Read the book but not seen the movie, so no comments on that specifically. But I can parse a complaint that the movie is too dark against your response that the book is equally dark.
First, as defenders of unfaithful adaptations are always saying, films are different from books. The gut impact of something powerful on screen is going to be greater than on the page. Sometimes you need to dial down the adaptation in order to have the same effect.
(Another example: the Blue Dong appears on the page quite a few times, where it has not brought forth the same reaction.)
Second, though (as I've not seen the film) this is only guesswork as far as Watchmen is concerned: relative emphasis. One complaint about the LOTR film: Too many battles. Reply: The book is full of battles too. Reply to reply: Yes, but look at how Tolkien writes them. They're de-emphasized, summarized in formal writing from a distance, no detailed accounts of hacking and stabbing. Put a lot of that in a movie and you've utterly changed the tone.
The fact that Ozymandias' Grand Plan couldn't actually work and was likely to end up making things WORSE after a few months went by. The ONLY possible way to save the situation was to arrest Ozymandias, clear up the events, put him on trial, and hope that some spectacular testimony on what caused this formerly heroic and upright man to become a supervillain might serve some of the same purpose as his harebrained scheme.
I thought it was a more than reasonable adaptation to film of the source and a better-than-good movie too, and what more than that could be expected of it I'd like to know.
I like to think of myself as a fairly open-minded "fanboi", but this movie just didn't ring my bells, even though there was much that I liked about it. I understand and applaud the things that make this particular work "different" from the average "superhero" fare, but that doesn't mean it's to my taste.
Comments 27
Except I found the too-long sex scene comic.
Reply
Reply
First, as defenders of unfaithful adaptations are always saying, films are different from books. The gut impact of something powerful on screen is going to be greater than on the page. Sometimes you need to dial down the adaptation in order to have the same effect.
(Another example: the Blue Dong appears on the page quite a few times, where it has not brought forth the same reaction.)
Second, though (as I've not seen the film) this is only guesswork as far as Watchmen is concerned: relative emphasis. One complaint about the LOTR film: Too many battles. Reply: The book is full of battles too. Reply to reply: Yes, but look at how Tolkien writes them. They're de-emphasized, summarized in formal writing from a distance, no detailed accounts of hacking and stabbing. Put a lot of that in a movie and you've utterly changed the tone.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
I thought it was a more than reasonable adaptation to film of the source and a better-than-good movie too, and what more than that could be expected of it I'd like to know.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment