Ain't It Cool News (
Movie News

Will Legal Wrangling Delay The Release Of WATCHMEN?

Beaks here... No longer content to run their own comic book properties into the ground, 20th Century Fox is now out to destroy geek-friendly projects at other studios. And if you think I'm going to give you my unscholarly opinion on the Fox/WB dust-up over Who Controls The WATCHMEN... This isn't my bailiwick, so there'll be no Star Jones act (don't need no Dwyane Wade up on me); I will, however, reiterate that, no matter how dire the situation looks (per the filing - which, at 112 pages, is probably longer than the shooting script for X-MEN: THE LAST STAND), you will have your WATCHMEN on March 6, 2009. Fox may be able to get away with mugging a rival studio for eight figures, but they're not going to actively impede the rollout of a $100 million-plus motion picture. Though Rupert Murdoch and his garbage-greenlighting toady Tom Rothman are certainly a pair of ruthless operators, knocking a potential blockbuster off the spring release schedule would be bad, bad, bad for the movie business in general (e.g. I can't imagine the exhibitors, who've been cycling through tepidly performing Fox releases all year, would be terribly pleased). The question right now is whether Fox will settle for a lump sum buyout or a percentage of the gross. My guess is that they'll gladly take the former - and I'm quite sure they've already a number in mind. $10 million? Too low. $50 million? Too high. $25 million? If David Poland's numbers make sense, The House of Rothman should be happy with that haul - especially since there's no guarantee that WATCHMEN will catch on with rank-and-file moviegoers. (I might've been one of those dipshits who lowballed THE DARK KNIGHT's domestic take, but there was still no doubt it would make more than BATMAN BEGINS. WATCHMEN isn't a franchise; it's a standalone gamble. And an R-rated one at that. There's no telling at the moment if it'll bomb or hit.) If you're looking for wild speculation, Defamer's Stu VanAirsdale is thinkin' that the move of HARRY POTTER AND THE HALF-BLOOD PRINCE to July '09 was actually a shrewd countermeasure: since WB might recoup zilch on WATCHMEN and very little on TERMINATOR SALVATION (which they're only distributing domestically), why not use the boy wizard to offset potential losses next year? It's not like '08 isn't already a raging success based on THE DARK KNIGHT's returns alone. Sure, SPEED RACER was a costly misfire, but GET SMART, SEX & THE CITY (via New Line) and FOOL'S GOLD are either massive to modest hits. Factor in BODY OF LIES and the Vince Vaughn/Reese Witherspoon vehicle FOUR CHRISTMASES, and it should be a reasonably profitable fall for WB. That said, I wouldn't want to be working for WB Legal at the moment. Don't forget that a similar slip-up forced the studio to cough up $17.5 million on THE DUKES OF HAZZARD. For those of you who enjoy playing dime-store attorney, here's the Summary of Action from Fox's filing...
Plaintiff Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation ("Fox" or "Plaintiff") brings this action to enforce Fox's exclusive copyright and contract rights in a motion picture property entitled "The Watchmen," including Fox's exclusive rights to produce and develop the picture and to distribute the work throughout the world. Fox acquired rights to The Watchmen property over the period of 1986 to 1990 under a series of contracts and agreements whereby Fox at substantial expense obtained the rights from the creators and authors of the original works. As detailed herein, defendant Warner Bros. Pictures ("WBP") is now proceeding to produce, develop and enter into distribution arrangements for a motion picture based on The Watchmen notwithstanding WBP's actual notice of Fox's rights in the work, and notwithstanding WBP's express contractual obligations to honor Fox's rights in The Watchmen. Fox seeks injunctive relief to restrain WBP from taking actions that violate Fox's copyrights and which stand to forever impair Fox's rights to control the distribution and development of this unique work. Fox also seeks damages to compensate Fox for losses incurred as a result of WBP's breach of obligations owed to Fox, and for a declaration of rights, including Fox's distribution rights, changed elements protection and other rights that WBP refuses to honor despite Fox's demand therefore.
Here's a salient excerpt from the Factual Allegations...
a) [Largo International, N.V.] agreed to pay Fox a substantial purchase price, plus interest and other charges, all as detailed more fully in the 1991 Quitclaim ("Purchase Price"); b) Fox was granted distribution rights to the first motion picture produced based on The Watchmen. LINV agreed that The Watchmen would be produced by LINV and distributed by Fox as a Subject Picture pursuant to the terms of the Largo Agreement for the time periods, territories and media set forth in the Largo Agreement (detailed more fully below) ("Distribution Rights"); c) LINV agreed to pay Fox a profit participation equal to 2.5% of 100% of the worldwide net proceeds of the picture and any subsequent motion picture based in whole or in part on The Watchmen, all as detailed more fully in the 1991 Quitclaim ("Profit Participation").
And here's the master list of quitclaimed projects from the Fox-Largo era...
Projects Quitclaimed To Largo "My Illegal Alien" "Watchmen" Projects Controlled by Fox for Potential Turnaround or Quitclaim to Largo "Above and Beyond" "Admission Impossible" "AKA" "Alien Cop" "Angel Pangs" "Baby Blue Eyes (Flamingo)" "Cop in the Old West" "The Gossip Columnist" "House Guests" "The Mick" "My New Partner" "Showdown" "Tidings" "Very Old Money" "A Year and a Day"
There are some real winners in there. Imagine the pitch meetings...

"Jim, I know you've got a lot on your plate, so I'm going to make this brief. Two words: 'Angel Pangs'." "Mike, you better clear your schedule for the rest of the afternoon, 'cuz I'm gonna blow you 'til Brokaw!"

I wonder what COP IN THE OLD WEST was about. Strange and sad that this saga began with the failed late-'80s development of WATCHMEN by Terry Gilliam, Charles McKeown and Sam Hamm. Such cautiously hopeful days. If there are any updates, we'll try to be a little more timely with 'em.

Readers Talkback
comments powered by Disqus
    + Expand All
  • Aug. 19, 2008, 11:56 p.m. CST


    by MMacKK

  • Aug. 19, 2008, 11:56 p.m. CST

    My apologies. I'll never do that again.

    by MMacKK

    And I fucking hope its not delayed.

  • Aug. 19, 2008, 11:57 p.m. CST

    Are sitting around your computer waiting to get

    by Phategod2

    off work too?

  • Aug. 19, 2008, 11:59 p.m. CST

    Sucks for WB.

    by FilmZ0mbie

    No matter, we'll still see the film, that's all I care about.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, midnight CST

    Predicting boxoffice is a fool's game

    by JackRabbitSlim

    So much of it has to do with unquantifiable elements that anything outside of ballpark estimates are foolish.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 12:01 a.m. CST

    those sly fox bastards

    by Mr_X

    fuck you fox!

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 12:03 a.m. CST

    The bigfoot body turned out to be a hoax. Who'd guess??

    by Uncle Stan

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 12:04 a.m. CST

    cool article

    by dudemandude

    As an intellectual property attorney I'm probably one of few who found the details of the article quite interesting :) Thanks for the news, unfortunate for WB, but they can afford it. Just don't screw up the release! This movie has incredible potential and I can hardly wait to see if it lives up to it!

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 12:06 a.m. CST


    by imascooby1985

    This is old news. Old and very sad news. I need to watch this movie as soon as possible and if Fox causes this to be delayed I will have a serious problem with them. (Im already dealing with a semi-serious problem with them after the cancellations of undeclared, firefly, drive, and hundreds of other good shows).

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 12:08 a.m. CST


    by imascooby1985

    am I going crazy or was there a Jackson/ Boyens writing Hobbit story up for about two minutes that is nowhere to be found now?

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 12:09 a.m. CST

    "Angel Pangs" "I'm gonna' blow you til Brokaw"

    by Rebeck2

    LOL. I laughed so hard I cried.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 12:13 a.m. CST

    Fox will get a piece of the backend & that will be that...

    by FuckMichaelBay

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 12:25 a.m. CST

    My roommates just had to asked why I was laughing so hard

    by IndustryKiller!

    "Two words: Angel Pangs" Fucking hilarious Beaks.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 12:26 a.m. CST


    by Darth_Kaos

    If they truly wanted to destroy any Watchman movie, they would have stop it when it was first announced. They started this shit, when it started filmming, so it's obvious that they couldn't muster up the talent to make it when they owned the rights, so they're going take some of WB's take.<br><br> But if they do start some major shit and they have to shelve the movie till whenever, I say we BAN all things with the FOX LOGO!

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 12:29 a.m. CST


    by imascooby1985

    guess you just have tastes that tend to skew away from the norm. Whether you like it or not, Watchmen is still the most celebrated (critically and fan-wise) graphic-novel of all time. And chances are, if you didnt like the book you arent gonna like the movie.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 12:31 a.m. CST

    I second Darth_Kaos

    by tyberious25

    Boycott Fox movies.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 12:34 a.m. CST

    Ok Beaks you really gotta find out what Angel pangs is about

    by IndustryKiller!

    Cause now i've got all my friends laughing about it and I have to know. What are Angel Pangs exactly? not the movie per say, but, assuming Angel Pangs is a noun, what are they?

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 12:36 a.m. CST

    Fox should have the prints burned...

    by WhinyNegativeBitch

    ...Then rush their own movie into production via Brett Ratner to have ready by the same release date.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 12:37 a.m. CST

    fox has held onto the right to distribute the first movie.

    by Mr_X

    why doesnt warner bros release a pos cartoon or something and then get the proper movie out after?

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 12:38 a.m. CST

    I've said before and I'll say it again...

    by The Dum Guy

    Fuck Rothman and fuck Fox.<br><br>I didn't even bother to see X-Files 2 b/c of the fact the DVD will be better and I hate that goddamn company...

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 12:38 a.m. CST

    Who Watches The Cockmen?

    by CellarDweller

    Rothman you fat, greedy bastard. you had your chance, with a number of promising properties and fucked them up. Now you want to piggy-back late in the game and take a chunk of WB's grosses. You're think you're shrewd but you're merely a lewd hack.It's now beyong a doubt that like that no-necked fuck Lucas you too are as Entertainment Weekly says of Lucas, "the enemy of fun." Zack Snyder may enjoy his rim-job until he wakes up groggy in the morning to find your tongue burried deep in his ass, distrating him from both your hands digging deep into his and WB's wallet. If you fuck up the release date of this beloved flick, I call a ban on ALL Fox movies until that fuck Rothram is forced to resign or God willing, he figuratively chokes on his own, ample bile (I keed, I keed...) Or do I?

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 12:39 a.m. CST


    by vehtam

    It's very sad people. They killed their own frnachises, like alien, predator, die hard, etc, so now they have to steal big gross movies from other studios. Prepare for Wacthmen with Jessica Alba, directed by brothers strausse (avp2) and with pg-13 rating. We all know fox is aiming for that....

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 12:39 a.m. CST

    call it watch me n

    by Mr_X

    a story about a boy named n who likes being watched

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 12:40 a.m. CST

    Can I just say it?

    by slugbat

    Watchmen the Movie looks absolutely fucking retarded. The trailer was DOA to 98% of the audience waiting to see TDK (the other 2% were taking a break from packing for Comic Con). <p> Now let me just say, I'm not a fan of Watchmen but I understand why many of you are. However, you gotta view that trailer through the lens of the casual movie-goer. You got some odd glowing Blue-Man Group guy floating around without his boxers on. You got RDJ's stunt-double mugging in front of a green screen. You have that queer blonde guy, who I suppose is the owl dude. You got that hot chick from The Heartbreak Kid somehow looking creepy and awkward and not at all hot. <p> Then you finish off the motherfucker with that weird clockwork contraption floating out of the ground. NOTHING MADE A LICK OF SENSE! And its all filmed in that cheeseball Zach Snyder style, all glossy and CG and claustrophobic on small-ass sets, with Wachowski-wannabe frame-rate shifts. All in all it has to be one of the worst teasers I've ever seen for such an ambitious project. <p> In the interest of full disclosure, I went from loving 300 to completely hating it. It just rings so false upon repeat viewings. I fell for the gimmick at first, but have grown weary of it; just point a camera at some real shit for once (that goes for Lucas, too). Yes, I have soured on Zach Snyder. I know many of you have, as well.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 12:40 a.m. CST

    The Sad Thing is...

    by Rebeck2

    The writer of "Angel Pangs" is probably on this talkback right now - just home from his brutal double-shift at Taco Bell.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 12:45 a.m. CST

    Holy shit, slugbat, I didn't recognize the Heartbreak Kid chick.

    by The Dum Guy

    But, I agree most audience members didn't know what that teaser was about, so I asked the projectionist to turn the volume up by 25% to make them pay attention.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 12:46 a.m. CST

    "And To Finish Off The Motherfucker"...

    by Rebeck2

    I agree, that last image had absolutely no meaning for the audience and was a bad way to end the trailer. It might as well have been a close-up of a Christmas ornament.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 12:48 a.m. CST

    Its time has come and gone

    by tensticks

    OK. I know Gaiman's a genius. I know how impeccable the source material is. But I have to say it: this movie is 5-10 years too late. The time to make a WATCHMEN movie is long past. After DARK KNIGHT, how can ANY comic book superhero movie ever be taken seriously again? It kills its own genre dead, and good riddance. It's like how HEATHERS killed 80s teen movies. It was the nail AND the coffin. PRETTY IN PINK was a great movie, but it could ONLY have been released BEFORE HEATHERS. Afterwards, it'd have been ludicrous. Well, DARK KNIGHT is HEATHERS, and WATCHMEN is PRETTY IN PINK. Even if it doesn't totally suck as a movie--and who knows, maybe it'll be good (though the trailer DOES look lame to me)--it doesn't matter. The last word has been spoken.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 12:50 a.m. CST

