Why can’t Hollywood just get along?
Lots of lawsuits dropping in the film and entertainment buisness lately. J.K. Rowling and the “Harry Potter” Lexicon, “Rear Window” vs. “Disturbia,” Watching the “Watchmen” tug of war, No Cash for Old Tommy Lee…and let’s not forget all the SAG drama, as studios fortify their ranks to do battle, be it now or in the future.
Sometimes…I don’t know, it’s weird. It’s like you can just TELL this blessed burg needs to chill out sometimes.
From the writer/director’s MySpace blog (via /Film):
I saw “Watchmen.” It’s fucking astounding. The Non-Disclosure Agreement I signed prevents me from saying much, but I can spout the following with complete joygasmic enthusiasm: Snyder and Co. have pulled it off.
Remember that feeling of watching “Sin City” on the big screen and being blown away by what a faithful translation of the source material it was, in terms of both content and visuals? Triple that, and you’ll come close to watching “Watchmen.” Even Alan Moore might be surprised at how close the movie is to the book. March can’t come soon enough.
I think it’s fair to say that if the movie was shite, Smith wouldn’t be singing its praises. Not that he’d be ripping it apart, he’d probably just abstain from commenting. He never misses an opportunity to talk shit about Tim Burton’s “Batman,” so this news has me jacked.
And no, I’m no Smith fanboy. I hate…just about every single one of his movies. But he’s a stand-up guy when it comes to commentary.
It’s no secret that, despite some nay-saying and general anxiety about Zack Snyder’s upcoming “Watchmen,” I have been on board since we first caught a glimpse of the trailer back in July. I got the sense that Snyder’s visual style might be strangely suited to the material in a surprising sort of way that could make it fresh for even the die hard fans.
And indeed, when that first still was released almost a year ago, I began to nurture an affinity for the look of the production.
Anyway, I came across this G4 behind-the-scenes look at the film recently and my excitement level kicked it up a notch.
The most surprising inclusion was an interview with Oscar nominee Jackie Earle Haley, who takes on the iconic role of Rorschach (a.k.a. Walter Kovacs) in the film. We get our first look at Haley’s look behind the mask and I have to say they stuck the landing. Take a look:
Here’s what Haley had to say about Snyder’s approach to the material:
It’s awesome. The guys is absolutely prepared…he’s previsualized the whole movie. He’s got amazing storyboards. He’s got wonderful depth and understanding for the characters, for the story, for the symbolism. Just everything.
I’ll be honest. I haven’t come across one piece of news that has turned me off of this production yet. I just hope the inevitable truncation of the graphic novel doesn’t put fanboys up in arms. I’ve never been of the unreasonable mind that portions of the book could be abbreviated or composited.
And Snyder’s already having a tough time whittling down what he did decide to include. So he’s certainly not out to make it a Cliff’s Notes version from the start.
Filmmaker Paul Greengrass has been drawn to the sphere of politics since day one in his career as a filmmaker. He launched into the fray with 2002’s blisteringly realistic “Bloddy Sunday” (an account of the Derry massacre of 1972) and followed it up with a “Bourne” installment, putting his unique knowledge of covert military operations to use.
2005’s “United 93” was a tightrope walk that managed to land him a Best Director nomination, while 2007’s “The Bourne Ultimatum” was easily one of the best films of last year. He has been a director on an upward curve, settling quite comfortably in his role as an artist to watch, if not the artist to watch.
One of my most anticipated productions of 2009 is Greengrass’s “Green Zone,” an adaptation of Rajiv Chandrasekaran’s “Imperial Life in the Emerald City” that could be a hell of a windfall for the Iraq stalemate when it finds its way to screen. Matt Damon will star and Greengrass will have yet another stage for his brand of cinema.
Finally, though I’m excited for the visual splendor and dedication to source material of Zack Snyder’s upcoming “Watchmen,” I think we all would have been interested in Greengrass’s spin on the material had it come to fruition when the project was at Paramount Pictures a few years ago. The “‘Citizen Kane’ of comic books” certainly knows from the beast of politics.
Now word is circulating that the director may be attached to direct DreamWorks SKG’s “The Trial of the Chicago 7,” a film originally stuck in Steven Spielberg’s ever-rotating wheel house of ideas. If it’s true, count this viewer excited.
Here’s what Neil Miller of Film School Rejects has uncovered:
Then this evening, out of almost pure chance, I was skimming through the pages of Production Weekly, checkout which productions are currently in active development when I ran across an updated listing the The Trial of the Chicago 7. After cross checking some other participants, including writer Aaron Sorkin and Producers Walter Parkes and Laurie MacDonald, I deduced that this was the same production. The only odd part was that instead of listing Steven Spielberg or no director at all, the production listed a different director: Paul Greengrass.
Well…that’s a development, to say the least.
Greengrass has shown in all the aforementioned films an adeptness to the even keel when dealing in hot button issues of war and policy. He spends a considerable amount of time focusing on character rather than the situation.
I remember interviewing Kevin Macdonald in early 2006 about his then upcoming “The Last King of Scotland,” and he made it a point of mentioning that he was more interested in the way politics affects the individual, rather than the statement of the politics themselves. I think that characteristic is applicable to Greengrass’s work ethic as well.
So count me in on this one. I’ve never seen Brett Morgan’s “Chicago 10” documentary, but I’ve always thought this story could be a hell of a showcase in narrative form on screen. Greengrass would be a great fit.
I’m heading out the door to hit the Wrath of the Con party tonight, but before I go, I thought I’d link out to the news items worth reading from Comic-Con this weekend.
At Cinematical, Elisabeth Rappe writes up the “Wolf Man” panel, which included the revelation of the film’s first trailer. She also calls Marvel’s new animated film “Wolverine vs. Hulk” a “blast.”
At The Movie Blog, John Campea kicks back with the ladies of “Bitch Slap” (who’ve certainly made the rounds) for an interview at the Marriott. There’s also some nice video of Entertainment Weekly’s Visionaries panel including Frank Miller, Kevin Smith, Zack Snyder and Judd Apatow. Strange collective.
At io9, Charlie Anders writes up the footage-less “Lost” panel with some video tossed in for good measure.
At Screen Rant, Vic Holtreman live blogs the “Terminator Salvation” panel.
At /Film, Peter Sciretta passes on Zack Snyder’s revelation during the “Watchmen” panel that the director would be interested in a “Dark Knight Returns” movie. Who wouldn’t? There is also the exciting news that Jonathan Nolan was confirmed as the lead writer on “Terminator Salvation” by McG himself.
That should be plenty to chew on. I’m outta here.
Variety’s Anne Thompson is hitting the turf as always, this time down in San Diego for the annual Comic-Con International.
She snagged “Watchmen” director Zack Snyder for some quick dishing prior to today’s Warner Bros. panel in Hall H (probably the most anticipated panel of the weekend). She pressed Snyder about running time concerns, content issues and what seems to be an ambivalence on the part of the studio to give this prestige product the breathing space it deserves.
Here’s the bit about running time:
Zack Snyder is currently battling with Warners over the ultimate running time of the movie, which is three hours. He’s trying to cut it down, but doesn’t want to lose a character like Hollis, [SPOILER OMITTED]. “”I’m not ready for that yet. If Dark Knight got two and a half hours, Watchmen should get fifteen minutes more,” he pleads. “I’m trying to be reasonable.”
And on content concerns:
But the studio still thinks Watchmen is too “too long, too sexy, and too violent,” says Snyder. For him, “that’s a reason to go. That’s the why. If you take that out you take out the why.” Otherwise it’ll just be another “watered down version of Watchmen, and then you might as well make another superhero movie. There’s a million characters out there you could do instead.”
I think it has been rather clear from the start that Snyder has been aware of the importance of a project like this in the eyes of the fans. I first crossed paths with him at last year’s Con, and the guy has a solid head on his shoulders. He understands both the burden and the potential of the adaptation and, what’s more, he keeps a light skip in his step about it all. He knows…he just seems to be saying, “Look, get out of my way and I’ll do this thing justice.”
Anyway, it’s a really solid interview from Thompson. There’s plenty to chew on, from costume designs on the film to the maturation of comic books. Give it a read here.
