I'm reading the comic right now and I'm liking it. I'm wondering, is the film adaptation any good? I heard it was faithful to the comics. Might get it for Christmas.
Probably one of the best capeshit movies we'll ever get, and it's 3 hours long and has plenty of problems.
>>78207536
Does some things very well, others horribly. Overall worth a watch.
There are a lot of differences between the comic and the movie. But, yeah, watch it after you're done reading!
>>78207536
>I heard it was faithful to the comics
Whoever told you that hasn't read the comic.
>>78207536
It's fun if you haven't read the comic.
Otherwise it'll disappoint.
>>78207536
A lot of the shots are lovingly ripped off from the comics so in a sense it's faithful.
Outside of that it fails to capture the numerous things that made the comic so good. Typical style-over-substance, edgy Snyder shit, along with the most on-the-nose soundtrack you'll ever hear.
The Comedian, Rorschach and Dr. Manhattan are pretty good though.
>>78207818
>the most on-the-nose soundtrack you'll ever hear
Goddamn that was the worst part, like the intro sequence is great but so many other scenes just have the worst songs chosen like fucking Hallelujah.
There are a few differences, which you'll probably notice after you've seen them both. And there are complaints with some validity to them that the movie misses the point of the book. Or even that the movie was better than the book. It goes both ways. On the whole though, it's a solid adaptation and a pretty good movie.
Snyder doesn't get enough credit for it if you ask me. As a comic fan and a director, he probably knew better than anybody that Watchmen was the 'unfilmable comic'. Yet film it he did, and he pulled a solid 7/10 movie out of it. And hey, if you ask me, better Snyder than some other dick pulled in by the studio who wouldn't have cared about the source material.
>>78208225
>it's ok that it was shit because it may have been even worse
Completely irrelevant, Snyder made a shit movie that completely missed the tone and message of the comic.
>>78207584
This. At the very least you should watch it just to form your own opinions on the adaptation, since general opinion on it is so divided.
>>78208303
>Completely irrelevant, Snyder made a shit movie that completely missed the tone and message of the comic.
He got so close, but fucked up the tone of the ending.
>>78207962
>fucking Hallelujah.
that was ironic.
>>78207962
>Hallelujah
If you believe Snyder, he did that on purpose to spite the execs for mandating that there be a protracted sex scene
>>78208303
What if the tone and message of the comic sucked?
>>78208303
actually, you and Alan Moore are the ones that missed the tone and message of the comic. Alan still refuses to admit he fucked up
>>78208541
>He got so close
Not really, it was only faithful in the most superficial sense of the word. And seeing as the comic had a lot of substance (90% of which was cut), he was really off the mark.
I went in expecting V for Vendetta.
I was very impressed by comparison.
>>78208641
wat
>>78208303
You clearly haven't read the Hamm script, have you? Trust me on this, we're better off with Snyder.
>>78208714
I haven't, but a shit movie is a shit movie either way. Saying "it could've been worse" doesn't excuse Snyder.
>>78207536
>I heard it was faithful to the comics.
HAHA
>>78207818
>A lot of the shots are lovingly ripped off from the comics so in a sense it's faithful.
This treatment is what killed V for Vendetta. They decided to copy cinematography and lost time to actually develop the characters. They changed the leader from a complex character who sincerely grows more loving into a Hitler expy in every aspect yet expanded the action sequences in such a way that made even V contradict his own ideals.
The opening bothers me the most. They decide to go for the side-by-side opening, but in motion it totally messed up the timing and they had to give Evey a contrived "suddenly: rape!" conflict.
>>78208225
>Watchmen was the 'unfilmable comic'.
In what way, other than the fact that "hooded vigilantes" are more common in comics? That's not really the case in film now, is it? Nearly all pages have the same panel size and progression; for a large part of it, it reads like a storyboard.
>>78209838
because it was created specifically to show the strengths of the comic medium, dingus
>>78209854
You didn't even understand my question. IN WHAT WAY, dingus? Fully explain your thoughts.
Watch the Watchmen Midnight fanedit.
>>78207536
I found it wrong. Awfully wrong.
But a lot of people liked it, so watch it and find yourself if it is good or not.
>>78209891
well there's the symmetrical issue, first and foremost
the use of color and paneling for storytelling
density of information in a comic panel that is straight-up impossible to recreate on film
>>78207562
"Probably one of the best capeshit movies we'll ever get"
I concur as does me brother who took a hell of a lo' o' persuadin' t' watch i' such is 'is 'ate of comics but 'e absolutely loved the film
ditto the V for Vendetta film which I actu'ly rate as emotion'ly an' narratively superior t'the original comic version
>>78210123
oh what fresh hell is this
With one exception, it keeps the literal events extremely faithful. The way certain things are presented shows that the director clearly missed much of the point, though.
>>78209854
>because it was created specifically to show the strengths of the comic medium
hahahaha
>>78209838
I mean, you can really just point to the cover and say "that's why"
The cover is Page 1, Panel 1
how do you recreate that in a movie?
It's my favorite cape movie, but I'd be the first to admit it misses the point of the comic to a degree.
It's like a shallow reading of the comic put to film, which, taken on its own terms is fun.
>>78207536
As a die-hard, autistic fan of the comic, no it's not good. Although it has its upsides, I find it overall unwatchable.
>>78210385
The covers were not "Page 1, Panel 1".
Unless you're referring to the collected volume, in which case you're not referring to the actual run, i.e. the actual production of the story.
>>78210991
I'd have to go back and look again, but I'm pretty sure all the covers are Page 1, Panel 1
