Is this the best capeshit movie ever made?
>>69693370
At the very least it's Snyder's best.
>>69693370
Probably.
Had a diverse cast, cool fighting scenes and pretty good plot.
>>69693370
It's definitely up there. I reread Watchmen the other day and re-watched the director's cut. For the life of me, I can't understand what anyone thinks is left out of the story that would have been pertinent to the way Snyder translated it to the screen.
>>69693370
Yes but none of that has to do with Snyder's direction just the source material.
>>69694876
That's a great one too. Prime Connelly.Connelly's always prime.
Close, but that's not BvS
>>69694799
NO SQUID MONSTER
>>69695080
>tfw Ben Affleck delivers as the best Batman to date
>in BvS
Fuck my life. Can't wait for the Solo Affleck batman film tho
>>69693370
Yes, maybe alongside V for Vendetta and Sin City.
>>69695138
Sin City isn't capeshit. It's a comic book movie
>>69695189
V for Vendetta isn't capeshit either.
>>69695130
Well, BvS isn't The Dark Knight tear, but it's good overall
>>69695189
>>69695212
You are right but in all fairness Watchmen is more akin to those movies than it is to super hero movies.
Several characters from Watchmen, most of them actually have no powers at all and the movie focus on the dramatic implications of being a vigilante more than on a super hero conflict not to mention that the characters are lots of things... but not heroes.
>>69695130
>unironically thinking that Ben Islameck gave a better performance than the patrician Bale
>>69694799
>>69695093
That was actually screenwriter David Hayter's decision. He began outlining literally the week after 9/11 and was just tired of seeing NY in ruins.
>>69696125
Bale is a one note shit lord who does that obnoxious as fuck shit to change his voice
>>69696476
I liked Bale all right, but I prefer Affleck. I also thought that the use of a voice modulator was a great idea.
the comic boo animation of watchmen is actually way better
>>69696125
Bales' performance was anything but patrician. It was fucking shit.
Affleck sold the character of Bruce Wayne and Batman better than any other actor prior.
>>69695130
>best batman
>shit detective cant listen a word, so smart stops at martha cant see forthcoming,
About that
>>69696805
How's that put together? Is it episodic or one continuous adaptation?
>>69696125
Bale was a shit Batman, the nip's dub is better
No, The Spirit is.
>>69696876
it's a 11 episodes comic book I think
>>69696125
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xZ5cH1Dh2G0
>>69693370
It's the one I watch the most, I find it intriguing and comfy.
It's definitely how I'd imagine a comic book coming to life
>>69696125
Bales Batman was confusing, and the script in all 3 films rushed and with more plotholes than the Star Wars prequels
>>69694799
The biggest issue is that Snyder literally just didn't understand the graphic novel. He basically did a shot for panel shoot of the entire graphic novel. Almost all dialog was written by Alan Moore, and all the framing was done by Dave Gibbons with notes from Moore.
Snyder's Watchmen excels in visual design(for the most part), and in the depth of the characters presented. Which is to say, things he took directly from the GN. Where the film fails are squarely on the changes Snyder chose to make.
Let start first with basic design then transition to the deeper stuff.
Watchmen was meant to be a superhero story in Alan Moore's "real world." Realism(excluding Dr. Manhattan) is central to the piece. To reflect this, the costumes worn by the GN's heroes look realistic, like they're made from real world materials: fabric, metal, etc. It works for the piece and imbues the characters with more humanity. They literally look like guys in costumes Which is what they ARE in Watchmen! That's the entire point! Unfortunately, Snyder didn't understand this, apparently assuming that visual design in the 80's was just shit. Syder's new costumes look like expensive, airbrushed plastic, like every other "dark and gritty" WB movie.
On the subject of humanity, Violence plays a central role in both the GN and the movie. The difference is in the GN only one character goes too far and is ostracized for his behavior :Rorschach. In fact, the primary reason the others think he's so far out is that he kills and maims criminals, with no regard for "due process." Extreme violence isn't glorified, it's shown as a negative, animalistic side of humanity. Conversely, in interviews Snyder said he extended fight scenes and "amped them up" because the film seemed boring without it.
>>69698806
>Continued
Consider Nite Owl and Silk Spectre's alley fight scene. In the GN it ends quickly and with expert precision. In the movie it's drawn out, bones snap, bodies break, and men are left to die. The outcome is seemingly the same Daniel/Nite Owl reclaims his lost power/virility; however, the changed relationship between violence and the characters means that in the GN that power comes from control and domination of evil by restrained application of force( "justice"), while in the film that power comes from giving in to the animalistic nature of man and glorifying in the hunt and violence of our most basic instincts. In other words, in the GN Daniel becomes a Man again, while in Snyder's adaptation he let's go of his humanity and becomes an animal.