    In That Case, I Hope...

    by Rebeck2

    The Watchmen pick Jon Cryer this time instead of that smarmy rich asshole, Andrew McCarthy.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 12:53 a.m. CST

    "Normals" were very interested in the trailer...

    by WhinyNegativeBitch

    ...When I saw TDK. I think the fans were actually a bit dissapointed that it was just one of those music montagey kinda trailers. I personally thought it was a fucking weak trailer, but that the film still looks good.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 12:54 a.m. CST

    I want a Scorcher movie starring Tugg Speedman!

    by TheWaqman


  • Aug. 20, 2008, 1:06 a.m. CST

    I'm a lawyer . . .

    by Olsen Twins_Fan

    and I can tell you that Fox's filing is full of words that make up sentences in the english language. I know that because I'm a lawyer. Now we don't need Starr Jones to interpret.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 1:08 a.m. CST

    Watchmen isn't a franchise; it's a standalone

    by Mr Cairo

    wanna bet if it makes its money it will somehow become a franchise probably toned down and with new previously unmentioned characters Dakota fanning and Jessica Alba

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 1:11 a.m. CST

    "I wonder what COP IN THE OLD WEST was about."

    by Karl Hungus

    That's why I love me some Beaks.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 1:19 a.m. CST

    "I wonder what COP IN THE OLD WEST was about."

    by codymr


  • Aug. 20, 2008, 1:20 a.m. CST


    by slugbat

    Brilliant point. Imagine if this had been released around the Batman & Robin era? Its time was between 95-97. And it would have cleaned up. We still weren't jaded on superheroes, eccentric villains and hot-ass babes, but we still needed an edge to them. Something a little ironic and subversive. Cue Watchmen. <p> Back then, all of the "normals" (lol great expression) would have been like, "What the hell?", but it a good way, instead of now, when my date turns to me and is like, "What the fuck?" in a way that could only mean, "if you like this bullshit, you will never get in my pants." <p> So I had to pretend I had no idea what the hell Watchmen is, like 98% of the audience; yeah, I'm a sell-out. I sold you all out, my fellow geeks, FOR A WOMAN!!! (89 Joker). And in the interest of full disclosure, I'd do it again. TDK excluded, of course. No.4 @ the IMAX coming soon!

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 1:23 a.m. CST

    ill be honest

    by imascooby1985

    Im a Watchmen fan and absolutely loved the trailer, but at the same time, on the second viewing all I could think was, how on Earth is a normal viewer gonna view this? The costumes look ridiculous (they did in the book as well, so this isnt a knock on either), the plot is nowhere to be found in the trailer, and there are no stars more recognizable that "that chick from Heartbreak Kid or the guy from Almost Famous. That said, I sure hope WB hypes the hell out of thisand doesnt just wait until it is out and hope the good reviews carry it.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 1:23 a.m. CST

    The trailer was meant to pique the interest

    by Dapper Swindler

    ...of the general audience. Not explain who these characters were, what it was about, and why they should care - no time for all that. It was only meant to tease the audience and enthuse the fans who already knew what it was (why it's called a teaser). And if you've been paying attention you would see that it succeeded. Wait for the second trailer to contain more story info.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 1:35 a.m. CST

    Dapper, I think it was more WTF

    by slugbat

    Than anything else. I was excited that the rabid Watchmen fanbase was finally getting their movie, and I was willing to start getting hyped -- I would at least support it in solidarity with my geek brethren...then I saw that damned teaser. I'm completely turned off right now. The saccharine CG, the outlandish costumes, the Zach Snyder frame-rate can I go from TDK to THAT??? <p> The only thing I found interesting about it was the Twin Towers in the Manhattan skyline pan. <p> And for God's sakes why does Malin Akerman not look hot in this movie?

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 1:36 a.m. CST

    if i were WB i'd get the legal team to find

    by slder78

    anything dirty on Rothman or Fox. Can't Fox be sued for the abomination that was the Fantastic Four "franchise"? What about Starship Dave or Meet the Spartans? Surely one of those movies is a violation of the Geneva convention.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 1:43 a.m. CST

    I'd rather watch women.

    by TooWhippy

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 1:46 a.m. CST


    by Sightblinder

    Is full of douche bags. No surprise here given how they treated Firefly. Assuming they ever make another movie I want to see, it takes very little effort on my part to buy a ticket to something else (preferably a WB movie) and slip in to watch their movie instead. I highly recommend everyone do the same.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 2 a.m. CST

    "unscholarly opinion"

    by Latauro

    Maybe so, but this is the best article about the situation that I've read.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 2:19 a.m. CST fucking tard

    by bacci40

    after the trailer release,dc sold out a 300k run of the graphic novel...they have now printed 900k and will most likely sell over a mil by years end...mostly to those who never heard of the the average movie viewer is smarter than your dumb cracker ass

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 2:26 a.m. CST

    since slugbat has made more than one idiotic post

    by bacci40

    allow me to retort...there is no dk without watchmen, you stupid git...where the fuck do you think the concept of placing heroes in a real world comes from??? and nolan pussied out...cuz in the real world, bats would be a total fucking psycho...just like rorshach...not this high minded christ figure...and the costumes are supposed to look silly and cheesy...and if you dont think that malin is hot in her silk spectre whore suit, then you are totally gay...which is ok...but gay guys should not make comments on who is hot and who is not

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 2:28 a.m. CST


    by wendybird

    They are as ruthless and money-hungry as they come. I would be content to sit back and watch WB and Fox eat each other. I am STILL furious beyond belief at WB's abrupt rescheduling of Harry Potter and the Half-blood Prince. I really don't care how ~shrewd~ a move it is. I hope Fox takes WB for as much as they can get for Watchmen. WB doesn't give a crap about the fans (nor does Fox). I don't give a toss about either of them. They both fail, but WB need a dose of humility - BIG TIME. The Dark Knight's success has gone to their heads.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 2:35 a.m. CST

    slugbat is right about the trailer...

    by Bill Clay

    The trailer was a fucking mess. It told the average movie viewer zero about the concept and telegraphed that Ozymandias is the baddie. Not a good sign when the trailer gives away the twist.<p> Oh, and has the telepathic octopus of the finale been reduced to a cloud of smoke, like Galactus?

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 2:37 a.m. CST

    I hope they DESTROY Watchmen

    by ShiftyEyedDog2

    <br><Br>I'm sorry, but those costumes, those characters....they look like complete SHIT!! Fox woud be doing us a favor if they managed to get this locked away in a vault never to be seen!<br><Br>

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 2:54 a.m. CST

    Ozymandias is the "baddie"...

    by The Dum Guy

    There is a bit of subtext to the title "bad guy" is the story, afterall Rawshark killed alot people.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 3:11 a.m. CST

    Seriously people

    by imascooby1985

    Posting that Ozymandias is the bad guy is a straight up dick move. The trailer in no way gives that away. In fact, the only thing I remember seeing Ozzy do in the trailer is take out the goon with the handgun while wearing his pimp purple jacket. Next time you are gonna discuss plot twists try and put in a spoiler warning.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 3:12 a.m. CST

    and dum guy

    by imascooby1985

    putting it in the title of your post is even worse.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 3:14 a.m. CST

    imascooby1985...not old, the decision came out yesterday

    by bacci40

    the suit was filed in feb...wb attys tried to say it had no merit..the judge ruled on fox's side...why the judge did not take into consideration that fox waited until principle shooting was complete is beyond me

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 3:18 a.m. CST

    ShiftyEyedDog2 are you slugbuts butt buddy?

    by bacci40

    why dont you read the book..tell me if the costumes in the book dont look absurd...the costumes are supposed to look the book and find out why

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 3:18 a.m. CST

    and phoenixmagi...

    by imascooby1985

    the "and Ill whisper no" quote was the only real problem I had with the trailer. I realize the trailer was greenband and needed to be cursefree, but the original (and much better) line is "all the whores and politicians will look up and shout 'save us'... and I'll look down and whisper 'no'". Hopefully it is like that in the actual film.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 3:19 a.m. CST

    Bill Clay...trailer didnt telegraph anything

    by bacci40

    in fact, most people walked out of the trailer thinking that manhattan was the baddie, cuz he was blowing away vietnamese

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 3:21 a.m. CST

    by old I mean

    by imascooby1985

    that I have read about this on other sites over a day and a half before this article was posted.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 3:23 a.m. CST

    signing contracts

    by Napoleon Park

    and then forgetting about the, is what drove Jimi Hendrix to suicide. What? Accidental death? He unwrapped an entire sheet of individually bubbled prescription sleeping pills and took them all accidentally? Is that what they told you?

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 3:24 a.m. CST

    Doctor Zoidberg...guess you think zack is stupid

    by bacci40

    the costumes are designed to look like batman and robin on purpose...watchmen the book was the deconstruction of comic book heroes...the movie will also decontruct comic book movie heroes

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 3:30 a.m. CST

    Er WTF? how is this possible with an army of leech lawyers???!

    by quantize


  • Aug. 20, 2008, 3:34 a.m. CST


    by Sidepocket

    Batman would have not been a psycho in real life, you can be harsh and not psychotic, detectives do it all the time. Thus why Batman is the world greatest...detective. Also, what The Dark Knight turned out to be supposed what most comic books do not the brilliance of Alen More without using his crappy writing and style. I remember when people got mad at all the changes in V4V movie but after reading that crappy book I was so glad they did.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 3:38 a.m. CST

    This is probably completely...

    by tomdolan04

    stupid, and I in no way grasp the full legal implications of the suit, but across all press reports of this I see the words "...Fox controls the distribution rights of the first movie based on the Watchmen property". <p> If this is the case, is there any way of not bumping up the side story project that was going to feature on the DVD up to a minor theatrical release and labelling it with "The Watchmen" prefix? Let that cop the brunt of the dispute, if it crashes and burns then they still have the $100million wide-release feature in the clear. <p> Undoubtedly they have a crack legal squad to think of things like this already but technically the side story IS a Watchmen property. It was just a random thought, ignore away.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 3:42 a.m. CST

    Tom Rothman is a cunt

    by Steve Rogers

    You know he is.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 3:50 a.m. CST

    Can I just say ...

    by bender7

    I fucking hate Watchmen. In fact I don't like most of Alan Moore's work. And I think he is a weirdo prick. He gives no cooperation to film makers when then do a movie of his stuff, and even when they make it work,like V for Vendetta, he blasts the shit out of it. Obviously Watchmen is important to the comic book world, but even if you love it, you have to admit it is a bit late and the trailer sure didn't seem to have a lot of depth to it

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 3:57 a.m. CST


    by Shermdawg

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 4:04 a.m. CST

    FOX are cocksuckers

    by G100

    Ask Al Swearingan.<p> <p>And anyone who dresses up as a Giant Bat or a Spider IS psychotic. No getting around it I'm afraid.<p> <p>While Moore might be strange the likes of Ditko makes him look flat out boring whereas Stan Lee is a cheesy publicity whore who really needs to STOP with the CAMEOS already !<p> <p>As has been said the large Watchmen book sales run is proof the trailer worked and a rising tide lifts all boats in a Box Office summer and brings people out with every big picture. So FOX will take what mone they can and scamper off.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 4:19 a.m. CST

    gosh sidepocket, so i guess time and the hugos

    by bacci40

    are pretty fucking stupid, for ranking such a piece of trash up there with the top novels of the 20th century...i would love to know what you think good writing is...forget it, i can guess...but as far as i know, see spot run, never won a hugo

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 4:19 a.m. CST

    All Hollywood studios are...

    by m_reporter

    ... money-grabbing shit-pits, but Fox is really raising the bar on a daily basis. At least other studios put out good films sometimes, and tend to invest in talented people.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 4:29 a.m. CST

    Doctor not angry

    by bacci40

    i just hate hater posts that only hate so that the hater can see his penname on some board...put some thought into it was a fucking teaser...primarily made for the fan of the comic, and to interest those non fans into either picking up the book, or learning more about it...they used the alternate version of the song from batman and robin too....coincidence?...look, zack is a fan of the book...not a fan like marc steven johnson is a fan of daredevil and ghost rider, but a fan who understands that if he doesn respect the source material, even if he makes money, he will be seen as a failure...zack has said that if all his movie does is sell a ton of the book, he will see himself as being successful...that wasnt a bullshit line...zack, like del torro and smith, is one of have to watch his interviews to really understand that he gets it

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 4:32 a.m. CST

    Murdoch+Rothman+Fox= Satan's nut sack!!!!

    by Gabba-UK

    Murdoch is a tax dodging cunt in my humble opinion and hopefully one of the first against the wall come the revolution. I already choose not to buy his papers, avoid his shitty TV channels do all that I can to avoid giving him a single penny of my hard earned cash after I'VE paid my taxes unlike him. I even choose to buy second hand copies of Fox films on DVD from ebay now. And with this latest episode of twattery I'm now choosing to not see Fox films at the cinema. I wont make any difference to his bank balance because there are plenty of uninformed sheep out there for his rabidly, right wing, keeping the populous afraid of their neighbours so they'll vote that way, brainwashing agenda, for him to fleece of their hard earned, tax paying cash. But I at least am a man of principle, something he would need a dictionary to look up. Rant over and I feel better for it!!!

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 4:39 a.m. CST

    bender7....v was pure, unadulterated shit

    by bacci40

    a bullshit take on the bushies and the right wing wackos vs a riteous terrorist, while the novel was about anarchy vs fascism...i dont need a fucking movie to preach to me, and tell me that the only way to overcome batshit christians is to become the fuck can a guy preach anarchy, yet tell everyone to dress up like him? and the fucking love story between v and evey was total may not like moore, but you cannot say that the movie had more meaning than the book...oh, and please, why dont you do some research on why moore has distanced himself from all adaptations of his works...if he wanted, he could be like miller, who has totally compromised all of his principles to get daily blowjobs from the suits

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 4:39 a.m. CST

    bender7....v was pure, unadulterated shit

    by bacci40

    a bullshit take on the bushies and the right wing wackos vs a riteous terrorist, while the novel was about anarchy vs fascism...i dont need a fucking movie to preach to me, and tell me that the only way to overcome batshit christians is to become the fuck can a guy preach anarchy, yet tell everyone to dress up like him? and the fucking love story between v and evey was total may not like moore, but you cannot say that the movie had more meaning than the book...oh, and please, why dont you do some research on why moore has distanced himself from all adaptations of his works...if he wanted, he could be like miller, who has totally compromised all of his principles to get daily blowjobs from the suits

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 4:41 a.m. CST


    by badboymason

    Agree that while as a fan I liked it, I can see why it would leave mainstream audiences scratching their head. BUT - it's a long way from release, of course there will be more trailers nearer release date that setup the film better for people unfamiliar with the comics. I think the problem will be that the "plot" of the novel is not the main selling point - of course you can cut a trailer that says "They used to fight for justice. The government shut them down. Now one of their own has been murdered..." but the plot on its own sounds kind of cheesy - its the execution that elevates the property.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 4:42 a.m. CST

    Tom Rothman: biggest douche in the Universe

    by kafka07

    Fox can keep all those other ones, like Admission Impossible and Very Old Money. It shows how little they thought of the Watchmen material to throw it in a list of crappy movies, and of how pathetically jealous they are now. Fox had their chance. They don't deserve Watchmen. Rothman and Murdoch only deserve the loofa treatment by Bill O'Reilly (which they probably love though).

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 4:54 a.m. CST

    Zoidberg knows best

    by tomdolan04

    WOOB WOOB WOOB WOOB WOOB WOOB (clacks hands and runs out of the room)

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 5:01 a.m. CST

    lay off of Hendrix man!

    by the power of GREYSKULL

    Fox and WB BOTH deserve what they get. What? Do people actually PREFER one of these studios to another? What is it exactly that you find so attractive about them? <p> We are talking about ENTITIES here - not people - who have only one mission. Make money. Think of it this way - remember the line from Terminator that it's a mistake to treat him like a person because he ABSOLUTELY WILL NOT STOP until you are dead - sub STUDIO for CSM-101 and YOUR WALLET for Sarah Connor...

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 5:12 a.m. CST


    by GavinVanDraven

    the sax player from Dave Matthews Band died.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 5:14 a.m. CST

    TomBodet Those Giant Robots Killer robots in WM are GREAT!

    by Xiphos_2

    Because there aren't any! I'm just kidding the folks that want a spoiler warning on book that came out over twenty years ago and are reading a talkback about the movie. People, finish the funny book before you open the TB. You can't expect to stay unsullied here.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 5:32 a.m. CST

    The Only Reason FOX is Doing This......

    by HermesTrismestigus

    Is to pressure Warner Bros. to allow them to release the 60's Batman tv show on dvd. Just watch for the settlement.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 5:33 a.m. CST


    by Spidermonkee

    I can't believe that nobody in this talkback has yet to point out to Tensticks that Gaiman has NOTHING to do with this project or the book that it was based on! As far as costumes looking stupid, I think that is an attempt to make the movie a comment on the superhero genre in film in the same way the book did for comics. How many superhero movies have used similar costumes? Batman, Spiderman, Superman Returns, etc. etc. ad infinitum. In comics, all superheros wear spandex. In movies, they all wear latex foam.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 5:39 a.m. CST

    I still don't care.

    by DerLanghaarige

    It's the new movie from the director of 300, for fucks sake! So many great directors were attached to this and they pick the guy who made one of the worst movie of the last 10 years? (Yes, I know, you all love 300, because it looks exactly like the comic book.)

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 5:39 a.m. CST

    I am a "normal" and I had no idea what I was watching

    by Cotton McKnight

    The blue guy, the weird looking submarine thing, the owl looking guy.. I had absolutely no idea what I was watching. And I was rather irritated by the whole trailer, actually.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 5:44 a.m. CST

    I was with a 'normal'...

    by tomdolan04

    and they were very insistent it reminded them of LXG...

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 6:17 a.m. CST


    by BringingSexyBack

    Frivolous corporate lawsuits. They need to be banned, so ustice can be done for those who need and deserve it.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 6:21 a.m. CST


    by BringingSexyBack

    but I was blown away by the trailer. After watching trailer after mundane trailer, Watchmen was the only one that was captivating - hence worth the money to see it.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 6:22 a.m. CST

    Not ALIEN COP!

    by Knugen

    I was DYING to see that!

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 6:36 a.m. CST

    Your lying about your "normals".

    by WhinyNegativeBitch

    No actual normal has any recollection or knowledge of LXG. As for Cotton, the fact that you even KNOW about AICN makes you a non normal. Sorry to break it to you now. Warners should release a movie titled "Shot on video footage of fat kid masturbating in his bedroom to picture of Tom Rothman. AKA first Watchmen picture." Cost em five bucks.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 6:40 a.m. CST

    I think it will generate a lot ..

    by DonnieDorko

    I think it will generate a lot of extra money from the success of The Dark Knight, not rightfully perhaps, but people will be wanting to see "semi-smart" superhero movies such as TDK and this will be the closest they can find. I know there really is no comparison but people won't know that. Personally I recently read the "book" and loved it, and the trailer looks great and Alan Moore should add some sugar to his coffee.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 6:41 a.m. CST


    by jimbubble

    Everything these parasites touch turns to shite! I mean from their news to their half arsed movies, all bullshit! C`mon Americans kill this fxcking huge steaming turd that is Fox off!

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 6:48 a.m. CST

    Terminator Salvation is only getting a domestic release?

    by MRJONZ72

    That doesnt make any sense to me why is that going to be the case?

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 6:50 a.m. CST

    After read that a second time

    by MRJONZ72

    Are you saying another company is going to release it overseas? If so wouldnt WB still see at least a little of the profits?

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 7:05 a.m. CST


    by tomdolan04

    No straight up, although by 'normal' I refer to my girlfriend and by LXG her exact words were "Ooh that one looks like that one we saw with Sean Connery, the kinda naff one" <p>

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 7:05 a.m. CST

    It would be the ultimate convention bootleg

    by Trazadone

    Can you imagine if it wasn't released? This would supplant the Star Wars Holiday Special as the most sought after bootleg of all time. Of course it will come out, but it's fun to speculate.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 7:07 a.m. CST

    I Also Never Read the Comic Books


    And I thought the trailer was okay. But I definitely thought it was a movie I would want to see. I still like '300', so I'm not gonna be hating on Zach Snyder. And the alternate history thing is always fun. Frankly, I'm looking forward to it.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 7:11 a.m. CST

    Where are the Hellboy 2 reviews on here?

    by L. Ron Bumquist

    I cant find them. As it's doing so-so business despite mostly positive reviews, and opening internationally this week why not stick a review on the front page and give it a boost?

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 7:13 a.m. CST


    by wookie1972

    I think Beaks is suggesting that Terminator a) will not be that good -not an ulikely proposition considering that McG is directing - and b) do much better overseas than in North America - again, not unreal considering that bad action movies transcend language.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 7:20 a.m. CST

    Watchmen was good

    by YeahSureWhatever

    Trailer looked spot on, but I just can't see them fitting everything into 1 movie, even a 3 hour movie. Also, I think the "Black Freighter" cut-ins would make a fine stand alone story.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 7:20 a.m. CST


    by wookie1972

    I think you might be right. That's exactly hoe these things work - remember MGM suing New Line over the title Goldmember? MGM settled for future title approval and putting the Die Another Day trailer on prints of Goldmember. I wonder if Warners offered Fox some of the "profits" on Clone Wars... And frankly, i would love it if the Adam West Batman was released because of this. The Dark Knight Batman isn't the only Batman.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 7:23 a.m. CST

    The Sam Hamm script was shit

    by wookie1972

    He downplayed the death of the Comedian, made the main plot about the "Watchmen" superteam (which, of course, didn't actually exist in the book) and ended a with a silly time travel plot.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 7:24 a.m. CST


    by wookie1972

    I heard that a complete Black Freighter story is being filmed, but it will only be shown in toto on the DVD.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 7:27 a.m. CST

    I'm John Q. Public and here's what I think of The Watchmen

    by HypeEndsHere

    "The who? Watchmen? What's that? Who are these people? Is that Hawkman? I'd like to see a movie about him but that doesn't look like him. This looks kind of gay. What's with the Smashing Pumpkins? Who the fuck are these people? Why do I care? The 300 guy made it? I guess it IS gay. Reminds me of the time I went to see Mystery Men. I think I'll stay home."

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 7:32 a.m. CST

    Honestly, Fox is indirectly responsible for the state of the wor

    by dr sauch

    They were probably 40% responsible for the Bush presidency.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 7:32 a.m. CST


    by dr sauch

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 7:33 a.m. CST


    by dr sauch

    As much as I don't want to admit thats true, because I'm gay for this movie, I lol'd at that.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 7:42 a.m. CST

    This shouldn't be a big deal

    by chewyou812

    With all of the lawyers that movie studios employ, I'd have to wager that WB knew this was a likely scenario before they officially green lit the film. This is precisely the sort of thing they look into before a film is allowed to go into production. So, while I hate Fox and Rupert Murdoch, I wouldn't boycott their films over a move that they would've been stupid not to make.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 7:44 a.m. CST

    dr sauch, are you an idiot, or do you play one on the internet?

    by Bill Brasky

    You give Fox and the Fox News Channel waaaaay too much credit. Stop listening to the fuck-wads at the 'Daily Kooks' or the ‘Move-On’ nut jobs. The highest rated cable show on all of television is the O'Reily factor. It gets (AT MOST) 5 million viewers on a good day. That's like 1.5% of the population of the United States. So....Fox is 40% responsible for Dubya huh? Usually only about 2 million people are watching at a time during the afternoon/evening news. That is compared to the tens of millions who watch NBC (completely in the back pocket of the DNC) and the other two major networks. Stop listening to the Far Left Wing propaganda about Fox and its affiliates. You are starting to sound almost as bad and the Ultra Right Mullet-wearing chicken hawks.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 7:44 a.m. CST

    Watchmen Babies!!!

    by HewligansHaircut

    Well, I'm just waiting for the straight to release DVD of "Watchmen Babies: V for Vacation".

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 7:45 a.m. CST

    The Trailer Works

    by sirbroiler

    I'm a confessed comic book geek - and nearly all of my friends are not anywhere near as hardcore. I can't tell you how many of those folks have asked me about Watchmen since seeing the trailer. So, there is no doubt in my mind that it truly served its purpose - to peak interest in the movie from a more general audience.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 7:48 a.m. CST

    Fuck Fox, fuck The Dark Hype, and...

    by Sailor Rip

    ...fuck some of you. I couldn't give less of a shit if the Watchmen teaser didn't "click" with the masses. It's not for them, it's for us the fans, Snyder knows this and that's who he's making it for. <p> Hey, maybe some teen pretty boy from Watchmen will die from an OC OD before it's released and then we'll see some huge bank at the box office.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 7:52 a.m. CST

    L. Ron Bumquist

    by Ghostball

    <p>I doff my cap to the Fear And Loathing reference. Manifesting my respect are these links to some of Aintitcool's Hellboy 2 reviews(Harry's, Mr Beaks' and Moriarty's... <p> <p> <p> <p>My personal expectation of the movie is that it will be a marginal improvement over the amiable but meandering original, but nowhere near approaching the euphoric thrills of, say, the first Star Wars, as I've been led to believe by some. The trailers have been glorious to look at but haven't really resonated with me emotionally in any way... nothing particularly funny, nor scary... <p>Luke Goss's villain seems pussified and unsure of himself, rather than Blade 2 badass (as he ought to be)... <p>And Selma Blair's character is now wearing pretty much bog standard cliched Matrix/GI Joe cosplay bollocks leather gear. Don't much care for her new 'do either - from the neck up she looks like a 90s Lolapalooza stoner. If the BRPD or whatever it's called is supposed to be a family of freaks, she ought to at least be get up in her 'A Dirty Shame' prosthetics... in which case, I would've booked my tickets on seeing the very first teaser pics.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 7:55 a.m. CST

    Watchmen is doomed as a movie post TDK

    by onezeroone

    What made the novel great was, as many mentioned, deconstructing the archetypical superhero as depicted in comics. Instead of making a movie that recreates the novel, what would work is a movie that deconstructs archetypical superhero as depicted in *movies*, which I feel TDK already did and did it really well.<p> And if you remember the trailer, the coolest part about analyzing it was comparing individual frames with panels, how similar they were. I think movie will do not so well but DVDs will be a hot sell.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 7:57 a.m. CST

    Cult Arthouse Movie That Does OK For A Few Weeks

    by LaserPants

    There is no way in hell this is going to be a blockbuster. If they're following the comic to the letter (and they better fucking be), this will be an intelligent, cult-y, art house film. BUT, and its a big BUT, this is also being directed by the jackass who excreted 300, the worlds most homoerotic AND homophobic film ever made. 300 = Gay fantasy for self-hating gay men.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 7:59 a.m. CST

    That makes sense tomdolan...

    by WhinyNegativeBitch

    ...My girlfriend thought it looked cool..."Kind of. Its meant to be good?".

