The podcast on the watchmen costumes gave reasons for every qualm.
True. Most of the reasons were ridiculous. I mean "The Comedian looks too perfect"? What the hell? What is any of that LOGICALLY based on?
If you disagree say so, but the arguments were far from stupid. In my view people are so desperate to get a watchmen movie that you can't even have a reasoned debate about the state of affairs for and against anymore. I do not like the way the movie is going. I do not believe Snyder to be anywhere NEAR the right guy to make this film and his CV has nothing to suggest he is capable of dealing with this material properly, and the cast is mediocre at BEST.
See...THIS is what the dialogue should have been about, then. Not "The Comedian looks too perfect".
The cast is medicore???
Are they well known, no. But mediocre? Are you kidding me? It's a wonderful mix of veterans, and relative newcomers, all very talented, none such a large name that people will have trouble seeing the character. The acting talent here simply cannot really be argued on any realistic level.
Look at the cast of Batman Begins. That movie didn't have a fraction of the depth of Watchmen yet every level of the production team in that film spanks the pants off this one. You gonna compare Nolan to Snyder?
In what way does the BATMAN BEGINS production team spank the pants off Snyder? Please, be specific. Absolutely I will compare what Snyder has done with the world of WATCHMEN to what Nolan did for the world of Batman. What makes you think he hasn't?
What i LOVE is that the defence for these costumes has been based on interpretations that have NOT come from the production team or director. How do you know what the Ozy costume is a play on? Or the Night Owl? i.e. why they are diff from the comic?
Because it's OBVIOUS. Why else would Snyder, who is keeping SO MUCH of the rest of WATCHMEN's visuals relatively intact, change the costumes so "drastically"? Because, as he has stated before, he wants WATCHMEN to "comment" on superhero fare in a way that everyone can relate to.
Why else? To make things look "cool and badass"?
Then why don't they. Why do they still look ridiculous?
To state all these explanations as if they are fact is ridiculous.
Certainly less ridiculous than "The Comedian looks too perfect" or "Wah, they didn't have these materials in the 70's and 80's".
Nay sayers at least have the comic and Moore interviews to fall back on as to what the original incarnations meant. All you have is conjecture and desire to defend Snyder's choices at all costs.
300 was a popcorn forgettable film. Watchmen (unfortunately) will be one too.
Why would WATCHMEN be forgettable? I mean, if they're remotely faithful to the source, explain to me how this movie could be "forgettable".
Moving on, what does the cast for Batman Begins mean to this production? Absolutely nothing. Just because the cast, at face value, doesn't seem impressive doesn't mean this movie is doomed.
That's just it. This cast SHOULD seem impressive at face value to anyone who doesn't equate "talent" with "big name".
The defense is for these costumes have been based on common sense! Have you read the book? While reading and understanding the book did you notice that there was a world within the book? That certain things came about as a result of another thing? And that logically, if you think about it in terms of the book, it all makes sense?
You're gonna tell me that Dan Drieberg, a man with a mind brilliant enough to think of an owl-shaped hover craft and all it's computer components, owl-rangs and other gadgets that only a brilliant mind could think of, can't POSSIBLY think of a high-tech armored suit using materials that couldn't have existed with out with the existence of Dr. Manhattan, a character who, in the book, is stated to have influenced much of the technology and clothing seen in the book?
Exactly. While they are not uber-faithful, they do retain MANY key faithful elements of the original suits. And none of these costumes can truly be argued against in the context of the characters and the world they will be inhabiting.
Ozymandias is another one. LOOK AT HIS COSTUME! Then go look at art books dealing with early created by early man(especially the Egyptian and Greek works) and then look at the character of Ozymandias. Look at the picture of him. Look at what he does in the book. Look at his interests. Analyze the character. His costume makes complete sense, given the character and what he does.
Agreed.
You don't need Snyder to come out and tell you everything that's going on. It's redundant. It's like if Christopher Nolan came out and started telling us how Batman Begins is about fear, fear and more fear. And how Batman's costume is supposed to strike fear! and blah blah blah. These costumes aren't a play on anything that one can't easily assess from reading the book.
