The Official "Watchmen" Movie News & Discussion Thread (Possible Spoilers)

[Raissa]

Plug Pulled On Watchmen Movie

Paramount has pulled the plug on its proposed film version of Watchmen, Alan Moore's celebrated superhero graphic novel, Variety reported. Producers Larry Gordon and Lloyd Levin were taking the project, with British director Paul Greengrass (The Bourne Supremacy) attached, out to other studios, the trade paper reported.

Watchmen came under heavy scrutiny in the wake of Paramount chief Brad Grey's surprise move to replace Donald De Line with Gail Berman as studio president in late March, the trade paper reported. De Line found out about the change while in London meeting with Greengrass about Watchmen and the need to cut its budget, rumored to be $100 million, the trade paper reported.

Paramount had been aiming for a summer start, but began releasing crews working on preproduction at that point.

http://www.scifi.com/scifiwire2005/i...ory=0&id=31145

[Leaping Larry Jojo]

This really is better off as a mini series than a movie.

[Terminatah]

She killed Futurama, and now she's killed Watchmen. I say we
KILL GAIL BERMAN.

-Terminatah

[Harley_Quinn]

This sucks, I've been waiting for this movie forever!

[James Harvey]

Entertainment Weekly first reported that Warner Bros. was in talks to pick up Watchmen after Paramount dropped the project. IGN Filmforce on Friday said it had confirmed that the movie was now at Warner Bros., but not with Paul Greengrass at the helm.

The Hollywood Reporter has followed-up and confirmed this as well:

"The Watchmen, the seminal DC Comics limited series created by Alan Moore and Gave Gibbons, has found a home at Warner Bros. Pictures. The project has landed at the studio with original producers Larry Gordon and Lloyd Levin -- but not with screenwriter David Hayter and director Paul Greengrass, who were with the project when it was let go from Paramount in June."

Comments?

[Terminatah]

Comments?

Yeah, one. If Warner Brothers screws this up, I'm going to end them one by one.

Rorschach style.

Or, eh, Ozymandias style. Whichever is worse.

-Terminatah

[Knight]

Im amazed that it wasnt at WB to start. It's a dc comics properity and almost everything DC comes through WB. that I know of.

[Sr.Infierno]

I wonder how they'll translate Watchmen's awkward, cheesy color contrasts onto the big screen

[Terminatah]

Recent casting announcements are as follows:

Patrick Wilson as Dan Dreiberg/Nite Owl II.
Billy Crudup as Jon Osterman/Dr. Manhattan.
Jackie Earle Haley as Walter Kovacs/Rorschach.
Malin Akerman as Laurie Juspeczyk/Silk Spectre II.
Matthew Goode as Adrian Veidt/Ozymandias.

Perhaps we will hear more news after the Watchmen panel at Comic Con. What does everyone think so far?

-Terminatah

[Hanshotfirst113]

Last I heard, Zach "I dared to remake Dawn of the Dead" Snyder was attached; my opinions about 300 aside for a moment, I'm not sure that his aciton oriented style would be suited to it; please, let it be someone else.

The question is: do we need a Watchmen movie?

Alan Moore doesn't think so, that's for damn sure.

It's a valid question. But I don't know if it's entirely relevant. I would pose the question -- knowing that it's only a matter of time before it gets made, is this a good way to make it? Of all the possible creative teams that could be assembled for anything, I think Aronofsky doing Watchmen is something of an equivalent to Nolan doing Batman.

In other words-- necessary or not, if they're gonna do it, might as well do it right.

Yes, well, I live in eternal fear that it will become a generic Hollywood action movie, al LXG.

I just watched Pi a couple days ago. It was good. I hated Requiem, but there's no denying Aronofsky's style.

Requiem was a powerful movie, but I don't ever want to watch it again. There's little denying, however, his sheer technical virtuosity.

However, how is his style suited for The Watchmen?

This is a valid question.

Can someone give me a background about who & what the Watchmen are?

Oh, god; Google it. It's conviluted.

Aronofsky and Hayter are gonna one helluva job to do to make this right. With the big story that Watchmen has, this film needs AT LEAST 150 min. Anything shorter would just ruin it imo.

