Watchmen
- Thread starter Augie March
- Start date
Azrael
circling Airstrip One
When's the leak dated? This article's from 11th November, and had Mr Snyder saying the opposite. Of course, this could be disinformation. Who knows? None of us until March, I'm guessing.
As goes that (possible) alternative ending:-
I'm okay with it. Cutting the squid lets Mr Snyder cut all the subplot around the island and the comicbook, and there's a common theme of humanity coming together against an otherworldly enemy. (The Doc's pretty otherworldly.) Previous drafts had Rorschach live and Veidt getting toasted, so it could be a lot worse!
8den
No I'm pretty sure that was 8ball...
Not to be funny, but provided that the central concept remains the same
Veidt creates an event that brings together humanity united against a common (non existent) foe
However because of the legal entanglement with Fox there is no earthly way this is seeing the light of day in March. Not going to happen.
Azrael
circling Airstrip One
If it's done well, same here. As it's a different medium I'm not expecting a carbon-copy of the comicbook.
We can't know for sure until something is announced, but I'd be amazed if WB don't pay Fox off, perhaps with a percentage of the box-office as compensation. After all the publicity featuring the release-date, delaying the movie would be commericially ... foolhardly, to say the least.
Both sides want to make a buck or million from this.
8den
No I'm pretty sure that was 8ball...
yeah cause people say "Honey lets not go see that movie, they lied about the release date on the trailer"
The case is resuming in late January. If watchman is going to be released in March, WB are going to have an awful lot of stuff lined up to go, right then and there, print ADs, press junkets, TV airtime bought, all an gamble that they get it sorted on the court steps in January. If Fox decided to be assholes or the judge was difficult, well all that money would be squandered.
Sanity in WB would be to set the release date back, you cannot be ready to go on a release this massive, with just a months prep.
And they will, just not in march.
ATOMIC SUPLEX
Member Since: 1985 Post Count: 3
Gahh, I can't remember but it also said the no squid ending had been debunked (but not how) so I assumed it came later.
ATOMIC SUPLEX
Member Since: 1985 Post Count: 3
No we didn't miss it.
http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=8521477&postcount=45
It's on the last page. I assumed this was what everyone was talking about. I'm sure it will only be distribution.
Still a bit of a pain in the arse, FOX are tits.
8den
No I'm pretty sure that was 8ball...
No it really won't. If WB launch the movie now they will be obliged to pay Fox for every use of the image, and every time the characters name's is used. Thats on promotion, merchandise, and tie ins.
While you may be sure, the Judge is saying Fox owns control over the copyright of the whole image of a WB film. WB would be insane to launch the movie before this is resolved.
Azrael
circling Airstrip One
WB own the movie and Fox own the rights to distribute it, so neither side can make a dime without the co-operation of the other.
None of us will know how it plays out until something is announced, but it doesn't make commercial sense for Fox to diminish their own profits, which putting Watchmen on ice until 2011 would almost certainly do.
Incidentally, this doesn't affect international distribution rights, which rest with (I believe) Paramount Pictures, so theoretically Watchmen could be released outside the USA without Fox's permission!
None of us will know how it plays out until something is announced, but it doesn't make commercial sense for Fox to diminish their own profits, which putting Watchmen on ice until 2011 would almost certainly do.
Incidentally, this doesn't affect international distribution rights, which rest with (I believe) Paramount Pictures, so theoretically Watchmen could be released outside the USA without Fox's permission!
8den
No I'm pretty sure that was 8ball...
NO THEY DON'T. The judge has ruled that Fox owns the copyright of the Watchman Movie period. Not distribution rights.
Azrael you're wrong about so much stuff it beggars belief. For Fox releasing the Watchman now, or never, won't cost them a dime, whenever it is released they make a mint. For WB if they release the movie now, every cent they spend in promotion and PR will go to Fox. For WB to wait till this is resolved makes much more sense, as they are already in for this for £100m. Fox don't need to spend a dime promoting this movie. If it's released and it doesn't do much business because of lack of PR, they'll just recoup their lawyers fees out of whatever profit the movie makes.
