WatchmenComicMovie.com Forum


Talk about the Watchmen comic book mini-series and film
It is currently Sat Dec 16, 2017 9:12 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 30 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon Mar 25, 2013 11:04 pm 
Offline
...you're locked in here with me!
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 7:53 pm
Posts: 10199
ROR-SHACK wrote:
My quote continued with "Still gets far though."

I still think it's a pretty good film. It just didn't achieve everything it was trying to. If it did, it would be great. As it is... just interesting.


Which version are you judging ?

I would honestly put The Director's Cut as one of the best superhero films ever made.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 26, 2013 3:22 am 
Offline
New Frontiersman
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2008 3:11 pm
Posts: 373
ROR-SHACK wrote:
My quote continued with "Still gets far though."

I still think it's a pretty good film. It just didn't achieve everything it was trying to. If it did, it would be great. As it is... just interesting.


You certainly seem to have downgraded your opinion of the film as time passes - just not as quickly as I did!

It remains a difficult film for a fan of the GN to view objectively, I think. However, the frustrating fact about it (IMO) is that those people who saw it with no previous knowledge of the source missed out on many of the themes and ideas of the GN because ZS failed to portray them clearly on screen.

I haven't seen the film in about 3 years now, but my curiosity is beginning to pique again. I wonder if I am detached enough from it and the GN to give it another viewing now?

Part of the problem for me was that I OD'd on the GN in the months prior to the film being released. Was that 'unfair'? I don't know, but I can usually live with departures from the source if it is done for cinematic/story-telling reasons I can understand the justification for (the LOTR trilogy). The problem with 'Watchmen' for me wasn't so much the departures and ommissions (apart from the squid), but that many of the themes the GN explored were lost by ZS's ham-fisted handling of certain aspects.

Looking back, I think it irritates me even more than it first did that all the main vigilante characters - to varying degrees - have super-powers, and were played 'straight', as traditional super-heroes with real-world problems. It completely changes a main theme of the film and makes it less interesting right from the word "Go", for me.

_________________
(ø‹›≈≈

"You Can't Help Smiling If You've Bitten Off Your Own Lips."

http://thegq2.co.uk/forum/index.php


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 26, 2013 3:36 am 
Offline
New Frontiersman
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2008 3:11 pm
Posts: 373
feliciano182 wrote:
ROR-SHACK wrote:
My quote continued with "Still gets far though."

I still think it's a pretty good film. It just didn't achieve everything it was trying to. If it did, it would be great. As it is... just interesting.


Which version are you judging ?

I would honestly put The Director's Cut as one of the best superhero films ever made.


That's also my issue; it's not a 'superhero' film - or it shouldn't have been - in the traditional sense. You can't judge it against things like "Avengers" or Nolan's Batman trilogy, even though TDK is a good example of what a 'Watchmen' film should have been, in many aspects. I still maintain that elements of Kick-Ass succeeded where Watchmen failed.

I'd say 'Watchmen' is one of the most interesting COMIC book movies ever made. The best SUPERHERO film ever made (IMO) is Superman 2, or The Avengers.

_________________
(ø‹›≈≈

"You Can't Help Smiling If You've Bitten Off Your Own Lips."

http://thegq2.co.uk/forum/index.php


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 26, 2013 1:00 pm 
Offline
...you're locked in here with me!
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 7:53 pm
Posts: 10199
Satan's Slut wrote:
That's also my issue; it's not a 'superhero' film - or it shouldn't have been - in the traditional sense. You can't judge it against things like "Avengers" or Nolan's Batman trilogy, even though TDK is a good example of what a 'Watchmen' film should have been, in many aspects. I still maintain that elements of Kick-Ass succeeded where Watchmen failed.


I don't understand your first point, I mean, obviously Watchmen isn't a traditional superhero comic book story..............but it is a superhero comic book story, trope subvertion, twists and character studies aside.

Satan's Slut wrote:
I still maintain that elements of Kick-Ass succeeded where Watchmen failed.


How ? By dumping the message not even halfway through the film :lol: ?

