whats Alan Moore saying about this movie?

[WalterKovacs]

i think thats totally wrong, there have been consistently bad movies made of alan moores graphic novel, from V for Vendetta to the absolute crap of League of Extraordinary gentlemen, Moore is just trying to save himself the embarassment of a poor quality movie with his name on it but i feel if he sees the movie and it is good (which i am still 50-50 on) he may agree to have his name put on it, so before you go around bashing one of the greatest writers of all time put some thought into what you are going to say.

right on

 

[WalterKovacs]

That guy should take his head out of his ass. If I wrote a comicbook and it were to be made in a movie I sure as hell would go see it, and even be consultant. Why can't he be like Mignola of Miller.


Wait....




It's the beard. I'm sure it is the beard. It has taken over control. Tonight, we raid Moore's house. bring electric shavers and balaclava's.

you know, if he were more like miller or mignola, he wouldnt be alan moore. he hasnt become a ****e, like veidt or ur mom (jk on that last one)

 

[MaskedManJRK]

you know, if he were more like miller or mignola, he wouldnt be alan moore. he hasnt become a ****e, like veidt or ur mom (jk on that last one)

Hey! That was totally uncalled for!

Veidt wasn't a ****e!

 

[WalterKovacs]

Hey! That was totally uncalled for!

Veidt wasn't a ****e!

lol <3

 

[MaskedManJRK]

lol <3

But seriously, I don't get how Mignolia and Miller are ****es.

 

[Jon Osterman]

you know, if he were more like miller or mignola, he wouldnt be alan moore. he hasnt become a ****e, like veidt or ur mom (jk on that last one)

Dude veidt isnt a ****e,veidt could pull of the ever envied, you have to pay me to give me a bj, that my friend, is class TRANSFORM!

 

[WalterKovacs]

Dude veidt isnt a ****e,veidt could pull of the ever envied, you have to pay me to give me a bj, that my friend, is class TRANSFORM!

dude seriously, what are you smoking?

and whatever it is, can i have some?

 

[Jon Osterman]

dude seriously, what are you smoking?

and whatever it is, can i have some?

dude, what im smoking is LIFE!!! and i dont mean like my life, i mean like shredded boardgame, its awesome

 

[WalterKovacs]

But seriously, I don't get how Mignolia and Miller are ****es.

mm, i think alan moore is picky in terms of hollywood, and i dont necesarily think either are ****es per say but sin city wasnt great, nor was 300. but i did love hellboy so my bad. stan lee, however, is a ****e. (lol, enjoy the imagery folks)

 

[Joker]

Sin City was great though, it was panel for panel from the comics...300 was also very good

 

[WalterKovacs]

Sin City was great though, it was panel for panel from the comics...300 was also very good

yeah it was pannel for pannel, and it was visually stunning but as a movie(s) it was nothing great

 

[Comic Book Boy]

yeah it was pannel for pannel, and it was visually stunning but as a movie(s) it was nothing great

I'm laughing, because I don't even have to debate this. The sheer number of people who disagree with you speak for themselves.

 

[Carmine Falcone]

I'm laughing, because I don't even have to debate this. The sheer number of people who disagree with you speak for themselves.

Wow. A textbook Ad Populum

 

[Steelsheen]

Nobody's perfect I guess, and he's had to learn the hard way.

As far as V for Vendetta and Watchmen (and the For The Man Who Has Everything Superman one-off that made it to the JLU animated show), Moore doesn't own the rights... DC do, and always have. It's a long, sorry story...

And since DC Comics and Warner Bros Studios are all part 'n' parcel of the mighty Time Warner Mega Globalcorp, well...

hmmm, well thanks for clearing that up man. i thought like most righters they start off with all the rights belonging to them then option them off as they please.

yeah it was pannel for pannel, and it was visually stunning but as a movie(s) it was nothing great

Sin City was really good, but its true that its not as great as 300.

 

[Jon Osterman]

yeah it was pannel for pannel, and it was visually stunning but as a movie(s) it was nothing great

Sin City was a good adaptation as well as one of the best visual movies i have seen but i agree in that the only thing incredibly remarkable about the plot is that they didnt turn it in to the clusterfudge of V for Vendetta or League of Extraordinary Gentlemen

 

[Figs]

yeah it was pannel for pannel, and it was visually stunning but as a movie(s) it was nothing great

I will assume then that you didn't like the graphic novels either since the film 300 was extremely close to the novel as well as Sin City was basically spot on. I understand when a writer gets pissed because his work translated to another medium gets changed and or altered but when it comes to V for Vendetta I don't see what the huge deal was. Aside from the fact that Moore seems to be anal like a fanboy and wants it translated 100% exactly like the novel. I love his written works, but as movies I still enjoyed From Hell and loved V for Vendetta. League was crap all around though lol. I just don't get aside from being anal, what the big deal about V was. It kept the main message of his book, the strength to rise against a totalitarian government. Which for those about to jump on me with the Anarchy thing, anarchy is definetly always apart of overthrowing a government/dictator. It's a cycle, when a country/government gets so corrupt you need the system to completely crash to start anew and fresh.

