• ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️



    Film & Television

    Welcome Guest


    ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️
  • ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️
    Forum Rules Film Chit-Chat
    Recently Watched Best Documentaries
    ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️
  • Film & TV Moderators: ghostfreak

film: WATCHMEN

rate this film

  • [img]http://i.bluelight.ru/g//543/1star.gif[/img]

    Votes: 4 10.0%
  • [img]http://i.bluelight.ru/g//543/2stars.gif[/img]

    Votes: 2 5.0%
  • [img]http://i.bluelight.ru/g//543/3stars.gif[/img]

    Votes: 8 20.0%
  • [img]http://i.bluelight.ru/g//543/4stars.gif[/img]

    Votes: 12 30.0%
  • [img]http://i.bluelight.ru/g//543/5stars.gif[/img]

    Votes: 14 35.0%

  • Total voters
    40
A little tidbit of info from Mr. Kevin Smith:

Motherfuckin' Kevin Smith said:
I saw “Watchmen.” It’s fucking astounding. The Non-Disclosure Agreement I signed prevents me from saying much, but I can spout the following with complete joygasmic enthusiasm: Snyder and Co. have pulled it off.

Remember that feeling of watching “Sin City” on the big screen and being blown away by what a faithful translation of the source material it was, in terms of both content and visuals? Triple that, and you’ll come close to watching “Watchmen.” Even Alan Moore might be surprised at how close the movie is to the book. March can’t come soon enough.

OMGOMGOMGOMGOMGOMGOMGOMGOMG!!!
 
how can it be finished and yet out next year?! :X


also, kevin smith isn't the most reputable source of info. he was saying revenge of the sith is better than empire strikes back before its release 8)
 
interesting

watchmeninsignia.jpg

What an unbelievable mess this whole Watchmen movie fiasco has turned into. The average person has to ask themselves: How the heck does something like this happen? I mean, isn’t this why corporations have massive legal departments stocked chock full of everyone’s favorite people: lawyers?

Let’s take a look at the history of Watchmen in Hollywood to try to sort this all out.



The crux of the matter hinges on something in the movie industry known as “putting a film in turnaround.” Turnaround is basically a way for a studio that owns the rights to a property (in this case, Fox ownership of Watchmen) to “release” a project and allow another studio to make a film based on that property.

Of course the studio which owns the rights does not give this away for free, but depending on the specific arrangement either sells or “leases” the right to the other studio - in essence keeping a string attached which will allow them to recoup the cost of acquiring the property and possibly any development costs they’ve put into it, plus interest.

With me so far? Good.

You may not be aware of this, but the Watchmen project has been bouncing around Hollywood for over 20 years. Fox originally acquired the rights to the graphic novel back in 1987 and did intend to produce the film. Their plan was to have the original author, Alan Moore, write the screenplay. Unfortunately at the time they were not aware of Moore’s opinion regarding a film adaptation of his work - which was that he didn’t think it was suitable for a cinematic format.

When it seemed like they would not be able to get the project off the ground, Fox put Watchmen in turnaround to a number of studios over the years, none of which did anything with it. Ironically, the first studio to snatch up the rights when Fox made them available was - Warner Bros. They intended to put Joel Silver (Lethal Weapon, Die Hard) in charge as producer, Terry Gilliam (12 Monkeys) as director and Sam Hamm (Tim Burton’s Batman) as screenwriter.

But Gilliam didn’t like the script, Silver was not able to raise enough money, and in the end the project languished for a number of years.

watchmen-comic-comp1.jpg


In 1991 enter producer Lawrence Gordon, a powerful Hollywood producer who was once a studio chief at 20th Century Fox and managed to secure the turnaround rights to Watchmen (remember, this means that Fox still owned the rights at a higher level).

In 2001 Universal took a shot at making the film with Darren Aronofsky (Requiem for a Dream) as director with Lawrence Gordon and Lloyd Levin producing a script written by David Hayter (X-Men, X-Men 2). What killed THAT deal was the fact the Universal Studios did not want to entrust such a huge production to Hayter, who wanted to direct the film with Gordon’s blessing.

