WatchmenComicMovie.com Forum


Talk about the Watchmen comic book mini-series and film
It is currently Fri Dec 15, 2017 10:09 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 54 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3

Overall, what is your reaction to Zack's answers in part II
It improved my opinion of how Snyder is handling the film. I'm excited - now more than ever before. 13%  13%  [ 1 ]
It didn't change my opinion. I knew Snyder was doing a good job. 63%  63%  [ 5 ]
It didn't change my opinion, but I'm still on the fence about Snyder in general. 13%  13%  [ 1 ]
It didn't change my opinion. I still feel Snyder will deliver a poor adaptation. 13%  13%  [ 1 ]
It lessened my opinion of how Snyder is handling the film. I'm more worried now that he's going to screw it up. 0%  0%  [ 0 ]
Total votes : 8
Author Message
PostPosted: Sun Feb 17, 2008 4:37 pm 
Offline
Intrinsic Field Subtractor
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 9:10 am
Posts: 1023
DoomsdayClock wrote:
The way I see it, its semantics.


se·man·tics /sɪˈmæntɪks/
–noun (used with a singular verb) 1. Linguistics.
a. the study of meaning.
b. the study of linguistic development by classifying and examining changes in meaning and form.

2. Also called significs. the branch of semiotics dealing with the relations between signs and what they denote.
3. the meaning, or an interpretation of the meaning, of a word, sign, sentence, etc.:

In communication, the idea that words have meanings and the concern over those meanings are of the highest importance. I've never understood those who dismiss those who disagree by saying "you're arguing over semantics."

That is to say, "you're arguing over the meaning of the words we are using to express our thoughts and the meanings of these words and therefore those thoughts are unimportant."

That said, I don't care if you don't add more options to your poll or if you add 50. BF and I are perfectly capable of stating our opinions without a poll.

The larger question though is, how many polls have you seen, maybe even political polls... that do not offer an option structured in a manner with which you can agree. Too often, they are trying to be unobjective.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 17, 2008 4:57 pm 
Offline
Tired of Earth.
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2007 11:01 am
Posts: 8035
Location: Clackamas, OR
For my part, I completely understand where Vynson is coming from. I especially like the idea that this movie is just a fanfilm on a very large scale. Because really, that's all this is: It's Snyder's interpretation of the graphic novel, put onscreen. It's nothing definitive, because we already have the definitive graphic novel.

And anyways, there have been so many different interpretations of this graphic novel over the years. It's like no two people read the story in the same way. So what's wrong with presenting one guy's interpretation in a really cool way?

Also, let's be honest, this movie was always going to happen. If it didn't happen 20 years ago and if it didn't happen today, it would've happened five, ten, fifteen years from now. These wheels have been turning for twenty years and they were never going to completely stop. The difference is that right now, thanks to the talent involved and the advances in VFX and makeup, I think that this current incarnation of the movie has the best chance at anything remotely resembling a good adaptation and a decent movie. If they come anywhere close, cool. If they fail... well, just ask any video gamer about Uwe Boll.

The main thing is that either way, we can continue reading and promoting the graphic novel and no one will try adapting the story again for quite some time.

_________________
This is truly a madhouse. And I'm the lunatic running it. I've spent three years wondering if I should be proud or ashamed.

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 17, 2008 6:26 pm 
Offline
New Frontiersman
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2008 12:26 pm
Posts: 317
Until the sequel, leastways.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 17, 2008 8:14 pm 
Offline
Tired of Earth.
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2007 11:01 am
Posts: 8035
Location: Clackamas, OR
Writer Of Wrongs wrote:
Until the sequel, leastways.
Bite your tongue, buster.

_________________
This is truly a madhouse. And I'm the lunatic running it. I've spent three years wondering if I should be proud or ashamed.

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 17, 2008 8:18 pm 
Offline
The Watcher
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 25, 2007 8:58 am
Posts: 3650
Location: New York
Vynson wrote:
That said, I don't care if you don't add more options to your poll or if you add 50. BF and I are perfectly capable of stating our opinions without a poll.

Very true. Part of my reasoning for not over-optioning the poll in the first place. The idea of the poll was specifically to see if Zack's answers changed anyone's mind about the movie, not to see if people felt the movie should not be made at all. In that context, the options I chose would fit for anyone.

_________________
Those who dance are considered insane by those who can't hear the music - George Carlin


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 17, 2008 11:04 pm 
Offline
New Frontiersman
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 9:39 am
Posts: 396
Location: North of 49, West of 100
For what it's worth, I didn't vote either.

I've never seen any of Zack's films. I don't care for zombie films (most are thinly veiled racism) and Frank Miller's take on ancient Greek history didn't particularly excite me either. That leaves me unable to form an informed opinion about Snyder's skill as a film maker.

From the point of the Q&A, I didn't see any new info revealed that would give me cause to judge (either way) whether he's actually done a faithful adaptation. I'm waiting for the film to come out to make up my mind.

