Why is Lucas so pesimistic about Episode 3's box office potentital?

I saw the publication as well and it was evn on the LOTR EE. but you do not know everything about the meeting. Neither do I.

 

On Iraq: Of course every country serves their own needs. I never said it was only the US, nor did I say they were wrong to do so. I only said that people shouldn't think that the US kicked out Saddam's government because they wanted to liberate the Iraqi people.

On LOTR: I know that the purpose of PJ's visit was to check out the pre-viz department, and I know that that's the only involvment ILM ever had with WETA on this. WETA was on their own, isolated in New Zealand. If ILM had indeed worked with them in any capacity, they'd have been credited in the credits of FOTR, just as Digital Domain was credited for their help on the one scene they did.

 

On Iraq: I agree. It was for others reason. I think liberating the people was one of those.
On LOTR: I agree there too. Not saying ILM should get credit jus that PJ went to get some previs help. That is why I like LOTR even more because PJ swallowed some pride and went to another filmmaker for some PV help. And not bashing SW and saying LOTR is superior. That is mostly where I am getting at.

 

Sorry Darth. not trying to start anyting. In a good mood today and I was just pumped there.

 

Okay, no problem. I agree that it's great that PJ isn't one of those egomaniancs who would never ask for help, or check out what others were doing.

I just hope that the overwhelming success of LOTR doesn't go to his head and turn him into one of those types. Doesn't look like it will, because he doesn't seem any more pride-filled since the first two. Bring on ROTK and King Kong

 

There you have it. His objection was, specifically, that even if the film wasn't as good, and he hadn't spent so much money, the film would've done just as well at the box office. And that's a horrible attitude to have.

That's awefully easy to say when you're not the one fronting the cash. I love it when these armchair self-financed directors strike their holier than thou pose when condemning Lucas. It's always good for a laugh.

Then again, Lucas' primary objection seems to be that while the film went over budget under the pretense of making a better film, the box office returns weren't going to similiarly increase and the film would be less profitable. Now before you start whooping and hollering thas Lucas only cares about the money, keep in mind that he has traditionally used the profits from one movie to pay for the next. In other words, Gary Kurtz's mismanagement put the final STAR WARS episode in jeapordy due to EMPIRE's reduced profit potential. I'd say Lucas had every right to be concerned.

Kurtz: George and I had many, many discussions about that, but it boiled down to the fact that he became convinced that all the audience was interested in was the roller-coaster ride, and so the story and the script didn't matter anymore.

I don't buy this for a minute. I know this is what Kurtz said, and maybe he believes it, but this statement completely contradicts everything we know about Lucas. Take any interview with Lucas, past or present, and you will find him enthusiastically talking about how important the story is and that his whole reason for making these movies is because he has a story he wants to tell. Pop in your DVD copies of TPM or AOTC (I know you have them ) and listen to the commentary track where Lucas talks at great length about the story and its themes.

Kurtz can say what he wants I suppose, but its plainly obvious that Lucas cares greatly for the story the art of telling it.

 

Bush did the right thing for the wrong reasons...

?

 

and how does the situation in Iraq relate to Episode III's box office potential?

 

Shelley, your responses are hilarious and ridiculous at the same time!

How so?

Thank you for adding some humor to the boards! I'll be looking forwarding to your response to this as well.

Why thank you.

Let's see, imdb is full of the LOTR gestapo?

It's the truth.

That was the best!!! Why did the LOTR gestapo vote both ANH and TESB above TTT?

The LOTR gestapo don't have a problem with the OT. Just the PT, because the PT is in direct competition with their precious borefests.

Was it so they would seem less biased towards SW? Or could it be that anyone, including you (yes, you!), can vote on imdb?

I thought you had to register first.

And I guess I should change my statement from you worshipping anything SW to you hating everything LOTR. That would seem to more fit the bill.

No, because it isn't true. But I'm not surprised you decided to make yet another generalization about me.

Your defense of calling LOTR a borefest with tenth-rate effects is that others called Lucas a liar and hack, his daughters are ugly pigs, the prequels are universally reviled and will be forgotten and that LOTR has killed SW off?????

Huh?

I said *NONE of that! So why are you bringing it up?

I didn't say you had.

You can think what you want about LOTR, that's your *OPINION*, but you have posted zero proof of anything, just your own *OPINION*!

