Watchmen

Started by Alpha Centauri50 pages

Cresh,

A) That doesn't actually disprove what I just said.

B) Do I need to go grab the video interview and other text interviews in which he has said what I have about his movie adaptations and Watchmen?

Because I will, if you really want to go through this pointless action.

I never denied that he is apathetic now, which is what you are trying to prove. I simply said that it doesn't mean he doesn't "care", in the sense that he's ok with it.

So you're not really proving me wrong, but if you need proof of what I've claimed he has said, I'll be happy to provide it. It's just a waste of time, since neither of us are wrong. I just think you're misinterpreting his lack of "care" for him being ok with it.

Originally posted by Newjak
I've already told you why it was stupid.

You took what I was saying to someone else, and decided to turn into your chance to get some point across that was irrelevant to what I was saying. That being it is best to wait and see how the movie turns out before condemning it.

Which is my general stance on all comic book movies anyways.

And we've established that you got my condemnation wrong, and misinterpreted it, which you've yet to admit.

Originally posted by Newjak
As to your point. If you accept it as opinion I have no problem talking about a future movie. What I will not do however is get into a "debate" with you about something that is not ground in concrete fact.

Which is...what? The fact that you simply cannot make an accurate and totally faithful adaptation of Watchmen in a movie?

That's not opinion, that is fact. There are many pieces of concrete evidence that show why this is a fact.

That does not mean it cannot be enjoyable, which I feel you are suggesting that I mean. So stop it.

Originally posted by Newjak
But just in case you can get over this often times need to prove yourself superior type approach you normally take. I will share my opinions on the matter.

I don't think you are stupid for having doubts about how well the movie can be adapted to film. I have my own concerns on the matter. Like I have no idea how they would replicate the Dr. Manhattan, "The Time is" scene. I think it will be hard to pull off on the Silver Screen.

What I won't do however is say that there is no chance for them to pull if off. Alan Moore is a genius but Hollywood is chuck full of them as well. I've also seen way to many sophisticated movies touching deep human thoughts on high levels, to not think there is someone who could pull it off.

Fair enough, but that only highlights your inability to see why Watchmen factually cannot be replicated 100% faithfully as a movie, and that is no less than it deserves.

For one thing, Alan Moore wrote the book to be impossible to reproduce in that way. Secondly, if they can't do it with Hulk, in three hours, why do you believe they can make a 100% faithful adaptation of the Watchmen book, in two and a half? Given Watchmen is a billion times more complex than any Hulk story, for example.

That's what you're not grasping, Jak.

Originally posted by Newjak
Whether is does though remains to be seen. So I look forward to this, but I'm also hesitant on it. Cause you never know and if this Movie does turn out to be crap then well I will be deeply disappointed. Cause I thought the Watchmen is a very good story.

You still interpret me as saying "It won't be faithful, so it won't be good.". I never said that.

I won't be going to see it, but if people enjoy it, then great. If it turns out to be enjoyable, fantastic, wonderful for YOU. I don't deny that it cannot be "good" as a movie, but my POINT AGAIN (I have to keep explaining it to you), is that it will not be as faithful as it deserves to BE. What it DESERVES is to be LEFT as a comic book, Alan Moore believes so, its fans believe so.

-AC

It doesn't matter how good a movie is. If you go in thinking its going to suck, you're already jaded against it.

So it the movie is less than perfection, even if its a really good movie. The Fanboys of the movie will think that it totally sucked.

Any movie that's enjoyable is a good movie. Because movies are meant to be enjoyed.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Cresh,

A) That doesn't actually disprove what I just said.


How does "I'm simply not interested." translate into "he does care"?

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
B) Do I need to go grab the video interview and other text interviews in which he has said what I have about his movie adaptations and Watchmen?
because obviously, since you think "I'm simply not interested" means that he cares its obviously going to be your mind putting extra emphasis that doesn't exist on those interveiws.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Because I will, if you really want to go through this pointless action.
No point really. Your mind has been made up. And your mind is like a steel trap, rusted shut.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
I never denied that he is apathetic now, which is what you are trying to prove. I simply said that it doesn't mean he doesn't "care", in the sense that he's ok with it.
So he's apathetic, but he cares... Do you know what "apathetic" even means?