Why has Hayter broken with Singer? I love to see him work on Man of Steel; why wasn't he involved with SR? Still, if he's attached to the screenplay, my interest just went up.

How many people have been attatched to this project?

It seems to be rotting in development hell; not sure why.

Yeah, one. If Warner Brothers screws this up, I'm going to end them one by one.

Rorschach style.

Or, eh, Ozymandias style. Whichever is worse.

DO NOT mess with fanboys. When will Hollywood learn ?

I wonder how they'll translate Watchmen's awkward, cheesy color contrasts onto the big screen

Cheesy? Just as long as they don't do the 300 Sin City thing and just attempt to film it word-for-word and digitize it.

You know, someone pointed out to me on the IMBb, you know who'd be so perfect for Rorschach? Michael Keaton. Crudup is definately a talented actor. So who's attached to direct NOW?

And I'm a little shaky on Levin and Gordon. As much as I loved Hellboy, their wham-bam action movie pedigree worries me; del Toro was talented enough to work within it, but I just don't think that that would work for Watchmen. Of course, they could always try respecting the rights of the creator, but that doesn't seem likely, does it?

[Sandoz]

Recent casting announcements are as follows:

Patrick Wilson as Dan Dreiberg/Nite Owl II.
Billy Crudup as Jon Osterman/Dr. Manhattan.
Jackie Earle Haley as Walter Kovacs/Rorschach.
Malin Akerman as Laurie Juspeczyk/Silk Spectre II.
Matthew Goode as Adrian Veidt/Ozymandias.

Perhaps we will hear more news after the Watchmen panel at Comic Con. What does everyone think so far?

-Terminatah

I'm not familiar with all of them, but I'm glad the studio chose actors who can really inhabit their roles rather than signing "big name" movie stars. (I for one am glad that we won't be seeing Keanu Reeves and Jude Law as Dr. Manhattan and Ozymandias.)

Patrick Wilson is a good actor, but he's pretty well-built. I wonder if he'll gain weight for Night Owl. Someone in the casting department must have really liked Little Children.

[Hanshotfirst113]

I'm not familiar with all of them, but I'm glad the studio chose actors who can really inhabit their roles rather than signing "big name" movie stars. (I for one am glad that we won't be seeing Keanu Reeves and Jude Law as Dr. Manhattan and Ozymandias.)

GOD, PLEASE STOP! Reeves as he to Mars: "Now, I'll, like, build stuff. Woah. The Comedian raping that woman was most heinous!" God, the mind boggles.

[Wonderwall]

GOD, PLEASE STOP! Reeves as he to Mars: "Now, I'll, like, build stuff. Woah. The Comedian raping that woman was most heinous!" God, the mind boggles.

Damn that would have been money hahaha!

[Terminatah]

It seems to be rotting in development hell; not sure why.

Actually, it's in heavy preproduction under the direction of Zack Snyder and is currently slated for a 2008 release. This is incomparably farther than any other attempt to get the movie made. In other words, it is definitely happening. Ironically enough, as mad as I was when Paramount killed the project, I couldn't be more thankful now. After seeing 300, I think Snyder is a phenomenal choice, because he will work harder than anyone to preserve the book's original essence without changing everything (the way Greengrass and Aronofsky surely would have).

And going back to the debate about whether or not the movie should be made in the first place, I think my former attitude in post #4 (which was exactly three years ago!) was a little callous. It is important to consider what the creator of the book thinks. However, I just don't see the movie as anything that could be considered in the same light as the book. The book will always be the definition of what Watchmen is. I think of the movie as a loving tribute to the book. And that is why I think it should exist.

-Terminatah

[Bones Justice]

I'm not very hopeful for this project. I still remember LXG, which was a horrible version of the original books. Actually, it was a horrible movie even if it wasn't adapted from anything.

I'm also not sure about this being crunched down into two or three hours, either. The original story had a lot of character development that will probably be lost.

I also don't really know about the story anymore, either. I did enjoy it when I first read it but looking back, Rorschach's story was the part that I really enjoyed and the rest was just okay. I've seen better spins on the story since then (Justice League Unlimited) so I don't know if I really need a condensed version of the old story.