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 8:02 a.m. CST

    What else is out in March of '09? Absolutely NOTHING.

    by SpyGuy

    After three months of cabin fever and lame romantic comedy movies, audiences will be positively salivating for a flick like WATCHMEN. And Fox knows it, which is why they're making their dick move.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 8:05 a.m. CST

    '90's Lolapalooza stoner...

    by OBSD

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 8:06 a.m. CST

    300 = Gay fantasy for self-hating gay men.

    by Bill Brasky

    Laserpants....stop it....I am going to pass out I am much!

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 8:07 a.m. CST

    "90's Lolapalooza stoner"...

    by OBSD

    You say that like it's a bad thing! I tried to get my girlfriend to cut her hair like that, but she was having none of it.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 8:07 a.m. CST

    Fox might cockblock 'em.

    by fiester

    It's not always about the money with Rupert. He's a crazy, bitter old neo-con with a hot young Asian wife.<p> But this will probably get done, even if Warners has to couch up some major cash.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 8:12 a.m. CST


    by Ghostball

    Trying at this stage to cockblock one of the most anticipated movies ever (yes - ever) is an exremely incongruent move. May I suggest if you want happier, more fulfilling, less envious lives you could always start making decent movies of your own again. I know, I know - you're not miracle workers.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 8:18 a.m. CST

    From the Director of 300...

    by fat bears

    The cache of Snyder being the director 300 is that he took a totally gay story all about 300 totally gay dudes fought off a host of also-totally gay Persian dudes. And he actually added depth and quality character moments to Miller's story (see the interaction between Leonidas and his queen). Snyder showed he could successfully and above all FAITHFULLY adapt the visuals and themes of a comic book with 300. Just 'cause the story of 300 was in love with beefcake doesn't mean everything Snyder does will be that way (see Dawn of the Dead and the noticeably absent worship of the male form). Snyder's talent in faithful translation from page to screen. Hurray for the inclusion of the Gunga Diner and Doc Manhattan's black bikini underpants!

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 8:19 a.m. CST


    by fat bears

    I guess black bikini underpants is pretty gay though....

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 8:24 a.m. CST

    Well nobody knew what 300 was...

    by knowthyself

    ...but like Watchmen the visuals will lure them in.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 8:26 a.m. CST


    by BringingSexyBack

    at least twice a week.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 8:30 a.m. CST

    Well Silk Spectres nipples should...

    by knowthyself

    ...keep you fanboys from questioning your sexuality for another year eh?

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 8:35 a.m. CST

    "You fanboys?"

    by Ghostball

    And who are you, Knowthyself -the New York Times?

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 8:42 a.m. CST

    Tom Rothman is a slimy snail trail!

    by Slippy

    What a vag!

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 8:42 a.m. CST

    I still can't believe they're moving HBP because of all this

    by skycrapper

    what a bunch of crap.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 8:43 a.m. CST

    What do you mean.."YOU fanboys."

    by knowthyself

    ...What do YOU fanboys?

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 8:44 a.m. CST

    Twilight scared away Harry Potter...

    by knowthyself

    ...what do you mean because of all this? WB is avoiding the Twilight stomping HP would have gotten because of the latest crap on the block.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 8:54 a.m. CST

    I fucking hate fox.

    by mefrog

    I. Fucking. Hate. Fox. Always have.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 8:58 a.m. CST

    Re: Spymunk 13

    by Ghostball

    ...That was a public information announcement brought to you by a plant from Fox.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 9:01 a.m. CST


    by L. Ron Bumquist

    Thanks Man, I can never find anything on this site. I'm not expecting miracles from Hellboy 2 either but I could sure use a dose of colorful escapism at the moment.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 9:05 a.m. CST

    Twilight ... please ...

    by skycrapper

    The Dawson's Creek Vampires scare away the release of Harry Potter give me a break. This is all about a cash grab just like the article suggests.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 9:09 a.m. CST

    At least the brought us the Simpsons...

    by AdrianVeidt

    ...and Family Guy.<p>...<p>That's all that comes to mind right now.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 9:10 a.m. CST

    So ridiculous...

    by DanielKurland

    That a company can just get millions of dollars for pretty much doing nothing.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 9:10 a.m. CST

    L. Ron Bumquist

    by Ghostball

    Yeah, I'm definitely there too... just hoping that HB II does more than what it says on the tin. But even if if doesn't, it'll at the very least least be spectacular-looking fun.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 9:12 a.m. CST


    by Ghostball

    Yeah, but that was 20 and 10 years ago - what have Fox done for me lately?? ;)

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 9:13 a.m. CST

    Speaking of Watchmen's Popularity...

    by AdrianVeidt

    I, like many of you, was at the midnight premiere of The Dark Knight and when the Watchmen trailer came on, there was a handful - a HANDFUL - of people that were excited. In fact, the guy behind me was like "well, I can miss that one." <p><p> As great as Watchmen is, I feel it's really only going to go over well with those that have read it. And if Snyder tries to dull it so that it can appeal to the masses, then he'll have a slight mutiny on his hands.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 9:14 a.m. CST

    You heard me...

    by AdrianVeidt

    MUTINY. So says Ozymandias.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 9:14 a.m. CST

    Watchmen will not outperform Batman.

    by cookylamoo

    There's nobody in it who could die and deserve an Oscar.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 9:14 a.m. CST


    by AdrianVeidt


  • Aug. 20, 2008, 9:16 a.m. CST

    Also, when are they going to option "Grayson"?

    by AdrianVeidt

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 9:16 a.m. CST

    Watchmen as Pretty in Pink?

    by Lou C.

    I get what your point is, but I think you'll be surprised at what happens. Do you really think there can be no successful superhero movie because someone made a great one? That's absurd. The difference between Pretty in Pink and Heathers is that Heathers was MOCKING the teen movies that preceded it. It was a dark comedy that ushered in a new era of teen attitude. That logic doesn't apply to superhero movies. Should they cancel The Avengers project now because of TDK? In fact, fuck it, let's never have a movie in the genre again because a really good one was made.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 9:20 a.m. CST

    Watchmen teaser not trailer

    by JoePecis Shinebox

    I thought a teaser does not have to explain the whole plot. In the case of Watchmen there is a whole hell of alot of plot. Its still friggin early so a full blown trailer will be released along with ads to let people know what its about.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 9:22 a.m. CST

    Spymunk 13 you don't know shit

    by g-ride9000

    My fucking girlfriend wants to see this film from the preview. Then my mom went to see dark knight, she thought "Rorschach" "Looked intresting" and would go see the film on her own. People will see this one, it looks so cool you don't have to understand it. The reviewers might hate it. So you could be partially right if the rotten tomatoes come out. Give the audience some credit. They ate up dark knight.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 9:32 a.m. CST

    Baby Blue Eyes (Flamingo)

    by dignan26


  • Aug. 20, 2008, 9:33 a.m. CST

    One word: LACHES!

    by rockgolf

    Laches is a legal defence that basically boils down to this: You can't sit on your ass forever then make your claim when it is most inconvenient for the defendant. Fox could not have missed that Watchmen has been in development at Warner's for at least a couple of years, could not reasonably be believed to not be aware that it had been filmed, yet it waited until a month after the trailer has been released to claim cause of action!<br> By this point Warners has sunk at least $50 million into the project. Maybe up to $100 million. Fox cannot be rewarded for waiting until all this money was spent. This should be dismissed on summary judgment.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 9:34 a.m. CST


    by lovecraftian

    I promised myself I wouldn't do this but... Here goes... Detractors, I understand those of you who are saying, "I don't know what this is." However, those of you are saying ad hominem that it is either "stupid", "gay", "not going to make money", or just believe it isn't relevant... you're either not paying attention to the graphic novel reprint sales going through the roof, didn't pay attention to the fact that this is A COMMENTARY ON COMIC BOOK SUPERHEROES AND SHOULD LOOK LIKE A SUPERHERO MOVIE NOT TDK, do not enjoy history or study historical trends, do not know that it is considered one of TIME's TOP 100 NOVELS (not graphic novels) of the 20th Century, or just aren't smart enough to enjoy something that isn't about "things going 'BOOM!'" In fact, if you, or the folks you were with, said, "This looks gay, " I'm going to make a call here and say that when the film gets released, and the reviews come pouring in--long since after the "TEASER TRAILER" has left everyone's mind--you, and the mindless, mainstreamaholics you consort with will go see it just like everyone else. Then you'll say, (in a "FOOOBAAAAWWLL!" voice) "That was fucking AWESOME!" BTW, if you're girlfriend won't sleep with you because you like some of the most cutting edge literature to ever grace the stands of a BORDERS(!) or a BARNES AND NOBLE(!) she's an idiot. End it. Sex is great, but having an intelligent conversation is nice too. I've been with both, and happy to say I'm MARRIED to someone that can operate well in both arenas. Besides, the women that won't sleep with you because you have a brain are only GOING TO SLEEP WITH YOU till you start acting like yourself (which WILL HAPPEN) and then they'll sleep with someone else.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 9:42 a.m. CST

    Shrewd and Dumb

    by the_patriot

    Gotta applause Fox on this one. All they had to do was pull up old paperwork and not spend a damn dime and they'll get $25 million. Hell, that's better than most of their last few releases. Warner on the other many times do these people have to have their asses handed to them like this before they do some due dilligence? This would be like buying an $80 million house and then finding out that you don't own the land. AGAIN. :P

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 9:42 a.m. CST

    Definition of LACHES:

    by rockgolf

    From<br> <b>LACHES, DOCTRINE OF</b> - Based on the maxim that equity aids the vigilant and not those who procrastinate regarding their rights; Neglect to assert a right or claim that, together with lapse of time and other circumstances, prejudices an adverse party. Neglecting to do what should or could, have been done to assert a claim or right for an unreasonable and unjustified time causing disadvantage to another.<br> Laches is similar to 'statute of limitations' except is equitable rather than statutory and is a common affirmative defense raised in civil actions.<br> Laches is derived from the French 'lecher' and is nearly synonymous with negligence.<br> In general, when a party has been guilty of laches in enforcing his right by great delay and lapse of time, this circumstance will at common law prejudice and sometimes operate in bar of a remedy which is discretionary for the court to afford. In courts of equity delay will also generally be prejudicial.<br> But laches may be excused from ignorance of the party's rights; from the obscurity of the transaction; by the pendency of a suit, and; where the party labors under a legal disability, as insanity, infancy and the like.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 9:44 a.m. CST

    Fox Watchmen concept art:

    by Ghostball

    Looks like Fox could've beaten WB at their own game, if they'd stepped up to the bat with this: <p>

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 9:44 a.m. CST

    Just a feeling but

    by Samuel Fulmer

    I don't think this film is going to do very well. It looks good, but I just don't see it getting embraced like other superhero films. Fox is fighting over something that in all likelyhood isn't going to be that big of a hit.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 9:46 a.m. CST

    I have to say this...

    by Sailor Rip

    ...WATCHMEN WILL BE ALL THINGS TO ALL PEOPLE. <p> I have faith. It's going to be as good as it's source material. It's B.O. returns mean nothing.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 9:57 a.m. CST

    guys guys guys - Watchman is going to have problems

    by ArcadianDS

    I never even HEARD of The Watchmen before I saw the trailer. I remember the bloody smiley buttons back in the day, and knew they were a comic book thing, but that was it. I remember reading OTHER comics, and the image of Rhorshack was under the UPC code instead of Spider Man for a while. Other than that, no clue or idea what it was about. I saw the trailer and my reaction was: "what the hell did I just watch?" I finally tracked down the full Watchmen comic series and read it in two sittings - not because the trailer engrossed me and haunted me. Not because the trailer made me want, crave, and need more. But because the trailer was so bat-shit crazy, and because people here were so bat-shit crazy about it, I had to find out what was going on here.<p> It was "good" for a comic book, but I think its not as good as most people insist that it be. Now the reactions to this are mostly white-eyed shark attacks like "YOU SUCK AND SHOULD DIE RITE NAO" and "YOU HAS NO TASTE IN ART AN CHARCTERS!" but putting all those exactly where they belong: the garbage - lets examine the most frequently used validation of Watchmen fanboism that doesn't stoop to middle school bullying: "It was innovative. It changed comic books."<p> Vulcanized rubber was innovative. It changed automobiles forever. That doesn't mean it stands up shoulder to shoulder with innovations like the Space Shuttle or Cellular Telephones, or the Computer. Oh sure "you wouldn't have Space Shuttles without vulcanized rubber" is very true - but that doesn't mean the two innovations are on equal footing. Not even close.<p> So to rebuke "new fans of Watchmen" for not being "new RABID fans of Watchmen" because they don't appreciate its innovative changes to comic books way back in the olden days, is just not fair. The comic should be judged by its content, and not by its publisher's uncanny ability to find a ripe time to publish it.<p> So me, a former (and currently closeted) aficionado of comic books to find the Watchmen "good but not great" does not bode well for its acceptance to mainstream audiences.<p> The best way to evaluate a comic book's mainstream appeal is to rewrite it as a short story - no art. Just story. And if you do that with The Watchmen, it is as predictable as a fall down a flight of stairs - and mainstream 'normals' in theaters are not going to enjoy watching a movie whose plot lines are running exactly 5 minutes behind their own intuitions.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 10:05 a.m. CST

