Judge rules in favor of Fox in battle over Watchmen

[Mike Farley]

Moore's statements fall far short of calling it a crime against nature. And if he didn't want it to be made into a move he shouldn't have signed over the rights.

Watchman was work for hire. Moore probably never had any choice in the matter.

 

[Noname Given]

This is excellent. There should never be a Watchmen Movie. It's a crime against nature.

Only in your twisted opinion.

Watchmen's creator quite famously agrees with him:

Sayeth Alan Moore:

"The 'Watchmen' film sounds like more regurgitated worms. I for one am sick of worms ... Will the film even be coming out? There are these legal problems now, which I find wonderfully ironic. Perhaps it's been cursed from afar, from England. And I can tell you that I will also be spitting venom all over it for months to come ... "

He believes the graphic novel is "inherently unfilmable."

Of course Alan Moore had NO PROBLEMS with taking the check for the rights, eh? Gotta love people with 'artistic integrity' AFTER they take the money.

 

[Dusty Ayres]

Re: 'Watchmen' film in legal jeopardy?

FOX is just pissed that The Dark Knight is such a huge hit while pretty much all their films this year like Meet the Spartans, Space Chimps, The Happening, X-Files2, and Meet Dave flopped.

Fox just wants payback for:

1) The Dark Knight and other Batman stuff being such moneymakers for Warner Bros., beating out their version of Batman

2)Losing out to Warners on the aborted 1982-83 Green Lantern movie.

"The 'Watchmen' film sounds like more regurgitated worms. I for one am sick of worms ... Will the film even be coming out? There are these legal problems now, which I find wonderfully ironic. Perhaps it's been cursed from afar, from England. And I can tell you that I will also be spitting venom all over it for months to come ... "

He believes the graphic novel is "inherently unfilmable."

Then he should have not submitted it to DC, but to Egmont/Fleetway/IPC. Also, his fellow Brits should have never let Rank collapse.

 

[Reverend]

Alan Moore hates movies in general, so I don't agree that he's a good judge. Plus, he worships some kind of snake-god (no, I'm not making that up).

I have to admit my sympathy for Alan Moore's opinions has somewhat evaporated after he made my home town into the next best thing to Auschwitz just because he didn't enjoy a walk out on the Plain...boo fecking hoo.
Still, saying something is "unfilmable" is only going to make an ambitions filmmaker all the more eager to take on the challenge. After all, I seam to remember a lot of hoo-har about how 'Lord of the Rings' was unfilmable too...

So, Larkhill? My condolences then.

Yes indeedy. The creepy part is I know exactly where that mass grave would have been dug. You can even see it on google maps.

 

[Timby]

Re: 'Watchmen' film in legal jeopardy?

FOX is just pissed that The Dark Knight is such a huge hit while pretty much all their films this year like Meet the Spartans, Space Chimps, The Happening, X-Files2, and Meet Dave flopped.

Fox just wants payback for:

1) The Dark Knight and other Batman stuff being such moneymakers for Warner Bros., beating out their version of Batman

2)Losing out to Warners on the aborted 1982-83 Green Lantern movie.

Fun conspiracy theorizing aside, given that current FOX management hasn't been in place for nearly that long, I find this highly unlikely. It's much more likely that FOX sees a goldmine on the way with Watchmen, its legal department took a look at some contracts, and said, "Hey, we might be able to cash in on this after all."

 

[DWF]

Re: 'Watchmen' film in legal jeopardy?

FOX is just pissed that The Dark Knight is such a huge hit while pretty much all their films this year like Meet the Spartans, Space Chimps, The Happening, X-Files2, and Meet Dave flopped.

Fox just wants payback for:

1) The Dark Knight and other Batman stuff being such moneymakers for Warner Bros., beating out their version of Batman

2)Losing out to Warners on the aborted 1982-83 Green Lantern movie.

Fun conspiracy theorizing aside, given that current FOX management hasn't been in place for nearly that long, I find this highly unlikely. It's much more likely that FOX sees a goldmine on the way with Watchmen, its legal department took a look at some contracts, and said, "Hey, we might be able to cash in on this after all."

No, FOX had the original rights to the movie.

http://www.comicmix.com/news/2008/09/04/watchmen-lawsuit-explained-for-you/

 

[paudemge]

Re: 'Watchmen' film in legal jeopardy?

I suspect the film will be released with Fox getting a bunch of money and possibly rights for more money on a sequel.
Only if they think they can guarantee to make more money on producing there own version would this movie not be released.
But it seems like they have no risk, and all gain from letting this movie go forward, after securing a monetary settlement.

 

[Timby]

Re: 'Watchmen' film in legal jeopardy?

Fox just wants payback for:

1) The Dark Knight and other Batman stuff being such moneymakers for Warner Bros., beating out their version of Batman

2)Losing out to Warners on the aborted 1982-83 Green Lantern movie.

Fun conspiracy theorizing aside, given that current FOX management hasn't been in place for nearly that long, I find this highly unlikely. It's much more likely that FOX sees a goldmine on the way with Watchmen, its legal department took a look at some contracts, and said, "Hey, we might be able to cash in on this after all."

No, FOX had the original rights to the movie.

http://www.comicmix.com/news/2008/09/04/watchmen-lawsuit-explained-for-you/

Thanks for missing my point.

I'm not disputing the legal reasoning behind the lawsuit. I'm talking about the rationale for the timing.

 

[DWF]

Re: 'Watchmen' film in legal jeopardy?

Fun conspiracy theorizing aside, given that current FOX management hasn't been in place for nearly that long, I find this highly unlikely. It's much more likely that FOX sees a goldmine on the way with Watchmen, its legal department took a look at some contracts, and said, "Hey, we might be able to cash in on this after all."

No, FOX had the original rights to the movie.

http://www.comicmix.com/news/2008/09/04/watchmen-lawsuit-explained-for-you/

Thanks for missing my point.

I'm not disputing the legal reasoning behind the lawsuit. I'm talking about the rationale for the timing.

No I understood your point but it's too easy to make that assumption but it's really a more complex issue than that.

 

[Braxton]

If only lawsuits like this had popped up in time for movies like "Spice World", "Transformers", and "Iron Man".

I don't think a lawsuit like this would have come up against "Transformers" since Hasbro owns all the rights. This lawsuit is about who owns the rights to this property. Hasbro owns all the rights to Transformers in the United States and whatever country they sell them in while working with TakaraTomy in Japan, who IIRC actually is the real owner of the Transformers property.

I find it amusing that neither company knows who actually owns the rights to this property. Has this lawsuit been going on since this movie went into production?