Slashdot Mirror
Watchmen Movie Trailer Is Out
I forgot to mention the other bit of exciting comic book movie news this week: DaSpudMan noted that the Watchmen trailer is out — from the Director of 300, which spawns mixed feelings at our office. But it looks pretty good.
IF you saw The Dark Knight and IF you are from a country where they are showing this trailer. I surely didn'y saw it.
The trailer for Watchmen got the E.T. treatment.
Just in case you were afraid that the character on screen was going to shoot you, his gun has been replaced by a walkie-talkie.
I love that ending exactly because the heroes think that he is just monologuing, when that is not exactly what happens. I was pretty much vague to avoid spoilers. Watchmen is definitely one of the best comics there is, so it is a big challenge to bring it to the screen. Even more if you consider the parallel stories and subplots.
> Ozymandius's costume looks completely different (I miss his purple one!), and Silk Spectre's costume is pretty generic looking.
Personally, I thought Ozymandius's costume in the comic book was kind of silly, and was somewhat relieved when they changed it for the movie. I'd tend to agree on silk spectre, except those faux garters are a little edgy.
> Nite Owl looks too much like Batman. (Sure they are similar characters, but very different also. I feel Nite Owl is not a very "dark" character, and making him into a 2nd rate Batman would not be doing his character justice.)
This is from memory way back in the eighties, but I seem to remember that Moore originally wanted to do this as a "parallel world" using the DC characters, but the company said no. I could be misremembering. But Night Owl was supposed to be this world's batman, and Dan Dreiberg struck me as the only really decent character of the whole bunch. As such, I'd expect him to be less "dark" than the other characters.
> Also I thought Rorshach's voice was a more distinctive monotone. He sounds just like any random guy whispering in this.
Did anyone else have trouble listening to Rorshach in the trailer? I could hear him fine in the "standard resolution" trailer, but his voice is drowned out by the music in the HD version. I wasn't expecting anything particularly different there -- Rorshach is a normal human, after all.
> But based on the production clips it seems like the director is really trying to be true to the story and look of the comic, so as long as they don't change the ending I don't see that it could be THAT horrible, no matter if Alan Moore has already disowned it (he disowns like ALL his movie adaptations, doesn't he?)
Agreed. The look is amazingly like the comic. And I applaud them for keeping it in 1985 instead of trying to twist the plot so it would fit in current times.
I'm not familiar with Smashing Pumpkins... what song was that?
Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
You know, it suddenly occurs to me that Rorschach is the closest thing in Watchmen to a classic comic-book character; four colour morality, only kind of in the opposite direction. Where Superman is always good and right, Rorschach is the mirror image of that; black and white, the negative side of utter uncompromise.
And he dies for it. It's all a metaphor for the old style of comics being killed off for being utterly unable to adapt.
Or something.
Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
You know, it suddenly occurs to me that Rorschach is the closest thing in Watchmen to a classic comic-book character; four colour morality, only kind of in the opposite direction.
Rorschach is a Psychopath, attempting to compensate by becoming rule-bound (and doing it poorly). Moore has the personality dead-on.
(It's interesting that the inspirations for Rorschach were apparently Steve Ditko's "Mr. A" and "The Question" - attempts at Objectivist superheros. Objectivism is a philosophy that starts from pure selfishness and derives the nonaggression principle and motivation for other behavior traits that keep its adherents within the law and make them people who, while often not likable, can be gotten along with. As such it's accessible to psychopaths. Teaching Objectivism to career criminals, motivating them to adopt its behavioral ruleset as a compensation, may be the only consistently successful rehabilitation program that has ever been studied.)
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
The sad fact is that authors rarely have any input in the film-ification of their work.
Indeed, Ms Le Guin has it spot-on. Having been involved with writing a few screenplays, I can tell everyone who's never been there, You Have No Idea. Seriously, on a project that makes it to the screen, there are a dozen or so self-important hacks between the writer and the final edit, all trying to "exercise their creativity" on the work. And the less clout you have as an established writer, the more talentless hacks will screw it up. It used to be that producers and other studio execs would take care of the business side and leave the filmmaking to the filmmakers. The modern studio system is rife with slick dolts who got into the business because their fathers, uncles, or other relatives "handed down" the job to them. These guys don't understand that it's not their job to "reimagine" your script. I've actually had these morons interrupt my pitch to to interject their "creative input". One instance: a story about a group of adventurers led by an old, but very wise and experienced man. One of the party is a young, good-looking, braggart prick. They're intentional polar opposites. The guy I was pitching to said "I think it'd be better if you got rid of the old guy and made the young guy the leader". His own assistant tried to explain why that'd be dumb, but the guy just kept basically saying "young heroes market better". What he was suggesting was the equivalent of getting rid of Picard and replacing him with Wesley or Barkley! In the end, he offered to buy the script outright--- which means he'd get some hack to rewrite the script with the young guy as the leader, and I'd see it on the USA Network at 3am and have to shoot myself over how bad it was. My co-writer and I insisted on full control, though, so (like all our projects) they option it for a nominal sum and it will never see the screen unless they get really desperate. S'ok. We get those option checks every year, and that's better than a single lump sum and an embarrassment on the screen. That was the last thing we pitched. We have better things to do with our time.
If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.