A Sneak Peek Of "Watchmen"

LOS ANGELES — Who watched some of "Watchmen"?

Select members of the press. That's who.

Director Zack Snyder previewed and discussed three scenes from his upcoming graphic novel adaptation Wednesday. The film is based on Alan Moore and Dave Gibbons' award-winning graphic novel of the same name about a group of subversive superheroes in hiding.

Snyder, who directed "300," said the movie was originally slated to be set in modern times and explained how he slowly persuaded studio Warner Bros. to stay true to the graphic novel's alternate 1985 setting, where Richard Nixon remains president and outlaws superheroes.

"I was like, 'What if we just set it back a little further, like 1990?'" said Snyder. "And then we just said that 1985 is cooler because then it would be more of a period movie. That was how, for me anyway, I got as much of the graphic novel back in."

Snyder began the preview _ spoiler alert! _ with the first 12 minutes of the film. The Comedian (Jeffrey Dean Morgan) is watching TV when a shadowy figure breaks into his apartment, attacking and eventually throwing him through a window to a bloody death below.

The opening credit montage detailed the early history of "Watchmen" characters from the 1930s to the 1970s. The montage featured the original Minutemen characters including Silhouette (Apollonia Vanova), who was killed alongside her girlfriend in the 1940s.

Next, Snyder showed a sequence detailing the origin of Dr. Manhattan (Billy Crudup), which began with the blue superhero standing on Mars recalling his love affair with a fellow physicist and the experiment that transformed him into a matter-bending superbeing.

Story continues below

advertisement

The final scene previewed focused on the second incarnations of Silk Spectre (Malin Akerman) and Nite Owl (Patrick Wilson) breaking into a prison to rescue fellow superhero Rorschach (Jackie Earle Haley) immediately after the duo had sex in Nite Owl's ship.

"Watchmen" is scheduled to tick into movie theaters March 6, 2009, but the film's release could be in jeopardy because of a lawsuit filed earlier this year by Twentieth Century Fox, which claims to have the rights to distribute a film based on the graphic novel.

"We're just working on the movie," Snyder said of the lawsuit. "I'm not a lawyer, so it's hard for me to comment on that. I probably shouldn't, I guess. We've just been forging ahead. If they wanted to come and stop us, I guess they would, but they haven't yet."

Snyder was also adamant that since no more "Watchmen" source material exists from the graphic novel, a sequel or prequel to his "Watchman" _ currently clocking in at a beefy 2-hour-and-43-minute running time _ could never be created. At least not one he'd direct.

"There can't be a sequel," said Snyder when asked about rumored sequel clauses in actors' contracts. "There won't be prequel. Not with me involved in it, anyway. They might be able to find someone to do it, but it won't be me. That's crazy talk."

___

On the Net:

http://watchmenmovie.warnerbros.com/

Comments

[Lendall]

I never see this kind of movie (even when I was young they bored me), but I can comment on the legal aspect. I used to be in the business and am on the mailing list of an entertainment attorney who explains the situation: The project was in turnaround from Fox to to Larry Gordon or his company Largo. That means that Fox was developing the project and then decided to stop and let the producer have it back. However, in a turnaround situation, when the producer sets the project up at another studio, the project's development costs at the first studio (Fox) become payable in full, with interest. Furthermore, whenever there is a changed element (the producer attaches a star or director, or even changes the budget), he is obligated to go back to the first studio (Fox) and give them a certain amount of time to decide if they want to put the project back into development. It is kind of incredible that Warners made the picture without vetting the chain of title (history of the rights), which would have shown immediately that it was in turnaround from Fox. Fox has Warners over a barrel, in my opinion.

[JTaverner]

I was expecting to watch a scene from the film . . .

[screwedrus]

The "Watchmen" was the very first time I ever was exposed to a "false flag" attack.

It was eye opening when it was first released, and it's so relevant now that it's kind of eerie.

[lost sheep]

This has nothing to do with GUN VIOLENCE from Hollywood.

This is the one time that ALL OF US must absolutely go see a movie and support it. And, if you have not read the Graphic Novel, go pick it up and read it. It ask really big questions that are very important in this years election, such as what are the limits of power? How much should the people who have power be allowed to use? Should we allow those with power and money and control simply to control our lives or do we have a say?