This is why the squid was so important. The original GN dealt with the nature of Man and his relationship with power. Fitting, considering that superheroes represent ultimate power fantasy in the same way that nuclear missiles do. Moore played with the concept of human nature, teasing the internal, unending conflict between animal and Man. The GN's finale is meant to show that Ozymandias believed in the animal. He believed that true peace was impossible because the animal would always win, Man and his reason would always falter. The squid gave the human animals an outside tribe so alien that they would all seem the same by contrast. The irony, of course, being that despite his outward expressions the Comedian ultimately believed in Man(Which is why he found Ozymandias' actions so impossible to accept.), taking masochistic joy in becoming a mirror of Man as animal as a result of his unwillingness to accept such an outcome. Life's a joke because all the Men around him keep acting like animals.
Snyder's ending is a total inversion of this. The comedian is portrayed as a tragic figure because he alone saw humanity as the animals we are, and Ozymandias essential unites humanity against a cruel and uncaring God.
>>69698852
To summise, Alan Moore wrote a modern examination of humanity and the nature of power as an analogy of Cold War paranoia, amid a backdrop with superheroes and villains.
Zack Snyder read a wicked awesome dark comic book about rape, and war, and swearing and shit with glowing blue cocks.
>>69698806
>>69698852
TL;DR
>>69699692
Are you retarded?
>>69699005
Now, read it anyway, bitch.
>>69698852
That's all in your interpretation of the material. Regardless of how you view the violence of the film, the alley fight is still Daniel indulging in a power fantasy, in exerting his will and dominance, the veritable antithesis of impotence. This is reflected in his dream about the costumes from the GN as well.
The exclusion of the squid is not an unforgivable omission, in my opinion. Set as Watchmen is in a world where superhuman ability is established as virtually nonexistent, it is a jarringly out-of-place element in the GN to begin with. The Comedian of the film is no more a tragic hero than he is in the GN. He's presented as a nihilist in both and sees Veidt's "practical joke" as the ridiculous, short-sighted pipe dream that it is, serving to do no more than delay what the Comedian sees as the inevitable. Regardless of whether mankind stands united against a bogus alien menace or we're united against an equally alien "god," the effect remains the same.
>>69699900
Sounds boring af
le blue penis
>>69693370
Yes because it pretty much exactly follows the book. Isn't it funny that when you follow the source material the movie turns out really good? Hollywood writers should take notes.
>>69699005
read moore's shit long ago, and it didn't made an enduring impression, but are you sure that those "man is an animal" and "violence is wrong" overly moralistic subtexts aren't just in your head? I mean, a telltale of good literature is to allow different readings.
also, since this is a FILM board, do you think >MUH COMIC BOOK
a really a valid critique?
>>69693370
My biggest beefs with the movie are right near the end.
>Dan watching Rorschach die and screaming
No, the whole point is that Rorschach dies alone and unmourned because he refused to compromise
>Laurie saying "Nothing ever ends" to Dan
That line only works because Doctor Manhattan is reminding Adrian that as smart as he is he's only human and can't put off humanities problems forever
>>69700769
I always thought that Manhattan bothering to kill Rorschach was out of character to begin with. I felt that if anyone should have been forced to kill him, it should have been Veidt. Ties back into "The Black Freighter" theme and drives the point home rather nicely.
>>69699918
The trouble with the overly violent fight in Snyder's adaptation is that it negatively affects Rorschach's impact as a character, while dramatically altering the character of the other of the the "heroes." The point is that the very concept of dressing up in costumes and fighting crime is the sort of childish thing a person might do if they had an unrealistic, black and white morality. The actual impact one might make would be very small, and ultimately circumvents the law.
Rorschach is too real. He's not playing around. His character's entire arch pivoted around his tragic confrontation with real evil, and how that fundamentally alters his perceptions. In his mind, the other heroes are naive, they have imaginary rules. In THEIR minds, it's their rules that separate them from animals. THEY show restraint. Rorschach doesn't because he hates evil men.
Now, for a more specific example, remember how Nite Owl reacts in the GN when Rorshach breaks a thug's arm while interrogating him. Seems silly for Nite Owl to be so shocked if he's snapping bones left and right himself.
>The squid
The issue with the squid is that without the squid humanity doesn't unite as one species against an outside invader. In Snyder's adaptation they unite under the threat that a cruel, American god will kill them if they don't. That's not unity. Next to the preposterously alien nature of the squid all humans are the same. However, despite his altered nature, Dr. Manhattan has been presented to the world as the arm of the United States. This means that he has a nationality. There is no more unity in his "attack" than if any other US developed WMD threatened the world. To every other nation, America lost control of an immensely destructive weapon.
>>69700155
How about >MUH SCREEN WRITER since the graphic novel was used essentially as a screenplay. Comparisons are only natural considering that Snyder did a panel to shot conversion, claiming to stay as "faithful" as possible.
>>69701031
>mfw I'm pretty sure there are people out there who think Watchmen is better than Porco Rosso
>nf
>>69701400
>>69701400
>There are people with different opinions
>>69701031
While I agree that "lowering the contrast between Rorschach and Nite Owl" does lessen the impact of the character, I don't think that repackaging Manhattan as a "dog off the leash" is so hard a unifying threat to reconcile. As memory serves, Veidt's monster only directly affected New York while the movie's plot had him making simultaneous strikes around the globe. In my opinion, trying to sell a domestic attack, no matter how alien it appears, as a world-wide threat is just as big a leap of faith.
