Moore Unsupportive of Synder's Watchmen

[DDS]

From the mainpage:
http://www.superherohype.com/news/watchmennews.php?id=7669

Source:Los Angeles Times
September 18, 2008



With the 20th Century Fox lawsuit against Warner Bros. over Zack Snyder's Watchmen still unresolved, the Los Angeles Times' "Hero Complex" blog recently interviewed comic creator and author Alan Moore and got his opinion on the movie that many have felt might finally get one of Moore's stories right. Moore apparently hasn't had his opinion about Hollywood swayed or changed, because he isn't just against the adaption of his graphic novel finally coming to the big screen, but seemingly against movies in general.

In the interview, Moore says that he finds "film in its modern form to be quite bullying," and as far as the much-publicized lawsuit, Moore seems to be thrilled about the legal problems surrounding the film which is due out on March 6, 2009, two months after the trial date that's been set for the case. "Will the film even be coming out? There are these legal problems now, which I find wonderfully ironic. Perhaps it's been cursed from afar, from England, and I can tell you that I will also be spitting venom all over it for months to come."

Then again, Moore has never watched any of the film adaptations of his books, and Zack Snyder probably shouldn't feel too bad that Moore isn't positive or supportive of the hard work he's been putting into making Watchmen faithful to Moore's original work.

You can read the rest of the interview with Moore here.

Meh, it looks like he just hates Hollywood. This doesn't make the film seem like it'll be any less unfaithful to me.

 

[MonBeeb]

Moore always detests the movies adapted from his books. From his perspective Watchmen the Movie is impossible because Watchmen was written specifically to do things that could only be done in comic books. He's going to hate it no matter what.

 

[Dr. Manhatten]

I kinda wish they'd stop talking to him about this (and I'm sure he wishes the same). He won't do a 180 on this and it's pretty well known he's against the adaptation so why keep bringing this up? How many different ways can we hear that he hates Hollywood and uses voodoo curses on Zach Snyder? Don't feed the troll

 

[The Major]

Moore always detests the movies adapted from his books. From his perspective Watchmen the Movie is impossible because Watchmen was written specifically to do things that could only be done in comic books. He's going to hate it no matter what.

It goes deeper then that. Wasn't Alan Moore sued for fraud when they made the League movie?

 

[CrimsonMist]

He'll always be that way. I do respect his opinion, as it's well justified, but this time only, i think he's making a mistake.

But i do think his idea that comics only currently exist because Hollywood is making movies off them is rather interesting.

 

[The Major]

He'll always be that way.

I don't blame him at all for being burnt off from it. It's not like he doesn't have a reason to be angry over his treatment by Hollywood.

I do respect his opinion, as it's well justified, but this time only, i think he's making a mistake.

Agreed.

But i do think his idea that comics only currently exist because Hollywood is making movies off them is rather interesting.

I agree with him. The last few years Hollywood and the comic industry have become quite incestuous. Much more then it used to be.

 

[Johann Krauss]

Who didn't see this coming?

 

[Ryudoz]

Source:Los Angeles Times
September 18, 2008



With the 20th Century Fox lawsuit against Warner Bros. over Zack Snyder's Watchmen still unresolved, the Los Angeles Times' "Hero Complex" blog recently interviewed comic creator and author Alan Moore and got his opinion on the movie that many have felt might finally get one of Moore's stories right. Moore apparently hasn't had his opinion about Hollywood swayed or changed, because he isn't just against the adaption of his graphic novel finally coming to the big screen, but seemingly against movies in general.

In the interview, Moore says that he finds "film in its modern form to be quite bullying," and as far as the much-publicized lawsuit, Moore seems to be thrilled about the legal problems surrounding the film which is due out on March 6, 2009, two months after the trial date that's been set for the case. "Will the film even be coming out? There are these legal problems now, which I find wonderfully ironic. Perhaps it's been cursed from afar, from England, and I can tell you that I will also be spitting venom all over it for months to come."

Then again, Moore has never watched any of the film adaptations of his books, and Zack Snyder probably shouldn't feel too bad that Moore isn't positive or supportive of the hard work he's been putting into making Watchmen faithful to Moore's original work.

