Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Let's be realistic;Love Kevin Smith or not, he was clearly just over-excited. Watchmen will not be three times more faithful than Sin City. Sin City was a simpler novel, direct translation.
-AC
Agreed. While I'm excited for the film, I just can't help but be a little skeptical that Snyder is going to do a horrible adaptation. If anyone has read the GN, they know there are numerous character plots tied in with the main one.
And for noob's sake, special effects do NOT make a good film.
A very good article regarding Watchmen from the ny times.
To put it simply...Hollywood politics and who gets a share. Well, that's show business.
FU 20th Century Fox and your shitty comic book movies.
Interesting.
The article, too. It's definitely gonna add the the acclaim Watchmen will get if it comes out, simply because now people are gonna praise it no matter what. Hype + this case = forced acclaim for the movie.
Just like The Dark Knight, the decision as to what this movie will be like has already been made in the eyes of most people.
-AC
Originally posted by DigiMark007
A shame that Moore feels as he does, and that as such it probably shouldn't be made. Also a shame that many will enjoy the movie but never touch the comic (as with many adaptations). But having read it already, I look forward to hopefully a faithful adaptation. Since I can't control whether it gets made or not, and despite any unfortunate circumstances, I can still enjoy it.
Digi, watch this...
Dave Gibbons comments on the visuals of the the film
http://www.comics2film.com/index.php?a=story&b=35244
(click to view his video)
That's good enough for me. At this point Alan Moore is IRRELEVANT! He needs to get off his high horse and be human. He did NOT invented anything out of the ordinary. A great comic book writer...no question about it. But he really needs to get off that high cloud and come down to earth.
If they done films from novels of the greatest writers such as like Shakespeare, Dante, and Dickens.... why not Moore's work? At this point he is making a pompous clown with his attitude. Oh, well....I love Moore's novels...but his attitude...nah. I pass...very much looking forward to the film.
Shakespeare didn't write about omnipotent supermen and simultaneous reality in a dystopian time when superheros exist on the brink of a nuclear holocaust, as well as the million other themes. Nothing Shakespeare wrote compares to the complexity of Watchmen. He was a great writer in terms of language, not plot.
He wrote things that simple theatre writers have been adapting. No theatre could adapt Watchmen. Stupid comparison and you should be ashamed for making it. The very fact that you do not understand why Moore's work is different is proof enough that you don't understand it. Watchmen is still the only graphic novel of its kind, and if there have been any since, they're rip-offs. So he very much did create something out of the ordinary.
Only fools would somehow grasp so desperately at the words of Kevin Smith and the man who did the Watchmen ART than the man who created the whole thing, in a feeble attempt to make Moore look like the bad guy by putting the majority against him.
"We've all accepted it, so therefore Alan Moore is wrong and needs to change.". Not in the slightest is that true. Alan Moore is already being kind enough by not challenging the movie's release, he doesn't need to further compromise by saying how great an inevitably unfaithful, and possibly not good adaptation is. He doesn't really do interviews, and only speaks on it when asked to, so if people ain't happy at what he is always going to say, they should stop seeking out his opinions.
People hunt him down, ask for his opinion, and when it hasn't changed from: "It's shit, stop doing it to my work please.", people wanna call him a moaner and tell him to get off his high horse. Everyone's an idiot. I have no issue with people like Digi who accept the facts, but see it out of curiousity. It's people who somehow propose Moore is some run-of-the-mill villain of the piece, simplifying his work in an attempt to justify Hollywood's actions.
Evidently the only thing irrelevant here is your opinion, since you have absolutely no grasp of Alan Moore, or his work. Instead, choosing to adopt the rather unintelligent but predictable outlook of "I'll keep saying how awesome this film's gonna be, and how poor Moore is, cos people don't wanna hear that. I'm going against the grain.".
Either way, you'll go see Watchmen, you'll definitely love it and definitely label it a great adaptation or whatever. Either because you needed it or to spite those who dislike it. So this is on deaf ears.
But I'll paraphrase you;
I'd rather listen to Alan Moore about his own book than some idiots on the internet.
