WatchmenComicMovie.com Forum

OK... so I watched the movie. I watched the DF and Under The Hood. I watched the motion comic. Overall, I have a rather good feel for the franchise. I know... I know... I haven't read the actual book. But how different can it be from the Motion Comic? I doubt it's different enough to sway my view.

Right now I feel that the Movie was actually better than the book. I did enjoy all the side elements (news stand) and all the supporting characters. But not having them in the movie did not hurt it. I thought the movie changed and cut the right things. I do think that Mason's death should've been in it, and I'm sure it will be in the final DVD release. Outside of that, I thought the movie did a better job then the book.

I knew nothing about Watchmen. Movie... Book... side material... I was introduced to all of that just in the last 3-4 weeks. So I'm coming in without any pre-determined mind sets of what the movie "should-be". I saw the movie first and then checked out the source material. And based on what I saw, I felt the movie was more enjoyable.

no.

_________________
@RealSlimCAvery

Why not just read the book before passing judgement?

_________________

I say this with all certainty. NOBODY PREFERS THE MOVIE TO THE BOOK. You HAVEN'T read the book, you've watched the motion comic.

Everyone who has read the BOOK knows it's better than the movie. Period. End of discussion.

_________________
Mexicano Al Grito De Guerra

I like them pretty equal. I liked the movie 'coz of the mostly accurate visual it gave me.
I haven't seen the motion comic, I haven't watched Under the Hood.

_________________
"One fine day in the middle of the night
Two dead boys got up to fight
Back to back they faced each other
Drew their swords and shot each other."

_________________
"HEY, man, I ain't buyin' THIS! Ripoff story ain't go no ENDIN'!"

^well said

_________________
Mexicano Al Grito De Guerra

Read the book. The way the pages fit together makes a whole different experience.

_________________
"And all the politicians and whores will look up and shout "Save Us!" and I'll look down and whisper "No". "

Some of you are being dicks about this.
She just wasn't a fan of Watchmen before the film.
I think this kind of belongs in "non-fan reaction of Watchmen" though.

_________________

How so? That's my honest, unbiased response. The original post states that this person thought that one version was better than the other, without getting to know the book. This could just as easily be paired with that recent thread asking us to detail the differences between the book and the movie for someone who had no intention of reading the book.

(edit: Mmm, yeah, that was rude, I'll admit it!)

_________________
"HEY, man, I ain't buyin' THIS! Ripoff story ain't go no ENDIN'!"

I read the book before seeing the movie. Loved them both (book edged out the movie though). To the original poster, I recommend you take some time and read the book. And don't rush through it, I think you'll feel it was worth it.

_________________
Biosynth. Rorschach Fangirl.
http://rorschachsjournal99.blogspot.com/
http://gothicdragon99.blogspot.com/

The movie would have had to have been the best one ever made to outdo its source. That is all I have to say on this matter.

_________________

The movie would also have to be over 5 hrs long.

With that said there are some elements of the story I liked better in the movie, but overall the comic is much better than the film.

And that's all you need to say. Very well put.

_________________
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.

I read the book before the movie came out, loved it, painted a 4 foot by 3 foot homage inspired by it (black freighter ending + Dan and laurie pre coitus after the squid goes off) read the book again after seeing the movie, another enjoyable read. To me they were both really good> In many ways I think it's easier to put together a book like watchmen than it is to make a movie like watchmen. (actually I know it is because a few guys over the course of a year did it, whereas the movie took 3 years and a horde of people to get onto screen + the expenditure of cred by Snyder to con the studio into doing it) I really want to see the director's cut before I give my final emphasis on this, but for me I'm likely to watch the movie far more times than I'll reread the book, also it's my favorite movie now and while the GN is my favorite Gn now as well, I've read very few Gn's vs thousands of movies, so I think for the moment I'll call it a tie. (the uppity part of my wants to scoff and say of course I prefer the Gn, but really the experience watching the movie is magical for me and I just want to have gay sex with it all spring break long) Anyhow this question is what do you prefer, not which do you think is better, so it's somewhat ambiguous.

I read the book several years ago.

Then I saw the film.

Then I read the book again.

I have to admit there are a couple of elements that I feel work better in the film
(i.e. Having Dr Manhattan on the TV behind Dan and Laurie when they are trying to get it on and it doesn't happen for Dan. I though that worked even better than having Ozymandias there
and I found Rorschach's death very powerful in the movie. It's powerful in the GN too but I think that last areal shot just edges it out. That and the look on Dan's face. Yeah, I know he's not meant to be there but I liked the fact he was.)

