Watchmen

Film talk.

Moderators: Dex, smash

annubius
Posts: 4
Joined: 17 Jul 2008 05:03

Watchmen

Post by annubius » 18 Jul 2008 11:51

Any of you guys Watchmen fans? Zack Snyder is directing the movie adaptation its set to be released next march, anyways the teaser trailer was just posted on apple trailers This has potential to be one of the best comic book movies yet. Check it out http://www.apple.com/trailers/wb/watchmen/

User avatar
Seriously
Posts: 618
Joined: 04 Aug 2006 21:00

Re: Watchmen

Post by Seriously » 18 Jul 2008 13:56

The old thread was weak and ill-named, I endorse this one.

This version of the trailer seems to be larger than the ones on the apple site, though it is true that my silly little computer can't handle hd.


It's a good trailer, but I've still reservations about the movie. Watchmen is just too much to put on the screen, in my opinion.


We'll see.

But at least Dr. Manhattan looks good!
Image

User avatar
Dex
Big Daddy
Posts: 1377
Joined: 04 Aug 2006 13:41
Location: Long Beach, CA
Contact:

Re: Watchmen

Post by Dex » 27 Jul 2008 02:27

Hell yeah Dr. Manhattan looks perfect. I didn't even know what movie trailer I was watching until I saw him, and I was all :shock:

I feel bad for people who see that trailer and go "Huh? Watchmen? Never heard of it". Even more so because the trailer shows nothing related to plot or dialog.

I also lol'ed at your video link, Seriously. It says "Watch The Watchmen Trailer" and my first instinct was to say out loud "Yes, but who watches the Watchmen... and who watches you while you watch the Watchmen trailer?"

Image
“Also, mouth-to-mouth causes AIDS” - Zilch 5/18/2010

User avatar
smash
Posts: 1332
Joined: 06 Aug 2006 03:43
Location: Cloud 6
Contact:

Re: Watchmen

Post by smash » 27 Jul 2008 19:37

This looks pretty good. What about the fact that Alan Moore does NOT endorse this film? He's basically said this story is unable to made into a film. I think specifically some comment that things were done in the comic that can't be done in any other medium. Also he's disillusioned with Hollywood.

User avatar
Dex
Big Daddy
Posts: 1377
Joined: 04 Aug 2006 13:41
Location: Long Beach, CA
Contact:

Re: Watchmen

Post by Dex » 27 Jul 2008 21:54

smash wrote:This looks pretty good. What about the fact that Alan Moore does NOT endorse this film? He's basically said this story is unable to made into a film. I think specifically some comment that things were done in the comic that can't be done in any other medium. Also he's disillusioned with Hollywood.
I noticed on the official website (and IMDB) that it makes absolutely ZERO reference to Alan Moore. Even when they say "based on the graphic novel..." in the credits blurb, they mention the artist.

Alan Moore is such a snob when it comes to anything mainstream.
“Also, mouth-to-mouth causes AIDS” - Zilch 5/18/2010

UncleMao
Posts: 251
Joined: 18 Aug 2006 11:24

Re: Watchmen

Post by UncleMao » 28 Jul 2008 07:31

Not true.

Alan Moore has been quoted that though he will still reserve his opinions on the movie, he thought the trailer was brilliant.

And you have to cut the guy some slack. He did get really cut and disillusioned when Hollywood butchered his League of Extraordinary Gentlemen and had that lawsuit debacle after.

On another note though, Zack Snyder threw his hat into the post Nolan Batman director's chair by saying that he really wants someone to make a film version of Miller's The Dark Knight Returns.

Few days later Miller responded with "I am ready when you are, Zack."

Tell me DC is not creaming their pants right now, given that personally I think it is a 50-50 chance Nolan will NOT return given the massive undertaking it would be to top TDK.

I am all for an older take on Bruce Wayne.

All they need is to stop Daniel Day-Lewis from running away to Italy to make shoes again for another 10 years.

User avatar
smash
Posts: 1332
Joined: 06 Aug 2006 03:43
Location: Cloud 6
Contact:

Re: Watchmen

Post by smash » 28 Jul 2008 08:21

Taken from latest Entertainment Weekly.

That school still includes Watchmen creator Moore, who has disavowed the film because of his general disdain for Hollywood, and his long-standing conflicts with DC Comics, a Warner Bros. sister company. ''Watchmen works perfectly fine as a comic,'' says the British scribe, who has scrubbed his name from the film's credits and abdicated his royalty check to Gibbons. ''There are things we did that could only work in a comic, and were indeed designed to show off the things that comics can do that other media can't.''

And from a specific interview...

ENTERTAINMENT WEEKLY: Don't you have the slightest curiosity about what Watchmen director Zack Snyder is doing with your work?
ALAN MOORE: I would rather not know.

ENTERTAINMENT WEEKLY: Do you think that any good can come of comics movies?
ALAN MOORE: I increasingly fear that nothing good can come of almost any adaptation, and obviously that's sweeping. There are a couple of adaptations that are perhaps as good or better than the original work. But the vast majority of them are pointless.

ENTERTAINMENT WEEKLY: Has Warner Bros. tried to contact you about Watchmen?
ALAN MOORE: No, they've all been told not to. They get the message.... I don't want anyone who works for DC comic books to contact me ever again, or I'll change my number....

User avatar
Dex
Big Daddy
Posts: 1377
Joined: 04 Aug 2006 13:41
Location: Long Beach, CA
Contact:

Re: Watchmen

Post by Dex » 29 Jul 2008 09:13

This is eerily creepy. While written and published in 1986, when the real Doomsday Clock was in actuality, 3 minutes to midnight, a panel in Watchmen reveals the following: A newspaper on top of Adrian Veidt's desk referring to this clock being set at "Five Minutes to Midnight".

In real life, the fact that North Korea successfully tested a nuclear weapon had advanced the clock 2 minutes, making it's current time (2008) 5 minutes to midnight, as of January 17th 2007. :waugh:

Sed quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
“Also, mouth-to-mouth causes AIDS” - Zilch 5/18/2010

User avatar
smash
Posts: 1332
Joined: 06 Aug 2006 03:43
Location: Cloud 6
Contact:

Re: Watchmen

Post by smash » 29 Jul 2008 19:15

Dex wrote:This is eerily creepy. While written and published in 1986, when the real Doomsday Clock was in actuality, 3 minutes to midnight, a panel in Watchmen reveals the following: A newspaper on top of Adrian Veidt's desk referring to this clock being set at "Five Minutes to Midnight".

In real life, the fact that North Korea successfully tested a nuclear weapon had advanced the clock 2 minutes, making it's current time (2008) 5 minutes to midnight, as of January 17th 2007. :waugh:

Sed quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
I thought they advanced the clock the other way? I thought another nuclear superpower meant closer to doomsday, I.e. midnight?

User avatar
AngelBaby
little. yellow. feisty.
Posts: 1880
Joined: 07 Aug 2006 07:35
Location: Cloud 9
Contact:

Re: Watchmen

Post by AngelBaby » 30 Jul 2008 00:19

Well, when Watchmen was published the clock was indeed 3 minutes until midnight, but in the years after it moved as far back as 17 minutes until midnight (1991 when the US and USSR signed the START I Treaty). Ever since, it's been creeping slowly back towards Armageddon, with the most recent move coming in 2007 after North Korea's atomic test. Imagine where it will go if Iran successfully builds and detonates a bomb. :ph34r:

FUN FACT: The eighth episode of the series Heroes is titled "Seven Minutes to Midnight", which was the time on the clock at the release of the episode. Also, the villain Sylar wears a watch that stopped at seven minutes to midnight. The series was filmed and began to air prior to the 2007 adjustment of the Doomsday clock, which until then did indeed read seven minutes to midnight.

User avatar
Dex
Big Daddy
Posts: 1377
Joined: 04 Aug 2006 13:41
Location: Long Beach, CA
Contact:

Re: Watchmen

Post by Dex » 30 Jul 2008 03:40

AngelBaby wrote:Well, when Watchmen was published the clock was indeed 3 minutes until midnight, but in the years after it moved as far back as 17 minutes until midnight (1991 when the US and USSR signed the START I Treaty). Ever since, it's been creeping slowly back towards Armageddon, with the most recent move coming in 2007 after North Korea's atomic test. Imagine where it will go if Iran successfully builds and detonates a bomb. :ph34r:

FUN FACT: The eighth episode of the series Heroes is titled "Seven Minutes to Midnight", which was the time on the clock at the release of the episode. Also, the villain Sylar wears a watch that stopped at seven minutes to midnight. The series was filmed and began to air prior to the 2007 adjustment of the Doomsday clock, which until then did indeed read seven minutes to midnight.
Thank you for clearing that up. Old is too lazy to look things up.

Image
“Also, mouth-to-mouth causes AIDS” - Zilch 5/18/2010

User avatar
smash
Posts: 1332
Joined: 06 Aug 2006 03:43
Location: Cloud 6
Contact:

Re: Watchmen

Post by smash » 30 Jul 2008 07:10

No sir, your terse explanation implied confusing elements.

You state it was 3 minutes to midnight in 1986 (85, whenever watchmen was made).
Then you said recently the clock was just moved up 2 minutes.
Now you say the clock is at 5 minutes to midnight.
3+2=5. You omitted that the clock was actually at 7 minutes in 2007.

User avatar
AngelBaby
little. yellow. feisty.
Posts: 1880
Joined: 07 Aug 2006 07:35
Location: Cloud 9
Contact:

Re: Watchmen

Post by AngelBaby » 30 Jul 2008 07:56

Someone needs to do the math.

:box:

Hence my question about 'don't they advance the clock the other way?'

User avatar
Dex
Big Daddy
Posts: 1377
Joined: 04 Aug 2006 13:41
Location: Long Beach, CA
Contact:

Re: Watchmen

Post by Dex » 24 Jan 2009 05:57

“Also, mouth-to-mouth causes AIDS” - Zilch 5/18/2010

User avatar
Seriously
Posts: 618
Joined: 04 Aug 2006 21:00

Re: Watchmen

Post by Seriously » 08 Mar 2009 04:11

I saw the movie: It is perfectly acceptable!


They took some things out, but they had to, and while they may have changed some things, they didn't change the fact that they happened a little over a half-hour ago. I find the acting with the notable exception of the President of the United States to be above par, the movie bringing me to empahize more with Laurie Juspeczyk than I did when I read it.

Also if you haven't read the comic book, just know that you're going to see a large CGI cat just sort of out of left field. Just ignore it, it is in there to pacify a very special certain sort of person. There's no reason for said feline to be in the movie, but on the bright side it doesn't look like they spent too much money on her.
Image

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest