Superhero Filmmakers: Where's Our Watchmen?

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
"V For Vendetta" was fairly successful. Superman Returns is going to be legendary, unless it's a Waterworld, but I doubt it. Superheroes are everywhere.

WHERE THE HECK ARE OUR WATCHMEN?

Squirrel_Police (Squirrel_Police), Monday, 26 June 2006 01:27 (7 years ago) Permalink

I actually enjoyed Waterworld. Low standards are nothing to sneeze at.

Beth Parker (Beth Parker), Monday, 26 June 2006 01:40 (7 years ago) Permalink

it was actually impressive to look at on the big screen. any impact it might have had, however, vanishes when watching it on tv.

latebloomer aka rap's yoko ono (latebloomer), Monday, 26 June 2006 01:46 (7 years ago) Permalink

When I invoked the memory of Waterworld, I was invoking the
memory of the a hugely hyped release, followed by the film's total
failure to make a profit. As for the movie itself, it was fun,
but it wasn't good. The writing was worthy of a SCIFI original
movie, not a worldwide release.

Furthermore, I seem to have woken up (at some point) in an
alternate universe where otherwise intelligent afficionados of
theater believe that Kevin Costner can act AT ALL. Although
to me his acting skills are worse than those of a drunk,
mongoloid 19-year-old playing charades. And we're here all week,
folks. Enjoy your night.


Squirrel_Police (Squirrel_Police), Monday, 26 June 2006 01:59 (7 years ago) Permalink

They decided not to put it out because, well, who watches the Watchmen?

Abbott (Abbott), Monday, 26 June 2006 02:37 (7 years ago) Permalink

p.s. officah, are you from les bois?

Abbott (Abbott), Monday, 26 June 2006 02:37 (7 years ago) Permalink

did anyone read the link above? they ARE putting one (a watchmen movie) out:

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr/film/brief_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1002727033

latebloomer aka rap's yoko ono (latebloomer), Monday, 26 June 2006 02:45 (7 years ago) Permalink

I just wanted to make that joke. But OTOH I heard they were making a Watchmen back in 2003. It has reached MBV status for yrs truly. I'll believe it when I see it.

Abbott (Abbott), Monday, 26 June 2006 02:48 (7 years ago) Permalink

It'll be like a new Don Quixote.

Abbott (Abbott), Monday, 26 June 2006 02:50 (7 years ago) Permalink

The Watchmen movie has been announced and pulled back so many times that I'm not going to believe it's really being made until someone is actually shooting it.

Tuomas (Tuomas), Monday, 26 June 2006 02:53 (7 years ago) Permalink

EXACTLY. Exactly. exactly.

Abbott (Abbott), Monday, 26 June 2006 02:55 (7 years ago) Permalink

Exactly what I said!

Abbott (Abbott), Monday, 26 June 2006 02:55 (7 years ago) Permalink

Yeah, that was an x-post.

Tuomas (Tuomas), Monday, 26 June 2006 02:56 (7 years ago) Permalink

X-post-actly!

Abbott (Abbott), Monday, 26 June 2006 02:56 (7 years ago) Permalink

Anyway, I see few serious problems with the possible film adaptations:

1) In order to narrow it down to 2,5 hours, the filmmakers will probably have to stick to the main detective plot which is, to be frank, rather ridiculous, and not really the thing that made the comic interesting.

2) How will they deal with the Cold War aspect of the plot? Will they still make the movie to be in an alternate timeline in the mid-eighties, or will they update it to include the war on terrorism or something? (While this approach actually worked with V for Vendetta, it's hard to imagine it working with Watchmen.)

Tuomas (Tuomas), Monday, 26 June 2006 03:06 (7 years ago) Permalink

who needs a watchmen movie

s1ocki (slutsky), Monday, 26 June 2006 05:01 (7 years ago) Permalink

really, what's the point

s1ocki (slutsky), Monday, 26 June 2006 05:01 (7 years ago) Permalink

because what's the last movie you can think of that had a naked blue-skinned man walking around the face of mars?

kingfish du lac (kingfish 2.0), Monday, 26 June 2006 05:15 (7 years ago) Permalink

s1ocki (slutsky), Monday, 26 June 2006 05:16 (7 years ago) Permalink

they wasnt on mars, tho

kingfish du lac (kingfish 2.0), Monday, 26 June 2006 05:17 (7 years ago) Permalink

so you basically just admitted you've seen the blue man group live dvd?

