Cool News
Emily Browning Loads Up On A SUCKER PUNCH For Zack Snyder!!!
Beaks here...
Entertainment Weekly's Hollywood Insider blog is out-scooping everyone today.
Last week, we learned that Amanda Seyfried was forced to drop out of Zack Snyder's "Babes Behind Bars" fantasy flick SUCKER PUNCH when HBO wouldn't budge on her shooting schedule for BIG LOVE. Being a fan of Seyfried's for a variety of reasons, this disappointed me. But HBO's stubbornness has, according to EW, created an opportunity for Emily Browning (recently in THE UNINVITED, but probably best known as Violet in LEMONY SNICKET) to take on the lead role of Baby Doll, a badass, asylum-bound chick who fantasizes of busting out of the joint with her fellow inmates (who'll possibly be played by Evan Rachel Wood, Abbie Cornish, Emma Stone and Vanessa Hudgens).
When Snyder was doing the press rounds prior to the release of WATCHMEN, he was talking up SUCKER PUNCH as a deliriously violent R-rated prison flick set in the 1960s. This was before WATCHMEN did whatever you want to say it did at the box office. I suppose he might catch some flack from Warner Bros. regarding SUCKER PUNCH's rating, but as long as he keeps the budget under control (and remember, he brought 300 in at a very reasonable $65 million), I've a feeling they'll let him go nuts with the bloodletting and bone-snapping.
As for anything else that might snag him an R... I've a feeling you'll have to make do with the classics of the genre: e.g. Jonathan Demme's CAGED HEAT or Jack Hill's bawdy duo of THE BIG DOLL HOUSE and THE BIG BIRD CAGE.
-
+ Expand All
-
From what I've heard.
-
I really like Snyder and want him to do more big films.
-
Don't make a 150 million dolalr R rated movie if you want to recoupe your money at the box office. Watchmen does indeed have a long life on Bluray/DVD so WB will make a profit on Watchmen. Its probably best that Watchmen was a reasonable success and not a gigantic one. No sequel and we don't have to watch pop culture do to Rorschach what it did to Ledgers Joker.
-
I <3 Emily Browning. And Emily in prison? Kicking ass? Ooooooooh yeah!
-
Apparently blue penis does not = box office gold
-
Watchmen is a rated R film that has brought in over 150 million to date and it's not even a month old.
It's a success.
Any rated R film that grosses 100 million is a success. -
Best lips EVER.
-
Given the online ratings + box office gross, I'd say Watchmen technically qualifies as a success, but not as much of one as people were hoping for... ...which, translated into Internet Exaggeration, means that a movie could make over $160 million, and have high ratings at both IMDB and Rotten Tomatoes (RT community's ratings), and still be "the biggest failure of all time!!!!!").
-
Gotta admit I'm surprised there hasn't been at least one word on this. Is it not geekspeak to discuss why stuff we like doesn't do to good? Or are the loyalties surrounding this property so convoluted and complex that it's property non-grata?
-
there. i said it.
-
It never had the potential to be a super mega hit. I think we got the best Watchmen we possibly could, but at the end of the day, i think Moore was right. It just doesnt make for a great movie.
-
It made a profit, but not by much; therefore people will see it as a tank.
-
The violence and bloodletting in the movie version was far more gruesome (and over-the-top) than what was depicted in the graphic novel. If all of that had been cut or toned down, Watchmen would have easily been PG-13. Ironic that if Snyder had remained faithful to the graphic novel in this aspect, the rating would have been lower, and, thus, the box office receipts would have been higher.I still enjoyed the movie, though, for what it is. But this was a "pointlessly" R-rated movie.
-
But its the only one in YEARS I've actually seen more than once in the theater and my love for it has yet to wane. I suspect it will be an ultimate cult and film studies movie, which is fine by me.
-
I could be wrong (you'd think I'd know this by now), but this site doesn't tend to talk about films much after they've been out a while.If you want to see people discussing this A LOT, I'd recommend heading on over to IMDB.
-
If you really want to discuss Watchmen, you can always step into AICN's very own The Zone and discuss it! http://zone.aintitcool.com
-
Holy crap, I didn't know anything about The Zone.And to think I call myself a fan of this site.Thanks.
-
...if you know what I mean!!1!LOL ZOMG WTF
-
Or this is worthless.
-
As someone who could go either way on Zack Snyder, I'm kind of depressed that this is his idea of a "dream movie" (cue dream puns in 3... 2... 1...). Isn't this the type of story (i.e., porn) that actresses try to avoid? But I guess since copious amounts of blood is involved it's empowering, or whatever.
-
her face is still crooked but she's starting to grow on me.
-
so if i say something dirty about her its okay coz we got the same age. oh wait im 20. i guess anyone now can say something dirty about her...however if i say it its less creepy coz i aint an old pervert who thinks about cheerleaders.
-
Can Snyder do anything apart from sex and violence. He has all the imagination of a 15 year old boy. He fucked up Watchmen with it too.Twat.
-
... breaking bones, blood, over-done sex scenes should have been toned WAY down so the attack on NYC could have featured bodies everywhere and been shocking. But, water under the bridge. Bottom line: Moore was right.
-
Like a Tarantino/Rodriguez wankfest. Why can't these directors grow up? Look at PTA - he's a proper filmmaker, not some geek fetishest. Couldn't Snyder make a proper film after the largely excellent Watchmen? Instead he regresses to fanboy wankery. I'd have thought the box-office for Grindhouse would have put WB off this idea.
-
Watchmen is NOT a success. Take a look at the production budget numbers we're given, which is officially between 120 and 150 million. Add to that the cost of marketing and prints and you get a film that, having made 170 million worldwide is far from making a profit. The typical equation is to take the budget, multiply it by 2 and that's the number you need to reach to start making some dough. Watchmen is far from that and certainly won't reach it in theatres. It could make a profit with the help of strong DVD sales, but I still doubt that it will be a profitable film any time soon. I'm not making a comment on the film's quality or anything (I enjoyed it despite some pretty major flaws), I'm just saying that, box office-wise, it's a failure. Oh and the fact that this is Snyder's first "original" movie does seem to reinforce the idea that everyone has about him; namely that he can do action, but anything beyond that is out of his depth.
-
I thought it was Alice In Wonderland with machine guns.
-
and make a baby.
-
There. I said it. Fuck off.
-
But admit it. You'd be hard-pressed seeing something with as much ambition and proper audacity this year.
