Watchmen in Development for HBO

[Totenkindly]

Watchmen Series in the Works at HBO with Damon Lindelof | Collider

For all the bitching about Lindelof on LOST, if anyone caught the three seasons of The Leftovers (HBO) where he was showrunner and cowriter on every script, for all three seasons, well, he's matured a lot since his crazy LOST days as a storyteller and often hints at the miraculous while then actually going for the mundane. (i.e., the best explanations are not necessarily the supernatural ones). This shores up a prior weakness to his craft (where things were just getting tossed in without regard for coherence, and often inexplicable supernatural solutions were tossed into the mix).

I have Snyder's Watchmen on bluray but was never impressed with it -- it seemed a huge mismatch between source material and director... plus trying to condense Watchmen to a movie is just kind of crazy. Considering the production quality and maturity coming to the TV series format and the ability to tell a longer story with character development (something a property like Watchmen would need), this seems to be a positive move and potentially definitive. "The Leftovers" also was based on a book for the first season, then seasons 2 and 3 were uncharted territory expanding on the story and did a pretty excellent job at creating more seasons of material not from the original source.

It's not clear yet whether he and HBO will share a vision and get something rolling, but it would be a welcome chance to do Watchmen (or something based on it) in a more appropriate format.

 

[Cellmold]

This is exciting! Though it may not necessarily be a positive outcome.

However it does make me want to grab my copy off the shelf again.

 

[Totenkindly]

I usually end up rereading it every so often. I hadn't liked Gibbon's style as much when I was younger, but his layout and recursive imagery (and how it reflects the text) is just pretty amazing...

... and then of course Alan Moore's script.

 

[Qlip]

I read it a long time ago, it was had an incredible impact, I could definitely use a re-read. I agree, it was a mistake to turn that into a movie, as I remember it, the graphic novel was very complex and had a lot of different elements in it that couldn't effectively be crammed into a theater. I wonder if they will have entire episodes in the Tales of the Black Freighter universe.

 

[Totenkindly]

I read it a long time ago, it was had an incredible impact, I could definitely use a re-read. I agree, it was a mistake to turn that into a movie, as I remember it, the graphic novel was very complex and had a lot of different elements in it that couldn't effectively be crammed into a theater. I wonder if they will have entire episodes in the Tales of the Black Freighter universe.

I dunno, but the beauty of a TV format is that that could be seriously considered rather than excised immediately.

 

[anticlimatic]

Fucking Lindeloff... how is he still getting work?

 

[Atomic Fiend]

As my friend would say "A toast to The Comedian; his actions resulted in the deaths of more Americans then Vientnamese"

 

[Totenkindly]

Fucking Lindeloff... how is he still getting work?

He did a pretty amazing job with The Leftovers, it's too bad the series never got as much press in the widespread market as it deserved.

My impression also is that Prometheus wasn't his fault, I blame Scott and the excessive editing from what I've seen of the excised footage. Idiots.

 

[anticlimatic]

He did a pretty amazing job with The Leftovers, it's too bad the series never got as much press in the widespread market as it deserved. My impression also is that Prometheus wasn't his fault, I blame Scott and the excessive editing from what I've seen of the excised footage. Idiots.

I liked everything about lost, Prometheus, and the leftovers except the ends of each, and I really don't appreciate his bastardizing of hard sci fi with soap opera one dimensional character fixations with his two favorite themes of 'belief' and 'running from/repressing issues.' He just seems like such an amateur and surface level writer to me that can't end a story in an objectively satisfying way to save his life. There are writers who imagine the entire off-screen lore of the story and pluck out bits and pieces of it to allude to the bigger picture (True Detective, Twin Peaks), and there are writers that focus on characters and just put one foot in front of the other letting them react off each other and let that drive the story forward (often in ways that surprise the writer). Lindeloff is the later, which would be fine if he wasn't constantly pretending to be the former, and duping detail oriented sci fi fan audience members like me into it.

 

[Totenkindly]

I liked everything about lost, Prometheus, and the leftovers except the ends of each, and I really don't appreciate his bastardizing of hard sci fi with soap opera one dimensional character fixations with his two favorite themes of 'belief' and 'running from/repressing issues.' He just seems like such an amateur and surface level writer to me that can't end a story in an objectively satisfying way to save his life. There are writers who imagine the entire off-screen lore of the story and pluck out bits and pieces of it to allude to the bigger picture (True Detective, Twin Peaks), and there are writers that focus on characters and just put one foot in front of the other letting them react off each other and let that drive the story forward (often in ways that surprise the writer). Lindeloff is the later, which would be fine if he wasn't constantly pretending to be the former, and duping detail oriented sci fi fan audience members like me into it.

