WATCHMEN!

[swordpath]

Looks awesome!

"The world will look up and shout "save us", and I'll whisper.... "No."

 

[speculative]

The Trailer by far beats anything I've ever seen, it was pure brilliance. I cannot wait to see this movie, as it is destined to be truly amazing.

I agree if you're talking about the long-form trailer with the remix of The End is the Beginning is the End. That ties into the film well I feel because it is a remix of a song used in another superhero movie, which seems to tie in with some of the themes...

By comparison, the TV trailers I've seen are disjointed and lack context. They need a better trailer for television; perhaps they'll put another one together after the film it out...

 

[ladypinkington]

I have been thinking about the comments here and I think that it can be frustrating when you really are into a character and story and want to see it told in a way that does it justice- now I believe that you can take artistic liberties to some extent and that you have to be understanding that film is a different medium and therefore the storytelling needs to be different to accomodate the different medium- or to modernize things so that they can be relatable to the currnet times- I can undertand that.

Here is the reason why I get upset at say like Fantastic 4. I get pissed off when people make films who have no understanding of the characters and why they are great. Take Dr. Doom- the real star of the Fantastic 4- he was nothing like Dr. Doom in the comics- they did a horrible horrible job- they didn't understand what made him lovable and awesome.

It wasn't that I was upset that scenes got cut or the storyline differed- it is that there was no understanding of the characters- there was no justice being done to them at all.

I think that people can be justified in being upset or disappointed with a film adaptation of a story or comic if the spirit and the understanding of what makes the story great and characters great are no where to be found.

The spiderman movies differend greatly in story and even the personality of spiderman was a bit different- not as much as a smart ass- more ISFP in the movie instead of ENTP in the comic it seems to me but still they kept very true to why spiderman is awesome both as peter and as the superhero- the essence and message of the story remained true and was done justice.

I think that you can take liberties but you have to understand what makes the character great and you should stay true to that if you want people who have an attatchment to that character to like it- which I think you should try to please the fans as well as the person new to it all. The characters have a fan base for a reason.

 

[SuperServal]

The first reviews are out and they look fairly Positive.

 

[The_Liquid_Laser]

I have been thinking about the comments here and I think that it can be frustrating when you really are into a character and story and want to see it told in a way that does it justice- now I believe that you can take artistic liberties to some extent and that you have to be understanding that film is a different medium and therefore the storytelling needs to be different to accomodate the different medium- or to modernize things so that they can be relatable to the currnet times- I can undertand that.

Here is the reason why I get upset at say like Fantastic 4. I get pissed off when people make films who have no understanding of the characters and why they are great. Take Dr. Doom- the real star of the Fantastic 4- he was nothing like Dr. Doom in the comics- they did a horrible horrible job- they didn't understand what made him lovable and awesome.

It wasn't that I was upset that scenes got cut or the storyline differed- it is that there was no understanding of the characters- there was no justice being done to them at all.

I think that people can be justified in being upset or disappointed with a film adaptation of a story or comic if the spirit and the understanding of what makes the story great and characters great are no where to be found.

The spiderman movies differend greatly in story and even the personality of spiderman was a bit different- not as much as a smart ass- more ISFP in the movie instead of ENTP in the comic it seems to me but still they kept very true to why spiderman is awesome both as peter and as the superhero- the essence and message of the story remained true and was done justice.

I think that you can take liberties but you have to understand what makes the character great and you should stay true to that if you want people who have an attatchment to that character to like it- which I think you should try to please the fans as well as the person new to it all. The characters have a fan base for a reason.

Damn you! I wanted to rant about this and you beat me to it.

Let me just add that in Watchmen the thing they really need to get right is Rorschach. That is going to be the most important character to most fans, and if they do him right, non-comic fans are going to love the character for the same reasons. A lot of times appeasing the fans is what makes the movie good as long as you know what's really important. Dr. Manhattan's penis is really not that important in how good this movie will be. If they can get the main characters right and convey the same feeling that the original story did, then not only will they please the old fans, but they will win over a lot of new ones.

 

[Costrin]

Damn you! I wanted to rant about this and you beat me to it.

Let me just add that in Watchmen the thing they really need to get right is Rorschach. That is going to be the most important character to most fans, and if they do him right, non-comic fans are going to love the character for the same reasons. A lot of times appeasing the fans is what makes the movie good as long as you know what's really important. Dr. Manhattan's penis is really not that important in how good this movie will be. If they can get the main characters right and convey the same feeling that the original story did, then not only will they please the old fans, but they will win over a lot of new ones.

Manhattan > Rorschach

imo

 

[MrME]

Damn you! I wanted to rant about this and you beat me to it.

Let me just add that in Watchmen the thing they really need to get right is Rorschach.

By many accounts, Jack Earle Haley, who's playing Rorschach, nails the character. He said that the voice he chose for the part is similar to the voice that Alan Moore used for Rorschach in an audio recording he once made. I hear Patrick Wilson also nails Nite Owl II.

 

[Kyrielle]

By many accounts, Jack Earle Haley, who's playing Rorschach, nails the character. He said that the voice he chose for the part is similar to the voice that Alan Moore used for Rorschach in an audio recording he once made. I hear Patrick Wilson also nails Nite Owl II.

