The wheels on this project are beginning to turn...

I could buy that... but who will they get for Rorschach?

It's rumoured Daniel Craig is being considered for Rorschach.

I'm sure some have already seen this, but AICN is saying that Aronofsky is off the project.

THEY CANNOT DO THIS YET!!!! THEY MUST WAIT TWO MORE YEARS!!!



AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!

Aronofsky's off the project. Enter director Paul Greengrass ("The Bourne Supremacy").

I'm pretty much in agreement with Twitch's sentiments. I really liked The Bourne Supremacy, both as an action and a dramatic film, but looking back, there's nothing that screams "This guy can make The Watchmen" about it. Still, there are much worse choices...

'Watchmen' on duty at Warner Bros
For "Watchmen" to make Warners its home -- albeit without Greengrass and Hayter -- is somewhat fitting as parent company Time Warner owns DC Comics and the studio is releasing "V for Vendetta," which is based on another comic book by "Watchmen" co-creator Alan Moore, and scheduled for a March 17 release. The studio is talking to directors and is looking for writers. Starting from scratch is not being ruled out as the studio would like to attract big-name stars. Paramount has the right of first refusal to co-finance the eventual picture.
Hollywood Reporter, December 18

Horror flick director on duty for 'Watchmen'
Zach Snyder, who made his feature filmmaking debut with 2004's "Dawn of the Dead," has come aboard to develop and direct "Watchmen," based on the seminal DC Comics saga of a vigilante superhero.
Alex Tse, who worked with director Spike Lee on the Showtime cable network production "Sucker Free City," is writing a script for the long-gestating "Watchmen" project, now in the pipeline at Warner Bros. Pictures. . . .
Sources say Snyder impressed Warner Bros. with his work on "300," an upcoming adaptation of a Frank Miller graphic novel that he directed and co-wrote.
Snyder shot the movie -- a Greek epic about the battle of Thermopylae in 480 B.C. -- on soundstages in Montreal using partial sets and greenscreens, similar in technique to Robert Rodriguez's "Sin City." The film is slated for release in 2007.
Hollywood Reporter, June 23

- - -

Link to thread on 300.

I'm not sure if I should worry or not, considering that this is my favorite comic of all time.

Who's that in the 300 trailer?

Huh, no sooner do I post an item at my blog -- on a rumour to the effect that the Watchmen production office will open in Vancouver in June, with shooting to start in August -- than a friend e-mails me to say: "I just met one of the location scouts for the upcoming 'Watchmen' flick. They are considering using SFU and the tower here in Surrey."

Interesting... The latest internet rumours say this movie may constitute a sort of Little Children mini-reunion... with Patrick Wilson playing Nite Owl and Jackie Earle Haley playing Rorshach...

Watchmen cast revealed.

I find the Watchmen graphic novel to be powerful in its multi-layered storytelling, ambivalent characters, and keen observation of the modern world. Count me extremely skeptical that they'll be able to catch any of that on screen.

Especially with Snyder directing. I think he'll have no problem mastering the visuals, but based on how simplistic and blunt 300, I don't know if he has the chops to handle Watchmen's story without "dumbing it down" in some way.

Don't lose all hope. The 300 graphic novel was even more simplistic and blunt than the movie was.

The first teaser movie poster is up, drawn by Dave Gibbons. He is supporting the movie, which is good--Gibbons was more than 'just the artist.' He was pivotal to much of the plot in the graphic novel.

The official website is up too.

Will there be parallel straight-to-DVD movies covering the material from the graphic novel that is left out of the main theatrical movie?

And both films are being filmed in Vancouver RIGHT NOW!

- - -

Bates to Score Watchmen and Earth Stood Still
Tyler Bates' latest movie Doomsday (Neil Marshall's upcoming Rogue Pictures release) may be March 14th, but the future is looking bright with the signing of two major films for 2008: Warner Bros.' Watchmen and Fox's The Day the Earth Stood Still.
ComingSoon.net, January 23

Fox sues over 'Watchmen'
20th Century Fox has initiated a legal battle against Warner Bros. over the rights to develop, produce and distribute a film based on the graphic novel "Watchmen." On Friday, the studio sued Warners, claiming it holds the exclusive copyrights and contract rights to "Watchmen."
Hollywood Reporter, February 12

I am skeptical about a Watchmen film because the graphic novel is so good but a part of me is really excited for it. It is similar to the upcoming Dune adaptation with Peter Berg directing: I don't think that he movie can match the original material but the mere prospect of having a theatrical version is something to look forward to. The casting of Synder can be a plus minus. I know that the visuals will be true to the novel but I'm not sure about the themes. But consider when Peter Jackson was chosen to direct The Lord of the Rings. That seemed odd at the time but turned out to great. Basically, we will see in due time if Synder can pull it off and I will look forward to it, win or lose.

