Slashdot Mirror


Dave Gibbons On the Forthcoming Watchmen Movie

An anonymous reader writes "Den Of Geek has been talking to comics legend Dave Gibbons about the upcoming transition of the Watchmen from the comic book to the silver screen. 'There are hardcore fans out there who'll be satisfied with nothing less than a word-for-word, line-for-line, scene-for-scene recreation of the comic book. I didn't believe that was ever going to happen.'" It's a rather short interview, but Gibbons addresses some interesting elements of both the movie and comic-book worlds.

27 of 181 comments (clear)

  1. The End Is Nigh... by berashith · · Score: 4, Funny

    See ya tomorrow

  2. Conversions by Jaysyn · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It will probably have as much to do with the comic book as Starship Troopers had to do with the Sci-Fi classic.

    Keep in mind, there wasn't a whole, whole lot of action in Watchmen, & a lot of the intricacies of the "superheroes" relationships will probably be glossed over.

    --
    There is a war going on for your mind.
    1. Re:Conversions by stoolpigeon · · Score: 3, Funny

      just saw a trailer for starship troopers 3 yesterday. the people responsible for it should be killed. slowly and painfully.

      --
      It's hard to believe that's how Micronians are made. Why don't we see it right now by having you both kiss one another?
    2. Re:Conversions by kithrup · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I don't see how I, Robot is "garbage." Other than a large action scene that Asimov wouldn't've written in his books, the plot is entirely an Asimovian robotic mystery: the three laws (or four laws, as Asimov had in his later books) are completely integral to the plot; the clues are related to robotics and are visible to the viewer, instead of being hidden and revealed after the fact; and the societal impact of the technology is examined.

      Even the actress they had playing Susan Calvin was the right age, and there was no romance between her and the main character.

      It was a shockingly good science fiction movie.

    3. Re:Conversions by sesshomaru · · Score: 3, Insightful
      The main problem with it is that it was "With Folded Hands" (with a Hollywood ending). Which is a good robot story, but it's by Jack Williamson not Isaac Asimov.

      I therefore judge it a pretty good movie by Hollywood blockbuster standards. I wonder if Hollywood will ever make a movie that is actually based on I, Robot.

      --
      "MIT betrayed all of its basic principles."
    4. Re:Conversions by elrous0 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I think the first Starship Troopers was one of Verhoeven's best films. But then again, I despise Heinlen and think that hack DESERVED to be parodied. Verhoeven just sized the material up for exactly what it was.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    5. Re:Conversions by Bj�rn · · Score: 3, Interesting
      Straight from the horses mouth.

      "That's very nice. I always thought the movie was badly understood. There was an article in The Washington Post when it came out that was not written by a movie critic. One of the editors wrote it saying that this was a neo-Nazi movie and I was promoting Fascism. That same article was published in all the European newspapers. When I went to do the publicity tour in Europe, everybody was already looking through that lens. The Washington Post is not a reliable newspaper anyway but they said the film was written by a neo-Nazi or a Fascist and directed by one. I strongly disagree with that. I saw it as a critique of American society. It is done in an ironic way but not pushing it very hard, which I hate because then it becomes dogmatic and becomes something else other than filmmaking. It was more that the novel by Robert Heinlein is very militaristic and has a tendency to be pro-Fascist a bit. We took a lot of cues out of American society at that time, which was [President Bill] Clinton, not realizing that a couple years later this whole situation would be much more acute and now you can put the film as a blueprint over Iraq or Afghanistan. But of course, I didn't know of bin Laden at that time." -- Paul Verhoeven

      So the satire of some future militaristic state is realy a satire about our own present.

      --
      Never express yourself more clearly than you are able to think. --Niels Bohr
  3. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  4. Movie Adaptations by majorgoodvibes · · Score: 4, Insightful

    are almost never 100% faithful - the closest I've seen lately is "No Country for Old Men."

    It's not that it's impossible but it's just not necessary or preferable. If a movie gets the spirit of its source material, captures something of its style, and brings something new to it that could only be accomplished cinematically then it's probably a successful adaptation.

  5. Re:Alan Moore doesn't do well on screen by Rogerborg · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Appparently, he agrees.

    How do you feel about Alan Moore's excision from the credits of Watchmen?

    Uh oh.

    --
    If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
  6. Re:Alan Moore doesn't do well on screen by berashith · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Add to this the fact that Alan Moore isnt lending his name to the movie and I am even more skeptical. A dark story with a non-happy ending doesn't sit very well with focus groups. I will save my cash a read the book again.