BUT the film just can't approach the book for complexity, the juxtaposition of ideas, background colour and content that could never make it into a film.

Plus stuff that gives clues to character motivation is lost and you should see how different Laurie is in the book!
Not to mention the news stand scenes and The Black Freighter.



Oh hells yeah. That was my first thought on leaving the theatre and I knew it didn't make it. I gives a valiant effort but all time best graphic novel does not equal best film here.

I know from your other thread you are interested in reading the book. Take the plunge. I really don't think one can really appreciate Watchmen from the film alone.
There is too much that simply isn't there.

_________________
This is serious

i think that is a flaw to the motion picture medium rather than this particular movie

_________________
We're all actors, Laurie. I'm just an actor who read the script.

I shouldn't say anything, since you already know. But I'm having some deja vu here. One of my little brothers was adamant that the Leven Thumps series is better than Harry Potter, despite the fact that he has never cracked open the cover on a Harry Potter book. I asked him how he knew that for sure when he didn't know anything about what he was comparing Leven Thumps to. You have watched the motion comic and seen the movie, so yeah, you have a pretty good feel for the franchise. But what you're really saying is that you thought the movie was more enjoyable than the motion comic. I bet a lot of people would agree with you. I couldn't say, since I haven't seen the motion comic. Regardless of what is or isn't missing in the motion comic, I think watching real people on a screen, animations moving with one guy doing all the voices, and reading a book are all very different when it comes to how you respond to a story. Personally, I prefer books in most cases, because I like to have the most complete version of the story possible. I prefer the book in Watchmen's case too, even though I loved the movie. Maybe you are just the type of person to prefer movies over books. Nothing wrong with that. My oldest brother does. Still, I just don't think you can compare the actual comic to the movie without having read it.



Technically, you haven't checked out the source material unless you've read the comic, since that is the source of both the movie and motion comic. Maybe you enjoyed the movie so much because you did go into it without a pre-determined mind set of what it should've been. I'm not going to rag on you for liking the movie better because I'm just glad you liked it enough to bother finding a fan site about Watchmen on the internet and buying the motion comic in the first place. The Watchmen comic is supposed to make you think about it when you're finished, and if the movie made you want to continue on a little Watchmen journey after it was over, then color me pleased. But your question was whether anyone else liked the movie better, and answering for myself, it's gotta be no.

And I can't help but say you should read the book, especially if you liked the movie. I know you've said before that you have never been a fan of the comic medium, but like I said then, maybe Watchmen would be an exception to the rule. It's not like you have to buy it if you feel like you wouldn't like it and it would be a waste of money. Read the first chapter standing in the bookstore or something to see if you get into it. That's how I see if I'm interested in most books I buy anyway

I didn't mention it as a flaw of the movie but, rather, a reason to read the book, to get that stuff because it's the only place to get it.
I know that stuff could never be in a film and I mean no criticism the Watchmen film for leaving it out.

_________________
This is serious

Loved both, prefer the book.

I haven't seen the motion comics, so I can't make a valid comparison, but the page structure in the Graphic Novel is mind-blowing. You can't read it one panel at a time - most pages have to be taken as a whole. It's that rich interweaving of message and medium that I find so enthralling. The fact that each page is almost self-contained, that turning the page often provides new illumination on what you've just read, despite being a new and different scene. It blows my mind, really.



I'm sure an equivalent could be done in motion pictures, but it would require quite a radical rethinking of how the material was presented. The GN broke new ground in how comics were structured: it might require a similar rethink of how movies are presented. Or are there already movies that play around with the movie medium? Citizen Kane did, I suppose, being the first to really treat a movie as a movie, and not just a film of a play (film buffs - correct me if I'm wrong).



Having just harped on about the greatness of the book, I still feel bound to say: surely, this is entirely subjective? Individual's preferences for a given medium are bound to colour their experience of the product. If someone enjoys watching movies more than they enjoy reading comics, then they might well enjoy the movie more than the book. Alan Moore argued that Watchmen was intended to be read curled up on your sofa with a cup of coffee (or words to that effect), but some people just don't like taking their information in that way. The book may be a better book than the film is a film (if that makes sense), but if you might still prefer the film to the book.

_________________
I shall go and tell the indestructible man that someone intends to murder him.