I have stated nowhere what I thought it might do once released. I made no box office predictions. This isn't because I don't have faith in the film, but because I don't know exactly how many screens it is opening on or how many screenings those screens will be exhibiting on opening weekend.

It may be technically impossible for FELLOWSHIP OF THE RING to gross more than Harry Potter upon opening weekend due to screens and number of showings... But that could work towards the benefit of LOTR's stamina in theaters, if the trend of positive word continues. If opening weekend, New Line offers LOTR on as many screens and showings as they can, and there is still a great deal of interest that has gone unsated by the initial availability of screenings... then in addition you have the word of mouth (if there is any, and there certainly seems that there might be a lot of it) then you have the formula for the film performing in a different fashion than HARRY POTTER.

You see, HARRY POTTER was designed for a fast burn. By opening it on so many screens, you ensured that the audience was able to see it in totale... and that they could see it multiple times quickly, so quickly and so easily that they served the audience's thirst for the film. Now we see the near 60% drop, but they've made a quick 200+ million.

The best sort of release is one that plays strong and consistent and is allowed to build. This is what happened with TITANIC, and by no means am I comparing FOTR to that film. Realistically... right now no one really knows what the audience is for this film.

There has been a lot of speculation. Some felt that it would be a 'geek' only film. Or that it was just for the 'Tolkien fans'. However, David Ansen's review is a portent that those predictions could have been wildly off target. Why? David Ansen is not a geek and he is not a Tolkien fan. Ansen loves film though, and the screening of FELLOWSHIP that he saw made him want to go out and buy THE TWO TOWERS to read because the film made him want to know more about these stories and these characters... What happens next... That sort of thing.

If the UK's SUNDAY TIMES was right all those years ago when they stated there were two types of people... Those that have read LORD OF THE RINGS and those that are going to.... Well, if that happens with this film, there could be a phenomenon about to be unleashed.

There are a lot of "ifs" in this, but that's what we're dealing with. It is the reason why I try my hardest to never deal with predicting box office grosses, for me... Film is about how well does it entertain me, how does it engage me and what does it give me.

Quite honestly, it has always puzzled me why movie fans fixate so much on box office grosses. Is it to some how give themselves some bizarre sense of security that they are somehow right in liking something like everybody else?

My favorite two movies of all time are KING KONG (1933) and THE ADVENTURES OF ROBIN HOOD (1938). Frankly, I don't care if they are your favorites or not. I did not choose those films, they choose me. I'm hardwired into my love for them. It isn't necessary that you love or even appreciate them. If you hate them, well... from my point of view, you're simply wrong. Everybit as much as I'm wrong from your point of view. And I don't need the AFI or the Academy of Motion Pictures Arts & Sciences or Exhibitor Relations to affirm it by its ranking on one list or another. Doesn't change the way I feel about those movies.

The only reason I care about Box Office is because Studio Execs care about it. And based upon that reaction... We'll either see more fantasy and period epics get made... or not. Because if LORD OF THE RINGS performs spectacularly, maybe New Line will have the money to greenlight Tim McCanlies' IRON MAN script. Or any number of other projects they might have in the offing. Because perhaps a great and outstanding performance by FELLOWSHIP OF THE RING, if God willing it were to out-perform TITANIC, maybe James Cameron would get off his ass and finally commit to making another fucking movie. Because if it performs great, gets Oscars for non-technical awards... it might make people realize that Fantasy and Science Fiction is cool... making booksales, TV shows and those other movies perform well, there by possibly inspiring future writers, filmmakers and creative types to go in that direction.

Maybe... just maybe if a serious Fantasy film adaptation is done to perfection... maybe people adapting other works from geek or fan orientated genres will take that seriously.

There are hundreds of reasons to hope for LORD OF THE RINGS to perform well... not the least of which is for UNIVERSAL to see the light and commit to making PETER JACKSON'S KING KONG instantly!

Why to root against it? Well if watching others fail is what floats your boat, you're a sad individual. If others' success deflates your own sense of worth, you're a sad individual. And if there is only room in your heart to love one thing completely... well, you're a sad individual. It isn't a sin to be polygamous in the world of fan related things, it's a blessing.

Of course, maybe that's just my opinion...

Harry Chimes In On Arwen/FemNazi revisionism Tangent Below....

Now, I'm one of the only people here that has spent a good deal of time with Phillipa Boyens, Fran Walsh and Peter Jackson. In particular I know Phil (what her friends call her) pretty darn well. First off, both she and Fran are most definitely not femnazis. Phil is a girly girl in most ways, though both she and Fran have a morbid fascination with Serial Killers, gore, monsters, the whole nine yards. If you ask me, the one that decided to make Arwen more kickass... I'd have to say, I'd think that'd have to be Peter.

To give you an example, when I was on set during the Eowyn and Faramir marriage thing, Phil was the one getting all gushy and girly, whereas Peter wanted to move along and get to some more cool guy stuff. Phil wanted the longing looks into one another's eyes between paired kisses and all that 'girly stuff'. Meanwhile as David and Miranda would catch their breath between takes, Phil would say, "You don't understand Harry, this is just about the only purely girl anything in this film. we just spent months of fighting non stop, I had to see this part, this is my payoff." ***Reasonable facsimille of what she said to me***

As for the Reason for changing the Flight To The Ford sequence... Well, personally I think it is so guys and girls can actually think that Arwen is cool, that she's worthy of a guy like Aragorn's love, that she endears herself through action as well as words. And that is done in the absolute most minimal amount of time. That way, in the very quick 10 minutes or so that she's on screen in FELLOWSHIP... she strikes into the memory of the viewer.

That is the most obvious place to put her for maximum impact for the viewer. I mean, Frodo has enough bravery in these three films to spread out over a dozen films. His character doesn't NEED to be strengthened there. Glorfindel.. well, we never even see or hear from him again in the whole epic. In my opinion it is far more important to make Arwen as strong a character as she can be with the audience, so that the pay off in Film Three feels right.

Also, I know some people that have been complaining about changes at the Prancing Pony, by Frodo no longer singing and dancing on the table and all that... Well, that may not be in the film, but Peter sure as hell shot that scene, because I've seen it. And it was grand.

Personally, I'd say if there were little things that seemed abbreviated or missing... I'd say it came down to making the film fit into a 3 hour slot with credits. On the DVD, I'd wager we'll see quite a bit of this material. I found out recently that the team that is currently putting together the DVD of FELLOWSHIP OF THE RING is the same team that put together that amazing FANTASIA BOXED SET that so many of us worship!