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
So you're not really proving me wrong, but if you need proof of what I've claimed he has said, I'll be happy to provide it. It's just a waste of time, since neither of us are wrong. I just think you're misinterpreting his lack of "care" for him being ok with it.
Where did I say that he was okay with it? I'm simply saying he doesn't care. Not that he didn't care, just that he doesn't.

Originally posted by Creshosk
Any movie that's enjoyable is a good movie. Because movies are meant to be enjoyed.

"Good" is subjective. Faithful adaptation is not.

Originally posted by Creshosk
How does "I'm simply not interested." translate into "he does care"?

You got one instance of him being apathetic and somehow you're interpreting that, despite his well known stance on movie adaptations of his books, as him being fine with the movie.

So the question is; how does "I'm simply not interested." morph into "I don't care."? He's not interested in the fight anymore, because this time they've been kind enough to at least remove him completely without a huge fight. He does care in the sense that he dislikes what is being done and wishes it would stop, he has explicitly stated this. Whether or not he "cares" in a sense that he's not going to let it eat him up because it's gonna happen anyway, different matter.

Originally posted by Creshosk
because obviously, since you think "I'm simply not interested" means that he cares its obviously going to be your mind putting extra emphasis that doesn't exist on those interveiws.

Do you want me to present the interview where he has explicitly said that his novels were written to be impossible to reproduce in terms of cinema, that he wishes they would be left as a comic, as intended?

There isn't anything I can add to that, emphasis or whatever else. He said it, people KNOW he has said it, it is known amongst his fans that he has said it, that he cares. Caring does not mean that he's sitting there stewing about it, and I never said he is. I said he cares because he does, if you think he's fine with this being done to his books, when he has explicitly claimed the opposite, then you are a fool. Especially since your grounds for such a claim is apathy toward a Hollywood that won't listen, that he dislikes ANYWAY.

So in short; do I need to go and get the interview and embarass you, or is this the moment when you concede the point?

Originally posted by Creshosk
No point really. Your mind has been made up. And your mind is like a steel trap, rusted shut.

Made up on what? That he cares? I can get you the video interview and text quotes showing you that he is obviously negative toward these things happening to his works. Impediment has also cited it, so it's clearly not something I'm making up.

What part of this is an issue for you? You found him being apathetic because there's literally nothing to be gained from him fighting, that does not mean he doesn't care what is being done to his work, and me saying he does care is not myth. He has expressed such.

I'll ask you again, do you want me to go and get the interview and all the quotes where he vehemently expresses his care? Yes or no will do, Cresh.

Originally posted by Creshosk
So he's apathetic, but he cares... Do you know what "apathetic" even means?

Are we discussing Alan Moore in general, or the one quote you have picked out? Alan Moore in general does not like what is being done to his work, he is very against movies being made, he has said it, even of Watchmen. Alan Moore in the interview you presented was expressing apathy toward a fight with Hollywood. They've removed his name, so he isn't interested in a fight, it's not worth his time. Does that mean he doesn't care that it's being MADE? No, since the aformentioned interviews, visual or textual, have contained him expressing displeasure and anger at this happening to his work.

Going so far as to even say he has had his work travestied.

Now, do you wish to continue this path of insisting Alan Moore is ok with his work being made to movie? Concede the point, Cresh. You're wrong. If you deny it further I'll simply provide enough video and textual evidence that any further denial will make you look stupid. You can avoid that.

Originally posted by Creshosk
Where did I say that he was okay with it? I'm simply saying he doesn't care. Not that he didn't care, just that he doesn't.

Ok, so we've established that he's not ok with it. Then you say "I'm not saying he didn't care, just that he doesn't.".