Now that is actually a greatly overrated superhero movie right there.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 27, 2013 5:52 am 
Offline
New Frontiersman
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2008 3:11 pm
Posts: 373
feliciano182 wrote:
Satan's Slut wrote:
That's also my issue; it's not a 'superhero' film - or it shouldn't have been - in the traditional sense. You can't judge it against things like "Avengers" or Nolan's Batman trilogy, even though TDK is a good example of what a 'Watchmen' film should have been, in many aspects. I still maintain that elements of Kick-Ass succeeded where Watchmen failed.


I don't understand your first point, I mean, obviously Watchmen isn't a traditional superhero comic book story..............but it is a superhero comic book story, trope subvertion, twists and character studies aside.


It's NOT a 'superhero' story, and the characters in the GN are not portrayed as 'superheroes'; that's not just my point, but THE point. Even Doctor Manhattan - while posessing superhuman powers - is not portrayed anywhere LIKE a traditional 'superhero' in the GN.

feliciano182 wrote:
Satan's Slut wrote:
I still maintain that elements of Kick-Ass succeeded where Watchmen failed.


How ? By dumping the message not even halfway through the film :lol: ?


Which is why I said 'elements of Kick-Ass succeeded where Watchmen failed'.

Kick-Ass' first outing against the car thieves provided more effective deconstruction of traditional superheroes in that one scene than ZS's Watchmen managed in its entire running time, IMO.

_________________
(ø‹›≈≈

"You Can't Help Smiling If You've Bitten Off Your Own Lips."

http://thegq2.co.uk/forum/index.php


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 27, 2013 6:27 pm 
Offline
...you're locked in here with me!
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 7:53 pm
Posts: 10199
Satan's Slut wrote:
It's NOT a 'superhero' story, and the characters in the GN are not portrayed as 'superheroes'; that's not just my point, but THE point. Even Doctor Manhattan - while posessing superhuman powers - is not portrayed anywhere LIKE a traditional 'superhero' in the GN.


Maybe this is an issue of semantics and subtext getting in the way, but to me, this has always been a deconstructed, subverted superhero story, to say otherwise seems to me like a rigid categorization of what the genre encompasses.

Satan's Slut wrote:
Kick-Ass' first outing against the car thieves provided more effective deconstruction of traditional superheroes in that one scene than ZS's Watchmen managed in its entire running time, IMO.


How ? Even if you find faults within the performances of the actors, which generally were all great (Ackerman being the notable exception) or Zack Snyder's directing, how is any part of the movie not sending the same message as it did in the comic book ? You can criticize the structural issues, the problem with the medium (as Alan Moore has said), but in script, this movie is inmensely similar to the comic book.

Even the ending, the only considerable grand change, was lauded by many people, personally I prefer the original, but what Zack & crew came up with was pretty incredible.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 28, 2013 4:26 am 
Offline
New Frontiersman
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2008 3:11 pm
Posts: 373
feliciano182 wrote:
Satan's Slut wrote:
It's NOT a 'superhero' story, and the characters in the GN are not portrayed as 'superheroes'; that's not just my point, but THE point. Even Doctor Manhattan - while posessing superhuman powers - is not portrayed anywhere LIKE a traditional 'superhero' in the GN.


Maybe this is an issue of semantics and subtext getting in the way, but to me, this has always been a deconstructed, subverted superhero story, to say otherwise seems to me like a rigid categorization of what the genre encompasses.


One of the main themes of Watchmen (GN) was exploring what would happen if ordinary people with no 'super powers' became 'masked vigilantes', or 'costumed adventurers', and how the arrival of Dr Manhattan would change them, and the world. The 'Superhero' genre has very clearly defined tropes - check the Wikipedia page - and the Watchmen GN subverted nearly all of them; especially by showing what would happen in the real world if ordinary people tried to become 'superheroes'.