I can't prove my opinion. I have posted proof about what wasn't my opinion.

So, until we can rid imdb of the dreaded LOTR gestapo, that's all we have to go with. Come to think of it, maybe you can start a campaign to break up the LOTR gestapo ring on imdb!

Uh...yeah.

That would free us all from their oppression and maybe we can see movies ranked how they truly should be - the SW movies in the top 6 and LOTR at the bottom, with all 0s!

If you say so.

Or could it be this is just how things are in your mind and you can't accept facts?

What facts can't I accept? I acknowledged that the LOTR borefests are better liked by the (frustrated would-be filmmakers known as) critics than the prequels, which, IMO, is evidence that critics are a joke, hypocritical, and don't know what they're talking about. The rest of the crap that Philip is trying to present as facts -- that the LOTR borefests blew AOTC away, that they're better liked by the public -- are not facts, and he's offered no proof.

 

He's not anti-George, and speaks well of him in other parts of the interview. But he calls it like it is.

No, he calls it like he sees it, and talks about stuff he has no knowledge of, like what goes on behind the scenes at LFL/ILM.

One of the arguments that I had with George about Empire was the fact that he felt in the end, he said, we could have made just as much money if the film hadn't been quite so good, and you hadn't spent so much time. And I said, "But it was worth it!"

I have trouble believing what Kurtz says, because he talks about stuff he couldn't possibly know, and he likes to cast himself as "the real talent" behind the successful movies he happened to produce.

And you're also overlooking that Lucas finances his own films. He put a lot of his own money into ESB, which Kurtz wasted (it's easy for Kurtz to talk when it wasn't his money that was squandered, and I've yet to see evidence that the movie was better because of Kurtz's guzzling the budget like it was booze -- the only evidence given of Kurtz insisting on something being made better has to do with an effect, not the story), and Kurtz's incompetence could have destroyed Lucas financially. The box office success of ESB was far from assured; it was the first sequel to what was then the highest-grossing film of all time, expectations were enormous, and the movie itself was darker and less kid-friendly. It was a big gamble for Lucas, and whether the third movie in the trilogy could have been made depended on ESB's success.

And that's the wrong attitude to have.

Kurtz is full of crap. Lucas cares about the story. Listen to his interviews, or listen to his director's commentary. He talks about the story.

Don't worry ShellEy. You have made excellent points with a lot of back up to those points. Some of these guys just do not have a counter argument. That is why they get personal. You and Phillip were having a decent "discussion"

Thanks, Ekenobi.

I am staying out of the political discussion.

Darth_Insidious ignored this post by DarthScully:

its not just the line from the FOTR DVD Darth Insidious. i've learned that information from years of collecting LOTR spoilers and production news. it wasn't too long ago (to me anyway) that Jakson did consider having Gollum be played by a real actor. as i've said, yes Weta did a lot of the work in bringing Gollum to life and the qualtiy to make him so convincingly real, nobody is denyign them that and Weta deserved the award that was given to them. its just that there is also an undeniable fact that ILM gave them a helping hand. Jackson, Taylor and company admitted that. its nothing to be ashamed of. in fact its something that we should be proud of.

Gollum was the only effect that was even close to being on par with anything in TPM or AOTC, and that was because ILM gave them a helping hand. Yet Jackson stands on Lucas's shoulders and gets the credit, praise, and awards that are spitefully denied Lucas.

 

Shelley,

Your reply about imdb being controlled by the LOTR gestapo?

-It's the truth.

Again, that's hilarious! Post proof or retract. Everything you say outside of quoting articles is all your *OPINION*!!! Where are you getting these facts that imdb is controlled by the LOTR gestapo? Give me a link.

What does registering for imdb have to do with the fact that anyone can register? Or are you concerned the imaginary LOTR gestapo will be out to get you? If so, use a fake name.

And also, if you can't come up with a better reason why LOTR was a borefest with tenth-rate effects, then don't give any. Your pathetic defense of people picking on Lucas or his daughters is a terrible argument. And your reply to that is just "huh"? I couldn't agree with you more! What were you thinking?

The facts are that the critics like LOTR better than the PT. Your response? That the critics are a joke, hypocritical and don't know what they're talking about. This is not evidence!!! This is your *OPINION*!!

And, the facts are that the imdb voters overwhelmingly voted LOTR higher than the PT. Your response? That imdb is controlled by the LOTR gestapo. Again, this is your *OPINION*!!!!