>>69701489
>In my opinion, trying to sell a domestic attack, no matter how alien it appears, as a world-wide threat is just as big a leap of faith.
I see. What you forgot is that Veidt's monster in the GN is a massively powerful psychic. The entire world experiences nightmares carefully crafted by the greatest artistic minds on Earth( a huge plot point concerning the kidnapping of artists and writers). THAT's what unites the world. Everyone everywhere share's the same horrific vision of the alien threat so that there's no denying it, and everyone is psychically imprinted with an irresistible fear of it.
>>69701448
*wrong opinions
>watching watchmen director's cut + under the hood every month in one sitting
thank you based synder
>>69698852
>Consider Nite Owl and Silk Spectre's alley fight scene. In the GN it ends quickly and with expert precision. In the movie it's drawn out, bones snap, bodies break, and men are left to die. The outcome is seemingly the same Daniel/Nite Owl reclaims his lost power/virility; however, the changed relationship between violence and the characters means that in the GN that power comes from control and domination of evil by restrained application of force( "justice"), while in the film that power comes from giving in to the animalistic nature of man and glorifying in the hunt and violence of our most basic instincts. In other words, in the GN Daniel becomes a Man again, while in Snyder's adaptation he let's go of his humanity and becomes an animal.
You got it wrong - Daniel doesn't get his virility back until after the scene where he and Silk Spectre save the people from the burning building. That's literally the only act of real heroism he does in the entire film, and it's only after that that he gets it up again.
>>69701628
No, I remember the artists' psychically-broadcast visions. What I don't buy is that never previously-mentioned "sensitives" around the world automatically equal blanket acceptance of the legitimacy of the threat. If there were any indication that there was some general acceptance of psychic phenomena in their world, it would have been easier to swallow. Moore had a chance to do that very thing with Moloch, but chose not to for whatever reason. As it appears in the GN, it comes off, at least to me, as some eleventh-hour macguffin to sell Veidt's plan.
Like I said, it's a leap of faith no matter which side of the fence you're on.
>>69702050
It's a graduated process. Daniel regains some of his lost virility every time he acts "heroically". This is depicted by his stature momentarily improving. He stands straight, back erect and only remembers to be weak afterward.
>>69702214
The main point is quasi-realism. Most laymen in the 80's believed in some degree of psychic power(as foolish as that seems), and I believe the creature was specifically engineered to be psychic. The event was carefully designed to physically harm only the most powerful nation on Earth, and to leave a lasting imprint of that harm on the entire population. This is what united them against a common foe. If this seems unbelievable, consider that on Sept 11, 2001, America suffered a much, much smaller and less alien attack and somehow united the entire Western World against the "alien" invaders. Consider the insane things done and justified in the name of that. No psychic powers needed.
Now, consider that Dr. Manhattan is shown to be a HUGE part of American international policy in the film, unilaterally ending the Korean War and intimidating the rest of the world to toe the American line. In the face of that, it wouldn't matter that America was also attacked, since it was America itself that caused it. Imaging if at the height of the Cold War America lost control of several dozen nuclear ICBM's. Now imagine they detonated all of the world in major population centers. Now, do you realistically see the world uniting in peace, or do you see them uniting against the country responsible?
No, it's not a good movie.
>>69702698
>It's a graduated process. Daniel regains some of his lost virility every time he acts "heroically". This is depicted by his stature momentarily improving. He stands straight, back erect and only remembers to be weak afterward.
This is not how it happens in the film. He only gains his virility back right after he and Silk Spectre save the people from the burning building. The do it in his plane right after.
It was his first (and only) genuine act of heroism in the film. Every other time he's acting selfishly or like a thug.
Snyder clearly understood the source material. I thought it was a perfect adaptation.
If you want an example of an adaptation that completely misunderstood the source material watch V for Vendetta.
>>69702837
>Snyder clearly understood the source material. I thought it was a perfect adaptation.
You're mad! Just watch this again and tell me he understood the source when shot this altered scene.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=evrbXKspeAs
yes, easily
>>69702698
>Now, consider that Dr. Manhattan is shown to be a HUGE part of American international policy in the film, unilaterally ending the Korean War and intimidating the rest of the world to toe the American line. In the face of that, it wouldn't matter that America was also attacked, since it was America itself that caused it. Imaging if at the height of the Cold War America lost control of several dozen nuclear ICBM's. Now imagine they detonated all of the world in major population centers. Now, do you realistically see the world uniting in peace, or do you see them uniting against the country responsible?
And in the news broadcasts in the aftermath of the creature's death, it's heavily implied that Veidt's subsidiary researching extra-dimensional energy sources is the cause of the creature's appearance. It would have been totally within the realm of world politics of the time to have seen it as yet another thing to blame the capitalist Americans for.
Once again, leap of faith, suspension of disbelief.