s1ocki (slutsky), Monday, 26 June 2006 05:25 (7 years ago) Permalink

does it count as watching when you just fast-forward to the good parts, then eject the disc when you're finished and put it back in its hiding place on the shelf?

kingfish du lac (kingfish 2.0), Monday, 26 June 2006 05:29 (7 years ago) Permalink

best superhero movie= "Unbreakable"

Ste (Fuzzy), Monday, 26 June 2006 08:20 (7 years ago) Permalink

Anyway, I see few serious problems with the possible film adaptations:

1) In order to narrow it down to 2,5 hours, the filmmakers will probably have to stick to the main detective plot which is, to be frank, rather ridiculous, and not really the thing that made the comic interesting.

2) How will they deal with the Cold War aspect of the plot? Will they still make the movie to be in an alternate timeline in the mid-eighties, or will they update it to include the war on terrorism or something? (While this approach actually worked with V for Vendetta, it's hard to imagine it working with Watchmen.)

-- Tuomas (lixnix...), June 26th, 2006.

there was a recent screenplay by David Hayter that supposedly dealt with all these problems really well (how, i don't know). but even Moore, who quite undestandaby doesn't want a Watchmen movie made but can't legally affect anything, said it was the best possible treatment of the material.

this screenplay is (from what i hear) supposedly the basis for the direction the current screenwriters are using. the producers had this set up at Paramount as recently as last year (with the guy who directed the Bourne Supremcy and that 9/11 movie) but when the studio changed hands the project was shelved and so they took it Warner Bros.

i can't imagine any film version of Watchmen being able to do justice to the souce marterial but this version has a slightly greater probability of actually getting made. the reasons being a. moore enjoying greater stature than ever (despite his fallout with the comic industry) b. the demand for superhero crap at an all-time high c. the stunning artistic and financial success of The League Of Extraordinary Gentlemen movie.

ok, kidding about the last one.

latebloomer aka rap's yoko ono (latebloomer), Monday, 26 June 2006 09:02 (7 years ago) Permalink

Eff Watchmen, where is Sam Raimi's Cerebus???

Huk-L (Huk-L), Monday, 26 June 2006 14:16 (7 years ago) Permalink

Why do people not like period pieces? Set it the 80s. Probably 10 years ago I remember reading an article about the Bond series pointing out that the constant efforts to keep the series up-to-date were as much as contributing factor as anything else to the fact that the films were so tedious. I totally think that's true.

(I remember interviewing Terry Gilliam back in 89 or so, when Munchhausen came out, and him saying Watchmen was his next project.)

pleased to mitya (mitya), Monday, 26 June 2006 14:18 (7 years ago) Permalink

Yeah, if you're going to make a Watchmen movie set it in the goddamn 80s. At the very least, that way you don't have to make up silly sci-fi/magicks reasons why the superfolks from the 40s (ie Comedian) are still relevant.

Huk-L (Huk-L), Monday, 26 June 2006 14:22 (7 years ago) Permalink

My wife and I are the only people on Earth who liked LXG.

Jesus Dan (Dan Perry), Monday, 26 June 2006 14:25 (7 years ago) Permalink

If they get the movie made, no doubt someone will say it's biting The Incredibles...

Tuomas (Tuomas), Monday, 26 June 2006 16:51 (7 years ago) Permalink

"WTF? This is just a huge ripoff of Astro City!"

Abbott (Abbott), Monday, 26 June 2006 17:20 (7 years ago) Permalink

there will never be a decent movie made of this, and in many ways I don't think anyone should even bother attempting it.

Shakey Mo Collier (Shakey Mo Collier), Monday, 26 June 2006 17:24 (7 years ago) Permalink

Scenario: Film is made. It migh be good, it might be rubbish but no-one will go and see it?

Why?

So newspaper subs in a vague sort of know will do headlines like "Who Watches The Watchmen. No-one, that's who".

Pete (Pete), Monday, 26 June 2006 17:59 (7 years ago) Permalink

Watchmen movie?? No, please.. not AGAIN
by - set_neuf (Wed Oct 26 2005 14:17:40 ) Ignore this User | Report Abuse

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And so... I read the buzz in IGN and superherohype.
Please, DO NOT DO THIS FILM.
Watchmen is the greatest comic book ever (or graphic novel you can say).
Yes, Watchmen is so cinematic and hace a lot of cinematographic language in his form, but please... a two hour film (or three) is so much little time to fully understand, appreciate and feel the characters and his history.