When will you give any facts to back up what you write? You have offered no facts or proof. And I'm still waiting...

 

Again, that's hilarious! Post proof or retract.

Check out the nasty comments about the prequels, then click on the names. See what other movies they've posted about.

What does registering for imdb have to do with the fact that anyone can register?

Ah. I thought what you said was that anyone could vote. I was pointing out that you have to register to vote.

And also, if you can't come up with a better reason why LOTR was a borefest with tenth-rate effects, then don't give any.

Reason? It's my opinion. IMO, LOTR was a borefest with tenth rate effects, not to mention mostly mediocre acting, mediocre directing, and lousy editing and pacing.

Your pathetic defense of people picking on Lucas or his daughters is a terrible argument.

Of what?

And your reply to that is just "huh"? I couldn't agree with you more! What were you thinking?

I was replying to what you said, which was your twisting around of what I said. It made no sense, so I said "Huh"?

The facts are that the critics like LOTR better than the PT.

Yes, and I never denied that. What I keep pointing out, and what keeps going straight over your heads, is that that is irrelevant to the discussion. Philip confidently proclaimed that the LOTR borefests blew the prequels away, that the public and critics liked them better, and the only proof he offered was that critics liked them better. He, and you, keep pretending that the critics liking them better means that the public does, too.

Your response? That the critics are a joke, hypocritical and don't know what they're talking about. This is not evidence!!! This is your *OPINION*!!

Uh...yeah, and I never said otherwise.

And, the facts are that the imdb voters overwhelmingly voted LOTR higher than the PT. Your response?

Along with "so what? IMDB does not represent all moviegoers."

That imdb is controlled by the LOTR gestapo. Again, this is your *OPINION*!!!!

No, actually, it's backed up by evidence, if you care to look.

When will you give any facts to back up what you write? You have offered no facts or proof. And I'm still waiting...

I have. It's Philip who hasn't offered any facts to back up the pertinent points. I'm still waiting for him to offer facts to back up his claim that the LOTR borefests "blew the prequels away" and that the general public likes them better.

I'm also waiting for Darth_Insidious to offer proof of Gary Kurtz's currently burgeoning career, and that Kurtz made Lucas focus on story rather than effects.

 

Shelley on IMDB's top movie list -
due to the LOTR gestapo who make sure to lower the prequels ratings while giving LOTR the highest ratings possible

I'll ask you again - do you have any evidence of this? to employ one of your favorite phrases -
Post proof or retract


gez

 

This is ridiculous! Listing internet site polls are proof to back up an argument is very weak. You are talking about an incredibly select group of people. First one has to have a computer. Then you have to have an internet connection. Then you have to be willing or wanting to visit the site. Finally you have to want to vote. IMDB or Rotten Tomatoes are not good indications of what the general public thinks about a movie, especially Rotten Tomatoes. Have you read any of those reviews? There is no way to classify every review as either fresh or rotten. I have read a lot of reviews that were listed as fresh, but sounded to me that the reviewer didn't really care for the movie. The IMDB poll samples only those people who care enough to vote. It in no way is an accurate representation of the general public.

Keeping on subject, it will depend how much Lucas brings into the public awareness that this will be the final Star Wars movie. I know that the media will do some of the job for him, but he will still have to do some of the advertising. This will bring up some of the box office take, but it is really going to depend on how dark the movie is to see how much repeat viewing there is.

 

IMDB or Rotten Tomatoes users an "incredibly select group of people"?

Well, most likely - are they anymore select than the users on this board?

Throughout this entire thread, I've been saying that critics' acclaim or lack thereof is meaningless. And I believe that, especially when it comes to movies like SW, or even a movie like Dumb and Dumber - it got brtual reviews (IIRC), but the point was that the average person, including myself, generally thought it was outstandingly hilarious.

So critical opinion does not = public opinion. Obviously.

Yet, generally speaking, critics know what they're talking about when they say they prefer the acting in "Film X" than in "Film Y". If critics are consistently saying the acting, script, directing, etc. is better in LOTR than in the PT, maybe there's something there. I mean that LOTR might be better acted than SW; again, SW has never been about acting.

But that's generally areas critics look to when deciding how "good" a movie is: acting, directing, pacing, cinematography, editing, script, plot, characters, etc.

