Moore Unsupportive of Synder's Watchmen

[I Am The Knight]

Alan Moore is a great man. Boycott this movie because it is not watchmen.

 

[RustyCage]

Referring to just the title of the thread: Who didn't see this coming? I mean, duh, how was it not obvious that he wasn't going to watch or support ANY Watchmen movie? Why is everyone suddenly acting like this is breaking news? It's been debated inside out, man.

As far as why goes, I tend to think that while everyone has the potential to be very intelligent and open minded, there can always also be an area or two of stubbornness or refusal to even explore the idea of something. And such seems to be the case here, as a result of unfortunate circumstances. Alan Moore is brilliant, he really is, but he's also created a bit of an irrational shell. He's brilliant in one direction only when he could go two, if I were to phrase it as simply as possible. If he were involved with the project like Dave Gibbons is, like Snyder wanted him to be, this WOULD be the ultimate movie telling of the story regardless of any runtime constraints. Moore just can't break out of the shell mentality he's created about impossibilities. He hasn't wrapped his brain around a different media of story telling, it's that simple. And while I find that unfortunate, I haven't lost the admiration I had for him from his work.

 

[Mercurius]

Referring to just the title of the thread: Who didn't see this coming? I mean, duh, how was it not obvious that he wasn't going to watch or support ANY Watchmen movie? Why is everyone suddenly acting like this is breaking news? It's been debated inside out, man.

As far as why goes, I tend to think that while everyone has the potential to be very intelligent and open minded, there can always also be an area or two of stubbornness or refusal to even explore the idea of something. And such seems to be the case here, as a result of unfortunate circumstances. Alan Moore is brilliant, he really is, but he's also created a bit of an irrational shell. He's brilliant in one direction only when he could go two, if I were to phrase it as simply as possible. If he were involved with the project like Dave Gibbons is, like Snyder wanted him to be, this WOULD be the ultimate movie telling of the story regardless of any runtime constraints. Moore just can't break out of the shell mentality he's created about impossibilities. He hasn't wrapped his brain around a different media of story telling, it's that simple. And while I find that unfortunate, I haven't lost the admiration I had for him from his work.

Not true, pal.

 

[RustyCage]

Not true, pal.

Care to state why?

It's merely my personal point of view by the way. There are no facts to call it right or wrong, it's just one person's humble opinion from viewing endless interviews. Yeah, he got shafted, he has reason to fear Hollywood, and I mentioned that, but it doesn't excuse him for not opening his mind up to -trying- with Watchmen. And where trying is concerned, he himself has stated his beliefs quite clearly.

 

[Mercurius]

Care to state why?

It's merely my personal point of view by the way. There are no facts to call it right or wrong, it's just one person's humble opinion from viewing endless interviews. Yeah, he got shafted, he has reason to fear Hollywood, and I mentioned that, but it doesn't excuse him for not opening his mind up to -trying- with Watchmen. And where trying is concerned, he himself has stated his beliefs quite clearly.

Sure I care, Rusty: my pleasure.

As I've stated it before: it's not like Hollywood and mindless execs would accept all that is needed to translate his works to a equivalent, film-wise.

They need action, slo-mo, they need to cut some important dialogue in the construction of the narrative, and they need to tone it down.

In V for Vendetta, I give you three examples of what it means:

a) Evey should be reborn naked in the rain, because people aren't born with clothes, and because she's finally free (thus the metaphor, and the paralelism with V's fiery birth), but they made that ridiculous scene in which she takes her bath in the rain, decorously clothed, of course;

b) V's vigorous anarchist attitude was tinted with some doubtful behaviour, indicating some guilt in him. Anarchist views generally disappeared from the movie, to get only the terrorist side of his actions, which is just dumb;

c) Drugged policeman has a vision at the end of the book. "W-what? Drugged? Cut it, not in our movie!" t:

Just three examples of a myriad. He just can't take those guys seriously, he knows they can't stand him. Not a chance.

 

[the_tortel]

Care to state why?

It's merely my personal point of view by the way. There are no facts to call it right or wrong, it's just one person's humble opinion from viewing endless interviews. Yeah, he got shafted, he has reason to fear Hollywood, and I mentioned that, but it doesn't excuse him for not opening his mind up to -trying- with Watchmen. And where trying is concerned, he himself has stated his beliefs quite clearly.

he just wants to argue..

I agree with you though rusty, you make some valuable points

 

[Mercurius]

he just wants to argue..

I agree with you though rusty, you make some valuable points

Hey, tortellini, you're back! How are you doin'?

Oh, come on, read first, talk later.

 

[the_tortel]

Hey, tortellini, you're back! How are you doin'?

Oh, come on, read first, talk later.

great actually, thanks for asking

and I did read first, I still talked though

 

[RustyCage]

Thanks tortel. t: That was encouraging, usually I just run into a bunch of elitist creeps on forums.. so I try not to post here too much to avoid any unpleasant encounters I will likely have to endure while trying to share my feelings or be excited about the movies/games/books/whathaveyou that I'm into. Sigh..