Exactly.
You want surprises, I want integrity.
I don't view "costume updates" as "surprises". You knew it was coming. Hell, Snyder and the studio told you it was coming for a year or more.
You want integrity, than you should damn well be excited about a director who seems intent on keeping every major element that he can faithful to the source material and relevant in the same fashion. Snyder is beating the CRAP out of any other comic book director in that department. Easily.
I liked the comic because it was unlike ANY comic I had ever read.
And this movie will be unlike any movie you have ever seen. Can you argue that logically? It's got the same damn source material.
It was not about flashy suits, big bangs or special effects...it was about people.
No, my friend. It was about both. The book WATCHMEN features action, intrigue, flash, special effects, and it's still all about the people in the costumes, and their world, and the significance and relevance of the superhero concept, and that's what carries the work to greatness. And why you think the movie will somehow not deal in these themes and moments is beyond me.
This comic was a drama and focused on the humanity of the characters.
Those pictures, Snyder's interviews, the leaning on green screen, the lack of Moore on board (he'd never have been so fair enough), the 2 hr and change running time, the weak cast etc etc all lead me to the conclusion that I definitely will not be paying to see this.
That's like refusing to see THE DARK KNIGHT because his ridiculous suit makes you think the movie will be all about special effects. Are you kidding me?
Sure you won't pay to see this. Sure you won't. Maybe you'll steal it, but you'll see it, and you know you will.
No way, no how. I will also make a prediction. Like all Snyder's movies...this will have a nice splash for a couple of weeks. Make the studios some nice change and then it will fade away fast when the next big movie comes along.
Like every other movie ever made? What's your point?
You guys act like I did no research. I've been following Snyder's development of this film from day one. I don't like anything he has said about it. He has NOT spoken at all about the psychology, politics, metaphors and symbolism.
Exactly which interviews were you reading?
All he keeps going on about is 'cool' and the sets, and R ratings and all these other buzz words that get people excited but mean nothing to placating my concern over him highlighting the key aspects of what made the comic unique.
I'm waiting for Snyder to talk to me about the politics, psychology and symbolism of Watchmen and how he is planning to adapt that for the movie. All these set pics and costumes stuff etc are, you are right, low on the scale. However the way he has done them worry me about these other elements I just mentioned that are VERY high on the scale. Funny how he has not talked about ANY of that stuff AT ALL.
One, why should he GIVE you the psychology of the characters? Isn't that kind of one of those "obvious" things about the story? If the characterization is intact, so too will the psychology be.
That said, I think you missed some of his key interviews. When I have time, I'll try and dig up the more reassuring ones. Try reading the script that got this project greenlighted. A script Snyder oversaw. Then tell me Snyder doesn't get it. Especially when you realize how much he has fought to include AFTER THE FACT.
Just listen to how intelligently the likes of Shymalan, Nolan and even Singer talk about their films in interviews and compare that to Snyder's.
Nolan states the obvious, and Snyder doesn't, and that's supposed to impress us?
THEN bear in mind NONE of those other director's films touch the depth of what Watchmen could and SHOULD be.
Which is?
PLEASE TRY AND UNDERSTAND AND ACCEPT some of us are not in the same boat as you. We are allowed to not like the way this is going as you can be all for it. Argue for and against but stop all this 'you have no idea what you are talking about' insinuation. It makes you into exactly what you are accusing others of being. Ignorant.
Your reasoning is absurd and biased. That's why you keep getting called out on your statements. They are vague and unfounded so far. You seem to selectively pick and choose "quotes" and "sights" that allow you to frame this film as a failure as an adaption, while apparently ignoring the elements that show this film is clearly on the right track in that regard.
"Ozymandius looked like a character who got bullied in school." Now, it's been a while since I read watchmen, but wasn't ozymandius the same man who was accused of being a homosexual by Rorschach?
