David Hayter to direct Watchmen movie

[KenM]

IMO the only way to do Watchmen right is a mini series. 8 hour minimum. Anyway, my casting ideas (a little biased )

Dr. Manhatan: CGI only way to do it.

Ozmandas: Bruce Boxlightner

Spoiler

He is known for playing good guys, great twist if they hype him up as one of the heroes, and he is the villian.

Comiedian: Jerry Doyle.

Rorsach(SP?): Ed Wassar.

Those are who I would like for those roles.

 

[drnuncheon]

To bad David Hayter will have to change the ending. He has already admitted as much. In order to get a PG13 rating or something.

Change...the ending.

See, you didn't really mean that.

You meant "completely undermining the plot, tone, feel, and meaning of the entire story".

My head hurts. A lot. Because I know whent hey say "change the ending" they mean that things are going to be twisted around so that

Spoiler

the bad guy's plot gets defeated - and incidentally ruining the coolest scene in the book, where the villain says "Did you think I would have told you all of this if there was any way you could prevent it? I did it five minutes ago."

Like I said, completely undermining the plot, tone, feel, and meaning of the entire story - turning it from a deconstruction and response to superhero stories into just another example of the genre.

J

J

 

[Qlippoth]

I'd pick David Caruso for Rorshach, Jeff Goldblum for Nite Owl, maybe a cgi-enhanced Peter Weller for Dr. Manhattan.

 

[Frostmarrow]

Change...the ending.

See, you didn't really mean that.

You meant "completely undermining the plot, tone, feel, and meaning of the entire story".

My head hurts. A lot.

I feel your pain.

 

[Black Omega]

On the other hand, changing the ending a little would not bother me much. I know it reinforced the whole theme that these people weren't heros in any sense.

But it didn't really seem to me the plot would work. One fast atrocity would trigger a year of change. Maybe two. But with no real threat out there they would have to keep faking it, and the more times they do it, the more chance it would be found out. And which point the whole point of the plot is defeated.

 

[Endur]

My choice of actors:

Rorshack: The bad guy from Usual Suspects (Kevin Spacey?)
Night Owl II: Nicolas Cage
Ozymandias: Arnold
The Comedian: Slyvester Stallone
Dr. Manhattan: CGI


With regards to the ending, I think the ending has to remain the same. Half new york, etc. Rorscach vowing that people must be told. And Doc Manhattan blasting Rorschach. And the newspaper guy reaching down to pick up Rorscach's journal.

I think you can safely drop all the "pirate art comic book scenes" and remain true to the flavor of the series.

Although I agree that if you leave the ending the same, the movie might be politically incorrect and "unproducable". i.e. the movie studio might think its too risky to spend money on with the ending the way it is in the series.

 

[Macbeth]

My choice of actors:

Rorshack: The bad guy from Usual Suspects (Kevin Spacey?)
Night Owl II: Nicolas Cage
Ozymandias: Arnold
The Comedian: Slyvester Stallone
Dr. Manhattan: CGI


With regards to the ending, I think the ending has to remain the same. Half new york, etc. Rorscach vowing that people must be told. And Doc Manhattan blasting Rorschach. And the newspaper guy reaching down to pick up Rorscach's journal.

I think you can safely drop all the "pirate art comic book scenes" and remain true to the flavor of the series.

Although I agree that if you leave the ending the same, the movie might be politically incorrect and "unproducable". i.e. the movie studio might think its too risky to spend money on with the ending the way it is in the series.

Arnold? As in Arnold Shwartzeneger? For OZYMANDIAS? I thought he was a funny choice based on physical simalarities for Dr. Manhattan, but for Ozymandias? I think that role is just a bit deep for the Terminator.

I thouroughly agree on Nicolas Cage for Night Owl II. Thats the only role that I KNOW who I want to play it, just like Quatermaine in LXG screamed "Connery."

As for the Pirate scenes, yes I think they can safely be cut. I have re-read the entire series skiping over the pirate parts, and it all still works, and you lose a minimum of depth.

 

[Endur]

Actually, Arnold would be a perfect fit.

Ozymandias is an immigrant from Austria or someplace like that, just like Arnold. And Ozy spent his whole life improving his body and his business (just like Arnold).

It also fits in well with having Stallone as the Comedian, as you can have the rivalry between the two of them in the various flashbacks.

Not that either of them would ever agree to play in a movie with the other.

Arnold? As in Arnold Shwartzeneger? For OZYMANDIAS? I thought he was a funny choice based on physical simalarities for Dr. Manhattan, but for Ozymandias? I think that role is just a bit deep for the Terminator.

 

[Kahuna Burger]

Although I agree that if you leave the ending the same, the movie might be politically incorrect and "unproducable". i.e. the movie studio might think its too risky to spend money on with the ending the way it is in the series.

Whoa.... "politically incorrect"? I mean, I strongly maintain that the phrase doesn't have much of any useful maening to begin with, but this takes it to a new level. Then we go with "unproducable". This at least has some meaning, which would be unable to be produced... which I guess would mean, hard to find people willing to produce it...

I think the best phrase to describe the ending would be "Likely to massively flop." Yeah you like it, a lot of people like it on this board, but generally speaking? Destroying the majority of any major city is something the heroes prevent or avenge. Its not something they find out about after its over then go "well, I guess in the big picture it worked..." Generally speaking, movies are about the people who actually matter in the plot, the plot does not happen in tiny bits behind their back and then they show up for the "Its too late, I won, and oh I'll kick your ass a little while I'm at it".

The way its written, the movie would be bad. Except maybe Kevin Spacey, who seems to like movies with "non conventional" endings, none of these wonderful actors you dream about would sign up for the movie, because they would read the plot and say "this role kinda sucks". It would have bad production values because the investers would say "you want to make a film where the people we think are the good guys are completely ineffectual, the real hero kills thousands of innocents including all his henchmen, and the spunky little tough guy gets shot in the back and everyone's ok with that?"

Because guys, when you take away the art, and the cool pirate story, and the big name artist who did it, and getting so attached to the story over its run that you have to like the ending too, THAT'S what this plot is. And its not a plot that makes a good movie. I suppose it could make the first 30 minutes of a kinda fun Lone Gunmen movie about the conspiracy theorists at that magazine tracking down the truth, but even that would be iffy...

OK, rant over...

Kahuna Burger

 

[drnuncheon]

I think the best phrase to describe the ending would be "Likely to massively flop." Yeah you like it, a lot of people like it on this board, but generally speaking? Destroying the majority of any major city is something the heroes prevent or avenge. Its not something they find out about after its over then go "well, I guess in the big picture it worked..."

Hmm. Kind of like Arlington Road, eh?

That movie worked because it was about the character and the discovery of the plot, not an action film about the plot itself. Watchmen could work in the same way, if it were done well. (Will it be? No - they'll turn it into another comicbook movie. The 'comicbook movie' genre is not ready for a deconstructionist take on the level of Watchmen.)

J