  7. hear hear. by apodyopsis · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I think that as long as it's true to the spirit of the comic book, and as long as - in broad strokes - it follows the plot and the characterisations...I don't think you can ask for every individual detail to be replicated.

    hear hear.

    Watchmen is a classic. It is my favorite classic. I still get it down and read it every now and then and it still makes me shiver.

    My instinctive reaction to the film is "Noooooo!", but on reflection I then think of the "V for Vendetta" movie and I remember that it is possible to make a damn good film out of a graphic novel without following it exactly. I know "Sin City" is more or less a scene for scene clone of the book, likewise "300" - but it does not have to be like that. Vendetta showed us that.

    1. Re:hear hear. by mad.frog · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Shameless plug -- I pulled out the Black Freighter story into its own "comic". I think it works well as a standalone story. See it here:

      http://boredomfestival.wordpress.com/2007/12/11/tales-of-the-black-freighter/

  8. I predict this will bomb. by arkham6 · · Score: 5, Funny


    Looks like its going to suck. Bad actors, the director is a dweeb, the special effects are going to be laughable.

    With production values this bad, who will watch The Watchmen?

    1. Re:I predict this will bomb. by berashith · · Score: 3, Funny

      I have no mod points, but this is great.

      Who watches the watchmen?

      In Hollywood... nobody!

  9. Re:Alan Moore doesn't do well on screen by Lilith's+Heart-shape · · Score: 4, Interesting

    A dark story with a non-happy ending doesn't sit very well with focus groups. No kidding. Just look at what happened with I Am Legend. In the book, the hero dies at the end knowing that, to the vampires, he was the monster. And then there's V for Vendetta. How the hell did the Wachowskis take a character that was a bomb-making anarchist and make a liberal out of him?
  10. Know what's funny? by liquiddark · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Every normal person I know seems to believe V for Vendetta was a great movie. Maybe adapting a good book into a good movie, even at the expense of diverging from the original work, isn't all bad.

  11. Re:How Politically Correct...? by hassanchop · · Score: 3, Interesting

    "Rorschach's rampant homophobia, for example, or the original Miss Jupiter's deep and abiding love for her would-be rapist, are uncomfortable but central topics in the book."

    Seeing as I barely noticed these things, I have to disagree that they are "central topics". It would be exceedingly easy to tell the important parts of the story while leaving most of that out, especially Rorschach's homophobia.

    "Jon's gradual shedding of his costume down to full-frontal nudity, as he gradually distances himself from humanity, is also an important progression."

    That I agree with. In the case of your previous examples, their absence would change little. This example was not only obvious, but necessary. Without removing the "deus ex machina" that Jon was, the story would have been impossible to tell.

    I still think that stupid "tachyon" garbage Veidt used was a major flaw in the story. I lost a bit of respect for Moore for using technobabble and hand waving to get around Jon's immense power.

  12. I wish they'd change the title by attemptedgoalie · · Score: 3, Informative

    As I understand it, in I Robot's case, the reason the story diverged so badly is because it wasn't based on the book at all.

    The studio owned the name "I Robot" and used it on a similar story. The movie that came out under that title would have been called something else if they hadn't already owned that particular name.

    --
    My mom says I'm cool.
  13. Yup. Expect it. by Weaselmancer · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Hollywood will glitz up the story, and gloss over the personal details. IMHO, it's the personal relationships that make the Watchmen such a good story. At its core it is a story about people, not action.

    It'll be a shame to watch that take a back seat to special effects.

    --
    Weaselmancer
    rediculous.
  14. Re:Alan Moore doesn't do well on screen by falcon5768 · · Score: 4, Insightful
    No uh oh, Moore is a asshole and its been well documented for years hes a egotistical asshole. His input has been sought for YEARS when it comes to movies of his works and he flat out refuses to help, then trashes what eventually is made under a misplaced idea that by denying his input it wont be made.

    Granted he has good reason in the past to not want to be associated with big companies as hes been screwed more than once, but the same can be said about a lot of other talented comic writers out there and they have had no issues with playing the game even after being burned in the past. I highly doubt that without Frank Millers help, Sin City or 300 would have been half as impressive as they where.

    --

    "Slashdot, where telling the truth is overrated but lying is insightful."

