Register Now!
 
LOG IN  |  SIGN UP
SCANNER

A Bunch of Hollywood Phonies Try to Make 'The Catcher in the Rye' Movie

Michael Cera in Revolt

There's nothing like some unabashed opportunism after the death of a beloved figure to warm your heart, eh? This weekend, the Telegraph reported that Hollywood is making another effort to snag the rights to J.D. Salinger's teen-angst classic, Catcher In The Rye.

Salinger - who died in January - spent his whole life fending off similar attempts from his giant farm / fortified bunker in New Hampshire. But this time, there are two added factors (other than the fact he's dead): Salinger did once say that his family could sell the rights after his death (you know, he was worried that he wouldn't leave them any money, which sixty five million copies later, seems like a moot point). Also, while the good ol' death tax is not in effect this year, it's possible that Salinger's estate could be taxed the traditional forty five percent in 2011, which means the family is encouraged to act fast.

Now, I'm sure this probably will upset a lot of people. Salinger was incredibly protective of his work and his legacy should be respected. Plus, the movie will almost inevitably suck. But you know who you should be really worried? Michael Cera. If this movie actually gets made in the next two or three years, there is no way in hell Cera will not be pegged to play Holden Caulfield which would effectively cement his place as the quintessential neurotic, angst-ridden teenage actor of the past thirty years. And he'll never play another role in his life and be hated by everyone forever.

But, um, if you actually are excited about the possibility of The Catcher In The Rye: The Movie (in 3D?), you can always tide yourself over with some melodramatic high-school English projects from YouTube. Salinger totally should have sued the pants off of these kids.
 

Comments ( 5 )

Unless Salinger dies and transfers his assets again in 2011, the Estate Tax won't apply. Besides, if you sell 65 million copies of _anything_ and don't do any estate planning, it's your own damn fault.

CE commented on Jun 21 10 at 2:40 pm

People we be upset. It's upsetting, but who didn't know this would happen. The real tragedy here is that high school freshman may never discover that they sort of like reading because of this book. They'll just watch the movie.

ManleyHopkins commented on Jun 21 10 at 3:26 pm

I'm pretty sure that the way the Estate Tax bill thing is written allows them to retroactively tax those who died during in 2010, assuming that it gets passed.

Me commented on Jun 21 10 at 3:27 pm

The estate owns the rights to the novel. They took possession of the rights when Salinger died and would have paid any tax on the value of those rights at that time.

The taxes owed regardless of the death tax would be capital gains on the increase in value of the rights between the time the estate took ownership and when the sell the rights.

No death taxes involved.

Really? commented on Jun 21 10 at 4:31 pm

@Really?
Copyright isn't stock. You don't, to the best of my recollection from law school, assess any capital gains on an intangible with no intrinsic monetary value. The estate owns the copyright, and won't be taxed on the transfer unless congress retroactively "corrects" the death tax lapse.

robert paulsen commented on Jun 21 10 at 6:22 pm

Leave a Comment