Watchmen (Zack Snyder, 2009)

Discussions of specific films and franchises.
Post Reply
Message
Author
User avatar
Fletch F. Fletch
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 3:54 pm
Location: Provo, Utah

Watchmen (Zack Snyder, 2009)

#1 Post by Fletch F. Fletch » Wed Mar 16, 2005 5:24 pm

A couple of interesting developments going on with this long-gestating project. The official site has gone live (http://www.watchmenmovie.com/). Not much there yet except for a couple of wallpapers and a forum.

Also, CHUD has posted the first part of a very interesting interview with the film's director, Paul Greengrass (Bloody Sunday, Bourne Supremacy). You can check it out here: http://chud.com/interviews/1914

Here's an interesting excerpt:
And I think that what it means is � and we�re engaged in a debate at the moment in this production on how to do it � you have to take the chronology of Watchmen, and by chronology I mean what I call the �footsteps to Armageddon� part of the machinery of Watchmen. You�ve got these two pieces of machinery, the first of which is the murder mystery with the caped crusaders and the various generations thereof, and the other is the footsteps of Armageddon. What you have to do is take that chronology as it�s given to us in Watchmen and try to update it. You don�t replace it, you just say �What would have happened if that chronology continued?� One of the most exciting things that I remember distinctly when I read Watchmen when it came out was this idea of a world that was our world but that had taken a slightly different course. Nixon had served three or four terms. Woodward and Bernstein had been assassinated. G Gordon Liddy had become the trusted advisor to the president. It was a kind of world turned on its head. What we have to do is imagine what would have happened to that Watchmen world if it had continued, rather than say let�s start with a new paradigm. It's about building on what�s there in the spirit of the novel. That's what we're going to try to achieve. So you feel that it�s addressing our world, but you�re not losing the world Watchmen gave us. Which is the Nixon four terms world.
Here is a review of David Hayter's script: http://filmforce.ign.com/articles/545/545644p1.html

Director Paul Greengrass talks a bit about the movie and portraying Dr. Manhattan on-screen http://www.comicon.com/thebeat/archives ... _talk.html

Also, pre-production is reportedly underway:
January 27, 2005 - DC-on-Film reports that pre-production is now underway on Paramount's Watchmen movie. The feature adaptation of the Alan Moore/Dave Gibbons comic book classic will be directed by Paul Greengrass from a screenplay by David Hayter.

According to DC-on-Film, the crew so far includes two members of Greengrass' The Bourne Supremacy: production designer Dominic Watkins and art director Peter Wenham. The visual effects supervisor is said to be Steven Begg, whose credits include Batman Begins and the Tomb Raider movies.

Filming reportedly takes place at Pinewood Studios in England later this year for a summer 2006 release. Production had previously been slated for Prague.
Last edited by Fletch F. Fletch on Wed Nov 15, 2006 5:27 pm, edited 1 time in total.

THX1378
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2004 5:35 am
Location: Fresno, CA

#2 Post by THX1378 » Thu Mar 17, 2005 8:34 am

I really don't see how this film is going to work at all. I've been a fan of the comic for years, as has a couple of my friends. All of us really were hoping that this would be done right as a 6-10 hour mini-series on HBO like Terry Gilliam wanted to do years ago. There really is no way that you can even get to the heart of what this comic is in a 2 or 3 hour film even if you do cut out the subplots. Half the reason why the subplots are there were to show us what made these people tick. The other big problem is that Paramount I know is going to go for a PG-13 with this film. It's set for a summer 2006 release which means that they are going to want to make money. There is no way around it that Watchmen, if in some way is going to stay true to the comic, has to be a hard R rated film. There is no way around it that the comic is meant for adults and I hope that Paramount keeps it that way and doesn't market the film for kids and teenagers. Oh well I know that you can't please every fan out there and this is going to be a hard sell for most of us. Like Paul Greengrass said in the interview this is the Citizen Kane of comic books so it's going to be interesting to see how it turns out.