Ah, okay.... thanks for explaining in more detail.

Personally, I find both approaches decent... but who says it's an exclusive binary anyway? Storytelling typically involves having a sense of at least some of the overall big picture while also giving the characters some reign so they can act freely. Not everyone is completely J or completely P in style. I would think that his first big outing in Lost would have clarified he was not someone who had all the details of the big picture figured out ahead of time, so I never felt suckered by anything he did later. I appreciate the fact that instead of throwing sloppy fantasy elements to cover inconsistencies in story (like in Lost especially as the series reached later seasons), he's shown some movement towards ambiguity as well as opting for the mundane and personal over the sometimes hackneyed-miraculous.

Another reason this is relevant in Watchmen is that, despite the superhero elements, it's pretty grounded for a superhero movie (and even ends on the personal and mundane), and is extremely character-driven. Also, you could see the flaws when he was spinning wholesale on a year-by-year storyline in Lost, when they did not have the big picture figured out; but The Leftovers was a book adaptation in Season 1, the two later seasons were extrapolations, and Watchmen is essentially a book adaptation that allows for some extrapolation.

IOW, his work on The Leftovers is relevant and suited for a Watchmen adaptation far more than Zack Snyder's strengths and weaknesses.

I'm not saying there might be some better choices out there (although I don't currently have any names in my head), but he's certainly not a bad choice.

 

[anticlimatic]

Ah, okay.... thanks for explaining in more detail. Personally, I find both approaches decent... but who says it's an exclusive binary anyway? Storytelling typically involves having a sense of at least some of the overall big picture while also giving the characters some reign so they can act freely. Not everyone is completely J or completely P in style. I would think that his first big outing in Lost would have clarified he was not someone who had all the details of the big picture figured out ahead of time, so I never felt suckered by anything he did later. I appreciate the fact that instead of throwing sloppy fantasy elements to cover inconsistencies in story (like in Lost especially as the series reached later seasons), he's shown some movement towards ambiguity as well as opting for the mundane and personal over the sometimes hackneyed-miraculous. Another reason this is relevant in Watchmen is that, despite the superhero elements, it's pretty grounded for a superhero movie (and even ends on the personal and mundane), and is extremely character-driven. Also, you could see the flaws when he was spinning wholesale on a year-by-year storyline in Lost, when they did not have the big picture figured out; but The Leftovers was a book adaptation in Season 1, the two later seasons were extrapolations, and Watchmen is essentially a book adaptation that allows for some extrapolation. IOW, his work on The Leftovers is relevant and suited for a Watchmen adaptation far more than Zack Snyder's strengths and weaknesses. I'm not saying there might be some better choices out there (although I don't currently have any names in my head), but he's certainly not a bad choice.

I guess having the ending already written neutralizes his biggest weakness, so this could potentially be a solid show. I'm a big fan of the Snyder film adaptation for three reasons: casting, story, and noir elements. Remains to be seen if 2/3 will make it over to the new series but at least the story is solid. I could see Lindeloff pulling off noir if he was into it, but I'm not sure if he is. I'll give it a chance though.

As far as story telling and ambiguity go, I suppose it boils down to a matter of preference. Personally I like my lore (story context facts, world building, and historical events) to be completely explicit- even if it's just in the mind of the creator, and not spelled out in the story. I don't mind ambiguity in lore as long as there is a strong sense that the writer knows more than he or she may be letting on. Lindeloff pretends to write this way, but is betrayed by his third act- every time- as someone who only has partial ideas that are not fully developed and integrated into his own system. Instead he focuses on sucking any and all ambiguity out of his characters, which is one place I genuinely enjoy ambiguity in story telling. I like knowing a little bit about characters, but I like them unpredictable too.

The most affectual character in the watchmen movie for me was The Comedian: "For a guy who calls himself The Comedian, I can never tell when you're joking."

 

[Totenkindly]

Pilot aired this past Sunday night.

Still processing and deciding how I feel about it.

