|
Post by ragabash on May 22, 2009 15:59:10 GMT -5
peanutfan et al Okay, I took another look at the gang fight, and I was mistaken about the lack of blood, there was some from what looks like a broken nose, and a few maneuvers used that would be very painful. That's still much less graphic than bones jutting out, stab wounds and what else. VeneNot only did I talk about the latter of those two scenes in my comments, but the first of the two images is something done by Rorschach, a character to who is extremely violent, especially in comparison to most other characters, and one I never denied was like that. By claiming I don't believe the comic was violent you're just using a strawman. I seem to have rather upset some people here by not enjoying the movie, and at this point I'm going to walk away from this thread. I've said my piece, agree or disagree with it as you will.
|
|
libertyprime
Junior Member
Hey, it was acceptable in the '80s.
Posts: 58
|
Post by libertyprime on May 22, 2009 16:07:29 GMT -5
I've read the comic, but not seen the movie. I have nothing wrong with an unhappy ending especially if it is realistic (considering the circumstances, setting and genre of course) But the barefaced betrayal displayed by nite owl and the others really annoyed me. Rorschach, for whatever reason, appealed to me as a victim of circumstance and as a person who adhered to his beliefs, and I started hoping that the truth would be revealed. So those last two panels were oddly satisfying.
I still think rorschach is completely psycho, though.
|
|
|
Post by John E on May 22, 2009 18:03:17 GMT -5
I'm just really particular about movie adaptations, No shit! "Too many liberties? You could count on one hand the number of movie adaptations that have taken fewer liberties. But seriously, I think I understand your complaints a lot better now. Thanks. I don't agree that they are problems (in fact I think were good choices on the movie makers' part) but I understand. I think something that's going on here is that comics leave a lot more details up to the imagination than movies do. A fight scene in a comic might last only a few panels. To make that into a good movie fight, you have to expand it into, say, 20 or 30 moves at least, so you have to fill in the blanks between the panels. For example, you admitted that the gang fight was bloodier than you remembered. I think you are filling in the rest of the fight in your head as a bloodless, Golden Age style affair. That may be a valid interpretation, but it's not the ONLY valid interpretation. I have, but I've only read one of the several comics it was adapted from.
|
|
|
Post by Admiral Lithp on May 22, 2009 21:41:18 GMT -5
He did not do the latter. He only did the former when he was just trying to get someone out of his nonexistant hair. When he tried to kill someone, he turned them into a steaming puddle. Rorschach being the best example.
I, however, would contend that that scene made much more sense than in the comic book. In the comic, they kill him because he's in the way of the lock...but he's still there. Then, somehow, in the next panel, he's turned around & standing beside the lock--all without ever being untied! Apparently, his corpse is Houdini!
Umm...no, you specified Rorschach & Comedian in your review. Not by name, but you talked about a character who "enjoyed killing," and another who "killed because he wouldn't compromise."
That's only because I worded it very poorly. The important thing is that it IS a movie adaptation. It needs some level of action. And also some level of filler. Like Erickson pointed out above, a fight that takes a few panels may need to be stretched into a few minutes. Action is the best way to go about doing that, in this scenario.
I think you missed my point that the violence is probably supposed to add to the deconstruction. Like you said, it is a characteristic of action movies. And Ozymandias IS famous for saying, "I'm not a movie/comic book villain," so I don't think I'm pulling this entirely out of my ass.
The only major change was the ending, which was debatably better, in that it made a lot more sense. I mean, it seemed to me like the Russians would just take advantage of America (and ONLY America) being hit by the squid. Also, the whole "alien invasion" theory sort of falls apart when you realize that it makes no anatomical sense--it has an exposed brain. You could kill it by poking it too hard in the head.
Don't get me wrong, though, both endings were good for their own reasons. Hence the "debatably" part.
Oh, come on, how does THAT work? You assume we're upset because we disagree with you, & are trying to point out some problems with your interpretation? Meh. Whatever.
Tangent to this argument: Interestingly enough, they actually didn't include what I feel were some of the most violent parts of the book. Tales of the Black Freighter & the murder of Nite Owl I.
Libertyprime: Yeah. If it weren't for Nite Owl being such a pussy & Dr. Manhattan sticking his big blue dong nose where it doesn't belong, things would have turned out a lot differently. Like you, I don't really mind downer endings, but Watchmen's seemed kind of anticlimactic, to me.
Unlike you, though, I didn't like the, "Maybe the truth will be revealed!" bit. I just don't like open endings. They bug the Hell out of me.
