logo Sign In

Fox wins the case against Warner Bros or so i read google it if you must. Heres a thread for everyone's thoughts on it.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

So does this mean no release of Watchmen a film i look forward to because i like the style of Sin City, but how faithful to the graphic novel will it be.

Anyway Frank Miller's Spirit is made in the comic noir styling as well but has received bad press and reviews.

I have a very bad feeling that 20th Century Fox instead of being the distributer of this film will bury it and never allow it to be released.

Then fans will never see it unless it gets leaked to the internet, and then whoever downloads that get sued by Fox and Warners.

If it never gets an official release then sadly i will never see it because torrenting movies that are supposed to be released in theaters is highly suspect and illegal.

This whole thing is funny as hell because it is just studio politics.  If 20th Century Fox wanted the movie they could have gone ahead with the project when it was originally submitted to them.  Now they have the legal right to the picture because the turnaround clause was not followed, i.e. Zack Snyders version of the film would have had to have first refusal at warners and then if they did not want it then warners could make it.

Not only that Fox now sees its shortsightedness with the ticket sales to be big money when these types of films are made.  When it was originally submitted to them in the mid nineties this type of picture would have been extremely risky.  There was nothing being made like it except perhaps the crow and that did not make tons of money like sin city did, or 300. At that point in time the most successful comic book movies were the first superman film in 1978 and the first batman film by Burton.

Comic book movies only made a certain amount of money and each sequel had reduced returns in terms of profit with the salaries of actors getting bigger on each film.

The dark knight is most successful comic book movie ever made.  Being the number 2 all time gross in terms of tickets sold and money made.  Only Titanic made more money.  i think the dark knight even beat the original star wars.

“Always loved Vader’s wordless self sacrifice. Another shitty, clueless, revision like Greedo and young Anakin’s ghost. What a fucking shame.” -Simon Pegg.

Author
Time

Whoa, I didn't even know this was going on. I hope it still gets released, I was looking forward to it.

I keep hearing everyone say that there is no way it will be any good because it will be so different from the original. Is there reason to believe this? 300 pretty much contained every frame from the graphic novel, though with several additions to make it longer and give it more story, and a few nonsensical things put in there just to remind people it was a comic book adaption, regardless of the fact that those things were not actually in the comic book.

Every single scene in both The Watchmen trailers matches up almost 100% with scenes from the comic book. Since many of the same people are behind this who were behind 300, and judging by how accurate the scenes from the trailers are, I am predicting this thing is going to be pretty close to spot on.

"Every time Warb sighs, an angel falls into a vat of mapel syrup." - Gaffer Tape

Author
Time
 (Edited)

It'll get released.  All Fox really wants is free money - a cut of the profits of a film they had no involvement in making, but happened ot own the rights to.  If they really wanted to block its release, they would have sued when the project was announced a year ago.

And the concerns about how close it'll be to the graphic novel stem from the confirmed changes to the ending, which, in the interest of not spoiling the movie/comic, I won't elaborate on.  But the ending WILL be different.  Even if the rest is pretty much spot-on.

Honestly, I don't have a problem with the change - even though I love the comic, the comic's ending would mean a lot more build-up would need to be included in the film, and it's honestly a little bit convoluted.  Changing the mechanism of the ending (the message is the same) lets them remove all that build-up, while not having to add much more since a lot of it's already kind of built in to the story anyway.  Plus it's less convoluted, and to the average moviegoer, would make more sense than the novel's ending which, honestly, comes a little out of left field.

We'll see in May, though.  I, for one, have very high hopes for it.

Author
Time

Just went to read the change you were talking about. Yeah, I guess it works well enough to the same effect without needing as much buildup, and being a little more believeable.

Still, I don't think there was anything wrong with the original ending. I don't think it is that far out there, plenty of people believe in aliens, and you have plenty of conspiracy nuts out there who claim the US goverment is planning on pulling pretty close to the exact same thing Ozy Mandias did and for the exact same reason. I think the original ending would have worked well enough, but I don't think I really mind this minor departure and simplification too much.

"Every time Warb sighs, an angel falls into a vat of mapel syrup." - Gaffer Tape

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Exactly - there isn't anything wrong with the original ending in my opinion, but I know that others don't feel that way.  My roommate read my copy of the comic when he first saw the trailer in front of TDK and (this was before any hint of the ending change had come out) thought that it was fantastic, but the ending seemed very out of place and strangely unrealistic while the rest of the comic had presented unrealistic things in a somehow realistic manner.