Az you do not know of what you speak. You're not seeing this movie next year.
Azrael
circling Airstrip One
Crikey, no need for caps lock: this isn't a political debate, it's a comic movie!
Justice Gary A. Feess, from the New York Times: "Fox owns a copyright interest consisting of, at the very least, the right to distribute the Watchmen motion picture."
A "copyright interest" is not the same thing as owning "the copyright, period". I'm not claiming to be an expert in US copyright law, but where has it been said that Fox will ever be able to seize Watchmen and release it themselves, at you seem to be arguing. Time Warner put up the money and negotiated the contracts: the film in the can is theirs. Fox may own an "interest" in its copyright, which is a different thing entirely.
Neither of us can say for sure if Watchmen is coming out next year, but I base my suspicion that it is on the fact that a delay would risk missing the bus: dark, broody superhero movies are in right now; by 2011, who knows? A delay would also require a whole new marketing campaign, which may or may not succeed. Fox clearly want more than lawyers fees back, they want some free cash, which a timely release is more likely to get them.
A good rundown of the tangled case is here.
ATOMIC SUPLEX
Member Since: 1985 Post Count: 3
I was looking for something on this too. All the headlines said "fox owns watchmen copywrite" but there is no official quote apart from the one above. The wiki page has a nice bit on what fox think they own.
They might well have a share, just a bit annoying that it's from an old contract to a defunct company that could have been paid off with only a million quid.
8den
No I'm pretty sure that was 8ball...
Firstly an apology I mixed you up With Azrael23 an asshole you got banned years ago for being a conspiraloon.
Not being funny here, but I work in film, and it's not going to require a new marketing campaign, aside from a massive fanboy base no one has heard of the film, the marketing campaign really cranks up in the two months prior to a major release. The fanboys will go see the movie if Synder used Jim Henson's muppet's to play Rorshach. That market's sown up.
Look the movie cost the best part of $100 million dollars, and the rule of thumb is you double that for the marketing budget. There is no earthly way that the bean counters in WB are going to chuck another $100m at watchman until they figure out, how much they have to give towards fox, or even if they really have to give anything.
And I'm sorry sod your "they have to strike while the iron is hot "dark brooding" superhero movie bullshit. Studios have people who are paid a fortune, to make a buzz happen about a movie, Watchmen doesn't need to ride the tail of Batman to make a wave. It's a massive film all by itself.
All I am saying is to set the ground work for a PR blitz you need, just as an example, all your cast and director available for a week or two of press junkets, you cannot arrange that in months notice.
There's no earthly way we're seeing the watchman movie any time soon.
Azrael
circling Airstrip One
Ah, my namesake haunts me from beyond the digital grave! For the record, I didn't get Mr 23 banned, but then, I would say that, wouldn't I?
That conflicts with your belief that no one has heard of Watchmen beyond a fanboy base, however massive it may be.
The Watchmen hype is already building: trailers in cinemas with the release date, merchandise revealed, etc. If Fox delay the film, say by a year or two, they'll need to get past the "Hey, this trailer is old news" crowd, and also the "That's the movie that got its ass sued, it's never coming out" crowd. As you work in the motion picture business, you'll know how fickle and fashion-bound it is. For those who don't treat Watchmen as a sacred object, it's just another blockbuster, and could do big business off the back of Dark Knight. Delay it and you risk that business.
Add to that the fact that Dave Gibbons could pull out ala Alan Moore, and Fox don't own a cent of the copyright to the Watchmen comicbook, and you have a risky proposition. Some fanboy boycott isn't out of the question. Maybe Time Warner will sue Fox for some of the marketing budget, seeing as the timing of their lawsuit wrecked the first run.
Talking of timing, why have Fox sued now? Watchmen is in the can. It's a tangible commodity, and it's going to see the light of day, sooner or later.
