Comments on: Details Of The Watchmen Lawsuit Settlement

By: Ryan Reynolds Will Wield The Ring » West 46th Street

Ryan Reynolds Will Wield The Ring » West 46th Street — Sat, 11 Jul 2009 09:25:15 +0000

[...] With him officially becoming “>Hal Jordan, no one knows what’s in store for the aforementioned “>Deadpool. With both film scheduled for a 2011 release, something has to give. I have no idea about the contractual status regarding either property, but I have to believe that “>Warner Bros., or “>“Fox” for that matter, would want their leading man fronting a rival franchise. And that’s to say nothing of the rivalry between “DC Comics” and “Marvel”. I can’t either of them would be happy with Mr. Reynolds being the face of both characters. Here’s hoping Warner Bros. has all their ducks in a row this time around, no one wants another “>“Watchmen” fiasco. [...]

By: Ryan Reynolds Will Wield The Ring | West 46th Street

Ryan Reynolds Will Wield The Ring | West 46th Street — Sat, 11 Jul 2009 07:47:02 +0000

[...] With him officially becoming “>“Hal Jordan,” no one knows what’s in store for the aforementioned “Deadpool.” With both film scheduled for a 2011 release, something has to give. I have no idea about the contractual status regarding either property, but I have to believe that “>”Warner Bros.”, or Fox for that matter, would want their leading man fronting a rival franchise. And that’s to say nothing of the rivalry between DC Comics and Marvel. I can’t either of them would be happy with Mr. Reynolds being the face of both characters. Here’s hoping Warner Bros. has all their ducks in a row this time around, no one wants another “>“Watchmen” fiasco. [...]

By: Watchmen Settlement Details Surface | The Movie Reviewer

Watchmen Settlement Details Surface | The Movie Reviewer — Wed, 28 Jan 2009 03:19:52 +0000

[...] agreement. The details of this agreement have started to come out, and this is what we know so far: ScreenRant offers up: So far, we know that the lawsuit will reward Fox with the [...]

By: Troy

Troy — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 03:54:26 +0000

I’m glad that I’ll still be able to see Watchmen, but I’m almost tempted to boycott Fox. Okay, maybe not, but this is just the latest in a long line of moves that Fox has made that I don’t appreciate.

By: Ken J

Ken J — Wed, 21 Jan 2009 04:00:15 +0000

@Inquisitor

Well, while I agree that it sucks when a company buys up the rights to something and never put it to good use, there’s also the issue of first come first served. If they were fast enough to get the rights to it before you did, you know what, it’s their’s. I mean how would you like it if you were quick to buy the rights to something that nobody else wanted at the time, the rights become in demand, and just because you took a while to find what you want to do with it, or you make something that didn’t turn out well, they force you to forfeit the rights on the basis that you didn’t do anything good with it for a certain amount of time? You probably wouldn’t be happy. So while it’s not perfect, as in this case with Fox, it is only fair that the people who purchased or acquired the rights to something first maintain those rights until they give them up or sell them…

By: JessSayin'

JessSayin' — Wed, 21 Jan 2009 03:16:10 +0000

This is what happens when you borrow Dad’s car without permission.

Is anyone wondering if Peter Jackson got ‘permission’ from the Tolkien estate and anyone else that had their fingers in the LOTR’s pie to make those movies? Nope.

So why didn’t Gordon get permission…in writing, when it clearly wasn’t ‘their’ movie to make.

THIS is why we have lawyers.

I’m just glad they got it sorted out and Fox left it UNTOUCHED in time for release.

(Nice gesture for such an evil empire.)

By: Vic Holtreman

Vic Holtreman — Tue, 20 Jan 2009 14:15:22 +0000

@Kane

That’s what Fox claims, yes. I never heard whether that was verified or not.

Vic

By: Kane

Kane — Tue, 20 Jan 2009 11:42:44 +0000

Just a thought…

Isn’t it well known now that Fox DID INDEED bring this issue up prior to filming?