And writing off Rotten Tomatoes or IMDB because it's basically "internet geeks" might be a little hasty: they are movie buffs and have probably seen dozens if not hundreds of films. As I said before, generally speaking, they know what they're talking about when criticizing a film.

And, as I said before, the Shelley/whoever debates are getting...interesting.

 

Shelley, Shelley, Shelley...

You still have yet to show that imdb is controlled by the LOTR gestapo! When will you learn that everything you're bringing up is your *OPINION*? Your response is that there is evidence of an imdb controlled by the LOTR gestapo? Prove it! You can't because there is no evidence - no evidence of anything you're writing.

Again, *ANYONE* can register to vote at imdb! So what if you pointed out the fact that you have to register! They do that so they can track the demographics of the votes! And, I'm sure, so that amazon.com can as well! But the fact remains that you, and anyone else, can register at imdb. Go ahead and add yours to the movies in question.

And until someone finds something better than imdb, it does represent the general public. If you've ever studied statistics the sampling at imdb is quite large, and probably +/- 3% from the general public. LOTR still is ahead of the PT regardless of the +/- 3%!

And Shelley - don't bring up other people's arguments in a response to my post. I never mentioned Kurtz. And, now you're acting like you don't recall mentioning others putting down Lucas and his daughters to defend your calling LOTR a borefest with tenth-rated effects? Why don't you go back and read what you wrote! It's all there! You reply "huh" and "of what." Lucas and his daughters have *NOTHING* to do with LOTR! Why did you bring it up?

I'm just showing that both critics and the general public preferred LOTR to the PT. If you have proof otherwise, let's see some links.

I'm *STILL* waiting...

 

God freaking damn it, I just lost my entire response. Wonderful.

To summarize:

- Post proof or retract that Kurtz needlessly spent money on ESB with nothing to show for it.

- George talks big about how much he emphasizes the story, but that's all it is, just talk. The proof is in his work. And I'm sure you've noticed that the most heard complaint about the PT by the people who loved the OT is that the focus is on the effects. Yet these same people didn't have a problem with ANH or ESB.

- WETA had no other involvment with ILM other than PJ's visit to their pre-viz department. Gollum is WETA's accomplishment alone. If ILM had helped, they'd be credited for it in the films credits, just as Digital Domain was credited in that of FOTR for their help. Post proof or retract that ILM has any involvment at all, other than PJ's pre-viz visit.

ILM was given their due credit for their advances in CG characters, in both T2 and Jurassic Park, where they deserved it. They deserve no special credit for Jar Jar, as CG characters, starring CG characters, and motion-captured CG characters had all been done before.

- Post proof or retract that IMDB is controlled by the LOTR fanboys. God, this is just as ridiculous a claim as when some people said that Rotten Tomatoes was rigging it so that AOTC has less positive reviews.

- Gary Kurtz has flat-out said that the rest of his career after The Dark Crystal sucked, and I never said otherwise either.

What are the generally considered George's best films? American Grafitti and A New Hope. Both produced by Kurtz. Which are generally considered the best Star Wars films? A New Hope and The Empire Strikes Back . Both produced by Kurtz. Kurtz suddenly leaves, and ROTJ is generally considered quite a step-down from Empire.

Proof that Kurtz made story his focus? Oh, I don't know, the fact that he gave up a lucrative producing job that anybody would've killed to have because of a conflict over the story?

You can feel his absence in every childish scene in ROTJ, mostly with the Ewoks. You can feel his absence with the fairy tale perfect ending, which would've been poignant and at the same time uplifting if he'd been there.

- Gary Kurtz doesn't hate George Lucas, nor vice versa. If they did, they wouldn't still talk to eachother on the phone. They even worked with eachother again on Return to Oz after George took over as director from Walter Murch.

 

And until someone finds something better than imdb, it does represent the general public.

It most certainly does not.

If you've ever studied statistics the sampling at imdb is quite large, and probably +/- 3% from the general public.

Oh wow...3 whole percent! I'm stunned!

LOTR still is ahead of the PT regardless of the +/- 3%!

Big deal. IMDB.com does not represent the general public.

Yet, generally speaking, critics know what they're talking about when they say they prefer the acting in "Film X" than in "Film Y".

No, critics are just people with opinions like the rest of us. I don't see how they know what they are talking about more than any of us.

