This forum is in permanent archive mode. Our new active community can be found here.

Watchmen - Comic or Movie first?

2»

Comments

  • There are worthwhile pieces of art in almost any genre and you dismiss it to readily.
    If you actually read my post, I said that some of my favourite movies are romantic comedies and that the ones that I readily dismiss are the fluffy ones. I'm not dismissing the entire genre, just a portion of them!
  • edited March 2009
    Challenge to Pete:
    I will consume any book, movie, series, etc. that you choose (excepting pornography), if you will read a Jane Austin book or watch a Jane Austen film of my choosing.

    @LA: I was referencing your previous posts that maligned the genre as a whole, and even though you admitted to liking some romance comedies, you did not recind your initial criticism.
    Post edited by Kate Monster on
  • Challenge to Pete:
    I will consume any book, movie, series, etc. that you choose (excepting pornography), if you will read a Jane Austin book or watch a Jane Austen film of my choosing.
    I read Pride and Prejudice like 100 years ago, if that lends any credence to my assertion. Haven't you directly admitted that at least the film adaptation of said novel is basically your trashy entertainment? You're a big fan of that Victorian-era romance stuff, and I'm pretty sure you've admitted that it's generally there simply for entertainment purposes.

    That is not to say that one cannot derive some value from these works, but then again, you can find water in the desert if you dig deep enough. :P

    Also, there's nothing with which I can really challenge you. Well, I guess I could tell you to read Twilight, but I wouldn't feel right inflicting that on you.
  • edited March 2009
    First, Jane Austen books are not set in the Victorian Era, but rather the Georgian and Regency Eras. Secondly, some adaptations of the films focus on the "fluff aspects", but every novel and some of the movies contain a good deal of information and insight into the time as well as the contemplation of larger themes like "what is love worth".

    You could challenge me to any number of things that I would probably dismiss as not worthwhile or not my taste that you feel has merit that I am not valuing. Plus, it will introduce me to something I normally wouldn't go for and I may find I like it. ^_^

    While you may have read Pride and Prejudice, you admit that it was quite some time ago. Also, I would probably ask you to read Mansfield Park or watch the relatively recent adaptation of it.
    Post edited by Kate Monster on
  • First, Jane Austen books are not set in the Victorian Era, but rather the Georgian and Regency Eras.
    Pwned.
  • First, Jane Austen books are not set in the Victorian Era, but rather the Georgian and Regency Eras.
    Pwned.
    I was pwned by like 20 years. Stupid British history.

    I may take you up on your challenge, but I have to find something for you to read/watch first. Our tastes generally overlap, so I want to find something I find significant that you either haven't read, or would normally trash for various reasons.
  • Our tastes generally overlap, so I want to find something I find significant that you either haven't read, or would normally trash for various reasons.
    It's easy. Just pick anything with awesome giant robots. Gundam SEED, BIg O, SDF Macross, Evangelion, I could name like, a hojillion.
  • Our tastes generally overlap, so I want to find something I find significant that you either haven't read, or would normally trash for various reasons.
    It's easy. Just pick anything with awesome giant robots. Gundam SEED, BIg O, SDF Macross, Evangelion, I could name like, a hojillion.
    Actually, Kate's never watched Eva, now that I think about it.

    I do Jane Austen, you do Eva? Sound fair? I'm really the one getting the bum deal here. :P
  • edited March 2009
    Our tastes generally overlap, so I want to find something I find significant that you either haven't read, or would normally trash for various reasons.
    It's easy. Just pick anything with awesome giant robots. Gundam SEED, BIg O, SDF Macross, Evangelion, I could name like, a hojillion.
    Actually, Kate's never watched Eva, now that I think about it.

    I do Jane Austen, you do Eva? Sound fair? I'm really the one getting the bum deal here. :P
    I want to watch Eva, so that isn't really fair - I just haven't had the opportunity. I will even listen to the CD of your choice.
    Post edited by Kate Monster on
  • Wait, the whole CD? Like, listen to every second of every song?
  • edited March 2009
    Wait, the whole CD? Like, listen to every second of every song?
    Yep. You wouldn't only read every other page or watch every other second of a movie, would you?
    Post edited by Kate Monster on
  • Wait, the whole CD? Like, listen to every second of every song?
    Yep. You wouldn't only read every other page or watch every other second of a movie, would you?
    If it's some crappy Georgian/Regency era British romance, maybe. :P

    That's a good challenge, actually, because (naturally) I'd want you to listen to something somewhat black or death metal oriented, that you stand a chance of actually enjoying if you give it a good listen. I can just throw In the Nightside Eclipse at you, but that would just turn you off completely.

