Comments on: Not-So-Cheery Holiday News

By: Milton Hascall

Milton Hascall — Fri, 12 Aug 2011 22:57:42 +0000

I would love to thank you for the efforts you could have produced in producing this knowledge. I’m hoping the exact same most desirable do the trick from you inside future at the same time. In simple fact your imaginative creating skills has inspired me to start my very own blogengine matter now.

By: Peter Bails

Peter Bails — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 10:56:19 +0000

Yes, this was a really excellent post. In theory I’d like to drop a line like this too – taking time and real effort to make a rational article… but what can I say… I stall a lot and never seem to get something done.

By: Unit99

Unit99 — Mon, 29 Dec 2008 16:26:08 +0000

>Hate Directive Says comic book movies NOT featuring well-known properties are things people are finding less worth spending their time with

By: Ratbat

Ratbat — Mon, 29 Dec 2008 15:36:46 +0000

Nobody can reasonably be mad at Fox for this. If their claim was without legal merit it wouldn’t have gone to court, to say nothing for the fact that they won. Fox owns distribution rights. WB shouldn’t have made this movie without knowing that. Of course Fox sued them. I would have.

By: Kimota94

Kimota94 — Mon, 29 Dec 2008 04:11:43 +0000

Wow, can I predict ‘em or what?!

Nice to see you guys and gals didn’t let me down…

By: M!

M! — Sun, 28 Dec 2008 23:16:22 +0000

I’m looking forward to Watchmen as any other person, but I think boycotting Wolverine is just stupid. It was Warner Brothers’ fault that they didn’t make sure everything was good to go before they went ahead with filming and promotion. Fox has the right to protect themselves and their properties.

By: SinisterPryde

SinisterPryde — Sun, 28 Dec 2008 17:16:32 +0000

Of course, all of this could ultimately be for nothing.

Its likely Fox is angling for kind of distribution deal for either this film or Batman. WB, of course, doesn’t want that, but its too late for that now.

Whats really going to be funny is reception when this film is released. To the public at large, it looks like an X-Men movie with new characters. The “R” rating might also hurt it a little bit at the box office. Lets face it, this film is a huge gamble and it could fail spectacularly. There’s a lot of buzz, but all of it I’ve read is from people who know what it is.

As to the lawsuit, WB has too much riding on this film to ignore Fox now. We will see it this year, the question is going to be, how much is it going to cost WB?

By: Anal Surprise

Anal Surprise — Sun, 28 Dec 2008 16:03:13 +0000

If the courts ruled in favor of Fox, this means Fox has a legitimate claim on the copyright of Watchmen. Stop thinking that some guy @ Fox just woke up last week wanting to screw things up for everyone. There was a whole legal battle behind this ruling that probably lasted months, if not years. Fox had a claim to the copyright, fought for their rights, and won. It’s not THEIR fault everyone went ahead with the movie before this matter was settled.

If you suddenly found out you had a legitimate claim to something like this, you’d just wave it off to not ruffle anyone’s feathers? Bull.

I’d understand the hate if the courts ruled that Fox’ claim was baseless… but it clearly wasn’t. Fox won. Fox was in the right, here. The people who denied Fox’ claim and went ahead with the movie are the ones in the wrong.

Get it?

By: Dhaise

Dhaise — Sun, 28 Dec 2008 09:52:07 +0000

How does a property at DC comics, which is owned by a huge corporation “NOT” belong to said huge corporation? I understand that Fox had a right to make a movie years ago, but wouldn’t the rights revert back?

Short answer: DC sold those rights as they pertained to film away about 10 years ago. The quagmire comes from a misunderstanding/oversight about what happened to those rights when the Fox project went into turnaround. As I understand it, WB thought/believed/hoped that the project was dead and they were free to scoop it up and develop it again, whereas the people holding the option had fine print that said they still retained the rights. I personally doubt that any lawyer on either side is going to kill this project regardless of a judges ruling, they are just bicking for how many zeros are going to be on the end of the check to Fox.
And for all the people insisting that ANY style over substance film treatment of a beloved property like wolverine or watchmen is going to be an automatic payday- I hope you didn’t have money invested in the Spirit.