    Watchmen comics are good

    by Samuel Fulmer

    The problem is that read today, it's just not the innovative story/concept that it was 22 years ago. It's kind of like when they decided to release a Puppet Masters movie in the mid-90's and everyone thought of how old hat and derivative of Invasion of the Body Snatchers it was, when in fact it was published back in the early 50's before Body Snatchers came out. Watchmen really blew people away back in the mid-80's because it was a dark/mature take on comics. Today, even the characters that were considered light-hearted/kid friendly have gone this route.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 10:06 a.m. CST

    ArcadianDS you voted for nixon

    by g-ride9000

    watchmen is the end of a dream

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 10:07 a.m. CST

    Ohhhhh Yeah... As far as FOX goes...

    by lovecraftian

    The issue they're bound to have after this little debacle will be PR. It's hard to fill up seats for a midnight showing when the "Holy Grail" of comic book films was something that YOU CLEARLY FUMBLED, and then tried to block from being released after it was already made. While it may look like like smart hardball to a few, including their top guys, to most it's just clumsy and contrived. It looks more like childish theatrics than sound litigation. And, with such "major hits" as AVP, X-MEN 3, and the Lucas prequels under their belts, they'll only estrange themselves further with the "see a movie more than once" crowd. While they may see this as an opportunity to get a bigger hunk of the monetary pie, if it goes on too long, FOX may lose out in the long run with an established, built-in fanbase no movie studio in this day and age can afford to snub.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 10:09 a.m. CST

    Watchmen suffers from "Citizen Kane" syndrome...

    by knowthyself

    ..if someone keeps telling you Citizen Kane is the best film ever made of course after you watch it you'll think "that was the best film ever made?" It's all about context. I read watchmen. Then I re-read it trying to keep in mind when it came out and suddenly I realized why its so beloved. The twist, at the time, was mind blowing. Nothing like it had ever been done before. Its tough to read it objectively when all those damn quotes on the back unfairly hype the work. It is what it is and when you remove the accolades its an amazing work. One that doesn't deserve the "I read it and its okay" comments that new readers are giving it. Re-read it. Thats my advice.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 10:11 a.m. CST


    by ArcadianDS

    I voted for Nixon 4 times, buddy. Say what you will, but Nixonomics is working.<p> can I borrow your pirate comic later? I have about 15 empty pages of space to fill.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 10:12 a.m. CST

    How long do you think Fox can shit on moviegoers...

    by rbatty024

    before people stop showing up to their films? Or has that already happened this Summer. Space Chimps anyone? Fox strikes me as the movie studio that hates making movies. There's a sense of disgust that they actually have to produce entertainment for people.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 10:15 a.m. CST

    The other groundbreaking comic from 1986/87

    by Samuel Fulmer

    Dark Knight Returns. I still think that was/is/always will be better than Watchmen. It dealt with alot of the same themes as Watchmen, but it took an established character that readers had a connection with and threw him into that world.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 10:24 a.m. CST

    I gotta admit..that alien squid....

    by knowthyself

    ...was pretty funny when I first saw it. I hope the movie really hits me harder at the end. *SPOILER ALERT* I got to the end of Watchmen and for some reason I just didn't feel the impact of all that loss of life. You had the heroes just walking around like nothing happened. That added shot of NiteOwl screaming after Rorscache dies gives me hope that the ending will pull more of my heart strings. I mean Rorscache dies...meanwhile Dan and Laurie are fucking inside? wtf? Million of people just died and they just have sex? Sure Doc Manhattan is heartless but the others are not reacting as they should be. Me thinks Snyder will rectify that mistake.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 10:29 a.m. CST

    knowthyself KNOWS

    by lovecraftian

    Exactly. Knowthyself, you're spot on. The story isn't about the twist. The story is about the running question. The story is about who controls your destiny. Consider what Michael Caine said about America and Batman. (I'm not quoting it because I want people to read it for themselves.) I think knowthyself's suggestion is absolutely correct. In fact, I'll take it one further, read it again, and examine each panel. Look for symbolism that you weren't looking for before. Each panel is full of it and patterned to the one before it and after it. Ask yourself about Dr. Manhattan's memories on the Jersey shore. "Why do they mean so much to him?" "What about that memory is so foreboading?" Ask yourself why the Cold War matters now. Read a little about '68, or Viet Nam, or Nixon, or Watergate, or Ayn Randian objectivism, or social Darwinism, Dr. Wertham's SEDUCTION OF THE INNOCENT and the Senate hearings that followed, or who Superman and Batman fought when they got started in the Great Depression. There is more than just an alternate history there, there is some pretty heady commentary that stands on its own, and not just for being innovative. Alan Moore is a pretty smart cat that plans everything he does with quite a bit of precision, "clockwork", you might say. So, dig deeper. I'm sure you'll change your mind.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 10:33 a.m. CST


    by lovecraftian

    Without wanting to give too much away...Dan and Laurie don't know about Rorschach, and Laurie IS devasted with the end. The point is the moral checkmate. It can put people into shock and make them numb.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 10:33 a.m. CST


    by Sailor Rip

    Just re-read DKR a few weeks ago. I don't see why it gets all the praise. It took a beloved character and turned him into a shell of a man and thrust him into a dark world. other than that, was the story really that good? No. <p> Now Watchmen, good characters and a great story that still holds up today and probably always will.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 10:34 a.m. CST

    Another Spoiler filled observation...

    by knowthyself

    ....the best part of Watchmen is that basically Moore took Superman and Batman...and told his audience..that for the over all good these characters would fuck us over in a heart beat. If they truly wanted to save the world...they'd have to sacrifice innocent lives in the process. I mean wow...holy fuck thats ballsy.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 10:37 a.m. CST

    Lovecraftian.....I understand the shock...

    by knowthyself

    *SPOIILER WARNING*...but it still doesn't ring true to me. Rorscache was Owl's best bud. He surely would have followed him outside. It just seems tragic that nobody knows he died at the hands of Doc fucking Manhattan.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 10:39 a.m. CST

    Don't trust your heroes....

    by cookylamoo

    But is this news in 2007? After Bush. After Clinton? After Eliot Spitzer. After Edwards. After Harvey Dent? And would a giant squid really unite mankind?

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 10:43 a.m. CST

    If history has taught us anything it's that...

    by knowthyself

    ....people always need to re-learn the same old lessons because they never learn the first time around. You think we learned after Nixon? Nope we re-elected Bush. History repeats itself so people must hear the same lessons over and over again.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 10:55 a.m. CST

    apparently i'm an idiot b/c fox is irresponsible

    by dr sauch

    Bill Brasky, I'm sorry I've insulted your boyfriends over at Fox. FUCK IT, WE'LL DO IT LIVE!

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 11 a.m. CST


    by g-ride9000

    I know right, like is Zach Snyder going to leave in the pirate side story? I'd call it a sub-plot, but the prefix "sub" assumes some sort of correlation with the main plot.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 11:01 a.m. CST


    by lovecraftian

    *MAJOR SPOILER WARNING! TURN BACK NOW!!!* I understand your statement. But it certainly rings true to me. I'm looking at it now, and Nite Owl is truly unhappy with Rorschach for his obstinence. Then the smartest man in the world calls his testimony unreliable. Anything Rorschach does will be highly scrutinized. Jon's already gone, and Laurie is horribly upset and just wants to go "somewhere else." Nite Owl now has the choice of comforting Laurie, the secret love of his life, or "talking sense" into someone he can't "talk sense" into, that'll probably be ignored anyway. By the way, Dan and Laurie are both weeping when they go off together.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 11:03 a.m. CST

    ALOT of people saw the The Dark Knight

    by zooch

    I know several who saw the Watchmen trailer before The Dark Knight and instantely ran out and bought the novel based on the trailer alone. It was opening weekend and they went to three Barnes and Noble and it was sold out and they had to order from a comic book store who was also sold out. This is because alot of people saw The Dark Knight, and all those people saw The Watchmen trailer, and all those people wanted to find out what it was all about. The fan hype for this film is HUGE, that's why FOX is trying to take a piece.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 11:09 a.m. CST

    i cannot believe what i'm reading

    by sokitome

    I thought people who posted on this site were somewhat intelligent but I guess I was wrong. "Watchmen" not relevant to today? Are you fucking kidding me? It is more relevant today than ever. I guess no one sees the parallels to 9-11. I'm not saying 9-11 was a hoax, but immediately after it occurred this country was as unified as I have EVER SEEN IT. To say WATCHMEN isn't relevant today is seriously bordering on the truly ignorant and stupid.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 11:11 a.m. CST

    That list of movies sound like porn titles

    by moviemaniac-7

    With a bit of imagination that is. Fox sux and that's it. Bunch of retards... They should drag that fucker Rothman out on the street and kick him till he rots in the gutter. Than it should start being respectable again.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 11:15 a.m. CST

    knowthyself, I agree with LVCRTN

    by g-ride9000

    They were pity fucking each other at best, the final frames of that scene conveyed their devastation. But for them a long period of their life they felt burdens because of their chosen professions. Most of theses burdens were lifted from their shoulders as soon as the giant monster hit New York. They think Ozymandias Utopia plan will work, and that lifts the burden of crime fighting from their shoulders.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 11:16 a.m. CST

    I stand (slightly) corrected

    by tensticks

    I meant Alan Moore, not Neil Gaiman, my bad. As for "can there never be another good movie/good superhero movie post-TDK?"--of course there can, and there should. But it had better be sharp as a fucking razor. And I'm not buying that Watchmen is it. As for be all/end all movies--someone brought up THE CROW (which is STILL in my all time favourites, and which DID change everything in its time)--well, we've seen those come and go also, haven't we? ID4, 5th Element, Matrix...some have had a longer legacy and impact than others...but TDK truly stands up as great CINEMATIC ART, not just a comic book/superhero/action movie. And this is coming from someone who's not especially a BATMAN fan or a comics fan in general. Back to WATCHMEN, with the above caveats stated, I still believe (as slugbat beautifully reiterated) that this movie is a decade late. I will see it, probably on opening day; I'm sure I may even enjoy it. And I will keep a very open mind and if I'm wrong, I'm wrong. But...we shall see.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 11:16 a.m. CST

    sokitome hit the nail on the head people

    by g-ride9000

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 11:26 a.m. CST

    One word: Countersue.

    by mbeemer

    Another word: "Extortion". Three more: "Restraint of trade".<p> There has been no secret that WB has been working on this for years, and for Fox to wait until the last moment to file a protest... Of course, WB will cough up some cash because "it's easier" than dragging things out in court even if they think they will win.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 11:27 a.m. CST


    by ArcadianDS

    you make a VERY important point, but first off let me thank you for at least letting me have an opinion, even if you disagree with it.<p> part of what makes a great comic book story so great is the anticipation. Lets be honest: If you are walking out of a comic shop with a new comic - one whose story and characters are just blowing you away each month, you'll probably have most of it read within 5 minutes of leaving that store. For the next 3.5 weeks, you read it. and read it. and you read it again. Then you read it and just look for little things in the backdrops of each panel - what kind of harbingers peek around corners of buildings? What does that recurring but obscured graffiti actually say? Is that a blue weiner on that guy?<p> Its the serialized pacing that makes comic books such an addictive form of art. My first reading of Watchmen was with a complete stack of them on the table and I devoured them in two sittings over a period of 32 hours. I read them without any anticipation. There was no 3.5 week long gaps to make me absoutely stir crazy for the next installment. Im also reading them from a perspective where Jonah Hex is dead. Superman is dead. Hal Jordan is dead. Spiderman went bad. Wolverine went moonbat vigilante. Thousands of mirror universes vanished and others merged with alarming results. The Losers died and were cradled to eternity by the spirit of a great indian medicine man. There have been more 'revolutionary' comic book storylines since Watchmen than you can count on 50 hands. The so called "revolutionary comic book" is now so common-place, its actually no longer revolutionary to make one. EVERY comic hero is an Angry Young Man with a grudge and a secret past. EVERY comic story involves a Judas Iscariot character that you "never see coming" but actually see him coming before he even shows up.<p> I will do as you suggest, and give it a second read - but I still think that its a comic whose legacy is very strong, and whose impact is very strong, but whose story is very not quite so strong.<p> and everyone must surely agree that the artwork itself, while certainly boundary-breaking for its time, is a bit stale now. I'd love to see somebody do a faithful frame-by-frame redressing with an airbrush to this. Not a redraw, but take the original line drafts and airbrush them instead of using a 16 color dot matrix copier.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 11:46 a.m. CST

    I just registered

    by SnapT

    The bidding starts at $100,000.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 11:47 a.m. CST

    For those of you pointing out the stupid costumes...

    by Blue_Demon

    I'm sure everybody's already told you the costumes are supposed to look that way.<p>As for non-geeks not getting the trailer, I couldn't care less. This is not the beginning of a franchise. It's one cool-looking movie based on a ground-breaking comic book. I remember a few people laughably saying that "Speed Racer" would be like "Blade Runner" and be discovered years later. "Watchmen" on the other hand does stand a chance to be this generation's "Blade Runner."