It's definitely a continuation, rather than a retelling per se -- Lindleof basically stepped away from the book and is doing his own thing using some elements of the book. It'll take a few more episodes to determine how cohesive the whole thing is. The first episode felt like a new story w/ new characters, with occasional flickers of characters / elements from the graphic novel.

Well acted, and Regina King is pretty stunning/bad-ass here. (Even Don Johnson is kinda cool.)

The open is kinda shocking in terms of the historical event in question, which has come into more awareness in the collective mind in the last twenty years.

It sounds like Robert Redford (a joke from the graphic novel) is still president.

it's not really clear what's up with Veidt at the moment. It looks like Laurie will also be prominent this season, and she's going by her dad's name now.

There's some other references and visual allusions to the book as well, although it feels more like a new riff that incorporates elements of the old.
HBO's Watchmen Premiere: All The Big References To The Original Comic Book

 

[Totenkindly]

Watchmen HBO Damon Lindelof Interview - Watchmen Creator Explains the Politics, Details, and History

 

[The Cat]

How is it?

 

[Totenkindly]

How is it?

Jury is out at the moment, I need a few more episodes to really see what is going on.

It's definitely its own creature, though -- not rehash. So I don't think I'll be frustrated with it for being derivative or bad... it's more of a matter of whether the riff they are playing works. The production quality and characters are there.

 

[The Cat]

Jury is out at the moment, I need a few more episodes to really see what is going on.

It's definitely its own creature, though -- not rehash. So I don't think I'll be frustrated with it for being derivative or bad... it's more of a matter of whether the riff they are playing works. The production quality and characters are there.

Does it take place before or after New York was destroyed by the "alien attack"?

 

[Totenkindly]

Does it take place before or after New York was destroyed by the "alien attack"?

I guess that is a small spoiler but not really anything huge, so -- it's now, albeit in an alternate now... 30-35 years after the alien attack. And yes, he's keying off the book, not Snyder's film, as far as that goes. So it is post-alien-attack, and the fallout from that... as well as the role of "heroes" (if there is one)... remember, in the book, the only superhero with powers was basically Dr. Manhattan. Everyone else was a "normal," although The Comedian was in great physical shape and Ozymandias was like in top peak perfect (almost ultra-human) while not quite having "powers."

At that time, in the 80's, nuclear war was the big thing we were all terrified of. The 'big issue' in the show is race relations. He also has the unenviable task of being against racism, while showing that some of the policies used to fight racism might have flaws as well. I'm just curious to see how he will pull all this off.

The show opens in

Tulsa OK, 1921, during what amounted to a massacre. It's pretty agonizing to view. Especially knowing everyone tried to cover that incident up until maybe two decades ago. I know I never had heard of it in school.

 

[Totenkindly]

Okay, I'm three episodes in, although the fourth just came out on Sunday night. (Maybe i'll watch tonight.)

Episode 3 is great because Laurie Blake is the central figure. Yeah... Silk Spectre. Except now she works for the FBI and is 30 years older. She is portrayed by Jean Smart (who I barely remember from Designing Women) and is just such a great, cynical, hardass -- I can believe this is actually her 30 years into the future, with a darker outcome that maybe the end of Watchmen initially suggested.

What really makes me accept it is not just her personality but how she's made up to look as young as possibly while still obviously being old -- it reminds me so much of her mom's appearance in Watchmen (who was old at the time), how much emphasis was spent on looks and trying to remain young even if the body has moved on. it was the way her mom was. She's the same -- she looks wonderful and is trying to dress and look like she is younger, but her body is definitely past the prime.

 

[Totenkindly]

Episode 5 was pretty decent. It revisits what happened on Nov 2, 1985. Also deals alot with Looking Glass's past and present and advances the current day plot significantly in whom some of the players are, what they might be up, etc.

Also has an 80's song cover by Nataly Dawn, who is part of Pomplamoose. I had to look it up as soon as I heard it, and then I saw her picture and recognized her -- her eyes are so distinctive.

Next episode should really kick ass based on some last-minute plot events in this episode, and probably fill in a lot of William's back story.

 

[Z Buck McFate]

I've only gotten as far as episode 4. The first two episodes were okay enough for me to keep watching, but episode 3 really hooked me.

I love Jean Smart as Laurie. (I liked her in Legion and Garden State, and tend to like everything I've seen her in after her initial sitcom career). I think it's got a strong cast. Jury is still out (for me) on Jeremy Something as Veidt, but otherwise I think it's strong.