-
A major budget, almost three hour running time, and the fact that it is a R rated comic book movie should have equaled major flop. Add on to that the incredible close mindedness and condeming attitude that most of us had on a movie that we hadn't seen yet. Not only has the movie made its money back based on U.S. box office alone, but when you consider DVD sales on the motion comic which cost nothing to make, the Black Freighter DVD, and the 5,000 different versions of the actual movie Dvd release that are inevitable this movie will be a cash cow for years to come. I don't know for certain how well the movie is doing overseas, but whatever is does make in the foreign markets is all profit. There are action figures, posters, tie-in books, and the original graphic novel was Number One on New York Times best seller list after the movie's release. All in all the Watchmen made enough money for the studios hopefully to take a few more risks in the years to come instead of rehashing the same plot lines and remaking the same movies over and over again. If I was the head of the studio, knowing everything that watchmen had working against it, I think I would be pleased, not overjoyed, but very pleased with the numbers
-
The very idea of this movie makes me hard. PLEASE make this and really push the sex as far as you can.
-
As I understand it, a movie would need to make roughly 2.5 times its budget before the studio sees any profit (since we're taking theaterowners' take and advertising into account.) It took "Watchmen" about three weeks to even crack $100 million--- an extremely slow amount of time for a movie that opened north of $50 million. So it's highly doubtful that "Watchmen" will make its money back on its theatrical run alone.
-
man after all that speech about the age thing. i was just testing the waters jeezzzz
-
i aint gonna lie on the internet. its sort of bigger though like close to 8.52847 inches, i measured.
-
I'm usually forgiving about movies, especially genre movies, but "Watchmen" was one of the more painful experiences I've had in a movie theater. The movie was bad on the level of "Speed Racer," "Fantastic Four" and "League of Extraordinary Gentlemen..." Absolutely no conviction or genuine feeling in the film whatsoever. It's as if Zack Snyder was on autopilot when he directed this, probably hoping that strength of the graphic novel's storyline will take care of itself in the end. Well, it does not; a completely literal translation of the graphic novel does not make a compelling movie. The movie had definite pacing problems; I felt that everything was crammed and rushed, and there was no time to care about the characters. And what happened to suspense, subtlety and imagination? The love scene in the Owlship and the prison escape scenes were so excessive it left me shaking my head. If you hadn't seen this movie yet, I would seriously advise you to wait for it on cable. "V for Vendetta" remains the best of the Alan Moore adaptations, and "Watchmen" doesn't even come close in terms of action, humor and overall sophistication.
-
Snider has no problem showcasing dong in his movies, so we better see some twat in this one.
-
And here's the final rub: Dr. Manhattan was shown personally turning people into microwaved, splattery mush. So, logically, since Ozzy appropriated Manhattan's power to obliterate major cities throughout the world, shouldn't the citizens have all been obliterated to bloody messes? If Snyder had gone full-out and shown us that massive level of gore, it would have made sense and maybe justified purposely making the movie an R rating (although this was have greatly departed from the subdued bloodletting in the graphic novel). But as the final movie stands now, there was absolutely no point in showing so much gore. Anyway, just some random thought that's been on my mind for a long while now.
-
Zack Snyder is losing buzz so fast.
Watchmen could well be his tipping point. -
You were all going nuts when you heard about Death Proof and Planet Terror. What happened there? What happened to Grindhouse being a fan's delight.
Remember what Milton Berle said. Don't tell jokes that only the band gets. -
The violence was over the top and served no real purpose. The 'attempted rape' scene for example, was way overboard. They could have reigned it in a bit and had a better movie, and a LOT more box-office.
-
...is bullshit. Not that it's never correct, but there are as many different type of arrangements between studios and theater chains and marketing firms as there are films.
-
she is off of big love and on that show proved that she plays crazy with the best of them...plus she has that lolita thing really working for her
-
the internet sites are all wrong...unless they are including the preproduction costs of the past 20 years the movie cost somewhere between 100-120 mil for the wb to make...and then pr was around 10-20 it will make back its money...just may not be the money maker they were hoping for
-
Chained Heat is the greatest fucking women in prison movie ever made! John Vernon plays the coolest warden ever, with a hot tub and full bar in his office.
-
It seems that the benchmark that many were setting for Watchmen was around 200 mil domestically, because that's what 300 made. So, in that sense, it may be considered a failure. It probably will find it's audience at home, like Batman Begins.
-
and it is considered a success incredibles had a robotic squid...it too is a success zack shoulda left the squid in
-
because it certainly was for Watchmen, it was just that he isn't smart enough to understand the source material. That film was a swing and amiss (at the box office as well as a great translation of the source material).
-
R Rating should require Nipples!
-
...And was on the cusp of being huge. Feel bad for her. Browning on the other hand, is, um, Shes legal now right? I mean, I can say I want to skull fuck her without sounding like I should be on To Catch A Predator, right? By the way, after the awesomeness of Watchmen, this sounds fantastic. Be interesting to see if he work just as well with self generated material.
-
The actual synopsis is basically Alice In Wonderland in a mental asylumn. I have no fucking idea where you got Porn from? Not that I'd complain about an Emily Browning porno.
-
i remember the fanboys wanting an R-rated. wow cant you guys just mean what u say
-
I know beaks article was misleading, but wtf? This sounds like Burton with machine guns.
-
...I just read in an old interview that he was heavily inspired by Moulin Rouge.
-
...Being such a huge, enormous flop. I mean, its PG-13, which means it should earn double that of an R rated film, and it only made a piddly 3 million bucks more than Watchmen. I guess Dreamworks animation will never get the chance to make a movie ever again. And 3D is dead.
-
they deleted my dirty comment about her, i said stuff. they better delete urs or else its discriminison
-
i should have the right to say the nasty stuff coz im am also 20. thats the beauty of being young. if i dont i will miss my chance and i will never be able to fantasize about young women ever! who are legal!
-
Mar 30, 2009 5:29:28 PM CDT
Well money aside, I thought Watchmen was an artistic success
by dr sauch
I really think that's the best interpretation short of a 6 hour, $500 million dollar film. Which I would totally have also supported.
-
Don't forget that THE THING was also a flop and look how good that film is. Why has it always gotta be about money? WATCHMEN rocked!!!
-
...in the Song of Ice and Fire pilot for HBO. Other than that, sure, the more pseudo-jailbait women's prison movies, the better. This idea seems more suited to Snyder's "depth," ie: cartoonish sex and violence.
-
She's a fellow Australian. Me and her theoretically could have been married with children four years ago. It would be a shame to pollute her genes like that though.
-
Emily Browning and Vanessa Hudgens in a prison chick film? That's genius, and I'll be there.
-
i like amanda because she looks dirty and has a curvy little trailer park body. emily browning? hottest lips since jolie and a cute bod. rock & roll. as for snyder? 300 was all right. watchmen was very, very good. his future efforts? on notice. we shall seeee.
