I never particularly disliked Snyder's movie, but I think it's possible to a stronger adaptation with more fidelity to the book.... but I also don't think that would be particularly exciting.
All my favorite comic adaptations tend to draw inspiration from more than one source rather than just being a straight adaptation of one thing (Batman Begins isn't just Batman: Year One, Civil War isn't solely based on that one comic). On the other side of it, one movie I quickly got bored with was Sin City, which lifted everything from one source. It had a certain novelty among other comic movies, but the novelty wore off and it was just like "Okay, I already have this story being told in a visual medium, I don't need the added benefit of watching Bruce Willis barely care."
Now, the first approach would be difficult to apply to Watchmen, given that (1) the story is only 12 issues long, and (2) a legion of folks would tear you to shreds for trying to insert supplemental material into the larger Watchmen narrative.
So we're left with what Lindelof is talking about (if I'm remotely understanding what it is he's talking about) which is more thematic and a response to the current cultural/political climate, just as the comic was in '85-86, rather than necessarily being literal. The whole explanation seems a bit murky (he says it's not a sequel, but then makes it sound very much like a sequel) and, I imagine, will only really start to make sense once we get character info/footage. But I get a sense that they're sort of throwing the source material in a blender and unloading it on the present day and we'll just have to see where that takes us.
I'm rather excited at the notion of Lindelof escaping the confines of full fidelity to the book. The Leftovers was already good in that first season, but it really took off when they got kept going beyond that book's ending.
Either way, Alan Moore's gonna hate it regardless of which way you go, so y'know...
