io9 
Enter your username and password.
San Francisco, 2:57 PM
Sun Nov 8
11 posts in the last 24 hours
Tip your editors: tips@io9.com
Editor-in-Chief:
Annalee Newitz | Email
News Editor:
Charlie Jane Anders | Email
Associate Editor:
Meredith Woerner | Email
Assistant Editor:
Lauren Davis | Email
Weekend Editor:
Graeme McMillan | Email
Contributors:
Joshua Glenn
Stephen Goldmeier | Email
Ed Grabianowski | Email
Austin Grossman
Paul Hogan | Email
Lauren Davis | Email
Chris Hsiang | Email
Lynn Peril | Email
Ann VanderMeer
Alasdair Wilkins | Email
Graphic Designer:
Stephanie Fox | Email
Interns:
Tim Barribeau | Email
Julia Carusillo | Email
Alex Eichler | Email
Cyriaque Lamar | Email
Caitlin Petrakovitz | Email
Mary Ratliff | Email
Josh Snyder | Email
Original material is licensed under a Creative Commons License permitting non-commercial sharing with attribution.
02/22/09
02/22/09
02/22/09
02/21/09
02/22/09
02/21/09
02/22/09
02/22/09
02/21/09
02/21/09
02/23/09
02/21/09
Imagine how much worse it would have been if the Sam Hamm script was made.
02/21/09
02/21/09
A million dollars is an invconcievable amount of money to most people. If you added up every possession, including the averages middle-class home, car and dog you might crack a half million (pre-meltdown) if Dad hasn't been playing too much online poker
This movie a 150 million+. That's a lot to invest, even on a property with a fervent, but built-in, audience. It's the brilliance of recent PR flacks to turn those fans into advocates instead of viewing them with animosity. It's all about getting a return on investment.
If Watchmen succeeds, you'll see more films like it. Spider-Man's faithfulness opened the door for Batman, Iron-Man and such. Even the Hulk reboot was an attempt to get closer to the material because that made Spider-Man billions.
I think it will succeed. Snyder's not a great director, but he's a slick one and, stripping everything away, this is a pretty, polished piece of pop entertainment.
Getting Alan Moore's writing to translate? Not really a priority. The emphasis, from everything I've seen, is on the aesthetic. And for a great many people, perhaps enough to refill the Money Bin over at Warners, that's enough.
Doesn't destroy the original book, doesn't tarnish Moore or Gibbons reputation and sink or swim, Zach Snyder will
live to speed ramp again.
02/23/09
Good points otherwise, though. :)
02/23/09
02/21/09
"(Something that had been hinted at before; I tend to think of Tim Burton's Batman Returns and Sam Raimi's last two Spider-Man movies - in particular Spider-Man 3, with its jazz interludes and weird uneven tone - as earlier examples of superhero auteurism)"
Ye gods, man. Spider-Man 3 was simply terrible, that's was why it was seemingly weird and uneven: it sucked.
02/22/09
02/22/09
02/21/09
I think this post is missing the "tempest in a teapot" tag.
02/22/09
02/21/09
that's literally the first thing i said when everyone was going nuts about how cool the first trailer looked. it's like, dude: we didn't even see anyone say a line of dialogue...it could be attack of the clones for all we know
02/21/09
I take issue with this. While the lack of dialogue in the trailer may have been disconcerting, I find it baseless to say that the visuals of a COMIC BOOK are the least important thing about it. Alan Moore specifically chose this medium to tell his tale in, and the art and visual look is integral in telling that tale.
02/21/09
02/21/09
What if WATCHMEN DOES flop? Well, it probably won't first of all - the film is tracking to open really well. At worst it will do soft numbers, with a front loaded first weekend. The film is almost guaranteed - simply because of marketing and awareness - to do over 100 million. That's not what anybody wants and it won't make the film profitable in theaters, but it will keep the thing from having a black eye. And I think it'll do more than that anyway. Plus, this film is going to live forever on DVD/Blu-Ray/Whatever is next. If this is the next BLADE RUNNER - a movie that takes a while to find its audience - it will be the next BLADE RUNNER - a movie that is a stalwart catalog title that will be a sure money earner for decades to come in an endless series of rereleases, anniversary editions and upgrades.
But again, what if WATCHMEN does flop? I'd like to read an article about that, not just a paragraph appended to a vapid series of other paragraphs from someone who seems to have no knowledge of the film (having not seen it) and possibly no knowledge of the business side of things.
One of the biggest problems with this blog entry is that because you haven't seen the film you have no context against which to judge its potential failure. What will studio execs take from a failure of WATCHMEN? You have no idea because you haven't seen the movie. Here's a hint: WATCHMEN is a singular film that will be either a singular success or a singular failure. This film will not make anyone rush out to greenlight a complex, three hour superhero epic and it won't squash impending films. I don't even think a failure will hurt Zack Snyder's career (and why are you asking about Billy Crudup's career? Have you seen the guy's filmography? Are you aware of his complete lack of interest in being a big movie star?), simply because it's not a bad movie. If the film doesn't perform it isn't because Snyder made a piece of shit, it's because he's made a movie that is dense and rich beyond the tastes of average mall-going crowds. Also, he's smart enough to have other projects lined up next. He'll be in production on SUCKERPUNCH this fall.
But please, don't let the concept of facts or knowledge get in the way of your check-padding bloviating.
02/21/09
02/22/09
And Graeme did put his finger on something important, I think. Watchmen's "visuals" are in many ways the least important part of the graphic novel. It's a nice looking piece of work, but it's really the writing, and especially all the little character quirks, that make it so outstanding and memorable. I think it's fair to question whether the movie can really capture that stuff, or whether it'll just feel like a random collection of action set pieces and cool-looking stuff.
I also think it's valid, and worthwhile, to wonder what happens if Watchmen does badly, after having been built up as the next step in smarter and more nuanced superhero films. How would this affect the next person who wants to make a darker or more nuanced superhero film?
I'm pretty sure the Billy Crudup thing was a joke. Graeme does that.
Again, you can disagree with Graeme's points, but I think they're clear and pretty well reasoned. And I'm sure Graeme would have opinions in his brain even if he wasn't being paid.
02/22/09
(The Billy Crudup's career line was a joke, to pull back from what even I saw as doomsaying. Sorry it didn't work for you.)
I get that you think the movie's great - your "if the movie fails, it's the fault of the audience" logic explains that much - but you seem locked off to the possibility that others won't share your love of it. I genuinely think that Watchmen will open strong, and then fall badly in the second week, and word of mouth goes from "OMG I HAVE TO SEE IT" to a much more mixed reaction which will, again, be fueled by disappointment that comes as much as anything from raised fans expectations coming off've a promotional campaign that pandered to the people that were already going to see it.
Sorry that you think I wrote this to pad my check (I don't get paid by the post, by the way), but this was written with more integrity than you're giving me credit for, even if you disagree with me on what I wrote.
02/21/09
02/21/09
Something isn't bad just because it's less than perfect.
02/21/09
The only real answer is this one: We. Shall. See.
02/21/09
02/23/09