PDA

View Full Version : Watchmen


powerslave_85
08-26-2008, 10:20 PM
Who else is pumped for this movie? I finally got around to reading the graphic novel, and now I'm really excited to see what they do with it on the big screen. It's been considered to be un-filmable in the past, but judging by the trailer it looks like they did a pretty good job with it. I'm worried about them fucking up the ending, though. BTW, if you've never read the graphic novel, DO IT. It's fucking amazing.

DethMaiden
08-27-2008, 12:10 PM
The graphic novel is AMAZING. The movie should be good.

Sinfulsot
08-27-2008, 07:52 PM
i'm looking forward to this. i read the miniseries when it first came out. however, i was 15 at the time and some of it was over my head.

ravenheart
08-29-2008, 10:44 AM
Yep, can't wait. I saw the full trailer at the IMAX in London when I saw The Dark Knight. Definitely going to be seeing this there.

mankvill
08-29-2008, 12:48 PM
:fist: rorshach rules.

Sinfulsot
08-29-2008, 06:03 PM
there is an animated version of the comic book available via iTunes. i've downloaded the first issue and looking forward to the next 11 to catch up. the narrator is a guy, who also does the female voices, but it didn't really bother me. it's also more than just a voice and panning over the frames, there's a bit more to it, such as seeing Rorshach's mask move as it was described in the comic.

powerslave_85
11-15-2008, 11:22 PM
Well, Zach Snyder (the director) confirmed that they changed the ending, thereby completely fucking up every bit of plot, message and character development that the novel builds up to, and for no other reason than he just felt like it. No wonder Alan Moore is such a bitter prick when it comes to people making movies of his comics.

DethMaiden
11-16-2008, 07:46 AM
Well, Zach Snyder (the director) confirmed that they changed the ending, thereby completely fucking up every bit of plot, message and character development that the novel builds up to, and for no other reason than he just felt like it. No wonder Alan Moore is such a bitter prick when it comes to people making movies of his comics.

How the FUCK do you change that ending? Is it going to be fucking happy now? Goddammit.

Sinfulsot
11-16-2008, 07:47 AM
I also heard that the release date was pushed. this is unconfirmed.

powerslave_85
11-16-2008, 09:05 AM
I also heard that the release date was pushed. this is unconfirmed.
I dunno, the newest trailer still says March.

***POSSIBLE SPOILERS AHEAD***









So far, all Snyder has said is that the giant Kraken is no longer in it. Which, as you know, would mean that the entire plot is for shit. He said it would have been too hard to film, which to me is absolute bullshit. You're telling me that in an age where we have movies like Lord of the Rings, Jurassic Park, and Cloverfield that you can't make a giant squid that really does nothing but sit there??!

Sinfulsot
11-16-2008, 09:08 AM
i was listening to totalrock.com and the dj was interviewing a guy from a band called Oceanio, and she brought up that the date was pushed. maybe in the UK? my apologies in advance for speaking directly out of my arse.

DethMaiden
11-16-2008, 09:43 AM
I dunno, the newest trailer still says March.

***POSSIBLE SPOILERS AHEAD***









So far, all Snyder has said is that the giant Kraken is no longer in it. Which, as you know, would mean that the entire plot is for shit. He said it would have been too hard to film, which to me is absolute bullshit. You're telling me that in an age where we have movies like Lord of the Rings, Jurassic Park, and Cloverfield that you can't make a giant squid that really does nothing but sit there??!

Well, if Ozymandias still fucks up NYC, I guess the squid isn't totally necessary. I just don't want Rorschach and Nite Owl to stop him.

powerslave_85
11-16-2008, 09:53 AM
The squid is the only thing that makes sense, though. It HAS to be something completely alien and horrifying in order to cause the world to put aside its differences and avert nuclear war.

DethMaiden
11-16-2008, 09:57 AM
The squid is the only thing that makes sense, though. It HAS to be something completely alien and horrifying in order to cause the world to put aside its differences and avert nuclear war.

True. Fuck.

Dear Zach Snyder: I will kill your family if you ruin Watchmen.

DethMaiden
03-02-2009, 05:46 PM
Going Thursday at midnight. PSYCHED IS AN UNDERSTATEMENT.

powerslave_85
03-02-2009, 06:30 PM
I dunno, I have pretty low expectations at this point.

DethMaiden
03-03-2009, 09:07 AM
I dunno, I have pretty low expectations at this point.

I have buried all of my cynicism at this point and will go in extremely excited regardless of the likelihood of it being any good.

Sinfulsot
03-03-2009, 03:16 PM
I still have to catch up. i bought the iTunes issues that are animated, yet based on the original comic book artwork.

ChildrenofSodom
03-06-2009, 12:18 AM
so....awesome

DethMaiden
03-06-2009, 09:09 AM
Book >>>>>>>>>> movie. But take them as separate entities and the movie was pretty sweet. The violence was all really cool. The changed ending pissed me off since the entire message was even changed. But whatever. Good movie, better book.

mankvill
03-06-2009, 12:32 PM
I just saw it

SO GOOD AHHH

At first i was kinda mad they didn't have the alien but I actually liked this way a bit better. Wish they would've done more with Rorshcach and the psychiatrist though.

Also: Was that MCR over the credits?

Div
03-07-2009, 02:15 PM
i heard it was a huge flop

but maybe they were talking about cocktor wanghattan's dong

Div
03-07-2009, 02:22 PM
Book >>>>>>>>>> movie. But take them as separate entities and the movie was pretty sweet. The violence was all really cool. The changed ending pissed me off since the entire message was even changed. But whatever. Good movie, better book.

