Cool News
WATCHMEN's Minutemen are on Parade!
Hey folks, Harry here - the latest WATCHMEN journal entry has shown up and if you click through to YouTube on the below video you can see the video in HD. Very cool. I love the old school look of those characters! Still have my fingers crossed... we need to see this movie now!
-
+ Expand All
-
he didn't have stache or cigar in that time period.
first. -
Look back at the old issue. He had the stache and cigy.
-
zzzzzzzzz
-
I was looking at it a couple of months ago and I'm pretty sure that young comedian in Minutemen did not have cigar or mustache. Those came later.
-
dot dot dot.
-
OH GOD EVERYTHING IS WRONG THE VOICES THE CLOTHING THE COLOR PALETTE THE COSTUME CHOICES THE CASTING THE PRODUCTION DESIGN THE LOCATION SCOUTING THE BLACK FREIGHTER MOTION PICTURE RELEASE EXCLUSION THE ADAPTED SCREENPLAY AND THE FUCKING SQUID OH MY SWEET FUCKING JESUS EVEN THE BREAKAGE OF GLASS WHEN THE COMEDIAN IS THROWN OUT THE WINDOW IS WRONG AND DR MANHATTAN WAS A SLIGHTLY LIGHTER SHADE OF BLUE THEY GOT THAT WRONG AND SALLY JUPITER'S RACK WAS WAY POINTIER AND FOX SHOULD JUST EAT WATCHMEN AND NEVER RELEASE IT FROM THEIR SMALL INTESTINE BECAUSE WHAT WOULD BE THE POINT IF EVERYTHING DIDN'T MATCH THE GRAPHIC NOVEL DETAIL FOR DETAIL AND WORD FOR WORD!??!?!
-
They've made it in live action with real people. Any fan knows Watchmen is a set of 2 dimensional still line drawings printed in a limited colour palette on surprisingly coarse paper. Schoolboy error.
-
are you guys so slow posting news everyone else already has?
-
I saw no squid. WHAT THE FUCK
-
and nobody here seems to care
-
the photo recreation is 98% comic accurate. But being so accurate, it makes the stuff that isn't jump out at you more. In the movie, Blake has a mustache and cigar in the minutemen era, when in the comic he did not. (and I did just recheck it.) Besides, I know that's a minor nit pick, I'm just pointing it out. Don't matter.
And it could be worse. at least I didn't bring up the... you know. Starts with an "S". let's try to go one talk back without bringing that up. -
Guess that means this talk back is over now.
-
Being filled by some video diary camcorder isn't the way these costumes were meant to be seen.
-
Looks awesome. When will we get to see it? The blonde is straight out of a Vargas painting. Never saw a women fill a costume like that!
-
Ohhh? yeah. The REDHEAD!
I am too focused. on the costume. LOL! -
Weird thing that happened to me today: I met a friend and gave her the late Christmas present which I'd been holding onto. She then gave me my Christmas present. We both bought each other....Watchmen. Spooooooky.
-
Totally kidding.
-
this movie,regardless if by its own is good or not,it is not going to be the movie equivalent of the graphic novel in any way.
because masterpieces like WATCHMEN can not be adapted in other mediums,in fact they define the medium they are created on.
the represent in its finest,the core elements that give the identity,individuality and beauty of each art form.
its other thing to listen to music,another thing to dance,another thing to read a book,to watch a theater play,another to admire a painting,another to admire a photograph,another a sculptuter,another to watch a movie and another to READ A FUCKING COMIC.
so lets moan and argue and shout about the comedian who doesnt have a moustache or that the squid isnt in the movie.yeah thats the problem,big problem indeed....morons. -
Jan 07, 2009 6:59:03 PM CST
OT: Have any of you ever seen SHIRLEY GHOSTMAN?
by unionjackass.webs.com
Because IMO Mark Wooton's comedy character is without doubt the most under-rated comedy creation in the last decade. I bring it up because I finally got around to buying the DVD. Anyway, I watched every episode the other night and I can't remember ever LMAO so much.
For anyone who doesn't know about SHIRLEY GHOSTMAN - you should. Get the DVD. You will not regret it. Or even YouTube it. -
Your presence with mere mortals is much appreciated even if we're a bunch of idiots who care about shit. Do you bottle your farts and sell them as perfume or do you just stick a finger up your ass to remind yourself that your shit smells like roses?
-
WHAT?!?!
-
Only The Hoff would be better.
-
but, so what? exactly how does him having on in the movie during that scene affect anything?
-
sweet.
-
Not only do we have squid trolls now we have mustache trolls!
-
go to joblo.com
-
I was joking, so maybe that doesn't count?
-
It would be really funny if the old Comedian were smoking a cigar while wiping the calamari from his mustache.
-
Wrong WRong wrong, poop poop poop,
No Squid=Galactus is a cloud. -
Jan 07, 2009 7:46:00 PM CST
The fact checkers need to give it a rest - accuracy is overrated
by noncents
Haha.
-
Verbatim word for word, with squid oddly included.
-
We need a 60 million dollar porn flick featuring fluttering waif like pixies copulating.
-
Mustachio Man is trademarked by noncents.
-
Crimson Dynamo
-
has any squids with mustaches I'm not seeing it. It beneath my high intellectual standards.
-
Jan 07, 2009 8:04:35 PM CST
Screw "Watchmen", how about "Carla Gugino Takes a Shower"?
by flim springfield
-
...into the opening for this flick....another reason to hate that fucking network.
-
we know FOX wont release the damn thing till 2010.
-
your comment was merely a springboard for grievances i possess for the nitpicking of fanboydom. i have no qualm with you sir.
-
If they keep "leaking" enough footage, we'll be able to cut the film together for ourselves. Let's screw *both* studios!