So, excuse my very bad english, and like myself say no to this film.

Thanks


Re: Watchmen movie?? No, please.. not AGAIN
by - futuramafan105 (Fri Nov 25 2005 10:24:45 ) Ignore this User | Report Abuse

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I've heard rumors that Darren Aronofsky may direct it, and in that case I'm all for it. He's a terrific director, I think he could do it a lot of good.
Re: Watchmen movie?? No, please.. not AGAIN
by - Frankeeee (Mon Jan 2 2006 02:30:56 ) Ignore this User | Report Abuse

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
They would not be able to do it justice. Look at 'From Hell' and 'League of Extraordinary Gentlemen.' Both terrible movies. 'V for Vendetta' looks like *beep* as well...Although I have been hearing great things...

Aronofsky was in talks, but that idea was scrapped...At least for now.

David Hayter wrote a screenplay for it, and Moore said it was "as close as I could imagine anyone getting to Watchmen."

I think it will be done. And it will suck. Unless someone like Aronofsky or Gilliam got ahold of it, and had Hayter's screenplay to work with.


Re: Watchmen movie?? No, please.. not AGAIN
by - stoner_839 (Fri Nov 25 2005 10:26:29 ) Ignore this User | Report Abuse

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*beep* you.
Re: Watchmen movie?? No, please.. not AGAIN
by - egacebotemes (Fri Mar 17 2006 00:38:23 ) Ignore this User | Report Abuse

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
i heard that the project is suspended
Re: Watchmen movie?? No, please.. not AGAIN
by - Prof_Gotham (Fri Mar 17 2006 17:44:34 ) Ignore this User | Report Abuse

UPDATED Fri Mar 17 2006 17:45:48

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Apparentely Warner picked it up after V for Vendetta received a strong advance buzz and whether or not it moves forward all hinges on how well V does.
Re: Watchmen movie?? No, please.. not AGAIN
by - Secondhandsmoke (Sun Mar 26 2006 19:02:28 ) Ignore this User | Report Abuse

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You know, if they were worried that it would lose its depth, or scope, the movie could just be part of a series. The book could be done justice in two 2 and a half hour filmes.

Also, does a bad movie really harm the source material at all? Batman and Robin is awful, but do any of you like Batman less having seen it?
Re: Watchmen movie?? No, please.. not AGAIN
by - Grapefruit13 (Mon Mar 27 2006 06:16:55 ) Ignore this User | Report Abuse

UPDATED Mon Mar 27 2006 14:16:48

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Watchmen is the greatest comic book ever (or graphic novel you can say).

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Personally, I've never been that big a fan of Watchmen; in many ways it's a pretty cheesy book to begin with (I pity any actor charged with the task of making Rorschach's absurd staccato dialogue sound any more convincing off the page than it ever was on it). Whenever someone calls it the best comic book ever, I am forced to wonder exactly what other books they've read... To me, it's not even the best Alan Moore comic.

But for those people who do think it's a masterpiece, whatever film is eventually made of it, it's not the end of the world. The book won't suddenly disappear just because a crappy film was made.

Maybe a film adaptation would simply expose the emptiness of the plot - they'd no doubt decide to trim back the subplots and supporting characters until the central core, Adrian Veidt's plan to "fix" the world, was all that remained. In that event, what we'd be left with is a fairly typical superhero film with a really stupid masterplan, a little cod-psychological baggage, and a middle-age spread.

In any case, am I the only one who things that Watchmen's time came and went over a decade ago? It's not novel anymore to show the psychology of a "costumed hero". It's been done too many times. You can't swing a cat in a video store without hitting a film featuring some guy running around with his underwear over his trousers and spewing angst at the camera.

As for Watchmen's storyline of social prejudice against superheroes, and the effect on them of trying to fit into normal society... well, let's say that all the way through The Incredibles, I had a serious case of deja vu...