Akira was like this, I saw the movie first and later read the books, and was surprised to see that they were entirely different stories. They were both good, but like you said would be considered separate.

mankvill
03-07-2009, 03:24 PM
i heard it was a huge flop

but maybe they were talking about cocktor wanghattan's dong

At one point in the movie there are like four blue dicks on screen at once

god damnit i was sitting next to some weird old guy that i didn't know i was so uncomfortable he was breathing so hard

JRA
03-07-2009, 06:36 PM
At one point in the movie there are like four blue dicks on screen at once

god damnit i was sitting next to some weird old guy that i didn't know i was so uncomfortable he was breathing so hard

Don't they make him wear black speedos or something?

Div
03-07-2009, 07:18 PM
in the book he did at first but then he slowly started wearing less and less clothing until he was just naked.

ravenheart
03-07-2009, 07:34 PM
there is an animated version of the comic book available via iTunes.

Those are coming out on DVD here next week.

There's also a fully animated story called 'Tales of The Black Freighter', with most of the actors from the new movie doing the voices, out in April.

DethMaiden
03-07-2009, 07:37 PM
I'll at the very least rent Tales of the Black Freighter. I was disappointed that that part of the book was cut from the movie, I'm glad they're doing something about it.

overkiller
03-07-2009, 07:44 PM
Yeah... that wasn't really very good.


I liked Ozymandias, but the whole idea of world peace magically arising after blowing up the world's major cities is kinda broken. And the whole idea that the world's nations will keep the peace "as long as they think John's watching" has some uncomfortable religious overtones. Of course we'll stop killing each other if we think God's watching... right...

overkiller
03-07-2009, 07:49 PM
Have you read the graphic novel?

I have not.

mankvill
03-07-2009, 07:51 PM
I have not.

Oh. I deleted my post because I guess it really didn't have much to do with what I was gonna say, but...

Now that I think about it, the ending in the movie is a bit more crappy than the one in the graphic novel, but I still think it works in the end. You should really read the comic. :O

powerslave_85
03-07-2009, 08:28 PM
The whole "enemy nations laying down their arms to fight a common enemy" thing works really well in the book. I haven't seen the movie yet, but I from what I've heard they pretty much fucked the ending completely, so I'm not surprised it made less sense.

DethMaiden
03-07-2009, 08:30 PM
The whole "enemy nations laying down their arms to fight a common enemy" thing works really well in the book. I haven't seen the movie yet, but I from what I've heard they pretty much fucked the ending completely, so I'm not surprised it made less sense.

The book ending makes infinitely more sense.

powerslave_85
03-07-2009, 08:39 PM
i bought the iTunes issues that are animated, yet based on the original comic book artwork.Not so much "based on" as "the entire comic, word for word." It was pretty cool, although it was kind of lame that they only had one guy doing the voices. I watched it so that it would be fresh in my mind when I go see the movie tomorrow. That way, I have more to nitpick and complain about :eyes:

I'm really excited for the Black Freighter DVD, though.

mankvill
03-07-2009, 09:14 PM
The book ending makes infinitely more sense.

True, but both endings still work, I think.

ChildrenofSodom
03-07-2009, 09:31 PM
The book ending makes infinitely more sense.

[spoiler]

Giant ass alien squid appearing and the world coming together to investigate its sources doesnt make sense at all out of context. In context, it is still far-fetched considering the lack of alien squids at anytime before then. At least in the movie, there is the fact that Manhattan is working with Ozy to develop technology using his own powers throughout, and then he turns around and uses it to destroy cities.

powerslave_85
03-07-2009, 10:51 PM
Giant ass alien squid appearing and the world coming together to investigate its sources doesnt make sense at all out of context. In context, it is still far-fetched considering the lack of alien squids at anytime before then.Um, what? The whole point of the squid is that it IS something no one's ever seen before. It's terrifying, it's alien, and it's completely unexplained. That's the reason why the US and Russia are willing to end hostilities: it's something so utterly preposterous that they have no choice but to cooperate.

mankvill
03-08-2009, 12:34 AM
Um, what? The whole point of the squid is that it IS something no one's ever seen before. It's terrifying, it's alien, and it's completely unexplained. That's the reason why the US and Russia are willing to end hostilities: it's something so utterly preposterous that they have no choice but to cooperate.

If that really happened, wouldn't Russia use that alien attack to push forward even more on the US? :O

Div
03-08-2009, 12:41 AM
spoilers too i guess:

i havent seen the movie yet either, but Rorschach was my favorite, he was definitely the deepest character and had the biggest impact on the story and depending on how you view the ending, gets the last laugh. ozy was too full of himself and lost in his own world, doc manhattan was too robotic, and nite owl was just boring. but rorschach and the comedian were definitely the coolest characters.

mankvill
03-08-2009, 10:34 AM
spoilers too i guess:

i havent seen the movie yet either, but Rorschach was my favorite, he was definitely the deepest character and had the biggest impact on the story and depending on how you view the ending, gets the last laugh. ozy was too full of himself and lost in his own world, doc manhattan was too robotic, and nite owl was just boring. but rorschach and the comedian were definitely the coolest characters.

:fist:

I really wish they would've done more with the psychiatrist and Rorshcach.

ChildrenofSodom
03-08-2009, 10:48 AM
Um, what? The whole point of the squid is that it IS something no one's ever seen before. It's terrifying, it's alien, and it's completely unexplained. That's the reason why the US and Russia are willing to end hostilities: it's something so utterly preposterous that they have no choice but to cooperate.

But I think the way the movie does it makes just as much since, if not more. Manhattan was giving his powers to Adrian to work on 'alternative energy devices.' Adrian sets up this operation to make the world hate Manhattan, with the cancer and the interview and everything, so he leaves Earth because he feels the whole world is against him. He finally returns to save the planet, but Adrian uses those energy devices as bombs, and the world blames Manhattan anyway.

It makes perfect sense. I think the way the book does it, though I am going on what others have said because I have not read it yet, the squid comes out of nowhere, there is no way for the people of the world, the other watchmen, or the reader to know that it is coming. Whereas, in then movie, there are at least hints and connections that can be made to earlier parts in the movie.