-
who are the trolls. I love the squid. I also really dig the minutemen costumes, however the mustache on comedian completely destroys the symbolic connections between Black Freighter and Ozmandius. When you realize that the shark IS the comedian, and then stick the mustache in too early, it messes up everything, including the third term election of Nixon. Snyder is such an idiot. (ø‹›≈≈
-
I find it very interesting that anyone who makes any criticism of this film is labeled a troll, while people whom I've never seen in this forum blindly praising this are never called out for being obvious plants.
I was very excited about this project in the beginning. Snyder went on and on about his personal crusade to make sure nothing was changed from the source material, this was going t be a faithful adaption or he would walk. i remember a specific quote where he was talking about he had to do the Watchmen because he feared someone else doing it.
Fast forward to now. The ending has been changed. The look of certain characters, Comedian and Certainly Night Owl 2, is dramaticaly different, the ending has been completely changed with no real explanation of why, and in the Japanese trailer we now see the Comedian apparently assassinating JFK, something that was a mere throw away line in the book. With more rumours that Veidt is now gay, again something never explicitly identified in the series it makes one wonder just how many changes have been made. I suppose in time we can all judge the movie for ourselves but every time more information is leaked it raises more questions about the quality of the film and ultimately the competency of Snyder. I have made my feelings on Snyders decision to radically change the ending very clear so I won't go into that, however I will keep making the same point that the central question that needs to be answered is why? If Snyder would simply explain his decisions as to why all these changes have been made perhaps it would defuse some of the scorn. -
Please justify why a mustache completely spoils the flow of the story? Surely there are bigger things to be worried about?
Or do you know some secret formula that proves that mustaches in movies always make the movie crap?
God...some people on this talkback *rolls eyes*
@Ominus:
Couldn't agree with you more. It's a different medium. That's why they call it being 'adapted' for the big screen, not carbon copied for the big screen. Changes HAVE to be made - things that work in a comic won't necessarily work in a film. The sooner you guys realise that even if this movie is shit you still have the book to go and read, the better. -
...that even though I haven't seen the movie yet, I am an expert on it, and can confidently declare that various details and changes from the graphic novel have or have not significantly effected the quality of the movie.
-
... does that mean the movie is doomed? Or can WB still settle with FOX at that point? Can anyone smarter than I am please share his/her insight? If this movie doesn't come out on March 6, I can't be held accountable for my actions.
-
Studios only care about money... and if the film doesn't get released, NO ONE GETS ANY! My guess is that, once the current round of posturing is over, they'll agree to a formula to split any profits and the film will open as scheduled.
-
Jan 07, 2009 8:50:41 PM CST
I wear no plants and "trolling" is overrated. I still like the
by noncents
The irony for dancingforever is that you take all this news so seriously when your efforts aren't even part of the creative process. What are you contributing to the film? Nothing. That simple. Your or anyone else's criticisms of the material have no weight. Why does Snyder have to answer to you? Why does any director have to answer to any audience member? If the audience member doesn't like the director's work, don't support him by talking up his work on a forum like this. Don't buy a ticket. Don't buy merchandise. For the non-creatives that don't actually do any creative work, your criticism of any work is all rigmarole. Go MAKE films. Go MAKE art. Go MAKE snuff. Etcetera.
-
That will be my new Troll name! Yes!
-
Some of them have rubber bat muscles and other of them are just plain skinny. If a dork like Toby McGuire can bulk up then so can these guys.
-
hollywood reporter is saying (paraphrase) " Rourke would play a tattooed Russian heavy named Ivan who becomes Whiplash ...
Rockwell would play Justin Hammer, a multibillionaire businessman and a rival ... Anthony Stark." -
http://tinyurl.com/7cnszo the Golden Age ones are so much cooler
-
The whole "Watchmen as Manga jailbait" angle would have worked better if the artist could draw.
That said, jail bait Doc Manhattan did interest me, if only for that absurdly low panty line. (But even there, that's a cop out. The REAL Osterman went full monty, baby!) -
I saw her in 27 Dresses or whatever, and she was both annoying and ugly. But seeing her in the trailer for this, it is quite apparent she as an absolutely incredible ass. I just want to cast her ass in something.
-
Basically, as I understand it, Fox can delay the release until this is settled in court, and then Fox would get the rights to distribute the film and take in all the box office gross. WB could insist they should be reimbursed for production costs, but the judge could rule against them. I say release it on day 1, and have the box office gross go into escrow until a judge can decide who gets what.
-
Seeing a few news items to hype up Watchmen, so one can only hope the hype isn't for nothing.
-
The true irony is that you come to a forum where movies are discussed and expect that people are not going to voice there opinion. The sad tired arguement of,"If you don't like it, make it yourself," is always a shortcut to not addressing the points made or criticism targeted at the project. Challenge yourself to debate the central question I put forth, why are these changes being made? Christ, I'm giving Snyder a free pass for put his son in the movie as a young Rorschachs.
-
a few trophies at the People's Choice Awards yet? How fucking slow are you?
-
I would myself rephrase that and say I want to cast something in Carla Gugino's ass.
-
bow wow chicka bow wow minutemen on parade...or that'll be the soundtrack to the inevitable porn "homage." homoage?
-
or do you actually feel that way? because i dont want to be mr obvious here and explain you're missing the whole point.
-
Carla Gugino wasn't actually in 27 Dresses!
-
I'm just sayin'!
-
The Silhouette swatting Silk Spectre's ass with that riding crop for 4 1/2 minutes straight. No music, no dialogue, just whacking and moaning.