You can read the rest of the interview with Moore here.

Shocker.

 

[Darknightnomis]

This is getting old.

Alan Moore has a legitamite beef with the way Hollywood has butchered his work (League of Xtrodinary Get. was horrific) but his continious cantankerous angst against Hollywood is not sounding so genuinebut just getting to be an "act".

 

[Docker2.0]

Dude is crazy but its a book he wrote and I just find it odd that people are bashing him becuase he doesn't want his work on film. He wrote the book so just respect his wishes. Dude is getting ripped on the mainpage becuase of what he believes over his own work.

 

[Mister Sinister]

Alan Moore has never been Mark Millar when it comes to adaptations of his work, he'll always be like that, this shouldn't be a surprise to anyone.

 

[Commodore Schmidlapp]

Alan Moore is my absolute favorite writer in any medium, but is really getting old. We get it, you don't like your work being adapted or the Hollywood system in general.

 

[Mr. Biggles]

He'll always be that way. I do respect his opinion, as it's well justified, but this time only, i think he's making a mistake.

But i do think his idea that comics only currently exist because Hollywood is making movies off them is rather interesting.

I agree with ya.

I kinda wish he does at least give this movie a chance, just in case it might give him a bit of a more positive view.

But still, it's understandable, and that's his opinion, so there we have it.

 

[Chris Wallace]

Moore always detests the movies adapted from his books. From his perspective Watchmen the Movie is impossible because Watchmen was written specifically to do things that could only be done in comic books. He's going to hate it no matter what.

I don't think this comes as a surprise to anyone. Especially after he wanted his name taken off of "V For Vendetta"-which I found to be better than the GN. I'm getting a little tired of hearing how much he hates the movies based off his work.

 

[Sawyer]

I understand Moore's perspective on this, and even though I think the movie looks great, I respect his views (he wrote the book, he has every right not to like the adaptation).

But that doesnt make him any less of a *****ebag.

 

[Steyin]

Moore should come to realize that this film is something that will make fans of his work happy, as would any adaptation of any comic really. Reading one medium and using your imaination can only go so far; seeing what you have read come to life in a visual sense is something only film/TV can do, and everyone deserves to have this happen. To argue against adapting the written into the visual, IMO at least, is to deprive people of seeing their wildest dreams/imaginary interpretation to come to fruition. For this reason is why I can't stand Moore or anyone really who stands in the way of such a transition.

Is the result always good though? No, but if the originators of the material would be open to aid in this transformation, rather than ***** about it, I think the results would be better.

 

[Solidus]

I love listening to all the idiots that know nothing of Alan on the front page at comingsoon.net, and all their little comments on it.

Alan is a God of writing. But most know he's a little...crazy. He is one of those types, brilliant, but also a little unstable. I understand his perspective, but I think he has a self ego that he may have acquired since he was born.

He bashes his own work to no end. He bashes TKJ, which I thought was flawless, and he thinks it was crap. He's just one of those type, he is a genius but sometimes a little big egotistical because he is. That may sound confusing but lol this is nothing new with Moore, he's been like this always.

 

[WormyT]

I love Alan Moores work.
But you know, hes always been a bit pompous. He prob can be.

Every now and then I meet people who don't like film at all and never rent movies or go to theatres. Hes probably one of them, mix that with LXG and his ego and you have this attitude.
It amazes me that he can't just go "huh, hey thats interesting but you missed the point of my story".

But, obviously his eccentric, superior mind is on a higher divine plane of reality and dimensional realm from within the portal of conciousness.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ucba9NtF3cE

 

[The Guard]

I don't see an ounce of crazy in the man. He's a little angry, he has a legitimate beef from some things that have happened to his work and because of it, not the least of which is his split with DC, and he's still letting that stuff bias everything about this work. And he hates Hollywood. The man's entitled to his opinion. It's just nice to see fans not going "Yeah, Moore's right" just because he created the property.