From there Gordon and Levin tried to get the film made by Revolution Studios, then Paramount, which wanted Aronofsky to direct (who dropped out due to schedule conflicts) and then Paul Greengrass (The Bourne Supremacy). Greengrass approached the project (still based on Hayter’s script) with the right sensibility and a Summer 2006 date was targeted as the release date. Unfortunately in the end budgetary issues killed the project at Paramount, when the studio didn’t want to spend $100 million to make the film.

So back into turnaround it went.

In 2005 Gordon and Levitt brought Warner Bros into the picture and that’s where things finally came together - in June 2006 Zack Snyder (300) was offically announced as the director of the Watchmen movie, with a script by Alex Tse which would be based heavily on David Hayter’s screenplay. On a side note, although it’s well known that Alan Moore has always been against a movie adaptation of his graphic novel, he did say at one point that Hayter’s script “was as close as I could imagine to anyone getting Watchmen.”

Watchmen Comic/Movie comparison
Comparison of a scene from the Watchmen movie with the Comic

It remains to be seen how much of Hayter’s script survives in the final film.

Which brings us, finally, to today and this whole ugly lawsuit where everyone (including our site) has labeled Fox as the bad guy. Now there is no love lost between Fox and myself. They’ve mucked up a lot of potentially great superhero movies (Daredevil, League of Extraordinary Gentlemen, X-Men 3, Fantastic Four), not to mention the grief they gave me about a Day the Earth Stood Still post here at Screen Rant.

The latest information that’s surfaced indicates that while Fox filed their lawsuit in February of this year, they claim that they had tried to contact Warner Bros via email, phone and postal mail since before the production even started, to no avail.

Now I’m not a legal-minded guy in any sense of the word, but here’s what it looks like may have happened:

It seems that Lawrence Gordon gave Warner Bros. the go-ahead to shoot the film. WB figures he owns the turnaround rights, so they’re golden (of course this doesn’t explain why they didn’t do some due diligence on the situation with a crack team of lawyers).

Gordon didn’t cross the t’s and dot the i’s on the Fox side of things, and assigned rights to WB incorrectly or incompletely in regards to his agreement with Fox.

Now Fox is taking Warner Bros to court, and it looks like the date may be as late as June 2009 (three months after the target release date for the film).

Now what I find unusual (or maybe not) is that Fox isn’t going after Gordon in this lawsuit at all - when it seems that HE is the source of all these problems and the confusion. Of course Warner Bros. has much deeper pockets than Gordon, plus they have the film in the can - so maybe it makes sense after all. What’s interesting is that they’re not targeting Paramount, which also made an attempt at the film and had gotten the green light from Gordon before it went to WB.

The cast of the Watchmen movie
The cast of Watchmen

However it looks like Warner Bros. will bring Lawrence Gordon into the middle of this legal battle, and rightly so as far as I can tell.

Will this affect the release date for Watchmen? Does Fox really want to keep the movie from being released or are they just playing this situation to the hilt in order to extract maximum coinage from Warner Bros. in an out of court settlement?

However this turns out, it seems to me that the real bad guy here may be Lawrence Gordon and NOT 20th Century Fox.

http://screenrant.com/watchmen-movie-delay-fox-studio-fault-vic-3576/
 
How bizarre. Is it any wonder that Alan Moore doesn't have anything to do with the studios? I mean... the guy's an arse, but I can't blame him for having an aversion to them.
 
Honestly hoping it isn't a faithful adaptation of the comic book but rather that it does for action movies what it did for comics at that time. Why would you want a direct scene-for-scene movie anyways, it would be impossible and/or really fucking boring.

The only exception of course, is Rorshcach:

"Dog Carcass in alley this morning, tire tread on burst stomach. This city is afraid of me. I have seen its true face. The streets are extended gutters and the gutters are full of blood and when the drains finally scab over, all the vermin will drown. The accumulated filth of all their sex and murder will foam up about their waists and all the whores and politicians will look up and shout 'Save us!' And I'll look down, and whisper 'no.' They had a choice, all of them."

"None of you understand. I'm not locked up in here with you. You're locked up in here with me"


If the story dosen't start with Rorschach muttering to himself in monotone with images of a dead dog I will be very dissapointed.
 
:(:X
The legal battle over "Watchmen" is about to get nastier and more encompassing as lawyers for Warner Brothers shot back at Fox in a joint report submitted to federal court on Friday reports The New York Times.

As previously reported, Fox plans to seek an injunction blocking Warner's planned release of the superhero film next March.