Spoiler:
Plus, he didn't really understand how the creature had been created or why it was necessary to kidnap a comic book writer, which is why I think this way's better since throughout the comic you see that Dr. Manhattan is working on *something* that's never explained - this way, that is the buildup to the new ending, which is already built in to the story.

It doesn't bother me, like I said, but I can see how it would bother some people.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

You mean to people who hated the fact that there were Aliens in Indiana Jones IV?

I would accept it in a comic book movie depending on if that was the type of material the universe was from early on and not just tacked on as a wtf? kind of ending.

A giant monster at the end for the general film going Public who had not read the graphic novel would think cloverfield and say based on that Watchmen= fail.

Not knowing that this is based off an old graphic novel.  

I have heard fanboy complaints that the costumes are too shumacher batman like, or that the the guy in the trailer narrating sounds like Christian Bale's batman.

 

Are they going to do the old school superhero stuff in a comic noir styling? 

I have read heroes ripped off watchmen,  i always thought they ripped off the X-men films by Bryan Singer and the original Kirby idea anyhow.

 

“Always loved Vader’s wordless self sacrifice. Another shitty, clueless, revision like Greedo and young Anakin’s ghost. What a fucking shame.” -Simon Pegg.

Author
Time

The idea of the ending of season 1 ripped off the idea of the ending of Watchmen, in that

Spoiler:
someone tries to "save the world" by destroying New York
, but the specifics are different.

I googled for info on the new ending of Watchmen, and since there's a LOT of confusion on it, and since I just discovered spoiler tags, THIS is the truth on the ending:

Spoiler:
In the graphic novel, Adrian Veidt/Ozymandias has created a monstrous psychic creature that he makes suddenly appear in New York, which sends out a psychic wave killing half the people in the city, whereupon everyone in the world, on the brink of nuclear war, believes that an alien attack is imminent, thus making everyone band together and end war with the constant threat of an alien attack.  But throughout the novel, it's discovered that Veidt has taken hostage many different people to an island for some reason I was never quite clear on, and that's how the Comedian found out about the plan, which is why he was killed at the beginning of the novel.

In the new ending, Veidt has been working with Dr. Manhattan throughout the film, supposedly to create a machine that uses the unique qualities of Dr. Manhattan's physical makeup and "powers" as a form of clean energy that will replace all current forms.  But in reality, he's creating a machine to imitate Dr. Manhattan's energy signature that will also create a blast powerful enough to destroy a major city.  Then, and this is also in the novel, he frames Dr. Manhattan, making it appear that he causes others to develop cancer, alienating him from the world and causing him to leave Earth, while making everyone in the world distrust him.  In the end, he uses his device to destroy major cities around the world in a manner that imitates Dr. Manhattan.  Since Dr. Manhattan is gone, everyone assumes that they are under constant threat of annihilation by Dr. Manhattan, and thus everyone bands together, ending war like in the novel's ending.

But the real important part of the novel's ending is that Rorschach had more or less figured everything out and had written it down in his journal, which he later mailed to a newspaper before going off to stop Veidt, later being killed.  The last frame of the comic shows a guy at the newspaper offices, his boss desperate for new material, picking up Rorschach's journal, ending with the possibility of Veidt's utopia being undone.  This WILL be retained in the movie.  So, even though the mechanism of the ending is changed, the message is still the same.

I figured I'd explain it since most websites seem to think that Veidt convinces Dr. Manhattan himself to destroy the cities, which doesn't make any sense and makes it sound like the writer had no idea what the hell he was doing.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Could the psychic creature that is not in the movie be ripped off of the film forbidden planet?

By the way how do you do that hidden spoiler that you have to highlight to read?

 

“Always loved Vader’s wordless self sacrifice. Another shitty, clueless, revision like Greedo and young Anakin’s ghost. What a fucking shame.” -Simon Pegg.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

How do you do spoiler tags? Hmm, after reading the explaination of the new ending, I still think the original ending as a reason to accomplish what was meant to be accomplished works better, but we will see.

As for Heroes, I really felt both seasons one and two did more than a little "barrowing" from The Watchmen. Not sure if it can be called a ripoff since it is not exactly the same story, but there are several elements that are clearly taken from the graphic novel. Sylar being a watchmaker's son was a pretty obvious homage. The end plot twist was shamelessly blatant. And in season two, all the flashbacks to the old has-been super heroes, whose children are now the current heroes, felt very much inspired by The Watchmen. Glad they gave it a rest with season three, you can only ripoff another franchise so much before people start accusing you of having no ideas of your own (which is an accusation I think Heroes deserves to be accused of, as I don't think that show has had one original thing about it from the very beginning).

