Watchmen in 1994- A Pop-culture TL

[vultan]

Okay, here is my first (serious) attempt at a TL. The premise is that Terry Gilliam's attempt to adapt Watchmen in the early 90's succeeded, leading to all sorts of differences in this TL, mostly as to which movies get made. The POD itself is kinda murky, granted, but please be gentle.
Here's the first bit:

From Wikipedia:
Watchmen was a 1994 film based on the critically acclaimed comic by Alan Moore and David Gibbons and directed by Terry Gilliam. It starred Arnold Schwarzenegger as Ozymandias, Bruce Campbell as the Comedian, Tom Hanks as the Nite Owl, Demi Moore as Silk Spectre, Brent Spiner as Dr. Manhattan, and Michael Keaton as Rorschach. The film rights to Watchmen were originally acquired for 20th Century Fox, but delays in scripting and budget issues led to the project moving to Warner Bros. The film was very successful both critically and commercially, currently holding a 91% average on Rotten Tomatoes and earning $822,387,716 at the box office. It was nominated for several Academy Awards, winning several, most notably a posthumous win for Michael Keaton’s Rorschach as Best Supporting Actor. It is also the first film ever to have a fan website.

 

[vultan]

Developement:

In August 1986, producer Lawrence Gordon acquired the film rights to Watchmen for 20th Century Fox, with producer Joel Silver working on the film.[1] Fox asked author Alan Moore to write a screenplay based on his story, but when Moore declined the studio enlisted screenwriter Sam Hamm. On September 9, 1988, Hamm turned in his first draft, but said that condensing a 338-page, nine-panel-a-page comic book into a 128-page script was arduous. He took the liberty of re-writing Watchmen's complicated ending into a "more manageable" conclusion involving an assassination and a time paradox.[2] Fox put the film into turnaround in 1991, and Gordon set up the project at a new company, Largo International, with Fox distributing the film.
Gordon and Silver moved the project to Warner Bros., where Terry Gilliam was attached to direct. Unsatisfied with how Hamm's script fleshed out the characters, Gilliam brought in Charles McKeown to rewrite it. The second draft, which was credited to Gilliam, Warren Skaaren, and Hamm rather than McKeown, used the character Rorschach's diary as a voice-over, and restored scenes from the comic book that Hamm had removed.[2] According to Watchmen artist Dave Gibbons, Silver wanted to cast Arnold Schwarzenegger as Dr. Manhattan.[4] Filming was to take place at Pinewood Studios.[5] Because both Gilliam and Silver's previous films, The Adventures of Baron Munchausen and Die Hard 2 respectively, went over budget, they were only able to raise $25 million for the film—a quarter of the necessary budget. In a last ditch effort to save the project, however, Gilliam personally brought a copy of comic to a group of potential investors to convince them to sign on. Impressed by the marketability of the story, Gilliam was granted his $100 million dollar budget, with filming scheduled to commence in the summer of 1993.

 

[vultan]

I'm working on more, but feedback would be nice.

 

[Arachnid]

Interesting though I doubt an movie with that cast would get a 91% rating.

 

[vultan]

Interesting though I doubt an movie with that cast would get a 91% rating.

If you play it for what it is, not trying to make it the next, say, Schindler's List, but a GREAT popcorn film, it might work. Just citing recent examples, Star Trek and Avatar have scored pretty high, and no one would accuse THOSE movies of having great casts. Also, I hope no one doesn't mind my making Michael Keaton an early Heath Ledger?

 

[Torqumada]

Schwarzenegger would probably have made a better Comedian. Ozymandias isn't supposed to be a large, heavily muscled hero. Someone with a trim, fit build is more appropriate.

Torqumada

 

[Redem]

Well the Rotten Tomato scores is determiny by all the critic they were able to found on the internet right?

That movie was done in 1994, severals years prior the internet became common which mean a lot of movie review that bulk of the review were in the print but not online, most people that posted review probably are nerd making its score very high

Still I still think its a bit too high in term of money, reward and everything a lot about watchmen are meta-commentary about comic something that doesn't necessarly speak to a large audience

 

[loneranger]

Schwarzenegger would probably have made a better Comedian. Ozymandias isn't supposed to be a large, heavily muscled hero. Someone with a trim, fit build is more appropriate.