And thank you too, Mercurius (you wouldn't be named after the Mobile Suit would you?), for actually providing something substantial, because I found it a bit insulting that you just went 'Nope, you're wrong.' without a single statement to suggest why. But anyway, I wouldn't say that what you have to say makes me wrong at all. As I said before -- in the same post you disagreed with, making this slightly redundant -- sure he got shafted in the past (even if I still found V to be incredible in both formats despite the differences), but shouldn't that encourage him to do more to stand in the way of that kind of treatment of his works in the future?

If you were Alan Moore, wouldn't you want to be involved to make sure it goes right, to deliver it to a new audience in a new way and make it something special? I mean, Zack offered him that, and if it were me, I'd have a hard time declining because I'd be passionate about Watchmen REGARDLESS of what happened with film adaptations of my works in the past, I'd want to try and make it the best it can possibly be because it's my baby.

But instead, he's taken the past incidents in combination with his cynicism and inability to see the possibility of good in film, and created this shell that he can't see through. That he chooses not to see through, according to his interviews. He has stated that he has no interest in trying. So, even taking things like what you said into account, that's my diagnosis, and I think it's pretty well grounded.

 

[Mercurius]

great actually, thanks for asking

and I did read first, I still talked though

You need to improve this reading technique, then: there was more than that grumpy retort of yours in that nice and wholesome post of mine.

 

[the_tortel]

Thanks tortel. t: That was encouraging, usually I just run into a bunch of elitist creeps on forums.. so I try not to post here too much to avoid any unpleasant encounters I will likely have to endure while trying to share my feelings or be excited about the movies/games/books/whathaveyou that I'm into. Sigh..


And thank you too, Mercurius (you wouldn't be named after the Mobile Suit would you?), for actually providing something substantial, because I found it a bit insulting that you just went 'Nope, you're wrong.' without a single statement to suggest why. But anyway, I wouldn't say that what you have to say makes me wrong at all. As I said before -- in the same post you disagreed with, making this slightly redundant -- sure he got shafted in the past (even if I still found V to be incredible in both formats despite the differences), but shouldn't that encourage him to do more to stand in the way of that kind of treatment of his works in the future?

If you were Alan Moore, wouldn't you want to be involved to make sure it goes right, to deliver it to a new audience in a new way and make it something special? I mean, Zack offered him that, and if it were me, I'd have a hard time declining because I'd be passionate about Watchmen REGARDLESS of what happened with film adaptations of my works in the past, I'd want to try and make it the best it can possibly be because it's my baby.

But instead, he's taken the past incidents in combination with his cynicism and inability to see the possibility of good in film, and created this shell that he can't see through. That he chooses not to see through, according to his interviews. He has stated that he has no interest in trying. So, even taking things like what you said into account, that's my diagnosis, and I think it's pretty well grounded.

no problem buddy, I know how things can be out there... gotta look out for a brother

 

[RustyCage]

You need to improve this reading technique, then: there was more than that grumpy retort of yours in that nice and wholesome post of mine.

This seems the most like a retort out of the conversation between you two. It only serves to prove tortel to be correct about your intentions..

 

[the_tortel]

You need to improve this reading technique, then: there was more than that grumpy retort of yours in that nice and wholesome post of mine.

I doubt it, even the most complex statements can merit very simple answers

 

[Mercurius]

Thanks tortel. t: That was encouraging, usually I just run into a bunch of elitist creeps on forums.. so I try not to post here too much to avoid any unpleasant encounters I will likely have to endure while trying to share my feelings or be excited about the movies/games/books/whathaveyou that I'm into. Sigh..


And thank you too, Mercurius (you wouldn't be named after the Mobile Suit would you?), for actually providing something substantial, because I found it a bit insulting that you just went 'Nope, you're wrong.' without a single statement to suggest why. But anyway, I wouldn't say that what you have to say makes me wrong at all. As I said before -- in the same post you disagreed with, making this slightly redundant -- sure he got shafted in the past (even if I still found V to be incredible in both formats despite the differences), but shouldn't that encourage him to do more to stand in the way of that kind of treatment of his works in the future?

If you were Alan Moore, wouldn't you want to be involved to make sure it goes right, to deliver it to a new audience in a new way and make it something special? I mean, Zack offered him that, and if it were me, I'd have a hard time declining because I'd be passionate about Watchmen REGARDLESS of what happened with film adaptations of my works in the past, I'd want to try and make it the best it can possibly be because it's my baby.

But instead, he's taken the past incidents in combination with his cynicism and inability to see the possibility of good in film, and created this shell that he can't see through. That he chooses not to see through, according to his interviews. He has stated that he has no interest in trying. So, even taking things like what you said into account, that's my diagnosis, and I think it's pretty well grounded.

It's funny that you use to run into elitist creeps. I myself stamp on tiny silly maggots now and then.