New pictures of the Watchmen characters have just been revealed. Rorschach and The Comedian look especially cool.

Yes!

They did a great job of casting, I think. I'm getting excited for this. Thanks for the link, Jason.

Yes!

They did a great job of casting, I think. I'm getting excited for this. Thanks for the link, Jason.

Yes!

They did a great job of casting, I think. I'm getting excited for this. Thanks for the link, Jason.

Man, you really are excited!

It looks cool, but are they going to deal with the fact that, say Nite-Owl was pudgy for much of the Graphic Novel? He looks pretty fit in that pic.

I was planning on fixing that (I think it's because of the glitches that have happened to site over the past day), but it is pretty funny, so I'm gonna keep it.

Crimson, Nite-Owl — even the '80s middle-aged version — looked at least somewhat fit in his costume, no matter what he looked outside of it.

Maybe those shots are of the Crimebusters in their heyday? That would make the most sense.

The first of 12 video journals!

Thanks for the link, Peter! As one of the comments for the video states, even if the movie stinks, it seems like it'll be great to look at.

The second video journal is up. I must say: at least visually, they're really dumping their all into this.

The first trailer for Watchmen will play in front of The Dark Knight, along with trailers for Terminator Salvation and Body Of Lies. Details...

The latest video journal features Dave Gibbons, the artist on the original graphic novel.

http://chud.com/articles/articles/15591/1/...ILER/Page1.html

According to CHUD, the Watchmen trailer is no mere teaser, but a full-blown trailer featuring clips of lots and lots of memorable scenes from the book. My anticipation for seeing this in front of Dark Knight(in IMAX!!) could not be higher.

The Watchmen trailer is indeed awesome, even if I could make out the digital grid on a few of the special effects. (Is that an effect of blowing the image up to IMAX size, I wonder?) They even seem to have kept the blue nuclear guy's nudity, which kind of surprised me. (I'm not surprised that it's in the film, but in the trailer...?)

Zack Snyder Reveals Secrets In ‘Watchmen’ Trailer
WatchmenIt’s a sacred comic, bobbing and weaving throughout the hallmarks of popular culture as if it were Forrest Gump’s evil twin. It explores the very nature of the “blockbuster,” de-constructing our popcorn heroes with the tools of philosophy, theology and morality. So it only makes sense that Steven Spielberg, the man who has shaped so much of our modern entertainment, would get an off-kilter shout-out in the new “Watchmen” trailer.
MTV Movies Blog, July 17

I'm just speechless.

Is that good or bad?

It's good. I wasn't sure what I thought on the first view, but by the second (and then third, etc.) I was sold.

If anyone hasn't read the Watchmen comics and is, for some reason, adverse to reading comics, then you can experience a fairly close approximation through the "Motion Comics" that Warner Premiere has started putting out.

You can download them, for free, through iTunes. As of now, only the first episode, which covers the first issues of the series, is available.

I pulled out my dog-eared copy of the TPB, and this is a close adaptation. About 1 panel is every 9 is cut for time, but often it is just a condensation of material. A few lines of dialogue here and there are removed or slightly altered, presumably for time. I guess Alan Moore's disassociation from the film extends to this material as well, as his name is nowhere to be found. Dave Gibbons is credited as "artist" and "consultant." The art is unchanged, aside from the animated flourishes. I found this quite nice, with good narration(all one actor, audio book style) and evocative music. I was almost fooled into thinking there was a full cast, the actor is that good. That is, until I heard him read a female character.

As good as this is, if you don't read the comics you are missing out on the groundbreaking, and illuminating, supplemental material that was published as back-matter for each issue. I think of these as a kind of extended teaser for the film, and they certainly got my excitement up for a full fledged movie version. I hope that this material speaks to a faithfulness on the part of the filmmakers, Alan Moore's thoughts aside.

FWIW, link to my blog post on why it might be better to have a Watchmen movie nowadays rather than back in the '90s when Gilliam was attached to the project; at the bottom of the post, I link to various news reports (including the original legal documents) regarding Fox's lawsuit against Warner, which, if successful, would prevent the film from getting released at all.

As much as I like Moore (or, more accurately, some of his work), I'm realizing more and more how much of a grouch the guy is. At this point, no matter how good any four color-to-screen adaptation might be, he'll curse it up and down. So, in that case, so what if he doesn't want his name attached? That means Gibbons will get more royalties — good on Dave.