I feel we have crossed wires. He doesn't care...but about what? He doesn't care enough to continue to fight a battle he SHOULD win, but CANNOT win. That is what he is not interested in, that OR the movie. He DOES care that this happens, it displeases him.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
"Good" is subjective. Faithful adaptation is not.

You got one instance of him being apathetic and somehow you're interpreting that, despite his well known stance on movie adaptations of his books, as him being fine with the movie.

I seem to remember a certain posters distaste for someone twisting words.

Quote me where I said he was fine with the movie. 🙂

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
So the question is; how does "I'm simply not interested." morph into "I don't care."?
Umm.. duh.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
He's not interested in the fight anymore, because this time they've been kind enough to at least remove him completely without a huge fight. He does care in the sense that he dislikes what is being done and wishes it would stop, he has explicitly stated this.
So "I'm simply not interested" means "I do care and I don't like this?"

Nice. 👆

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Whether or not he "cares" in a sense that he's not going to let it eat him up because it's gonna happen anyway, different matter.
Hmm... Should I take the word of someone who's known to be arrogant that I've seen that first hand or the word of the person in question..

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Do you want me to present the interview where he has explicitly said that his novels were written to be impossible to reproduce in terms of cinema, that he wishes they would be left as a comic, as intended?
Are you going to keep asking me that?

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
There isn't anything I can add to that, emphasis or whatever else. He said it, people KNOW he has said it, it is known amongst his fans that he has said it, that he cares. Caring does not mean that he's sitting there stewing about it, and I never said he is. I said he cares because he does,[]/b]
"I'm simply not interested."

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
[B] if you think he's fine with this being done to his books,
Quote me.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
when he has explicitly claimed the opposite, then you are a fool.
Reported.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Especially since your grounds for such a claim is apathy toward a Hollywood that won't listen, that he dislikes ANYWAY.
Where did I make the claim? 🙂

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
So in short; do I need to go and get the interview and embarass you, or is this the moment when you concede the point?
Should I concede a point I wasn't making.. Hmm...

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Made up on what? That he cares? I can get you the video interview and text quotes showing you that he is obviously negative toward these things happening to his works. Impediment has also cited it, so it's clearly not something I'm making up.
Clearly...

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
What part of this is an issue for you? You found him being apathetic because there's literally nothing to be gained from him fighting, that does not mean he doesn't care what is being done to his work, and me saying he does care is not myth. He has expressed such.
"I'm simply not interested."

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
I'll ask you again, do you want me to go and get the interview and all the quotes where he vehemently expresses his care? Yes or no will do, Cresh.
I'll take it that's a yes you are going to keep asking me.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Are we discussing Alan Moore in general, or the one quote you have picked out? Alan Moore in general does not like what is being done to his work, he is very against movies being made, he has said it, even of Watchmen. Alan Moore in the interview you presented was expressing apathy toward a fight with Hollywood.
Oh, appeal to motive fallacy.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
They've removed his name, so he isn't interested in a fight, it's not worth his time. Does that mean he doesn't care that it's being MADE? No, since the aformentioned interviews, visual or textual, have contained him expressing displeasure and anger at this happening to his work.
Your point is...? 🙂

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Going so far as to even say he has had his work travestied.

Now, do you wish to continue this path of insisting Alan Moore is ok with his work being made to movie?

Yo, Air Conditioner.. I'm over here... Quit attacking that scarecrow.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Concede the point, Cresh. You're wrong. If you deny it further I'll simply provide enough video and textual evidence that any further denial will make you look stupid. You can avoid that.
You do I'll report you for spamming. 🙂

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Ok, so we've established that he's not ok with it. Then you say "I'm not saying he didn't care, just that he doesn't.".
and?

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
I feel we have crossed wires. He doesn't care...but about what? He doesn't care enough to continue to fight a battle he SHOULD win,
Appeal to motive fallacy.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
but CANNOT win. That is what he is not interested in, that OR the movie. He DOES care that this happens, it displeases him.
"I'm simply not interested."

🙂

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
-AC
Does anybody know how to turn this Air Conditioner off? Its sucking up things that I have no part in and spitting them out at me...