What you just said above is, obviously, the difference between you yourself and Moore, and your diagnosis is obviously well-grounded, but in your own projective behaviour in the same situation.

But as to Moore, it is way from the mark, IMO, Rusty.

 

[Mercurius]

I doubt it, even the most complex statements can merit very simple answers

Indeed, my dear retortel. t:

 

[the_tortel]

Indeed, my dear retortel. t:

that's a good one, I never thought of retort being in my name, haha

that's cool

edit: I feel like I'm spamming, I leave this at this

 

[RustyCage]

It's funny that you use to run into elitist creeps. I myself stamp on tiny silly maggots now and then.

What you just said above is, obviously, the difference between you yourself and Moore, and your diagnosis is obviously well-grounded, but in your own projective behaviour in the same situation.

But as to Moore, it is way from the mark, IMO, Rusty.

No no, I described what I would do, and what any person with an open mind and passion for his past masterpiece would do. Try. Forget the past and do what you can to be involved and make sure it happens right this time. That was an example to help explain what you apparently misunderstood when you disagreed. But my diagnosis applies to what Moore IS doing, which is not trying. Simple enough.

Nice try in twisting that around though, it seems tortel was pretty close to the mark as to you, IMO, Mercurius.

 

[Mercurius]

Nice try in twisting that around though, it seems tortel was pretty close to the mark as to you, IMO, Mercurius.

Whenever you need a twist in order to see your own ideas more clearly, just call, Rusty.

 

[Bubastis]

Tonight that stupid Gerard Way moron said that Watchmen fans have been waiting 20 years for the film. Thats when I realized; is the graphic novel not good enough? Like the book only existed as a blueprint for the film?
Alan Moore is right. Why do we wait with anticipation for the film to be regurgitated for us in another medium that we know won't be as good!? DO we subconsciously still think that film is the ultimate medium and is superior to the graphic novel format?

 

[Crook]

There are many people who think film is the ultimate medium for telling a story. So yes, lol.

 

[The Guard]

Tonight that stupid Gerard Way moron said that Watchmen fans have been waiting 20 years for the film. Thats when I realized; is the graphic novel not good enough? Like the book only existed as a blueprint for the film?
Alan Moore is right. Why do we wait with anticipation for the film to be regurgitated for us in another medium that we know won't be as good!? DO we subconsciously still think that film is the ultimate medium and is superior to the graphic novel format?

Why do people look forward to a Batman, Superman, or X-Men movie? Or any other film?

Because it's exciting to see something you grew up loving rendered in a different medium.

 

[Bubastis]

Why do people look forward to a Batman, Superman, or X-Men movie? Or any other film?

Because it's exciting to see something you grew up loving rendered in a different medium.

The difference is that there are dozens of Batman, X-men, and Superman stories that can be told, or can be told better. Watchmen is perfect exactly where it is. And to read it and think afterwards "Man, that was pretty good, but it's too bad that it's not a movie instead. I hope somebody adapts it so that I can be told the same story again."

 

[Nirvana]

Alan Moore is such a *****ebag.

 

[Evil Twin]

The difference is that there are dozens of Batman, X-men, and Superman stories that can be told, or can be told better. Watchmen is perfect exactly where it is. And to read it and think afterwards "Man, that was pretty good, but it's too bad that it's not a movie instead. I hope somebody adapts it so that I can be told the same story again."

Who here thinks that a movie has to be as good as or better than the original in order for it to be a worthwhile film adaptation? I don't. IMO, that's a straw man argument.

I didn't knock No Country For Old Men because it wasn't Cormac McCarthy's story word for word. There have been various adaptations of Shakespeare's work over the years, some better, some worse, but it didn't mean that each attempt didn't bring something to the table. A very legitimate reason to bring Watchmen to screen is because it IS grander in theme, scope, depth, symbolism, and ideas than the X-Men, Superman, Batman, Iron Man, etc. superhero movies we have been getting. Potentially raising the bar on what we get from superhero movies is a more than worthwhile goal.

 

[Solidus]

Who here thinks that a movie has to be as good as or better than the original in order for it to be a worthwhile film adaptation? I don't. IMO, that's a straw man argument.

I didn't knock No Country For Old Men because it wasn't Cormac McCarthy's story word for word. There have been various adaptations of Shakespeare's work over the years, some better, some worse, but it didn't mean that each attempt didn't bring something to the table. A very legitimate reason to bring Watchmen to screen is because it IS grander in theme, scope, depth, symbolism, and ideas than the X-Men, Superman, Batman, Iron Man, etc. superhero movies we have been getting. Potentially raising the bar on what we get from superhero movies is a more than worthwhile goal.

Even though I keep saying the same thing again and again. But LOTR is another example. Considered a classic by most, and did not follow it word from word, and changed a lot. Even though Watchmen is my favorite Graphic novel and story of all time, there is always room for improvement. And sometimes a film can help. And of course it can hurt it as well. But to me everything I have seen and heard, it seems to be doing a great job bringing it into this medium.

But well said Evil.