-
i think my genes wont help her have healthy children. im an ethical person so i know its not right to spread bad genes. but i know someone like her will settle down with some crackhead and it will all be for nothing so it might as well be me. again im being honest.
-
I don't know if anyone here is saying that Watchmen's box office performance is any indication of its quality. It didn't perform well. The Thing also didn't perform well. I'm inclined to believe that The Thing is a much, much better film than Watchmen. But their box office performances don't reflect quality. If anything, box office reflects the zeitgeist, and the zeitgeist is definitely not a great way to define what is and isn't good.
-
Yep, shes legal.
-
I remember how various people were shitting about Proyas' DARK CITY. Now DC is considered a SF classic and it will be cherished in the future as much as mentioned Scott's and Carpenter's gems. WB will make their money on WATCHMEN, it will become a part of studio's legacy and will be watched (!) and analyzed long after people will forget about TRANSFORMERS and IRON MAN. These were not a bad movies, but its not the same league as Snyder's extravaganza.
-
Just curious- does this film have a greenlight or well there be some re-budgeting after his expensive underperformer Watchmen.
-
i guess that makes me and emily browning soulmates or at least i can make dirty jokes about her! why delete my comment!?
-
I'd rather just see a remake of that wonderful piece of Blaxploitation cinema.
-
Some people need to pull their heads out of their asses if they think Watchmen would be better as anything less than an R rating. The cursing alone puts it into an R and anything less would require a wholesale raping of the source material. As if there wasn't already enough bitching about the changes made, Jesus, just shut the fuck up already...
-
Mar 30, 2009 6:54:59 PM CDT
People comparing Watchmen to Blade Runner & The Thing
by kwisatzhaderach
are clearly out of their minds.
-
Yet you go without his well wishes and make a movie he has said time and time again he doesn't want turned into a film. He deliberately made the comic UNfilmable. That is disrespect to the greatest comic writer of all time.
-
Just should not have been made.
-
Mar 30, 2009 7:03:59 PM CDT
Malin Akerman naked = success. Therefore, Watchmen was a hit.
by sighborg
Who cares about critics or boxoffice. Naked Malin Akerman. Hopefully more naked Malin Akerman on the dvd. That's success.
And Amanda Seyfried is hot. -
Or her head Ben Buttoned onto a body double? Hmmm? (And yeah, I used Ben Button as a verb... and coined a phrase.)
-
Watchmen underperformed. Anyone that says it is a success is wrong and simply doesn't understand the numbers. It's OK they are complicated. If you really want I can explain them all, but make no mistake it underperformed. The real downer has been the international take.
I love the movie and I am thrilled it got made. We owe Snyder. The fact that it got made is due to Snyder and the capital he earned making 300. He spent it all on Watchmen. -
Printing and advertising 10 - 20 million. Ha Ha your silly! Where did you get that number? Make things up much?! 20 million for a tentpole, maybe in 1979
-
Batman Begins grossed 200 million theatrically. It's an example of a film having "legs" and making money beyond opening weekend.
-
, Evan Rachel Wood, Abbie Cornish, Emma Stone and Vanessa Hudgens, let's just say there'd be more jizz stains on the walls than in George Takei's colon after a week long opium bender in a San Fransisco bath house.
-
as a result, adverstising costs have dropped what would have cost 50 mil a year ago to promote, now costs half that amount
-
not initially in fact, when he found out that hamm was writing a treatment, he was stoked this was long before he was screwed by both dc and film companies he never read the hamm script, but he had long chats with gilliam...and it was gilliam who first stated that the book could not be done in one film, and was more suited for a mini series format
-
Says who? You? Can you link me to a source of your TV and billboard advertising rates. Your a silly person, why do you have to make stuff up? Just admit you don't know what your talking about.
-
ad rates are way down...why do you think im making this stuff up? havent you noticed that rating on tv are way down? with ratings drops rates go down the same is true for both radio and print media...which is why newspapers are close to folding, and local stations are laying off local talent left and right i aint making shit up
-
That would have been the best way to go. As it stands, though, I loved Snyders take on it. It wasn't perfect, but it was pretty friggin' good.
-
Everybody knows zack Snyder is way-more interested in abs and blue genitals.
-
and we lost the opportunity to see her naked. fuck you HBO.
-
she is fucking ugly. she looks like a very pretty MAN. FUCK HBO FUCK THEM UP THEIR STUPID FUCKING ASSESS!!!!!
-
Mar 30, 2009 8:39:39 PM CDT
"Not only has the movie made its money back based on U.S. box of
by bjornegar
Patently FALSE. You better give your accounting degree back to community college and take up needle-point. Because you want something to be true has no leverage on reality. WATCHMEN needed to bring in $300 million to be considered a "modest success." It won't make that unless somebody just hands it $150 million dollars. Some blue-d!@k fetishist or something.
-
Yes you are making it up. "10 to 20 million" advertising costs what a spurious claim. Again, where did you get that number? Answer- you made it up. Try 50 million. Then you make vague statements about the economy. Admit you don't know what your talking about and try to avoid making up figures in the future.
-
I know it's not actually porn, but I was making a joke about the genre (babes behind bars). Sure a movie about a bunch of women stuck in prison or an asylum could be fine in its own right, but having already seen Snyder's proclivity towards violence and sex scenes, and judging by the names of the actresses he wants to star, I don't think this is one of those times. Then again I hadn't heard that thing about Alice in Wonderland with a machine gun before, which sounds kind of cool.
-
Dawn of the Dead, 300, and Watchmen are among my 3 favorite movies of the last 5 years.
-
what more can you fan boys want??? holy crap. i was blown away by it...maybe in time it will be better appreciated..certainly way better than iron man and dark knight..maybe the problem was that it was too smart for todays audience
-
NOW!!!!!!!!!!!
-
i'm so horny i can't even spell.
-
Never had read the GN. I liked the ending very well ad as an outsider I can say it worked much better than the squid. It fit very well with the story we were presented anyway. It's a much more intelligent ending for someone struggling with whether they care about the human race or not. Anyway I think this was the toughest super hero story to bring to the screen ever. The only thing more difficult would be a live recorded origin story of Auqaman shot at Seaworld. Even if it was not a traditional box office success, it was dreaming the impossible dream and I think Snyder deserves a pat on the back. Considering how badly it could have gone, really truly, I mean look at Spiderman 3... director producer, characters, fanbase... it was all there, and yet it sucked royal webbed balls.
-
...and I live far enough away from our hometown that I feel I can safely admit here on the internet to you weirdos that I have been inside of Amanda's vagina. I dated her big sister when we were all kids and one night after this event thing called Mayfair I totally fingered that. It cracks me up every time I see her on HBO.
-
Her sister is a suicide girl type and is about 3,990,482 times sexier.
