WatchmenComicMovie.com Forum


Talk about the Watchmen comic book mini-series and film
It is currently Fri Apr 03, 2020 2:20 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 57 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu Dec 04, 2008 8:36 pm 
Offline
Silk Swinger of Suburbia
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2008 7:10 am
Posts: 1789
Pagliacci wrote:
And I also think a lot of people are going to miss out on this movie due to lack of interest.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aXZVheNsyQ8

TheYoungTurks, a relatively popular Youtube channel made a very poor analysis of the Watchmen trailer, without even doing research or showing interest on what it's about, all the while making very vague assumptions.

This got me thinking, if a respected Youtube channel doesn't wanna Google watchmen to find out what it's about, half these people who saw the trailer in theaters are going to think "Gee, this looks fucking stupid. Is that a batman ripoff? What's that smiley thing" but never actually look further into it.

Of course, I'm just drawing conclusions myself.

Regardless, the video pissed me off. I'm not going to blame someone for not knowing what Watchmen is, but to sit there and do an analysis of it without doing a bit of research (as I said in the comments, the guy had a fuckin' laptop right next to him!) is ridiculous.

For those who don't feel like sitting through it, lemme summarize what was said for you:

1. STAR TREK IS KEWL
2. WHAT'S WITH THAT HAPPY FACE? THAT DOESN'T FIT THE MOOD AND IT LOOKS UNCOOL
3. STAR TREK IS KEWL
4. OKAY SO THIS IS BASICALLY ABOUT A BUNCH OF RETIRED SUPERHEROS WHO DONT HAVE POWERS ANYMORE WHO GO TO A BLUE NAKED GUY FOR HELP BECAUSE HE STILL HAS SUPERPOWERS AND THEY'RE GETTING KILLED
5. I LIKE THE PART WHERE HE SAYS "THE WORLD WILL SAY SAVE US AND ILL BE LIKE NO"
6. WHATS UP WITH BATMAN WANNABE?
7. STAR TREK. HEH.

EDIT: *Weird, it cut off my title at the end even though it gave me enough space to type it all. Apologies, the thread title is not a typo.


that guy had something 'in' for nite owl...funny...i think it's the price just must pay for trying to make nite owl more scary. damn him, that was never the point of dan.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 04, 2008 8:44 pm 
Offline
Genetically-Altered Lynx
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2008 5:13 am
Posts: 2512
Location: San Fran
The point is not to make him scary. It's to update him to more accurately satirize the superhero he's meant to reflect: Batman.

In 1987, Nite Owl's costume reflected Batman's costume, which was that gray leotard with the black cowl and cape.

In 2009, Nite Owl's costume will still reflect Batman's costume, which is now a solid bodysuit.

Nite Owl was meant to look like Batman in 1987, and he's meant to look like Batman now. If they hadn't updated him, that sentiment would be lost.

_________________
He did it.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 04, 2008 8:51 pm 
Offline
Silk Swinger of Suburbia
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2008 7:10 am
Posts: 1789
that's the whole problem. I never thought of watchmen, the movie as commentary to the superhero movies genre. ok, it's a big genre, culturally and economically impactful in U.S., but when you're there, in a theater room, looking bale's rubber batman beating the crap out of joker and his goons, you're not recording the bale's rubber batman. when you check your memory, the first layer at least a few days after you watched the movie, you see that scene with the gray and blue (or black and gray) batman of always, the good and old of the comic books. he's there, because the iconic image of batman is intact and the movie merely conected to it.

the comic books carachters that led to nite owl's creation should remain more evident. he's neven a satire of batman - not graphically speaking. so, zack placed too much confidence in this concept of superhero movies stuff when people are helplessly stuck to the source, the comics, it's the bloody power of the media, of the original. the movie options - when it comes to adapt a hero's suit for example - are just an understanding, a silent agreement you do with the director as you watch the film, because you know you couldn't see a guy in spandex fighting criminal with real uzis and 44's. but the spandex is there, in your mind.

zack should have trusted the original source a little more and deviate as much as the carachter and its original concept, not his, could get. he had dave gibbons beside him and it shocks me to know that he really approved that. perhaps he just wanted to play cool to don't be sassy as alan, the poison spitter. we all liked that, but deep inside we knew some of those choices would bring mocking consequences...and there we have it, that bloody video of the turk fella. it's just the beginning, unless zack and debbie pull a hell of a cool trailer in January.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 04, 2008 9:02 pm 
Offline
Genetically-Altered Lynx
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2008 5:13 am
Posts: 2512
Location: San Fran
As difficult as that was to decipher, I get what you're saying.