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 11:49 a.m. CST

    nobody in this talkback has used the words 'not relevant'

    by ArcadianDS

    Nobody in this talkback used the phrase "not relevant" so stop inventing things to be angry at, you angry post-teen fanboi.<p> And stop being so indignant that a stupid 12 issue comic book isn't being heralded as the New New Testament for our generation, and that all of our planet's evil would be squashed if everyone would just read a 14 page edition of the new and improved Snuffy Smith with 120% more angst and bitterness and 396.8% more pointless, plot-halting sexual romps. Because that right there my friend, is the biggest reason why some of you 35ish year olds still have such a turgid erection for The Watchmen - it was the first comic book you ever saw in which people had sex, and women's breasts fell out of their Barnum & Bailey trapeze costumes. Oh and a fat balding middle-aged guy boinks a young woman who isn't but probably is supposed to be Wonder Woman's daughter.<p> Im no prude. If a sex scene is a natural event within the development of a story, then let it happen. But out of nowhere, for a hot young woman to look at a fat slick haired middle aged recluse and say "my but you're ravishing!" because he removed the Cult of Bob eyeglasses from his puffy meat-pie face is the pinnacle of teenage pandering in order to sell a comic book. I was willing to let some of that go as long as this talkback remained outside of the retard zone, but you booked flight for all of us and flew us there personally, so out comes the real criticisms.<p> Its a poorly written story whose gaping maw of plot holes that are shoehorned with cut-and-paste sex scenes and a little kid reading the back of a box of Captain Crunch.<p> as for extolling the artwork, sorry but in my universe, orange sidewalks and pink concrete is not 'artistic' - its a cheap stunt that shouts "look how we aren't coloring sidewalks gray like Superman and Batman. Aren't we clever now."<p> But nothing glares out at the reader brighter than the, for lack of a better term, directing of this comic book. The story's pacing has all the stop-start-stagger-start-stop-start of a first day at driving school. At times, it actually runs out of gas and has to thumb a ride back (ahoy me hearties! Here be me heapin stash o' filler content fer ye!) Oh sure, I get that there are crazy wackadooodle parallels with the pirate story and the actual story im supposed to be reading. The problem is that its not actually running in parallel AT ALL. The main story comes to a railroad crossing and we spend at least one full comic book worth of panels watching a Pirate Train chug its way down the track. When it finally passes, we're so happy that we can get back to moving forward that we dont even mind that after having to sit through all that, there wasn't even a pretty red caboose at the end to honk and wave at. It is an unresolved wait at a railroad crossing that serves only to stop us from reaching our destination too soon (i.e. before buying a few more comics). You can almost hear the conversation: "holy crap we suspected this would take off but look at last months sales for Watchmen! Its insane!"<p> "yeah - order an extention of 3 more issues. I dont care how they do it, but this property is white hot right now, and why sell 10 issues if we can find room to squeeze two more in there, right? RIGHT?"<p> I could do this for 800 more words, but you wont care because you still think your precious little comic book is above rebuke and is so Holy that we dare not speak ill of its glaring weaknesses. Just because it was the closest thing to hardcore porn that you were able to get your chubby little teenage fingers around doesn't mean the rest of us have to worship it like a Crayola Koran.<p> and im out.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 12:04 p.m. CST

    Arcadian DS

    by lovecraftian

    I see where your coming from in your post, and on some points I agree with you. But there are a few things I'd like to mention. I'll write this out point by point (not because I'm lecturing, but because it's the best way for me to organize my thoughts in response.) 1)You're absolutely correct about anticipation. It's why started collecting comics in the first place. And perhaps, WATCHMEN read better in its serialized days, if for no other reason than it is just rife with panel-by-panel symbolism. It's almost sensory overload.--Though, that might be the point: a commentary on omniscience. (See Doc Manhattan and Ozymandias)--That said, I don't think it defines comics as an artform per say. It may enhance the experience, or give you a different perspective. I have to take issue, however, with the idea that comics must be serialized to invoke the sense of drama that comes from the artform. I believe trade paperback sales and the advent of the graphic novel supports me on this. 2)"Superman is dead. Hal Jordan is dead. Spiderman went bad. Wolverine went moonbat vigilante."--While this may be true, these storylines have all happened before. In fact, they happened at the onset of the IRON AGE, the direct response to THE WATCHMEN and THE DARK KNIGHT RETURNS. You're right to say that every comic tries to be "revolutionary" now. But I've read the current crop; and frankly, these guys are merely attempting to expound upon what Moore had already done. Unfortunately, many times, as was the case with the IRON AGE, the stories suffer because writers are still thinking two dimensionally and thinking strictly inside of the realm of the genre. Now, while I'll give Grant Morrison HIS due, it isn't as if he's breaking a LOT of new ground. And those who've come after are all influenced by what he, Moore, Miller and Gaiman had already accomplished. 3)The Artwork--The artwork, though hip in its day, shouldn't be changed for one reason, nostalgia. The dot matrix look invokes a feeling of the good old days of comics from the GOLDEN to the SILVER AGE. In fact, the characters themselves are iconically representative of old Charleston Comics characters with "four color" overtones (a term that specifically refers to the kinds of heroes that were created when that printing style was in effect.) But if you'd like to know what it might look like, here's a link that would give you an idea:

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 12:10 p.m. CST

    Dark Knight will cause a "windfall profits" tax on WB!

    by YouAreAllMyBastardChildren

    Should it really cost $12.00 to see a movie? [It shouldn't matter whether it's a Friday or Saturday night.]

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 12:20 p.m. CST

    ArcadianDS, I really think you've missed the boat

    by oisin5199

    First, Watchmen works better as a complete piece, not the 12 issue serial, in terms of pacing. And yeah, it's relevant, and it changed the comics industry, but that's besides the point. As a piece of literature, there's so much complex stuff going on in every frame, subtext, metatext, character work, complex political and social themes. Don't let the 80s art fool you. Nothing has ever come close to Watchmen in the entire medium of graphic novels.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 12:27 p.m. CST

    If the film is as great as the novel.

    by Evangelion217

    Then it will be just as great, if not better then "TDK." Hell, if the film is half as great as the novel, then it might touch the level of brilliance. And I will definitely be satisfied. While Alan Moore will complain that it is TOO faithful to the novel. Nothing will ever please that man. Lol!!!!

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 12:32 p.m. CST

    Can I just say...

    by mefrog

    ...the theory of normal audiences not caring or giving a shit about Watcmen can go both ways. One of my friends who has seen TDK four times is in the group that thinks it looks stupid, though I think if Zack can put a fucking sick second trailer together that raises interest and not just awareness WB can have a good run (though nowheree near 300).<br> <br> My girlfriend, on the other hand, who had never herd of Watchmen other than me talking about it, leaned over to me after she saw the trailer and said she wanted to read the book now. So, I got her a copy, she read it, and loved it.<br> <br> The trailer has definitley caught the public eye - the next task is to create a trailer like that sick 300 preview two years ago.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 12:34 p.m. CST

    lovecraftian....thank you

    by bacci40

    while arcadian criticisms deal with the surface story, you show what makes watchmen the greatest comic series ever is because of its subtext, which was also about the history of comics, and what led moore to write watchmen in the first was the first comic made, where the reader had to do research to understand everything that was going on...dont know about the kefauver committee? well then you dont really understand the keene commission....dont know the history of ec comics? then you wouldnt get the black freighter? dont know ayn rand? well, then you might think that rorshach is cool, but you wouldnt understand his true motivations...

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 12:39 p.m. CST


    by lovecraftian

    Thank YOU. I appreciate the back-up.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 12:47 p.m. CST

    dont forget one important thing about me

    by ArcadianDS

    I read The Watchmen and I liked it. A lot. I agree that it is one of those rare moments where a comic book transcends - it is indeed a work of literature. It is not perfect, and unfortunately, many of its imperfections make it impossible to translate to film. Moon himself has vowed to never see a movie adaptation of The Watchmen. He has gone on the record stating that he doesn't feel it would translate well to film. Im not trying to raise a big ranty carbuncle over this - I just happen to agree with the opinion of one of the brilliant minds behind this comic book.<p> bacci I like the cut of your jib as they say, but I think a comic book that insists that the reader brush up on two decades worth of world history and global politics in order to understand what its talking about is a comic book that needs a rewrite. I happen to disagree with you. I dont think you have to pull up a chair and a chicken and sit next to Leeloo as she visually digests the whole of human history in order to understand a guy who dresses up like a hawk and flies around in a giant lozenge shaped owl sperm. I think the comic gives you enough cues to get the world in which it takes place.<p> and unless there's more to the black freighter than the fact that its big enough to transport a giant hypno-squid across the ocean, then Im missing some subtext somewhere.<p> Many new/young writers stumble upon their own wit, and try to be too clever in what they write - so much so, that nobody really 'gets it' without having all of it explained. I think The Watchmen suffers from a small dose of that syndrome - they tried to be too clever and too witty, and as a result, nobody can really get all the subtext without the author standing over your shoulder, pointing to a pane and saying, "you see what I did there?"<p> "I...uh....there's an indian woman drawing a giant space hypno-squid."<p> "yeah yeah but did you see what I did there?"<P. "its an...indian woman...and she...*sigh* no I dont see what you did there."<p> Its a reference to the British Monarchy indirectly subjugating its colonies via passive-directive force to maintain a war like empire while appearing to be a humanitarian effort."<p> "right. hypno-squid. I see it now *turns page* sooo...what does the cherry fruit pie represent?"<p> "thats an ad. keep turning."

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 12:49 p.m. CST


    by ArcadianDS

    cuz this website blows<p> "yeah yeah but did you see what I did there?"<p> "there's an indian woman....she's..drawing...*sigh* no I dont."<p> "Well its a reference to the British Monarchy's 20th century efforts to subjugate its colonies by passive-directive force and maintaining a war-like expanding empire by employing benevolent humanitarian efforts."<p> "ooookay. Giant Hypno-Squid. I see it. *turns page* so then... what does the cherry fruit pie represent?"<p> "nothing. thats an ad. turn the page again."

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 12:50 p.m. CST


    by knowthyself

    ArcadianDS you are certainly entitled to your opinion. Even if you end up not liking Watchmen. I'm hoping the film can sort of take Watchmen and perhaps just fill in those gaps that will turn a new generation on to it's messages. For example they made NiteOwl look less stupid. Its a good move and will help ease todays audience into Moores time machine that is Watchmen. Giving Ozymandias nipples, again taking the message of the book and translating it into todays cinematic language. Plus I believe the art style of the book was intentionally mimicking the old school comics, again taking THAT look and adding the blood,violence, and nudity those comics never had.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 12:55 p.m. CST

    i called him moon?

    by ArcadianDS

    wow I need to proof better before clicking the 'post talkback' button if I want to be taken seriously. Also, I need to stop being a moron in every 4th talkback, but thats another topic for another day.<p> There's a lot of people in here telling me that I missed mountains upon mountains upon uncrested mountains of subtext, sidetext, metatext, textatext, and maybe even some sexotext in this comic that is so crammed into every frame, its a wonder it stays shut on a counter.<p> So can someone give me a solid example citing a series of specific panels and crowbar out an avalanche of every kind of 'text' being referenced here?<p> Cuz I read it and I see a comic book about horny emo superheros who dont find the whole daring-do stuff fun anymore.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 12:55 p.m. CST

    You coulda said the same about 300...

    by knowthyself

    ...its based a comic most haven't read. They don't care about Frank Miller. They just see another sandle epic. But the visuals and trailer got everyones attention. That's all Watchmen needs. Get their attention with some crazy visuals. And yes putting "from the director of 300" will help immensley. Plus I feel TDK is leading the way for Watchmen to take the "we love dark comics" thing and run with it.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 12:57 p.m. CST


    by ArcadianDS

    I like the comic - Im not sure I will like the movie.<p> cuz Im not one who automatically likes a movie because I enjoyed the book/tv show/cartoon/original movie. If that makes sense at all.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 12:58 p.m. CST

    ArcadianDS: Don't worry about it.

    by knowthyself

    You don't have to like it. No matter what anyone says. Its obvious you didn't miss anything and you just don't like it. (Not being sarcastic btw...even though it sounds sarcastic. Weird.) Hell thats perfectly fine. Don't let them get to ya. Its just comics for christ sakes.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 1:10 p.m. CST

    It's easy

    by DonnieDorko

    The movie will draw a lot of extra money from TDK because people are aching for another "semi-smart" comics-superhero-flick. They don't care that they're not comparable.. They'll see it because there are nothing, nothing, even close to the desire to see something like The Dark Knight.. It's NOT the one and only best film in the universe but I think it will HELP the Watchmen movie alot.. I've read it and I love the "graphic novel" and I know that it will put off a lot of the fans of the Batman-action and it is, to be honest, a lot more high level than Batman, but I don't think the Irony, satire or political content (ironically, being in fashion again - even if I hope the Georgia thing won't be a new cold war) will hurt the movie. The trailer looks great, the moment of release is absolutley brilliant! This is solid gold!!! AND ELI ROTH IS NOT IN IT!!!!!!!!!!!

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 1:20 p.m. CST

    Deathbed: The Bed That Eats People

    by Henry Inglenook

    STOP DRILLING, YOU'VE HIT OIL!!! You had me at 'Deathbed'. patton.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 1:21 p.m. CST

    am i missing something here

    by j2talk

    but, when rights are sold for a particular project aren't they usually for a specific length of time and usually need to be renewed???

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 1:22 p.m. CST not sure what you dont get

    by bacci40

    moore wanted to show that the medium could transcend common perceptions...and with v, watchmen and from hell (and the unfinished big numbers) he did dont want to do research to understand a comic? then you dont want to read want to read miller...shoot, ellis did basically the same thing with planetary...and what about sandman? unless you had some understanding of world religions and mythos, much of what gaiman was doing would totally fly over your head...i like that moore challenged the reader...i like that it took me many readings over a period of time to truly understand the scope of the work...but thats me...

