Ric Robertson Taking Paid Summer Hiatus From Movie Academy … 
‘The Big C’ Finale Airs On Showtime Tonight 
Obama Scandals Bring MSNBC 7-Year Low While Fox News Rises 
Ang Lee Departs FX Pilot ‘Tyrant’ 
DreamWorks Eyes January For ‘Glimmer’ And Dylan … 
Warner Bros TV & ‘Smallville’ Co-Creators … 
How Many Times Does Seth MacFarlane Have To Say No To The … 
UPFRONTS 2013: TV Spinoffs’ Almost Perfect Year 
OSCARS: Animated Feature Rule Change 
Cannes: Relativity Sets ‘Hunger Games’ Liam … 
RATINGS RAT RACE: Billboard Awards Surge From 2012, … 
Cannes: Park Chan-wook’s ‘Sympathy For Mr. … 
Cannes: Stanley Weiser To Script ‘Three Graves … 
Yahoo CEO Foresees Big Opportunities To Sell Ads On Tumblr 
Disney, Lucasfilm Animation Prep ‘Star Wars … 
Cannes: Deadline Crashes Palais Forum With Costa Gavras, … 
Hammond On Cannes: Sun Comes Out As Parties, Deals And … 
Kelly Rowland, Paulina Rubio In Talks To Join ‘X … 
‘Fast & Furious 6′ Breaks Records In … 
Specialty Box Office: ‘Frances Ha’ Triumphs As … 
‘Star Trek Into Darkness’ $164.5M Global: Lower … 
VIDEO: Why Is Fox’s Sister Company Hosting New ‘Watchmen’ Sneak Peek?
UPDATE: Warner Bros just issued this statement after today’s status conference in federal court in Los Angeles to determine how to proceed in the Watchmen case after Juge Gary Feess concluded that Fox is entitled to summary judgment on its copyright infringement claim and has the right “at the very least” to distribute the motion picture set for release in March. I’m told that Warner Bros is looking for leverage to help it in negotiating with Fox:
“We respectfully but vigorously disagree with the Court’s ruling and are exploring all of our appellate options. We continue to believe that Fox’s claims have no merit and that we will ultimately prevail, whether at trial or in the Court of Appeals. We have no plans to move the release date of the film.”
- WATCHMEN RULING: Where Was Larry?
- SHOCKER! Federal Judge To Side With Fox In Warner Bros ‘Watchmen’ Film Lawsuit
- ‘Watchmen’ Contracts & Court Documents
- SAVE US! Warner’s ‘Watchmen’ In Legal Peril After Judge Won’t Dismiss Fox Suit
Editor-in-Chief Nikki Finke - tip her here.
Loading ...
Thing is, I’m pretty sure Fox doesn’t really WANT distribution rights. After all, they passed on the project because they didn’t think it could be turned into a commercially viable film (a three hour, R-rated superhero film with literary aspirations?) Remember, Fox ALREADY had two box-office and critical bombs based on Alan Moore comics (FROM HELL and LEAGUE OF EXTRAORDINARY GENTLEMEN); who can blame them for thinking the guy’s poison? (Of course, both films butchered the source material, but it’s not like studio executives KNOW that- we all know that they NEVER read the books they turn into movies!)Warners only hope is to give Fox a big bag of money up front- and hope the free publicity somehow helps turn it into a big enough hit that they don’t lose their shirts.Moore has openly said he’s placed a curse on all adaptations of his work following his mistreatment by both Fox AND Warners in the past (literally- he’s a practising occultist!), so he must be loving every minute of this- and I’m sure lawyers for both sides are praying he doesn’t get called to the stand!
We should all be glad that Warner Bros. decided to make Watchmen, even though they didn’t own the rights. Because if Fox had decided to make Watchmen, God knows what would have happened. I do know one thing, though. It would not have been pretty.
Once Tom Rothman decides to get his greedy, grubby hands on a project, that project is doomed. Just look at X-Men: The Last Stand and the two Fantastic Four movies. They could have been really good, they should have been really good, but they ended up sucking. X-Men and X-Men 2 are pretty much an anomaly.
Anyway, if Fox had made Watchmen, it would have sucked big time. It would have been rated PG-13 instead of R. It would have been 2 hours long at the most and most probably shorter than that. And it would have been directed by a hack director like Brett Ratner. Is that what you would have wanted?
