Recent Related Items:

42 Comments


Daniel Fenwick says:

I think you miss understand me here old man (I love saying that sounds like I’m just yelling old man instead of saying your name). I don’t mind fox getting money for this I do think it’s a bit greedy to ask for anymore then they put in to it, but whatever that’s the way the world works. My only problem is with an attempt to ban the film or even delay the release. There is no reason for either. If fox simply gets a huge pay out for doing absolutely nothing but the movie is unaffected I don’t care. I don’t give a damn about WB I just care about the film.

I disagree that fox is doing nothing wrong simply because lets face it they havn’t put really anything substantial in to this film, but you can bet they will ask for a substantial payout. Though as I said before if fox can make a habit of this whole let other companies make movies and just sue them later I would be pretty happy. Fox gets a profit, but good studios (or at least better ones) get to make the flims. Fox puts out good TV shows just sometimes mis manages them, but their movies generally suck.

Ken J says:

“I disagree that fox is doing nothing wrong simply because lets face it they havn’t put really anything substantial in to this film”

Funny, I thought I said that EXACT criticism about Fox and this situation before until Vic pointed out to me that putting a film in “turnaround” is a very normal process and there isn’t anything seen as wrong with it.

But I guess I’m just “defending” Fox, yep, really I am… :-D

Good show, lol.

the old man says:

Yeah, I like your idea about Fox not making the movies. Daniel have you ever gambled and won? Just curious. I agree with you that Fox shouldn’t get a big windfall, because I’m afraid of the precedent it might set.

I see WB’s action like running a red light. You might get away with it, but you shouldn’t. If everything goes well in court, we’ll see that movie on time no probs. Just boycott the new “TDTESS.” Fox should feel some pain for its arrogance too.

Daniel Fenwick says:

I won’t Boycott anything. Boycotting is useless because the amount of people that will do it is so insignificant that it will have no effect on anything. Besides even though 80% of their films are crap they still sometimes release a few good ones and I don’t want to miss those. Wolverine sounds better by the day.

Felix says:

I find it interesting that Fox claims to have tried to contact WB earlier by phone, mail, and email. No mention of sending a document by any type of courier – which would have required a signature and created a record of the delivery. Did they send it registered mail or just put a .42 stamp on the envelope. And who in particular did they try to contact? Whatever legal tactic they can apply now was also available to them earlier. The case might be made that the earlier attempts at contact were token attempts that were meant to fail, in which case FOX had planned all along to let the production go on and then hold the release hostage.

If Gordon didn’t have the appropriate rights to take the movie to WB, it’s hard to see how FOX can avoid including Gordon in some sort of complaint. I could imagine someone at WB suggesting that if anyone owes money to FOX, it’s Gordon.

Horrorphile says:

The only group losing in this matter is the fanbase (IE: the consumers). Either way this goes the studios will profit over any losses they may or may not percieve. That is just so truly sad, especially with box office already down even with the hits this year.

I’ve been a fan of this work since it debuted in the comic world and have been a HUGE fan of Alan Moore’s work since his run on Swamp Thing. I have salivated over this coming to the silver screen since I first saw it listed as a work in progress in Wizard magazine. I regularly checked on the progress every month without fail just to stay abreast of any changes that may befall it.

Now saying that…I’ll say this…Fox has owned the rights to this since the beginning and that is a simple fact. There is NO WAY that they weren’t aware of this property being developed and filmed at a rival studio. Knowing this it therefore makes no sense whatsoever that would only make token attempts over a two year period to halt production and recoup the turnaround rights before an announced release date. It also seems a BIT odd that a trailer comes out for the movie a week before it is announced it is being delayed by a “rival studio.” All this does is whip the fanbase into a frothing lynch mob of exasperation and then aim them at the owner of the rights of the property.

None of this makes any coherent sense at all. It just seems to be a “he said, she said” situation or just a viral ad campaign to promote the movie and build fanaticism further for the release.

I could be way off on this but it’s my private observation of this sad situation.

Again…it seems the only true loser so far is the consumer and a suicidal move on Fox’s part.

Mary says:

It’s difficult for me to see Fox as “innocent.” How can this property have been developed at more than one studio with this rights bomb ticking away if Fox had notified those studios of the potential problem in any substantive manner? Are these studios run by idiots who love handing millions to their competitors? I think not. Yes, Warners should have checked more carefully to make sure that Gordon had secured his rights … no doubt they will be more careful in the future! However, it is logical to assume that they acted in good faith simply because otherwise they are risking big bucks. On the other hand, it is likely that Fox is not because they have much more to gain by failing to inform Warners of their risk.

No, indeed, I believe that if Fox “informed” Warners, it was in a way that was likely to be overlooked or misunderstood because they were in fact looking for this opportunity to get something that they want … and now it’s come out, hasn’t it? Warners owns the rights to DC characters and Fox would like to put out 60s Batman DVDs. Gee, it isn’t even about Watchmen! Only it is. Fox is holding Watchmen for ransom. I don’t think that is very honorable.

Page 2 of 2«12
What's your opinion? Leave a Reply!
GravatarWant to change your avatar?
Go to Gravatar.com and upload your own (we'll wait)!

 Name (*required)

 Email Address (*private)

 Website (optional)

 Rules: No profanity or personal attacks.
 Use a valid email address or risk being banned from commenting.


If your comment doesn't show up immediately, it may have been flagged for moderation. Please try refreshing the page first, then drop us a note and we'll retrieve it.