I feel if someone walked into the movie without any knowledge of the book, a giant ass random squid would make very little sense. That is one of my only complaints about the movie: was it being made for the general population or for the comic book nerds? Because they never explain Ozy's weird lion thing, or his Antarctic fortress, etc.

overkiller
03-08-2009, 11:04 AM
spoilers too i guess:

i havent seen the movie yet either, but Rorschach was my favorite, he was definitely the deepest character and had the biggest impact on the story and depending on how you view the ending, gets the last laugh. ozy was too full of himself and lost in his own world, doc manhattan was too robotic, and nite owl was just boring. but rorschach and the comedian were definitely the coolest characters.

[SPOILERS AHEAD, although at this point probably everyone's either read the book or seen the movie, so it probably doesn't matter..]


I absolutely hated Rorschach. All the moments when you're supposed to go "Whoa, he's awesome!" are pretty transparent and contrived, even if they usually work (I found myself inadvertently going "Whoa, he's awesome!" a few times). I realize that all the characters are meant to be flawed, but at least from the impression I got from the movie, I thought he was the shallowest character, with all his loud, empty moralizing. I was kinda happy when he blew up at the end; he and his black-and-white (surprise!) worldview are so incredibly beneath Ozymandias and Dr. Manhattan.

Spiral_Slave
03-08-2009, 11:16 AM
Thought the movie pretty much sucked. Too long, predictable and boring. Also blue dick everywhere wtf.

overkiller
03-08-2009, 11:26 AM
Also blue dick everywhere wtf.

Hahah. Yeah. Someone mentioned to me that they think it's there as a sort of phallic symbol of his superpowers, but I'm not sure I buy that. I read that in the comic, the illustrator wanted to make his genitals understated, like a classical sculpture, so that they would be there but they wouldn't obstruct the reader's view of everything else. Somehow that interpretation didn't make it into the movie, and instead we get Cocktor Wanghattan, as Div so gracefully put it. :D

ChildrenofSodom
03-08-2009, 11:35 AM
Hahah. Yeah. Someone mentioned to me that they think it's there as a sort of phallic symbol of his superpowers, but I'm not sure I buy that. I read that in the comic, the illustrator wanted to make his genitals understated, like a classical sculpture, so that they would be there but they wouldn't obstruct the reader's view of everything else. Somehow that interpretation didn't make it into the movie, and instead we get Cocktor Wanghattan, as Div so gracefully put it. :D

Yeah, I heard we were going to see dick, but I thought it would be like the Simpsons movie, where they show it for two seconds and thats it, but nope: dicks galore, the whole movie.

JRA
03-08-2009, 11:39 AM
Were there at least boobs?

Also, the thing that makes people sympathetic to Rosharch is his backstory, I don't know if that was discussed in the movie or not.

overkiller
03-08-2009, 12:03 PM
Were there at least boobs?

Also, the thing that makes people sympathetic to Rosharch is his backstory, I don't know if that was discussed in the movie or not.

Yeah, and they seemed just as pointless as the giant blue dicks.


We get Rorschach's backstory, and it does generate some sympathy, but it seems fairly truncated--so what we're left with is a predictable picture of a young kid neglected/hated by his parents and made fun of by bigger kids. Yawn. And we witness his discovery of the little girl who was fed to dogs, which ultimately makes him as crazy as he is, but this also seems forced and truncated.

Div
03-08-2009, 01:08 PM
[SPOILERS AHEAD, although at this point probably everyone's either read the book or seen the movie, so it probably doesn't matter..]


I absolutely hated Rorschach. All the moments when you're supposed to go "Whoa, he's awesome!" are pretty transparent and contrived, even if they usually work (I found myself inadvertently going "Whoa, he's awesome!" a few times). I realize that all the characters are meant to be flawed, but at least from the impression I got from the movie, I thought he was the shallowest character, with all his loud, empty moralizing. I was kinda happy when he blew up at the end; he and his black-and-white (surprise!) worldview are so incredibly beneath Ozymandias and Dr. Manhattan.


I guess when you put it that way, the other two characters definitely had broader perspectives on the world. But I just found it too hard to relate to a giant blue omnipotent being or a rich supergenius. I thought it was respectable in the way he would rather die than compromise his mission, even if the conspiracy wasn't as big as he thought. And his sometimes over-the-top conservatism provided a bit of comic relief at points, like when he was leaving veidt's tower and made the journal note,

http://img23.imageshack.us/img23/9452/rorschach119.jpg

mankvill
03-08-2009, 01:20 PM
But I think the way the movie does it makes just as much since, if not more. Manhattan was giving his powers to Adrian to work on 'alternative energy devices.' Adrian sets up this operation to make the world hate Manhattan, with the cancer and the interview and everything, so he leaves Earth because he feels the whole world is against him. He finally returns to save the planet, but Adrian uses those energy devices as bombs, and the world blames Manhattan anyway.

It makes perfect sense. I think the way the book does it, though I am going on what others have said because I have not read it yet, the squid comes out of nowhere, there is no way for the people of the world, the other watchmen, or the reader to know that it is coming. Whereas, in then movie, there are at least hints and connections that can be made to earlier parts in the movie.

I feel if someone walked into the movie without any knowledge of the book, a giant ass random squid would make very little sense. That is one of my only complaints about the movie: was it being made for the general population or for the comic book nerds? Because they never explain Ozy's weird lion thing, or his Antarctic fortress, etc.

There is an explanation for the squid in the comic, but for the life of me, I don't really remember what it was...