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 1:35 p.m. CST

    I liked the trailer

    by The Winged Doucheman

    But I haven't read the graphic novel, but I will before the film comes out. I tried to get my GF excited about it, but she shrugged her shoulders and rolled her eyes. To the outside viewers probably look at this thing like a serious version of the Tick or Mystery Men. Hopefully the marketing can turn around public perception. I doubt we'll see any Burger King toy promotions though.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 1:36 p.m. CST

    F**k Moore, he's wrong

    by DonnieDorko

    F**k Moore, He has a valid point about the difficulties and that the story and media reflects the media so it won't transcend as intended as a comic.. (or semi-comic with pages just in text). Of coooooourse it will be lost in a movie-version, but that's not all that are great about the novel.. I've read everything Chuck Palahniuk's ever written and my conclusion is.. he's a schmuck.. They're all good but 'Survivor' and 'Fight Club' are great.. but all the rest are copies.. and Fight Club was better as a Movie... As he himself thought... This won't happen with "Watchmen" of course.. But it looks great and most of it's points will transcend.. I don't care about the comics-purists.. It will be a great movie.. And even if there's no comparison whatsoever, the success of The Dark Knight will bring people to watch this, even if it by false pretences...

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 1:38 p.m. CST

    Fuck, I should re-read before posting.

    by The Winged Doucheman

    Or the grammar police will put me in jail and sodomize me with a broom stick.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 1:59 p.m. CST


    by Sidepocket

    There is nothing wrong with Watchmen or V as stories. I like there stories, the problem is More's writing. These books under another writer with the same story could be written better. V was just a mess, its an entire book about nothing. Nothing happens. Even with all the social and philosophical commentary they are never completed and thus nothing happens. It is an entire book about nothing. Watchmen is better because it has a real plot, but More craps it up with his writing. Which is every time someone speaks, Ivanhoe falls out of their mouth. He makes things complex that has no complexity, that do not NEED to be complex to tell the story. They are just complex for complex sake, or complex to make it sound smarter than it really is and cover up for crappy writing characterization. Oh as to a book that was way better? The Long Halloween. Its just like the V Movie, it has Alan More ideas but cut out the unnecessary crap More puts in his work making it all about the story and the flow is excellent.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 2:18 p.m. CST

    The Long Halloween Was Great...

    by LaserPants

    But your bat-shit crazy insane if you think its anywhere near as good as Watchmen. Watchmen deconstructed and then leveled the entire idea of comic book heroes. The Long Halloween was just a really good Batman story with some amazing artwork.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 2:28 p.m. CST

    Wait, wait...

    by Pop_aristocrat

    Didn't Fox's claim on the Watchmen rights end in '91? I thought since they never did anything with the property, the film rights would revert back to the original property holder...unless Corman made a version of this movie for them too... Star Jones, care to clarify?

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 2:32 p.m. CST

    Five words and One number

    by FilmZ0mbie

    that ensure this thing will make money: "From the visionary director of 300". Some of you boggle my mind. Srsly.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 2:34 p.m. CST

    And good point up there by whoever...

    by FilmZ0mbie

    Who gives a fuck if this makes money in the long run?

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 2:35 p.m. CST

    Fox seems to be claiming...

    by knowthyself

    ..that they still have some of the distribution rights. Not the property rights.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 2:37 p.m. CST

    They made the movie. That's all that matters.

    by knowthyself

    As long as it's done and I can get it on video afterwards I could care less how much it makes. Just like Speed Racer. Loved it. Its mine for all time. Box office numbers are for those who invested money in the project. Not me the movie goer.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 2:43 p.m. CST

    Someone needs to make a Cop in the old west Graphic Novel

    by The_joker

    Then some studio exec will approve it. Cuz "Cops in the Old West are SO in right now. I'd cast Jean Claude Van Damme as the cop, cuz it just feels right.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 2:45 p.m. CST

    regardless of if you like it or not, I say we boycott fox

    by sokitome

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 2:47 p.m. CST

    cut off

    by sokitome

    sorry, damn enter button. I am getting sick and tired of FOX fucking up everything we geeks like. If they try and fuck this thing over, i know they probably won't but if they do, I say we FINALLY DO something about it. We keep saying we're gonna boycott this and that, but I say if Fox does fuck with this we fuck with them back. Like not seeing the Wolverine movie. You all with me? Aww fuck it who am I kidding, I'll see you all there in line.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 2:51 p.m. CST


    by Sailor Rip

    The only reason I care if Watchmen makes any money is that it will encourage studios to finance other "risky, big budget non mainstream" projects. If Watchmen tanks get ready for cinematic diahrea and a slew of no brainer sequels.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 2:51 p.m. CST

    speed racer

    by sokitome

    Knowthyself, thank you. I thought I was the only one who liked Speed Racer. I know it's not for the general movie going audience, but I liked it too.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 2:56 p.m. CST

    a "stupid 12 issue comic book" "I liked it. A lot"

    by G100

    Riiiiiiiiiiiiiight.<p> <p>Anyone care to guess how many of the Watchmen Trade peperbacks have sold over the years ?<p> <p>I'm betting it's quite sufficient to ensure that even without the unprecedented 1 Million copies printed this year there is a "base" of more than enough people out there who will be interested in the Movie to ensure it has a great deal of interest come opening day.<p> <p>Will it be a smash ? Nobody knows at this point and speculation is just that, speculation.<p> <p>Some also seem to be forgetting that the story itself is mostly Rorschach (which is a superb narrative) a large chunk of Nite Owl a good helping of Silk Spectre then Manhattan then Ozy and Comedian and then the supporting characters and minutemen.<p> <p>As for the acclaim garnered by The Watchmen and Moore, sorry but that certainly isn't about to change because of a few rabidly hostile postings.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 3:26 p.m. CST


    by FilmZ0mbie

    I suppose that's a good reason to care about this film's financial sucess. But I tink for the most part it's going to be happening anyways thanks to stuff like TDK and even 300. Didn't this site run a story about Fincher gearing up to adapt Black Hole? Granted though, the financial sucess of this film would mean a higher chance of some other great indy titles seeing thier day on celluloid.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 3:27 p.m. CST

    think* their* blah.

    by FilmZ0mbie

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 3:57 p.m. CST

    On repeated viewings 300 gets lamer and lamer

    by r2hunter

    It's not something you can enjoy again and again unless you are into getting off on the male body. But, Snyder's Dawn of the Dead is ok to watch now and again. Not as good as the original, of course, but still a lot of fun.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 4:19 p.m. CST

    300 is funny as shit. Great action.

    by knowthyself

    Come on. Not rewatchable? And seriously the gay comments are getting old. The homophobia around here is ridiculous. God forbid a film have half naked men without geek getting in a tizzy about it. Grow up.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 4:19 p.m. CST

    Too much rubbish and blah in this article.

    by Damien Chowder

    I got bored when at "This isn't my bailiwick" Can we have it short and sweet please. AICN lately seems to love fleshing out some 2 sentence info into the 7th bible. Very sorry but thats how I feel.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 4:49 p.m. CST

    Observation -

    by DennisMM

    Anyone who leads a Talk Back post with "fuck you," "you're a moron," or, of course, "your a fag" demonstrates the paucity - nay, bankruptcy - of his/her POV. Your defensiveness hides fear, people, and we can smell it.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 5:05 p.m. CST

    Deconstruction ...

    by DennisMM

    only works if you understand what you are supposed to be deconstructing. Merriam-Webster online tells me deconstruction is the analytic examination of something (as a theory), often in order to reveal its inadequacy. Putting Nite Owl, Silk Spectre (She wears SILK, Snyder!) and especially Ozymandias in sculpted rubber/leather is not deconstruction. The critic needs tools to actively deconstruct, else the result can't be more than spoofery. Neither "Dawn of the Dead" or "300" suggested to me that Snyder possesses the skills to actively deconstruct anything.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 5:15 p.m. CST

    Observation related to article -

    by DennisMM

    If Fox's lawyers aren't canny enough to know the property is called "Watchmen" rather than "The Watchmen," they don't deserve a dime. I would give them 100 of the net on "Angel Pangs," though.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 5:20 p.m. CST

    Surely a court would make Fox pay for half the production cost

    by Damien Chowder

    Due to Fox leaving it to the last minute, they can't argue "we didn't know".

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 5:24 p.m. CST

    There's a film called 'Admission Impossible'???

    by Johnno

    When is this gem coming out?

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 6:02 p.m. CST

    We reap the benefits...

    by Banzai Rootskibango

    ...even if Watchmen fails...WE still get our Watchmen movie. It's not as if "the sequel" depends on this one's performance. It's a one-shot deal. <P> That being said...let's go ALIEN COP! Whoo!

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 6:08 p.m. CST

    So Fox is gonna try to delay Watchmen and pussify Wolverine?

    by The Winged Doucheman

    Release a Fantastic Four 3 and they hit the trifecta of shitty ideas.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 6:59 p.m. CST

    interesting TB

    by slugbat

    To reiterate: I have no dog in the Watchmen Movie fight, other than that I know a good Watchmen Movie is good for comic book fans in general. My entire point is that the teaser is not having the desired effect of drawing in "normals," but is in fact turning them off. As one who understands the impact Watchmen had on this beloved artform, but never quite got into it, I'm in a good position to understand the casual viewer's opinion of it. Unfortunately, after the teaser, it is most likely, "Teh Gay." <p> And no, this is not shadenfreude on my behalf, because MY beloved franchise, GIJoe (the Hama-verse, not the dumbass cartoons) is about to be ASS-FUCKED, in the ASS!

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 7:01 p.m. CST

    who says no sequel?

    by ArcadianDS

    Anyone who thinks for one minute that a summer action movie that makes a truckload and a half of money is NOT going to get a sequel/prequel/"Origins" spinoff is, in the words of the great Kazoo, a neolithic dumb-dumb.<p> I called it a "stupid 12 issue comic book" because thats what it is. When I said "I liked it. A lot." I was referring to the narrative and the concept of Watchmen - and trying to segregate my interest in this story as a CONCEPT, as opposed to the flawed diamond that is its implementation. Problem is that there is an angry mob element here and elsewhere that insists we worship this piece of work like it is the natural continuation and completion of Canterbury Tales, or is some long lost and recently discovered work of Shakespeare.<p> All Im saying is, crank down the volume on the fanboi rage, because all that's going to do is generate more people like me: who read Watchmen with the expectation that they will be absolutely blown completely away by it, when in reality they are blown straight to the outer banks of meh once it concludes.<p> Remember how everyone panned a bit about how the over marketing and over saturation of Iron Man risked hurting the movie by building its anticipation to hopelessly high levels? Remember people saying that about The Phantom Menace? Thats what Im cautioning against here - but Im just one guy, and you're a whole mob - with torches and shovels.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 7:53 p.m. CST

    Point to the Canterbury/Shakespearean comparisons please

    by G100

    Or drop it for the laughable straw man argument it so clearly is.<p> <p>I also see you seem to have gotten very curiously hot and bothered about the sex scene but completely failed to notice the build up to that preceeds it in the story.<p> <p>*****SPOILERS***SPOILERS***<p> <p>The fight between Laurie, Dan and the muggers interspersed with the Manhattan interview. There's a blindingly obvious parallel and foreshadowing between the fight and Dan & Laurie getting it on. Which is reflected verbally in the Manhatten scene where his human ties are systematically ripped apart. This also goes to the heart of Manhattan leaving Earth since Laurie is Manhattans last human contact which she severs by seeking out Dan to stay with and then sleep with him.<p> <p>Hardly "out of nowhere". And as for your devastating critique that Laurie suddenly finds Dan attractive (wrong BTW it's fairly clear she is fond of Dan from the first Rorschach/Manhattan/Laurie encounter) Anyway as for the taking the glasses to reveal a slightly hidden aspect of a character, well does the name Clark Kent mean anything to you ?<p> <p>And I'm certainly not raging either for or against this Movie or the book as I know the books place in popular culture is justly assured while the film at least looks promising.<p> <p>But to deal in absolutes, like telling everyone there is absolutely no doubt whatsoever that it will be either a sure fire Bomb or Smash, is frankly laughable at this stage.<p> <p>You also talk about "marketing" and "over saturation" "risked hurting the movie by building its anticipation to hopelessly high levels?" yet you also say "part of what makes a great comic book story so great is the anticipation." I'm well aware that comics are different to Movies but they aren't THAT different in the case of Hype as the Superman "fake out" death clearly shows.<p> <p>Finally you also say "Cuz I read it and I see a comic book about horny emo superheros who dont find the whole daring-do stuff fun anymore."<p> <p>Rorschach ? The Comedian ? Manhattan ? Emo ???? REALLY!<p> <p>And they ALL enjoy it, even Dan and Laurie, once they start doing it again.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 8:27 p.m. CST

    Failing to release Watchmen would be a great story

    by INWOsuxRED

    When it gets released, it will be a relief at best for fans of the comics, and more likely a disappointment. If it somehow were to be blocked from release, it would be a wonderful legend. Unfortunately it will be released, lawsuit or not. I just love the idea of a mythical great film that nobody is allowed to see. Brian Wilson's Smile was a much more interesting story when nobody was allowed to hear it.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 8:30 p.m. CST


    by Mockingbuddha


  • Aug. 20, 2008, 8:37 p.m. CST

    The real danger

    by Mockingbuddha

    here as I see it is that Fux get a big slice and WB then forces Snyder to make it more palatable hoping for a bigger return. The Worst Case Scenario: PG13 Watchmen. I like the idea of a theatrical release of Wathcmen: The Black Freighter. Let Fux distribute that. Only problem is I look forward to the Directors cut with the Freighter story in it, and I can see this idea blowing that. Still if Freighter has to "take one for the team" then so be it. Also, every Watchmen TB I've read is FULL of spoilers. So I don't know why we should jump on people now. Also Watchmen haters are just stupid. And not just about this. It's a proven fact that they have to do a double overhand loop knot to tie their shoes. Never trust anyone under IQ 130! Heh, I am never happier than when I see a new Watchmen TB. SPOILER!!! GIANT SQUID!!!