Trust me, guys, it'll work. -
The Comedian's and Nite Owl II's looks are completely different? uhm... how?? Nite Owl's outfit is better, if anything. The Comedian's is exactly the same or damn near close enough! Is it cuz he has a mustache and cigar in his early years? -gasp!- Sure, it's a bit odd that Snyder decided to put that in while nearly everything else is taken exactly from the panels of Watchmen, but Jesus man how anal are people gonna be about this movie?! If you wanna bitch about the ending, be my guest, but the character designs for Nite Owl and Comedian are spot-on.
-
and it's NITE OWL, Mr. dancypants-stickler-for-detail-guy.
-
Sexy as hell. What else can I say? I'm sure she'd be a joy to talk with...after you work her through for about 2-3 weeks straight. I'm sorry, Carla. You're just that damn bangin' hot.
-
http://www.watchmencomicmovie.com/photos/030608-niteowl-big.jpg
You would call this identical? -
Instead of identical in fairness
-
Seriously, the fucking nitpicking has to stop. No one cares about your stupid opinions OH MY GOD HE HAS A MOUSTACHE.
Fuck I can just imagine how unbearable most of you must be in real life. -
Seriously the movie CANNOT be 100 PERCENT identical to the comic and if it was what the fuck would be the point? Read WatchMen the graphic novel and don't watch the movie and enjoy the book for fucks sake. And let the rest of us watch the movie and get excited you MOOK.
-
Sir if what excites you is seeing the genius of Alan Moore defiled by a so called film maker best know for a cgi homoerotic borefest, so be it. I will take no part in that. Doesn't it strike you as a bit odd that Alan Moore has refused to have his name associated with this project in anyway? To those of us who have loved the source material from day one it's heartbreaking to see this happen. Instead of the brilliant concept of the squid, we get nuclear bombs with Docs energy signature and then spoon fed some crap about the tone or idea being the same. If the tone, idea, whatever you want to call it is the same then why change it? If the Watchmen is such a masterpiece why make a change to the ending of all things? Unless of course the director involved with the project is intimidated to pull it off or perhaps his own shameful thoughts of an audience to dumb to understand it. Alas with your arguemnt, I fear you have proven him correct.
-
To be honest, right now, I would rather watch a Minutemen film. Silly costumes hiding huge tragedies. IN THE 40's!
-
I'm a huge Watchmen and Alan Moore fan. I know that Alan Moore had his name taken off this project, because he'd been burned by Hollywood, so much in the past - with V for Vendetta, From Hell and League of Extraordinary Gentlemen -
I know that Zach Snyder and co - would have loved to have had him on board.
What are your feelings about Dave Gibbons who has given the project his full blessing?
I read Watchmen when it first came out, and remember a lot of people being hugely disappointed with the ending and the extra dimensional creature (not squid)
Also - I'm not sure if Alan Moore has much right to complain about his characters being changed too much - I mean Hollywood's only done to him, what he's done to other writers characters. I'm sure Frank L Baum would be spinning in his grave if he knew that someone had come up with a story where Dorothy was in a Lesbian tryst with Alice and Wendy (Lost Girls)
Sorry if my post makes no sense - I'm writing it sneakily whilst at work. As for my opinion on Watchmen, I remain cautiously optimistic. -
Actually sgt spoon acknowledges the differences in Nite Owl's costume, but is merely saying it fits better for the film, and I would agree. As Watchmen satirised comic costumes i would say it saturises superhero film costumes. The costume that i am not keen on is Ozymandias.
Your response to Brighteyes doesn't really prove anything, since you just put on a pompous tone and don't actually deal with his comments, just make up an opinion you claim he is expressing.
I have concerns over Snyder's ability to pull this off, but I will at least wait until it ACTUALLY COMES OUT rather than picking it apart over silly things like a tache.
I get your concerns over the squid, but the squid is merely a device, rather than the point and I can understand why that is being changed. More importantly i don't think that is betraying the source material in any way, it is the ideas and the point that he needs to be faithful to, rather than the specifics. The change, from what i have heard, is not dumbing it down, just altering the delivery to something more credible.
This is an adaptation and acknoledgements must me made to the change in medium.
Alan Moore's refusal to be involved predates the current incarnation of the project due to his feelings about Hollywood adapting his work gennerally (and after From Hell and League of... I can understand that! V was better but flawed), that's common knowledge. -
stupid typos!
-
"The change, from what i have heard, is not dumbing it down, just altering the delivery to something more credible."
So what Zack Snyder and company come up with is more credible than Alan moores original idea? Then that means the source material, by your statement is inferior to the original? I know a lot of people who loved the squid and to this day remember it's appearance as one of the biggest iconic moments in comic history. As to bright eyes comments, again some makes an asserition that the cusotmes are spot on to the origanls, then that is easily disproven, then the arguemnt changes to it doesn't matter. There needs to be a consesus in what actual arguement is being made other defending Zack Snyder. If you chose to be on his side and want to champion a campaign that Snyder is far more in touch with this story and concept than Alan Moore so be it. I will continue to defend Moore's concept, to me that is the superiror version. -
it should be good enough for us, no?
-
Again you are putting words into people's mouths, this time mine. I am not for a second saying that Snyder si more in touch with the material than Moore, but he is the one making the film and is responsible for it, and he has the right to make changes that he thinks will work better within the medium he is working in!
As I have said, the squid was a tool rather than an idea, I think the idea seems to be the same, the delivery changed. I may prove to be wrong, I also said I don't know if Snyder is up to the task. Even if he is and it is, I can't imagine it would ever be as good as the book, but it is a different entity.
And as I said, Bright eyes acknowledges that Nite Owl's costume is difference, I was taking that into account in how I read his use of "spot on". -
As here, ""The change, from what i have heard, is not dumbing it down, just altering the delivery to something more credible." And then comment on your statement to the ending being more credible that's putting words in your mouth?
