There's no doubt an ending change is a bad idea, but I'm still confident this will be a good movie. It'll certainly look awesome. But I have worries about the actors involved. If they include a lot of the dialogue between Silk Spectre and Dr Manhattan, is Malin Akerman capable of doing it justice? Jack Earl Haley as Rorsach on the other hand, I like.
Don't find the Dr. Manhattan Atomic Bomb thing that bad, really. Didn't expect it to be Alan Moore's Watchmen, I expect it to be a movie slightly based on Watchmen's characters and ideas with other influences added which might or might not be good.
I'd watch it as a movie in it's own right, and so far I can't tell whether it's going to be absolute shit or ridiculously great or in between (like most comic book movies). Then again I didn't really research it much, just read this thread once in a while.
Why is it ok to not be Alan Moore's Watchmen, though? It's his work, his characters, his story. Why is anything else acceptable?
Originally posted by Scythe
Seems like it. Seems like there's false hope that the film's director will read these posts and halt the film's production.Other than that, what is the point of constantly complaining about the Watchmen film?
So, because you can't believe of any other possible reason to complain besides simply not liking it, there isn't any?
Might as well only allow one person, one post per thread. If you like it or dislike it, we get it, so why even post, ever?
-AC
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Why is it ok to not be Alan Moore's Watchmen, though? It's his work, his characters, his story. Why is anything else acceptable?-AC
Why it is ok? I-i don't know, cause he signed over the rights to DC or something?
Besides, where does "his story, his creation" stop and a different story begin?
I think it will be nothing more than an action movie with Watchmen characters and some unsuccessfully adapted Watchmen plot. Peppered with obligatory Snyder slow-downs. That isn't good enough.
I don't think it should have been made, but it is, so whatever.
If he's saying he respect's Moore's wishes and Moore HIMSELF enough that he's leaving him off the credits, surely he respects him enough not to make the movie.
-AC
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
I think it will be nothing more than an action movie with Watchmen characters and some unsuccessfully adapted Watchmen plot. Peppered with obligatory Snyder slow-downs. That isn't good enough.I don't think it should have been made, but it is, so whatever.
If he's saying he respect's Moore's wishes and Moore HIMSELF enough that he's leaving him off the credits, surely he respects him enough not to make the movie.
-AC
Well, I will wait and judge the movie. The last part is a good point though, stupid thing to say, really.
Originally posted by Kovacs86
http://www.publiusforum.com/watchmen/watchmen_index.htmlI wanted to post this and have a moan somewhere, and I didn't think it was really worth opening a thread for, so there it is.
What do people think?I honestly thought the guy talked a lot of crap, especially as he was clearly as blindly right wing and with as distorted a view of liberals as he claimed Moore to be in the reverse.
Also, he seemed unable to accept a different political opinion, or even the fact that never in Watchmen does it proclaims that Ozymandias is ultimately right. I found it to be extremely objective, leaving the reader to make up their mind. Clearly, the writer of that essay did so.
I suppose it would have helped too if he'd checked his facts about the story before he wrote that. Did he miss that Laurie was conceived several years after Comedian's attempted rape of her mother? Wrong on two counts, there!
While he certainly had some good points, I really found that article to contain a huge amount of bullshit.
However, I was interested to see what others think...
A lot of shit. That guy obviously didn't understand a bit of the book.
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
If he's saying he respect's Moore's wishes and Moore HIMSELF enough that he's leaving him off the credits, surely he respects him enough not to make the movie.-AC
I don't get that, Moore don't want to be on the credits even if it is a 100% accurat adaptation, thus he respects Moore's wishes and don't put him on the credits.
Originally posted by jalek moye
changing the edning is crap. although changing it from that stupid looking alien would be good.
Why? Why then not remove the stupid looking man in Egyptian get-up, or an owl costume? It's there because they are meant to look utterly ridiculous. That was one of Alan Moore's intentions, to suggest that if these people did exist, they would look a bit silly.
Additionally, it's not an actual alien, it's a mechanical droid.
Originally posted by Morridini
I don't get that, Moore don't want to be on the credits even if it is a 100% accurat adaptation, thus he respects Moore's wishes and don't put him on the credits.
He's also said he doesn't want his work adapted, and Watchmen shouldn't be made, when approached originally.
Originally posted by Bentley
Because author worshiping is one of the things that drive current art to the ground.
I'm thrilled that you feel the cocky and cool "F*ck Alan Moore, he needs to grow up." sentiment is commendable on an implied level at the very least, but between you and the inane rattlings of other people here who feel he should be ignored, or those not ignoring him are worshippers, I've actually decided to list all the reasons that, in my opinion, this adaptation and others like it are not ok.
Are you ready? Are ya? Here we go:
I'd say lowering the standard by bastardising art that IS great would be right up there with what drives art into the ground. Especially bastardisation in the form of Hollywoodising great works, something America's major movie industry has a habit of doing.
Whether it's stealing breathtaking movies from Asia and re-naming them with Sarah Michelle Gellar as the co-star, or turning V for Vendetta into an "Isn't rebellion cool, kids?!" circus show; Hollywood pulls it off.
Furthermore, they do it with the bullshit excuse that it's to widen the audience and that the changes are to appeal to new "fans". Also known as people who go to see movies for the sake of seeing movies/on dates and not because they are genuinely a fan of what's being done. People who paid money and time to see The Fast & the Furious or Snakes on a Plane. People who will almost definitely be more likely to think, after the movie, about how fast they can get their date home for sex than the movie itself.
These are the kind of people who tried to get the Fantastic Four so-called new fans by, in Jessica Alba's words, making it "sexier". Yes, it's true. Some people went to see that movie because Jessica Alba's body looked disgustingly attractive in that body suit, but that wasn't necessary, and that is not going to make people go out and re-read or discover the Fantastic Four as a comic.
It's the reason Max Payne is being played by someone who ladies will like and not a man who actually looks like you could see him on the street and think "Wow, he's been through shit.". It's the reason movies that will, almost definitely, become overlooked in time despite being legendarily good.
These movies are made for the near sole purpose of making money. No self-respecting Watchmen fan is anything but CURIOUS to see how this all unfolds. If you're, in any way, remotely positive about the fact that the man who did 300 is working on this masterpiece, you probably also feel that it being "Good enough.", is passable.
People who fancy going to see Watchmen because the trailer looks alright and they want a night out are generally not the people this story or its themes are aimed at, which brings me to my next point.
The fact is, anything on this scale of media exposure is ultimately and regretably going to be aimed at the mainstream populace. The people to whom if you said, "Here are two piles of brown. One is shit, one is clay, put your hand in.", would end up with smelly fingers because they seriously cannot tell the difference.
I'd actually say that's what drives art into the ground. Not respecting one of the smartest men to pen a story, Heaven forbid, by agreeing that his books shouldn't have a hole cut out of them so that Hollywood can grease it up and bestow a violation that would only befall a prison inmate with a vice holding his crack open.
-AC