Who's Going to Go Watch the Watchmen?

I haven't read the comic in a few years, but most great adaptations (comic or otherwise) don't bear much resemblance to the original source, if any, so I'm not too worried about how "faithful" it will be. That said, I'm not much of a fan of Zack Snyder, so I'm not too excited to see his latest film - Terry Gilliam was once on board to make a Watchmen miniseries, though, which I would've held out for with bated breath.

I don't think Alan Moore ever liked Hollywood, even before they adapted any of his comics - he was content in the past to simply distance himself from the movies, and I doubt that anyone really tried to seek out his opinion. With movies like Hellboy and Sin City, though, the creator actually began to have input in the film version and take more of a creative lead; Moore still didn't want any part of it, which probably surprised people. I don't see him as a prima donna, because he doesn't seek attention, but shies away from it.

That said, I don't like that he tends to swear off responsibility for and demean what's at least partially his own creation.

(By the way, as far as 300 goes, I think the less Miller is involved in anything at this point, the better; see All-Star Batman and Robin and the recent film of The Spirit)

I think it's reasonable to expect an artist to get a bit pissy when his creation is lifted and repurposed for something he doesn't necessarily condone. Just because he basically had no choice but to sign away movie rights and suchlike when his novel was originally published doesn't mean he has to cooperate when they want to exercise their options. And even if he's not involved, he's certainly allowed to express his opinion regarding what they're doing to his characters and stories.

Whether or not they do a "good job" of adapting his work (and I agree that well-done adaptations are usually not completely faithful to the original works), it must be hard to see it become anything other than what he originally intended.

That being said, he does seem to be a bit of a nut. I guess I'm just okay with that. And I do want to see the movie.

Also, I don't care what anyone says; Constantine is an awesome movie, and 300 is overrated.

Ah, well, I guess I was misinformed, then. I was under the impression that most standard book contracts included all sorts of "the publisher now has the right to do whatever the hell we want with your story" stipulations, promising only royalties to the author, and not necessarily any control. I know specific movie options are usually not part of the deal, because no studio wants to commit to an unknown, but I always thought that the publishers usually retain the rights to shop it around at their choosing.

If he's really doing what you're saying, then yeah it's rather dickish; though I imagine it's hard to turn down that kind of money, it is all too easy to whine about artistic integrity afterwards.

I still think I like him, because he's a smart guy, his eccentricity is kind of hilarious, and I loved the "read a book, Frank" statement he made about the "boy-loving Athenians" slur in 300.

(By the way, OMG YOUR SUCH AND IDIOT.)

You know, the other possibility here is that the marketing is misleading. Maybe it will be a downer, all heady and political, and they're just promoting it as Iron Spider-Batman 7 to get people in the theater. It wouldn't be the first time a studio pulled a trick like that.

I suppose it will probably be more like Fight Club, though. The insight and commentary will be buried in there, but there will be enough whiz-bang nonsense surrounding it to render it irrelevant and almost disingenuous, missed by most of the audience.

My God. It's full of win.

Well, that's what he usually does. I know he gave his royalties for V for Vendetta to David Lloyd, so nothing to worry about there.

Well, I just got back from seeing the movie. I saw it in IMAX, dead-center of the theater.

Holy shit.

The movie, well, it's as good as they could have possibly made it. Everything was handled very well- none of the major plots were dumbed down or removed- it was all very faithful. And it was all executed with such a flare, it was amazing. They did change the ending a bit, but you know what? Dammit, I actually liked the movie's ending better than the comic's. It actually makes a little more sense, and doesn't quite leave you with the same anti-climactic feeling that the comic did.

Most people will complain about the same thing, and it's true- pretty much every scene with Dan and Laurie together is guaranteed to be totally overdone. They've got two brawl scenes in the film- one of them only lasted a panel in the comic, the other didn't even happen. Of course, here it's shot in slow motion with a whole bunch of effects and choreography. It's kind of strange: Silk Spectre, we know has been trianed to be a crimefighter since childhood, so seeing her pull of stunt flips and roundhouse kicks and shit makes sense. Nite Owl is a bird entusiast who hasn't excercised in fifteen years, so seeing him pull off the same stuff is a little weird- if they had to give him a fight scene, they probably should have had him using the gadgets and stuff they showed earlier in the film. Also, they have a sex scene, three panels long in the comic, that lasts about two minutes here. And it's kinda unsettling, though that's probably the point.

But that's all minor stuff, really.

Honestly, the title montage alone is worth the price of admission. Actually, no it fucking isn't- when the hell did movie theaters start charging $11 for admission and about $20 for popcorn? Screw that shit- I snuck in snacks from the dollar store. But I digress.

Seriously, go watch the movie. It kicks ass.

So, that was the loudest thing I've ever seen.

So how about that Watchmen video game? This level was probably my favorite!

Last edited by matchead (25 March 2009 5:56:42 pm)