-
Please see my comments about fitting the medium and also tell me where I said Snyder was more in touch with the medium then moore.
-
I just wanted to say that I saw 300 a couple of weeks ago, I am thoroughly reassured that Zack Snyder is going to deliver an excellent film (squid or no squid)
Toodles! -
Joking around about the mustache there fella. Not joking about the squid.
-
It's a real question. Why can't these guys bulk up a little for these roles? The actor playing Ozymandius is very skinny and wears a rubber muscle suit. One of these Minute Men had tooth pick legs. I don't expect these guys to look like professional wrestlers but they could have some kind of physical presence. Don't you think it helps that Christian Bale is in great shape as opposed to Michael Keaton wearing a turtle- neck and lifts? I guess Russel Crowe should have kept the weight on from THE INSIDER when he was Maximus or Brad Pitt didn't need to bulk up to play Achillies. If I'm missing the point then they should have cast Kathy Bates instead of Carla Gugino. Carla has nicer tits but Kathy is a better actress.
-
Kudos on the best post in the TB so far!
-
I'm boycotting the Black Freighter DVD
-
Thinking about it, the tache and cigar in the Minutemen scenes may be because they have had to show alot of the old stuff in the montage so you don't have any of the dialougue. It may be just to clarify that this is the same guy. that's easy to tell in the book, it's stated.
-
fap fap fap fap fap fap fap fap fap fap fap fap fap fap fap fap fap fap fap fap fap fap fap fap fap fap fap fap fap fap fap fap fap fap fap fap fap fap fap fap fap fap fap fap fap fap fap fap fap fap fap fap fap fap fap fap fap fap fap fap fap fap fap fap fap fap fap fap fap fap fap fap fap fap fap fap fap fap fap fap
-
I couldn't last that long. I had only half as many faps when I finished.
-
Reposting because I think it's significant and maybe we should calm down and wait to see how it plays out. This is my own speculation:
Just thought about this, but what if Snyder isn't precisely making Manhattan the cause, but it could be that Ozy is making it seem like Manhattan is calling forth an extraterrestrial threath!!!Think about it, like those fucking energy made aliens from Day the earth stood still or whatever, it could be explained that Manhattan was a product of an alien universe, maybe Ozy would have it explained that his human form crossed over to some interdimensional place, and towards the end of the movie, Manhattan being all emotional would open a gateway into this alien place and that such energy lke beings like him would bombard the planet!!!! THIS WOULD BE A GOOD SOLUTION TO ALL OF THIS!!! The threath is not Manhattan himself, but Manhattan unwittingly opening up a gate to an alien world that supposedly made him and that would immediatedly attack the Earth upon Manhattan becoming angered at it and thus 'going to war'!!!! Hopefully this is what Snyder has in mind!!!! I pray it does as it'll solve everything for everyone and it'll in fact even be better!!!!!!!! Hopefully Snyder and Gibbons explain it as such... so the alien threath still remains and it fits in better. The comedian could've just been sent to investiagate something on an island where Ozy was planning to send up rockets and satellites or whatever technology he needed to make this happen and of course killed all the scientists and artists involved afterwards who were thinking it'd just be some kind of cool holographic light show to communicate things around the world!!! -
Snyder has zero ego which means he has alot to prove and is deathly afraid of dissapointing fans. That is why we get stuff like this in Watchmen. Its great to see.
-
they hadn't thought to put nipples on their super-suits. Just nooses.
-
Look at the Comedian. He's a 16-YEAR-OLD babyface. Sure, he's got a leer, but he's a kid. He's clean-shaven and cigar-free and he looks like a kid. Then he tries to rape Sally Jupiter (and suffers the broken nose he never has fixed). The point is that this sweet-faced teenager is scum, apparently. Having a 30-year-old, mustachiod, smoking Blake removes the message that this guy was always, always, always a sick and pathetic individual. It's also a metaphor, in that the Comedian later comes to represent the USA - even in its supposed innocence, the USA was thuggish, in Moore's view. That's what it's all about. That's why it's significant. That's why it's not merely a tiny cosmetic change. If we see the attempted rape, these two small factors remove layers of meaning.
I've read "Watchmen" more than 20 times. I've discussed it with others many more than that. I've picked up on lots of tiny things with each reading. Some are significant, some are not. But spending 10 seconds to add a bit of meaning to an otherwise basic scene of brutality is worth it. -
I'm pretty sure that was him in the Nite Owl I costume, wasn't it? It looks like him if I squint.
-
Hmmm...not from my perspective. I'll agree the short hair doesn't work as much as her long black hair in last season's Entourage. And sorry to Carla to be a typical shallow asshole guy speaking only of her physical traits but goddamn! she's a freakin super hottie who's practically 40 and that is most excellent on many different levels.As for the the increase in debate/argument over the minutia of Snyder's Watchmen, I think the single consensus we should all be able to agree upon is that we will have to wait and see the end product. No matter what we think, pro or con, on the "squid", this isn't something we're going to change. This isn't Zombie testing out a rumor of him directing Conan and us going apeshit and the studio picking up on it and then giving it to Ratner (which is like not being forced to give a gorilla a blow job but instead being forced to give a rhinoceros a blow job). I want Snyder's changes to work but I'm convinced he doesn't have the creative chutzpah to pull it off (comparing him to Moore is absurd and really, apples and oranges if you get down to it).But, and here's the rub...all we can do is wait and see. If Snyder blows it...what then? No Watchmen sequel? Haha! Wait till this rakes in a ton of coin and the studio pushes for a remake and the studio hires the guys who wrote Bay's "Transformers" to write it. Then I think it's safe to say we should all fucking revolt and take one giant collective shit on Snyder's front porch.
