miramax to New Line after Miramax put it in turn-around. And so I called and expressed my interest, and it was really by January that New Line decided they wanted to bring somebody in and I came aboard shortly after that, once we had delivered The Matrix and released it.

I read that Peter Jackson initially planned to remake King Kong, but that project was canned and The Lord of the Rings took its place.
BO: Yes. I can only tell you what I've heard about that, Peter was going to do King Kong for Universal. Universal had gone through the unfortunate experience of racing out against Volcano with Dante's Peak. And they looked around while they were preparing King Kong and they said well Disney's going to make Mighty Joe Young and Sony's making Godzilla, and they didn't want to be the third monster picture out so they decided to put King Kong in turn-around.

You're both obviously fans of The Lord of the Rings books and it's arguably the most popular book ever written. In your opinions why? What's the magic?
MO: It was probably the first book to create a completely believable alternate universe. The level of detail and depth and mythology enables you to completely suspend your belief, and this was long before Quest or any of the video games that allowed you to go into an alternate world. You know, this was long before Dungeons and Dragons and any of those role-playing games. Tolkien was really the wellspring from which all that stuff flowed, and the grip that the book has on you is something that Peter wanted to capture on film and was able to do so.
BO: And I think that the magic of the book is that it resonates to people in today's world, such as the journey of Aragorn who thinks he is forever flawed because of his ancestry, but grows to learn that in fact he can become King, that in fact he can become a leader of men so much more than his background might suggest he could. And Boromir who, out of a desperate move to save his kingdom does something he regrets in trying to grab the ring from Frodo, becomes heroic in his efforts to redeem himself. And Frodo's journey as the smallest of people who sets off to save the world. These are all heroic stories that I think people can relate to.

Film viewers are different to book readers, not to mention that what may have worked as entertainment back when the book was written may not necessarily fit the Hollywood criteria of how to tell a story today. Did you try to strike a balance, or did you just think let's stay true to the book?
MO: We said let's stay true to the book. The idea of trying to appeal to the conventional instinct of what you think a film audience wants is a trap. Because what audiences really want is something that's distinctive and engaging, and if you just try to pander to that they won't actually thank you for it because they'll ultimately feel like they've been there, done that. So the feeling was that the unconventional nature and structure of the book, which a lot of people thought would be the undoing of the film, turned out to be one of its strongest assets.

Do you guys think you did the book justice?
BO: Yeah.
MO: Absolutely.

This was an enormous project, what was the most daunting thing about getting this project off the ground and getting it made?
BO: First of all finding such a wonderful cast…
MO: …all 22 of the major speaking parts!
BO: …and yet that fell into place almost effortlessly. In fact, in most cases the first person on the list of who we wanted was the person cast. And then it was the logistics. We did in fact build 30 kilometres of road…
MO: And also because we built it across parkland we had to remove the road at the end of it and restore the land.
BO: We had at times five shoots spread across New Zealand connected by satellites so Peter could keep his imprint on what was being captured. The over 2,500 people we had working on the film – just administering that was a very large undertaking, and the challenge of that isn't so much getting it done, because you can always find a way to get it done, the challenge is preserving the integrity of the story while you're dealing with the logistics.

When we talk about the film being a challenge, you guys actually tripled the challenge by making the three movies back to back, which had never been done before.
MO: It's never been done, never three at once, and never sequels to a previously unreleased first film. They made Back to the Future Parts II and III after the first film was a success. They would never have made Back to the Future Part II and III without having first released Back to the Future.

How did you go about convincing everyone that this risk was the right risk to take?
MO: It was actually easier than you think because New Line had a history of not being able to get sequels made of some of our more successful movies like Dumb & Dumber and The Mask, and this was an opportunity to know we had the sequels in hand. So although it was a great risk, there was a pre-sold, pre-aware audience, and the feeling was that if it worked, and we had the other two sequels in the can, then it would become retroactively a very visionary decision.

The great thing about the first film is that yes, you've got some amazing special effects in there, but the special effects never overwhelm the sense of story or character. Do you think that an over-dependence on special effects is a problem in Hollywood storytelling these days?
BO: I think that in really good filmmaking, all the elements of the movie have to support the story. If they don't, then the film won't work particularly well. And if special effects are just a device to capture imagination, I don't think that works. What I do love about Peter Jackson as a filmmaker is that the effects support the story. In The Matrix when Larry and Andy first had the idea to use the Hong Kong stunt guys and stuntwork I thought, what are they doing, that looks awfully artificial. But of course it's a clue to the audience that the reality in the film is artificial. I think if you're a good filmmaker you're using these tools to tell your story, and they're not artifice, they're quite integral to the story.

How does it feel to potentially own the international box office for three consecutive Christmases? Nobody's ever done that before. Not even Harry Potter's going to pull that off, now that his third film has been pushed back a year.
MO: That's what we hear. I mean, the box office is such a boon, but the first film has already exceeded our expectations to such a degree that everything from here is just gravy. We had great ambitions and our ambitions were exceeded, especially here in Australia where the box office was just gigantic. It's incredibly gratifying.

How did you guys feel at Oscar time?
MO: We were thrilled, I mean the 13 nominations was a great compliment to all the people who worked on the film, the four wins were terrific, and we've got two more years of being in the running.

Does this now set you up as shoe-ins for the next two Oscars? Are people going to be disappointed if you're not there?
MO: We can't look at it that way. I don't know, maybe people will be disappointed if we're not there, but we don't look at it that way. You just have to make a great film.

We've talked about the challenges of making this film. On the flip side of that, what was your favourite experience in making this project?
BO: I think for me it was the camaraderie of working so closely with the cast and becoming very close friends to all of them. It was a great experience.
MO: Yeah, there was an amazing kind of esprit de corps when you're working for 15 months, 274 shooting days. It's going to be a 10-year odyssey for Peter and Fran. Barrie and I will have been on the movies for six years by the time it's done. It's pretty unreal.

New Zealand as a nation has embraced The Lord of the Rings. That must be heart-warming?
MO: There is literally like one degree of separation from everybody in New Zealand to the film. Everybody's got a friend, brother, son, room-mate who's affiliated with the film to some degree. It's pretty gratifying.

Now there are two versions of the DVD coming out, one in August and one in November, both with stacks of different special features. By the time the trilogy is out on DVD, how many hours of viewing can we expect?
MO: Oh God, I couldn't even guess!
BO: I know for The Fellowship of the Ring there are three separate special feature DVDs, but how many hours that translates to I'm not sure.
MO: A lot!

We said before that Lord of the Rings is arguably the most popular book ever written. In 100 years time, are people going to look back and say that that old classic film The Lord of the Rings is their favourite movie of all time?
MO: I think it's possible.
BO: Yeah, I'm convinced it will be among the favourites of all time.
MO: Absolutely. There's a timelessness to these movies that will allow them to age unbelievably well.