Um, who’s the doofus who “forgot” to get the rights before the studio poured millions of dollars into this? I don’t have an ounce of sympathy for anyone involved.
@ anotherwgamember:
I think the better thing for the WB to do should Fox successfully block “Watchmen” would be to move “Harry Potter” up to March 6 to spite Fox. It’s already completed and fans will flock out in droves to see it, regardless what time of the year it’s released.
As for moving up “Terminator Salvation” nearly a month ahead of schedule, it’d cancel itself and “Wolverine” out. “Salvation” has to prove itself to audiences that it’s not another T3, even with all the positive things going for it (great trailer, great cast, good writer). And putting HP 6 against “Avatar” might be commercial suicide, even though HP has a loyal fanbase — they were absolutely livid about the July 2009 move and might riot if it’s pushed even further to November/December 2009.
Basically, WB didn’t clear the chain of title, a major, major f*ck-up. Fox is doing exactly what any other smart studio would have done, they waited until they had maximum leverage to move. (BTW, the move occured months ago and WB didn’t work it out.)
That being said, the studios HATE each other. A few years ago, I was involved in a smaller, but somewhat similar deal between Fox and another studio. I couldn’t believe the level of animosity. The other studio was willing to screw over all of the artists, talent, and trash the work that had been done on the project just to stick it to Fox. It made no sense on a business level; pure “bite off your nose to spite your face” stuff.
This is going to get way more ugly before it’s done and the repercussions will last years.
(Watch out 20th TV shows on the CW and WBTV shows on Fox!)
Good idea anotherwgamember.
I read most of the agreements and court papers and have to say that I agree with the Judge and am suprised by less than terrific lawyering by folks on WB’s side.
Under the initial 1991 Quitclaim Agreement Fox retained distribution rights to the Watchmen. To put it more accurately, Fox granted Largo most rights, subject to the conditions (probably conditions precedent) that Fox got to distribute the picture in exhcange for a substantial fee/participation, and that the picture count towards Larry’s overall deal. You could also phrase it that the grant of rights from Fox to Largo was conditional, or that Largo never got unconditional distribution rights.
The 1994 Perpetual Turnaround agreement purports to supersede everything that came before it and recharacterize the relationship as one where Larry has a perpetual option to buy out all the rights from Fox for half a million bucks (to cover development expense) plus interest,etc.
You can argue back and forth about potential conflicts between the 1991 Quitclaim agreement and the 1994 Pepetual Turnaround agreement, or about provisions in the other amendments to the 1991 Quitclaim Agreement but none of this solves the basic problem: There is no piece of paper which grants Larry/WB an unconditional distribution right to The Watchmen. To the contrary, there are at least two pieces of paper saying Fox has a right to distribute the move in exchange for half a million or so plus bucks.
Larry couldn’t/wouldn’t help clear up any potetnial ambiguities. Thus, I agree with the judge, everything is fairly clear (although complicated) from the face of the documents.
Larry’s deal lawyers should have caught this in 1994, at the latest. WB’s in-house lawyers should have caught this prior to greenlighting the picture (an intern probably wrote the chain of title memo). And I don’t understand why WB’s trial lawyers spent much of their brief arguing that the 1994 Perpetual Turnaround agreement validly superseded everything that had come before it. It seems to me that the better course would have been to hang their hat on the 1991 agreement; arguing that agreement GRANTED all rights to Largo, and that the condition imposed on that grant was excused by impossibility after Larry’s overall deal ended. Also, what about waiver, or counterclaiming for unjust enrichment or detrimental reliance?
Shocking is right.
I have a solution. Warner Bros. allows Fox to distribute its Adam West BATMAN TV series to DVD.
The reason this classic television show isn’t on DVD is because Fox own the show (and TV rights), but Warner Bros. owns the character and has refused to make a deal to avoid competition with its own BATMAN movies and animated shows.
Everyone wins – FOX makes millions off the DVD sales, Warners releases WATCHMAN and cashes in on more BATMAN publicity – and I can buy the Adam West TV show.
Haha! It’s good to be Lawyer.
Jerry Beck:
Brilliant solution. Under your terms, both Fox and Warners would both “save face” and make a profit.
Unfortunately, we are dealing with egos & personalities, two items that have destroyed more movie/film deals in Hollywood than drugs, wars or even death. But…props for suggesting a solution with integrity.