  15. Re:Alan Moore doesn't do well on screen by Dunx · · Score: 4, Informative

    You're missing the point - Alan has distanced himself from every recent film made of his work, he doesn't take the fees offered even. He talked about this quite extensively in an interview on Radio Four a few years ago in the Chain Reaction series.

    So Alan Moore not having his name on the credits means nothing at all about the quality of the film.

    --
    Dunx
    Converting caffeine into code since 1982
  16. Can't Fit in 90 Minutes by ewhac · · Score: 4, Insightful
    The Watchmen sprawls all over the place, and there's no way it would fit in three hours' running time, much less the Hollywood-standard 90 minutes. Something's going to get chopped.

    Personally, I nominate for deletion the entire novel-within-the-novel of the shipwrecked castaway. Every time that came up, I found myself flipping forward, looking for the main story to pick up again. In fact, it seemed all the extra characters who we saw passing by the newsstand in New York were just "whales" (q.v. Douglas Adams).

    I would be very disappointed if Rorschach's backstory as told to the psychologist were cut. Some amazingly powerful and resonant stuff in there. "Looked at sky through smoke heavy with human fat and God was not there. The cold, suffocating dark goes on forever and we are alone. Live our lives, lacking anything better to do. Devise reason later."

    Really, really good.

    Schwab

    1. Re:Can't Fit in 90 Minutes by Remus+Shepherd · · Score: 4, Informative

      The director has already said that it's a three-hour movie, although he's in a fight with the studio to keep it that long.

      As for the story of the Black Freighter, it will be released in its entirety as a separate DVD-only animated film, released along with the Watchmen's theatrical release. More on that here.

      I think they are taking extreme steps to make this movie faithful to the comic, and I'm heartened that it will be entertaining and true to the original. But we'll see....

      --
      Genocide Man -- Life is funny. Death is funnier. Mass murder can be hilarious.
  17. Re:Alan Moore doesn't do well on screen by Lilith's+Heart-shape · · Score: 3, Informative

    I agree mostly (V wasn't really an anarchist, he just wanted to destroy the current system so that a new, better one could be built instead). Really, the major difference with "V" can be illustrated by this one key line change:

    I disagree. Read the novel again, especially his little "speech" to the statue of Lady Justice atop the Old Bailey where he said that he had once loved Justice, but had found a new love: Anarchy.

    Also, remember what he said to Evey about what would happen after the Norsefire regime finally fell, how the people would have the chance to create for themselves a society of voluntary order, or to build another government and let history repeat itself.

  18. Are you kidding? by elrous0 · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Hollywood can't even handle a Phillip K. Dick story without slapping on a happy ending. Do you think for a second that they are going to spend tens of millions of $ on a movie and include ANYTHING that makes even one test screening audience the *slightest* bit uncomfortable?

    The only way to do include any of this sort of material be to do it on the cheap and raise independent funding. If you accept Hollywood's fat cash, you accept that they're going to make your movie as inoffensive and audience-pleasing as possible. Those are the strings attached.

    --
    SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
  19. Re:Alan Moore doesn't do well on screen by hkmarks · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I thought V for Vendetta was a very good movie. It wasn't much like the original, but it was a good movie. It needed to change to suit the times, and it did. And it looked good. And it discarded some bullshit that didn't make sense.

    The Justice League Unlimited episode based on his Superman story "For the Man Who Has Everything," was also excellent, partly because it excised a sort of pointless subplot.

    Alan Moore is a good writer, but he also uses other people's characters and ideas, and tosses anything that doesn't suit what he's trying to tell. He's as guilty as anyone of screwing with originals to adapt them to his own taste.

    Watchmen was based on old Charlton characters (Blue Beetle = Nite-Owl, the Question = Rorschach, etc.); V for Vendetta was strongly influenced by 1984; Supreme was based on Superman -- and he tossed the character's history to make his own version); Tom Strong is based on various pulp heroes; League of Extraordinary Gentlemen was based on various literary characters, and is not the first such pastiche by far (and it was an awful book); and Lost Girls was a pervy take on fairy tales. Even Top 10, probably my favourite thing he's done, makes innumerable references to other works, and I'm not sure how much it was influenced by Astro City.

    Moore really is good, and Watchmen is his most important work, so I hope it's adapted well. (It really came along at the right moment; the world was ready in the 1980s for a serious deconstruction of superheroes.) I've only seen stills so far but they really seem to capture the right mood and look. But his work is not flawless, and it's practically as derivative as the movies it inspired.