In ZS's Watchmen we see the main characters punching through concrete; being thrown into concrete walls hard enough to smash chunks out of them, and get up; making impossible leaps/jumps/drops with no adverse effects where there should be, and many other 'super-powered' feats. None of this is played for satire, and runs completely against the message of the GN. The DC of the film even adds in 'Magic Disappearing Rorschach', for no reason whatsoever.

feliciano182 wrote:
Satan's Slut wrote:
Kick-Ass' first outing against the car thieves provided more effective deconstruction of traditional superheroes in that one scene than ZS's Watchmen managed in its entire running time, IMO.


How ? Even if you find faults within the performances of the actors, which generally were all great (Ackerman being the notable exception) or Zack Snyder's directing, how is any part of the movie not sending the same message as it did in the comic book ? You can criticize the structural issues, the problem with the medium (as Alan Moore has said), but in script, this movie is inmensely similar to the comic book.

Even the ending, the only considerable grand change, was lauded by many people, personally I prefer the original, but what Zack & crew came up with was pretty incredible.


The scene I mention in Kick-Ass has added punch owing to the fact that the film is set up as having strong elements of comedy; from the moment the scene with the car-thieves begins, the comedy is suddenly gone, and events take a brutal turn. In complete contrast with what's gone before we are shown a realistic and brutal fight, and a shocking stabbing; the film leaves us in no doubt whatsoever what would happen if an ordinary person tried to put on a silly suit and fight crime in the real world.

Watchmen (the GN) is much more subtle about showing us this, but it does show us time and time again that these are real people, and there are real-world consequences to their actions - both large and small.

The Watchmen film essentially muddies the messages and gives us 'superheroes' with powers beyond the average mortal but with real-world problems, which might have been OK had the same thing not already been done in 'Hancock' and 'The Incredibles'.

Rorschach's 'Rumrunner Leap' in the film serves as one of the greatest examples of this, and clearly demonstrates that ZS simply did not get many elements of the GN.

_________________
(ø‹›≈≈

"You Can't Help Smiling If You've Bitten Off Your Own Lips."

http://thegq2.co.uk/forum/index.php


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 28, 2013 11:38 am 
Offline
...you're locked in here with me!
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 7:53 pm
Posts: 10199
Satan's Slut wrote:
One of the main themes of Watchmen (GN) was exploring what would happen if ordinary people with no 'super powers' became 'masked vigilantes', or 'costumed adventurers', and how the arrival of Dr Manhattan would change them, and the world. The 'Superhero' genre has very clearly defined tropes - check the Wikipedia page - and the Watchmen GN subverted nearly all of them; especially by showing what would happen in the real world if ordinary people tried to become 'superheroes'.


Uhm, I've said this before myself, and thus concluded that it's not a typical superhero story.

I think even Alan Moore said something about how the "Tales Of The Black Freighter" was something he thought about while taking in account the kind of world were living in at the time of Watchmen, if you have superheroes everywhere, then what would comics be about ? Not superheroes.

Satan's Slut wrote:
In ZS's Watchmen we see the main characters punching through concrete; being thrown into concrete walls hard enough to smash chunks out of them, and get up; making impossible leaps/jumps/drops with no adverse effects where there should be, and many other 'super-powered' feats. None of this is played for satire, and runs completely against the message of the GN. The DC of the film even adds in 'Magic Disappearing Rorschach', for no reason whatsoever.


You know, I remember a certain character catching a bullet in the comic, not to mention one who invented a hovering vehicle capable of carrying several people, and another one who single-handedly stopped a city riot.

Though I can see where you're coming from, it is still clear that what we see in the movie is just meant to be embellishment, people still left the theater concluding that none of the characters in the movie were super-powered by any means with the exception of Dr. Manhattan, if we were to assert that people that can land with their backs on their walls intact in every movie we see are superpowered beings, then all Jean Claude Van Damme movies have basically been tame science fiction.

Even then, how many action scenes in total are in this movie ? Ver few, and most of them quite short, the film is not affected by any of them, not a single event is affected by the stylization (sp) of these scenes.

