Watchmen

Well sorta. It takes a rather cynical view to the whole superhero genre.

Originally posted by jalek moye
lol thats what we all orignally wanted. it just shows with something lke watchmen people will complain either way

I don't know. Considering its apparent 'reverence' of the source material, I think it's a safe bet to assume that audience reaction will be more positive than critical reaction. The majority of comic book 'fanboys', including Watchmen, are far more concerned with superficial fidelity to the source material rather than creating an intelligent interpretation, as can be seen by the hate some comic book movies receive.

Yeah, people will ***** if the camera angle and the coloring isn't the exact same as the book. Zack Snyder probably had the best intentions in mind, but his priorities while making the film are apparently screwed.

Originally posted by queeq
Well sorta. It takes a rather cynical view to the whole superhero genre.

That's not mutually exclusive. Comics where far and away more idealistic when Watchmen was written, exploring the potential problems of a comicbook world when people have realistic flaws was a large part of Watchmen. The God/Superman/Non-human contrast is one of the best examples, Rorschac's sociopathy is probably the most blatant one.

So: cynical? Yes. But that was a means to an end IMO.

Originally posted by Master Crimzon

Yeah, people will ***** if the camera angle and the coloring isn't the exact same as the book. Zack Snyder probably had the best intentions in mind, but his priorities while making the film are apparently screwed.

At least Zack actually gives a toss about Watchmen while making the movie version unlike the other people that have done movie versions of other Alan Moores work.

Indeed

one of the past directors/screen plays wanted to set it in modern times, 2005.

which would have been completely retarded.

But i think they have the best shot imaginable for this movie to work. It turns out i wont see it for a full week after it comes out. I should probably stay away from this area so i don't get the crap spoiled out of it

Oh mai gawd, lyke, no one spoil da endin' fo' meh!

Well i hope no one does'nt do that even if they have changed it to something else from what happens in the graphic novel, I would like to find out that stuff for myself.

Originally posted by Kazenji
Well i hope no one does'nt do that even if they have changed it to something else from what happens in the graphic novel, I would like to find out that stuff for myself.

Pretty much, me too. I'm waiting to see if there are any changes. Hope spoiler tags get used.

Originally posted by DarkDethbringer
Indeed

one of the past directors/screen plays wanted to set it in modern times, 2005.

which would have been completely retarded.

I don't know about that. It would at least have shown vision. Times are different than in 1985. It's quite an endeavour to reconstruct the feel of that times, especially for a young director like Snyder. You can't bring it properly in the grain of the movie.

I am looking forward to seeing it. I still have hopes for it. The only fear I have that he indeed may have been focusing too much on getting everything to look the same. To me, that is rather silly. Make your own movie, I'd say, not a moving version of the comic book.

Originally posted by Kazenji
At least Zack actually gives a toss about Watchmen while making the movie version unlike the other people that have done movie versions of other Alan Moores work.

Of course caring about the source material is vital, but (I'm speaking theoretically here, as I hadn't seen the movie either) Zack simply doesn't understand the meaning of caring. For example, see TDK- it was, on the surface, different from the comics; set in a darker, grittier, and more realistic world. The characters, especially the Joker, did not have the external personality of his comic book counterpart. But it still captured what Batman is about- the desperation of channeling a fundamental insanity into either destructive or helpful purposes, the morality of chance vs. order, humanity's nature, the fallibility of so-called 'heroes'... in short, it got what Batman is about. Comic books and movies are different mediums- it's impossible to make a movie exactly like it comic book counterpart. And even if that happens, then the deeper themes should be more important than the external and the superficial.

Same thing could be said about every comic book thats been turned into a movie.

I just got back from the premier. I've had my feelings hurt.

Originally posted by Kazenji
Same thing could be said about every comic book thats been turned into a movie.

Hardly. A good comic book adaption should be relatively faithful to the original themes (although expanding them is suitable), and be created as a movie, not a graphic novel. It's very sad when certain directors and fans care more about not changing the characters than creating a good film.

In any case, I enjoyed it.

The movie sucked.
It was draggy and most of the people watching with us in the cinema were dozing off or leaving the theater.
And it lasted for more than 2 hours!

Reading the novel is better.

Originally posted by Master Crimzon
It's very sad when certain directors and fans care more about not changing the characters than creating a good film.

Well some of the characters for the movie version at least need to look like their comic counterpart in some way can't have too much of a change with some of them.

I agree that looking like your comic book counterpart isn't a negative thing, but it's far from being the most important. And yeah, the filmmaker can superficially change the characters almost to any extent so long as he doesn't mess with the deeper aspects.

Getting the deeper aspects in place is the primary goal.

Originally posted by Master Crimzon
Of course caring about the source material is vital, but (I'm speaking theoretically here, as I hadn't seen the movie either) Zack simply doesn't understand the meaning of caring. For example, see TDK- it was, on the surface, different from the comics; set in a darker, grittier, and more realistic world. The characters, especially the Joker, did not have the external personality of his comic book counterpart. But it still captured what Batman is about- the desperation of channeling a fundamental insanity into either destructive or helpful purposes, the morality of chance vs. order, humanity's nature, the fallibility of so-called 'heroes'... in short, it got what Batman is about. Comic books and movies are different mediums- it's impossible to make a movie exactly like it comic book counterpart. And even if that happens, then the deeper themes should be more important than the external and the superficial.

The whole property of Batman compared to Watchmen is different though. I don't disagree with what you're saying, but my point is that Watchmen is a self-contained 12-part story, whereas Nolan created his own Batman story and wasn't confined to adapting a single work.

I just got back from seeing Watchmen and overall, I really enjoyed it. I thought it was as good of an adaption we're going to get. It wasn't flawless of course, but I really enjoyed seeing some of the elements I enjoyed about the graphic novel on the big screen. I really think that seeing the movie made me appreciate the novel more, not because the movie was bad, but rather because the movie added to my overall Watchmen experience. For example, seeing the movie allows you to hear the pain/detatchment in Dr. Manhattan's voice, films do these sensory things that any medium within literature simply cannot. My one big gripe may come off as nitpicky to some of you, but I thought the ending credit music was terrible, totally didn't fit. Other than that, there were few things I felt were out of place or poorly-executed, and I didn't even really mind that the ending was different. For me, it worked.

The opening credits were pretty badass too.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
I like looking at the RT reviews side by side: Too slavish, too much different.

Snyder never stood a chance.

Thing is: I never care what the critics say, and if anyone actually did, the movies that are considered classics wouldn't be considered so classic anymore.