03.06.09

[Rust]

So... why do you suppose the release is so far away?

Will they do it Cast Away-style and fatten the cast up before the septemper-shoot and do the contemporary scenes first and then de-fatten them and pump them up for later shooting for the flashbacks?

Or is it something else?

 

[Luchastyle]

some of those things could be going on. but if they start shooting in september, i don't know how long the shoot is. could be anywhere from 3-8 months really. let's say it was 6 months so they finish in 3/08, there is a lot of cg work to do, with manhattan and mars. perhaps that takes a long time. or perhaps the shoot is even longer. more 8 or 9 months. in which case they would finish filming next summer. then it would take a few months to edit and do cgi. which means the film would be done near the end of 08, perhaps do a film festival or two. and who knows? they may even push up the release date. we'll see. but i do agree that it is quite a long time.

 

[Captain Carnage]

Scheduled to finish principal shooting in February 08.

I figure it's the marketing boys who want the luxury of time so they can figure out how to best sell it.

 

[Overman27pj]

So... why do you suppose the release is so far away?

Will they do it Cast Away-style and fatten the cast up before the septemper-shoot and do the contemporary scenes first and then de-fatten them and pump them up for later shooting for the flashbacks?

Or is it something else?

They are trying to wait out until the next cold war!

 

[Lobster Charlie]

Yeah, that's a huge amount of time. I'm thinking that the marketing has no idea how to handle this until they see some actual finished sequences. I don't think the CGI they're shooting for is really all that crazy, in comparison to a King Kong or a LOTR.

 

[Shifty]

Filming ends early next year plus post production, so it could only be released at the earliest in December '08.
WB already has their big holiday '08 film with Harry Potter 6 next November.

Plus all the other studios have their big budget movies. None which will be Rated R. So its pretty dicey to release it in December, sure it will have plenty from the 300 fanbase but March is wide open.
WB has 10,000 BC slated for March '08 so it looks like the studio is trying to develop the "spring blockbuster" season. No studio is going to have anything open against Watchmen in March but in December there probably would be. Since the studios only have November/December to release their big holiday movies.

Remember Star Trek Nemesis and Superman Returns? They were out for a short time with built in fans and then pushed aside very quickly for something bigger and better. January is when studios dump their crappy films, and everyone goes to see the award show nominated movies. So not a good month for Watchmen.

Also, WB has to look at their 2009 movie lineup. Studios usually release one or two movies a month. So 2008 is already full and they could use Watchmen for the month of March '09. They can put Watchmen trailers in for July 2008, starting with TDK, onward.

03.06.09 That's a pretty easy date to remember.

WB and Paramount delayed Zodiac from a late 2006 release to early 2007. Fincher's film disappointed box office wise it but its one of the best reviewed films of the year, so having it out in March doesn't mean the script is horrible. WB is investing a lot for a R-rated 2.5 superhero movie, March '08 is one of the best dates to earn back its money.

 

[toddly6666]

The longer the wait, the better. Movie producers screw up movies by rushing and trying to meet the theatrical release date. I think this will just give this movie more breathing room, then trying to rush it out quickly. March is an excellent time to release movies anyway.

 

[sad lieutenant]

The longer the wait, the better. Movie producers screw up movies by rushing and trying to meet the theatrical release date. I think this will just give this movie more breathing room, then trying to rush it out quickly. March is an excellent time to release movies anyway.

You guys are giving the studio way too much credit. Basically, they took a small risk with the Snyder-directed, R-rated comic book adaptation 300. It was released in March of 2007 and was a hit a made the studio a bunch of moolah.
Now, they are taking a slightly larger risk with the Snyder-directed, R-rated comic book adaption Watchmen.
If 300 -- an ultraviolent, idiosyncratic nerd property that the studio didn't know how to handle -- did well when it was released in March, then it follows that Watchmen -- an ultraviolent, idiosyncratic nerd property that the studio understands even less -- might do as well or better with a March release.

 

[Caliber]

I think the release is far off because this is going to be process to make sure they got everything covered. I doubt filming this will take a short time and hope they take all the time needed. Its good to see that they will taking their time.