 

[WalterKovacs]

I will assume then that you didn't like the graphic novels either since the film 300 was extremely close to the novel as well as Sin City was basically spot on. I understand when a writer gets pissed because his work translated to another medium gets changed and or altered but when it comes to V for Vendetta I don't see what the huge deal was. Aside from the fact that Moore seems to be anal like a fanboy and wants it translated 100% exactly like the novel. I love his written works, but as movies I still enjoyed From Hell and loved V for Vendetta. League was crap all around though lol. I just don't get aside from being anal, what the big deal about V was. It kept the main message of his book, the strength to rise against a totalitarian government. Which for those about to jump on me with the Anarchy thing, anarchy is definetly always apart of overthrowing a government/dictator. It's a cycle, when a country/government gets so corrupt you need the system to completely crash to start anew and fresh.

yeah but the movie was about left wing versus right wing (and there was a right answer) whereas the graphic novel was longer, more complex, and was about totalitarianism versus anarchy in terms of ideas. the movie was much more dumbed down

 

[Jon Osterman]

Damn Straight!

 

[WalterKovacs]

Sin City was a good adaptation as well as one of the best visual movies i have seen but i agree in that the only thing incredibly remarkable about the plot is that they didnt turn it in to the clusterfudge of V for Vendetta or League of Extraordinary Gentlemen

im sorry, but clusterfudge is the funniest word i have ever heard

 

[Figs]

yeah but the movie was about left wing versus right wing (and there was a right answer) whereas the graphic novel was longer, more complex, and was about totalitarianism versus anarchy in terms of ideas. the movie was much more dumbed down

To a small extent it may have had some left wing/right wing motives. Overall it was also about totalitarianism like the book, just not as complex or long though. The film had a dictator type character(name escapes me at the moment), the people had strict rules and basically no real freedoms. That is not left or right wing ideals, it's totalitarianism at it's heart.

 

[Nivek]

Wow. Rampant stupidity. Sad, but expected.

 

[WalterKovacs]

Wow. Rampant stupidity. Sad, but expected.

well im so sorry we cant all live up to be geniuses like you

 

[The Mighty Wind]

Yeah I don't get his apathy toward Hollywood adaptations of his work. It's almost as if he doesn't care what half the planet feels about his work.

wait a minute. That actually could be considered a noble stance.

Some writers and artists are just that way (I certainly hold the same sort of opinion). They created a work of art, and the way they established it, is how they want the public to view that work, its how they intended it, and "adapting" cheapens the value of their work for them.

That said, I still want my Watchmen movie, but I do know that if I were in Moore's position, I'd probably hold a similar opinion.

 

[Captain Carnage]

Oh, another quick V for Vendetta gripe, if I may.

The comic is a cautionary tale, warning the reader of the dangers of embracing and then being seduced by totalitarianism, turning a blind eye to the truth until it's too late and we all find ourselves under the cosh and minus our freedom (as history has all too often demonstrated). Following the limited nuclear conflict of the comic, the people of England allowed Norsefire to take advantage of the situation and achieve supremacy, establishing a power base that then became nigh on impossible to challenge and so paving the way for the atrocity of places like Larkhill.

Whereas in the movie, we had Norsefire (mentioned only once by name incidentally, as I recall) engineering acts of terrorism in order to deceive the population and basically trick them into elevating them into power. No insidious element of seduction of the masses at all, just plain, straightforward deception from the word go... which by and large lets the public off the hook.

To my mind, this weakens the intended message of Moore's work and provides for a much less satisfying (and disturbing) story. It's a lot more sinister and thought-provoking to think that, sometimes... we all but do these things to ourselves...

My concern is, bringing this thread back OT, that the Watchmen movie will similarly dilute Moore's powerful themes and overall message in similar fashion. What a wasted opportunity if that turns out to be the case (and having seen a script as recent as last November... I'm not hopeful).

 

[Superhobo]

I always thought that it was handled better in the book, Norsefire's (and Susan's) rise to power. In the book, like you said, the people themselves were afraid, and in their fear, allowed Norsefire to rise to supremecy, which allows for stuff like Norsefire. This is how it happens in real life, e.g., Hitler. In the movie, there's a convoluted backstory that tells it in reverse, with the concentration camps coming first (which, and lets be honest, folks, wouldn't go by without notice in the way that it does in the movie), then the "virus,"(which is the film's version of the nuclear conflict, I guess.) and so on.
I enjoyed the movie as a whole, but I wish they would have stuck with the comic's backstory.