I hate quotations. Tell me what you know.
Re: Watchmen movie?? No, please.. not AGAIN
by - duckfandango (Fri May 26 2006 11:03:47 ) Ignore this User | Report Abuse

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As for Watchmen's storyline of social prejudice against superheroes, and the effect on them of trying to fit into normal society... well, let's say that all the way through The Incredibles, I had a serious case of deja vu...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

By God, is that what you think 'Watchmen' was all about? You are an idiot. I pity you.
Re: Watchmen movie?? No, please.. not AGAIN
by - Grapefruit13 (Tue May 30 2006 13:09:17 ) Ignore this User | Report Abuse

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By God, is that what you think 'Watchmen' was all about?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

No, it's not. I would think you might have realised that from reading the rest of my post, but clearly you missed it. Watchmen is a work of many, many threads and storylines weaved together, and the storyline I mentioned is one of them.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You are an idiot. I pity you.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I'm not an idiot, so you needn't pity me. Just learn to read a whole post, think a bit before you respond in future, and try not to be so pointlessly rude to strangers.

Oh, yes, if a pig comes by Castle Dracula on a Tuesday, playing a banjo…
Re: Watchmen movie?? No, please.. not AGAIN
by - NCurran1987 (Mon May 29 2006 01:49:49 ) Ignore this User | Report Abuse

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alan Moore actually said that Watchmen doesn’t have a plot really. I mean he said at the end of the day a lot of the plot points where used in previous mediums and stories. Watchmen was about the telling more than the tale and you can't falter it for one second there. Its also one of the few comics that can truly be called comics and that have no way of ever being properly translated into a film or a book. Due to its complexities that take advantage of the comic field like no other book has.

And also I though the dialogue in the book was excellent so I don’t know what your getting at there. Also I believe adaptations of books like this DO hurt the source material. Some character like batman’s films being bad doesn’t hurt batman cause he's got just as many incarnations in the comic books field that are of mixed qualities. Batman’s a never ending character who will still be in a monthly comic LONG after were dead. Unlike Watchmen (which is a one off book which can never be re imagined by a new writer) it loses its soul because of that. Batman is a corporate character who is at the whim of an editor or executive so you pretty much know it’s only there interpretation.

Chuck Norris is'nt afraid of the dark, the dark is afraid of Chuck Norris!
Re: Watchmen movie?? No, please.. not AGAIN
by - Grapefruit13 (Tue May 30 2006 13:23:23 ) Ignore this User | Report Abuse

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And also I though the dialogue in the book was excellent so I don’t know what your getting at there.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Specifically, that a lot of the dialogue was a touch cheesy and b-movie esque, in particular Rorschach's stilted, monosyllabic "crazy guy" speech patterns. I often wonder if the dialogue weren't deliberately cheesy, to echo the superhero comics that Moore was referencing and building on.

But if you don't know what I'm "getting at" - well, that's because it's just an opinion, and you don't feel the same way. That's all.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unlike Watchmen (which is a one off book which can never be re imagined by a new writer) it loses its soul because of that.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The book itself would never lose its "soul"; how could it? It will still exist, even if a thousand movie versions are made.

There have been at least three film adaptations made of Wuthering Heights, none of which have managed to eclipse the power of the novel itself. My copy of V For Vendetta is still sitting out there on the shelf, unaffected by the film adaptation, just as it is unaffected by the different interpretations of other readers: one person's interpretation of a book - which is, as you say, what any film adaptation boils down to - does not infringe on my own.

It is possible that people who have never read the book will have a distorted view of what it is about if they see the film first, but then, if they hadn't seen the film they probably never would have searched out the book anyway

Oh, yes, if a pig comes by Castle Dracula on a Tuesday, playing a banjo…
Re: Watchmen movie?? No, please.. not AGAIN
by - luciddream_3 6 days ago (Tue Jun 20 2006 07:01:59 ) Ignore this User | Report Abuse

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I have to agree with this. The Watchmen movie will eventually get made and everyone who has read the comic knows that it will most likely be a let down due to the difficulty of bringing the sheer magnitude and scope of the content to the Big Screen. However, in the end we must all remember that it is only a movie and essentially, just one (or several writer's) interperitation of the material.

It is unfortunate that a big budget movie will most likely be the way Watchmen is brought to the masses. On the other hand, this might not be bad thing either. Maybe it will inspire those to actually read the book afterwards?

It's pretty much a given that most movies based on books just aren't as good as the source material regardless of the genre. In regards to comic books, this is probably more so due to the difficulty of blending the fantastic visual elements with a great story.

Will the Watchmen movie be terrible? Who knows? Will it ruin the characters, history, etc.? Nah...at the end of the day, it's just a movie, really. Nothing worth losing sleep over.