Ok, now you've changed your implied stance to "I didn't say he was fine with it.". So I don't need to keep proving that he's not, I can concentrate on the relevant parts, seeing as you've conceded that he isn't fine with it (If you are still in doubt, I can provide you with the evidence you seem to be afraid of).

Originally posted by Creshosk
So "I'm simply not interested" means "I do care and I don't like this?"

Nice. 👆

How many times am I going to have to explain the difference to you? Is context one of your allergies? Is attention something you can't afford to pay?

He can be both. He's not interested in the movie because he isn't interested in becoming embroiled in a battle he can't win against Hollywood. He has been there and done that, and this time they have adhered to his request, so it's even more reason for him to just let the inevitable happen and know that he is supported in his negative views toward it.

YOU seem to be intent on insisting some kind of non-existent point.

You are misunderstanding the context in which he isn't interested. He does care, and I have evidence to prove that he cares about these matters. You don't want me to post it for some reason.

Originally posted by Creshosk
Hmm... Should I take the word of someone who's known to be arrogant that I've seen that first hand or the word of the person in question..

You should learn what context means and realise that you are misinterpreting the quote that you found. Before you argue that you are, again, I have evidence that proves you are misquoting.

He cares, just not enough to embroil his life in a battle he can't win, especially when those doing the movie have been "kind" enough to remove all association. He can't stop the movie, so what else can he do besides be disinterested?

How much longer am I going to have to walk you through this?

Originally posted by Creshosk
Are you going to keep asking me that?

If that's what it'll take to make you realise that the quote you have been humping like a dog in heat has been taken out of context by you, then yes.

Originally posted by Creshosk
"I'm simply not interested."

Really? Am I going to have to overwhelm you with videos and quotes, and links that prove he does care?

Is that something you want me to do, Cresh?

Originally posted by Creshosk
Reported.

This is funny, and I'll show why later.

Originally posted by Creshosk
Where did I make the claim? 🙂

Typical Cresh debate style. Blatantly imply something and then deny you ever meant it because you kept yourself safe by not actually saying it. I'll admit, that's a tricky little technique.

You, I and everyone reading the thread can clearly see you implying he doesn't care that this is being done. How? Because you said it! Oh! That's right, you made the fatal Cresh mistake of actually saying it.

You linked me to the article, in response to me saying "He doesn't like this being done to his works.", and you said "He doesn't seem to care.". He does, factually, and I have evidence to prove it.

You have ONE quote, taken massively out of context to suit yourself, which I keep correcting.

Originally posted by Creshosk
Should I concede a point I wasn't making.. Hmm...

No, just the point you know you were making, that I've since broken.

You claim he isn't interested, but you believe so for the wrong reasons. Previous interviews support my argument, supports the point that you are taking his "I'm not interested." comment out of context and too broadly. Nothing supports yours.

Originally posted by Creshosk
Clearly...

Look, either request the proof that would prove I'm not lying, or stop insisting I'm lying but pooping yourself whenever I bring proof into it.

Originally posted by Creshosk
"I'm simply not interested."

Again, you're factually wrong, and I have evidence to support it.

Originally posted by Creshosk
Oh, appeal to motive fallacy.

No counter? Thanks, I'll take that as point conceded.

Originally posted by Creshosk
Yo, Air Conditioner.. I'm over here... Quit attacking that scarecrow.

And you reported ME? Haha. Pot, kettle, water etc.

Originally posted by Creshosk
You do I'll report you for spamming. 🙂

Now that is a new low. Threatening to report me for posting lots of evidence that would undeniably crush your debate.

I might just get a mod to come see that, tell you that it's not spamming, and then I will provide all the evidence I desire.

Originally posted by Creshosk
and?

And that makes absolutely no sense.

Originally posted by Creshosk
Appeal to motive fallacy.

Another point conceded, then. Not doing too well, Cresh. One liners and no counters. I thought you'd have improved since we last met, giving people too much credit is a flaw of mine.