"Every time Warb sighs, an angel falls into a vat of mapel syrup." - Gaffer Tape

Author
Time
skyjedi2005 said:

Could the psychic creature that is not in the movie be ripped off of the film forbidden planet?

 

 

No, I really don't see any connection. It feels much more H. P. Lovecraft inspired.

"Every time Warb sighs, an angel falls into a vat of mapel syrup." - Gaffer Tape

Author
Time
skyjedi2005 said:

Could the psychic creature that is not in the movie be ripped off of the film forbidden planet?

By the way how do you do that hidden spoiler that you have to highlight to read?

 

Why are you so worried that things will be "ripped off" one film/book or another?  As long as it's not done in the exact same way, why does it matter?  I don't think a single movie in the past 30 years (maybe even 50) has had an original idea.  Every major blockbuster has taken ideas that came before it, repackaged them, and made them look new and fresh.  Isn't that enough?  From Star Wars to The Matrix, every single movie has borrowed and reborrowed from what came before.

Unless the writers/directors/producers never read or see any other comic or movie, they're going to be influenced by everything that has come before and they're going to include little things here and there that are either blatant ripoffs or nice little homages.  As long as the story is adapted properly, not much else should matter.

 

F Scale score - 3.3333333333333335

You are disciplined but tolerant; a true American.

Pissing off Rob since August 2007.
Author
Time

The spoiler tag's easy: [ spoiler ] and [ / spoiler ] without the spaces.  I just recently discovered it.

And as Moore was finishing the comic, issues 1-6 or something had already been released, someone pointed him to an episode of (I believe it was) The Twilight Zone where

Spoiler:
a group of scientists creates a psychic creature to destroy a city and blame it on aliens in order to facilitate world peace.

Frustrated, but too late to change anything, Moore instead simply threw in a reference to that Twilight Zone episode in the last issue (12) of the comic (I think when Sally Jupiter is watching TV in the last few scenes), to acknowledge the similarities.  He has not, however, said that he intentionally plagiarized the episode, just that it was an awkward coincidence.

Author
Time
lordjedi said:
skyjedi2005 said:

Could the psychic creature that is not in the movie be ripped off of the film forbidden planet?

By the way how do you do that hidden spoiler that you have to highlight to read?

 

Why are you so worried that things will be "ripped off" one film/book or another?  As long as it's not done in the exact same way, why does it matter?  I don't think a single movie in the past 30 years (maybe even 50) has had an original idea.  Every major blockbuster has taken ideas that came before it, repackaged them, and made them look new and fresh.  Isn't that enough?  From Star Wars to The Matrix, every single movie has borrowed and reborrowed from what came before.

Unless the writers/directors/producers never read or see any other comic or movie, they're going to be influenced by everything that has come before and they're going to include little things here and there that are either blatant ripoffs or nice little homages.  As long as the story is adapted properly, not much else should matter.

 

Thank you!  Sometimes I feel like beating sense into skyjedi is part of the sub-culture of this entire site.

To that end, I offer this link:

Internet Public Library - Basic Plots in Literature

 

 

My outlook on life - we’re all on the Hindenburg anyway…no point fighting over the window seat.

Author
Time

"beating sense into skyjedi is part of the sub-culture of this entire site."

 

LOL, I don't think that is possible. Actually, I think Sky is a very sensible guy. I generally have enjoyed his posts in the past, even when they were picking something apart, typically they did it quite intelligentlly. Lately they have been growing increasingly exhusting though, especially with he and Hunter piggybacking on one another to create endless threads of sheer complaining.

 

That said, I am still rather fond of sky.

"Every time Warb sighs, an angel falls into a vat of mapel syrup." - Gaffer Tape

Author
Time
 (Edited)

You guys do know that i am a huge fan of JJ abrams right?

The only thing i don't like is Star Trek by him.

I like Lost, and Alias, have not really gotten around to watching fringe yet.

Okay i will admit i hated Cloverfield but he did not direct it unlike some would think.

And i hated his choice of using that guy from Coppote in MI3, and i am not a huge fan of tom cruise so that might have had something to do with me not liking the movie.

I don't necessarily hate JJ's style.  I think hunter might hate it but please don't bunch me together with another forum member my views are my own and i would hope unique.

The style of quick cuts and faced paced action worked excellently on Alias but that is not the style of Star Trek.