I watched the trailer 4 or 5 or 6 times as I was making my way through the graphic novel. The pacing of the novel was great and it was pretty exciting finally recognizing various scenes from the trailer as I got further into the novel. But then I hit the 90% mark and it trailed off. I was really displeased with the ending, but I loved the buildup. Kind of a letdown. I'm significantly less interested in the movie adaptation now.

I know a few others that hate the ending, and their reasoning varies wildly. I taught a class on the graphic novel for a college credit, and I think only three students liked the ending out of the eight.

That said, I think it's the only ending that makes sense, based on what's come before. It's not the most satisfying — the good guys don't really win, in a traditional sense; it's definitely a lesser-of-two-evils type deal. Which stings. But for the story, for the characters and the setting and the themes, it's the only ending that works.

Perhaps you're right... it may be the only ending that works in the context of the story. But that context apparently is a time where the inevitable result of the Cold War was a nuclear confrontation, which we can judge with hindsight these days. I still felt cheated, having followed the buildup of strong characters such as Night Owl and Rorschach only to see them discarded to focus on a man who amounts to nothing more than a minor character throughout the rest of the novel. The former two characters are interesting, but as soon as we move into the climactic act, they're as worthless as their attempts to stop Ozymandias. It was jarring and unsatisfying. Yet the novel touches on brilliance at points, specifically the two chapters on Mars. Absolutely superb... I just thought the pacing and buildup which were all executed very well came to an unsastisfying conclusion.

As for the movie, the above concerns aside... I'm looking forward to the reunion of Patrick Wilson and Jackie Earle Haley if only because it reminds me how good Little Children was. Maybe they should have gotten Kate Winslet to play Laurie. As a big fan of Waking the Dead I have an interest in any role Billy Crudup plays. But as I've learned the hard way, good casts don't make good movies. Hopefully this one will be alright.

While he very little face-time for the bulk of novel, Ozymandias is absolutely focal to the story; the guy IS everywhere. There is almost a reference to him on every single page, and if you go back and re-read it, you'll notice that his presence is everywhere, his earlier decisions are focal to everything that's happening, and so on. And I wouldn't say Dan or Walter are discarded either, especially since their two reactions to Veidt's terrible plan are the ones that matter most — you spend the whole novel learning how morally bleak and uncompromising Rorschach is, only to slowly learn he's the only one who cares enough to not accept Veidt's plan. If anything, the novel is about people, and it really shows how three-dimensional the entire cast is. There's a lot of thought that went into all of the characters.

I mean, how COULD it have ended? If anything, if it ended in a less-Greek tragedy way, I don't think there'd be as much conversation about it.

I'm with Jason: I think the ending is perfect as it is. Not only for the reasons outlined above, but also for the way in which it, like the rest of Watchmen, continually deconstructs the entire superhero genre, with all of its cliches and stereotypes, while at the same time, affirming and celebrating those things as well.

For example, when Ozymandias remarks that he's not some "Republic Serial villain" right before revealing that he has already put in motion the destruction of New York. True, his aims are far from a typical villain's -- he wants to save the world, after all -- and yet noone can argue that the particulars of his plan were, in fact, incredibly villainous. And in the process of saving the world, he becomes the very megalomaniac that he derides earlier on when recounting his spiritual journey retracing the steps of Alexander The Great. Perhaps a slightly more beneficent megalomaniac, but a megalomaniac nevertheless.

As I read the ending and the various characters' fates, it just made me appreciate all the more the complexity of both the narrative and the characters. The Watchmen is one of those rare books that one can enjoy from an "academic" perspective -- the narrative structure and post-modern deconstruction are fascinating -- but also from a more "emotional" perspective. I found Rorschach's story, in particular, very compelling. For all of its structural complexity and deconstruction, it is still, at its heart, a classic superhero tale.

How could it have ended?? When one of your characters is a literal deus ex machina... there are lots of possible endings.

Ah, but can he really be a deus ex machina when his actions are completely and absolutely pre-determined (in his mind, at least)?

The A.V. Club looks at Watchmen (contains some potential "light" spoilers):

Studio War Involving ‘Watchmen’ Heats Up
Lawyers for Warner Brothers, which has already shot a movie of this graphic novel about the seamier side of superhero life, and lawyers for 20th Century Fox, which claims it owns the rights to the material, laid plans for a frenzied fight in a joint report submitted to the federal court here on Friday. . . .
Friday’s filing makes it clear that not only Mr. Gordon, but also Paramount, Legendary and even Universal Pictures can expect to be drawn into the fray. Universal had tried to make a version of the film in 2001, before Paramount took over. And though Paramount dropped its plans for the movie, it became involved as a partner when Warner teamed up with the director Mr. Snyder in the wake of the box office success of “300.”
New York Times, August 29