Satan's Slut wrote:
The scene I mention in Kick-Ass has added punch owing to the fact that the film is set up as having strong elements of comedy; from the moment the scene with the car-thieves begins, the comedy is suddenly gone, and events take a brutal turn. In complete contrast with what's gone before we are shown a realistic and brutal fight, and a shocking stabbing; the film leaves us in no doubt whatsoever what would happen if an ordinary person tried to put on a silly suit and fight crime in the real world.


I could perfectly agree if the movie didn't fall flat on it's face not half an hour after.

Satan's Slut wrote:
Watchmen (the GN) is much more subtle about showing us this, but it does show us time and time again that these are real people, and there are real-world consequences to their actions - both large and small.


All of which was still in the movie, Rorschach was still driven insane by his crusade against crime, the first Nite-Owl was still brutally murdered by gang members, Laurie still was an inmature girl, and Ozymandias, with all his resources and powers, decided genocide was the solution to genocide.

Satan's Slut wrote:
Rorschach's 'Rumrunner Leap' in the film serves as one of the greatest examples of this, and clearly demonstrates that ZS simply did not get many elements of the GN.


"Rumrunner Leap" ? What ?

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 28, 2013 12:14 pm 
Offline
Oh how the ghost of you clings...
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 28, 2008 6:20 pm
Posts: 789
Location: United States
As always, unless otherwise specified, I am judging the Director's Cut. As a stand-alone film, it's a good interesting film but falls short of greatness. I am looking at it as if the graphic novel does not exist. Some performances are kind of weak, and the ending lacks an emotional punch. Millions of people die, but it doesn't really feel like it.

I don't think I'm downgrading my opinion of the film. I think I've just had to spend a lot of time on this forum talking to fans who think it's utter crap. I think Snyder deserves respect for what he did, because it's amazing the movie doesn't collapse under the weight of everything. It's a coherent story with some interesting themes. Weather you like his decisions or not, I think you have to admire the guy for making brave choices, like telling a non-linear story, Doc's nudity, and the running time.

It seems like I'm one of the few fans on here who thinks the movie is just good.... not a masterpiece or a mess. It definitely has greatness in it, but it also has some big flaws.

_________________
"Computer unnecessary."


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 03, 2013 6:24 am 
Offline
New Frontiersman
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2008 3:11 pm
Posts: 373
feliciano182 wrote:
Satan's Slut wrote:
One of the main themes of Watchmen (GN) was exploring what would happen if ordinary people with no 'super powers' became 'masked vigilantes', or 'costumed adventurers', and how the arrival of Dr Manhattan would change them, and the world. The 'Superhero' genre has very clearly defined tropes - check the Wikipedia page - and the Watchmen GN subverted nearly all of them; especially by showing what would happen in the real world if ordinary people tried to become 'superheroes'.


Uhm, I've said this before myself, and thus concluded that it's not a typical superhero story.


The GN certainly isn't, no. That's the point; the only person in the story who has any kind of superpower is Doctor Manhattan, and even he is far from a traditional superhero. Nobody in the GN is a superhero in any sense of the word.

feliciano182 wrote:
I think even Alan Moore said something about how the "Tales Of The Black Freighter" was something he thought about while taking in account the kind of world were living in at the time of Watchmen, if you have superheroes everywhere, then what would comics be about ? Not superheroes.


I've never seen that quote before. However, the word 'superhero' is never used once in the GN, and none of the characters - bar Dr Manhattan - have superpowers; unlike the film.

feliciano182 wrote:
Satan's Slut wrote:
In ZS's Watchmen we see the main characters punching through concrete; being thrown into concrete walls hard enough to smash chunks out of them, and get up; making impossible leaps/jumps/drops with no adverse effects where there should be, and many other 'super-powered' feats. None of this is played for satire, and runs completely against the message of the GN. The DC of the film even adds in 'Magic Disappearing Rorschach', for no reason whatsoever.


You know, I remember a certain character catching a bullet in the comic, not to mention one who invented a hovering vehicle capable of carrying several people, and another one who single-handedly stopped a city riot.