Even coming out of tv I think people like JJ abrams and Joss Whedon are the George Lucas and Steven Spielberg of this generation.  Too bad for Whedon though looks like dollhouse is a flop before it even airs.

I don't mean they are even close to what old school Lucas or Spielberg were just the Best i can think of of the young crowd of directors at the moment.  I would have considered Tim Kring in the past as a newcomer to watch but Heroes totally nuked the fridge.

I don't see the guy who directed batman begins and the dark knight as working in science fiction but Christopher Nolan would be on the list of young talents i would consider to direct a sci fi movie i i was the studios.

Or that guy who did Pans Labrinthe and the 2 Hellboy movies.  I can't think of his name at the moment.

Some would say John favreau who directed Ironman, i thought he was a dubious choice when he was announced as the director early on but the movie turned out okay anyways.  I am not a fan of him as an actor really so this guy was an unknown at least to me doing his first comic book movie.

Really ideally if you were a science fiction author or screenwriter there are a ton of people these days you would want to make your story on screen except for George Lucas or Steven Speilberg, those guys wore out their welcome with Indiana Jones IV.

“Always loved Vader’s wordless self sacrifice. Another shitty, clueless, revision like Greedo and young Anakin’s ghost. What a fucking shame.” -Simon Pegg.

Author
Time

I want to see Watchmen when it comes out and would be disappointed if it did not. However, I'm skeptical of the movie being a great translation of the comic and I won't lose too much sleep if it's delayed.

Also, skyjedi, your title for this thread uses poor sentence structure.

"Now all Lucas has to do is make a cgi version of himself.  It will be better than the original and fit his original vision." - skyjedi2005

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Are you an english teacher now too? lol

Just be grateful i did not do texting speech or ebonics as some people may sometimes do by purposely misspelling words. 

I have not been in school since 1997 so of course my english is a bit rusty.  and i was always bad at sentence structure.

I try to spell as well as i can without looking up words in a dictionary i don't have one on hand that scans words as i type them and gives suggestions as it is not built into the forum software.  It only tells you if it thinks you misspelled something.

But yeah my thread title uses talk speech and not written speech, but i'm not writing an essay or a book here,lol.

“Always loved Vader’s wordless self sacrifice. Another shitty, clueless, revision like Greedo and young Anakin’s ghost. What a fucking shame.” -Simon Pegg.

Author
Time
skyjedi2005 said:

You guys do know that i am a huge fan of JJ abrams right?

You wouldn't know it by the way you post.

The only thing i don't like is Star Trek by him.

I like Lost, and Alias, have not really gotten around to watching fringe yet.

I thought you only liked the first season?  Didn't he leave after that?  I've only watched a few episodes here and there (I don't like it), so if I got that wrong, then ok.

Okay i will admit i hated Cloverfield but he did not direct it unlike some would think.

According to IMDB, he hasn't directed much of anything.  5 eps of Alias, 2 eps of Lost, Star Trek (director/producer), and MI3.  Those are the notable ones anyway.  It looks to me like he has a lot more experience writing and producing than he does directing.  I'm not saying he's a bad choice though.  Why don't you ever seem to have a problem with the writers?  They wrote the story, aren't they at least somewhat to blame on Star Trek?

Even coming out of tv I think people like JJ abrams and Joss Whedon are the George Lucas and Steven Spielberg of this generation.  Too bad for Whedon though looks like dollhouse is a flop before it even airs.

Just checked out Dollhouse on IMDB.  Kind of funny, Dollhouse starring Faith from Buffy and Fred from Angel :P

I don't mean they are even close to what old school Lucas or Spielberg were just the Best i can think of of the young crowd of directors at the moment.  I would have considered Tim Kring in the past as a newcomer to watch but Heroes totally nuked the fridge.

If you've been watching Heroes at all then you'd know that just about everything that took place in the first half of season 3 was a lie.  All of it in order to get Sylar to do what they wanted him to do.  So the only relationship that was left in tact is Claire and her uncle the flaming dude.

Or that guy who did Pans Labrinthe and the 2 Hellboy movies.  I can't think of his name at the moment.

Benicio Del Toro.

Some would say John favreau who directed Ironman, i thought he was a dubious choice when he was announced as the director early on but the movie turned out okay anyways.  I am not a fan of him as an actor really so this guy was an unknown at least to me doing his first comic book movie.

And he says virtually the same thing in the behind the scenes videos on the DVD.  He was freaked out that the movie was going to be a total failure.  The whole time working on it, he wanted to stay as true to the Iron Man comic as possible and he just hoped that people would like it.  The origin story was obviously changed so it would make sense on release (putting it in Vietnam wouldn't have made any sense in 2008).