The Potter and Terminator ideas were just the two off the top of my head. I’m sure Warners could find other ways to ruin Fox projects. These guys only understand being squeezed in the nuts (where, BTW, the hide their pocketbooks.)
Maybe the judge is correct, but Fox bears as much blame for not bringing this suit sooner. They waited until now to do this to squeeze Warners. It’s time for the giant corporation that backs Warners to get up from its slumber, mutter “Fuck you, Rupert” and kick Fox in the nuts.
(Which, hopefully will be the beginning of the crumbling of the united front the studios are presenting in contract negotiations against the unions. I’d love to see these monopolies at each others throats. See, it is possible for the little guy to win.)
We should all be glad that Warner Bros. decided to make Watchmen, even though they didn’t own the rights.
Translation: “I support theft.”
… *siiiiighhhhh*…
For those dwindling few knuckleheads remaining out there still tiresomely bleating the demonstrably false “Fox waited until just now to do anything,” over and over again:
http://uncivilsociety.org/watchmen_leichter.pdf
“Fox in 2007 learned that WBP was purporting to produce The Watchmen and was intending to commence principal photography. [...] Fox in August 2007 demanded that WBP ceases and desist from producing, mmarketing, distributing or otherwise taking further steps to use The Watchmen …” (emphasis mmine)
The relevant court documents are all freely available out there on the ‘net, kiddies. Read more; shoot off mouths less.
Jerry Beck: I have a solution. Warner Bros. allows Fox to distribute its Adam West BATMAN TV series to DVD
I third that motion.
In the meantime, I think it’s time for us fanboys to pit ticking clock against ticking clock:
Boycott “24″ until Fox simply settles for either a small piece of Watchmen or the rights to distribute the Batman TV show.[1]
No watching any of this season of “24″ in its original broadcast, no watching it at Fox.com or iTunes or anywhere else, period, until it’s settled with Warner distributing it on day-and-date. Period.
I’d prefer the latter over the former. And it makes far more sense to me to boycott a motif-ishly similar-ish show (the ticking clock thang) whose season premiere is in 11 days than to make the empty threat to boycott a likely-awful Wolverine movie that’s months away from hitting the theaters.
Fox’s movie division (starting with Tom Rothman) is notorious for having contempt for superhero and genre movies, as demonstrated most appallingly with the irredeemable X-Men 3: The Last Stand[2] and, arguably, their piss-poor marketing of the underrated X-Files: I Want To Believe[3], so regardless of the law, they don’t deserve to have their mitts anywhere near a movie property that they never had any faith in to begin with. It’s Warner that put up the money to actually film the property, not Fox, it’s Warner that put the movie into Zack Snyder’s hands, not Fox. And it’s Warner’s DC Comics that actually published the comics.
OTOH, I suppose all of this is a backhanded compliment for the movie as I doubt that Fox would be so intent on wresting the right to distribute the movie from Warner rather than simply settling for coinage if the movie actually sucked.
— Rob
[1] And only the ’60′s show, no attempt to sneak future rights to Batman shows into the fine print of any contract. I know that as a fan, I stopped trusting movie studio lawyers two decades ago due to the tangle of Spider-Man rights.
[2] FTR, X3′s craptacularness is not director Brett Ratner’s fault, IMO — he did as good as he could with the crap script he was given. It was Fox’s responsibility to fire the screenwriters before the first roll of film was inserted into the camera for their bastardization of the series.
[3] And yes, I do mean underrated The X-Files: I Want To Believe, which should have been released in December rather than July. Idiots.
PS: This would not be a comic-book-geek-ish-enough post for my taste without the footnotes.
Here is what I think, Fox is pissed off at Warner for making the movie. Didn’t bother to do anything about it until after it was at the Comic Con, saw how popular it was there. Fox saw the possibility of the money, and now want’s their rights back so they can release it.
It’s all about greed!
To IP Lawyer: Great homework! I want to have your child. Another thought: maybe WB and Fox are still angry at each other after doing the first dual studio production, “The Towering Inferno” (1974).
WB out and out stole a film they didn’t own. Zack Snyder rode his bloated ego to help them. But this is typical of the business where:
1. Executives and producers call writers in
for “meetings” on projects then steal their
pitches and use them as notes. (You know
who you are, you talentless douchebags)
2. An ABC TV executive issues a memo asking their
deal babies to steal TV shows from around the
world.
3. Authors plagiarize or just fabricate memoirs
go on Oprah and make bank.
THE THIEVERY MUST STOP!!!