By: Nate

Nate — Sun, 28 Dec 2008 04:07:12 +0000

I am claiming ignorance on the case cause I haven’t read any of the case files. However, I do have a question: How does a property at DC comics, which is owned by a huge corporation “NOT” belong to said huge corporation? I understand that Fox had a right to make a movie years ago, but wouldn’t the rights revert back? I truly am saying I don’t understand what is going on in this case. I also don’t feel that Fox should be cheated out of money if they DO deserve it, my problem lies if they block the release. I think that this film is very important to our favorite medium and if good, could bring a lot more people into a comic shop.

By: darrell_d

darrell_d — Sat, 27 Dec 2008 14:51:25 +0000

“No, I agree with some people, you don’t let an entire film be made, allow huge buzz to be built and then say “Wait we get to make money from this for doing nothing but sitting on 10 year old documents we did nothing with.”

Hmm. Maybe you should read up on the case a little? Fox let WB know about the rights they retained right after Zack Snyder was announced as director. WB rebuffed them. Repeatedly. But, if it makes you feel better, stick your fingers in your ears and go, “LALALAALA, not listening, Fox is evil! They cancelled Firefly!”
I swear, suddenly half of internet fandom are lawyers. Who knew.

By: JoJo

JoJo — Sat, 27 Dec 2008 13:24:43 +0000

AdamUnRama, you’re confused. You said “WB already showed the Watchmen up in Portland (OR). They had execs asking people if they knew about comic, if the person said ‘no’ then they were able to watch the movie for free, as long as they answered questions about the movie afterword. WB is going for a (I forget the term)way to prove that it i no longer jut WB’s intellectual properties, it is the property(ies) of those who have seen it.”

Warner Bros wasn’t asking people if they had read the comic when they recruited them in order to establish some bizarre “property” claim or whatever you’re blabbing about. They simply asked people that question because they wanted unbiased opinions about the film itself. This sort of screening happens all the time in the market research process.

By: kaijumaster

kaijumaster — Sat, 27 Dec 2008 13:00:17 +0000

No, I agree with some people, you don’t let an entire film be made, allow huge buzz to be built and then say “Wait we get to make money from this for doing nothing but sitting on 10 year old documents we did nothing with.

By: Bloodmage

Bloodmage — Sat, 27 Dec 2008 10:22:16 +0000

1- Fox has every right to protect their copyrights, and WB should’ve done the research. If you recall, Marvel had a similar ruling against them for use of “The Champions” a couple years back.

2- Watchmen is not “unfilmable”. It’s not nearly as complex a narrative as some say it is, and similar films already exist, minus the superheroes.

By: Bairfanx

Bairfanx — Sat, 27 Dec 2008 06:35:55 +0000

I’m sure fox is in the right legally, but this is stupid beyond belief. How long have we known that there was going to be a Watchmen movie released by WB? And instead of get this taken care of last year, they wait, in order to what? Likely to use screwing the release date up as a bargaining chip for more money.

It’s despicable.

By: Kyle

Kyle — Sat, 27 Dec 2008 04:13:28 +0000

Best case scenario Fox allows Warners to release the Watchmen film. Warners allows Fox to release the Batman 60′s TV show and they split the profits. win win, fair probably makes too much sense for them

By: Zoink

Zoink — Sat, 27 Dec 2008 02:31:22 +0000

Fox will probably get some huge chunk of money from WB and then the movie will be released either on time or a bit late. I think both companies are a bit off on this situation. WB should of checked to make sure everything was clear before making the movie and Fox should of tried to stop it before the movie was finished filming.

I don’t think a boycott would do anything. Wolverine is still going to do pretty darn well and when Watchmen does come out it will too. Just go see movies you want to see and don’t go too crazy.

By: RogerBarnes

RogerBarnes — Sat, 27 Dec 2008 01:34:03 +0000

Two things to consider here. 1) Marvel knew about this before they made the movie and were stupid to move forward without fixing this first. 2) Fox just spent a bundle on litigation to get this ruling… they’re not going to allow them to make the movie for peanuts.

By: snikt snakt

snikt snakt — Sat, 27 Dec 2008 00:59:53 +0000

“OM has the funniest post here. Comics Fans Assemble! and then we’ll fight ‘The Man’ running Fox. It’ll be stupendous.”

that dude is famous for his rants…

By: Outsider

Outsider — Sat, 27 Dec 2008 00:16:54 +0000

That’s not correct.