-
I like her as an actress, but she's ugly in the face.
Ms. Browning is beautiful. Good choice. -
Don't make me get racist...
-
this is what i was saying I agree
-
100 million in box office means about half goes to the theaters which leaves lets say 50 million for the studios. Then you need to subtract P&A which is the actual physical prints for the film as well as marketing which for the Watchmen was lets say on the low figure 50 million. Well, 50 million minus 50 million equals ZERO. Which means the studios and production companies which ponied up the budget for this FAILED DISASTER have yet to recoup one penny of their production budget. This is reality.
-
Nothing personal, but the movie scene is almost frame by frame, exactly the same as the comic book.
The violence was (unnecessarily) increased in other scenes, like the alley fight, but the attempted rape was dead-on. -
Emily Browning is the shit. Hmmn, I'm sure there's a poo joke there somewhere.
-
I've read the graphic novel many times over the last few years and feel Snyder did a fantastic job.Interesting to read some of you saying Watchmen didn't need to be made as a R rated film. Even WITHOUT the graphic violence and sex scene on the Owl Ship, the film would have been slapped with a R due to Dr. Manhattan's penis. Most of you guys would have screamed "sell-out!" if Snyder covered Dr. Manhattan's genitals for the entire duration. Can you imagine the level of outrage on this Talkback if it were announced last year Watchmen was being filmed as a PG-13?Personally, Watchmen was a far stronger film after a second viewing. I was far more comfortable/satisfied with the changes made to the climax, after a second viewing.Terrific film. It's a shame it isn't a financial success.
-
I live in Japan and it was just released here on the weekend.
I am a fan of the comic and I loved it. My wife who had never read the comic,really enjoyed it too. She had read articles about it before and didn't have expectations of it being a typical comic book movie. Think that made a big difference.
Also agree on the ending, much better than the comic.
Acting wise agree with everyone on Jackie Haley, he was amazing. Patrick Wilson and Jeffrey Dean Morgan also very good. Billy Crudup did well,Malin Ackerman wasn't great but was good in the what the role offered. Mathew Goode was definetely the worst casting
I can understand why this won't do amazing box office wise, as its a challenging, mature, non-hollywood movie.
On the naked Manhattan issue, its funny comments I had heard about it came mostly from friends who are also Australian, American or British, Western Europeans friends didn't mention it much at all. It seemed to be more about how prudish we are than anything else. The overreaction by the American public to Janet Jackson's wardrobe malfunction was definete proof of that.
-
Am I the only person on here who thought Crudup was excellent?I was really moved by his performance. Good stuff.
-
But it is what it is. It has all the real world relevance of Leprechaun in Space.
-
I hope we(Australian, British and Americans) can get over our rediculous prudish/immature view on the human body, so nudity (not sex), won't result in a high i.e. R classification
-
Snyder is at the helm. I have no qualms if the man wants to make a female prison riot film (or at least that's what it sounds like). No harm there. I genuinely enjoyed Watchmen, despite it not meeting expectations so I'm game.
-
I hate that pompous statement almost as much as the claim Watchmen was an "unfilmable" novel.As someone who has read Moore's novel at least 8 times...pretending Watchmen is "unfilmable" is absurd.
-
I just read with great sadness that Andy Hallett Has passed away. He played the demon Lorne on Angel. He was only 33 and died of Heart failure. His portrayal of Lorne was amazing. What a tragedy. He deserves his own thread, guys...
-
Yeah, I read about this a couple of hours ago. Very sad. Where's the thread, AICN?
-
33 years old and heart failure, so unlucky, Andy thanks for the laughs and entertainment as Lorne on Angel
-
R-Rating FTW!
-
Sorry, but where do you get YOUR numbers? You quote figures and demand sources when Bacci disagrees with you, and yet you don't see the hypocracy in that? I have to call bullshit on you here. Not saying I know anything about production costs, but I trust your figures as much as I do the next random blohart/nobody on the Internet claiming to know more than everybody else and coming off like an asshole in the proccess. In other words, not at all.
-
Loved, loved, loved, loved, loved, loved, loved it!!! THANK YOU ZACK!!!
-
Just for the record...
Cumulative gross for THE WATCHMEN through four weeks of release: $103,273,462
Reported budget: $150 million
Source: http://tinyurl.com/47hvb -
All of you wannabe accounts don't have nearly enough information to say that Watchmen was a profit or a loss. Underperformed? Surely it did. But revenue from a movie comes from a multitude of different sources... domestic and foreign box office, merchandising, dvd & blu-ray, video games, and so forth.
Not to mention that the movie sparked an extra million copies of the graphic novel (also a Warner property) to be sold. The revenue streams have just started coming in, and the books won't be closed for years. -
I'm skeptical. Not saying the lass is incapable of it, not saying she wouldn't do it, and as a dirty old man I will fully admit I would LOVE to see her get dirty with some scandalous girl-girl action, but I don't see her publicist and/or agent letting her take that big a step. HSM3 to Caged Heat in so few steps? I just don't know....
-
Alan Moore is an asshole. He's a standard, self-loathing hipster/hippie/communist/anarchist prick railing with pseudo-indignation and eternal self-righteousness. His hateful view on the world has finally completely pervaded his writing to the point where nothing he produces now is enjoyable in any way. Furthermore, Watchmen is absolutely filmable, though--guiltily--I wished they'd chosen to follow the narrative more solidly through Rorshach's perspective. Moore hates heroes and he hates humanity. In truth, Oz is his "good" guy and so is Manhattan (who, not so coincidentally, disengages completely from mankind; Alan Moore's utopian vision is utter destruction and desolation, a place where "nothing moves"). Sad. His misanthropic philosophy continually corrodes his storytelling. The same thing happened with V for Vendetta: an awful, adolescent anarchic fantasy.
Fuck Alan Moore. -
I'm not knocking on the Snyder movie, and enjoyed it as its own thing. But I could still see an HBO mini-series version being commissioned several years from now. After all, it would be blasphemous to try to make a sequel. So how else will Time Warner try to make more money off of the Watchmen property? As a 6 or 12-episode mini-series (which would have the Squid in it finally) would be the most logical choice. Remember there was the Dune movie, and then the mini-series version.
-
Can't see ut happening, unless it was animated.
Would prefer to see a mini-series based on Preacher, Fables, 100 Bullets, Y the Last Man, Transmetropolitan -
is he joking guys or what? coz when i say stuff like that i mean it as a joke. but i dont think its nice to defame someone like that. i mean keep it to urself
-
thats sad and unexpected
-
...Alice in wonderland with machine guns. A giant fantasy movie set in a womens asylumn and the imagination of a chick about to get violated. Yet we are talking about wether Watchmen was a minor hit, or a minor failure. And what a communist anarcist Alan Moore is. Doesn't make much sense
-
big, dumb, violent and obvious seems to be all he's capable of. That's not a bad thing, unless you're adapting Watchmen. So I'm happy he's returning to his stupid roots.