By: Inquisitor

Inquisitor — Tue, 20 Jan 2009 11:25:33 +0000

Well, considering that they will lose a lot of money with dragonball (i guess who wants to see a dragonball with Goku at high school, Bulma with two guns and no Crilin….) and street fighter – the legend of Chun Lee…i mean…Chun Lee?????????? Not talking about Cowboy Bebop….
It was a bad behaviour indeed from Fox, i mean, image is all at certain levels and if they, after the win, just asked the money for the lawsuit and nothing else they would have seem better to the world. Now it just seem that they are jelous cause someone did what they couldn’t do….and i hate those companies that buy the rights from books and comics and keep them for years without even trying to use them….

By: Ken J

Ken J — Tue, 20 Jan 2009 08:54:37 +0000

Wasn’t Live Free or Die Hard a Fox production? I loved that movie, lol.

By: dave fernandes

dave fernandes — Tue, 20 Jan 2009 05:55:15 +0000

I’m surprised no mention of the 60′s Batman TV series came up. You would think Fox would push that point to make a lot more money off the deal.
I don’t hate Fox. I blame W.B. incompetence. Fox of course waited until a movie got made. What’s the point of suing without a bargaining chip.

By: Vic Holtreman

Vic Holtreman — Tue, 20 Jan 2009 01:34:43 +0000

Hey Kane, are you on Twitter? You’ll probably get a kick out of this:

http://www.twitter.com/foxmovies

Vic

By: Kane

Kane — Tue, 20 Jan 2009 01:08:45 +0000

Over a year or so…?!

Hehe… Pfft. I’d say Fox hasn’t had a tentpole release that was both critically AND commercially successful since ‘X-Men 2′ in 2003!

It’s actually become a bit of an obsession of mine lately – a game I play, guessing which films are Fox films, simply by looking at the title and the poster. Perfect example in recent memory? ‘Meet Dave’. You can just tell… way before you see the Fox logo.

The only films that ARE worthy seem to be ones that are mostly done by outside creative forces, such as ‘Revenge of the Sith’ (the quality of which is debatable), ‘Borat’ and ‘The Simpsons Movie’.

By: Metallicat79

Metallicat79 — Tue, 20 Jan 2009 00:13:22 +0000

@Vic
I suposes so, but it just feels a bit overblown, coupled with the fact fact fox has not had a descent film in over a year or so, they had torecoup their losses somehow i guess. Perhaps a better term would have been Overhyed and overblown.

By: Vic Holtreman

Vic Holtreman — Tue, 20 Jan 2009 00:06:24 +0000

@Metallicat

While it was a big ugly fight, I wouldn’t call it a waste of time, effort and money since WB ends up with the lion’s share of the profits but Fox still gets some coin for doing nothing.

Vic

By: greenknight333

greenknight333 — Mon, 19 Jan 2009 23:57:30 +0000

I hate FOX..Parasites…

By: Metallicat79

Metallicat79 — Mon, 19 Jan 2009 23:42:42 +0000

What a waste of time effort and moeny for anyone involved. These are resources better spent elsewhere, all so fox can promote their crappy movies.

By: Goliad

Goliad — Mon, 19 Jan 2009 17:48:21 +0000

some times you have to sleep with the devil to get what you want.

i never put too much stock into the studios, but i will be more aware whom i patronize now. fox is at the bottom of my list.

By: Vic Holtreman

Vic Holtreman — Mon, 19 Jan 2009 16:19:27 +0000

@The Glove

That’s a great point that’s been brought up before. Can you imagine if after all this the movie ends up doing mediocre box office?

Although I tend to doubt that, myself.

Vic

By: The Glove

The Glove — Mon, 19 Jan 2009 14:32:58 +0000

I really wonder just how sucsessful this movie will be, surely it only has a cult following? the trailers look great but i’m not really looking forward to the film, i’m pretty sure I wont bother(not that i do much these days anyway!)going to the cinema to see Watchmen.
my problem with it is that I dont like the watchmen story, just never really got it( i’ve owned the graphic novel for nearly 20 years and have only read it once.)so this does not make me too eager to see a film of the same book.