Re: Watchmen movie?? No, please.. not AGAIN
by - NCurran1987 5 days ago (Tue Jun 20 2006 17:15:51 ) Ignore this User | Report Abuse

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm more annoyed with hollywood. They cant come up with there own stories. I hope it crashs and burns some days. There going to make such a sh it movie outta this, its annoys me so much to see the book bastardised. Its like looking at a child you love and watching him from an alternate reality and seeing that hes become a whore. You dont like the way he's turned out in this world. It annoys you. You cant stand to see him travistised in this way. Thats how i feel about movie adaptions.

Chuck Norris is'nt afraid of the dark, the dark is afraid of Chuck Norris!

¨ˆ¨ˆ¨ˆ¨ˆ¨ˆ¨ˆ (chaki), Monday, 26 June 2006 18:02 (7 years ago) Permalink

GENE WILDER IS...RORSCHACH!

Huk-L (Huk-L), Monday, 26 June 2006 18:38 (7 years ago) Permalink

chaki should write, direct, and score the watchmen movie.

latebloomer aka rap's yoko ono (latebloomer), Monday, 26 June 2006 18:47 (7 years ago) Permalink

when i was 16 i would totally be able to do this. thats when i had the magik baby.

¨ˆ¨ˆ¨ˆ¨ˆ¨ˆ¨ˆ (chaki), Monday, 26 June 2006 18:56 (7 years ago) Permalink

8 months pass...
http://www.aintitcool.com/images2007/rorshach_badge.jpg

blueski, Friday, 9 March 2007 20:48 (7 years ago) Permalink

i still say chaki should do this

latebloomer, Friday, 9 March 2007 20:50 (7 years ago) Permalink

apparently snyder slipped pic that in the 300 extended trailer

latebloomer, Friday, 9 March 2007 20:51 (7 years ago) Permalink

yeah that's how i came across it (uh)

blueski, Friday, 9 March 2007 20:55 (7 years ago) Permalink

seems like they're actually setting all this in the alternate 1985 of the comic:

http://www.chud.com/index.php?type=interviews&id=9172

latebloomer, Friday, 9 March 2007 21:31 (7 years ago) Permalink

Your movie audience is basically where your comic book audience was when the graphic novel was written

i think Snyder is kinda right here!

blueski, Friday, 9 March 2007 22:12 (7 years ago) Permalink

Although superhero films tend to be more jaded, self-aware and (occasionally) subversive than mainstream comics were in the mid-eighties.

chap, Friday, 9 March 2007 22:35 (7 years ago) Permalink

I dunno about that. the 80s was a pretty adventurous time for comics.

Shakey Mo Collier, Friday, 9 March 2007 22:37 (7 years ago) Permalink

Yeah, but it was mainly going on around the margins and in Brit comics till Watchmen/DKR. You had groundbreaking mainstream writers like Claremont, I guess, but on the whole there wasn't any of the knowing winkery which Watchmen helped bring to comics, and which is present in the majority of superhero movies.

chap, Friday, 9 March 2007 22:42 (7 years ago) Permalink

Cerebus has a ton of self-referential stuff goin on in it but yeah - on the margins for sure (I only mention it cuz I've been re-reading High Society lately)

anyway I can't see this film not sucking horribly.

Shakey Mo Collier, Friday, 9 March 2007 22:47 (7 years ago) Permalink

Agreed. An animated High Society film, on the other hand, would be amazing.

chap, Friday, 9 March 2007 22:50 (7 years ago) Permalink

Cruise as Ozymandias?!?

*shoots self*

Shakey Mo Collier, Friday, 9 March 2007 22:54 (7 years ago) Permalink

(sorry I just read that Snyder interview bit)

Shakey Mo Collier, Friday, 9 March 2007 22:54 (7 years ago) Permalink

fifth pilfered filthy pilchard falafel

Why'd You Wanna Tweet Me So Bad? (dog latin), Monday, 8 August 2011 11:12 (2 years ago) Permalink

to be fair, this film was fucking awful

Once Were Moderators (DG), Monday, 8 August 2011 11:18 (2 years ago) Permalink

and there was awful fucking

Number None, Monday, 8 August 2011 11:19 (2 years ago) Permalink

it's awfully fucked

Millsner, Monday, 8 August 2011 11:24 (2 years ago) Permalink

the comic was a big part of my childhood and i seem to be the only person on earth who found nothing except "hallelujah" to object to in the movie

I liked it too.