Really ideally if you were a science fiction author or screenwriter there are a ton of people these days you would want to make your story on screen except for George Lucas or Steven Speilberg, those guys wore out their welcome with Indiana Jones IV.

Again you're lumping Lucas and Spielberg together because of one movie.  One movie that pretty much had to get made when it did if Spielberg and Ford ever wanted to do it.  The screwup that is Indy IV is all Lucas.  If I were a film executive, I would still consider Spielberg, but without Lucas.

 

F Scale score - 3.3333333333333335

You are disciplined but tolerant; a true American.

Pissing off Rob since August 2007.
Author
Time
lordjedi said:

Or that guy who did Pans Labrinthe and the 2 Hellboy movies.  I can't think of his name at the moment.

Benicio Del Toro.

 

Guillermo Del Toro.  Benicio is an actor.  His only directing credit is from 1995.

 

My outlook on life - we’re all on the Hindenburg anyway…no point fighting over the window seat.

Author
Time
skyjedi2005 said:

But yeah my thread title uses talk speech and not written speech, but i'm not writing an essay or a book here,lol.

Hehe. Don't worry about it. It was simply bad enough that I felt I had to say something.

"Now all Lucas has to do is make a cgi version of himself.  It will be better than the original and fit his original vision." - skyjedi2005

Author
Time

Well, it seems that Fox is seeking an injunction to block the release of "Watchmen" and Warner doesn't want to settle.

What this really means, IMO, is that Fox wants to push as hard as they can to force Warner to give them as much money as possible.  Which will happen because Fox doesn't lose jack shit if the movie doesn't get released, and Warner loses, well, everything they put into it.  It's cheaper on their part to settle eventually, and smarter.  But there is always the possibility that Fox will lose the trial (I highly doubt that, though).

Author
Time

The one kink in Fox's armor, from a legal perspective, is why did they wait until the film is on the verge of release before going to WB about this?  SOMEONE got word back to Fox early on that the film was moving forward.  This is Hollywood we're talking about...the in-breedingt that exists there is the entertaniment industry equivalent of the kid on the porch in Deliverance.

This is just Fox's way of making some fast easy money.  They're hoping to strong-arm WB into either paying them outright or giving them a cut of the take.  Don't think for a minute that artistic integrity or any of that happy horse shit has anything to do with this.

My outlook on life - we’re all on the Hindenburg anyway…no point fighting over the window seat.

Author
Time

I am afraid this is quite likely to end up postponing the release date, I hope not though. Fox is very obviously playing dirty. This thing was announced long ago, Fox could have jumped in back at the very beginning and said it was theirs and kept it from being made, instead they wait until it is completely finiished. Bastards. It is so blatant too, that really ought to be taken into account when this goes to trial. Fox has earned themselves a lot of hate from the nerd community over the years, with a stroke of a pen they killed Firefly, Futurama, and a few other sci-fi series they have brought to a premature end.

"Every time Warb sighs, an angel falls into a vat of mapel syrup." - Gaffer Tape

Author
Time
 (Edited)

I'm still mad with fox for cancelling Space above and beyond,lol.

I'm probably the only person who actually liked that show and that is why is was cancelled.

Firefly was a dumb move, but hey at least we got serenity out of that.

Like if buffy was not cancelled the awesome best selling lost season in the comics would not exist.

Futurama was cancelled but we got these direct to dvd features and cartoon shows.

Was it ever brought back to tv like Family Guy?

The cancellation of Enterprise eventually led to star trek 11 by JJ abrams.

Fox is not the only network or studio who have cancelled shows.  Sci Fi shows almost always get cancelled.  Journeyman a show i liked was cancelled. 

The new flash Gordon cancellation on sci fi lead to the awesome reboot comic, and a new big screen movie in the works.

Frank Miller is going to make the new Buck Rogers movie.

“Always loved Vader’s wordless self sacrifice. Another shitty, clueless, revision like Greedo and young Anakin’s ghost. What a fucking shame.” -Simon Pegg.

Author
Time

The Futurama DVD-movies are being cut up into 4 episodes each to make a 16-episode "season" that's airing on Comedy Central (so far they've aired the first two, not sure about 3, and the 4th movie comes out in February).  Based on the ratings those episodes get, they'll decide whether to bring it back as a regular series.

And if Frank Miller touches Buck Rogers, I'll shoot myself.  Have you seen "The Spirit"?