20th Century Fox Suing Over Warner Bros. Watchmen

[BlackLantern]

also Fox appears to have 'Right of first refusal', which means that if Gordon and Legendary Pictures were going to produce Watchmen, Gordon was contractually obligated to present the project to Fox first before going to any other studio....

 

[Anita18]

The truth comes out. Fox and WB were sent the same script at the same time in 2005. Fox outright rejected it, while WB was interested.

I was under the impression that after the film was canceled at Paramount that they went only to WB.

That open letter broke my heart. I feel so bad for the people who weren't involved in the legalities, but worked their butts off in the artistic part of the movie. WB's faith in its projects has been amazing as of late, and I'd hate to punish it.

Too bad the legal team dropped the ball. Ugh, rules are rules, but I do think WB has a case in that they can't delay the release if there are tens of millions of marketing dollars on the line.

 

[mre]

The worst case scenario... Fox siezes distribution rights of the completed film, has it cut down to 85 minutes, demands re-shoots, and changes the rating from R to PG-13. I find the latter somewhat unlikely, but the thing to remember about Fox is that when they fight, they aim for the balls.

Just in response to your worst case scenario here (and I know you said it is unlikely but I would still like to address it); Can Fox make these changes, as distributor?
Does a distributor of a film typically have a say in the film itself?

 

[BlackLantern]

No...Fox has no say in the actual film itself....but if Fox is granted distribution rights, then theoretically they can choose to not release the film period....but I don't see that happening because it can lead into lawsuits with Legendary Pictures

 

[BlackLantern]

I've read a bunch of different stuff

1. Fox wants either a lump sum payment or percentage

2. WB thinks they can make their case and beat Fox clean

3. There are some in Fox that want to see if they can kill the film outright

4. A settlement is being worked on and will be reached on or about the 20th

that's just what I have come across

 

[Anita18]

Last I herd fox is planning on stalling the movie at least until November of 2009.

Hey, at least that'll be in time for Oscar season.

 

[Ace of Knaves]

Did you bother even reading the threade or just coming in here going damn fox you suck and all that usual other junk.

If you would you would have seen your answer.

JAL, do you work for Fox or something? Please stop whinging!!! People have every right to hate fox the same way you have every right to hate TDK.

 

[Ace of Knaves]

After reading that "open letter" it has proved what i've said all along. Fox didn't want nothing to do with Watchmen. They just wanted to sit on their arses and twiddle their thumbs. Now someone else has come along and pumped millions of dollars into the project and done the hard graft for them, they are all of a sudden interested again. Disgraceful.

It's basically like me getting a contract from a firm to build a wall. I build the wall, do all the hard work and then this firm tells me they ain't gonna pay me.

 

[mre]

I have a question:
If WB owns DC, and Watchmen is a DC comic, why then was Fox even offered this? Or any other studio?

 

[BlackLantern]

I find a better analogy is if I own a car and you need a car, we make an agreement that if I am going to sell the car I'll sell it to you....and then I turn around and sell the car to someone else....

 

[BlackLantern]

I have a question:
If WB owns DC, and Watchmen is a DC comic, why then was Fox even offered this? Or any other studio?

the film rights were offered to Fox.....a comic book property and rights to adapt a film based on said property are two different things...

 

[Ace of Knaves]

I find a better analogy is if I own a car and you need a car, we make an agreement that if I am going to sell the car I'll sell it to you....and then I turn around and sell the car to someone else....

lolz.

well then i'd get up off my arse and find another car.

 

[Ace of Knaves]

the film rights were offered to Fox.....a comic book property and rights to adapt a film based on said property are two different things...

Yes but as that letter says, Fox didn't want nothing to do with it. Now that the project is complete they are like "Oh no no no, we change our minds!! You did all the hard work for us! na na na na na!! "

 

[BlackLantern]

but Ace, if we had a legal agreement that I would sell you that car, and I broke that agreement, you would be within your legal right to seek action against me....

 

[BlackLantern]

Yes but as that letter says, Fox didn't want nothing to do with it. Now that the project is complete they are like "Oh no no no, we change our minds!! You did all the hard work for us! na na na na na!! "

...but all that is, is a letter...it's not a legal binding document, simply a statement of interest or non-interest....this is a matter of law, the law says Fox was wronged due to breach of contract, regardless of their intent toward the project....there are tons of films that get shelved for years and years....'Hancock' sat on the shelf for 10 years, 'Smokin' Aces' took about 5 years to get made....this just happens to be a huge film based on a piece of literature with a serious ****ing fanbase behind it....

 

[Ace of Knaves]

Yea I know what you are saying. I understand all the legal formalities. But what i'm trying to say is this. Fox deserves all the **** that is coming their way, no doubt. They passed up on the opportunity to make this film, that has now been proved.(unless this guy is the biggest ********ter in the world). The have just sat on their arses and watched one of their rivals pump millions and millions into a project THEY TURNED DOWN. They have twiddled their thumbs while their rival has grafted their arse off. Now that the project is nigh on finished they come running back in saying "oh no, we change our minds. You did the work for us, thanks But we are gonna sue you anyway!"

They are scum. From a moral and ethical standpoint, they cannot be defended.