User avatar
Fletch F. Fletch
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 3:54 pm
Location: Provo, Utah

#3 Post by Fletch F. Fletch » Thu Mar 17, 2005 9:57 am

Not to mention, the key will be in the casting. If they don't get the right people for the right roles then the film will fall apart pretty damn quick. I interviewed someone last year who had read Hayter's latest draft and apparently he has figured out a way to condense the narrative and changed the ending but still keep it true to the spirit of the book. We shall see.

Personally, my dream would be for it be an animated mini-series done on HBO or Showtime where you could do the entire series justice.

THX1378
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2004 5:35 am
Location: Fresno, CA

#4 Post by THX1378 » Thu Mar 17, 2005 10:42 am

Personally, my dream would be for it be an animated mini-series done on HBO or Showtime where you could do the entire series justice.
This is what should have been done in the first place, and the only way it could work. I can't remember if Gilliam said when he wanted to do the project or if it was someone else that one way it could have worked was to animate one comic book frame at a time and have some flow to it so it looked like a animated film. I'm waiting to see what Sin City looks like because it's seems like Rodriguez /Miller have done something like this with their live action film. Using whats in the comic as a blue print. and going by whats in the comic frame and shooting that for the film. I'm hoping that the script's ending isn't changed too much from the comic because even in todays post 9/11 world the whole doomsday ending would still work well. As for casting the only people I've heard so far wanting or interest in doing the project were Jude Law-Ozymandias, and Simon Pegg-Rorschach. I don't know much about Pegg at all being able to play Rorschach, I've only seem him in Shawn of the Dead. I'd really like to see Rorschach be played by Gary Oldman or Steve Buscemi. Thats the only people I've heard so far that were interested or they were looking into.

User avatar
Fletch F. Fletch
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 3:54 pm
Location: Provo, Utah

#5 Post by Fletch F. Fletch » Thu Mar 17, 2005 1:31 pm

THX1378 wrote:As for casting the only people I've heard so far wanting or interest in doing the project were Jude Law-Ozymandias, and Simon Pegg-Rorschach. I don't know much about Pegg at all being able to play Rorschach, I've only seem him in Shawn of the Dead. I'd really like to see Rorschach be played by Gary Oldman or Steve Buscemi. Thats the only people I've heard so far that were interested or they were looking into.
You know who would make a great Comedian? Ian McShane? Esp. the way he looks now. He's got the slicked back, black hair, moustache... as long as he beef himself up a bit. He'd be perfect. I always thought that Willem Dafoe would make a good Rorschach. He's got those odd features and he can certainly play someone intensely driven like that.

THX1378
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2004 5:35 am
Location: Fresno, CA

#6 Post by THX1378 » Thu Mar 17, 2005 8:47 pm

Never would have thought about Ian McShane. One of my friends when I talked about this at work today said that they need to John C. Reilly to play Night Owl. Seems that everyone wants Brad Dourif to play Rorschach. I can't see Dourif playing a bad ass.

User avatar
lord_clyde
Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2004 4:22 am
Location: Ogden, UT

#7 Post by lord_clyde » Thu Mar 17, 2005 11:00 pm

I think Brad Dourif could pull it off, and Dafoe is too old. Damn this movie better be good, Watchmen is my bible.

User avatar
dx23
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 8:52 pm
Location: Puerto Rico

#8 Post by dx23 » Thu Mar 17, 2005 11:10 pm

I really don't see how this film is going to work at all. I've been a fan of the comic for years, as has a couple of my friends. All of us really were hoping that this would be done right as a 6-10 hour mini-series on HBO like Terry Gilliam wanted to do years ago. There really is no way that you can even get to the heart of what this comic is in a 2 or 3 hour film even if you do cut out the subplots.
I completely agree. This is one comic series that has to be done as a TV mini-series, not a feature film. There is no way to tell the entire story in 2-3 hour film. And it has to R rated. And it needs a great cast. And it can not be sold to the public as a summer blockbuster or a comic book film ala Spider-Man, Hulk, Punisher or Daredevil. This is one of the most important comic of all time because of the story and dialogue and is not going to be treated as such in a Hollywood environment. Actually this is a comic that stands against everything that Hollywood is. And Alan Moore has to be involved, so the director fully understand what Watchmen is all about.(although I really, really doubt that will happen).

