Comics. (Not the comedians) — Page 4

xhonzi said:

What's your beef?

xhonzi said:

ooooooooooooooookay.....

Actual (literal) lol.

RedFive said:

xhonzi said:

CP3S said:

Tyrphanax said:

Watchmen was okay, but then I only ever saw the movie.

Then you've experienced Watchmen about as much as someone has experienced Batman by only watching the Joel Schumacher films.

I thought that Watchmen was a pretty decent adaptation.  Just this morning I heard someone else dismissing it. 

I think the movie ending may actually (literally) be my preferred ending... though I'm still thinking about that.

What's your beef?

I have to agree with 3PX here, but kinda xhonzi as well.  While I do feel that the movie was a good interpretation of the book, it doesn't come close to the depth of the original.  Maybe the Batman analogy was a little harsh, but I think a good analogy would be The Lord of the Rings - the movies were amazing, but they paled in comparison to the deep mythology and legend that were presented in the book.

With Watchmen the comic, every frame is carefully crafted to tell the story with art along with words, and the way the images mirror what is being said is remarkable.  You don't see it often in comics, and certainly not done so well, and it's something you can't really mimic in a film.  It really elevates the medium of comics to more than I ever expected out of them.

Another thing the movie fell short on was the ultimate themes of the book.  There was so much grey in Watchmen, so much ambiguity and confusion.  It showed the dark side of heroes - how little power they actually have, what it would take to really make a difference, and what type of person it would take to do so (not to mention the type who would challenge that person).   It's a huge moral quagmire, and I don't think the movie portrayed that part of the story to it's fullest.  And I think this is the whole heart of the story, so it really left me cold when I saw it in theaters for the first time.

Pretty much all these things said by RedFive sum up how I feel the movie can't even begin to compare to the book.

To me, Watchmen wasn't so much about the story, but about the way the story was told. I absolutely loved it. While the movie tells mostly the same story and does stay pretty faithful to the comic, it just doesn't capture ANY of the things that I felt made the comic great.

And I think this is the whole heart of the story, so it really left me cold when I saw it in theaters for the first time.

Couldn't agree more with those words. Which is why I don't think my Joel Schumacher Batman comparison was that far off, someone might really like Batman Forever, it portrays Batman solving puzzles and kicking ass, what else is Batman beyond that? But it doesn't demonstrate anything that really makes Batman Batman, in the same way Zack Snyder's Watchmen failed to demonstrate the things that made Watchmen Watchmen. Without its themes, it was just a silly generic superhero story, with over the top goofy costumes and names. I mean seriously, Nightowl? On his own without the philosophical depths of the comic, he is just a really lousy cheap Batman ripoff.

An example of the crappiness of the movie: Most of the people I know who watched the movie without ever reading the book immediately pegged Ozymandias as the villain from his very first scene. And why not? He somehow comes off as a stereotypical villain in the film, complete with cheesy accent. He is portrayed so that the minute you see him you think this guy is up to no good. In the books he is setup as the least questionable of the lot. For all of the horrible ugly flaws of rest of the heroes, Ozy is easily the one who comes off as the most morally upright, which makes the ending all that much more of a sock to the gut; and even leaves you to ponder that his actions might have been right. 

Also I still can't buy any of the defenses for the changed ending other than the lazy "it was easier". Making the world believe Dr. Manhattan was the threat was silly. Everyone has seen his power, who would think the world stood a chance against him, even if they did unite? The alien threat makes far more sense as an attempt to end the cold war and bring the world together.

All that said, I did enjoy the movie, but it really was just an empty shell of the book. I don't think I would have liked the movie at all if I didn't already love the book. It IS the cheesy generic brand superhero story Watchmen (the comic) could have been had it lacked the depth that made it good in the first place.

xhonzi said:

I thought that Watchmen was a pretty decent adaptation.  Just this morning I heard someone else dismissing it. 

I think the movie ending may actually (literally) be my preferred ending... though I'm still thinking about that.

What's your beef?

I found the film lost a lot of points with me personally when Dan and Silk Specter are attacked by the goons in the alley.

In the comic it's a spontateous act of surprisiong and frightening violence, and both are clearly shocked in the aftermath.

In the film they smirk at each other before entering a slow-mo orgy of bone breaking. They practically high five at the end.

I think Snyder's love of filmic violence occasionally clouded his attempts to be faithful to the (themes especially of the) book.

I'm not that much into comics, but I have the complete Sandman by Neil Gaiman (I also bought the Absolute Edition).

And another great series is Fables by Bill Willingham.

And I'm reading the Season 8 and Season 5 comics of Buffy and Angel.

Have you heard about how Marvel is making a new Spiderman who is black, Mexican, and possibly gay?

Why not give each categories it's own superhero, in order for everyone to be happy?

^This. I never cared for any of the ultimate comics.

Bumping 'cause I'm bored.

This was the very first comic book I ever bought and read:

I was only in kindergarten when I bought it, so I couldn't really read the words. I enjoyed it soley on a visual, visceral level.

I re-read the comic as part of the Knightfall trade paperback a number of years ago, and suffice it to say, it didn't look or read as good to my jaundiced adult eyes. Nevertheless, a fair amount of its imagery has imprinted itself on my mind, and it along with B:TAS helped define my image of the definitive Batman.

Who drew the cover?

Kelley Jones.

Ah, I thought I knew the style. He drew some of the Sandman Comics.

Ziggy Stardust said:

Have you heard about how Marvel is making a new Spiderman who is black, Mexican, and possibly gay?

Why not give each categories it's own superhero, in order for everyone to be happy?

 Why not just change his name to Captain Token PC Guy and be done with it?

The first superheroes I gained an interest in were Batman, Superman, and Spider-Man, mostly due to the movies/TV shows which were extant at the time. When I wanted to take the next step and delve into their comics, this is what I had to contend with:

While I like Ben Reilly in spite of the Clone Saga – and I’ve since come to terms with long-haired Supes – the '90s really were a shitty time to be a kid who just wanted to read some fun, colourful stories of the heroes they saw on TV.

greenpenguino said:

Ugh, I hate animé. As a former animator I can say that it is the laziest style of animation ever (Besides Go!Animate. Grrr.)

Lol.