Watchmen

Aug 10, 2008 00:29

Finished reading it ( Read more... )

comics

Leave a comment

skepoet August 10 2008, 04:46:26 UTC
I am wondering why they took Darren Aronofsky and replaced him with Zack Snyder. Snyder has a great visual eye, but a simplistic ear for narrative. I agree with what Alan Moore told Terry Gilliam, the book is almost unfilmable as it cuts across several generations.

That said, so far I have had little reason to feel negatively about the movie other than ALan Moore's disavowal. He even had a problem with V for Vendetta, which surprised me although the attempts at his League of Extraordinary Gentlemen and his period of Swamp Thing were admittedly awful (but then again Chris Nolan uses a lot of Grant Morrison and Alan Moore's work on Batman over Frank Millers).

Reply

thehefner August 10 2008, 05:00:52 UTC
Actually, it was gonna be Paul Greengrass (UNITED 93, THE BOURNE SUPREMACY/ULTIMATUM) before Snyder, but Paramount declined to make it. It's funny, though, after THE FOUNTAIN, I can easily imagine some people lumping the same criticisms they have for Snyder on Aronofky. They went with Snyder because 300 made an assload of money. At least, I think it'll be as simple as that.

Snyder genuinely dedicated to getting this film right. He's well aware of the pressure on him, and if this film fails, it'll be from lack of talent, not effort.

Reply

skepoet August 10 2008, 05:06:13 UTC
I skipped a director--honestly, I am just amazed its getting made because of the sheer number of botched attempts to make the Watchmen--its chewed director and scriptwriters up and spit them out before. So since Synder is getting this made, it's a feather in his cap regardless of any other considerations: I also think its interesting (and perhaps wise) that the cast is largely unknowns or little knowns.

Reply

thehefner August 10 2008, 05:08:20 UTC
That's one of the many promising "well, maybe Snyder's actually got something here" factors, that he resisted any stars or name actors and instead went for unknowns and character actors, some of whom are Oscar caliber.

Reply

skepoet August 10 2008, 05:10:15 UTC
Also, the trailer does show that he's paid attention to Dave Gibbon's art, even if he has updated it with flashes of images that could have been in 12 Monkeys or Se7en.

Reply

thehefner August 10 2008, 05:13:28 UTC
Yeah, I don't think Snyder knows how not to make something stylistic, but I'm not going to hold that against him like many are, immediately crying "Bah, where's the realism?!" I imagine Greengrass would have made it hardcore realistic, and I'd loved to have seen that, but regardless, I'm anxious to see where Snyder's going with this.

Reply

american_arcane August 10 2008, 05:16:50 UTC
When I saw the trailer, even without having read the story, I was impressed with the visuals.

Now, they just make more sense. :)

Reply

thehefner August 10 2008, 05:20:23 UTC
While he has those music-video-visuals, he's packing the film with stuff these locations and this glorious photo of the Minutemen.

He's certainly earned my interest, that's for sure.

Reply

skepoet August 10 2008, 05:21:43 UTC
I did find it funny that he used a song recorded for a batman soundtrack for that trailer (even if it was remixed or re-recorded down tempo).

Reply

american_arcane August 10 2008, 05:26:37 UTC
They do that all the time with trailer music.

Sometimes, depending on what movies are coming out from what studios and how the trailers are arranged, at a theater you'll get two in a row that use the same music.

That's always good for a laugh for those of us who pay attention to such things. :)

Reply

thehefner August 10 2008, 05:30:14 UTC
Snyder was personally involved with that trailer. He knows what he's doing, and god, I love him for it. Partially because only a handful seem to get it.

Also, funny story about that trailer: the MPAA refused to let him show Adrian's would-be assassin aiming a gun directly at the camera. So Snyder CGI replaced the gun with... wait for it... a walkie-talkie.

Reply

skepoet August 10 2008, 05:35:49 UTC
So Snyder CGI replaced the gun with... wait for it... a walkie-talkie.

Irony is a dish best served at the expense of Spielberg.

Reply

thehefner August 10 2008, 05:28:41 UTC
I kind of fell in love with Snyder in that moment, especially with the fact that he's putting nipples on Ozymandias' suit. He's doing exactly what a WATCHMEN movie needs to be doing: while the comic was a response to superhero comics up to 1985, the movie will be a response to superhero movies up to this point. Coming right on the heels of THE DARK KNIGHT, it's at the exact perfect time for audiences to be receptive to such a story... if it's done right, of course.

Again, far as I'm concerned, Snyder gets A for effort.

Reply

skepoet August 10 2008, 05:29:47 UTC
specially with the fact that he's putting nipples on Ozymandias' suit.

Now that's funny.

Reply

thehefner August 10 2008, 05:31:03 UTC
People were criticizing him about it, asking him if it was on purpose, and his response was, "Uh, duh?"

Reply

skepoet August 10 2008, 05:34:41 UTC
You know, I sometimes forget that pop culture has a memory that short. I mean its like missing the Adam West jokes on Family Guy, but barely a decade ago instead of, say, four.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up