It looks like the “Watchmen” marketing plan is kicking into high gear. The trailer landed last week and is attached to prints of “The Dark Knight.” Meanwhile, the panel with Zack Snyder and company is one of the most anticipated Hall H gatherings of this year’s San Diego Comic-Con.
Well now it looks like WB and Detective Comics have transferred the Alan Moore graphic novel to an animated endeavor, currently available on iTunes. The animation is really simple — just frames from the book set to motion — and it’s a great primer for anyone who hasn’t read “the ‘Citizen Kane’ of comic books” yet.
And the first episode is FREE! Can’t beat that. Go check out your iTunes store now!
httpv://youtube.com/watch?v=R3orQKBxiEg
And in Quicktime here. Also, it just occurred to me the Smashing Pumpkins song on the trailer is a remix of a tune which originally showed up on the “Batman & Robin” soundtrack. Ha.
I really won’t be caught dead at another San Diego Comic-Con so long as I live (though I will be attending what should be a fun after party Friday night). But studios are beginning to announce their line-ups and I guess it’s time to start rooting through what would be worth checking out.
Warner Bros. has apparently revealed its schedule, though the only thing I’m interested in is “Watchmen” and “Terminator Salvation.”
But let’s face it, the “Terminator” thing will be a whole lot of hot air, much like the “Watchmen” thing was last year. In any case, I’m hoping Zack Snyder has some schnazzy stuff to reveal this time around. I have high hopes (and a really good feeling) about this thing.
Two posts at /film and Obssessed with Film have me spinning my wheels this morning, wondering just who in the heck has approached comic scribe Mark Millar to revamp Superman for the screen in three years.
The whole story started with a Daily Record interview that quoted Millar as saying he “always wanted to reinvent Superman for the 21st century.” He then went on to reveal that he had his “director and producer set up” and that there was even a target year in mind: 2011.
This, of course, sent the Web geek community into a bit of a tizzy. In response, Millar (creator of “Wanted” and author of “Superman: Red Son”) had this to say:
PS: That Superman news is interesting, isn’t it? In the interests of clarity (because I’m sure this will be picked up somewhere) a very well known American action director heard about my love of Superman, approached my (sic) and asked me to team up with he and his producer to make a pitch for this. We’ve been talking for several weeks now and, if this is going to happen, we’ll know by Christmas. He has huge pull at WB so fingers crossed. But this is nothing more than a huge US name pulling me into his fold and making me part of a package.
The first name that leaps to my mind is Wolfgang Petersen, but he’s obviously German. However, you may recall Petersen was signed on to direct a Superman vs. Batman film for Warner Bros. way back in 2002. That was, of course, way before Christopher Nolan unleashed his reboot of the Batman franchise on the marketplace. Peterson might be construed as having “huge pull at WB” since he releases most of his films through the studio and has managed a few considerable hits there (“The Perfect Storm, “Troy”) despite the occasional clunker (“Poseidon”).
The filmmaker was also quoted as recently as two years ago — during the build-up to Bryan Singer’s “Superman Returns” — expressing an interest in pitting the two superheroes on the screen together. Sure seems like a possibility to me.
Who else could Millar be hinting at? The Wachowski Brothers have sure made a bundle of money for the studio in recent years. “Watchmen” helmer Zack Snyder has also been welcomed with open arms in Burbank after delivering big on “300,” and he seems just the sort of person who’d be interested in reimagining the Superman character for a new franchse.
Francis Lawrence? “Constantine” didn’t really find its footing, but “I Am Legend” (thanks to Will Smith, of course) made a killing worldwide.
McG? The “Charlie’s Angels” films made bank at Sony, but he still convinced Warners to hand him the key to a massive franchise in the form of “Terminator Salvation.” He’s also been here before and, according to rumor at the time, had one hell of a mind to revamp the franchise with casting speculation such as Beyoncé Knowles and Johnny Depp floating about.
And surely Tim Burton — a WB staple through the years with “huge pull” indeed — isn’t treading these waters yet again. Or is he? He certainly had a unique vision of the character once upon a time.
Thoughts? As long as it isn’t Brett Ratner, I’m happy.