If WB prevails then it’s open season on intellectual property. The labyrinthine rights contracts would allow any studio with a tenuous claim to make a film still owned by another, ignore the cease and desist then profit from their thievery. WARNER BROTHERS SHOULD GET NOTHING for their crime.
FOX are scumbags too but this time they are in the right.
ps: Harry Potter above was funny as hell.
Enough — Rights are rights. The fact is – and its all there in b/w in the court order, that Fox put Warner Bros on notice. years ago — before even a single frame had been filmed. Warners legal team gace Fox the brush off and told their production people to press on with the film regardless of Fox’s stakes in the project.
THAT’S WHY THERE IS A LAWSUIT.
Hopefully a deal is reached soon, but WARNERS screwed up and needs to pay to make this right.
Hey, here’s a question for all of you angry self-declared WATCHMEN fans-(and I mean this seriously, not sarcastically).Why are you so eager to see a film that is being made EXPRESSLY AGAINST THE WISHES of the original comics author? If you love comics as much as you say you do, why do the various film versions-good, bad, and mediocre- seem so much more important to you? (I’m not talking about the industry types this blog is written for-you’re concerned about the BUSINESS of Hollywood, and the original comic is as irrelevant to your concerns as the novel REVOLUTIONARY ROAD is to THAT film).I’m as fascinated by this behind the scenes squabbling as everyone else here- but I actually LIKE comics (and more importantly, READ them), and I find this need fanboys have for Hollywood to JUSTIFY them by making big budget movies of the stuff they claim to love pathetic- ESPECIALLY that crowd that doesn’t actually read , just complains about the movies “trashing” the source material.Look, I’ll be paying attention to this story (because I love a good corporate fight)- but I really don’t care if the damn movie EVER comes out…I don’t have to, because I don’t think a hack director can “legitimize” Alan Moore by making a movie of his work.
cst: How can Watchmen fanboys like me justify siding with Warner over the movie?
It’s easy:
Alan Moore’s hands aren’t exactly clean regarding other properties and how *he* plays fast and loose with copyrights in the comics world. He went ahead with his “Lost Girls” graphic novel porn treatment that crossed over adult versions of Alice in Wonderland, Dorothy Gale and Wendy from Peter Pan long before the copyright on Peter Pan went into the public domain in the UK. He put the kibosh on the still-uncompleted “1963″ superhero pastiche series essentially because he was pissed off at his co-creators. And he’s done quite a number of work-for-hire comics for various publishers, often blatantly “inspired by” other comics, in the past two decades since his falling out with DC over Watchmen.
Yes, there are a number of levels of irony regarding the Watchmen property and its being made into a movie (and I won’t even go into the situation around League of Extraordinary Gentlemen), but suffice to say, in general, I side with the copyright owner of the given property (whether the original author or not). It helps that Alan Moore assigned his share of the movie rights to his artists and otherwise washes his hands of the movies rather than blocks them outright becasue he clearly does not want to deprive his co-creators of that income and other opportunities they have to produce ancillary material for their own benefit, such as Dave Gibbons’s Watchmen art book being released by Titan.
So with the ironies out of the way, I find Fox’s lawsuit to be ridiculously opportunistic and the penalties that it’s asking for — particularly their attempt to wrest distribution of the movie from Warner — to be so far beyond what they deserve that I have little respect for their being correct on the basis of absurd technicalities. I think they deserve repayment of the original development costs and perhaps half of the profits that they would have gotten had either Universal or Paramount succeeded in making the under Larry Gordon’s contracts (if that) because they’re run by people who are clearly openly hostile to superhero comics. After the creative and/or box office debacles of League of Extraordinary Gentlemen (a bastardization of a Moore co-creation, BTW), X-Men 3, Daredevil and Elektra, among others, I think Fox should simply quit their claims to make movies out of ALL comics properties that they have or say they have any sort of options on.
Nice response on the LEGAL front- but you’re still dodging the heart of my question: why do you care about the FILM VERSIONS of comics more than the actual comics themselves? Of course, must “comic-book fans” are really just SUPERHERO fans; if you’re just looking for power fantasies, than I guess bigger really IS better. But anyone who really reads and understands a writer like Moore knows he’s so much more than that- unlike, say, Frank Miller, who enthusiastically sold out to write ROBOCOP 2 and hasn’t really been any good since- which is why Hollywood gave him the keys to the kingdom.