-
There's so, so much spin floating around about whether or not Watchmen was "successful" on this board alone that I figured I'd attempt to clear some things up. I realize, by definition, I'm just contributing it, but I'll try to be as objective as possible:
-By Warner Bros. own definition, the movie is a disappointment. They were hoping for a $70+ million opening weekend, and when they realized it couldn't happen they were hoping for a $60+. The movie ended up doing $55.
-Every single weekend, Watchmen has fallen by over 60% from the previous weekend. That is bad no matter how you look at it and indicative that audience buzz is more negative than normal. Tentpole films are expected to have large declines these days thanks to so much hype over the opening weekend, but even then you're usually looking at 50-55%.
-The budget: Most people in Hollywood will tell you that the production budget is always a few notches above what's been reported. The number tends to be cited as being in the $130-150 range, but let's be generous and say it was only $140. For a tentpole film, you need to add on $40-50 million (and again, I'm on the low end). I highly doubt Warners has spent less than $200, all things considered. Then you need to consider Fox's cut and individual theaters' cuts of the final gross.
-Watchmen will end up with about $110 million in the U.S. By all accounts, that's a disappointment because everybody (and you can make an argument about whether or not they were being overly optimistic, but at the time, everybody) expected it to do at least $140 million. But then there's foreign box office - $67 million with more to come. And then there's DVD revenue, which is becoming a lifesaver for some movies' profitability. So yes, there's certainly more money to be made.
-Was Watchmen a box office failure? It did worse than everyone thought it would. (Except you. You were smart and never expected it to make anything other than exactly what it made.) Might it eventually break even? Warner Bros. is certainly crossing their fingers. But it's not a success by any means. -
The violence in the film was a natural extension of what existed in the original graphic novel. Doc Manhattan’s attack in the comics is actually shown to be quite gruesome, replete with blood splatter all over the place. Snyder’s interpretation of the violence is a tad bombastic but hardly off the grid, as some of you are implying. Regardless, the profanity, sexuality and probably even that lesbian kiss at the beginning of the film’s credits would have made this an R rated endeavor regardless so the notion that Zack made Watchmen too violent to jack up the rating is absurd. The real stupidity of these claims is that those of you crying foul about the film being too R rated would have just as easily derided the film had it been PG-13, calling Zack a fucking sellout. Again, Snyder could never have pleased everybody so I give the man credit for making a damn fine film that stays very true to the spirit of the original book. And incidentally, Fuck Allen Moore. Gibbons is the co-creator of that entire universe and he’s been there every step of the way. Moore is a whiny little bitch who got burned by the Hollywood machine years ago and decided to write off the whole process, despite having an opportunity to work with a director who respected his talent and vision. Moore gave up any involvement in this film so he and his pathetic pack of rabid fanboys need to shut the fuck up and move on. Some of you decided to hate this film before you saw a single frame of footage so really, why pretend otherwise?
-
Will there be a shower scene with Evan Rachel Wood? I'm there!
-
It's a nearly three hour, R rated movie based on a beloved miniseries of comics from the 80's that features superhero's who with the exception of one aren't super who are in an alternate US timeline and despite the marketing, not a whole lot of action in the movie.
It's domestic take was just about all that should have been expected given what I've just laid out.
I thought the movie itself was OK. Not bad, not great, just OK. Something that I'm glad I saw, that I enjoyed while watching it, but something I'll probably not go out of my way to see again more than once.
People also have to remember that the story was groundbreaking when it came out, but that was 20 years ago. A lot has changed. The threat of nuclear war with the USSR has passed. I'm 27 and I can barely remember it. People who weren't there at the beginning to experience that aspect of it will look back and say to themselves, what was so ground breaking again?
A lot of things that made it groundbreaking at the time have been ripped off a million times over and translated into other media that those of us who are unfamiliar with the material have seen and experienced. It isn't nearly as groundbreaking a story told now as it was when it was told then regardless of the medium involved.
That's not a knock on the movie or the comic. Things that scared and motivated the masses then aren't scary and don't motivate us any more and something unfathomable then like an attack on a major US city that kills thousands isn't just fathomable now, it's history now. -
Mar 31, 2009 12:32:29 PM CDT
Blade Runner and The Thing were hated during their theatrical re
by polyh3dron
You say people comparing Watchmen to Blade Runner and The Thing are nuts, and back when those two came out someone would have said that to anyone comparing them to prior classic films as well.
-
browning is hot. Snyder was awesome directing Watchmen. 300 wasn't that great though. But I'd love to see what he'll do on his own. I'm excited.
-
Mar 31, 2009 1:23:37 PM CDT
I know "Bladerunner" and "The Thing (1982)." Watchmen is NOT eit
by daytripper69
Not even by a longshot. "Bladerunner" and "The Thing" are visionary science fiction classics, full of atmosphere and suspense. And they've got great characters that I truly care about. And great acting! I cannot, unfortunately, say the same for ANY of these aspects for Snyder's "Watchmen." All three movies may have underperformed box office-wise, but to compare "Watchmen" with the other two films on any kind of artistic level is simply laughable. I cannot imagine anyone looking at this film in 20 years and calling it a classic. May as well call "Daredevil" a classic while you're at it!
-
With that said, I don't really like Snyder's movies. Remake of Dawn was pretty good, 300 was simply bad in all aspects(boring, repetitive non sense that should have stayed a 5 minute demo reel), and WatchMen was good but nothing really special. I mean everything great about it came from the comic. This project sounds fucking great though and once again he intrigues me every time but hasn't really delivered a sucker punch yet;) -
I seem to recall about six months before the movie got released everyone was up in arms and signing petitions because there was a rumor that the studio was forcing PG-13 on Snyder. Now, of course, the same people are whining that Snyder fucked up by making it R Rated. It just goes to show how people will bitch about anything. Also, to anyone who claims that Snyder didn't "Understand" the source material I would pose a challenge ro back that statment up with your iopinuions on just exactly what aspects of the comic book e didn't understand. The reason that Watchmen was so revered upon its release was tat it was much deeper than just about any comic book that had ever been put out prior to it. Watchmen is not high literature, people, it's a smart, deep comic book, nothing more. Don't get me wrong,I love the comic, but it isn't the second coming of the written word and it is not by any stretch of the imagination hard to understand for ayone with a half-ass high school education. Watchmen is very well written and it was a benchmark for comics, to hold it up to a standard higher than that it to show that YOU don't really understand it and therefore have gone on the offensive and attacked anyone who had the balls to try their hand at it. It was never unfilmable, it just required a little vision. Maybe Syder's vision wasn't perfect but he did a damn good job and made a movie probably as good as one could have been made. Watchmen unfilmable? No. The Dark Tower is unfilmable, the Watchmen was a comic book. A comic book is like a storyboard, by definition, filmable.