“Fox owns the Movies rights to the creation of a Watchmen movie. What Warner has done is the same as if DC put out a Wolverine comic under the DC logo. Marvel would never let it happen, and would probably never let it see the light of day under there own Logo.

This is quite the striking blow to Warner.”

From everything I have heard so far, what you are saying is incorrect.

They (Fox) argued for the rights for everything but the judge has awarded them an interest in the copyright, thats not the same thing.

Its also nothing like your analogy, your Marvel/DC analogy would have been stopped before it even got to casting.

This is much, much closer to the “Dukes of Hazard” crap that happend a few years ago.

By: C. Towns

C. Towns — Sat, 27 Dec 2008 00:08:24 +0000

to all the people who keep bringing up the Batman TV series… theres more to it then problems with DC/WBs. Fox would still have to renegotiate contracts/royalties with guest stars, music and other various licenses from that TV series.

http://www.tvshowsondvd.com/news/Batman-Watchmen-Batman-Deal-Reported/10573

By: Evan Waters

Evan Waters — Fri, 26 Dec 2008 23:50:46 +0000

Honestly… if it was decided this quickly it may have been pretty clear cut. It would surprise me that WB wouldn’t have been aware of this arrangement, but then, Fox itself thought it was okay to put the Silver Surfer on quarters without asking the U.S. Mint, so these things happen.

By: Dhaise

Dhaise — Fri, 26 Dec 2008 23:45:31 +0000

Poor evil Fox, how dare they want a share of something they paid to secure the rights for. WB can make any movie they want,who cares who they sold the rights to?!

PS- Wolverine and Watchmen both look like they suck.

By: jay mon

jay mon — Fri, 26 Dec 2008 22:31:25 +0000

Terry Gilliam never said it wasunfilmable, he said it would work, but as a 4-5 hour mini-series on hbo, showtime, etc.

By: AdamUnRama

AdamUnRama — Fri, 26 Dec 2008 21:54:40 +0000

Listen, we are doing exactly what they want us to do; talk about the movie. Get the online community worked up, so the entertainment news sources will talk about it, and make people want to see the movie that much more. Its going to make more money for both parties.

WB already showed the Watchmen up in Portland (OR). They had execs asking people if they knew about comic, if the person said ‘no’ then they were able to watch the movie for free, as long as they answered questions about the movie afterword. WB is going for a (I forget the term)way to prove that it i no longer jut WB’s intellectual properties, it is the property(ies) of those who have seen it.

By: The Man

The Man — Fri, 26 Dec 2008 20:52:53 +0000

Phooey! Why does everyone want to fight me!?

By: Matthew Raleighbaconburgerfarley

Matthew Raleighbaconburgerfarley — Fri, 26 Dec 2008 20:22:01 +0000

Warner probably is the innocent party in all of this.
Fox is just jealous of the Dark Knight’s success and wants to catch up badly after seeing there won’t be another Star Wars feature film for another 20 years until its 50th anniversary. Its not like DC is not to blame either. Here you have a company that raked in HUGE success with Dark Knight and yet they STILL don’t want to market their big 3 characters in their own comic line the proper way!

By: G.

G. — Fri, 26 Dec 2008 18:11:15 +0000

“What needs to happen now is comic book fans need to unite and boycott all Fox movies until Watchmen is released. Make every single film they release a box office flop, and write the heads of the studio to let them know that our need to see Watchmen on screen is more important than their attempts to make money off of something they didn’t even work on.”

Ahahahahaha.

Yeah, totally not doing this.

In fact, I’m going to go out of my way to watch all the FOX movies I can – even ones that look awful – just to offset your sad little crusade.

By: darrell_d

darrell_d — Fri, 26 Dec 2008 17:39:37 +0000

Ah, the boycott strategy. I hope the holding breath and kicking and screaming on the ground is next. ‘Man-children Unite!’

By: Jesse

Jesse — Fri, 26 Dec 2008 16:31:37 +0000

“Fox doesn’t OWN the rights. They have a right to the distribution, that’s all.”

That’s not correct.

Fox owns the Movies rights to the creation of a Watchmen movie. What Warner has done is the same as if DC put out a Wolverine comic under the DC logo. Marvel would never let it happen, and would probably never let it see the light of day under there own Logo.

This is quite the striking blow to Warner.