Div
03-08-2009, 01:30 PM
ozymandias created it to scare the world into thinking there may be an alien invasion. then he teleported it into new york and it released the psychic waves that killed half the city.

what i dont get is that, even if it makes the world unified at the time being, eventually when no more squids arrive things are bound to go back to the way they were, or hell it could even cause weird squid worshipping cults to arise. tho i still think its better than the movie's "god watching over us" ending.

overkiller
03-08-2009, 01:31 PM
hell it could even cause weird squid worshipping cults to arise

:lol:

SirLardsAlot
03-08-2009, 03:01 PM
I, for one, loved it. :party:

I really want to read it now.

ChildrenofSodom
03-08-2009, 05:45 PM
what i dont get is that, even if it makes the world unified at the time being, eventually when no more squids arrive things are bound to go back to the way they were, or hell it could even cause weird squid worshipping cults to arise. tho i still think its better than the movie's "god watching over us" ending.

I think Manhattan watching over us would scare people more in the realm of comic book stories than the threat of a giant ass squid, which never existed, existed, and then went out of existence.

ChildrenofSodom
03-08-2009, 06:02 PM
I loved the sex scene.

andrew_metalhead
03-08-2009, 07:36 PM
movie sucked. truly a shitfest. except for Roreshack (not sure of spelling) I didn't like anything about that movie.

ChildrenofSodom
03-08-2009, 07:55 PM
Well, thats a different opinion....

powerslave_85
03-08-2009, 09:22 PM
I loved the sex scene.
Oh god. That was so terrible. Even in the book it's awkward and goofy, but it was just way over the top and...graphic.

Things I liked:
-Rorschach and The Comedian were done to perfection, as was Dan/Nite Owl II.
-It was incredibly faithful to the novel up until the last 45 minutes or so. There were tons of shots that were straight out of the panels (The Comedian going through the window, Archie rising up out of the water).
-The opening sequence with the Minutemen was superb
-They did a great job with the overall feel of the city and the time period.
-Dr. Manhattan was also very well done, and well-acted. A lot of people complained about the voice, but that's pretty much how I heard it in my head when I was reading it.
-Archie (the owl ship) was way cool.

Things I didn't like (spoilers, yadayadayada...)
-The sex scene. Ugh.
-The guy who played Veidt. He looked a little too scrawny and nerdy, and was a little too much like a stereotypical super villain.
-A lot of the gore was completely unnecessary. The part where they cut the guy's arms off in jail? In the book all they do is stab him! The guts hanging from the ceiling were dumb too.
-Rorschach's scene with the kidnapper is WAY cooler in the book, but Snyder said it was too much like Saw. Goddamnit. As crazy as Rorschach is, it still seems out of character for him to just hack someone up with a meat cleaver.
-The ending. Eh. It makes more sense than I thought it would, and I guess it still fits the "tone" of the original, but I still like the book ending a lot more. They also didn't do a good enough job of emphasizing the fact that the plot was so horrifying that it made The Comedian completely crack up.
-The very very end with the newspaper guys. In the book, they show that the New Frontiersman is a right-wing nutjob conspiracy magazine. That kind of changes the whole significance of Rorschach sending his journal to them.
-The fight scenes were way too stylized. They spend most of the movie showing that Nite Owl II is a paunchy, middle-aged sad sack, but then he's beating people up with moves right out of the fucking Matrix.

JRA
03-09-2009, 12:11 AM
-Rorschach's scene with the kidnapper is WAY cooler in the book, but Snyder said it was too much like Saw. Goddamnit.


So...then if any idiot Saw fans come crying, you simply say, "Before SAW, Watchmen did it better. Fuck Zack Snyder, that retard.

Div
03-09-2009, 12:29 AM
http://img14.imageshack.us/img14/2975/watchmen0625.jpg

zgodt
03-10-2009, 12:01 PM
Oh god. That was so terrible. Even in the book it's awkward and goofy, but it was just way over the top and...graphic.

Things I liked:
-Rorschach and The Comedian were done to perfection, as was Dan/Nite Owl II.
-It was incredibly faithful to the novel up until the last 45 minutes or so. There were tons of shots that were straight out of the panels (The Comedian going through the window, Archie rising up out of the water).
-The opening sequence with the Minutemen was superb
-They did a great job with the overall feel of the city and the time period.
-Dr. Manhattan was also very well done, and well-acted. A lot of people complained about the voice, but that's pretty much how I heard it in my head when I was reading it.
-Archie (the owl ship) was way cool.

Things I didn't like (spoilers, yadayadayada...)
-The sex scene. Ugh.
-The guy who played Veidt. He looked a little too scrawny and nerdy, and was a little too much like a stereotypical super villain.
-A lot of the gore was completely unnecessary. The part where they cut the guy's arms off in jail? In the book all they do is stab him! The guts hanging from the ceiling were dumb too.
-Rorschach's scene with the kidnapper is WAY cooler in the book, but Snyder said it was too much like Saw. Goddamnit. As crazy as Rorschach is, it still seems out of character for him to just hack someone up with a meat cleaver.
-The ending. Eh. It makes more sense than I thought it would, and I guess it still fits the "tone" of the original, but I still like the book ending a lot more. They also didn't do a good enough job of emphasizing the fact that the plot was so horrifying that it made The Comedian completely crack up.
-The very very end with the newspaper guys. In the book, they show that the New Frontiersman is a right-wing nutjob conspiracy magazine. That kind of changes the whole significance of Rorschach sending his journal to them.
-The fight scenes were way too stylized. They spend most of the movie showing that Nite Owl II is a paunchy, middle-aged sad sack, but then he's beating people up with moves right out of the fucking Matrix.

I saw it last night. I agree with you on most of this. I was largely disappointed. The first (failed) sex scene was fine, just right in its awkwardness. The second was ridiculous. "Hallelujah?" Really? The music choices throughout the movie were idiotic, actually. Why not just do a regular film score?