Warners has now come back arguing that Fox "sat silently" as producer Lawrence Gordon took the project "to studio after studio with Fox's express knowledge" and paid the studio a third of a million dollar sum for the rights to the property as early as 1991.

Warners says Fox was even offered the opportunity again in 2005 to make the film but "simply rejected it," and they'd gone so far as to grant Warners rights to the title "Watchmen" which they had earlier registered with the MPAA.

Fox claims Gordon did not keep the studio apprised of his plans as required by a 1994 agreement under which he was supposed to deliver a much larger buyout price that has never been paid.
http://www.darkhorizons.com/news08/080901e.php

Los Angeles federal judge Gary Allen Feess has set a January 6th trial date for the Fox/Warner Bros. "Watchmen" lawsuit reports the trades.

During a meeting between attorneys on Tuesday, the judge set the date for discovery and deposition proceedings throughout the rest of this year.

Feess admits the issues are too complex to be resolved on an interim basis, he wants the case to move quickly and has already asked for expedited discovery.

Warner Bros. Pictures has not however backed away from the March 6th release date for the film.

http://www.darkhorizons.com/news08/080903i.php
 
axl blaze said:
that trailer was epic, it won't load but I know I saw it before I saw Batman. they seemed to show too much Dr. Manhattan, however.

Alan Moore, as ingenious as he is, is a whiney prick. I like how Entertainment Weekly compared him as the modern day Orson Welles - because he is simply just that. he claims that none of his movies were adapted correctly, and though I think From Hell might have been lacking I also think that V for Vendetta was a prime adaptation. and Moore trashed V because of the most banal, contrived aspects. things like coming up with some cutesy name for breakfast or for altering what he called the federal post office's title.

you might be a genius but please get over yourself. I truly only like to listen to you when you are writing the script for a comic book.

I'll agree with Alan Moore with this about V:

He charges the Wachowski's with turning his political fable about anarchy and fascism in a post-Thatcher England into a weak tale of American liberals standing up to George W. Bush-styled neoconservatives
http://www.popmatters.com/film/features/060526-vforvendetta.shtml

That being said, I loved the movie and I also think Moore is a whiney prick and wish Moore would just shut the hell up.
 
^freakin sweet

imdb has the film coming out a couple days after my birthday. :D i'll re-read it after it comes out.
 
:X:X:X:X:X
:Xfuck fox:X
:X:X:X:X:X

Think that whole "Watchmen" legal wrangle would have been all easily fixed up by now? Think again.

District Court Judge Gary A. Feess says he intends to grant 20th Century Fox’s claim that it owns a copyright interest in the comic book adaptation according to The New York Times.

"Fox owns a copyright interest consisting of, at the very least, the right to distribute the ‘Watchmen’ motion picture" the ruling said.

Fox had been seeking to prevent Warners and Paramount from releasing the dark superhero epic which is shaping up as one of the most eagerly anticipated releases of next year.

Feess advised both studios to now look toward a settlement or an appeal, but if the appeal approach is taken then the film will be delayed well into 2010 or beyond.

A settlement, with some sort of co-distribution arrangement, now seems the likeliest outcome but the film's March release date is also now looking highly uncertain.

http://www.darkhorizons.com/news08/081228b.php
 
^oooh? source?

After the panic last week, things might finally be calming down on the legal front of the "Watchmen" film.

Before a phone meeting on Friday the spill hit the online arena with producer Lloyd Levin going public with a letter over on HitFix which Fox later responded too, while producer Larry Gordon wrote a lengthy letter to the judge overseeing the case.

Then the talk suddenly changed with word over the weekend that both Fox and Warners asked Judge Feess to delay the upcoming hearing because “settlement talks have been productive” and needed to continue over the weekend according to Variety. The judge has granted the new request to postpone the judgement but is keeping the January 20th court date in place for the time being.

Further information could well come out and resolve the issue over the course of the next week, we'll soon see. Meanwhile a new viral site has gone live at TheNewFrontiersman.net, while the 'Tales of the Black Freighter', the DVD mini-movie tie-in has been given an R-rating by the MPAA due to 'violent and grisly images'.
http://www.darkhorizons.com/news09/090112e.php

not happy about the undies they put on the blue guy
watchmen.jpg
 
Top