 

[toddly6666]

Not discrediting Miller's book and Snyder's version of "300," but I think WATCHMEN is a bit more important to not screw up. "300" is not known as the greatest graphic novel, Watchmen is, and is probably the most anticipated graphic novel made into a movie. There are tons of comic books/graphic novels that would make a great movie - when you read 300, it's like any other graphic novel that you think "yeah, it would be great if they made a movie into it," but it's not the holy grail of graphic novel books. Look at the Lord of the Rings movies - they were given a lot of time, risk, and breathing room to do it right and not rushed. When dealing with highly respected literature/graphic novels, it's just not smart to rush it. I want WATCHMEN THE MOVIE to have enough time, even if it's screened and gets poor reviews, that they still have time to go back and fix it, instead of being pressured to release a half-ass job in the theaters.

 

[Sandman138]

You guys are giving the studio way too much credit. Basically, they took a small risk with the Snyder-directed, R-rated comic book adaptation 300. It was released in March of 2007 and was a hit a made the studio a bunch of moolah.
Now, they are taking a slightly larger risk with the Snyder-directed, R-rated comic book adaption Watchmen.
If 300 -- an ultraviolent, idiosyncratic nerd property that the studio didn't know how to handle -- did well when it was released in March, then it follows that Watchmen -- an ultraviolent, idiosyncratic nerd property that the studio understands even less -- might do as well or better with a March release.

This, right here, is the reason. Watchmen may be revered by nerds and critics, but as a super-hero film, they have no way to market it against films like The Dark Knight or Iron Man. If they release this movie during peak seasons, they are setting it up to fail because it can't do what other super-hero movies can: sell itself by name recognition. Hence, March.

 

[sad lieutenant]

This, right here, is the reason. Watchmen may be revered by nerds and critics, but as a super-hero film, they have no way to market it against films like The Dark Knight or Iron Man. If they release this movie during peak seasons, they are setting it up to fail because it can't do what other super-hero movies can: sell itself by name recognition. Hence, March.

True dat.

 

[Shifty]

Well it will be 03.06.08 soon, one year to go and apparently something big is happening at 11:55 PM EST.

 

[Shifty]

holy ****

http://rss.warnerbros.com/watchmen/2008/03/one_year_to_go_1.html

 

[CaptainGenerica]

Not important, but I just realized 3-6-9 are the prominent figures on a clock.

 

[Shifty]

200 days until...

 

[Katsuro]

Not important, but I just realized 3-6-9 are the prominent figures on a clock.

And it'll be released at midnight, so 3-6-9 12:00. Snyder, you clever son of a...

 

[laudanum09]

very very nice. unfortunately because of my snyder bias i'd be inclined to think it was rather a clever marketing exec rather than snyder, but if I were to cast that aside I must say that the guy knows his *****, at least all of the nitty gritty aesthetic details and comic references. even if the film sucks like v for vendetta, it will still be a joy to see it brought to life...

 

[Nivek]

I loved V for Vendetta, then again, I dont think Alan Moore is a god either.

 

[Bubastis]

Does an early March release mean that the film can't be nominated for any Oscars?

 

[The Squirrel]

I loved V for Vendetta, then again, I dont think Alan Moore is a god either.

V for Vendetta was pretty good. Better than LXG for sure. I wasn't to impressed with 300, but Snyder looks to be doing good with Watchmen.

 

[The Battousai]

Does an early March release mean that the film can't be nominated for any Oscars?

(best 8,000th post evah!)

 

[Shifty]

Does an early March release mean that the film can't be nominated for any Oscars?

It can for the 2010 show.

 

[Steelsheen]

Does an early March release mean that the film can't be nominated for any Oscars?

It can for the 2010 show.

if its impressive enough... and if the competition is pretty slim (which is doubtful, given that Terminator and Potter is coming out too and thats just from WB alone) it could probably make the technical awards for Oscars 2010. other than that, most films nominated for the Oscars usually gets released Nov-Dec of the previous year.

 

[Shifty]

And it'll be released at midnight, so 3-6-9 12:00. Snyder, you clever son of a...

60 days...