CHUD.com Community › Forums › THE MAIN SEWER › CHUD.COM Main › Aranofsky OFF Watchmen already?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Aranofsky OFF Watchmen already?

post #1 of 21
Thread Starter 
Sorry if this has already been posted, but i found this in EW:

Quote:
PROJECT: Watchmen, Alan Moore's metasuperhero epic, about a cadre of costumed, government-regulated avengers

HISTORY: The Citizen Kane of the comic-book world, it's been deemed unfilmable practically since DC Comics published it in 1986. Warner Bros. commissioned the first script in 1989, and Terry Gilliam (12 Monkeys) passed on directing after producer Joel Silver balked at his $40 Million budget. Then Universal secured the rights and redrafted the plot three years ago with X - Men scribe David Hayter, who hoped to make the film his directrial debut.

STATUS: Hayter's screenplay migrated to Revolution Studios, where Darren Aronofsky (Requiem for a Dream) was rumored to be prepping to direct it after completing his current film--until the Revolution deal fell through in just the last couple of weeks.

PROGNOSIS: If Arnofsky's hoping this is his Kane, it needs to be set up at a studio. Then again, Kane failed at the box office and wasn't deemed a masterpiece till decades later.
post #2 of 21
"Hayter's screenplay migrated to Revolution Studios, where Darren Aronofsky (Requiem for a Dream) was rumored to be prepping to direct it after completing his current film"

So I'm assuming The Fountain is a go? How come we haven't heard anything on pre-pro (post Brad Pitt's departure)?
post #3 of 21
Moriarty mentioned they were well into pre-production of "The Fountain" with a reduced budget and Hugh Jackman replacing Pitt.


I also remember posting this in the "Watchmen thread"

Quote:
Darren Aronofsky's Watchmen


It will never happen
Still believe that.
post #4 of 21
Thread Starter 
Quote:
So I'm assuming The Fountain is a go? How come we haven't heard anything on pre-pro (post Brad Pitt's departure)?
There has been news. Hugh Jackman's now playing the lead.
post #5 of 21
Problem is, EW has their facts wrong.

The Revolution deal did not "fall apart." The film was in turnaround from Universal. What that means is that Universal did not want to greenlight a David Hayter film.

When you change an essential element -- director, script draft, cast -- on a project in turnaround, you have to then offer it to the original studio again and give them a chance to make the film. Frequently, they end up making it because it's a better package now.

Right now, Universal is actively considering Aronofsky's WATCHMEN. If they decide they still don't want to make it, Larry Gordon and Lloyd Levin can then shop it to any other studio.

This same thing happened on HELLBOY. Repeatedly. But these guys are very loyal. Once they've got a filmmaker attached, they'll fight for him as long as they can. Trust me... Aronofsky is still attached, and they still plan to make it right after THE FOUNTAIN.
post #6 of 21
Moriarty fails to mention that Aronofsky will drop the project like a bad habit if the rights to Dazzler become available.
post #7 of 21
I'd heard about Hugh in the Fountain and the reduced budget... I was talking about something more specific? Shooting locations and dates, casting, spy reports of pre-pro artwork, sketches... this seems to happen with every other cool film.

What's this Dazzler you speak of?
post #8 of 21
C'mon! Dazzler! The mutant who's a human disco ball! She makes pretty stoner lights, and... that's, that's about it.

Okay, I got nothin'.
post #9 of 21
post #10 of 21
Moriarty's full of shit, Harry's fat, Quint's... somethin', and Mr. Beaks has no pecker.
post #11 of 21
Quote:
Originally posted by Clarence Beaks
Moriarty's full of shit, Harry's fat, Quint's... somethin', and Mr. Beaks has no pecker.
MAN HAV U GOT THAT RIGHT BUDDI
post #12 of 21
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!

Fuck AICN for saying this was official!!!!

Not happy

RD
post #13 of 21
Beaks, stop trollin' on yourself. There will be a few that will do it for you in a couple moments. The no pecker angle is a good one though...
post #14 of 21
Actually, the "no pecker" bit is a standard Beak-sult. It pops up often in my talkbacks.
post #15 of 21
Quote:
Originally posted by MoriartyAICN
Problem is, EW has their facts wrong.
EW? Facts wrong? NEVER.
post #16 of 21
Well, rumors always have a bit of truth.

I am just not clever enough to come up with a "no pecker" insult. The fat one I probably could come up with, but all the other ones take a level of sophistication that is well above my head.
post #17 of 21
Don't beat yourself up. You're PLENTY cleaver.
post #18 of 21
Maybe this is for the best.

A 2 hour Aronofsky "Watchmen" is nothing more than a missed opportunity.
post #19 of 21
I'm sorry, did you all take crazy pills?

It is official. Our story was right, and is still right. EW doesn't know what the fuck they're talking about if they still think Revolution was involved.
post #20 of 21
Quote:
Originally posted by MoriartyAICN
I'm sorry, did you all take crazy pills?

It is official. Our story was right, and is still right. EW doesn't know what the fuck they're talking about if they still think Revolution was involved.
*decides to button his lip and see what happens*

RD
post #21 of 21
Quote:
Originally posted by Colt45

So I'm assuming The Fountain is a go? How come we haven't heard anything on pre-pro (post Brad Pitt's departure)?
In addition to Hugh jumping in for Pitt, the first news that this was coming back came when Ellen Burstyn said at the Golden Globes that she was gonna start filming on The Fountain pretty soon. That sent a lot of people for a loop as I remember.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: CHUD.COM Main
CHUD.com Community › Forums › THE MAIN SEWER › CHUD.COM Main › Aranofsky OFF Watchmen already?