-
"I want Snyder's changes to work but I'm convinced he doesn't have the creative chutzpah to pull it off." I think you have encapsulated the anti-Snyder camp's feelings there. He seems like the nicest guy in the world, with a great appreciation of the work, but he's a lightweight artistically.
-
I actually enjoyed his Dawn more than the original and it's certainly better than anything Romero has done in recent years and 300 was an incredibly accurate translation so why do people hate the guy so much? He seems to respect source material and he has his own style so like him or not, he's hardly a Uwe Boll or Anderson.
-
I won't miss the squid. The squid is just a means to an end. And in all honesty the squid is probably the one weak link in the story of watchmen. lets face it. watchmen is very much set in the real world. in the real world people would never buy the attack from outer space. but even if they did buy that the genetically spliced squid were form outer space, would we buy that it was meant as an attack? and even if it was perceived as an attack, would it really stop us from nuking the sh*t out of each other? don't get me wrong. the squid is cool as hell. but as a story point, it's weak. and we're talking about a two and a half hour movie here. the squid is present in the graphic novel that should take about six or seven hours to read. in that context you can't fully develop the plot behind the squid. it HAS to be condensed. what makes more sense? uniting the world against aliens (which you have to prove exist and are a threat) or uniting the world against a common threat that they understand and fear a great deal to being with? which would the smartest man in the world go with? pointing the finger at Dr. Manhattan streamlines the story, makes more sense, brings the same results, and makes Manhattan's decision to let veidt's trickery go untouched even more noble, and his exile more purposeful.
-
http://tinyurl.com/8c9sg7
-
How does one convince the world that Dr. Manhattan, no matter how bizarre his actions, is not still the property of the USA? I don't think you could. He's spent 25 years as the symbol of the strong arm of US nuclear capability. Does acting estranged from humanity and sulking somewhere send a message that he no longer is an American asset? If so, Dick Cheney's long visits to "undisclosed locations" and television appearances could suggest he's only interested in himself, not the USA first and foremost. (I use this only as an example of possible odd behavior.) If Cheney then got the nuclear football and launched a strike against NYC, would he be seen as a rogue without nation, or as a crazed American? What if Al Gore had taken command of the internet and shut down computer systems around the world, leading to untol death and destruction somehow? I can't imagine a broad consensus of international opinion supporting the rogue option. The USA in the story is already unpopular. If the USA's supergod killed millions, the USA would be blamed. And then where does sympathy for the devastated city come from?
-
So is Stephen McHattie playing Nite-Owl I in the flashback/photos, like he's playing the older the version? And I always thought the Nite-Owl II costume looked... odd. Having a cape that covers half your upper arms, and is pinned just above the sternum, seemed to make it impossible to lift your arms up.
-
WHAT THE HELL IS COMEDIAN POINTING AT? Not as clear in this video, but the actual photo shows there is something on his knee that he's pointing at.
IN THE ACTUAL COMIC, there's some kind of mark on his knee that he's pointing at.
Im convinced that someone doesn't sit at a drawing table with a page full of plotted out comic frames, and draws a hand pointing at something, and calls it 'oh just nothing actually' - when you draw, every line you draw has a purpose. So what is he pointing at, and what kind of foreshadowing does it bear? -
Yeah, his costume is a bit unwieldy for real life, which is one reason they redesigned it. Freedom of movement is important if you're going to make leaping, slo-mo high kicks, especially if you're an out-of-shape guy in his 40s (like me). The costume as presented in the comic obviously has a semi-rigid collar structure, like Ozymandias's. The capes can be pushed back, but they naturally fall in a Batman hang-over-the-arms-cause-it's-moody fashion. They surely look good, though!
-
First off: as a squid purist, let me say that I don't think we hate Snyder at all. The pro-squid argument doesn't start with "Snyder's a dickhead", it starts with "Ok, and why is this being changed?".Just because we might rail against this change, do we also talk shit about his earlier work? Or actually say the words "I hate Snyder"? I think some people are zealous for effect as I can't imagine anyone outside of Moore and Gibbons that would take this so very personally. But I don't think this pro-squid argument is born out of any feeling over Snyder at all, good or bad.I think the better description for my concern at least is that, I don't feel that Snyder is capable of filling in material worthy of Watchmen for all that he is cutting. And don't fool yourself, in changing the ending, he has to change a LOT. Granted, by keeping the GN ending he'd *theoretically* have a lot more film and this thing is already clocking 2.5 hours so there's the practicality of the medium to consider but again...he didn't just cut stuff out...he's changed the entire ending and is instead utilizing a pre-existing character who will then need relatively dramatic changes to his storyline to fit with the new ending.I, personally, don't think Snyder and his writers are up to the task of filling in what they're cutting. This is like the worst example of hiring some jackass off the street to overdub profanity in a "fuck"-laced Tarantino flick and you can recognize instantly it's not the same guy talking. Well, this is that same thing only to the infinite power. Doesn't mean it's bound to fail but I've seen nothing to make me think Snyder can pull this, obviously very ambitious move, off. Many of you have said the squid is a bad idea even in the GN itself. At the risk of sounding like a snob, I wonder if you only judge it on it's circumstantial aspect (it just shows up!) and not it's metaphorical/symbolic aspects both within the story and without (which is only part of what makes such a great device). Plus the idea of trying to gauge how a fictional people would react to the various elements of the story is even more absurd then presuming how modern 'real' audiences would react to the squid ending. But yet there is no absence of pure theory on how people would react is there?!We cannot presume our 21st century mentality and cynicism on the alternate 80's universe where Watchmen takes place.How can you say that the sudden appearance of a monstrous and utterly without precedent dead gigantic thing who is, at the very least, "not of this Earth", and whose arrival and subsequent "death throes" psychologically burst minds and slaughter millions of civilians surrounding the area but yet people would be MORE likely to parse this tragedy and not unite as one people than they would an unknown American scientist getting irradiated and disintegrated only to reconstitute himself as a living God who, after single-handedly fighting for us in defeating Viet Nam by disintegrating them, then goes rogue and wipes out NY killing millions? That wouldn't be debated whatsoever?Even if we speak in pure conjecture here, and we are, I think one is more of a stretch than the other.All that said...again and again apparently...I still want this to be great. I want the changes to work for this film. I want to enjoy Snyder's work as much as I enjoyed Moore/Gibbons' work.The more movies like this that fail, the less likely we are to have our genre kept alive beyond the scope of the comic and the graphic novel. For the same reasons why movies like the FF shitfests are bad for geeks...it's not just bad movies but harming motivations for the money men to keep a tight purse and balk on possible stories we'd all love to see. We're on the brink of a possible amazing time for Marvel film and if, out of the blue, all movies remotely portraying comic/GN/superhero related stuff bomb drastically, you can bet we might not get anything whatsoever. Only a asswipe wants this to actually flop as this failure could hurt us all in terms of geekdom.Make sense? (sorry for wallOtext)
-
Well put. I don't hate Snyder. I just don't have any confidence that the film will capture the nuances of the story that are so important in making it more than just a dark superhero story. Perhaps he has. Perhaps I'll be surprised. That would be wonderful. But until I see a journal or promo piece with convincing dialogue (not possible from Akerman, from what I've seen so far), I'll remain skeptical. WINO? No. "Watchmen" an ambitious failure? My big fear.