-
You gotta admit, somewhere in England, Alan Moore is laughing his ass off.
-
I enjoy both films a hell of a lot...but...can we quit pretending they're up there with The Godfather Part 2?
-
You call out people for comparing Watchmen to Bladerunner and then compare Watchmen to Daredevil? Are you for fucking real with that nonsense? I actually think Bladerunner and Watchmen can be fairly compared because both films in their respective times offered audiences something completely divergent from the typical film and both works are incredibly nuances and layered, working on many levels. Like it or not, Watchmen is a work of art and your own personal distain and hyperbolic attacks isn't going to change that. You are free to hate the film but to compare it to something as vapid and meritless as Daredevil is fucking ridiculous.
-
...on whether or not I liked it. I could give a fuck how much the studio did or didn't make and all of you who need monetary validation of your opinion, good or bad, are fucking sad.Yay! Other people did or did not like the same thing that I did or did not causing said thing to make or not make a lot of money. I am worthy! Seriously, grow up.
-
You are morons. Financially speaking, Watchmen is, and I quote, "an UNMITIGATED DISASTER". The movie along with publicity cost as much as $250 million dollars, which means that it neads to make around $400 million to approach breaking even which isn't going to happen. The studio is losing over 100 million dollars on this flick guys. It's really quite awful.
-
...You are a fucking idiot. There is a reason it took twnety years to get to the screen, and thats because, guess what, its fucking niche material. Its cult material that requires a tentpole budget. I'm suprised that a) Warners went ahead and let it get made in as faithful a form as it did and b) warners managed to make as much money as they did off of it. The fact that it won't make a large amount of money shouldn't be a shock to anyone, and if it is, you are in the wrong business, or place way too much stock in the cinema going public. Even though I think it will fair somewhat better, I wouldn't be sitting at WB's going "Gee, Where The Wild Things Are should easily cross 250 million at the box office." What I also don't get is, if Watchmen is a disaster, costing 130 mil, where does that leave flicks like The Posideon Adventure, or even Monsters Vs. Aliens 3D, which by Watchmen numbers did very, very shit.
-
Mar 31, 2009 4:53:36 PM CDT
dancetothebeatofthelivingdead, I'll answer your question
by spandau belly
What didn't Snyder get about Watchmen? He didn't get the world and the atmosphere, that's for sure. The book had all sorts of pre-apocalyptic feelings of a doomed world. The book accomplished this through the newspaper guy's rantings and through sad scenes like when those punks kill Hollis Mason. The movie sorta tried to accomplish this with those scenes with Nixon in the war room, but those played more like a Dr. Strangelove type spoof than the feeling of desperation and borderline global apathy in the book.What else didn't he get? That the superheroes weren't super. They had no special powers other than being in good shape and having gadgets. In the movie they do all this Matrix style wife-fu shit. It changes the very nature of the story and the characters. Instead of people who chose to become superheroes to make a difference in the world around them, these characters are now like the X-Men, they're born different, born superhuman.He also didn't get that this wasn't an action story. He showed off the superheroes' superstrength in lengthly fight scenes featuring every hyperbole possible: dudes getting their heads smashed through granite countertops and shaking it off, punching through solid brick walls etc. It would be fine to flesh these scenes out more if it weren't at the expense of scenes that could've established the atmosphere or the characters better and if they were done as part of the story instead of just action set pieces.
And what else didn't he get? Well, the Adrian Veidt character. In the book he came across like Robert Redford or John Kennedy. He was so charming and engaging that it really drove home that he wasn't a villain and that if there was a villain in this story it was human nature at large. In the movie Veidt now is a foppish glam-rock weirdo who talks with the dry remove of your typical Bond villain.I also thought Snuder's endless blasting of popular music showed that he has A.D.D. and like the fight scenes, the music was shoved in to keep noise and motion flying at the audience instead of letting us spend quiet moments getting to know the characters more. What did he get? Well, actually most of the characters. Rorschach, Manhattan, Dan Nite Owl, Laurie etc were all pitch perfect when they weren't doing some wire-fu bullshit. -
"Unmitigated Disaster", you are definetely in need of some real perspective.
Watchmen box office wise may fail to reach expectations of the Studio, but is certainly not an unmitigated disaster.
On the expectations front, if WB really expected it to make huge money, think they were in dreamland, a similar kind of dreamland that investors in Investment Banks were in when they kept expecting them to make record profits. -
...the fact that Watchmen has made over $100 million is impressive to me; how much it cost doesn't really change that (or shouldn't), so all these semantics about profit margins are a little absurd. I mean I can understand freaking out if you work for Warner Bros. and your job is on the line, but I don't really understand how it affects any of you weirdos.
-
He only fought to keep the integrity of the book intact in the film. Yeah. He SOOO didn't get it. So much so that he copied it nearly panel for panel. Yes he CLEARLY missed the point by properly adapting it to the silver screen. Yes. Somehow you get something he didn't. Congratulations. You're an idiot.
-
I actually do think Snyder did a fairly good job of adapting Watchmen, but saying he understood the material because he nearly copied it panel-for-panel would be like me saying I "get" quantum physics because I copied "A Brief History of Time" word-for-word for my thesis paper.
-
Who gives a fuck? Why are you so invested in how much this movie has made? Everyone is so delusional when it comes to money = success. Hate to be juvenile about it, but I guess that means all you gripers think TWILIGHT is a great movie. Worry about your own lives.
-
if the budget was 140 million and they spent 50 million on P&A (prints and advertising), and these figures are considered low, then the cost to roll the film out just in the US was approx 200 million. Taking in 100 million in the box office is a disaster you fucking idiots. The theater chain takes half, which means HALF, of those ticket sales which equals 50 million. That leaves 50 million for the studio to recoup on their P&A which means they haven't even started seeing recoupment on their production budget which was around a 140 million. Is this too difficult for you to grasp? Its called addition and subtraction, you stupid fucking idiots.
-
Oh, I got you the first time. But to me a "disaster" is something like The Adventures of Pluto Nash. I really couldn't care less how much money Warner Bros. spent on advertising. But you should have been able to figure that out from my first post, you fucking idiot.
-
By taking such a simplistic view you seem to have completely forgotten what so many people have already pointed out and made yourself look like a complete idiot, its not just about US Box office. Its about international box office, its about merchandising, its about book sales, DVD rentals and sales.