Torqumada

Might I suggest either Robert Patrick or Gary Oldman?

 

[ryackov]

Terry Gilliam's films aren't directed towards a popcorn audience. Nor would Watchmen, a hyper-modernist kabob of interlocking stories and critiques.

 

[Fenwick]

I see the worst film ever made. 1994 was right at the high point of movie marketing. Those who make the film will want Watchmen action figures, collector cups, and more. As such the idea of "dark" or "edgy" heroes gets toned down just enough so parents can take their kids to the movie. Everyone is in shape, Dr. Manhattan is either wearing pants or only filmed from the waist up, and worst off Watchmen is split between those who liked the movie and those who stick to the book.

 

[Redem]

I see the worst film ever made. 1994 was right at the high point of movie marketing. Those who make the film will want Watchmen action figures, collector cups, and more. As such the idea of "dark" or "edgy" heroes gets toned down just enough so parents can take their kids to the movie. Everyone is in shape, Dr. Manhattan is either wearing pants or only filmed from the waist up, and worst off Watchmen is split between those who liked the movie and those who stick to the book.

Good point *Cue saturday morning watchmen tune*the only way I could imagine it being worst is have it being direct by Tim Burton when he's uninspired

but kinda funny the most outrageous thing is one character having to wear pant

 

[The Vulture]

If we're going by the original Hamm script, then it's pretty well sanitized and changed up a lot.

I'm interested to see more, vultan. Particularly some of the other casting choices.

 

[Fenwick]

Good point *Cue saturday morning watchmen tune*the only way I could imagine it being worst is have it being direct by Tim Burton when he's uninspired

but kinda funny the most outrageous thing is one character having to wear pant

I think the issue with this POD is that one is applying modern superhero views to things. In 1994 the big budgets were being thrown out at films in hopes of equal or greater returns, yet Batman Returns would have an effect upon another "dark" superhero film. While Batman Returns made money the studios were upset at what they expected was a much larger return. A big issue issue for Warner Bros with the second Batman film was how McDonald's cut off its tie-in promotions losing about $27 million, not including actual sales.

So with Batman Returns as a template for future film ideas we should not look to today for the next superhero film, but Batman Forever. So instead of action and character development we get to enjoy more family-friendly things. Picture it now...

The Minute Men are trouble but happy. The Comedian forced a kiss upon the Silk Spectre before she slapped him! Rorschach is brooding but actually cracks a few jokes. The film ends with a victory and not millions of people dying. Of course we get sweet action figures, happy meals, t-shirts, and of course Watchmen bedsheets.

 

[Magniac]

Terry Gilliam's films aren't directed towards a popcorn audience. Nor would Watchmen, a hyper-modernist kabob of interlocking stories and critiques.

I posited a 1990 Watchmen movie last year https://www.alternatehistory.com/discussion/showthread.php?t=131830.

The AH.com community spoke in the poll I posted:

Ridley Scott 11 25.58%
Steven Spielberg 6 13.95%
George Lucas 2 4.65%
Terry Gilliam 6 13.95%
James Cameron 3 6.98%
George Miller 1 2.33%
Tim Burton 7 16.28%
Kathryn Bigalow 2 4.65%
Joe Dante 0 0%
John Landis 0 0%
Peter Hyams 0 0%
Tony Scott 0 0%
David Cronenberg 1 2.33%
John Carpenter 1 2.33%
Richard Donner 0 0%
John McTiernan 0 0%

I think they were right about Ridley Scott and Tim Burton being better visionaries than Gilliam for converting this story onto the big screen, though personally I would also put several others ahead of him, and none of them would be Spielberg. I also should have included Paul Verhoven (kicks self).

I think the issue with this POD is that one is
applying modern superhero views to things. In 1994 the big budgets were being thrown out at films in hopes of equal or greater returns, yet Batman Returns would have an effect upon another "dark" superhero film.