I'd vote for a mini-series instead like others have suggested. I don't think any of the effects are too tough for television these days.

[Hanshotfirst113]

After seeing 300, I think Snyder is a phenomenal choice, because he will work harder than anyone to preserve the book's original essence without changing everything (the way Greengrass and Aronofsky surely would have).

Ahh. How ironic; I dislike 300 so, I think that he'd be at the bottom of my list. But I think it's a tricky issue, because this is a project that would probably be better fit to a more "art film" style filmmaker (someone off of the beaten path like Terry Gilliam), but of course, with the commercial nature of the film, such is

And going back to the debate about whether or not the movie should be made in the first place, I think my former attitude in post #4 (which was exactly three years ago!) was a little callous. It is important to consider what the creator of the book thinks. However, I just don't see the movie as anything that could be considered in the same light as the book. The book will always be the definition of what Watchmen is. I think of the movie as a loving tribute to the book. And that is why I think it should exist.

Moore has always been vocally opposed to the creation of a film of Watchmen, but evidently that doesn't matter to DC or WB, so at least I hope that it doesn't become LXG or a Jerry Bruckheimer production-type of film.

And Bones, to what in JLU are you reffering?

[Noukon]

Alan Moore doesn't think so, that's for damn sure.

It's best to ignore what Moore thinks in this case. His opinions on film adaptations are a bit slanted.

My concern here is Snyder. Watchmen is a nearly impossible thing to adapt to film. 300 worked because it was a direct page-to-film translation; he did a great job adapting the graphic novel directly into film form, but there was nothing else to it. Keep in mind that the portions of the film that weren't originally in the book were its only real failings as an adaptation.

Watchmen is steeped in the graphic novel form, structurally and visually, and, as I said, is essentially impossible to adapt directly. The story would need to be shortened and re-worked significantly, and so many elements of it would need to be abandoned simply because they couldn't work on film. The best thematic elements of the story would have to be completely removed for the story to appeal to a mainstream film audience.

I can't see a film adaptation working even with the most masterful of filmmakers behind it, let alone a director with such a minimal and unimpressive record.

[FightingDreamer]

I'm going to have to agree. Despite the fantastic castings so far, this is either going to be A. An LXG-esque nightmare where a layered and thorough piece of work is diluted into a crappy action flick or B. A straight adaptation. I just don't see how else it could work. I'm not familiar with Snyder (I've heard his Dawn of the Dead remake is good), but judging by the 300 trailers he seems to be the wrong choice. Gilliam had it right when he said this could only possibly work as a TV miniseries.

[BatKid]

So it'll either be a straight up 100% adaptation, or suck horribly? What kind of reasoning is that?

Snyder was iffy for me, but he did handle 300 nearly perfectly from the book. But like someone said, there's 300....and then there's Watchmen. A WHOLE different ballgame. However, everything that Snyder has mentioned on the film has me very hopeful. The guy really does understand the book, and it's evident he wants to preserve as much of the book as possible.

Cast sounds fantastic so far too, so that's a very good sign.

[FightingDreamer]

So it'll either be a straight up 100% adaptation, or suck horribly? What kind of reasoning is that?

Snyder was iffy for me, but he did handle 300 nearly perfectly from the book. But like someone said, there's 300....and then there's Watchmen. A WHOLE different ballgame. However, everything that Snyder has mentioned on the film has me very hopeful. The guy really does understand the book, and it's evident he wants to preserve as much of the book as possible.

Cast sounds fantastic so far too, so that's a very good sign.

Well, OK, there's obviously stuff they'll have to cut out, but Snyder has a huge task ahead of him, and he risks being burned at the stake by angry fanboys if he messes up or makes too many radical changes. I appreciate that Snyder is trying to preserve the feel of the book (he's even doing it in the 80's rather than trying to update it), but... I just don't know. Dawn of the Dead and 300 both look like red-blooded action pics, and that's just not what Watchmen is. There's nothing wrong with action, but Watchmen's (few) action scenes in the graphic novel are fairly low key, and that matter-of-fact tone may be lost in the film. The cast looks fantastic, sure, but I'm still unsure as to whether this will work.