But most people simply wouldn't be able to appreciate the naivete that Nite Owl's original costume was meant to reflect. If Snyder wants most people, the general audience, to see evocations of Batman when they see Dan Dreiberg all dressed up, he's going to have to show them the Batman that most of them recognize, the movie version. Most people, with six Batman feature films made in the past twenty years, think of the movies nowadays over the comic books. And Dan Dreiberg himself is not meant to be a mirror to Batman or Bruce Wayne, you're right, but the public persona of Nite Owl II is. The gadgets, the vehicle, the "creature of the night" dynamic. Audiences are still going to see Batman, in one way or another, when they see Nite Owl in costume for the first time, just like people reading Watchmen twenty years ago did.

_________________
He did it.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Dec 05, 2008 6:20 am 
Offline
Vigilante

Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 2:01 pm
Posts: 78
Mere Being wrote:
[...]and there we have it, that bloody video of the turk fella.


...Which is waay less consequential than you make it to be.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Dec 06, 2008 4:41 pm 
Offline
Minuteman

Joined: Wed Nov 19, 2008 1:49 pm
Posts: 11
EmPiiRe x wrote:
As difficult as that was to decipher, I get what you're saying.

But most people simply wouldn't be able to appreciate the naivete that Nite Owl's original costume was meant to reflect. If Snyder wants most people, the general audience, to see evocations of Batman when they see Dan Dreiberg all dressed up, he's going to have to show them the Batman that most of them recognize, the movie version. Most people, with six Batman feature films made in the past twenty years, think of the movies nowadays over the comic books. And Dan Dreiberg himself is not meant to be a mirror to Batman or Bruce Wayne, you're right, but the public persona of Nite Owl II is. The gadgets, the vehicle, the "creature of the night" dynamic. Audiences are still going to see Batman, in one way or another, when they see Nite Owl in costume for the first time, just like people reading Watchmen twenty years ago did.


I don't understand comparing Nite Owl to Batman, really. He is strongly based off Blue Beetle II (Ted Kord), as I'm sure everyone posting here knows.. Most obviously, Archie = The Bug. I doubt Moore really was thinking Batman at all.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Dec 06, 2008 4:56 pm 
Offline
A pretty butterfly.
User avatar

Joined: Tue Dec 11, 2007 8:12 pm
Posts: 925
Location: New Jersey
BT Shire wrote:
EmPiiRe x wrote:
As difficult as that was to decipher, I get what you're saying.

But most people simply wouldn't be able to appreciate the naivete that Nite Owl's original costume was meant to reflect. If Snyder wants most people, the general audience, to see evocations of Batman when they see Dan Dreiberg all dressed up, he's going to have to show them the Batman that most of them recognize, the movie version. Most people, with six Batman feature films made in the past twenty years, think of the movies nowadays over the comic books. And Dan Dreiberg himself is not meant to be a mirror to Batman or Bruce Wayne, you're right, but the public persona of Nite Owl II is. The gadgets, the vehicle, the "creature of the night" dynamic. Audiences are still going to see Batman, in one way or another, when they see Nite Owl in costume for the first time, just like people reading Watchmen twenty years ago did.


I doubt Moore really was thinking Batman at all.


...really? Dan is rich, is a genius, has a costume very similar to Batman's, has a bunch of gadgets, has a vehicle with his owl motif, and has all of this crap under his house in a hidden basement.

Seems an awful lot like Batman to me.