Wait, I thought you were adament that Burton's revival of Batman wouldn't have any positive effect on a film made in '90. Now you think a hypothetical '94 Watchmen doesn't/isn't allowed to live up to the standards of those movies?

The Minute Men are trouble but happy. The Comedian forced a kiss upon the Silk Spectre before she slapped him! Rorschach is brooding but actually cracks a few jokes. The film ends with a victory and not millions of people dying. Of course we get sweet action figures, happy meals, t-shirts, and of course Watchmen bedsheets.

Heh, I see this in a Terry Gilliam Watchmen made at any time. An ATL Watchmen that is only in the preproduction stage under the sixth Python right now would follow the same kind of gentile storytelling. 'Brazil' is the only truly adult movie the man had in him, IMO. Though obviously he isn't motivated by merchandising.

I still think a couple of the directors on my original list could've pulled off a faithful adaption ala 2009, or at least of the interesting screenplay being kicked around back in the early nineties. It would be a monstrous flop, I think, the 'Heavan's Gate' of special effects blockbusters, but it wouldn't be a travesty.

The virtue of making 'Watchmen' in the era it was eventually made was it didn't have to be such an expensive, risky venture, thanks to cheaper CGI and the returns DVDs generate.

 

[vultan]

Edited version of my first posts:

From Wikipedia:
Watchmen was a 1994 film based on the critically acclaimed comic by Alan Moore and David Gibbons and directed by Terry Gilliam. It starred Arnold Schwarzenegger as Ozymandias, Bruce Campbell as the Comedian, Tom Hanks as the Nite Owl, Demi Moore as Silk Spectre, Brent Spiner as Dr. Manhattan, and Michael Keaton as Rorschach. The film rights to Watchmen were originally acquired for 20th Century Fox, but delays in scripting and budget issues led to the project moving to Warner Bros. The film was very successful both critically and commercially, currently holding a 91% average on Rotten Tomatoes and earning $822,387,716 at the box office. It was nominated for several Academy Awards, winning several, most notably a posthumous win for Michael Keaton’s Rorschach as Best Supporting Actor. It is also the first film ever to have a fan website.

Development:

In August 1986, producer Lawrence Gordon acquired the film rights to Watchmen for 20th Century Fox, with producer Joel Silver working on the film.[1] Fox asked author Alan Moore to write a screenplay based on his story, but when Moore declined the studio enlisted screenwriter Sam Hamm. On September 9, 1988, Hamm turned in his first draft, but said that condensing a 338-page, nine-panel-a-page comic book into a 128-page script was arduous. He took the liberty of re-writing Watchmen's complicated ending into a "more manageable" conclusion involving an assassination and a time paradox.[2] Fox put the film into turnaround in 1991, and Gordon set up the project at a new company, Largo International, with Fox distributing the film.
Gordon and Silver moved the project to Warner Bros., where Terry Gilliam was attached to direct. Unsatisfied with how Hamm's script fleshed out the characters, Gilliam brought in Charles McKeown to rewrite it. The second draft, which was credited to Gilliam, Warren Skaaren, and Hamm rather than McKeown, used the character Rorschach's diary as a voice-over, and restored scenes from the comic book that Hamm had removed.[2] According to Watchmen artist Dave Gibbons, Silver wanted to cast Arnold Schwarzenegger as Dr. Manhattan.[4] Filming was to take place at Pinewood Studios.[5] Because both Gilliam and Silver's previous films, The Adventures of Baron Munchausen and Die Hard 2 respectively, went over budget, they were only able to raise $25 million for the film—a quarter of the necessary budget. Gilliam left the project in frustration, saying the comic was too complicated and edgy to produce anyway. However, in a last-ditch effort to save the film, Silver sent a copy of the comic to Ridley Scott, in the hopes he would take over. Intrigued by the story, Scott signed on to begin filming after the completion of 1492: Conquest of Paradise. It's generally agreed that the version Scott put out would be much darker than the one Gilliam could have ever done.