-AC
Wow, Alpha, you need to chill, man, Haha. You seem like a religious nut not only preaching the gospel but trying to ram it down people's throats. If you don't like the idea of this movie being made, good for you, don't watch it. Don't insult people for liking Kevin Smith enough to believe his opinion, or those who compare literary works. The beautiful thing about art is that it can be interpreted however the recepient wants. EVERYONE is entitled to an opinion, and everyone can be excited about this movie. Just like everyone can not want to see it.
P.E.A.C.E.
Originally posted by SpaceMonkey
Wow, Alpha, you need to chill, man, Haha. You seem like a religious nut not only preaching the gospel but trying to ram it down people's throats. If you don't like the idea of this movie being made, good for you, don't watch it. Don't insult people for liking Kevin Smith enough to believe his opinion, or those who compare literary works. The beautiful thing about art is that it can be interpreted however the recepient wants. EVERYONE is entitled to an opinion, and everyone can be excited about this movie. Just like everyone can not want to see it.P.E.A.C.E.
1) No chilling need be done.
2) Ok, now did you miss this:
"I have no issue with people like Digi who accept the facts, but see it out of curiousity. It's people who somehow propose Moore is some run-of-the-mill villain of the piece, simplifying his work in an attempt to justify Hollywood's actions.".
Or the whole context of what I am saying, or the fact that I haven't got an issue with anyone going to see this movie?
I clearly made reference to a specific kind of opinion on this movie that I've seen in a number of different places, and on this forum. A specific kind of attitude toward this movie and its creator.
It wasn't a rant against people who want to see the movie, or people who like Kevin Smith enough to trust his opinion. The kind of opinion and people it was a rant against is explicitly pointed out in the post. It doesn't even say those people aren't allowed their opinion.
I'm giving you the credit of a civil reply, give me the credit of reading my posts or asking what I mean if you're confused.
If you truly got out of my post what you did, you obviously didn't read it properly.
But you can go and quote WD for calling people idiots (Or me, realistically) for criticising Kevin Smith's opinion, if you're gonna quote mine.
So it's you who needs to chill. Chill and realise what I was saying, and whom it was addressed to in a general sense, sir.
I also believe you appreciate the hypocrisy of telling me what I do and do not need to STOP saying, whilst telling me everyone has the right to voice how they feel.
Farewell.
-AC
Notice I did not quote you. I did that because I figured I missed something. I must agree I probably needed to read your post more carefully, however, I will quote this: "Only fools would somehow grasp so desperately at the words of Kevin Smith ", that's kind of what got me going. From that point I was speed-reading to get to the end.
As far as the hypocrisy of my statement, I DID say you're entitled to your opinion, just without it being insulting to people whose opinion differs from yours.
In closing, thanks for the time. I hope to enjoy the film, and the Watchmen experience altogether, as much as you seem to have enjoyed the novel.
Originally posted by SpaceMonkey
Notice I did not quote you. I did that because I figured I missed something. I must agree I probably needed to read your post more carefully, however, I will quote this: "Only fools would somehow grasp so desperately at the words of Kevin Smith ", that's kind of what got me going. From that point I was speed-reading to get to the end.
Yeah, and you obviously didn't finish the quote either.
"Only fools would somehow grasp so desperately at the words of Kevin Smith and the man who did the Watchmen ART than the man who created the whole thing, in a feeble attempt to make Moore look like the bad guy by putting the majority against him.".
It was more with the reason people do it, than doing it at all.
Originally posted by SpaceMonkey
As far as the hypocrisy of my statement, I DID say you're entitled to your opinion, just without it being insulting to people whose opinion differs from yours.In closing, thanks for the time. I hope to enjoy the film, and the Watchmen experience altogether, as much as you seem to have enjoyed the novel.
It's not up to me who finds it insulting.
-AC
Originally posted by SpaceMonkey
Wow, Alpha, you need to chill, man, Haha. You seem like a religious nut not only preaching the gospel but trying to ram it down people's throats. If you don't like the idea of this movie being made, good for you, don't watch it. Don't insult people for liking Kevin Smith enough to believe his opinion, or those who compare literary works. The beautiful thing about art is that it can be interpreted however the recepient wants. EVERYONE is entitled to an opinion, and everyone can be excited about this movie. Just like everyone can not want to see it.P.E.A.C.E.
It's strikes quite odd doesn't it?
This is so similar to Christians protesting during The Passion of Christ back in 2004. Hahaha...how silly they looked.
