why do people hate this movie so much? Please I would like a decent discussion.
>>66619998
It's a soulless imitation of the source material. Snyder can reproduce the image from the page, but not the emotion.
The director is a known hack
>>66619998
>why do people hate this movie
directed by Zack Snyder. same movie with any other directors name on it and it would have made top 10 lists.
>>66619998
It's not a movie for the masses. People who actually know something about movies don't hate it.
people hate it?
>>66620094
So you think it's people that ahte the director more than the movie being bad?
>>66619998
I don't hate it.
I liked the Film Noir / Crime Thriller elements with Rorschach. The rest wasn't that good.
And the naked Manhattan with his blue cock ... that was even weirder than grown-up men in tight leather bat costumes.
>>66620071
thanks for your insight, I should read the watchmen sooner or later, I just have the money to buy the whole series.
>>66620094
It's literally this
>>66620104
ahahaha
>>66619998
Bad acting on some of the part and the plot change at the end ruined it. Other than that the movie was pretty well done.
>>66620104
>>66620122
don't get me wrong I absolutely loved it from start to finish, and I have watched the ultimate cut.
I do udnerstand that people whoa re attached tot he source material can be upset but I personally love Snyder film making, at least the movies I've seen so far.
>>66620217
which aprts? Don't specify ont he ending maybe I woudl liek to read the source amterial sooner or later.
>>66620094
This. After both Sucker Punch and Man of Steel turned out to be shit people started saying his actual good movies like this and 300 were shit too.
>>66620278
I loved MOS but I really don't want this to become a MOS discussion.
>>66619998
Because they can't accept that Snyder accidentally made a good movie. The source material was so good that all he had to do was follow the basic premise of the story and make it look cool and it turned out good.
>>66620311
thanks for your opinion, I feel a little better now loving this movie.
I personally find the opening credits to be one of the most beautiful i've ever seen.
Like for example Conana The Barbarian .
>>66619998
Because it copy pasted the story of one medium into another without accounting for why it was held in such high regards in the first place.
>>66620104
This. It's a patrician classic
It's completely unnecessary. The original comic book was an incredible work and didn't need to be translated into another medium.
By making it into a movie, Snyder didn't add anything into the source material, but tried copying it meticulously page by page. It was a good effort, but doesn't hold up to the comic book, and a lot of the work is lost in the transposition from one medium to another.
Many movie adaptations work incredibly (The Godfather, Kubrick movies, Raging Bull, etc) because they do something the original couldn't, they go further, they add something, even - and in many cases - if the original work is not so good to begin with. Watchmen couldn't do it as a movie, because the comic book was already excelent, and there was nothing to be added.
100% pointless to watch if you've read the comic which probably every fan has already done several times over.
To do a frame by frame adaptation but change the ending was full retard.
I liked it, but it definetly could have been better. Like most comic adaptions though the fans always complain about how it's not a true adaption or as good as the original medium.
>>66620378
what does that mean?
>>66620278
>Sucker Punch
>turned out to be shit
Word of mouth killed it in the box office.
An arthouse capeshit film was already a tall order but then Jamal saw it on Friday night expecting the usual, hated it and told everyone about the blue cock.
>>66620380
>irrational fanboy: the post
>>66620604
>>66620541
I would like to not get shitposting, although I asked more about the movie itself being good or not as a movie and not compared to the source material I do understand fans that cna be upset.
Anyway thanks everyoen for the discussion, now I have a better vision of people's idea of this movie. I'm pleased I am not the onyl oen who loved it. :)
>>66620257
He did not changed the ending in the sence of "how", he change one part of it in the sence of "what". He changed one thing that did exactly the same thing as in original.
>>66620774
I was asking more abotu which aprts for you were bad acting. I perosnally foudn the acting on point, with all completely unknown cast to me btw.
>>66620862
Not the same anon as >>66620217, i thought acting was fine.
>>66620928
Oh, sorry, thanks.
>>66620774
Still pretty bizarre given how faithful to the source material the rest of the film is.
>casting Carla Gugino
>Poor costume design
>Actor portraying Ozymandias wasn't charismatic enough.
I was completely fine with the lack of Octopus Monster though.
People hate this movie for the same reason people hated The Wizard of Oz when it first came out in the late 1930s.
>>66620128
Yes, because it isn't bad.
>>66620071
This is objectively false.
>>66619998
I enjoyed it
I don't mind the liberties they took with the narrative, but the "Zack Snyder" aesthetic annoys me. It could have been a lot worse.
It's a dull dull film that doesn't remotely earn the plot twists it tries to pull.
As an adaptation snyder managed to somehow miss literally all the subtext which is quite an achievement
It's clunky as FUCK. Anything worthwhile in it loses steam quickly in the movie.
There's no god damn giant psychic vagina squid at the end. That's all I asked for. Everything else could have been shit (including that dumb fucking drawn out sex scene) but you take the god damn squid away. Fuck you
>>66619998
I simply did not connect with or care about any of the characters. I didn't even finish watching it. Walked away 3/4 of the way through.
>>66623464
welp, thanks for the spoiler.
the movie is entertaining and visually does the graphic novel justice but like others have said, it's completely at face value. It has all of the style of the book and none of the substance.