Originally posted by Creshosk
Does anybody know how to turn this Air Conditioner off? Its sucking up things that I have no part in and spitting them out at me...

Oooh, lucky I'm not one to run off and report you.

Now, I'll be gathering shitloads of evidence in anticipation for your next reply. It's going to be a very long reply, your obsession with having to reply will have a field day.

-AC

Hey, A.C., what do you find intriguing about the trailer? Anything?

I stand by my original statement that my expectations are not high for this film, but I have to admit that I got a few goose pimples when I saw Osterman being disintegrated in the chamber.

Zack Snyder made 300, so he obviously knows how to make a shot look pretty.

I didn't find anything intriguing about the trailer. Discussing it is as far as I'll go, cos it still pertains to the book. I won't be spending time nor money on this movie.

-AC

In case anyone was curious, on itunes, you can download Watchmen motion comics. Basically, they just animated Dave Gibbons artwork. I think its actually pretty good

Whether or not the film adaption will be faithful to the source material or not, I don't think anyone can deny how cool it'll be actually seeing some of your favorite scenes from the graphic novel on film.

I won't go in expecting the same depth of the graphic novel, but I'll still line up to see how the movie turns out and until then I'm going to try to reserve judgement. Alan Moore has every right to not be involved and to be bitter about past adaptions of his work, but I don't think fans have to react the same way and shun the film completely. Just don't expect perfection. Take what you can from the movie and criticize the aspects you felt were poor.

Originally posted by SnakeEyes
Whether or not the film adaption will be faithful to the source material or not, I don't think anyone can deny how cool it'll be actually seeing some of your favorite scenes from the graphic novel on film.

It's fine as it is. I don't desire to see these scenes live. I never understood that notion of "Won't it be awesome to see them come to life on the big screen!". No, not really, I'm fine how they are.

I fully realise what the book does, what is was intended to do, so I've never thought "Wouldn't this be good as a film?".

Originally posted by SnakeEyes
I won't go in expecting the same depth of the graphic novel, but I'll still line up to see how the movie turns out and until then I'm going to try to reserve judgement. Alan Moore has every right to not be involved and to be bitter about past adaptions of his work, but I don't think fans have to react the same way and shun the film completely. Just don't expect perfection. Take what you can from the movie and criticize the aspects you felt were poor.

Fans don't have to, but they should, in MY opinion.

It's not even like I'm judging the quality of the movie as I've said, but I'm boycotting it on principle.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Ok, now you've changed your implied stance to "I didn't say he was fine with it.". So I don't need to keep proving that he's not, I can concentrate on the relevant parts, seeing as you've conceded that he isn't fine with it (If you are still in doubt, I can provide you with the evidence you seem to be afraid of).
Lol, changed... lol conceded....

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
How many times am I going to have to explain the difference to you? Is context one of your allergies? Is attention something you can't afford to pay?
Reported. 🙂

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
He can be both. He's not interested in the movie because he isn't interested in becoming embroiled in a battle he can't win against Hollywood.[]/b[]quote] You are though. 🙂

[QUOTE=10841359]Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
[B] He has been there and done that, and this time they have adhered to his request, so it's even more reason for him to just let the inevitable happen and know that he is supported in his negative views toward it.

Unlike you, who seems to be spamming a perfectly good thread...

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
YOU seem to be intent on insisting some kind of non-existent point.
No, that'd be you.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
You are misunderstanding the context in which he isn't interested. He does care, and I have evidence to prove that he cares about these matters. You don't want me to post it for some reason.
Cause it'd be spamming? 🙂 Which I suppose you're already doing..

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
You should learn what context means and realise that you are misinterpreting the quote that you found. Before you argue that you are, again, I have evidence that proves you are misquoting.
You do I'll report you again.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
He cares, just not enough to embroil his life in a battle he can't win, especially when those doing the movie have been "kind" enough to remove all association. He can't stop the movie, so what else can he do besides be disinterested?
It seems you care more than he does.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
How much longer am I going to have to walk you through this?
heh... Now I know why you saying conceded is so funny to me.. Conceited!

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
If that's what it'll take to make you realise that the quote you have been humping like a dog in heat has been taken out of context by you, then yes.
You want to be reported again? 🙂

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Really? Am I going to have to overwhelm you with videos and quotes, and links that prove he does care?
You threaten to spam, I threaten to report.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Is that something you want me to do, Cresh?
I'm simply not interested.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
This is funny, and I'll show why later.
Or you'll fail miserably again.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Typical Cresh debate style. Blatantly imply something and then deny you ever meant it because you kept yourself safe by not actually saying it. I'll admit, that's a tricky little technique.
I didn't imply, you infered. 🙂

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
You, I and everyone reading the thread can clearly see you implying he doesn't care that this is being done. How? Because you said it! Oh! That's right, you made the fatal Cresh mistake of actually saying it.
Quote it. 🙂

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
You linked me to the article, in response to me saying "He doesn't like this being done to his works.", and you said "He doesn't seem to care.". He does, factually, and I have evidence to prove it.

You have ONE quote, taken massively out of context to suit yourself, which I keep correcting.

*sniff sniff* Smells like hypocrisy.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
No, just the point you know you were making, that I've since broken.
I say I wasn't making a point and you tell me I was making a point.. Want me to quote where you complained that I was doing that very thing?

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
You claim he isn't interested,
Are you calling him a liar?

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
but you believe so for the wrong reasons.
He said it is the wrong reasons?

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Previous interviews support my argument, supports the point that you are taking his "I'm not interested." comment out of context and too broadly. Nothing supports yours.
Other than him saying it.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Look, either request the proof that would prove I'm not lying, or stop insisting I'm lying
Haha! Quote where I called you a liar.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
but pooping yourself whenever I bring proof into it.
Proof against a point I never made.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Again, you're factually wrong, and I have evidence to support it.
I'm factually wrong am I? I love that AC quote of yours... heh.. conceited.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
No counter? Thanks, I'll take that as point conceded.
Argument from silence. Boy you suck at this.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
And you reported ME? Haha. Pot, kettle, water etc.
Water? That's a new one.

But yeah. I reported you for member bashing. which I haven't done. and No, I did not call you conceited, I just find it funny that you keep saying "conceded cause it sounds like conceited.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Now that is a new low. Threatening to report me for posting lots of evidence that would undeniably crush your debate.
Threatening to report you for spamming/trolling. Your evidence has no real place in this thread other than to troll the people looking forward to the movie. Since you'd be crushing a non-existent point.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
I might just get a mod to come see that, tell you that it's not spamming, and then I will provide all the evidence I desire.
Want me to?

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
And that makes absolutely no sense.
To you.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Another point conceded, then.
HAHA! God you're a riot... I point out that your argument is logically flawed and you tell me I've conceded a point. You truly do suck at debate.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Not doing too well, Cresh. One liners and no counters.
Appeal to silence fallacy.. yup that means your argument is invalid.. just like that. 🙂

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
I thought you'd have improved since we last met, giving people too much credit is a flaw of mine.
It's not the only one. You think I'm actually trying to debate you.. That's rich.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Oooh, lucky I'm not one to run off and report you.
For what?

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Now, I'll be gathering shitloads of evidence in anticipation for your next reply. It's going to be a very long reply, your obsession with having to reply will have a field day.
And I'll be waiting to report you with baited breath. 🙂

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
-AC
Seriously... the panel's fallen off and it had the manual attached to it. none of the buttons are labeled and its getting really cold.

Seeing as your last post was quite literally nothing to do with my argument regarding Watchmen, and was everything to do with you needing to continue to post, I think it's about time I close this off.

Your core argument is that his phrase: "I'm not interested.", means that he does not care. I say "How can you say he doesn't care about what's being done to his work?", you say "I never said that.". So what exactly doesn't he care about, Cresh? I've explained to you that you're misplacing the context, and rather than him simply not being interested because he doesn't care, it's because it's a fight he can't win, and considering they've removed his name, he has no reason to fight the aforementioned losing battle.