The bullet catch - while ultimately unrealistic in the real world - is made much more plausible in the Watchmen universe of the GN. Veidt is constantly being shown as the absolute pinnacle of the human physical specimen, however, even he says he wasn't sure he could do it, and he does not escape unscathed - we are cleverly primed to suspend our disbelief just enough to give the bullet catch a pass.

The Owl Ship - IIRC - is just another example of 'Manhattan Tech', which demonstrates how Dr Manhattan has influenced the world, along with viable electric cars and the fabric Rorschach's mask is made from.

Who stops a city riot single-handed?

feliciano182 wrote:
Though I can see where you're coming from, it is still clear that what we see in the movie is just meant to be embellishment, people still left the theater concluding that none of the characters in the movie were super-powered by any means with the exception of Dr. Manhattan, if we were to assert that people that can land with their backs on their walls intact in every movie we see are superpowered beings, then all Jean Claude Van Damme movies have basically been tame science fiction.

Even then, how many action scenes in total are in this movie ? Ver few, and most of them quite short, the film is not affected by any of them, not a single event is affected by the stylization (sp) of these scenes.


That's the problem - in my experience, most of the people I know who haven't read the GN thought the characters all had powers, then weren't sure - they left confused.

The difference with JCVD movies is that none are based on one of the most acclaimed GNs of all-time, which didn't set up the main characters as having any kind of superpowers. You can expect a certain level of excess from a JCVD film. Having said that, I cannot recall any of his films in which the laws of physics are blatantly disregarded.

Of the 4 films I know of that feature someone punching through a solid wall, or concrete, 3 of them have explanations, and one doesn't. Terminator 2 - he's a friggin' Terminator; The Matrix - it's a computer simulation; Robocop - he's friggin' Robocop; Watchmen; ermmmm.... He's a government employed masked vigilante with no superpowers... How does he punch a chunk out of a concrete pillar?

feliciano182 wrote:
Satan's Slut wrote:
The scene I mention in Kick-Ass has added punch owing to the fact that the film is set up as having strong elements of comedy; from the moment the scene with the car-thieves begins, the comedy is suddenly gone, and events take a brutal turn. In complete contrast with what's gone before we are shown a realistic and brutal fight, and a shocking stabbing; the film leaves us in no doubt whatsoever what would happen if an ordinary person tried to put on a silly suit and fight crime in the real world.


I could perfectly agree if the movie didn't fall flat on it's face not half an hour after.


Which is why I said 'elements' of it.

feliciano182 wrote:
Satan's Slut wrote:
Watchmen (the GN) is much more subtle about showing us this, but it does show us time and time again that these are real people, and there are real-world consequences to their actions - both large and small.


All of which was still in the movie, Rorschach was still driven insane by his crusade against crime, the first Nite-Owl was still brutally murdered by gang members, Laurie still was an inmature girl, and Ozymandias, with all his resources and powers, decided genocide was the solution to genocide.


Indeed, but the message is lessened when it becomes 'our superpowered betters have problems', instead of exploring what makes ordinary people think they can be 'superheroes' and try and sort out humanity's problems. Because the film portrays these people as having super abilities, the audience does not question their right to appoint themselves above 'us' as judge, jury and executioner, because it is what is expected of a superpowered human; get bitten by a radioactive spider and develop powers? Become a superhero. Land on Earth and find out that you have extraordinary powers because you're an alien? Become a superhero.

Snyder misses the chance to challenge the audience to ask themselves questions like "Why are they doing this? What gives them the right?"

feliciano182 wrote:
Satan's Slut wrote:
Rorschach's 'Rumrunner Leap' in the film serves as one of the greatest examples of this, and clearly demonstrates that ZS simply did not get many elements of the GN.


"Rumrunner Leap" ? What ?


Seriously? There's a whole thread on it in this forum...

_________________
(ø‹›≈≈

"You Can't Help Smiling If You've Bitten Off Your Own Lips."

http://thegq2.co.uk/forum/index.php


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 30 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 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:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
[ Time : 0.090s | 11 Queries | GZIP : Off ]