Watchmen Update

[CptGreedle]

I don't think anyone will want to sign a contract with him again.
When you screw over 2 companies like this... you've signed your own death warrant.

[arrow61095]

Gordon and Fox got the movie rights from the autor "David Gibbons" in 1986.

Fox gave the rights to Gordon in 1991 (17 years ago), but also wrote up a separate contract with Gordon that contains a clause somewhere in the contract that says that Fox get "first option" to distribute anytime someone involved with the project changes.

[arrow61095]

Originally Posted by CptGreedle

I don't think anyone will want to sign a contract with him again.
When you screw over 2 companies like this... you've signed your own death warrant.

+1000

Gordon is done.

[CptGreedle]

Originally Posted by arrow61095

Gordon and Fox got the movie rights from the autor "David Gibbons" in 1986.

Fox gave the rights to Gibbons in 1991 (17 years ago), but also wrote up a separate contract with Gibbons that contains a clause somewhere in the contract that says that Fox get "first option" to distribute anytime someone involved with the project changes.

I see, that makes sense now (almost).
And yet it seems like Fox might be overstepping their rights, but without seeing the contract I really have no idea how far their rights go.
It could have been one of those clauses that Gordon just overlooked and did indeed forget about. But he is still finished in Hollywood.

[meckel]

Originally Posted by arrow61095

My personal "best case" solution on this is:

WB gets the rights to release and distribute Watchmen.

Fox gets the rights to release and distribute the 60s TV Batman show.

Gordon has to pay Fox's re-coup costs and the buy out costs out of his pocket on all the work that they did before they scrapped Watchmen in 1991. (a little over 1 million).

Fox gets 30% of the profit from the film. (So, if it loses money Fox makes nothing, but also loses nothing. Once Warner re-coups its loses due to production costs, etc...., 30% to Fox)

Someone (either Fox or WB) sues Paramount for trying to sell distribution rights that they did not own & takes a portion of their 25% cut.

There are so many other issues with the 60s Batman TV show ever seeing DVD/Blu-Ray. Warner has very little to do with it. It is more with the production company and how the contracts were written, as reason the Green Hornet has never been released either. TVSHOWSONDVD.com had a very good story about all the issues around the TV show

http://www.tvshowsondvd.com/news/Bat...Reported/10573

If your are lucky enough to have ALN (American Life Network) on your cable line-up they show Batman followed by The Green Hornet every Friday @ 9, in all its campy glory

[Ben]

Originally Posted by anomynous

Fox is evil, so I hope they lose.




Cancelling Futurama, Firefly, Terminator, cranking out movies............

I don't believe Terminator has been canceled....

[arrow61095]

Originally Posted by CptGreedle

I see, that makes sense now (almost).
And yet it seems like Fox might be overstepping their rights, but without seeing the contract I really have no idea how far their rights go.
It could have been one of those clauses that Gordon just overlooked and did indeed forget about. But he is still finished in Hollywood.

the confusion is my fault for mis-typing one of the names, it should be:

Originally Posted by arrow61095

Gordon (the producer) and Fox got the movie rights from the autor "David Gibbons" in 1986.

Fox gave the rights to Gordon in 1991 (17 years ago), but also wrote up a separate contract with Gordon that contains a clause somewhere in the contract that says that Fox get "first option" to distribute anytime someone involved with the project changes.

[Memnoch71]

I still say the movie will be released on Schedule. The only reason Fox is filing to have the Release Blocked is so that WB Doesn't go ahead and release it early. Then the legal wranglings over how much or what percentage of the take everybody gets becomes a lot more complicated.

Fox simply wants it's Day in Court to get this settled. WB is not necessarily at fault here, but that doesn't mean they will not have to end up paying to get the movie into the Theatres on time. Either way I guess we'll just have to wait and see.

[statikcat]

Originally Posted by Ben

I don't believe Terminator has been canceled....

Nope it comes back in Feb

[anomynous]

It's moving to Friday nights in Fox's death slot, it's getting cancelled

[CptGreedle]

I am still about 70% confident this will be release on time, 80% that it will be released next year, and 90% that it will be released by 2010.
I highly doubt it will get blocked completely, but it is still possible.
It is far more likely that FOX just wants to make sure they get their say and have the chance to make money off of this. FOX still does not deserve any money for this since A), they did none of the work, B), they sat on it for 20 years and did nothing. But since the courts thrive off of legalities like this, they do at least have the right to fight this in court.
But I am sure we will see this come to light sooner rather than later. There has been no court ruling saying that the movie can not be worked on still (as far as I know), so post-production should still be ongoing. This means that if the movie is allowed to be released on time, there should be no hang ups production-wise.

[Ben]

Originally Posted by anomynous

It's moving to Friday nights in Fox's death slot, it's getting cancelled

If that happens, look for the WB to pick it up. It's a great show and a lot of folks in the industry are rooting for it.

[Red Hood]

Plus lena headey is

[fighthefutureofhd]

Originally Posted by anomynous

It's moving to Friday nights in Fox's death slot, it's getting cancelled

that's not fox's death slot. the x-files used to be on friday nights and was one of fox's biggest television hits. if not their biggest. very few friday night shows can make that claim.