Almost all of the violence and gore was inane, tacky, and pointless. It single-handedly ruined the movie. For instance: Dr. Manhattan can completely vaporize particles, but somehow he leaves giant splashes of blood and entrails behind wherever he goes? It doesn't make one goddamn bit of sense. And when Dan and Laurie get in the fight in the alley with the gang dudes? Cracking people's arms off and breaking necks and shit? It's completely laughable. All they do in the book is kick a little ass; that's all it makes sense for them to do. I conclude that Zack Snyder is a dipshit with no taste.

Oh, oh: and the dogs chewing the bone with the girl's shoe still attached...? Can you say ham-handed?

"Human bean juice." :hecho:

powerslave_85
03-10-2009, 12:29 PM
Oh, oh: and the dogs chewing the bone with the girl's shoe still attached...? Can you say ham-handed?

"Human bean juice." :hecho:Yeah, I don't know why they had to be so obvious about that.

I was suprised they kept that line, haha. I liked that it was a rare attempt at humor for Rorschach, though.

overkiller
03-10-2009, 03:59 PM
I conclude that Zack Snyder is a dipshit with no taste.


That pretty much sums it up. But at least Watchmen wasn't racist and homophobic like 300 was.

JRA
03-10-2009, 04:37 PM
That pretty much sums it up. But at least Watchmen wasn't racist and homophobic like 300 was.


I can't remember what was racist about 300, or homophobic for that matter.

Div
03-10-2009, 04:47 PM
I can't remember what was racist about 300, or homophobic for that matter.

didnt you see him kick that negro man into the pit?

mankvill
03-10-2009, 06:02 PM
didnt you see him kick that negro man into the pit?

Madness!

overkiller
03-10-2009, 06:27 PM
I can't remember what was racist about 300, or homophobic for that matter.

What was racist about it was the depiction of almost the entire race of Persians (read: Arabs) as hideous monsters.

What struck me as homophobic is the effeminacy with which Xerxes (the utmost villain) is portrayed, in direct opposition to the hyper-manly Leonidas; remember when he starts massaging Leonidas' shoulders, and the manly man Spartan shrugs him off and makes some quip or other to him? Another thing was Leonidas' comment about Athenians being "boy-lovers"; that's a really complicated issue which involves ancient sexualities (the Spartans were the biggest pederasts of them all), and the film simplifies it, with remarkable stupidity, into a macho comment that implies that intellectuals are homosexuals and/or pedophiles. Even if Snyder didn't directly intend all of this, the whole spectacle is just "sublimely stupid," as Alan Moore put it.

ChildrenofSodom
03-10-2009, 06:39 PM
I think you have to remember that this movie was made for the public, not just the comic nerds. Just because YOU know about the dead little girl, that doesnt necessarily mean that a general audience member will.

powerslave_85
03-10-2009, 06:43 PM
He went to investigate a kidnapping. The girl's clothes were in the oven, there was a chopping board covered in blood beneath an assortment of butcher's tools, and dogs were fighting over bones in the backyard. C'mon. All but the most dimwitted in the audience would have put it together.

mankvill
03-10-2009, 06:44 PM
What was racist about it was the depiction of almost the entire race of Persians (read: Arabs) as hideous monsters.

What struck me as homophobic is the effeminacy with which Xerxes (the utmost villain) is portrayed, in direct opposition to the hyper-manly Leonidas; remember when he starts massaging Leonidas' shoulders, and the manly man Spartan shrugs him off and makes some quip or other to him? Another thing was Leonidas' comment about Athenians being "boy-lovers"; that's a really complicated issue which involves ancient sexualities (the Spartans were the biggest pederasts of them all), and the film simplifies it, with remarkable stupidity, into a macho comment that implies that intellectuals are homosexuals and/or pedophiles. Even if Snyder didn't directly intend all of this, the whole spectacle is just "sublimely stupid," as Alan Moore put it.

but the movie isn't based off history, it's based off a comic. D:

overkiller
03-10-2009, 06:54 PM
but the movie isn't based off history, it's based off a comic. D:

Ok, but in that case the movie only exacerbates problems that may have already been present in the comic. Not matters of historical accuracy, mind you--there is none of that in 300, which is fine, because that's not what the movie is about--but the issues I just outlined above.

JRA
03-10-2009, 06:56 PM
What was racist about it was the depiction of almost the entire race of Persians (read: Arabs) as hideous monsters.

What struck me as homophobic is the effeminacy with which Xerxes (the utmost villain) is portrayed, in direct opposition to the hyper-manly Leonidas; remember when he starts massaging Leonidas' shoulders, and the manly man Spartan shrugs him off and makes some quip or other to him? Another thing was Leonidas' comment about Athenians being "boy-lovers"; that's a really complicated issue which involves ancient sexualities (the Spartans were the biggest pederasts of them all), and the film simplifies it, with remarkable stupidity, into a macho comment that implies that intellectuals are homosexuals and/or pedophiles. Even if Snyder didn't directly intend all of this, the whole spectacle is just "sublimely stupid," as Alan Moore put it.

But Frank Miller made 300 didn't he?

overkiller
03-10-2009, 06:58 PM
But Frank Miller made 300 didn't he?

Frank Miller wrote the comic, and Snyder directed the film; see my response to mankvill.

ChildrenofSodom
03-10-2009, 07:04 PM
He went to investigate a kidnapping. The girl's clothes were in the oven, there was a chopping board covered in blood beneath an assortment of butcher's tools, and dogs were fighting over bones in the backyard. C'mon. All but the most dimwitted in the audience would have put it together.

Yes......your point?

ChildrenofSodom
03-10-2009, 07:04 PM
There were 9 foot tall beast men and three story tall elephants.

JRA
03-10-2009, 07:29 PM
Frank Miller wrote the comic, and Snyder directed the film; see my response to mankvill.

Well, you said Alan Moore said it was "sublimely stupid" and I'm thinking, "what's he complaining about, he didn't make the comic?"