All these questions are framed very simply in the GRAPHIC NOVEL by one very simple question: WHO WATCHES THE WATCHERS?

During 8 years of the Bush-Cheney administration, apparently nobody did, and they run rampant bringing our country to the edge of ruin. Those with power in the movie and graphic novel at least have the morals to debate the question.

I heartily recommend both the GN and movie to all Huffington Post members.

[ZenBastard]

Actually the phrase is "Who Watches The Watchmen?"

And while I agree that this material is as pertinent today as it was when it was written I can't in good faith recommend the movie. It's got nothing to do with the actors, producers or Zack Snyder. It comes down to the fact that movies made from books, comic books or graphic novels just don't translate that well. There's so much to be absorbed from The Watchmen graphic novel that there's just no way to fit it all in. This was certainly true for V for Vendetta & it's going to be true for The Watchmen. This is one of the reasons Alan Moore doesn't want his name attached to movie projects based on his material, because they end up being pale shadows of the original material.

[MountPanic]

Actually actually the phrase is "Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?" which can be translated as watchers, watchmen, guardians or the like. It's open to some amount of interpretation. Of course "Watchmen" suited Alan's needs well, since he was creating stand-ins for the Minutemen.

[ugmold]

More gun violence...love that Hollywood

[whsmith]

joe lieberman is that you? Please don't comment on stuff you have no clue about.

[rjmiller]

Actually it should have fairly little gun violence, as the Comedian is the only character that uses a gun. Since he dies in the opening scene, its a pretty unfair characterization.

Considering you obviously have no idea what you're talking about, you probably shouldn't bother. "Watchmen" is the most highly acclaimed graphic novel ever and is on Time magazine's 100 greatest novels (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All-Time_100_Greatest_Novels). It's an amazing book that I highly recommend everyone reads.

[Clavis]

Actually, "Watchmen" is one of most adult of stories, in terms of how horrible, rare and significant gun violence is. The Comedian -- the character you see in the photo above -- is a notoriously amoral contract killer who is in no way glorified or celebrated for his violent acts, even though they are technically authorized by the government, for whom he works (after giving up the freelance superhero life). He is considered a monster, even by those who worked alongside him and knew him best. There is nothing I can think of in the source material that in any way promotes violence (possibly leaving aside the controversial ending). Don't let a Hollywood-ified publicity photo throw you.

[Summer71]

Absolutely hands down one of the best graphic novels ever written. I wil be first in line when this movie comes out!

[Palemoon]

Thanks to you both for helping clear that up for me. And I admit, that I haven't read all of the novel. Only seen bits and pieces here and there on the internet, along with discussions, or the "V vs Rorshack" debating contests over who would win. But I am looking forward to this movie for sure. And I respect the fact that he might not want them done as movies, but some things are just too important. :)

I really loved V For Vendetta and I read where he only read half the script before tossing it out and has never seen the movie. Shame. I thought the movie was great, but it did turn me on to the novel and the more I read it or about it, the more I can appreciate how Moore felt about his unhappiness with it. I'll still like the movie regardless, but I now have a bigger, more open mind. And his talking of anarchy has certainly opened my eyes. I have been studying that some and I agree with him that it is a morally sensible form of society.

Anyways, I am in danger of rambling on, but it's because of all of this that I have been reading about philosophers and doing heavy, deep thinking. Not just about the philosophers, but society thoughts and the deep meaning of civilization as we know it. Sometimes I feel as if I'm on the verge of that great secret that Poe spoke of.

[Biddy]

Yep. You are correct. He's withholding his name. His name being absent from the credits is his request.

[Palemoon]

I find it curious, that on the official site, there is not one single mention of Alan Moore. Is he withholding his name from being associated with the film in the way that he did with "V For Vendetta"?? He is the soul of both of those graphic novels. And writing genius behind most of it. And whose writing style, and political ideologies, are relevant and striking to this day.

[leftbehind2000]

I got a sense from what I've read that Moore simply does not want his work done in cinematic form. Period. So there would be no endorsement or acknowledgement from Moore no matter how good the film might be.

That said, this is an absolutely incredible work. On the one hand I really want to see the film, and on the other, I can't see how it could possibly measure up to the brilliant novel.

[whsmith]

Alan Moore doesn't want to be involved in any way - he's even deferring his share of the royalties to the artist Dave Gibbons who is enthusiastic about the project.