Originally Posted by arrow61095

Gordon and Fox got the movie rights from the autor "David Gibbons" in 1986.

Fox gave the rights to Gordon in 1991 (17 years ago), but also wrote up a separate contract with Gordon that contains a clause somewhere in the contract that says that Fox get "first option" to distribute anytime someone involved with the project changes.

well that makes more sense. it has been 17 years since he acquired the rights, but his deal with warner didn't just happen this year. it happened probably a year or two ago. if not more so it doesn't end up being 17 years ago. so that would blow out the defense that he may have forgotten since it was 17 years ago. they didn't just sign a deal this year. if so warner is stupider than i give them credit for.

[Memnoch71]

Originally Posted by CptGreedle

I am still about 70% confident this will be release on time, 80% that it will be released next year, and 90% that it will be released by 2010.
I highly doubt it will get blocked completely, but it is still possible.
It is far more likely that FOX just wants to make sure they get their say and have the chance to make money off of this. FOX still does not deserve any money for this since A), they did none of the work, B), they sat on it for 20 years and did nothing. But since the courts thrive off of legalities like this, they do at least have the right to fight this in court.
But I am sure we will see this come to light sooner rather than later. There has been no court ruling saying that the movie can not be worked on still (as far as I know), so post-production should still be ongoing. This means that if the movie is allowed to be released on time, there should be no hang ups production-wise.

The problem is that the Judge decided that Fox's Case had enough merit to go to Trial. In response to A) TRUE, they did nothing involved with this film and B) the problem with this is that if they had tried to make this film 20 years ago or even up untill just recently it would have been too Expensive to film or more than likely would not have been able to make it 'right'. I myself am glad Fox had enough sense to NOT try to make this film too early where they would have either had to water it down to get it made, or it would have looked silly because the technology required to make it look realistic was either too expensive or just flat out did not exist yet.

I hold out hope that WB and Zach Snyder have done the story justice and that we all get to see it coming up in March! I personally could care less which company gets what amount of the money as long as we all get to see it! If it turns out Fox's claim is legitimate then they will get paid. As it turns out this big mess might just be a product of bringing the 'Unfilmable' to the big screen and it might just be the only way we all will get to see something truely special on the screen. (Or it might just suck, who knows )

[CptGreedle]

True. This film could not have been made 20, or even 10 years ago.
It is good Fox didn't try to make it then. (or that they scrapped it, whatever it was).
I hope that we see this sooner rather than later. Otherwise it may be a phantom movie that will only be seen by a select few and never widely released. I highly doubt that will be the case.
I just hope there is no delay. The judge said there is enough evidence to go to trial, but WB is planning to appeal that and the next court date is Jan 20th, so we will see what happens then.

[arrow61095]

Originally Posted by fighthefutureofhd

well that makes more sense. it has been 17 years since he acquired the rights, but his deal with warner didn't just happen this year. it happened probably a year or two ago. if not more so it doesn't end up being 17 years ago. so that would blow out the defense that he may have forgotten since it was 17 years ago. they didn't just sign a deal this year. if so warner is stupider than i give them credit for.

Talks started with WB in October 2005, so it was 14 years (and 5 other movie studios) since he had signed the contract with Fox.

(For a more complete history, see my long post on page 2)

[fighthefutureofhd]

ok. i guess 14 years is a long time and one could forget a detail so large as this one. i guess. my bad!

[thedarkangel1975]

http://www.darkhorizons.com/news09/090108i.php

Warner Bros. Pictures has asked for the decision regarding the injunction against "Watchmen" to be moved up according to The Hollywood Reporter.

Fox and Warner Bros. had agreed to let Judge Gary A. Feess decide whether to issue an injunction at a meeting on January 20th, but Warners wants the hearing be moved up to as early as Monday due to critical timing in regards to the film's marketing.

Feess made a preliminary ruling on Christmas Eve that producer Lawrence Gordon failed to acquire Fox's entire interest in Watchmen, thereby leaving Fox with distribution rights under a 1994 turnaround agreement.

If the injunction is granted, Warners would be barred from releasing the film though it likely would appeal immediately. Feess has encouraged the parties to settle the dispute.

[Bizi Jones]

Open Letter from'Watchmen' Producers

http://www.hitfix.com/blogs/2008-12-...hmen-producers

...the flashpoint of this dispute, came in late spring of 2005. Both Fox and Warner Brothers were offered the chance to make Watchmen. They were submitted the same package, at the same time. ...

The response we got from Fox was a flat "pass." That's it. An internal Fox email documents that executives there felt the script was one of the most unintelligible pieces of shit they had read in years. Conversely, Warner Brothers called us after having read the script and said they were interested in the movie - yes, they were unsure of the screenplay, and had many questions, but wanted to set a meeting to discuss the project, which they promptly did. Did anyone at Fox ask to meet on the movie? No. Did anyone at Fox express any interest in the movie? No. Express even the slightest interest in the movie? Or the graphic novel? No.

Sounds like they're pleading to Fox cause they know they're screwed

also, this just reaffirms Fox's asshat attitude and behaviour as a Studio