-
I think its a concern of a)Some people still thinking that popular equals good, good example from Jim Curry there with Twilight.
b) Some people thinking that this makes riskier (some would say alternative) projects less like to be greenlighted. - I think this is a valid concern. -
"greenlit", not "greenlighted"
-
“Watchmen” is comparable to the likes of “Daredevil” and “X3” because the material felt like they were handled by directors who did not have a feel for the source material. These directors brought a dumbed-down music video mentality to the films when the original material tended to be deeper and more literate than your average comic. (Actually I have more respect for “Daredevil” and “X3” because at least an attempt was made to make a real film out of the source material, instead of settling for a slavish transcription.) And don’t give me that stuff about Watchmen film “offering audiences something completely divergent from the typical film” because there’s nothing new going on here. Had “Watchmen” been released 15 years ago, there might be a case made for it, but the first “X-Men” movie to “V for Vendetta” to “The Dark Knight” had made dark, nuanced superhero movies the norm.
-
=Mega-Blockbuster.
-
Snyder spent too much time and integrity making a moving version of the comic book--not a good film--and as such it is pretty hard to take seriously in it's current form (I'll bet someone else could improve the edit). He should have concentrated on Doctor Manhattan and Rorschach since their stories are such contrasting elements. It was an interesting failure, for me. But mostly it was just silly.
-
Uh, it's not exactly the same thing, since Superman is the most recognized superhero in the world, but if those are your terms, fine.
-
I figured someone would bring that up... and maybe there is legitimate cause to worry about something like "Sandman" ever being adapted. The thing is, I can't imagine a "better" version of Watchmen making much more money. Don't get me wrong, I do think a better version of Watchmen is possible, but the only way the story could be significantly changed would be to dumb it down... in which case maybe it would make more money, maybe not, but we certainly wouldn't be any better off.
-
Not being able to enjoy Watchmen as much as myself and others.
Understand on your dark point, yes given Dark Knight (really don't think X-Men is that dark, and V for Vendetta has similar aspects, but is a different kind of story), it doesn't show as much contrast as it would 10 years ago or so.
Watchmen is a great comic book, perhaps one of the best.
It certainly isn't unfilmable, as others have pointed out, particularly as it is in many senses are storyboard, but I think for some people its impossible to make a movie about it that would have pleased you. You have romanticised it so much that it has become bigger in your head than just a really well done story, almost like a religious sense of infallibility.
-
Its about all those mysterious numbers we will never be able to add up... Listen, the reality is the film underperformed. Studios are not hoping to start recoupment on the production budget from selling it to some Belgium cable channel eight years down the line. If the domestic box office barely covers the P&A on a 100 mill + film it means it FAILED. Spin it anyway you want, the movie was a financial disaster. That's reality. You can cry all you want but one day you have to face facts that Santa doesn't give two fucks about your Dr. Manhattan action doll. Now go bellyache to someone else.
-
If we are focusing purely on box office and not the product, think dumbing down could help.
Was also thinking whether a
known actor would have helped. As an example Brad Pitt as Veidt, salary probably around $15m, could that get an extra $30m in the door , hmmm , maybe, maybe not. Those whould be attracted to simply see a good looking guy could be put of by the word of mouth saying its a dark, mature, movie, certainly not a light "popcorn" one.
Contrast this to Iron Man which in my mind got its large box office thanks to RDJ and being a "fun" movie. -
Really, I tried to like to like "Watchmen" when I was watching. But the movie had dropped the ball too many times, and after the 30 minute mark (and witnessing the horrible old age makeup on Carla Gugino), I just gave up on the film and the analytical mind kicked in. Doing a MST3000-style mocking of the movie might have been the only way for me to keep my sanity. And from your post, you're making me out to be some kind of comic book fundamentalist. Far from it! I love Batman but "The Dark Knight" is NOT a faithful adaptation of the comics. Nevertheless, TDK was a successful piece of filmmaking on its own terms. The film had psychological verisimilitude, whereas "Watchmen" left me unconvinced. Same thing with "Lord of the Rings;" again, not an exact translation of the source material but the spirit of the work had been successfully captured. Just ponder a "Watchmen" directed by Chris Nolan or Peter Jackson... now that would be something.
-
$170,806,537(domestic+foreign) - $85,000,000(theaters) - $50,000,000(US P&A) - $10,000,000(Foreign P&A / that's a low estimate) - $140,000,000 (production budget) = National Debt of Zimbabwe = MASSIVE FAIL...
-
The guys at Warner would agree with you on the underperforming at the box office.
Its your financial disaster comment, is where you come across simple and uniformed. In the real world when any business spends money on an investment its not so simple, there are multiple facets and issues to that investment.
Would recommend chatting to some in business, and understand about decision making, might help you with the difficult situations you will face in life. -
In your heart of hearts do you think, a Watchmen movie could have been made that would have pleased you, been made within the budget Synder had for such an alternative property. i.e. not about one of the most famous comic book characters or about on of the most famous and popular books ?
If so what would be different, given that it was a 12 issues series would you prefer to have it split over two or three movies (though don't think a Studio would have ever gone for that)? -
Dan doing wire-fu is an excusable extrapolation, though. If he has a ship that can hover and also act as a submarine, he can have a suit that is a powered exoskeleton that would allow him to jump. As for Laurie, if she were as fit as a ballet dancer or a Cirque Du Soleil performer.Now, about breaking bricks with the fist -- there are plenty of martial artists who can do that.
-
HALF OF THE PREDISPOSED FANS OF THE MATERIAL HATED THE MOVIE.
Now, all the wannabe accountants can go hug their Beanie-babies.
Zack Snyder is a germ, and reality is the disinfectant. -
Apr 01, 2009 3:05:17 AM CDT
Miyamoto: Could a "Watchmen" adaptation be made that would pleas
by daytripper69
Absolutely!.... Any clever director/screenwriter could have done a much better job than what we ultimately got, and within budget. A major problem I had with the film was its lack of emphasis on the threat of nuclear annihilation. The main tension in the novel was that the world was on the brink of nuclear war, but I hardly felt that in the film. As someone else in this talkback pointed out, we had Nixon in the movie to convey that we were about to war with the Soviets, but those scenes came off as a parody of Dr. Strangelove (bad Nixon makeup and all), with hardly any tension developing as a result. We didn’t get that feeling of dread the way the graphic novel’s Newsstand Guy did (who was supposed to represent the Everyman). When Snyder decided to cut out Newsstand Guy, he pretty much cut out the soul of the film. Snyder could have at least had the other characters talk about nuclear tensions with Russia, but these discussions were absent, to the detriment of the film. Overall, there was a lack of humanity in the movie. As I said before, the quiet scenes (like the ones between Nite Owls I and II, and Dan and Laurie) did not ring true because the dialogue was lifted directly from the novel, without alterations—resulting in unnatural performances. Re-working of the dialogue in appropriate places would have been most welcome. Finally, the tone of the movie could have matched the source material better. One of the things I like about Alan Moore as a writer is the eerie way he can grasp any genre, but put his own unique twist into it. The “Watchmen” graphic novel was pretty much your standard superhero yarn, BUT with real world characteristics. If one was to successfully capture the spirit of the graphic novel, then that person should think, say, “Superman II” but with homosexuality, sexual deviance, and mutually assured destruction thrown into the mix. Those were the elements which set the graphic novel apart from the other superhero fare, but were never dealt with in a meaningful way in Snyder’s adaptation.