Div
03-10-2009, 07:56 PM
Yes......your point?

well dont you think it was handled cooler in the page i posted back there than in the movie?

powerslave_85
03-10-2009, 08:12 PM
Yes......your point?
That you have to be really fucking dense to not make the connection, and it's really patronizing for Snyder to be bludgeoning us over the head with the point like that?

overkiller
03-10-2009, 08:54 PM
Well, you said Alan Moore said it was "sublimely stupid" and I'm thinking, "what's he complaining about, he didn't make the comic?"

Alan Moore said 300 was sublimely stupid (although he didn't actually see it, heh...) in an interview in which he was being asked whether he was happy with the choice of Zack Snyder to direct Watchmen. His answer was more or less "no, I'm not". He has just about zero to do with the making of the movies based on his comics.

ChildrenofSodom
03-10-2009, 09:01 PM
well dont you think it was handled cooler in the page i posted back there than in the movie?

It was already established that the movie wasnt being made from the book entirely. I think that in the context of a 3 hour movie, compared to a much longer read of the comic, that scene helped to develop the character. Obviously it was later in the movie, but seeing as how the flashback took place in a 'reveal all your secrets' setting (with the psychologist) it still makes sense. And the visual of killing the man lines up with the past 10 years of action/horror/torture movies. I think its unfair for people to bad talk the director on this point in the film because I think it is what American film watchers want to see. Scream, Saw, the Rob Zombie movies, Hills Have Eyes, and every other two-bit slasher/splatter films have been popular for a reason. I don't particularly enjoy these films...but thats another story.

That you have to be really fucking dense to not make the connection, and it's really patronizing for Snyder to be bludgeoning us over the head with the point like that?

It wasn't that over the top. I assume you have read the comics, and thats why you say that it was. Most people who saw the film cold walked away saying 'woah...that was badass' and they are sleeping soundly tonight, not sitting around and acting butthurt that the director broke from the comic. Alan Moore disowned this piece, why should Snyder stay 100% true to it.

ChildrenofSodom
03-10-2009, 09:03 PM
Alan Moore said 300 was sublimely stupid (although he didn't actually see it, heh...) in an interview in which he was being asked whether he was happy with the choice of Zack Snyder to direct Watchmen. His answer was more or less "no, I'm not". He has just about zero to do with the making of the movies based on his comics.

Then why should Zack Snyder honor Alan Moore by following his story line exactly? The more I think about it, the more I respect Snyder because he made the film his own by disconnecting the two works in key areas.

powerslave_85
03-10-2009, 09:12 PM
It wasn't that over the top. I assume you have read the comics, and thats why you say that it was. Most people who saw the film cold walked away saying 'woah...that was badass' and they are sleeping soundly tonight, not sitting around and acting butthurt that the director broke from the comic. Alan Moore disowned this piece, why should Snyder stay 100% true to it.It doesn't piss me off because it's different from the comic, it pisses me off because it's shoddy, lazy film making.

overkiller
03-10-2009, 09:13 PM
It doesn't piss me off because it's different from the comic, it pisses me off because it's shoddy, lazy film making.

Bingo.

powerslave_85
03-10-2009, 09:17 PM
I honestly don't have an opinion on Snyder based on anything other than this movie, because I never saw 300 (it looked dumb, and frat boys yelling out catchphrases preemptively ruined it for me), but all the unnecessary blood and guts gave me a pretty low opinion of him.

zgodt
03-10-2009, 09:22 PM
It was already established that the movie wasnt being made from the book entirely. I think that in the context of a 3 hour movie, compared to a much longer read of the comic, that scene helped to develop the character. Obviously it was later in the movie, but seeing as how the flashback took place in a 'reveal all your secrets' setting (with the psychologist) it still makes sense. And the visual of killing the man lines up with the past 10 years of action/horror/torture movies. I think its unfair for people to bad talk the director on this point in the film because I think it is what American film watchers want to see. Scream, Saw, the Rob Zombie movies, Hills Have Eyes, and every other two-bit slasher/splatter films have been popular for a reason. I don't particularly enjoy these films...but thats another story.



It wasn't that over the top. I assume you have read the comics, and thats why you say that it was. Most people who saw the film cold walked away saying 'woah...that was badass' and they are sleeping soundly tonight, not sitting around and acting butthurt that the director broke from the comic. Alan Moore disowned this piece, why should Snyder stay 100% true to it.

The non-comic-nerd people I know who've seen the movie but not read the novel still think that scene (among others) was hideously stupid. I hate movie makers who "play down" to an audience they assume to be chumps, and that's how most of Snyder's choices feel. Movie makers who assume a smarter audience tend to make smarter movies. Saw is not what American moviegoers want to see; it's what Saw fans want to see. Fuck Saw fans. Saw isn't on Time Magazine's list of the best 100 novels of all time. The problem is not a director failing to stay "100% true" to the source material; it's a director's klutzy handling turning a great book into a poor film.

powerslave_85
03-10-2009, 09:28 PM
Fuck Saw fans.This is my general philosophy on life, really.

ChildrenofSodom
03-10-2009, 09:37 PM
eh...whatever...I dont see why people take this stuff so seriously. Its a movie.

Div
03-10-2009, 09:42 PM
It was already established that the movie wasnt being made from the book entirely. I think that in the context of a 3 hour movie, compared to a much longer read of the comic, that scene helped to develop the character. Obviously it was later in the movie, but seeing as how the flashback took place in a 'reveal all your secrets' setting (with the psychologist) it still makes sense. And the visual of killing the man lines up with the past 10 years of action/horror/torture movies. I think its unfair for people to bad talk the director on this point in the film because I think it is what American film watchers want to see. Scream, Saw, the Rob Zombie movies, Hills Have Eyes, and every other two-bit slasher/splatter films have been popular for a reason. I don't particularly enjoy these films...but thats another story.


Slow down there Hemingway, you write all that but I just asked a simple question, and you didn't even answer it.