So,before I go on, I'm going to leave this to get some discussion going over what I have. You think cast is okay, fisrt off?
Secondly, my original intention was that the Gilliam film would be PG-13, but this Scott film will be R, so I took the box office down accordingly.
Also, if it helps, the second POD that I had Forrest Gump fall through in preproduction (how else am I going to get Tom Hanks for this role?) and Watchmen released on that date in OTL, so that's gotta help some, right?
Discuss.

 

[Redem]

Huh I don't think you took down the box-office number is still 822,387,716, a staggering ammount of money considering avatar did $748,860,222

 

[vultan]

Huh I don't think you took down the box-office number is still 822,387,716, a staggering ammount of money considering avatar did $748,860,222

This is an R-rated movie. I don't want to push it.

 

[Redem]

This is an R-rated movie. I don't want to push it.

Huh the highest grossing r-rated movie is the passion of the christ with $370,782,930

most of them don't do much over 200 millions (terminator 2 in 1991 did $204,843,345)

(I was suprise to hear from Box-Office mojo that Jerry Maguire is R-rated)

 

[vultan]

Huh the highest grossing r-rated movie is the passion of the christ with $370,782,930

most of them don't do much over 200 millions (terminator 2 in 1991 did $204,843,345)

Didn't Gladiator go over $400 million?

 

[Fenwick]

Major Issues with a 1994 "comic book" movie

1. Too long
   • To stick to the book one needs a lot of time, and in 1994 few people made three hour+ films.
   • Studios and audiences will not stand for a comic book movie taking so long
2. Not for kids?
   • "Bob I want to make a movie about superheroes who are depressed, lonely, murders, and ends with a massive genocide!"
   • Expect the 1994 studio controlled film to be sent through a series of rewrites so it can meet marketing, and censor approval.
   • The 90's was the time of stuido mega-pics not director control
3. Too depressing, dark, violent
   • Given the common type of superhero movie at the time would anyone want to see such a downer?
   • A movie about nuclear holocaust, ending in millions dead and no real happy ending?
   • I fear a reedit would occur, which makes people like Watchmen, but the directors cut making nerds love watchmen.

So we get what with all this taken into account?

First I can see a studio head asking Nite-Owl to be taken out of the picture. "We just did a Batman movie! If we want a hooded guy with gadgets why not make another Batman movie?"

Next Rorschach cannot be the pyscho we like him to be. "What parent will buy little Bobby a Rorschach toy if he comes with a dead dog, and a vat of grease?" So we can seem him be brooding, but he makes jokes.

Silk Spectre is a girl, and will have to be attractive so no issues there. However I see her needing to be saved a few to many times.

Comedian works, but his back story is limited so he just becomes this heroic, if flawed man who dies.

Dr. Manhatten really does not fit into the film, unless you up the budget, and increase its length. If you work on an hour and a half to two hour film working in how a man turned into a god, and slowly lost his interest in humanity eats up a lot of screen time. So like before he would get cut.

Ozymandias works, yet his goal for everything may have to be changed. No artic base, and alien invasion. Perhaps he just plans to destroy New York and blame the Soviets. It would be so easy to turn this rounded character into a simple corporate villian.

So you get a film about a washed up hero named Rorschach, brought back to avenge the death of his friend the Comedian. Some times he visits an older man who was once a hero for guidence, as well as this attractive former hero he has the hots for. Rorschach deals with an ex-hero turned psycho, and stops his plot to "trick" the world into peace. The film ends with the Soviet Union falling apart by the people peacefully protesting, and Rorschach gets to be a hero full time again knowing people will accept him for it.

While I get the urge to make Watchmen popular I do not think the people are ready for it. People in their thirties will recall Batman and Robin tv show, as well as Superman with Christopher Reeves. They will have skipped the dark brooding comics, and think of more mainstream ideas of what a superhero is. Worse off you will deal with the Warner Bros. studio heads due to the large budget the film has. Studio heads want to make money, not make good movies. In the 1990's everyone was waiting for the next Home Alone (small budget massive returns) which can attractive the target family audience.