This comic is not about visual effects or CGI or having a flashy action movie director. Is all about the story and how it is developed. If Paramount don't see that soon, this is going to be another League of Extaordinary Gentlemen or LXG as Hollywood likes to call it.

two mules
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 12:01 pm
Location: London, England

#9 Post by two mules » Fri Mar 18, 2005 5:12 am

William H. Macy would make a great Rorschach. And Robert Redford reminds me of Adrian Veidt.

THX1378
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2004 5:35 am
Location: Fresno, CA

#10 Post by THX1378 » Fri Mar 18, 2005 7:40 am

I completely agree. This is one comic series that has to be done as a TV mini-series, not a feature film. There is no way to tell the entire story in 2-3 hour film. And it has to R rated. And it needs a great cast. And it can not be sold to the public as a summer blockbuster or a comic book film ala Spider-Man, Hulk, Punisher or Daredevil.
You know that Paramount is going to sell this as one of the summer 2006 tent pole films because their going to get a giant cast of whos who in Hollywood today to star in it. I think that Greengrass understands what he is up against in make this film. He talked about how this is the Citizen Kane of comics and that it's going to hard to please both the fans of the comic and Paramount wanting a blockbuster summer comic book film. I still think the only director that had any chance of doing and getting this film right was Terry Gilliam. Every interview he did when he talked about doing the film he sounded like he got what the comic was and how it had to be done. He talked about that if he were to do the film the screenplay would be the comic itself, that nothing would change because it was perfect the way it was. He said in the interview that it would only work as a mini-series on HBO because you really need EVERYTHING that is there in the comic with it's story to make it work. Cutting out the subplots is going to dumb down the film because they are there for a reason. I wish I could find a way to get ahold of the screenplay so I could read it for myself because thats going to be the first sign if it's going to work or not.

User avatar
NoHayBanda
Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2004 6:32 pm
Location: NYC

#11 Post by NoHayBanda » Fri Mar 18, 2005 10:47 am

It's too bad it's far too late for this, but I have a feeling that Klaus Kinski would have made an amazing Rorschach.

THX1378
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2004 5:35 am
Location: Fresno, CA

#12 Post by THX1378 » Fri Mar 18, 2005 11:11 am

IMDB listed that at one time Robin Williams was interested in playing Rorschach. I don't know how that would have worked out had the film been made.

jcelwin
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 2:09 pm

#13 Post by jcelwin » Fri Mar 18, 2005 11:36 am

I would rather see 'non-star' actors playing these parts. At least it would cut down on the budget, hopefully then it could be used for other things. Hopefully it would also mean a less star-oriented movie, and it would mean that they could find talented actors that fit the roles really well. I hate when they just want to get stars in to fill the parts even when they are totally crap for it.

That said, I don't think there are any major stars around that could fill the role of Rorschach, at least no physically. It would take a lot of skill to bring the right amount of depth to the character instead of just 'playing' a deranged psychopath.

User avatar
Elephant
Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2004 7:17 pm
Location: Brooklyn

#14 Post by Elephant » Fri Mar 18, 2005 2:53 pm

And Alan Moore has to be involved, so the director fully understand what Watchmen is all about.(although I really, really doubt that will happen).
I guarantee you there is no way Alan Moore will be involved. I work at DC and this guy is so against any of his books being made into films, but since Watchmen was published prior to the days of the creator-owned properties, he pretty much has no say. But basically, the word around the office here regarding this film is pure dread. No one's excited about it and no one thinks it has a chance of being the least bit good. My opinion is that there's no reason to make it into a film anyway--doesn't it stand on its own as a monumental achievement for the medium of comics? What can making a film version possibly add?