I've designed workplace polls in the past to try and gauge opinions. The bottom line is that if you're not careful, you end up asking loaded questions that confirm your own bias. It's kind of like asking your neighbour when he stopped beating his wife.

_________________
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes.

-Juvenal


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 17, 2008 11:41 pm 
Offline
The Watcher
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 25, 2007 8:58 am
Posts: 3650
Location: New York
dandreiberg wrote:
I've designed workplace polls in the past to try and gauge opinions. The bottom line is that if you're not careful, you end up asking loaded questions that confirm your own bias. It's kind of like asking your neighbour when he stopped beating his wife.

Point taken. But this poll isn't rocket science. Either the answers to the questions changed your mind about how Zack Snyder was handling the film or it didn't. Pretty cut and dry. But, now that I think about it, a complete neutal option might make sense. I'll add it...

_________________
Those who dance are considered insane by those who can't hear the music - George Carlin


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Feb 18, 2008 7:55 am 
Offline
…a puppet who can see the strings.
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 27, 2007 1:42 pm
Posts: 8538
Location: A stronger world
Curiosity Inc. wrote:
Bite your tongue, buster.


Image




Impossible to resist!

_________________
Dr. Brooklyn wrote:
it was tying it into the rape-revenge stories and making light of a verys erious sub-genre that kind of offended me.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Feb 18, 2008 10:33 am 
Offline
Gazing into the abyss.
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2007 8:19 am
Posts: 1576
Curiosity Inc. wrote:
Kingmob wrote:
The worst thing you can do is go into action and try to make it look cool. If it isn't organic, then it's going to come off ugly and contrived.
Who's to say, then, that "organic" fight scenes don't "look cool?" And nowhere in Snyder's response did I hear him say that he was going to shoot the action sequences as he shot them for 300. As a matter of fact, he said that the fight scenes for Watchmen would "probably not as extreme in its use of variable speed as 300." To me, this means that the technique will be far more subtle, if it's used at all.

Kingmob wrote:
I don't even want him to reference 300 when he talks about it. It should be as far away from 300 as possible; those slo-mo sequences were godawful.
I agree with you that the variable speed was overdone and the angles were garish at times. Still, those are cinematography problems. The fight choreography -- how the weapons were used, how the punches were thrown, who died when and how -- that was awesome.

So, the fight scenes will be choreographed by the same guy that did 300. That's great. The cinematographer, on the other hand, will be Larry Fong... who was also the cinematographer for 300.

:shock: *gulp*

Well, here's hoping he won't make the same mistake twice. Fingers crossed.


Where did I say organic fight sequences couldn't look cool? What I meant was, if you go into an action sequence and block it purely on the basis of what would look cool rather than how it works in the location, pace and flow of the scenes preceding, and the film as a whole then it's going to look ugly and contrived (I don't see why we needed that stupid slo-mo crap in 300. Just because the backdrop to the film is hyper-stylised, doesn't mean the action has to be). I remember watching some of the classic Westerns and rarely did it feel like the director was pushing the action scenes out of there natural tempo or...I suppose you could say mis en scene (as an encompassing description) and it still thrills you. In fact a quite mundane action scene can be lifted by a few small movements- not sure which of the Hawks remakes it is (but it stars that teen singing idol), but there's a bit in an action scene where the sidekick comes barrelling out of a building, tossing a rifle to John Wayne before they both fire. There's a great bit of timing and fluidity to the movements and it's all captured in one camera I think. I never look at it and think, damn, if this had been slowed down, and cut down to 20 shots, it would be so much better, but then I guess I haven't been infected by the MTV style of moviemaking.

Some of my favourite action comes from director Michael Mann. He uses an ex SAS guy (possibly plural, I'm not looking it up), and you can see in parts of Collateral and Heat where it feels completely organic to the film, while looking better than hyper stylised stuff. In fact that short sequence where Cruise gets his bag back from the hoods, and shoots from the hip is sublime. It's not exaggerated, it's compact, and Cruise's character is clearly marked out as a badass. It doesn't have to be pretty, it's what gets the job done in the shortest number of movements. I like my action to be rough, brutal and grounded in as much reality as possible, and I think that's what the Watchmen needs to offset the slightly absurd costumes and situation.

_________________
This city is afraid of me. I have seen its true face.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Feb 18, 2008 2:14 pm 
Offline
Tired of Earth.
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2007 11:01 am
Posts: 8035
Location: Clackamas, OR
I hear you, Kingmob. I guess I didn't quite know what you meant by "organic." See, to my mind, the term strictly means "any substance that contains at least one carbon atom."

Anyway, if I'm reading your post correctly, it sounds like you think the action sequences should be shot as if someone in the area just happened to have a camcorder handy. That sounds great to me. The problem is that the graphic novel has several cutaways by virtue of its medium.