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 9:19 p.m. CST

    Hey, here's a small fact:

    by Half-Baked-Goggle-Box-Do-Gooder

    I'm gonna go see "Watchmen". Opening Day. <p>I bought and read the comic series when it came out in the mid 80's, I was approaching 30 then and was married with a daughter, so I wasn't too worried about the "Impressing a member of the opposite sex" thing. I'd already pretty much lost interest in classic long-underwear comic books by then, and appreciated "Watchmen"'s slaps at the form, but I was already there. That wasn't the be-all and end-all of the book, though. I read it and liked it because of it's depth and impressive story structure. That achievement stands to this day, and occasionally I turn on a new person to the book. That's fine, too. <p>I don't give a RAT FUCK if it's a Smash Hit or a Colossal Bomb. I don't care a whit if it's a mega-flop, or does respectable BO, or if it becomes a beloved cult classic. I don't need the validation. I'm perfectly fine with my social standing as it relates to my movie attendance. I think that I'm going to like the movie. I will not allow myself to be jerked around by the hype machine into a screaming, spastic fit of inflated expectations. <p> I don't buy the "This movie will fail because it is irrelevant to modern comic fans who won't be able to relate to the way the comic deconstructed the classic comic book hero archetype of the time" argument. Fuck that. There have been plenty of successful movies made about subjects that the audience very probably wasn't around to appreciate the finer points of those movies' cultural settings. Examples? about "Saving Private Ryan", or "The Godfather", or "Gone With The Wind"? Those movies succeeded because they were GOOD MOVIES, not because of the pre-release opinions of a closed society of obsessive, cranked-up fanatics. As with all movies, "Watchmen" will stand or fall on it's own merits, not on the opinions of the geek nation. <p>I don't care if any of you like it or hate it. I'm going to see it for myself, not for any of you. I hope to see some of you there, but it won't break my fucking heart if some of you get it or not. We can discuss "Watchmen"'s pros and cons on these boards after it's release. That makes a lot more sense than trying to predict the future of an unknowable quality like the popularity of a piece of manufactured popular entertainment. That's fine, too.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 9:34 p.m. CST

    Watchmen - lower your expectations

    by Miyamoto_Musashi

    lower, lower

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 9:44 p.m. CST


    by harryflashman

    I'm probably going to regret ever raising my ugly head on a forum but since the subject of 300 was brought up (and it seemed to have a great many detractors)I thought I must. 300 captured a comic/graphic novel which in turn was a stylized telling of the Spartan/Greek/Athenian land defense at Thermopylae as written by Herodutos in The Histories. The account in The Histories itself could be seen to be stylized since it is all eyewitness testimony from all parties involved - we know how unreliable eyewitness reports can be. So to meander slowly to my point. I think he really got Allan Miller's vision but also understood the source material for the comic. Is he going to do this with Watchmen? I dont know. What I do know is the chance of getting my wife to watch it a the theatre is zero. She has never read a comic but is otherwise incredibly well read and has great taste (I even managed to get her to watch Hellboy but have paid for that one - I was forced to watch Definitely, Maybe). So... apart from the fans, the Watchman may only appeal to those who wanted to see Mystery Men - people like myself. Monologue over.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 9:45 p.m. CST

    I think "promising" is about right

    by G100

    The success of Dark Knight certainly argues against a public unwilling to go for smart or dark comic book films but at the end of the day you just never know with a Movie so nothing is certain.<p> <p>I like Half-Baked will be more than happy to go and see this Movie and then judge it on it's own merits.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 10:06 p.m. CST


    by slugbat

    I enjoyed 300's unapologetic defense of nascent Western values. However, it's all very gimmicky. The claustrophobic, artificial sets and the ceaseless greenscreen and pure excess on every frame of the screen; it's all too much for repeat enjoyability to me.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 10:13 p.m. CST

    Normal people will see watchmen, but it won't be a smash hit

    by MurderMostFowl

    Don't get me wrong... I *want* it to be. I actually thought the trailer was good. I never read the series and just picked up random bits from comic book friends years ago. So I watched the trailer as if I knew nothing, and I think it worked. It really intrigued me. I was still suspicious that it was going to not be as cool as it seemed, but I came away from it with the same impression I did back in the day when I first day the "Darkman" trailer, or "Hellboy". Sort of a... "Hmm... now this could be cool. Ok you've got my attention" sort of feeling. I think people will go see watchmen. It has the mystique about it as being "famous", but not many normal people knowing what or why. Almost like "Les Miserables" to the normal crowd... "I *should* see this movie because... well, it's famous" If the movie is actually *good*, then it will take off. They've got enough pull to probably get a sizable number of people in the seats to start. If you want to get them to come back it has to be a great movie though. We'll find out soon!

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 10:40 p.m. CST

    I fucking hate fox

    by Series7

    I just heard that they want to shit all over the new Wolverine movie. And since Deadpool is in it probably means fox owns the right to anything with Deadpool. So that probably means this generations retarded red headed step children twins version of the Zucker brothers Seltzer and Fredberg will probably be allowed to make the Deadpool movie since Deadpool is suppose to be a funny comic book character. And since Fox seems to love sucking the farts out of Seltzers and Fredbergs ass, they are foxes wonder boys who can do no wrong.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 11:07 p.m. CST


    by harryflashman

    I cant disagree with the huge overuse of greenscreen but previous filmed incarnations of this story never quite got the point of something that was so momentous in history that it is still taught at Sandhurst (British version of Westpoint) and at the Naval Academy in Annapolis. I think on the comic side and historical side I still think it was the best way to bring it to the screen. The claustrophobia to me seems perfect given the size of the area that they were defending and the number of spartans (both involved and non-involved). Quite interesting to note that the Spartans were incapable farmers (all their farming was done by slavery) and incapable offensive warriors (they were later involved in offensive campaigns at which they failed miserably). I think maybe I love the original source too much to look at this as just a movie.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 11:41 p.m. CST

    Fuck You Fox: Your New Cottage Industry

    by grievenom

    It's been decades since you've made classics like the original Star Wars and Alien series, etc. Today you put out shit and you reek like shit. Maybe your plan is to rape other studios. That will be your business plan. To piggy-back on other studio's success, and make all your money through cocksucker lawsuits. Congrats on your new business plan, you fuckin weasels.

  • Aug. 20, 2008, 11:58 p.m. CST

    sgraf_x - the psychic dipshit...

    by Bill Clay

    Since you know nothing about Watchmen, how do you know who Ozymandias is- from a trailer that didn't name the characters? F'ning whining geeks.

  • Aug. 21, 2008, 12:08 a.m. CST

    Spymunk 13 - Re: "May Collapse A Studio"

    by Bill Clay

    Right on target, Sir! "Snakes on a Plane" proved that this internet geek circle-jerk doesn't equal box office.

  • And Kudos for calling someone a dipshit for having Psychic abilities (Sadly you're clearly far too stupid to realise that READING THE BOOK means of course he knows who Ozy is. Duh!) Yet you praise some idiot who thinks this "May collapse a studio" (hilarious BTW) So no psychic ability there, eh ?

  • Aug. 21, 2008, 12:57 a.m. CST

    All of the people

    by imascooby1985

    who say the box office numbers dont mean shit to them need to try looking at the bigger picture. Yeah, whether this does good or not you still get to see a Watchmen movie and will have it for all time. But you also need to realize that movies that do well get other projects going. We wouldnt be talking about this film at all probably if 300 hadnt made big money. When a movie of a certain nature does well, it allows the studios to take chances on other films of the same ilk. So if you want the studios to focus more on dark superhero movies instead of just turning out shit like Disaster Movie, you should be praying that this does well so they dont think Dark Knight was just a fluke.

  • Aug. 21, 2008, 1:06 a.m. CST

    I recently read Watchmen...

    by Dapper Swindler

    I knew about it for a long time, but the trailer inspired me to finally sit down and read it from cover to cover. And here's my opinion - it's good. It's really fucking good. I've read a lot of comics and a lot of books. Degree in English. Read and discussed many classic and modern stories. Not that that makes my opinion anymore valid, it's only my humble opinion. But this... Watchmen is really good. Sometimes during reading I had to put the book down for a moment because it's packed with so much power and meaning. I didn't think it would live up to all the hype, but it did. This is just my opinion though, I'm not going to argue or write an enormous essay that explains why I like it.

  • Aug. 21, 2008, 1:19 a.m. CST


    by Series7

    I've been in same dilemma as you, know about the book for forever. I am going to read it next. I hope i like it as much as you. I need to read A Killing Joke as well.

  • Aug. 21, 2008, 2:08 a.m. CST

    DennisMM...ever read hamm's script?

    by bacci40

    that was the fox treatment...where they were called "the watchmen" and not attys dont know the book...they know the property...if i was the wb, i would force the issue and try to get the case into court as quickly as possible...then, i would present only on piece of evidence to the jury...that hamm script...if they arent falling down with laughter at the absurdity that fox really cared about this property, by the end of page one...ill eat harry's nasty shorts..."ITS THE GODDAMN WATCHMEN!!!!"

  • Aug. 21, 2008, 6:59 a.m. CST

    Arcadian DS

    by wookie1972

    "Anyone who thinks for one minute that a summer action movie that makes a truckload and a half of money is NOT going to get a sequel/prequel/"Origins" spinoff is, in the words of the great Kazoo, a neolithic dumb-dumb." There's never been a sequel to Gladiator (even though supposedly there's a very trippy treatment in which Maximus becomes a time-travelling eternal warrior), nor has there ever been a sequel/prequel to the BIGGEST MOVIE OF ALL TIME (Titanic wasn't an action flick, but still...) Face it, some movies survive on their own.

  • Aug. 21, 2008, 8:16 a.m. CST

    "ALL STUDIOS are shit."

    by DocPazuzu

    True, but not all studios made AvP:R.

  • Aug. 21, 2008, 9:31 a.m. CST

    Yeah, Watchmen stinks...

    by Oknight

    If Comics remained famous for 20-some years after their creation because they were crap... We'd have an AWFUL LOT of very famous comics.

  • Aug. 21, 2008, 9:56 a.m. CST

    Who the fuck is Beaks??

    by johnnykool

  • Aug. 21, 2008, 10:23 a.m. CST

    Bacci40 ... yes, I know ... but, jeez!

    by DennisMM

    I read Hamm's script many years ago. To the best of my knowledge, Hamm was responsible for turning the never-was "Crimebusters" team into the dysfunctional "Watchmen" or "New Watchmen" team that, to the best of my knowledge, has appeared in every significant version of the story since. (Those I've seen or read about in detail, at least, which are Hamm, Gilliam/McKeon, Hayter and Tse. Snyder's post-Tse rewrites are unknown to me.) That shouldn't stop Fox from knowing the title of the script it paid for, twice - from Hamm and Gilliam. <p> <p> And, as bad as Hamm's script is in places, let's not forget how awful Gilliam's is. After terrorists destroy the Statue of Liberty and Manhattan appears too late to save the day, the Comedian chides Jon thusly (approximately) - <p> <p> Hamm: Manhattan, you asshole! What took you so long? <p> <p> Gilliam: Manhattan, you cad! While you've been dithering, this lady's gone to pieces! <p> <p> Oy.

  • Aug. 21, 2008, 10:36 a.m. CST


    by DennisMM

    You mean the public doesn't remember great comics of the past such as Deathblow, X-O Manowar and Archie's RC Racers? I was thinking about those just the other day. But I'm a sad, sad, person with a freak memory.

  • Aug. 21, 2008, 1:32 p.m. CST

    SPOILER: The book is 22 years old...

    by Bill Clay

    Any whiny dickdrip who wants to cry about spoilers after two decades should get out of their parent's basement a little more often. <p> BTW, did you cry when your history teacher spoiled the end of WWII for you? LOL!

  • Aug. 21, 2008, 2:29 p.m. CST


    by FilmZ0mbie

    I'm still reading "The Greatest Generation" no spoilerz!!!11111onetwoponyduck

  • Aug. 21, 2008, 3:29 p.m. CST


    by FilmZ0mbie

    Let's just say he doesn't give the play a standing ovation.

  • Aug. 21, 2008, 3:54 p.m. CST


    by imascooby1985

    True, all studios are run by assholes. But Fox really is the worst. Before this, they fucked up X-Men, cancelled brilliant shows like Undeclared, Drive, The Tick, and countless others, and run a news network so conservative they will revert to lying before admitting a democrat was right about anything.

  • Aug. 22, 2008, 1:43 a.m. CST

    Lying at Fox...

    by Gremlin517

    That's what it was created for, the whole channel was conceived as the bulwark for the Neo-Conservative never reverts to lying, because it is, in essence about lies...

  • Aug. 22, 2008, 1:44 a.m. CST

    I love Gilliam...

    by Gremlin517

    But I am pleased as punch that his version was not the one that we are all going to see...