If critics are consistently saying the acting, script, directing, etc. is better in LOTR than in the PT, maybe there's something there.

No it doesn't.

I mean that LOTR might be better acted than SW; again, SW has never been about acting.

But that's generally areas critics look to when deciding how "good" a movie is: acting, directing, pacing, cinematography, editing, script, plot, characters, etc.

Yeah, and that they proclaim the LOTR borefests so superior in all those areas shows me that they don't know what they are talking about.

And writing off Rotten Tomatoes or IMDB because it's basically "internet geeks" might be a little hasty: they are movie buffs and have probably seen dozens if not hundreds of films. As I said before, generally speaking, they know what they're talking about when criticizing a film.

Why?

 

- Post proof or retract that Kurtz needlessly spent money on ESB with nothing to show for it.

What he has to show for it: one improved effect.

- George talks big about how much he emphasizes the story, but that's all it is, just talk.

Post proof or retract.

The proof is in his work.

His work is great without your god, Gary Kurtz, squandering his money.

And I'm sure you've noticed that the most heard complaint about the PT by the people who loved the OT is that the focus is on the effects.

And I'm sure you've noticed that there are many more people who love the story and think the effects are part of the story.

Yet these same people didn't have a problem with ANH or ESB.

Post proof or retract.

- WETA had no other involvment with ILM other than PJ's visit to their pre-viz department. Gollum is WETA's accomplishment alone.

Post proof or retract.

If ILM had helped, they'd be credited for it in the films credits, just as Digital Domain was credited in that of FOTR for their help. Post proof or retract that ILM has any involvment at all, other than PJ's pre-viz visit.

Post proof or retract that they didn't.

ILM was given their due credit for their advances in CG characters, in both T2 and Jurassic Park, where they deserved it.

But not when they deserved it for TPM and AOTC.

They deserve no special credit for Jar Jar,

Why not?

as CG characters, starring CG characters, and motion-captured CG characters had all been done before.

Then Weta deserves NO CREDIT for Gollum. NONE. ZERO. But they got it, and even were praised for being groundbreaking when they weren't.

- Post proof or retract that IMDB is controlled by the LOTR fanboys.

*sigh* I can't.

God, this is just as ridiculous a claim as when some people said that Rotten Tomatoes was rigging it so that AOTC has less positive reviews.

And claiming that Gary Kurtz is the real genius behind the OT, and that he has a burgeoning career.

- Gary Kurtz has flat-out said that the rest of his career after The Dark Crystal sucked, and I never said otherwise either.

Yes you have.

What are the generally considered George's best films? American Grafitti and A New Hope.

Post proof or retract.

Both produced by Kurtz.

Big deal. Ben Burtt worked on all the SW films.

Which are generally considered the best Star Wars films? A New Hope and The Empire Strikes Back .

Post proof or retract.

Both produced by Kurtz.

Big deal. Ben Burtt worked on all the SW films.

Kurtz suddenly leaves,

Kurtz gets his ass fired for his incompetence...

and ROTJ is generally considered quite a step-down from Empire.

Post proof or retract.

Proof that Kurtz made story his focus? Oh, I don't know, the fact

What fact?

that he gave up a lucrative producing job

He was fired.

that anybody would've killed to have because of a conflict over the story?

He was canned for his incompetence, and he violently opposed making Vader Luke's father. Oh, and he wanted to kill off Han. What a genius this guy is. Am I ever glad Lucas fired him.

You can feel his absence in every childish scene in ROTJ,

Post proof or retract.

mostly with the Ewoks.

What about the Ewoks?

You can feel his absence with the fairy tale perfect ending,

Post proof or retract.

which would've been poignant and at the same time uplifting if he'd been there.

Post proof or retract.

- Gary Kurtz doesn't hate George Lucas,

No, he just trashes him every chance he gets. Just like you claim to like the prequels yet trash them every chance you get, and say stuff like they will be forgotten, the public hates them, offering no proof except your "adjusted for inflation" grosses, which you cling to as if they were the Holy Grail.

nor vice versa.

No, Lucas isn't as petty and full of bitterness as Kurtz.

If they did,

 

George talks big about how much he emphasizes the story, but that's all it is, just talk. The proof is in his work.

Well that is highly subjective proof, my friend. I look at his work and I see a wonderful story with textured characters and intriguing, multilayered plots. And that's just in the prequels!

