Watchmen Movie

Discussion in 'Archive: SF&F: Films and Television' started by EDKRIEG, Jul 26, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Count_Doodie Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    May 25, 2006
    star 2
    oh my giddy aunt am i freaking out! everything looks awesome! the new trailer is not as good as the other "tone poems" but still awesome. annoyed me a little bit that they kept referring to themselves as "watchmen" but im guessing that was just for the trailer. seem to remember snyder saying something about leaving the "crimebusters" title vague.

    loooks like the trailer included a few shots of the new dr.manhatten explosions ending the idea of which is growing on me..... slowly....

    is it just me or does rorschach sound more coherent than he should? dont get me wrong he still sounds good but i'd've had the speech more disjointed. but again this might be just for the trailer.

    did i mention im freaking out?>!

    awesome awesome awesome!
    -doodie
  2. Merlin_Ambrosius69 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Aug 4, 2008
    star 5
    I forget -- did they not call themselves Watchmen? I know they were the Minutemen in the 60s and the Crimebusters in the 70s... but I was under the impression they named themselves Watchmen, or Rorshach did, at some point early in the story.

    N'est-ce pas?
  3. Count_Doodie Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    May 25, 2006
    star 2
    i'm thinking it's just for the tailer.

    in the comic they never actually give themselves the title of watchmen. the title of the comic book is taken from the "who watches the watchmen" graffiti seen through out the comics.
    -doodie
  4. Sith_Lord_Linkoping Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Jan 19, 2001
    star 5
  5. WormieSaber Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Oct 22, 2000
    star 5
    Would like to get that game on Playstation.
  6. BobaMatt TFN EU Staff

    VIP
    Member Since:
    Aug 19, 2002
    star 6
    Anybody downloaded the new free footage off of iTunes?

    Aces. :cool:
  7. Leto II Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Jan 23, 2000
    star 6
    Wow.

    "Fox Wins Ruling in Watchmen case."

    As an IP lawyer, that's all I gotta say. Wow.

    I mean, I'm not surprised by the ruling, but I'm a little taken aback by the way it was delivered. He (the judge) just cut right to the chase, and in this case I suppose that might not be a bad thing. Gives the parties more time to work it out.

    The licensing/merchandising rights for Watchmen were definitely lost by Fox many years ago (if they ever even had it) and are completely secured by DC, and, in turn, Warner. That of course just adds another interesting layer of complexity. Fox's claims have only been toward distribution of a Watchmen motion picture from the very beginning. The copyright, title, characters, story, etc. are all owned by DC.

    If Fox fully intend to be dicks about this, I guess the movie might be delayed. But they're probably still just wanting a chunk of cash. They're ***holes, of course, but WB handled this in a way befitting of the Bush Administration. At worst, they probably could have gotten Fox to back off with 2.5% of the gross. Now the gambit might cost them 4-10x that.

    This sucks. Despite TDK's incredible success, Warner Bros. are not doing that well this year. No one is thrilled with how WB are handling Where the Wild Things Are, and the Harry Potter delay is an obvious and irritating cash-grab, but Warner Bros. produces a lot of exciting (and surprisingly risky) big-budget projects, typically maintains good working relationships with filmmakers, and has a president who is unusually honest and forthright about his motives.

    Fox just makes a lot of terrible movies, markets the hell out of them, gets a big opening, and then stops marketing them. And they have an ***hole president (Rothman), to boot.

    WB needs more money so they can keep doing projects like Watchmen; Fox needs less money, because I'm still mad I paid to see The Happening.

    I'm worried about what this means for the cut of the film. Not so much that Fox now has a say, as WB is now going to be even more anxious to turn the thing into a cash cow. If WB hands over the rights, then Fox wouldn't just let it collect dust. But of course, with them being Fox, we'd get a 95-minute, PG-13 version.
  8. gonzoforce Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Feb 27, 2002
    star 5
    at least Fox didn't make it from the beginning. You know they'd screw it up and try for a pg-13 kiddie version.
  9. Darth-Lando Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Aug 12, 2002
    star 6
    Well, I was having a merry Christmas...
  10. Gobi-1 Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Dec 22, 2002
    star 5
    I know I'm simplifying a very complicated matter but since Fox only won distribution rights do they actually have a say in the film's content? I assume (and I know I'm probably wrong) that distribution rights means that Warner Bros. makes the film, they hand it off to Fox who distributes it, then Fox gets a cut of the profits.