    Let me think on this a bit and I'll get back to you.
  • Yeah, I could just give you Emma or Northanger Abbey, two of Austen's fluffier works, but I think Mansfield Park or Sense and Sensibility might have more to offer you.
  • edited March 2009
    Why not start off with the motion comic?
    Post edited by regan strongblood on
  • Why not start off with the motion comic?
    I'll pretend I didn't read that.
  • Why not start off with the motion comic?
    Yeah, no. If you're gonna do that, the book takes just as much time to consume, and the motion comic is abridged (I gave up when I realized that they cut out parts of Rorschach's Journal).
  • edited March 2009
    Watchmen 5 minute opening.

    I thoroughly enjoyed the movie, but the first 5 minutes (which are shown at the above link) were probably the best 5 minutes of the movie. Anyone else not able to get the opening out of their head?
    Post edited by Cremlian on
  • Watchmen 5 minute opening.

    I thoroughly enjoyed the movie, but the first 5 minutes (which are shown at the above link) was probably the best 5 minutes of the movie. Anyone else not able to get the opening out of their head?
    The opening credits were pretty fucking cool. Really, the whole movie was pretty fucking cool.

    I totally thought you would've enjoyed the giant blue glowing penis the most, though.
  • edited March 2009
    Watchmen 5 minute opening.
    Notice who Nite Owl is protecting at the beginning of the montage.
    Post edited by Sail on
  • I totally thought you would've enjoyed the giant blue glowing penis the most, though.
    Well, I was impressed with that giant blue glowing penis, it was comparable to mine, you should ask your mom about it.
  • Funnily enough, that opening sequence didn't make me want to watch the film at all, but it certainly made me want to check out the book.
  • So I've read the book through once and watched the movie after. I must say that kind of ruined the movie for me, because it didn't impress me at all and I was able to realize how bad the ending was (my first impression of the squid: CTHULHU).
  • So I've read the book through once and watched the movie after. I must say that kind of ruined the movie for me, because it didn't impress me at all and I was able to realize how bad the ending was (my first impression of the squid: CTHULHU).
    So what did you think was bad about the ending?
  • I liked the movie. It had its weak points such as the huge gap between the performances of the actors (Billy Crudup, Jeffrey Dean Morgan and Jackie Earle Haley turned out some great performances while Malin Akerman, Patrick Wilson were dull as dishwater, Carla Gugino was an outright miscast with horrible make-up and Matthew Goode was lacklustre at best). Some of the make-up was painful (like Silk Spectre as an old lady and Nixon with a caricature of a nose that was distracting at best). The film also lingered too long on moments to drive home what was made out to be some incredibly twisting/difficult to understand plot (which was really just a bald exploration of objectivism) and supposedly deep interpersonal relationships (that would have been interesting if it weren't for the cardboard acting of some of the cast). Despite these criticisms, the film was well worth it for Jackie Earle Haley's Rorschach, some beautiful visuals, an objectivism lesson, and the sweet moment of the elderly man holding the younger man before the blast (which I understand is the culmination of a side relationship in the comic - which I still haven't read).
    As someone that has not read the comic, the ending worked for me 100%. The squid (which has been described to me) seems like it may work well in a comic, but would have turned the tone of the move toward a drive in monster flick (I think).
  • So I've read the book through once and watched the movie after. I must say that kind of ruined the movie for me, because it didn't impress me at all and I was able to realize how bad the ending was (my first impression of the squid: CTHULHU).
    So what did you think was bad about the ending?
    I guess I expressed it wrongly. The ending as the ending of that movie was ok, because they couldn't use the Squid, since they didn't mention it before and normal people couldn't associate a Cthulhu when they'd have seen the squid instead. However, because I've read the book and the "squid ending", the ending in the movie is kind of lame compared to it, because all that associations are lost.
Sign In or Register to comment.