-
The artist storyline in the comic was always a weak link and bad red herring at best. Keeping to the "comic super hero killer" mystery makes watchmen more focused. All that changes is that Ozy frames Manhattan. It doesn't change anything about Manhattan because he's not in on it. It sure does give him a REASON to leave unlike the comic where he just decides to go for no reason."Hey I'm a god...might as well make a world of my own eh? Laterz!" What kills everyone changes nothing. The moral check mate still exists. Ozy still gets away with it. Rorschache still dies. The heroes end up being dick heads and Rorschaches journal is still the ticking time bomb. Almost nothing changes. Except for the "take the artists to the island to create a monster" sub plot which was stupid to begin with. The squid is a giant fantastical mess in a supposedly realistic gritty world. So much for down to earth and grounded. A giant monster just showed up to stop WWIII. Really? That FITS in the watchmen world? The same novel that has one hero rape another?
-
I respectfully disagree and I think you might not remember Jon's personal transition in the GN either (with respect, he doesn't remotely think "I'm a God, might as well make my own world" etc). Granted, I haven't read the GN in a while but as I remember it, the whole thing builds and builds until the rather unexpected ending which, of course, has so many of us debating back and forth. But we're not speaking of the quality of the original GN as that is the realm of pure opinion. We're talking about changing the original GN for the movie version; if you guys think the original GN's ending sucked then maybe Watchmen isn't so ripe for film translation after all? Or maybe your passion for this project is misplaced or exageratted? Why would you argue about something you considered "dumb" in the first place?The squid is symbolism personified, both in the GN's fictional world as well as to us, the reader in the "real" world. It works on multiple levels and that is why I think it works so well.At the end of the day tho, I don't believe there is any point in arguing which is the better choice as it's really come down to individual faith and of all things, faith is undebatable.
-
...but isn't it a massive spoiler to show Jackie Earle Haley with Walter Kovacs/Rorchach plastered across the screen in these Videos?
-
It might be if the public had any idea who Walter Kovacs is, in the story. He's not identified by name until Chapter 6, when he's in custody - if memory serves. And, with his shaved head and glasses, Haley doesn't look much like Kovacs does in the film. I suspect the general public, which is unlikely to see these promo pieces, anyway - or remember them if they should - will connect the dots.
-
Truer words have never been spoken. Snyder is giving us the watchmen we have all been waiting for. Darren Aronofsky if my favorite working director today but I am glad he did not do Watchmen cause you could bet your ass it wouldn't be anywhere as near accurate as Snyders version.
-
That is the important question. He has cherry-picked certain aspects of the story, leaving behind those he seems to find insufficiently "cool." For me, faithfulness to visual elements (I won't argue about the costumes, I won't argue about the costumes, I won't argue about the costumes ...) is not nearly so important as faithfulness to tone and, most of all, to theme and meaning. I'll repeat what I've said before: Show me that these actors can convince me they are these characters and I'll forgive the blunders I see in Snyder's vision. Until then, this is just a collection of pretty pictures and bits of "big" dialogue that punch up the trailers.
-
Darth Macchio is making a lot of sense with his comments. Why is it that anyone who dares question Snyder is met with only cries of "The squid doesn't matter deal with it!" How many times have I asked the same question, why change the end? What is the logical explanation other than to make the movie a product that is more consumable by the masses. It's an absolute slap in the face to any real fan of the source material. If the squid was such a bad idea why is it that for 20 years there has been no out cry of disgust? In the circles I travel and back in those times every fan of this series I met had interesting thoughts on the squid, it's origin, what it meant in a metaphorical sense, and the outright awesome visceral essence of it. Maybe you had to be there who knows.
Bright eyes, you make a statement as ridiculous as anything I have seen in this talkback or any other for some time, Snyder is the only director to give us a version this faithful? Sir you are either an obvious plant or someone who makes superfluous statements on a whim. Are you really asserting that no other director in the world could make this movie except an individual know for homoerotic gladiators movies and bad zombie remakes? I mean your joking right. That being said, i don't place all of the blame on Snyder, I have no doubt that the studio took one look at the ending and felt it could affect box office and killed it. -
and can never be shown in the trailer. I'm looking forward to just all the normal scenes of characters standing around talking to each other. I'm looking forward to the poetic nuance of the Dr. Manhattan chapter. The brutal nature of Rorschaches chapter. I want to see all the non costume scenes. I think the tone will be spot on but again the trailers are just money shots. The movie is the meat. So we'll have to wait and see. The good news is all signs are good so far.