_________________
"With our thoughts we make the world."
-- Gautama Buddha


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Dec 06, 2008 5:01 pm 
Offline
Genetically-Altered Lynx
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2008 5:13 am
Posts: 2512
Location: San Fran
Blue Beetle might be his closest Charlton Comics counterpart, but the characters in Watchmen are not meant to be satirical versions of those specific characters. They are meant to reflect certain archetypes. Rorschach is not meant to directly mirror The Question, but, rather, he's a commentary on the moral absolutism of characters like him. Likewise, Dr. Manhattan is not meant to directly mirror Captain Atom. He's written as a commentary on the idea of a Superman inhabiting our world. The only similarities that Dr. Manhattan and Captain Atom share is that they both gained their powers through a scientific mishap. The idea that the characters in Watchmen are only ever supposed to be about Charlton Comics characters is flimsy, as they are meant to speak to the entire medium of comics and all of it's characters (or, at least, it's archetypes).

_________________
He did it.


Last edited by EmPiiRe x on Sat Dec 06, 2008 5:12 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Dec 06, 2008 5:04 pm 
Offline
Intrinsic Field Subtractor

Joined: Fri Nov 21, 2008 6:17 pm
Posts: 1028
Quote:
I don't understand comparing Nite Owl to Batman, really. He is strongly based off Blue Beetle II (Ted Kord), as I'm sure everyone posting here knows.. Most obviously, Archie = The Bug. I doubt Moore really was thinking Batman at all.


Aside from Archie being The Bug, Dan has the Owlmobile, various costumes for different conditions, etc, etc. There are obvious references to both Batman and the second Blue Beetle. The "creature of the night" motif, the mugger origin, some of the costume elements. Visually, he's an amalgamation of Batman with the gray and the "themed" cape and cowl, the Utility Belt, the second Blue Beetle with the goggles, and caped superheroes in general with his color-coded costume scheme. And he's got something that very much resembles Batman's method of operations. The inventing angle is mostly Blue Beetle's, though Batman was an inventor as well. The connection is always going to be made. But the Blue Beetle and Batman, at least the second one, have always had similarities.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Dec 06, 2008 8:12 pm 
Offline
Tired of Earth.
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 3:19 pm
Posts: 8132
Location: 1060 W. Addison St.
I really don't doubt that those guys could have gotten more info than what they said from Wikipedia.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Dec 06, 2008 8:43 pm 
Offline
Silk Swinger of Suburbia
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2008 7:10 am
Posts: 1789
dejavroom wrote:
Mere Being wrote:
[...]and there we have it, that bloody video of the turk fella.


...Which is waay less consequential than you make it to be.


Certainly it is, but as others pointed out, I'm afraid it somehow reflect the general public opinion about it. I mean, that guy has zero knowledge about watchmen and there are many people like him. and the first things he thought were 'oh this is uncool'. damn it, I wished watchmen made it up to the hype or at least didn't fully depend on mouth to mouth. i didn't want it to be 'cult' and recognized only years in the future or more optimiscly, on DVD. i wished people really could taste it is good...unless I'm being too naive about the influence of the opinion of a guy like that or how big is the range of people like him, i'm sure afraid, yes.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Dec 08, 2008 9:52 pm 
Offline
Alien Squid Monster

Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 5:21 am
Posts: 156
Well, it definitely sends the message that the next trailer needs to explain what makes Watchmen what it is. While the last trailer laid out the plot on a basic level, maybe the next one should include Nixon, some of the good dialogue, and more emphasis on the people behind the masks, rather than costumed vigilantes kicking the shit out of hordes of enemies. The Spirit (which looks to be a huge pile of garbage), coming out after Dark Knight might appear to the casual audience that the comic adaptation trend is over. Watchmen needs to offer the casuals something they haven't seen, and an R rating isn't gonna cut it. TV Ads aren't long enough to really convey all that much, but a two-and-a-half minute movie trailer would do nicely. The last one was about that long, and the latter half was almost all music.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Dec 09, 2008 4:43 am 
Offline
Vigilante

Joined: Fri Oct 31, 2008 11:45 am
Posts: 56
I haven't shown anyone the trailer except for someone in my college class who's currently reading it, so he's excited.

I pointed out the poster at a cinema to a friend (comedian falling from window) They asked what it was.

To make it sound less nerdy I simply told him it was a super hero movie about a detective who's mentally screwed up while a big naked blue guy goes around blowing up the Vietnamese.