Dude is crazy but its a book he wrote and I just find it odd that people are bashing him
becuase he doesn't want his work on film. He wrote the book so just respect his wishes. Dude is getting ripped on the mainpage becuase of what he believes over his own work.

Moore didn't just write it...he sold the rights to the book, or DC produced it and owned the rights outright to begin with. I doubt he wrote WATCHMEN for free. He doesn't get to decide what's done with it anymore, and you'd think he'd realize that.

 

[RakuMon]

My problem with Moore is that he is completely hypocritical to object to "adaptations" of his original work when his entire body of work is all about adapting other people's stuff and taking them out of their original context.

Watchmen was pitched as a riff on the Charleton characters. League of Extraordinary Gentlemen is based on the literary works of Stoker, Haggard, Wells, Doyle, and countless others. Have you seen Lost Girls? You think J.M. Barrie would have approved of the way Alan Moore "adapted" Wendy from Peter Pan?

When you think about it, movies like "V for Vendetta" and, likely, "Watchmen," are closer to the spirit and intent of the original books than Moore's own variations on his sources are. The Wachowskis and Snyder bend over backward to make sure their movies adhere as much as cinematically possible to Moore's works whereas Moore does whatever the hell he wants with Mina Harker, Jack the Ripper, or Little Red Riding Hood.

 

[MonBeeb]

My problem with Moore is that he is completely hypocritical to object to "adaptations" of his original work when his entire body of work is all about adapting other people's stuff and taking them out of their original context.

I believe it's called "deconstruction," and I'm pretty sure it's very different from adapting a literary work into a soulless cash-cow of a movie. That's the real key here. From his perspective these adaptations are soulless.

 

[IKnowSomeJudo]

There are three or four companies now that exist for the sole purpose of creating not comics, but storyboards for films. It may be true that the only reason the comic book industry now exists is for this purpose, to create characters for movies, board games and other types of merchandise.

This is very true. I can't count how many times I've read reports of comic book writers selling adaptation rights of their work to big studios BEFORE THEY'VE EVEN BEGUN WRITING IT.
It's like noone's interested in working on comics for comics' sake alone; "the comic I wrote, yeah it's pretty cool and all, but wait till you see the movie, man. THE MOVIE"
And people like Mark Millar would probably ditch their comic careers and sell their own mothers if someone offered them a janitor's job on a movie studio lot.

 

[matrix_ghost]

My problem with Moore is that he is completely hypocritical to object to "adaptations" of his original work when his entire body of work is all about adapting other people's stuff and taking them out of their original context.

Watchmen was pitched as a riff on the Charleton characters. League of Extraordinary Gentlemen is based on the literary works of Stoker, Haggard, Wells, Doyle, and countless others. Have you seen Lost Girls? You think J.M. Barrie would have approved of the way Alan Moore "adapted" Wendy from Peter Pan?

When you think about it, movies like "V for Vendetta" and, likely, "Watchmen," are closer to the spirit and intent of the original books than Moore's own variations on his sources are. The Wachowskis and Snyder bend over backward to make sure their movies adhere as much as cinematically possible to Moore's works whereas Moore does whatever the hell he wants with Mina Harker, Jack the Ripper, or Little Red Riding Hood.

THank you .
And i thought i was the only one who thought like that. It's this thing that i don't understand with moore. I think the guy is brilliant writer but at the same time a eccentric/weirdo ( choose whichever word is more fitting) figure.
But it's okay for him to complete change certain characters and interpret them in a different way but if someone else does that to his characters , he''ll get pissed

 

[Bubastis]

I believe it's called "deconstruction," and I'm pretty sure it's very different from adapting a literary work into a soulless cash-cow of a movie. That's the real key here. From his perspective these adaptations are soulless.

 

[Mercurius]

Moore is right, obviously: no director would ever be bold enough to embrace the most daring parts of his work, both in sense and in form.

Watchmen may be a nice movie to watch, but it will sound like a short and bashful version of the comics for those who read the book and understood some of it.

But, anyway, Fox deserves a little bit of punishment for being so greedy. A nice, straight boycott would be just wonderful.