-
at the very least it's a different way of destroying a city. blowing shit up is just unoriginal and typical hollywood. and the squid has one more thing going for it. it's created by artists and writers, hence veidt is essentially uniting the world through ART. let me know if there's a cooler way to save the planet.
-
They would have changed Watchmen to "their vision" because people like Fincher, Tarantino, Aronofsky, and P.T. Anderson have very specific styles and would change the nature of a project to suit their style. They don't have to be faithful because in their minds..thier ideas are better. Snyder is a scared little puppy of a guy. Which I like cause he just wants to get it right, not make "snyders watchmen" like Gilliam surely would have done. As long as millions of new yorkers die they did NOT sell out. To me the squid is the easy part to get in..its the millions of dead people and how the heroes justify the means to the end. THAT is the ballsy part and its intact. Mass appeal my buttocks. That ending is going to rock alot of worlds.
-
...with millions of new yorkers dying and having the heroes decide its for the best. Yeah REAL mainstream. I mean ALL movies end that way. Heck Slumdog ended that way. How mainstream and typical hollywood if you ask me.
-
and don't give me that argument that you shouldn't have to not watch the film and someone should have made it right.GUESS WHAT? There is no other director in this world who would have gotten as close and faithful to Watchmen then Snyders version. Fuck its so annoying, just don't watch it problem solved. Sit down and really think about another director making this film and it being as close to Watchmen as this is looking, and because there isn't one and if you think it shouldn't be made then don't watch it, fuck! it literally is that simple. And I know in the back of all your heads you are all thinking you could have made a better watchmen movie if you got to make it but no you COULD NOT. Keep typing your redundant qualms and feel like a king behind your keyboard, the one place where you guys feel like your worth a damn.
-
It would just be Dr. Manhattan staring at the audience for two hours. Abstract art n junk.
-
you can still get "the millions of new yorker dying and the heroes decide it's best" even with the squid. i'm talking about the method of annihilation. how many hollywood films end with explosions you think?
-
Ummm...last I checked that squid just appeared and the telekinese crap blew the people up. It was just another kind of explosion. Its not like the squid was eating people n shit. Not to mention in the GN the squid appears and the people are instantly dead. Whats the difference between that and an explosion?
-
there's a flash of white, and then we see the city already obliterated and millions dead. there's no need to show the explosions. and since there's no need for the movie to create the squid, they have more money to spend. and what do they come up with? hollywood explosions. why? because they know you're all like those zombies in land of the dead. shoot up fireworks and your asses will get hypnotized into the theaters.
-
Man, if we have to answer that question, you are lost.
-
Lost Highway has an explosion at the end. That must mean its a mainstream hollywood piece of crap. Of course. My bad. You're absolutely right. Have a nice day.
-
you know my point exactly. explosions is waaay overused in movies. even lost highway used it, see.
-
the 'real world' of watchmen cease to be real once manhattan arrived. it opened up a whole lot of possibilities. one writer even said so in the excerpt. if you can believe in the existence of a blue being with the power of god then a giant squid from outer space is not that hard to swallow.
if it were the real world, and the squid appeared and it destroyed half the city, and you can SEE the squid with your own eyes, then you WILL perceive it as real. you will not have the objectivity to judge it as silly, were you not just looking at drawings of it in your funny pages. -
he failed to take himself 'inside' the world of watchmen, be a part of it. there's still that distance that separate his world and that world. hence he thinks the squid is silly.
-
But so is Doc M. If Doc M can exist, the squid can exist.
-
I'm loving the attention to detail. For the most part the Minute Men are right out of the book. I love how awkward they are and how most of what they're wearing looks like they just put it together themselves with a little elbow grease from stuff off the rack! The Commedian's 40s mustache is annoying - don't they have enough movie magic to make him not have a mustache and then have a mustache? Not a big deal. Just don't get me started on the squid... No squid, lots to rewrite -eliminates the cool ayn rand drop-outs subplot, and also lacks the vision, plus sheer bizarreness and coolness, of the original ending, trading it for summer event 'splosions (let's be clear, much different from a symbolic house igniting at the end of Lost Highway). What annoys me is squid for explosion swap doesn't seem necessary - like it was just made to be "easier" or more conventional. Like Zack Snyder was either thinking "I love this book but man, that squid thing is dumb," or "how the hell am I going to show a giant 5D squid thing killing people with its psychic death cry?" In either instance - lame. The original ending's a chance for him to blow people's minds and show some - an opportunity, not a problem. I'm sure Dave Gibbons could've given it a redesign or something. The third alternative is some suit says "Squid, what the hell? You're making this into a big explosion or you're out on your ass" In which case I sympathize. I'm still going to watch this thing and hope it's awesome but it would be great to be able to get all psyched up about it.