And I'm sure you've noticed that the most heard complaint about the PT by the people who loved the OT is that the focus is on the effects.

Yes, I'm aware that there are a handful of fans who seem oddly fixated on the effects. It's a shame, really, cause they're missing a wonderful story.

Post proof or retract that Kurtz needlessly spent money on ESB with nothing to show for it.

He said so himself by admitting that he let the film run overbudget.

Gary Kurtz has flat-out said that the rest of his career after The Dark Crystal sucked, and I never said otherwise either.

It's safe to assume, then, that Lucas did far more for him than he did for Lucas.

Proof that Kurtz made story his focus? Oh, I don't know, the fact that he gave up a lucrative producing job that anybody would've killed to have because of a conflict over the story?

"Gave up a...producing job" is an awefully charitable way of saying that he was fired for being an irresponsible boob who stuck his nose in where it didn't belong. The fact that his career tanked after THE DARK CRYSTAL is very telling. Funny, you'd think a humble and talented guy like he would have easily found work.

But he does have a small cult following of sorts simply because he pops up every now and again to say some nasty things about Lucas and heap undeserved credit on himself. I guess fame is what you make of it, eh?

 

Yeah, it's funny how Darth_Insidious slams Lucas for "not giving proper credit" to those he works with (which is what, exactly?), but has no problem with Gary Kurtz heaping all this credit on himself, acting like he's the real talent behind the two or three successful movies he happened to produce.

Oh, and Darth_Insidious, I'm still eagerly awaiting your proof that Han Solo was originally slated to die in ROTJ like Kurtz wanted.

 

Shelley, Shelley, Shelley...

Again, you're offering nothing better than imdb. Until you find something better, it is the general public. Your arguments go nowhere because you have yet to post any proof or facts. And why doesn't it represent the general public? You have proof of that as well? You're stunned about a +/- 3% accuracy of imdb? Maybe you should study statistics more - you wouldn't be so stunned.

Obviously you think you're a little goddess who is correct about everything and can't accept any facts that come your way.

Since you're so "in tune" with the general public, *POST PROOF OR RETRACT* what the general public really thinks about LOTR and the PT.

Oh, and when replying to messages, don't include edited quotes from multiple messages in one of yours. It's making you even more incoherent than usual.

I'm *STILL* waiting Shelley...

 

SkiHoth, SkiHoth, SkiHoth...

Again, you're offering nothing better than imdb. Until you find something better, it is the general public.

That is the most bizarre logic I have ever seen. How is IMDB suddenly rendered "the general public" because I "can't" offer something "better"? Better than what? An internet site that, by your estimate, represents 3% of the population?

Your arguments go nowhere because you have yet to post any proof or facts. And why doesn't it represent the general public? You have proof of that as well?

You have proof that it is the general public? Including those people who don't have a computer and/or don't have an internet connection and/or don't know that IMDB.com even exists and/or aren't registered at IMDB.com and/or care enough about either LOTR or SW to vote in the polls?

You're stunned about a +/- 3% accuracy of imdb? Maybe you should study statistics more - you wouldn't be so stunned.

Uh...ok.

Obviously you think you're a little goddess who is correct about everything

If you say so.

and can't accept any facts that come your way.

Facts of what? You haven't shown a single fact that IMDB.com is the general public.

I'm *STILL* waiting Shelley...

For what? And I'll continue to wait for your proof that IMDB.com not only represents the general public, but actually is the general public.

 

And Shelley - a little note regarding imdb.

Citizen Kane is ranked very high on imdb, but I saw it and thought it was terrible. Does that mean that it is terrible? No! Does that mean that the general public prefers Citizen Kane to ANH or TTT? Yes! I can accept the fact that the general public likes some movies that I think are terrible, and vice versa. Can you?

 

Shelley, you really do need to learn some statistics! When did I say that imdb represents 3% of the population? Never! Why do you continue to put words in my mouth? I said that considering the number of votes, the *ACCURACY* is probably +/- 3%!!! Do you understand the difference between an *ACCURACY* of +/- 3% and *REPRESENTING* 3% of the population? Obviously not! Study some statistics and maybe you'll understand.

And I have yet to see any of your proof of the PT either equaling or surpassing LOTR in the general public, which is your claim. You have none!

I'm *STILL* (*YAWN*) waiting...