THX1378
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2004 5:35 am
Location: Fresno, CA

#15 Post by THX1378 » Fri Mar 18, 2005 3:08 pm

My opinion is that there's no reason to make it into a film anyway--doesn't it stand on its own as a monumental achievement for the medium of comics? What can making a film version possibly add?
If the film was done right, it could be the greatest comic book film ever made. It's all there to be done. Going with some no name actors could work if you got the right people. I don't see this being made for anything under $75 million and not without a lot of CGI.

User avatar
Elephant
Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2004 7:17 pm
Location: Brooklyn

#16 Post by Elephant » Fri Mar 18, 2005 3:24 pm

THX1378 wrote:If the film was done right, it could be the greatest comic book film ever made. It's all there to be done. Going with some no name actors could work if you got the right people. I don't see this being made for anything under $75 million and not without a lot of CGI.
Right. But that's an enormous if. The chances of it being "done right" are so slim . . . unknown actors aren't going to get people unfamiliar with the comic (probably the majority of the target audience; $75 million worth of fanboys seems doubtful) into the theater, and the compression of the story which will no doubt occur trying to collapse 12 issues of an incredibly detailed and dense narrative into 2-3 hours is going to be nothing short of totally confusing (especially to those unfamiliar with the comic).

User avatar
Fletch F. Fletch
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 3:54 pm
Location: Provo, Utah

#17 Post by Fletch F. Fletch » Tue Jun 07, 2005 12:47 pm

The second part of CHUD's interview with Paul Greengrass about Watchmen is online

From Coming Soon!:

Watchmen May Move Location
Source:
ScreenDaily.com
Last week, we posted a story from Variety about some of the problems facing the Paul Greengrass directed movie based on Alan Moore's Watchmen. On the European film industry site ScreenDaily.com, there is more news about the problems facing the movie, as it's been announced that the film, which has been in preproduction at London's Pinewood Studios may not be able to afford to shoot the movie there as originally planned.

The new management at Paramount Pictures has been carefully examining the proposed $120 million budget for the comic book epic, forcing the productiong to start looking at other possible shooting locations. Producer Lloyd Levin cites the exchange rate of the US dollar to the British pound as one of the reasons for the change of location, although he made it clear that Greengrass was still attached and that they're still hoping to release the film in the summer of 2006.

It may be a disappointment to fans of the graphic novel if the movie isn't shot in the country that Alan Moore calls home, especially after the fiasco that was Moore's The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen a few years ago. Then again, maybe Paramount and the producers are trying to avoid a similar mistake--that movie never made back its production budget--by cutting costs before things get out of hand.
Also, UK movie mag, Empire has a nice look at the pre-production phase of the movie:

Edit: It looks like the film is off again. Damn.
[url=ttp://www.comingsoon.net/news.php?id=9909]Paramount Puts Watchmen into Turnaround[/url]
Source: Variety
June 7, 2005

Paramount has officially pulled the plug on Watchmen, putting the comic book adaptation into turnaround over the weekend. Producers Larry Gordon and Lloyd Levin were taking the project, with British director Paul Greengrass (The Bourne Supremacy) attached, out to other studios.

Variety says the film, based on the DC Comics series of the same name, 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. 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.

Paramount had been aiming for a summer start but began releasing crews working on pre-production at that point. The film was previously set up at Universal Pictures.

THX1378
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2004 5:35 am
Location: Fresno, CA

#18 Post by THX1378 » Tue Jun 07, 2005 7:15 pm

Now this sucks. I was looking forward to seeing this next summer if it was going to be done right. Seems like this will never get made but maybe thats a good thing if it doesn't til everyone can get there s**t together with it. I say use the time to get things together and work things out before they start work on this film again so they get it right. One thing that I love is that they were going to cut its budget. I can't see how this film CAN'T be made for anything under $75 million. Oh well, will all have to wait and see how this is going to turn out.

ecschmidt
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2004 12:59 am

#19 Post by ecschmidt » Wed Jun 08, 2005 12:15 am

I can't see how this film CAN'T be made for anything under $75 million.
I'm having trouble getting my head around this statement. If you're saying it needs to be an expensive film, then I agree. If you're saying they shouldn't spend too much on it... well, could you elaborate?