-
I would just loved to have seen that on screen, done in an HP Lovecraft type way...all writhing around, dying and shit, its tentacles crushing people and smashing into buildings while New Yorkers are screaming in madness as their minds pop in their heads, unable to comprehend what they are seeing. Ozy's V/O would be over the top of it...coolly explaining his plan. Could have been so powerful. I'm just worried that the footage of the explosions in the trailer looked too similar to what I've already seen in Heroes Season 1 (which is ironic seeing as so much of Heroes storyline was stolen from Watchmen in the first place...except they used an explosion to unite the world, rather than an alien squid attack)
-
I don't think the squid would have worked on film. In the comic, the squid works...barely. It just manages to get us to buy it. (My opinion of course) In a film, I don't think it would work for the person who is unfamiliar with the comic. I'd love to see the squid myself, as a longtime Watchmen fan. But to those who don't know the comic at all, it would induce some rolling of the eyes. This reminds me of all the drama about Tom Bombadil being left out of Lord of the Rings. Tom would NOT have worked on film. But is Tom what people loved about Lord of the Rings? Is the squid what people loved about Watchmen? Is it really THAT important? I can't believe that the absence of the squid and a few minor costume changes would illicit such anger. So they don't have the squid and the costumes are different...Is it REALLY that much of a tragedy? The squid takes up a fraction of a fraction of the story. What if the rest of the movie is spot on and captures the comic perfectly? You can't expect perfection from Hollywood. But do not worry! The squid will always be with us! It's foul, stinking, mutated psychic calamariness will dwell forever there on the page of the comic and in our hearts. :)
-
AS long as you're kidding about the mustache :P
The squid is something to be concerned about though, since if what they changed it is what the rumours say, then a hell of a lot has changed that changes the whole flow of the original story. -
So did Moore. He proposed it to DC, but when DC refused to reassign copyright of Watchmen to Moore and Gibbons, Moore fucked off with that and a number of other ideas that never happened.
-
The squid could have been done in a realistic horror movie fashion. But it would probably cost more than this film's budget would allow.
-
What I remember from 20 years ago was that the series would mostly cover the ten-year period mentioned in Hollis Mason's "Under the Hood," from 1939 to the beginning of 1950. It was going to be about how everything that seemed bright and shiny about costumed heroes went bad - the bad blood between Comedian and Hooded Justice and HJ's eventual disappearance; Dollar Bill and the Silhouette's fates; Sally Jupiter's slow descent from would-be star to joke; Mothman's emotional issues; Captain Metropolis's egocentricity; the hidden sexualities of the Minutemen; Frederick Wertham; and how the Comedian saved superheroes, if only momentarily. IIRC, it was going to end with the announcement of Dr. Manhattan's existence. It was going to be very dark, even more cynical than "Watchmen," and filled with a pervasive sense of falling downhill into hell.
-
that's what I'm talking about. It's his chance to go nuts, like the end of Akira - or realistic horror style, BC, whatever style he thinks works. Splungeman I think it's not so much like Tom Bombadil (a peripheral character, not really necessary to the plot, only thematically important, and so, replacable as long as that theme is addressed). It's more like when they made Galactus into a cloud - Galactus is big guy, change his outfit or whatever, but he's not a cloud. The squid is there, it's the climax of the story, change what it looks like or something but don't make it something that it's not for the reason that the story as it is doesn't "work" or it's too hard to make, or would cost too much. If a filmmaker is creative enough they can have anything in their film. Also, what would people (not hypothetical people, out there - you, reading this) rather see? A big explosion? Or something that, if pulled off right, could be totally bizarre, haunting, and cool.
-
Dammit.
-
I'd love to see that. As you guys describe it, it sounds tighter and more character driven, but it could be really good on its own. It could be like 49ers is to Top Ten. Not really necessary but totally welcome and very good on its own.
-
Moore doesn't say much about the villains the Minutemen faced in the '40s and '50s. They seem to mostly have been racketeers and spies from what I recall. Moloch began his career in the '40s, as a young man. In "Under the Hood," Mason says that being a costumed hero became a bit of an embarrassment because there were very few costumed villains to begin with and eventually almost none.
-
I do think that to a degree people are expecting every nuance of the book to be in the film, which never happens, there isn't time. And also it's very hard to do when you change medium. When you read a comic you take as much time as you like to drink in every detail (and there is always so much to take in with Alan Moore's stuff!) and some bits were always going to be lost. It's why the main line of thought has always been that it was unfilmable. Certainly to make a film version work (and I still remain cynical) you can't be slavish, it's about translating it right. I think Snyder has the right intent, we'll see come release date if he has the ability. A lot of people here think the film needs to be as amazing as the book. And also that to do that it needs to be identical. I think that's impossible myself, I guess it's an issue of expectation.
At the end of the day, however good/bad the film is, I will still have the book.
Readers Talkback
User Login
Top Talkbacks
- Whitney Houston 1963 - 2012 -- 171 total posts 169 posts
- AVENGERS enemy revealed as pink boardgame pieces... You might suffer some form of elation... SPOILERS!!! -- 157 total posts 111 posts
- There's a STAR TREK video game that is going to lead into JJ's STAR TREK 2 apparently... -- 138 total posts 75 posts
- Here's The Red Band Trailer For Drafthouse Films' THE FP! -- 67 total posts 67 posts
- To Commemorate The 3D Release Of STAR WARS EPISODE I: THE PHANTOM MENACE, George Lucas Wants You To Know...Greedo Shoots First!! -- 479 total posts 62 posts
- New JUDGE DREDD post production footage pops up -- 59 total posts 59 posts
- Does ‘SNL’ Rhyme With ‘Deschanel’?? Learn Which SATURDAY NIGHT LIVE Vet Hosts After Sexy Zooey!! -- 62 total posts 59 posts
- HANNA's Saoirse Ronan to boss around seven little people -- 48 total posts 45 posts
- Friday Brings SWEEPS DAY NINE!! Gab Here About Tonight’s FRINGE!! Plus Einstein on TIM, Wiig On PORTLANDIA, MAHER, CLONE, GIFTED, GRIMM, SPARTACUS, SUPERNATURAL, GOLD RUSH And More!! -- 116 total posts 32 posts
- SPACE 2099!! -- 181 total posts 30 posts