    The whole thing reeks of sour grapes.
  11. Leto II Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Jan 23, 2000
    star 6
    Hey, look at it this way -- Fox will actually make some money on a genre film this coming year. Go figure.

    Essentially, looking at it from an attorney-standpoint, all that's really happened is that the judge has prevented WB from rush-releasing the film to make Fox's claim moot (i.e., it would then already out be there, so there'd be no distribution to share), or damage the film's chances so that there'd be no profits to share.

    Evidently the trial may still go on (unless the parties reach a settlement), and while the judge has made it clear that Fox has enough of a case to take this action, that's no guarantee that they'll actually prevail at a trial.

    Basically, here's how this all went down:

    * 20th Century-Fox possesses the rights in the '90s, with Lawrence Gordon producing.
    * Terry Gilliam, of all folks, decides graphic novel is "unfilmable." After Gilliam's declaration, the Red Wings begin playing in their new ice arena down in Hell.
    * Unable to find a way to make the movie, Fox passes on production.
    * Gordon becomes free to take the film to another studio, so long as he apparently signs some legal stuff at the greenlight-phase.
    * Gordon takes the movie to Paramount.
    * Paramount picks it up; Gordon gets Paul Greengrass on it.
    * Paramount's president changes, wants Watchmen to cost $40 million less, Greengrass balks, Paramount drops Watchmen.
    * After Tom Rothman ascends to head-of-studio, Fox begins to alienate every filmmaker in the world not named Cameron or Luhrmann.
    * Warner Bros. grabs the rights.
    * Zack Snyder expresses interest following the massive success of 300.
    * Zack Snyder makes Watchmen.
    * Fox remembers Gordon never signed the stuff he was supposed to, needs $$$ bad, sues WB and Gordon to extort money from the movie's seemingly-impending success.
    * Judge declares injunction that basically says "yeah, this'll be put in front of a judge soon." It also blocks WB from shoving the release date up in front of the trial to avoid paying Fox.

    ...In a nutshell.
  12. Merlin_Ambrosius69 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Aug 4, 2008
    star 5
    From Comic Book Resources:


    So, how are the "Watchmen" movie legal shenanigans going to shake themselves out? Let Lying In The Gutters give you the exclusive.

    Currently the situation has Fox filing suit against Warners and other connected companies over the rights to produce and distribute the upcoming "Watchmen" movie, based on contracts signed a considerable while ago. And it appears that they have a very good case indeed.

    But do Fox really want to make a ?Watchmen? film of their own? Do they want the money from the Warners ?Watchmen? film? Do they want a cut? A payoff? Or just holding up a rival?

    None of the above. Sources tell me that Fox want the 1960s Batman TV series. Currently Fox own the TV footage, but Warner Bros own the characters and trademarks, via their ownership of DC Comics. The rights to a DVD release have been held up for a long time now, and this case looks like it may be the instrument to release them.

    Oh, Fox will get a wodge of cash as well - many millions of dollars it seems. But it seems they also want the rights to release the Adam West-starring Batman on DVD, something long denied fans of the series. And Warners will get the ?Watchmen? film, to release as planned.

    There were comic fans who threatened Fox boycotts over what they saw as their scuppering of the Watchmen movie. Looks like they may soon have cause to thank
    Fox for this action.
  13. Gobi-1 Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Dec 22, 2002
    star 5
    Well at least something good my come out of all this. I've been waiting for the Adam West series to come out.
  14. Yodaminch Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Mar 6, 2002
    star 6
    Indeed. Now who has to sue who so I can get my X-men and Spider-Man animated series dvds?:p
  15. Leto II Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Jan 23, 2000
    star 6
    An open letter from Watchmen executive producer Lloyd Levin concerning the legal shenanigans 20th Century Fox are pulling on the production.

