It's probably too early for him to add this, but I bet I know what LBangs' gut will say about this: Darren Aronofsky to direct The Watchmen.
I feel like they've made the best possible choice for directing this, but how on earth do you get The Watchmen down to two hours? Impossible, I say! But Aronofsky's doomed attempt will be worth watching nonetheless.
What are they going to do about the ending and the story with a story about the pirates? They have to leave the pirate stuff out to even have a chance of filming it and that explains what Ozzy's doing. Plus I can't believe a studio will pay for a film with that downbeat of an ending. Not in the USA. I love the comic and have read it at least 5 times, but it's unfilmable. Maybe as a TV miniseries it could be done but no way as a movie.
Well, Requiem for a Dream had about as downbeat an ending as you can get, so maybe Aronofsky can get away with it twice. I do agree the pirate story is sure to be cut though, so the script will have to come up with some other way of foreshadowing what Ozzy's doing (he does reveal all at the end, if nothing else). I just don't know how he's going to flesh out so many characters. Singer could get away with it in X-Men, but it seems to me most characters (and their motivations) are essential to the plot in Watchmen, making Aronofsky's (and the screenwriter's) juggling act far trickier.
All I feel in MY gut is a hankerin' for chocolate, but I think reading about Aronofsky directing Watchmen might actually be giving me wood... :-)
Does excessive drooling count as a response?