Mr. Ex wrote:
As for recommending a version to a first-timer, it has to be this version. Simply because this version is closest to the novel. Some folks have said that it's "too much" for a newbie. Well, if it is, then the novel is too much for a newbie.
I couldn't disagree more. The transitions in the book aren't so jarring; TBF blends seamlessly into the story. In the movie, it sticks out like a sore thumb and disrupts the story. The individual scenes also had little relevance to that point in the story. Unlike the book where the relevance is clear.
Also, in a book, the reader has control over pacing. They can read as fast or slow as they want. They can take as long as they want to ponder the meaning of something. You can't do this in a movie. The director has complete control over pacing. This is one reason why a complex and multi-layered story like Watchmen works best as a GRAPHIC NOVEL. And it's a reason why no movie could ever capture all the depth of the graphic novel. It's no one's fault, it's just the nature of these mediums.
Watchmen is often praised for doing things that only a graphic novel could do, and TBF is the perfect example. It would be a mess as a regular book, and it was a mess as a film. But in a graphic novel, it works perfectly. The perfect medium for it.
"Closest to the book" in what sense? It terms of literal events? Yes, perhaps. But in terms of good story-telling? Comes no where close to the book.
Saying "if you won't like the film then you won't like the book" is simply absurd. Neither film version comes anywhere close to capturing the brilliance of the graphic novel.