Kingmob wrote:
In fact a quite mundane action scene can be lifted by a few small movements- not sure which of the Hawks remakes it is (but it stars that teen singing idol), but there's a bit in an action scene where the sidekick comes barrelling out of a building, tossing a rifle to John Wayne before they both fire. There's a great bit of timing and fluidity to the movements and it's all captured in one camera I think. I never look at it and think, damn, if this had been slowed down, and cut down to 20 shots, it would be so much better, but then I guess I haven't been infected by the MTV style of moviemaking.
Sure, that would look great. Trouble is, in a graphic novel, that scene would have been slowed down and cut into at least four panels (read: shots).

The action sequences in Watchmen are just as fragmented. And maybe it's just me, but if I had a choice between long, single-shot takes of action sequences and going by the book, I would go with the former.

_________________
This is truly a madhouse. And I'm the lunatic running it. I've spent three years wondering if I should be proud or ashamed.

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 19, 2008 11:41 am 
Offline
Gazing into the abyss.
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2007 8:19 am
Posts: 1576
Ok, firstly, consider a dictionary with more than one definition of a word. I don't know if you were being intentionally snarky or just plain stupid, but that kind of crap offends me.

Secondly, I'm not holding up that scene from Collateral as the way I want all future action to be directed in all future films. I'm just using that as a complete contrast to the crap MTV editing that still exists today, and ruins the quality of films imo. 300, as just an example, could have been so much better if they'd got rid of that stupid slo-mo. It was unnecessary artifice.

Films like Seven and Taxi Driver have been raised when discussing a Watchmen film, and that's just the kind of action I'd expect. None of it's pretty per se or stupidly over edited, but because of that it's gritty, and visceral and grounded in some kind of reality. As much as Watchmen deals with people in stupid costumes, this doesn't need to be Marvel action hour where the camera is thrown about like a cheap hooker just because some schmuck of a director thinks more camera moves = more bums on seats.

_________________
This city is afraid of me. I have seen its true face.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 19, 2008 12:22 pm 
Offline
...look on my works, ye mighty, and despair!
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2007 7:58 am
Posts: 2158
Location: Stockholm
I am going to have to say that I liked the choreography and editing in 300. I thought the action scenes were very satisfying.

There are similar scenes shown in Gladiator, but they are dealt with in another way (i.e. in editing). I prefer the appraoch used in 300.

Haven't seen Collateral, but I know Se7en rather well, and am intimately aware of the action in Taxi Driver. Both of these films work so well because they build up a tension. It's the release of that pent-up tension which is portrayed so well.

I have always felt that the key to Watchmen is the ability to be able to build up and then release tension cinematically throughout that film. It's a tough job, but I am not pre-judging a director's work when I haven't seen any bloody rushes or final cutting. That's silly.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 19, 2008 1:45 pm 
Offline
…a puppet who can see the strings.
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 27, 2007 1:42 pm
Posts: 8538
Location: A stronger world
Kingmob wrote:
300, as just an example, could have been so much better if they'd got rid of that stupid slo-mo.


I liked it myself - for me the film would've been worse without it.
However I wouldn't want to see it become a mainstream technique - it'd be great if Snyder did a little (tiny) bit of it as a throwback in his future movies, but I wouldn't want to see anyone steal his thunder. Speaking of which, I wonder what Zack thinks on *eugh* "Meet the Spartans"
Why, you know you're doing good as a movie director when the 'makers of Epic Movie' decide to make a feature length parody of your last film!

_________________
Dr. Brooklyn wrote:
it was tying it into the rape-revenge stories and making light of a verys erious sub-genre that kind of offended me.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 19, 2008 4:04 pm 
Offline
Tired of Earth.
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2007 11:01 am
Posts: 8035
Location: Clackamas, OR
Kingmob wrote:
Ok, firstly, consider a dictionary with more than one definition of a word. I don't know if you were being intentionally snarky or just plain stupid, but that kind of crap offends me.
I was being a college student, majoring in Bioinformatics, commenting about how the modern-day vernacular has bastardized scientific terms such as "organic" ("theory" is another casualty). So... snarky, I guess. Apologies.

Kingmob wrote:
Secondly, I'm not holding up that scene from Collateral as the way I want all future action to be directed in all future films. I'm just using that as a complete contrast to the crap MTV editing that still exists today, and ruins the quality of films imo. 300, as just an example, could have been so much better if they'd got rid of that stupid slo-mo. It was unnecessary artifice.
Okay.

Re: AYB. Based on what I know about Zack Snyder, I think he has a good enough sense of humor to take any so-called "parody" in stride. The bigger question is what Frank Miller thinks about it.

_________________
This is truly a madhouse. And I'm the lunatic running it. I've spent three years wondering if I should be proud or ashamed.

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 54 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Yahoo [Bot] and 4 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
[ Time : 0.109s | 15 Queries | GZIP : Off ]