Now comes the evidence that he does, in fact, care, despite not being interested enough to wage a war against Hollywood;

Passage 1:

"Alan Moore adamantly opposed a film adaptation of his comic book, arguing, 'You get people saying, that Watchmen is very cinematic, when actually it's not. It's almost the exact opposite of cinematic." Moore said that Terry Gilliam, preparing to direct Watchmen for Warner Bros. at the time, had asked Moore how the writer would film it. Moore told Graydon about his response, 'I had to tell him that, frankly, I didn't think it was filmable. I didn't design it to show off the similarities between cinema and comics, which are there, but in my opinion are fairly unremarkable. It was designed to show off the things that comics could do that cinema and literature couldn't.".

Adamantly opposed? Specifying precisely why he doesn't want his movies adapted, and why he thinks they shouldn't be? Sounds like he cares.

Passage 2:

"Moore also told Entertainment Weekly in December 2001, 'With a comic, you can take as much time as you want in absorbing that background detail, noticing little things that we might have planted there. You can also flip back a few pages relatively easily to see where a certain image connects with a line of dialogue from a few pages ago. But in a film, by the nature of the medium, you're being dragged through it at 24 frames per second.'. Moore had opposed the adaptation of Watchmen from the beginning, intending to give any resulting film royalties to Watchmen artist Dave Gibbons. According to Moore, David Hayter's script was as close as he could imagine anyone getting to Watchmen. However, Moore added, 'I shan't be going to see it. My book is a comic book. Not a movie, not a novel. A comic book. It's been made in a certain way, and designed to be read a certain way: in an armchair, nice and cozy next to a fire, with a steaming cup of coffee.".

Well then. Specifying WHY his works do not work as a movie, specifically Watchmen. Opposed to it from the beginning? Sounds like he doesn't care, doesn't it?

Let's recap before I proceed further:

You said: He doesn't seem to care (That his work is being travestied in this way).

Yes, that is what you meant, because you posted that in reply to me saying he does. So obviously that is what you meant that he didn't care about, any denial is weaselling.

I said: He does care, he just isn't continuing to fight a losing battle after they've adhered to all his wishes, save for not making the movie.

You said: He's not interested.

Further misunderstanding the context of that quote, continually denying that he cares, whilst also claiming...that he does care. So it remains to be seen from you what exactly he doesn't care about, since he evidently cares that this is happening, and is opposed to it, if not actively.

On with le proof.

"In January 2008, Alan Moore revealed that he had negotiated to have his name removed from Zack Snyder's film and to have all royalties go to Dave Gibbons. He said that Gibbons had asked him if he was interested in being updated about the film, but the writer declined. Moore said, 'I won’t be watching it, obviously. I can at least remain neutral to it as long as they’re taking my name off of it and not playing these silly, ultimately futile games like they were doing last time, which worked out so well for them.".

Note that bolded part.

He said he can remain neutral, disinterested if you will, AS LONG as they adhere to his wishes. He is still opposed to it happening, his opinion has not changed, so again, the pendulum swings back your way, Cresh.

What doesn't he care about? You've continually said he doesn't care, about what? About the movie being made? I've proven he does. About his work being butchered? I've proven he does. So what doesn't he care about? Is this all stemming from your off interpretation of "I'm simply not interested.", which I have since also proven to be out of context?

You have questions to answer.

Next piece of proof, last piece of proof:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=JSb_ZPliu3Q

Hmm, sounds like a man who definitely doesn't care about this.

"Eventually I decided to refuse to accept any money for the films, and to ask if my name could be taken off them, so as I can avoid the embarassment of seeing my work travestied in this manner.".

Sounds like a man who doesn't care...let's continue.

"The most recent film that they've made of mine is apparantly this V for Vendetta, which was the final straw between me and Hollywood.".