Even the biggest pictures can flop, and Watchmen is a middle-rank player. Fox want maximum cash; Time Warner want maximum cash; both are more likely to get it by settling before March. They might get irrational and fight it out, but for now I'll have faith in the almighty dollar.
brixtonvilla
should be Oslovilla, really
New stuff here, some new footage & Snyder talking about the film:
http://www.aintitcool.com/node/39626
*faps*
http://www.aintitcool.com/node/39626
*faps*
Azrael
circling Airstrip One
*Back in from watching the Thames fireworks ... which were spiffy*
Thanks for that, brixtonvilla. Good to see some news come out concerning the actual movie, and not which multinational corglomorate gets to bag X% of its profits.
Although there is a development on the legal front: this blog has something interesting to say:-
"It all comes down to whether Feess will issue an injunction. If the judge blocks the release then it's game over, Fox can demand whatever it wants and Warners will pay (like it did back in 2005 when an injunction was issued against The Dukesof Hazzard--by, you guessed it, Judge Gary Feess--and the studio quickly settled for a reported $17.5 million)."
If Justice Feess doesn't issue an injunction, it seems that Time Warner can release Watchmen as planned and fight over the profits with Fox at leisure. Apparently Mr Murdoch's company has to show that they'll be "irreparably harmed" by a release, a claim which their previous indifference over the Watchmen rights may damange a little.
Ah well, happy new year, be interested to see how this plays out.
Thanks for that, brixtonvilla. Good to see some news come out concerning the actual movie, and not which multinational corglomorate gets to bag X% of its profits.
Although there is a development on the legal front: this blog has something interesting to say:-
"It all comes down to whether Feess will issue an injunction. If the judge blocks the release then it's game over, Fox can demand whatever it wants and Warners will pay (like it did back in 2005 when an injunction was issued against The Dukesof Hazzard--by, you guessed it, Judge Gary Feess--and the studio quickly settled for a reported $17.5 million)."
If Justice Feess doesn't issue an injunction, it seems that Time Warner can release Watchmen as planned and fight over the profits with Fox at leisure. Apparently Mr Murdoch's company has to show that they'll be "irreparably harmed" by a release, a claim which their previous indifference over the Watchmen rights may damange a little.
Ah well, happy new year, be interested to see how this plays out.
what's the release date supposed to be?
ATOMIC SUPLEX
Member Since: 1985 Post Count: 3
Fap fap fap fap fap.
ATOMIC SUPLEX
Member Since: 1985 Post Count: 3
b) go and whine on their blogs that bits were missed out
Squid?
Looks like pretty much everything else is in. Even the pirate comic book in an extended cut.
Azrael
circling Airstrip One
Now that's the question!
6th March 2009 is the planned release date for both the USA and Britain.
Beside squiddy, I'm not hoping for a slavish copy of the book, which would be a pointless exercise. (Since I can, y'know, go and read the comic.) I want it to be a base for something relevant to a different medium. Mr Snyder says the Watchmen film will do for superhero movies what the comicbook did for, well, comicbooks.
Bold claim, but sounds interesting.
Azrael
circling Airstrip One
ATOMIC SUPLEX
Member Since: 1985 Post Count: 3
Good news and Fox didn't get all that much after all.
DaveCinzano
WATCH OUT, GEORGE, HE'S GOT A SCREWDRIVER!
fogbat
The Talibum
brixtonvilla
should be Oslovilla, really
New Japanese trailer, with much more "historical context" kind of footage:
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=Dk2QYPIZBUI (minor spoilers/differences from the book)
Looks good - looks like a lot of effort has gone into the feel and the "alternate reality" of the film
And I knew always Blake wasn't joking about
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=Dk2QYPIZBUI (minor spoilers/differences from the book)
Looks good - looks like a lot of effort has gone into the feel and the "alternate reality" of the film
And I knew always Blake wasn't joking about
offing JFK.
Similar threads