User avatar
lord_clyde
Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2004 4:22 am
Location: Ogden, UT

#20 Post by lord_clyde » Thu Jun 09, 2005 5:51 am

I cant believe we're getting another mission impossible instead of this. Goddamn it.

User avatar
dx23
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 8:52 pm
Location: Puerto Rico

#21 Post by dx23 » Mon Aug 29, 2005 7:55 pm

I was reading the recent Wizard Magazine and it has an article about the demise of Paramount's Watchmen project and it hints the possibility of WB buying back the rights for the film and releasing it as a mini-series on HBO. Right now the project is on the limbo, but the are still some people working on the script and on bringing this comic to film. Is good to hear that this idea hasn't been completely shelved.

User avatar
lord_clyde
Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2004 4:22 am
Location: Ogden, UT

#22 Post by lord_clyde » Mon Aug 29, 2005 8:23 pm

dx23 wrote:
...releasing it as a mini-series on HBO.
That I would not mind seeing. Watchmen has far too many layers to be confined to a two or even a three hour film. After seeing From Hell butchered on the silver screen I must say I would rather see HBO handle this one. (Slightly off topic, Rome looks great! Takes awhile to set everything up, but it's awesome!)

THX1378
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2004 5:35 am
Location: Fresno, CA

#23 Post by THX1378 » Mon Aug 29, 2005 9:25 pm

hints the possibility of WB buying back the rights for the film and releasing it as a mini-series on HBO.
Thats about the only way this project would work at all and keep everyone happy would be to do the mini-series. Now all they have to do is find a way to get Terry Gilliam on board *couple of years ago in an interview he stated that if he was going to do Watchmen that he would do it as a mini-series.* and were set.

User avatar
Fletch F. Fletch
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 3:54 pm
Location: Provo, Utah

#24 Post by Fletch F. Fletch » Thu Sep 01, 2005 9:40 am

THX1378 wrote:
hints the possibility of WB buying back the rights for the film and releasing it as a mini-series on HBO.
Thats about the only way this project would work at all and keep everyone happy would be to do the mini-series. Now all they have to do is find a way to get Terry Gilliam on board *couple of years ago in an interview he stated that if he was going to do Watchmen that he would do it as a mini-series.* and were set.
Agreed. Altho, my dream for it would be as a mini-series on HBO but animated in Dave Gibbons' style so that you could get as close to the comic book as possible.

User avatar
Polybius
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 10:57 pm
Location: Rollin' down Highway 41

#25 Post by Polybius » Sat Sep 10, 2005 1:55 am

At the risk of steering this a bit OT, my nice shiny new Bud Plant catalog arrived today, and I see that the nice folks at Graphitti are producing a 20th anniversary deluxe edition.

WATCHMEN: The Absolute Edition
By Alan Moore and Dave Gibbons.

Celebrate the 20th anniversary of Watchmen, the classic 12-issue miniseries. Each page of art has been restored and recolored by WildStorm FX and approved by Gibbons to appear as originally intended. A beautifully designed slipcase has been created to hold this oversized hardcover collection.

Additionally, this grand tome includes 48 pages of supplemental material produced exclusively for the Graphitti Designs Watchmen hardcover edition, not seen since the original publication. Included is a cornucopia of rare and historically valuable treasures, samples of Moore's Watchmen scripts, the original Watchmen proposal, Gibbons conceptual art, cover roughs, and more. [Expected: Oct]
DC, 2005

HC, 8x13, 464pg, FC


Boo yah 8-)

Lists for $75.00

I think us enterprising souls can probably find it for @ $60.00

Post Reply