Clearly his emphasised that it was the final straw between him and any dealings with Hollywood, hence "I'm not interested.", which comes from them adhering to his wishes this time. Therefore he has nothing to be interested IN, it doesn't mean he doesn't care. He has proven many times, as I have, that he does. You now have video footage of him expressing his opinion and care.

More? Ok.

"They were written to be impossible to reproduce in terms of cinema, and so, why not leave them simply as a comic, in the way they were originally intended to be?". Are you still proposing that he doesn't care, or clinging to your "He's not interested." misquoted nonsense? There's more, we're not through.

"And, [b]if you HAVE to make them into movies, please make them into better ones than the ones I have been cursed with thus far.".

1) Note the bolded part. He is accepting the inevitability of Hollywood doing this, that is why he's not interested anymore, because they've adhered to all his other wishes, so what else can he do? It doesn't emphasise a lack of care, in any way, it shows a presense of it, but an admission that acting upon it is futile.

2) He feels he has been cursed with his works being adapted into movies. It doesn't sound like he lacks care, it sounds like he's rather peeved.

If the next reply has nothing to do with my post and has no mature counters or relevance, I will report you for spamming and trolling. So where do we go from here? You've weaselled and dodged, lied and flip flopped your way to me having to comprehensively beat you down with undeniable facts and proof. What's the next step? Where do we go? Logically it should be you admitting you've been defeated, but there is more chance of Watchmen being great than there is of that happening, so what's going to happen now?

You've got nowhere to go in this debate, unless it's your aim to continue posting "I'm simply not interested.", despite the proof that Alan Moore has contradicted your use and application of his quote.

With that said, I anticipate your quote by quote reply of nothing relevant to this thread. I've put you in a point where you literally cannot counter my argument, all you can do now is reply with continued ignorance or petulance.

Away you go. If your next reply is anything like your last, I'll report you to enough mods that something will eventually be done about you. I'm already about to report you for admitting you're not trying to debate, and therefore you're trolling, so one more won't look good for you.

-AC

Reported for spamming and trolling. 🙂

Why are you in here? to give the people who want to see this movie a hard time?

And no, I didn't bother to actually look at or read anything you just posted.

It's nice to win.

Anyway, continuing to thread discussion;

Don't expect to see The Black Freighter sub-plot involved, oh no. That's been cut. A very relevent and poignent piece of the plot has been cut, but yeah, it can totally still be a faithful adaptation.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
It's nice to win.
Ignorance is bliss eh?

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Anyway, continuing to thread discussion;

Don't expect to see The Black Freighter sub-plot involved, oh no. That's been cut.

-AC

Do you have anything positive to contribute.. ever?

You backed down and bailed out, dude. That's a forfeit, sorry.

Reported, again. This thread isn't for "Positive contribution only.", it's for discussion of the movie. Deal with it. Let's see you contribute:

What are you most looking forward to, or not looking forward to about this movie?

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
You backed down and bailed out, dude. That's a forfeit, sorry.
If you say so. 😂

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Reported, again. This thread isn't for "Positive contribution only.", it's for discussion of the movie. Deal with it. Let's see you contribute:

What are you most looking forward to, or not looking forward to about this movie?

-AC

You realize that your troling, bashing AND spamming won't go over very well don't you?

and I'm still going to laugh at you because you thought this was some sort of debate. seriously. 🤣

I'll reserve judgment til I see the movie. Oh yeah and reported again. doped

Your reports will honestly get nowhere considering the posts you've made. A couple of mods have already expressed that they're tired of you, to me.

I wasn't asking you to judge the movie, I thought that was implicit when I said:

"What are you most LOOKING FORWARD to/not LOOKING FORWARD to about this movie?".

Stop looking for any reason to disrupt the thread and contribute.

What are you most LOOKING FORWARD to/not LOOKING FORWARD to about this movie?

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri

What a completely ignorant statement. Why should he be happy people are doing things with his work that he doesn't want and never wanted?

Clearly you misread what i said 🙄

i never said anything about people doing stuff with his work only that people are taking notice of what he's done in the comic world................or would he rather have some cult following and have all his work very obscure ??