----------------------
If I wrote a book and it was made into a shitty movie, that served as the first introduction it had for a lot of people, I would be pretty bitter about it too. In fact, I wouldn't even give them the rights to do a movie unless I was co-director.

ChildrenofSodom
03-10-2009, 10:05 PM
Slow down there Hemingway, you write all that but I just asked a simple question, and you didn't even answer it..

Sorry. :D Short answer is no.

zgodt
03-11-2009, 09:25 PM
eh...whatever...I dont see why people take this stuff so seriously. Its a movie.

What do you think movies are for?

ChildrenofSodom
03-12-2009, 03:56 AM
What do you think movies are for?

For entertainment.

zgodt
03-12-2009, 06:47 AM
For entertainment.

And what is entertainment for?

Div
03-12-2009, 07:27 AM
ok, saw it last night, heres my feedback:

it was cool to see the characters in live action but the action scenes had almost a michael bay level of bullshit. like when the comedian was punching through walls and had his head put through a marble counter top... guess what, the counter top isnt going to break, your head will. i point this out because it confused the hell out of my friends who were led by that scene, among other over the top ones, to think that they had actual superpowers.

that sex scene was even cheesier than left4head.

i dont know why they gave rorschach the batman voice. i knew it was monotone, but i never pictured it so deep, i thought he would have a more grungy voice. for that matter, dr wanghattans voice seemed alot softer than i wouldve expected.

why was the comedian gunning the protesters down with a shotgun? what the hell was that about? in the book he only shoots tear gas at them.

i felt the costumes were done well, probably the best aspect of the movie.

the music fit the time frame, but seemed horribly out of place at some points, and some scenes i think wouldve been better had there just not been any music at all.

rorschachs death scene was better than in the book. in the book he just goes outside and gets blasted by manhattan after saying a few things, and noone seems to notice, daniel was too busy fucking the silk slut and veidt was meditating up in his room. i felt the movie scene did him more justice, nite owl was his parter for a long time and it was more fitting for him to be upset over his death. my only complaint was that his dialogue was a bit rushed.

the intro credits were cool.

they rushed too many parts of the plot, events were happening before you could build up appreciation for them, it made the movie seem alot less exciting because of that.

and where the fuck was rorschachs refrigerator scene? i was really looking forward to that :(

http://img9.imageshack.us/img9/1498/watchmen0220.jpg


but overall i found the movie to be enjoyable, the main complaint is that they tried to cram too much stuff into such a short amount of time. the best thing tho is all the photoshop fun people are going to have with this now that it's in the public spotlight.

http://images.encyclopediadramatica.com/images/1/1f/1236571508359.jpg

http://images.encyclopediadramatica.com/images/2/29/Buttsecks_watchmen.jpg

http://images.encyclopediadramatica.com/images/9/9d/Watchmen4.jpg

powerslave_85
03-12-2009, 08:58 AM
At least they left in the "Behind You" part. I liked Rorschach's voice, it's pretty much what I heard in my head as I was reading.

overkiller
03-12-2009, 09:16 AM
I'm kind of undecided about the music. There were certainly times when it was idiotic (e.g. the sex scene), but in a way I feel that using certain well-known songs as "The Times They Are A-Changin" and "The Sound of Silence" gave it a distinct "20th-century America" feeling. And I don't mean that just in the sense that the songs fit the period well, but that they strengthen the film's thematic ties to that part of history.

"All Along the Watchtower" seemed like a strange choice for the showdown scene, though. I mean... in a way it worked, I guess, but I just remember being jarred and confused when it first came on; it didn't seem to fit the mood at all. And the fact that they lined up the lyric "Outside in the cold distance/A wildcat did growl/Two riders were approaching/And the wind began to howl" with Nite Owl and Rorschach approaching Veidt's complex (complete with wildcat) was just trite.

Also, some of the songs were definitely intended as references to past movies. I mean, how can you hear "The Sound of Silence" in a movie and not think of The Graduate? My guess is that it was intended to connect that movie, one of the greatest comedies ever made, with the funeral of the Comedian. And it fits the mood of the scene, because that song is fairly sad in itself... now that I think about it, that may actually have been pretty clever. But playing "Ride of the Valkyries" in the Vietnam scene was a painfully obvious reference to Apocalypse Now, although it was kind of comical to see the gigantic blue Dr. Manhattan in place of Robert Duvall's gunships.

powerslave_85
03-12-2009, 09:22 AM
I'm kind of undecided about the music. There were certainly times when it was idiotic (e.g. the sex scene), but in a way I feel that using certain well-known songs as "The Times They Are A-Changin" and "The Sound of Silence" gave it a distinct "20th-century America" feeling. And I don't mean that just in the sense that the songs fit the period well, but that they strengthen the film's thematic ties to that part of history.

"All Along the Watchtower" seemed like a strange choice for the showdown scene, though. I mean... in a way it worked, I guess, but I just remember being jarred and confused when it first came on; it didn't seem to fit the mood at all. And the fact that they lined up the lyric "Outside in the cold distance/A wildcat did growl/Two riders were approaching/And the wind began to howl" with Nite Owl and Rorschach approaching Veidt's complex (complete with wildcat) was just trite.

Also, some of the songs were definitely intended as references to past movies. I mean, how can you hear "The Sound of Silence" in a movie and not think of The Graduate? My guess is that it was intended to connect that movie, one of the greatest comedies ever made, with the funeral of the Comedian. And it fits the mood of the scene, because that song is fairly sad in itself... now that I think about it, that may actually have been pretty clever. But playing "Ride of the Valkyries" in the Vietnam scene was a painfully obvious reference to Apocalypse Now, although it was kind of comical to see the gigantic blue Dr. Manhattan in place of Robert Duvall's gunships.Those lyrics from "All Along the Watchtower" are quoted at the beginning of the chapter with that scene in it, and the chapter is called "Two Riders Were Approaching." I thought "The Sound of Silence" was cool because it was it was written in the wake of Kennedy's assassination, and was played at the funeral of the guy who, in the story, shot Kennedy.