It's always all about the voice, isn't it. Nothing can kill a character more than a misplaced voice.

 

[Apollanaut]

Nite Owl is my favourite character, he's such an unlikely superhero, being nerdish and overweight and endearingly naive.

 

[MrME]

It's always all about the voice, isn't it. Nothing can kill a character more than a misplaced voice.

Well, something personal and distinctive has to come through that mask. Plus, the way his dialogue was written in the comic really suggested a gruff, coarse voice. Hopefully, he won't overdo the voice like Christian Bale did with his Batman voice in The Dark Knight.

 

[ladypinkington]

Well, something personal and distinctive has to come through that mask. Plus, the way his dialogue was written in the comic really suggested a gruff, coarse voice. Hopefully, he won't overdo the voice like Christian Bale did with his Batman voice in The Dark Knight.

Oh oh- you are so right- I hated Chritsian Bale's voice- it did ruin it for me.
I know- he is trying to diguise it like a regular guy would who doesn't want his voice to be recognized- but I just think Batman needs a better voice to begin with- one that has more of a presence to it both as Wayne and Batman. Bale just doesn't have it man, he just doesn't have it.

I am so excited- I just re-read the comic and have seen every clip they have available for Watchmen and it looks awesome- the director is a huge fan himself of the comic which makes me have more confidence in the movie and Dave Gibbons approves of it and loves it.

Does anyone know what Alan Moore thinks about it or is he just keeping out of all of this period?

 

[SuperServal]

Does anyone know what Alan Moore thinks about it or is he just keeping out of all of this period?

I will be spitting venom all over it.

and

"I find film in its modern form to be quite bullying. It spoon-feeds us, which has the effect of watering down our collective cultural imagination. It is as if we are freshly hatched birds looking up with our mouths open waiting for Hollywood to feed us more regurgitated worms. The 'Watchmen' film sounds like more regurgitated worms. I for one am sick of worms. Can't we get something else? Perhaps some takeout? Even Chinese worms would be a nice change."

 

[ladypinkington]

Oh wow- well that's a shame.

He should go into the Hallmark business.

Being with you is better then being eaten alive by meaninglessness
embodied in chinese worm food takeout.

LOLOLOL

Well, there is a lot of crappola but there are also a lot of awesome
artful and meaningful works of art in film. Just as in any medium- there are sucky comics and good comics, good books and crap books, art that is crap and good art.

 

[SuperServal]

Well, there is a lot of crappola but there are also a lot of awesome
artful and meaningful works of art in film. Just as in any medium- there are sucky comics and good comics, good books and crap books, art that is crap and good art.

Exactly. The guy's a little crazy. That's probably what allowed him to write such genius graphic novels.

He is pretty cool though despite his distaste towards film.

 

[ladypinkington]

Exactly. The guy's a little crazy. That's probably what allowed him to write such genius graphic novels.

He is pretty cool though despite his distaste towards film.

Oh yeah- he does seem cool. I like people who are characters and he is definately a character.

Don't get the unibomber look but hey- whatever floats your boat,lol.

I would like to see Christopher Guest do a mockumentary on someone like Alan Moore and the whole comic book scene. I wonder if he is like Mr Glass from Unbreakable in real life, Alan Moore that is?.

Still Guest could mokument all the different circles of comic personalities and creators- Stan Lee to Alan Moore to Frank Miller and others and have them show how they criticize and get along or don't get along.

 

[Kyrielle]

Well, I got my ticket online for the midnight showing here. Should be exciting and packed with the entirety of the Sequential, Illustration, and Animation departments...as they are usually the three nerdy departments.

That's a lot of people. And I can bet you a bunch will be dressed up...I think I will make a tally, in my blog, of the event...maybe take pictures. With captions like: "Can you guess the number of Rorchachs in this picture?" "How many Night Owls does it take to screw in a lightbulb?"

 

[SuperServal]

Hahaha! A good old Christopher Guest mockumentary is *perfect* for that. Do you think Eugene Levy could pull off playing him?


Kyrielle, that would be awesome!

 

[EffEmDoubleyou]

Moore has been quoted as saying, “As long as I could distance myself by not seeing them,” he said, he could profit from the films while leaving the original comics untouched.” He sure likes the money he gets for the adaptations but he is so put out by them that he wont even watch them.

If dude is so interested in his artistic integrity, I suggest he tear up those fat checks.

 

[SuperServal]

I didn't think he did get money from them actually. I swear I read that somewhere...... I at least read that for Watchmen he gave his check for the adaptation to Dave Gibbons, the illustrator. That makes him seem less crotchety if true.

 

[EffEmDoubleyou]

I didn't think he did get money from them actually. I swear I read that somewhere...... I at least read that for Watchmen he gave his check for the adaptation to Dave Gibbons, the illustrator. That makes him seem less crotchety if true.

Watchmen is a work for hire. That means he doesn't own it and doesn't get to decide how it is exploited, but is still due royalties. So no, he didn't have to approve turning it into a movie, but he will still be paid for it.

I can't speak to whether he gave the money away. I agree that it would change things.