 

[BlackLantern]

Welcome to America....****ing over the guy across the street since 1776....morals and ethics are entirely subjective....Fox is going to take a certain amount of heat, but your average movie-goer is probably not even concerned about it....If anything positive comes out of this, any comic property that gets adapted, the studio will make sure the due diligence on rights and licenses will be covered

 

[Ace of Knaves]

Yea I hope so.

To be honest i'm not bothered when this comes out. It could come out tomora or next year. I just don't like seeing people who work hard getting ****ted on. And that is what Fox is doing. ****ting on people who work harder than them.

 

[Motown Marvel]

After reading that "open letter" it has proved what i've said all along. Fox didn't want nothing to do with Watchmen. They just wanted to sit on their arses and twiddle their thumbs. Now someone else has come along and pumped millions of dollars into the project and done the hard graft for them, they are all of a sudden interested again. Disgraceful.

It's basically like me getting a contract from a firm to build a wall. I build the wall, do all the hard work and then this firm tells me they ain't gonna pay me.

if fox had legal rights to it, then they are rightfully allowed to do anything or nothing with the film.

a better analogy would be: i own land that im doing nothing with, its just sitting empty, despite all the potential if could produce. you come along and build your store on the land without my permission because its a good location for your business. then you're all shocked and surprised that im pissed and calling my lawyers because your developing and making money off land that i legally own.

 

[Ace of Knaves]

But as i've said, i'm not disputing the legalities. I'm just saying that IMO, Fox cannot be defended from a moral stand point. The fact is they are ********s, simple as that. I really can't be arsed to repeat it for a third time, my reasons and there in black and white.

 

[Motown Marvel]

its not that they're interested in the film, as you state. they're interested in the money. which is entirely logical. they're a business, which means their job is to make money. someone has infringed on their legal rights, and so now they're seeking vindication by hitting WB where it hurts, their wallet. how does that make them "********s"? and whats so immoral about that? you talk about moralities, but theres nothing immoral about not wanting to be involved in a film. they have the rights to it, they dont want to be involved with it, so its up to them to do nothing with it. theres nothing immoral about that. thats their decision which just happens to not jive with what you want. people complain about morals and calling fox greedy and selfish, but im pretty sure most people here can actually care less about all that, and can care less who gets the money from watchmen, as long as come march 6 you can be sitting in a theater watching the movie.

 

[Shivsguy616]

if fox had legal rights to it, then they are rightfully allowed to do anything or nothing with the film.

a better analogy would be: i own land that im doing nothing with, its just sitting empty, despite all the potential if could produce. you come along and build your store on the land without my permission because its a good location for your business. then you're all shocked and surprised that im pissed and calling my lawyers because your developing and making money off land that i legally own.

Great analogy! I'm surprised that this has to be explained to them so often

 

[TheVileOne]

Ace of Knaves give it a rest.

20 years ago this movie couldn't have been made as it is now.

 

[BirdsDoThus]

Great analogy! I'm surprised that this has to be explained to them so often

That isn't that good of an analogy. If it were that clean cut, there would be no argument.


Let's say me and my friend buy a video camera together. We are going to make this little movie, so we purchase it together. But stuff gets in the way, and we sort of forget about doing whatever we were going to do with the camera. We sort of brush it off, and he holds on to it, but I'm like "Hey don't do anything without me, let me know whats going on with that camera!"
A couple of years goes by and he approaches me saying he wants to make that little movie, and I'm all "Psshh. I'm not in the mood anymore." So he goes to his other friend and they make the movie together. I find out and I feel all left out, so after all of that time I start saying "I own a piece of the camera you used to make that movie!".
My very limited understanding is that Larry Gordon had the camera, but Fox wanted to know what he used it for when he was going to use it, so they could decide if they wanted in. Gordon pitched it to them, they passed, another cooler and more talented "Friend" came along and made the movie with him. Now Fox is claiming because they had paid of part of the instrument used to make the movie, they own the whole thing.

Wow, it really is...confusing. Point being, yeah. It isn't as clean cut as WB opening a lemonade stand on their land.

 

[Ace of Knaves]

its not that they're interested in the film, as you state. they're interested in the money. which is entirely logical. they're a business, which means their job is to make money. someone has infringed on their legal rights, and so now they're seeking vindication by hitting WB where it hurts, their wallet. how does that make them "********s"? and whats so immoral about that? you talk about moralities, but theres nothing immoral about not wanting to be involved in a film. they have the rights to it, they dont want to be involved with it, so its up to them to do nothing with it. theres nothing immoral about that. thats their decision which just happens to not jive with what you want. people complain about morals and calling fox greedy and selfish, but im pretty sure most people here can actually care less about all that, and can care less who gets the money from watchmen, as long as come march 6 you can be sitting in a theater watching the movie.

So when they passed on the idea of making a movie out of it, what were they planning on doing with it? Just keeping it locked away for no apparent reason so no one else could touch it? Yea, they really appreciate their customers don't they.

Ace of Knaves give it a rest.

20 years ago this movie couldn't have been made as it is now.

Na I ain't gonna give it a rest. I don't like seeing people work hard and spend loads and loads of money for nothing.

Fox ARE ********s. They have just sat on their arse and waited for someone else to do the hard work for them. I've had a boss like that before, he got a brick wrapped round his head. I just don't like people like that, Fox is the definition of that kind of attitude here.