"Desolation Row" (which is covered by My Chemical Romance in the end credits) is quoted at the beginning of the first chapter. I actually like that cover, though it was completely inappropriate for the ending of the movie.

They totally blew their opportunity to use "99 Red Balloons." The lyrics fit the themes of the movie PERFECTLY, but they used it in the cheesiest way possibly.

Indestructible
04-06-2009, 05:56 PM
i could not follow it

EvilCheeseWedge
04-22-2009, 06:06 PM
I'm late to this... I read Watchmen before I saw it. I liked the book. I didn't like the movie.

Wasn't one thing about the movie that did it for me... Just the overall impression I had when walking out of the theater was, "Meh." Some good stuff, sure, some bad stuff, yep, but overall... it was just non-memorable to me.

Also +1 for the commentary on the racism/homophobic elements of 300. I regret wasting time on that movie...

Div
05-04-2009, 09:43 PM
http://img14.imageshack.us/img14/2975/watchmen0625.jpg

i just got that this was a Mad Max reference

Maidenmagic
06-24-2009, 08:18 PM
Love the graphic novel. Movie is a good adaptation but lacks a soul. Jackie earle Haley IS Rorschach.

DethMaiden
07-24-2009, 09:01 PM
i just reread this whole thread now that the DVD is out and I watched the documentary on the making of it and the significance of the novel to the comics world (which feels really empty since it lacks an interview with Moore - unsurprisingly, but still, this is why Decibel won't induct bands' albums with deceased members into the Hall of Fame - the story is incomplete), and yeah, the movie was decently made with a gigantic budget and all this, but I still think that really it was kind of a slap in the face to the fans of the comic. They kept it just true and accurate enough to pacify the casual fans but took away the soul that made it special for diehards. It's still one of the greatest graphic novels of all time, but at the end of the day the movie was a half-baked attempt at an interpretation that ultimately failed in its clear cashgrab motives. Maybe Snyder will eventually be discouraged enough to stop making movies.

Div
07-24-2009, 09:06 PM
i still think moore was being a bit of a prick about the whole thing. i mean if you wrote a book that was going to be a movie you would go see it. even if it looked like a poor adaptation you would still go see it out of curiosity because you made the damn story, its yours, and you would be interested in seeing how it turned out.

mankvill
07-24-2009, 09:12 PM
Movie ending > Comic ending

Yes, the comic is better than the movie, but the ending makes more sense in the movie than the comic. Come on, the whole vagina monster invading New York City is a bit more farfetched than making it look like Dr. Manhattan did it.

DethMaiden
07-24-2009, 09:34 PM
i still think moore was being a bit of a prick about the whole thing. i mean if you wrote a book that was going to be a movie you would go see it. even if it looked like a poor adaptation you would still go see it out of curiosity because you made the damn story, its yours, and you would be interested in seeing how it turned out.

He hasn't gone to see ANY of the movies made of his works. Which is kind of lame, yeah, especially since V for Vendetta was fantastic and maybe better than the comic.

DethMaiden
07-24-2009, 09:43 PM
Movie ending > Comic ending

Yes, the comic is better than the movie, but the ending makes more sense in the movie than the comic. Come on, the whole vagina monster invading New York City is a bit more farfetched than making it look like Dr. Manhattan did it.

It isn't about the likelihood though. We've already read 300+ pages that permit time travel and teleportation at this point in the novel, and the squid is perfectly feasible in context. It's the fact that it changes the message to be kind of uncomfortably religious, with Dr. Manhattan cast as the Old Testament God.

powerslave_85
07-24-2009, 09:46 PM
Ugh. Really? People still don't understand the squid?

JRA
07-24-2009, 09:49 PM
Isn't there like an extra hour or something of footage on the director's cut?

DethMaiden
07-24-2009, 09:56 PM
Isn't there like an extra hour or something of footage on the director's cut?

24 minutes but I couldn't make myself watch it again, partly because it would be four hours long and I really didn't think that would be a wise investment of time.

powerslave_85
07-24-2009, 10:00 PM
24 minutes but I couldn't make myself watch it again, partly because it would be four hours long and I really didn't think that would be a wise investment of time.
Yeah. I am curious as to whether they added Hollis Mason's murder back in, though.

DethMaiden
07-24-2009, 10:07 PM
Yeah. I am curious as to whether they added Hollis Mason's murder back in, though.

I know they shot it because there's clips of it on that Tales of the Black Freighter/Under the Hood DVD. But it's not gonna save the movie or anything.

ChildrenofSodom
07-25-2009, 07:50 AM
http://stuffwhitepeoplelike.com/2009/07/13/127-where-the-wild-things-are/

Again, I don't think Snyder 'owed' anything to the fans. He didn't make the movie for the 1,000 Watchmen fans out there, he made it for the American movie-going public. If he was making it for the die-hard fans, he would have made it straight-to-DVD and had a big convention for you guys.

Considering he even made the movie in the first place, stayed true to the book 96% of the time, and put all that money and time into it, I don't think he should be crucified for taking a few (some larger than others) creative liberties in directing the film. Moore is a douchebag to everyone that wants to make his work accessible to the masses, and I think his detachment from the movie warranted Snyder's manipulation of it.

DethMaiden
07-25-2009, 08:37 AM
It doesn't piss me off because it's different from the comic, it pisses me off because it's shoddy, lazy film making.

I'll just use this already-expressed opinion to sum up my own. It just wasn't a good movie for the most part, faithfulness to the book notwithstanding.

Indestructible
07-25-2009, 08:41 AM
I saw that movie i couldnt follow the plot i did not know what was going on