-
... "Watchmen" should have been the "Blue Velvet" of superhero movies. I mention "Blue Velvet" because it was a movie which revealed the darker side of postcard-perfect Everytown, America. The Watchmen graphic novel is basically superheroes doing unheroic things. Sadly, I never got that kind of shock when I watched Snyder's adapation. So the film is a big FAIL for me.
-
"we don't have to watch pop culture do to Rorschach what it did to Ledgers Joker."
Never a truer word hath been spoken. -
Thank you for a non-venemous thought out response, I do disagree with you on almost all points but I;ll quickly explain why. First of all, I think he did get the atmosphere, but I do agree with you that Hollis Mason's death was really missing from the film. The difference is, the GN was a real slow burn and no movie could convey that creeping sense of doom as well as the book did. Well....that's not true, it would be extremely difficult to convey it in a movie and Snyder spent quite a bit of screen time dealing with the paranoia. I think he 'got it' I don't think it went over his head. I just think he's not a good enough filmmaker to put that paranoia and dread up on the screen. Secondly, he didn't make the Watchmen superhuman, the book was very clear that they could kick all form of ass. He added the Oldboy homage, and I personally liked that. Yes, maybe they fought too well, but they fought just as wel in the GN. These were regular people who trained to fight at an irregular level. Had they not, they would have gotten taken down just as often as they stood victorius. For them to be succesful crimefighters in that dystopian society, they would have HAD to learn to fight that way. As far as the music was concerned, more ften than not, it fit. He used the right music at the right times for the most part. I've gotta tell ya, I've seen so many Vietnam movies use Watchtower needlessly to set a mood. When Dan and Rorshach were on their way to confront Veidt it seemed to me that it was the first time a movie had ever used it right. And yes, I know what the song is about, I'm a huge Dylan fan. Consider that he used it at the exact moment that Moore used it. Now for the part where I totally agree with you. Yes, Snyder understood and put a fantastic group of characters on the screen. I don't think that's something anyone would argue. He 'got' the characters and their mindsets brilliantly...for the most part. He fucked Veidt up bad.....really, really bad. The Veidt of the GN is nowhere to be found in the movie. The actor that played him? Holy shit, he was terrible; and so was Akerman. In the book, Veidt was the ultimate badass, yet he chose to step down from that because he was intelligent enough to realize he wasn't doing any good. He then used his brains and his unending charisma to build an empire and the platform to do what he would eventually do. The actor was a whiny shell of Veidt, no charisma, totally unbeleivable in his role. He seemed like a third rate villian in a bad superhero movie. Was there too much action? I'll give you that, but you are talking about a few seconds of excess here and there. Even in your examples of what you thought to be excessive action, you cited a few three second screenshots. Most, not all, but most of the action was true to the book and to omit what wasn't may have given you two or three minutes of screen time. Now, that would be enough time to show Hollis' death and I agree I would have rather seen that than punching through walls. Everything else omitted or shortened for the running time worked with the story. Yes, sometimes the action was a bit over the top, but I don't believe it took away from the message of the movie, a message I believe Snyder got.
-
...it hilarious that Schnipple says, "Now go bellyache to someone else" to a group of people having a civilized discussion that he keeps interrupting with his bombastic negativity?
-
You explain something to somebody who lacks basic comprehension and instead of gratitude, you get - ah, yes, I get that but don't you see it's much more complicated... Listen, you dummy, women lie, men lie, but numbers don't. Watchmen was a box office disaster. They have yet to start recouping their production budget for a $140 mill film. Now do you get it? What I'm saying to you is that its not that complicated. In fact, its real simple. The movie was a financial FAILURE. Now do you get it? Or is it still too simple for your complex, ancillary, emerging, secondary market reality.
-
In your eyes, reality is negative. I could give too fucks about how Watchmen does financially. Why do you feel the need to refute the fact this film was a failure in terms of doing business? Does it change what the movie means to you? I thought the movie was a piece of shit and was glad the studio got fucked over. They deserved it for ruining a great comic. But really why defend it? You guys sound like those dildos arguing over rappers' record sales.
-
Itf theres a shower scene, Im there.
-
are awesome, but this is a step in the wrong direction for Snyder. Self-indulgent pulp shit, leave it for Tarantino, who doesn't seem capable of anything more. Snyder has shown us glimpses of a visual brilliance we haven't seen since Lucas. Come on, man, set your sights higher.
-
"Snyder has shown us glimpses of a visual brilliance we haven't seen since Lucas." You must tell us what you've been smoking! There's nothing brilliant about washed-out colours and slow motion.
Readers Talkback
User Login
Top Talkbacks
- Whitney Houston 1963 - 2012 -- 171 total posts 169 posts
- AVENGERS enemy revealed as pink boardgame pieces... You might suffer some form of elation... SPOILERS!!! -- 157 total posts 111 posts
- There's a STAR TREK video game that is going to lead into JJ's STAR TREK 2 apparently... -- 138 total posts 75 posts
- Here's The Red Band Trailer For Drafthouse Films' THE FP! -- 67 total posts 67 posts
- To Commemorate The 3D Release Of STAR WARS EPISODE I: THE PHANTOM MENACE, George Lucas Wants You To Know...Greedo Shoots First!! -- 479 total posts 62 posts
- New JUDGE DREDD post production footage pops up -- 59 total posts 59 posts
- Does ‘SNL’ Rhyme With ‘Deschanel’?? Learn Which SATURDAY NIGHT LIVE Vet Hosts After Sexy Zooey!! -- 62 total posts 59 posts
- HANNA's Saoirse Ronan to boss around seven little people -- 48 total posts 45 posts
- Friday Brings SWEEPS DAY NINE!! Gab Here About Tonight’s FRINGE!! Plus Einstein on TIM, Wiig On PORTLANDIA, MAHER, CLONE, GIFTED, GRIMM, SPARTACUS, SUPERNATURAL, GOLD RUSH And More!! -- 116 total posts 32 posts
- SPACE 2099!! -- 181 total posts 30 posts