    Add Tom Rothman and the rest of the Fox brass to my list of those who get puked on if I ever come into physical contact with them (i.e., Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, George W. Bush, Ann Coulter, Elisabeth Hasselbeck, etc.).

    It's a very persuasive letter. I would like to see something similar from the Fox camp, but I know I'll never get that, which just makes me take WB's side all the more. This seems to be one of those instances where the right decision is favoring the spirit of the law over the letter of the law. Fox had their opportunity, and they passed.

    But in a sense, this really has little to do with the actual case -- as much as I may loathe Fox at this point, they still seem to have a distribution claim over the film, and might end up walking away with some cash on the back-end points. But that still doesn't excuse their scummy, absolutely reprehensible behavior one scintilla.
  16. Blur Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Aug 11, 1999
    star 4


    I'm a huge fan of the "Watchmen" mini-series/graphic novel, and I've read this at least 4 times. Excellent story, characterization, etc. This is definitely one of the best comic series of the 1980's and 1990's.

    I also saw the trailer for "Watchmen" in front of TDK last summer and was extremely impressed.
    I hope the film is at least 3 hours long - it would have to be, to do the graphic novel justice. However, I have a feeling it will only be 2 - 2 1/2 hours long at the most.

    I think they're making "Watchmen" action figures too, to coincide with the film - interesting, since in the graphic novel there are action figures of the characters that are available (in the context of the story).
  17. Ramza JC Head Admin and RPF Manager

    Administrator
    Member Since:
    Jul 13, 2008
    star 7
    They were showcasing figures at Comic Con, yes. Although I felt like if I bought them, I would unwittingly fund a giant psychic squid attack...

    I was really looking forward to this movie, yet Fox is being so tenacious that now the pessimist in me is wondering if we'll even see it this year...
  18. Dawud786 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Dec 28, 2006
    star 4
    So, does anyone know... as Alan Moore endorsed this film? He hasn't tended to be a big fan of the big screen adaptations of his work. So I'm wondering.
  19. Yodaminch Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Mar 6, 2002
    star 6
    Nope. He's mentioned he won't see the film.
  20. Dawud786 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Dec 28, 2006
    star 4
    Does this have to do with him feeling comics shouldn't be adapted to the film media period, or because he thinks they always end up butchering his work?

    I know he hated The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen and certainly didn't append his name to V for Vendetta.
  21. Carlis Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Jun 14, 2008
    star 1
    He has actually said that the script is "as close as I could imagine anyone getting to Watchmen", but he doesn't think there should be a movie, and that the story is solely meant for the comic book medium.
  22. Ramza JC Head Admin and RPF Manager

    Administrator
    Member Since:
    Jul 13, 2008
    star 7
    Alan Moore hasn't endorsed the film, because apparently his policy since The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen has been to, well, not endorse films based on his works. Not that I imagine adding "Alan Moore's" to the front-end of the film title (IE Alan Moore's Watchmen) is really going to make any difference in who goes to see the film. Alan Moore fans already know that he made Watchmen, and people who don't know Alan Moore could care less if he came up with it.
  23. Dawud786 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Dec 28, 2006
    star 4
    That's not really the point though dude.

    I think the idea of doing a film based on an artist's work who doesn't want it done is kind of a bummer, you know? Unfortunately, he sold his intellectual property rights to this a long time ago, so I imagine Alan's not going to see a dime from this adaptation of his work.
  24. Sith_Lord_Linkoping Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Jan 19, 2001
    star 5
  25. Merlin_Ambrosius69 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Aug 4, 2008
    star 5
    Watchmen release date 3/6/09 is written in stone!

    The studios released a joint statement which said: "Warner Bros. and Fox, like all Watchmen fans, look forward with great anticipation to this film's 6 March release in theatres."

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/7832719.stm
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.