So far there are two reliable sources who approve of the film so far. Gibbons (the artist) and Kevin Smith (a fan and fellow movie director with a good reputation) which should be quite enough.
As for Moore...yes, I do respect and appreciate his work. His ego and attitude are below the dirt on my boot. As for his creativity and original stuff....we'll...he will never come near Jack Kirby. Moore is an excellent story teller and writer. But with creativity Kirby is beyond in the comic book industry. That however, it's my opinion.
We can all have our right criticism of the film once is release. However, that FAT and ugly Skank 20th Century Fox wants to prevent us. That's what should be tackle. A major movie studio trying to cash in by means of legal matters rather than been reasonable and civil.
Preventing art from been seen is indeed a crime.
Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
This is so similar to Christians protesting during The Passion of Christ back in 2004. Hahaha...how silly they looked.As for Moore...yes, I do respect and appreciate his work. His ego and attitude are below the dirt on my boot.
Preventing art from been seen is indeed a crime.
I agree with these parts of your post, which I read in it's entirety, 100%.
Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
It's strikes quite odd doesn't it?This is so similar to Christians protesting during The Passion of Christ back in 2004. Hahaha...how silly they looked.
So far there are two reliable sources who approve of the film so far. Gibbons (the artist) and Kevin Smith (a fan and fellow movie director with a good reputation) which should be quite enough.
The least you could do is actually reply to me and address my points directly.
It's not about them as people, just what has been SAID.
I don't mind Kevin Smith, I like some of his work, but he goes overboard with his initial opinions. A blind man can tell that say it's three times as faithful as Sin City is a freshly hyped, just-seen-the-movie comment. It's obvious. The logic alone defies his claim, if that's what he meant. Frank Miller doesn't write what Alan Moore writes.
Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
As for Moore...yes, I do respect and appreciate his work. His ego and attitude are below the dirt on my boot. As for his creativity and original stuff....we'll...he will never come near Jack Kirby. Moore is an excellent story teller and writer. But with creativity Kirby is beyond in the comic book industry. That however, it's my opinion.
Him beyond below someone in your opinion, in terms of work produced, does not mean you are afforded the right to say he hasn't ever done ANYTHING out of the ordinary.
Batman, for example, has two real stories that are CONSISTENTLY called definitive; The Dark Knight Returns and The Killing Joke.
The Killing Joke by Alan Moore, by the way. That book actually changed the DC universe in many ways, and is considered by many to be the Joker's definitive depiction. He's arguably done more for comics being taken seriously than ANY other writer in the medium.
You like Kirby more, smashing. I like Kirby, the man is a freak in terms of how well he has executed his best work, it's amazing. He has never and will never produce a Watchmen level piece, though. Ever.
Your claim that he never did anything out of the ordinary is wrong.
-AC
Originally posted by Alpha CentauriBatman, for example, has two real stories that are CONSISTENTLY called definitive; The Dark Knight Returns and The Killing Joke.
The Killing Joke by Alan Moore, by the way. That book actually changed the DC universe in many ways, and is considered by many to be the Joker's definitive depiction. He's arguably done more for comics being taken seriously than ANY other writer in the medium.
You like Kirby more, smashing. I like Kirby, the man is a freak in terms of how well he has executed his best work, it's amazing. He has never and will never produce a Watchmen level piece, though. Ever.
-AC
Are you aware Alan Moore criticized his own work in The Killing Joke, considering it disappointing?
- Despite its popularity, Moore himself would later find much fault with his story, calling it "clumsy, misjudged, and [devoid of] real human importance." Moore, trying to present far more relatable characters that were like real people, found that Batman and the Joker were just presented as characters[13] and said, "I don't think [The Killing Joke]'s a very good book. It's not saying anything very interesting."[14]
He still gives praise to Brian Bolland's artwork, though.
And Moore holds Kirby in very high regard, by the way. He credits the boundry-busting he & Stan Lee were doing in Marvel Comics in the 1960's as paving the way for his own work in the 1980's. He sometimes has minor criticism for Lee, for seeming to take more credit for the work.
Kirby couldn't do the kind of work Moore did in his prime unless he worked in the indie comics medium of the day with it's heavy drug culture. Not a lot of Kirby's work is enjoyable reading today, but I give him full credit as an important trailblazer.