Oh and batman can't get it up.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Dec 09, 2008 11:20 am 
Offline
Gazing into the abyss.
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2007 8:19 am
Posts: 1576
That must have swung it

_________________
This city is afraid of me. I have seen its true face.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Dec 09, 2008 2:28 pm 
Offline
Alien Squid Monster
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2007 11:31 pm
Posts: 127
TelepathicCephalopod wrote:
Well, it definitely sends the message that the next trailer needs to explain what makes Watchmen what it is. While the last trailer laid out the plot on a basic level, maybe the next one should include Nixon, some of the good dialogue, and more emphasis on the people behind the masks, rather than costumed vigilantes kicking the shit out of hordes of enemies. The Spirit (which looks to be a huge pile of garbage), coming out after Dark Knight might appear to the casual audience that the comic adaptation trend is over. Watchmen needs to offer the casuals something they haven't seen, and an R rating isn't gonna cut it. TV Ads aren't long enough to really convey all that much, but a two-and-a-half minute movie trailer would do nicely. The last one was about that long, and the latter half was almost all music.


Yes please.Have anyone noticed there was no mention of Nixon,Soviets or the part that grounds this movie takes place among several decades?The confusion over why Ozymandias have Schumacher-nipples or why Nite-Owl looks like poor man's Batman must be clarified.There was enough vibe that would give the message "this is not your usual superhero flick" but then again it was not exactly ground-breaking in the post-TDK world(oh man this sounds so pretentious when you write it).We need a trailer demonstrates why Watchmen is the most celebrated graphic novel of all time;why it's so special.This movie should pander to the audience who expects more from movies than Fantastic Four.

For the record I showed the trailer to three non-fans.One of them will see it but not hyped about it,the other said 'meh' and the last one answered with "when will the toys are coming out?" :evil:

_________________
...making your schoolboy heroics redundant.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Dec 09, 2008 6:39 pm 
Offline
Tired of Earth.
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 3:19 pm
Posts: 8132
Location: 1060 W. Addison St.
FYI to everyone, the Comic-Con trailer has Nixon in it.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Dec 09, 2008 7:39 pm 
Offline
So impotent.
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 14, 2008 4:33 pm
Posts: 5
Location: West Hollywood, CA
Pagliacci wrote:
And I also think a lot of people are going to miss out on this movie due to lack of interest.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aXZVheNsyQ8

TheYoungTurks, a relatively popular Youtube channel made a very poor analysis of the Watchmen trailer, without even doing research or showing interest on what it's about, all the while making very vague assumptions.

This got me thinking, if a respected Youtube channel doesn't wanna Google watchmen to find out what it's about, half these people who saw the trailer in theaters are going to think "Gee, this looks fucking stupid. Is that a batman ripoff? What's that smiley thing" but never actually look further into it.

Of course, I'm just drawing conclusions myself.

Regardless, the video pissed me off. I'm not going to blame someone for not knowing what Watchmen is, but to sit there and do an analysis of it without doing a bit of research (as I said in the comments, the guy had a fuckin' laptop right next to him!) is ridiculous.

For those who don't feel like sitting through it, lemme summarize what was said for you:

1. STAR TREK IS KEWL
2. WHAT'S WITH THAT HAPPY FACE? THAT DOESN'T FIT THE MOOD AND IT LOOKS UNCOOL
3. STAR TREK IS KEWL
4. OKAY SO THIS IS BASICALLY ABOUT A BUNCH OF RETIRED SUPERHEROS WHO DONT HAVE POWERS ANYMORE WHO GO TO A BLUE NAKED GUY FOR HELP BECAUSE HE STILL HAS SUPERPOWERS AND THEY'RE GETTING KILLED
5. I LIKE THE PART WHERE HE SAYS "THE WORLD WILL SAY SAVE US AND ILL BE LIKE NO"
6. WHATS UP WITH BATMAN WANNABE?
7. STAR TREK. HEH.

EDIT: *Weird, it cut off my title at the end even though it gave me enough space to type it all. Apologies, the thread title is not a typo.


Fuck 'em, thats what I say. Im of the opinion that something like Watchmen is not for mass consumption and the masses are stupid.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 57 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
[ Time : 0.108s | 11 Queries | GZIP : Off ]