Rorschach? Psycho? Perhaps, but not as much as Ozymandias. Apparently, with great intelligence comes great insanity.
|
|
|
Post by John E on May 22, 2009 22:49:19 GMT -5
He did not do the latter. He only did the former when he was just trying to get someone out of his nonexistant hair. When he tried to kill someone, he turned them into a steaming puddle. Rorschach being the best example. Personally, I liked that they had Dr. Manhattan's victims blow apart into a gory mess because it drives home to the audience the horror of Dr. M killing people at whim, with an ever decreasing regard for human life. Disintegrating people into thin air has a sterile feel to it and dulls the impact, whereas the audience and the general public in the story are supposed to be scared of Dr. M. Can you imagine Rorschach disappearing into thin air with a glittery special effect, like he was being beamed up, and then Night Owl falling to his knees and screaming "NOOOOOO!"? That would just look silly.
|
|
|
Post by Admiral Lithp on May 22, 2009 23:25:24 GMT -5
He did not do the latter. He only did the former when he was just trying to get someone out of his nonexistant hair. When he tried to kill someone, he turned them into a steaming puddle. Rorschach being the best example. Personally, I liked that they had Dr. Manhattan's victims blow apart into a gory mess because it drives home to the audience the horror of Dr. M killing people at whim, with an ever decreasing regard for human life. Disintegrating people into thin air has a sterile feel to it and dulls the impact, whereas the audience and the general public in the story are supposed to be scared of Dr. M. Can you imagine Rorschach disappearing into thin air with a glittery special effect, like he was being beamed up, and then Night Owl falling to his knees and screaming "NOOOOOO!"? That would just look silly. That would've been great. To be fair, I do think they made it a little more gory. They had entrails flying & shit, where in the comic, they just kind of had a burst of blood & smoke. I always felt that was just to be a bit more realistic, but now that I think of it, you have a point. One thing I didn't like was Ozymandias saying that Dr. Manhattan "may as well have been sobbing," for all the more he could read his expressions. It always seemed to me that Dr. M was more-or-less just going through the motions of human empathy without really feeling anything.
|
|
|
Post by ragabash on May 23, 2009 4:55:03 GMT -5
Oh, come on, how does THAT work? You assume we're upset because we disagree with you, & are trying to point out some problems with your interpretation? Meh. Whatever. I'm sorry if there's some voice of frustration there, I'm kind of dealing with a ton of things IRL (family and medical issues) right now that are leading me to overreact to some things. While I'm still feel I've said what needs to be said and won't be continuing in the debate, I should have said so differently. I am truly sorry for any offense taken.
|
|
|
Post by Admiral Lithp on May 23, 2009 19:40:17 GMT -5
Oh, come on, how does THAT work? You assume we're upset because we disagree with you, & are trying to point out some problems with your interpretation? Meh. Whatever. I'm sorry if there's some voice of frustration there, I'm kind of dealing with a ton of things IRL (family and medical issues) right now that are leading me to overreact to some things. While I'm still feel I've said what needs to be said and won't be continuing in the debate, I should have said so differently. I am truly sorry for any offense taken. No big deal, that was the only thing that annoyed me. Anyway, I hope all that works out for you.
|
|
|
Post by gadfly on May 30, 2009 2:53:23 GMT -5
Quick question on the Watchmen and Tales of the Black Freighter DVD releases -- who else is holding out for the rumored 'Ultimate Edition' on DVD/Bluray?
I'd probably eventually buy the 2-disc Director's Cut and the Tales from the Black Freighter if I didn't feel that somehow there is probably going to be a better double-dipping in the offering to combine the two releases in a superior deluxe collector's edition package.
|
|
|
Post by Admiral Lithp on May 30, 2009 15:29:50 GMT -5
You could always sell it later & get the Ultimate Edition. That's what I plan to do with Advent Children, once Advent Children Complete comes out.
|
|
|
Post by Thejebusfire on May 30, 2009 15:41:03 GMT -5
I didn't get the chance to see it.
I heard it terrible.
|
|
|
Post by John E on May 30, 2009 16:56:15 GMT -5
I didn't get the chance to see it. I heard it terrible. You mean Watchmen or Tale of the Black Freighter? I haven't seen TotBF myself, but neither have I heard any reviews of it.
|
|
|
Post by Admiral Lithp on Jun 2, 2009 0:39:10 GMT -5
I didn't get the chance to see it. I heard it terrible. You mean Watchmen or Tale of the Black Freighter? I haven't seen TotBF myself, but neither have I heard any reviews of it. Neither have I. Can't see it as being TOO great, though. Very dark pirate tale. Woo. It's short, so the effect of the ending will probably be lost. Plus, it was really meant to coincide with the other characters' stories.
|
|