I wonder if the point of the hallelujah bit is to make you go "jesus christ this is disgusting", just as it would be if you were actually watching two old fetish people getting it on?

The New Dirty Vicar, Monday, 8 August 2011 12:22 (2 years ago) Permalink

I doubt it. Also neither of them are old

Number None, Monday, 8 August 2011 12:24 (2 years ago) Permalink

dont really see how malin akerman is disgusting unless you hate people with oblong heads

fucking awful film mind you

Once Were Moderators (DG), Monday, 8 August 2011 12:45 (2 years ago) Permalink

im much more willing to believe that snyder could make a good movie one day than bay could

He already did, it was called "Dawn of the Dead."

Dave Zuul (Phil D.), Monday, 8 August 2011 13:24 (2 years ago) Permalink

yeah yeah i know. i liked DotD, though it's pretty clear now that James Gunn's script is why it was good. bay also made The Rock which was a good movie, but im positive he'll never make that mistake again.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YKbsdMRqhcI (Princess TamTam), Monday, 8 August 2011 13:27 (2 years ago) Permalink

The Rock was not a good movie. [/objective scientific view]

The New Dirty Vicar, Monday, 8 August 2011 14:54 (2 years ago) Permalink

2 weeks pass...

lol I actually saw some of this on TV the other day - was kinda worth it for my wife's lolzy reactions, but not really

satisfying punishment for that thing he said about lesbians (Shakey Mo Collier), Monday, 22 August 2011 16:57 (2 years ago) Permalink

5 months pass...

Brian Azzarello, a comics author who is writing the mini-series for the Watchmen characters Rorschach and the Comedian, said he expected an initial wave of resistance because “a lot of comic readers don’t like new things.”

er...

ledge, Wednesday, 1 February 2012 12:28 (2 years ago) Permalink

“It’s our responsibility as publishers to find new ways to keep all of our characters relevant,” said DC Entertainment Co-Publishers Dan DiDio and Jim Lee. “After twenty five years, the Watchmen are classic characters whose time has come for new stories to be told. We sought out the best writers and artists in the industry to build on the complex mythology of the original.”

James Mitchell, Wednesday, 1 February 2012 12:37 (2 years ago) Permalink

I love how Alan Moore just gives the same response he always gives to everything.

The New Dirty Vicar, Wednesday, 1 February 2012 12:54 (2 years ago) Permalink

“I think the gut reaction is going to be, ‘Why?’ ” Mr. Azzarello said in a telephone interview. “But then when the actual books come out, the answer will be, ‘Oh, that’s why.’

uh...

Wie wol ich bin der vogel has noch den erfret mich das (forksclovetofu), Wednesday, 1 February 2012 13:08 (2 years ago) Permalink

the accounting books

flags post o fu (darraghmac), Wednesday, 1 February 2012 13:14 (2 years ago) Permalink

Azzarello's writing Wonder Woman for DC's New 52 and it's not bad, and his Joker graphic novel from 2010 was well receive if a little overrated, but this? Eh.

You got to ro-o-oll me and call me the tumblr whites (Phil D.), Wednesday, 1 February 2012 13:23 (2 years ago) Permalink

no, i LIKE azzarello but doing watchmen for a DC that could not proclaim its creative bankruptcy more clearly is the king of NAGL

Wie wol ich bin der vogel has noch den erfret mich das (forksclovetofu), Wednesday, 1 February 2012 13:25 (2 years ago) Permalink

They've really tried to buttress this terrible idea with talented writers.

Suede - the fabric, not the band (DL), Wednesday, 1 February 2012 13:25 (2 years ago) Permalink

I for one can't wait for the comic which finally reveals to us all those things Ozymandias already told us in rich detail about his life.

You got to ro-o-oll me and call me the tumblr whites (Phil D.), Wednesday, 1 February 2012 13:34 (2 years ago) Permalink

Brian Azzarello, a comics author who is writing the mini-series for the Watchmen characters Rorschach and the Comedian, said he expected an initial wave of resistance because “a lot of comic readers don’t like new things.”

I would say the lack of self-awareness is amazing here, but we are talking about an adult that creates super-hero comics and just signed up to write a watchmen prequel.

da croupier, Wednesday, 1 February 2012 14:13 (2 years ago) Permalink

It's a living

Number None, Wednesday, 1 February 2012 14:17 (2 years ago) Permalink

Yeah but it's not like they hired in Stephen King and he's all "I have heard of these Watching Men and look forward to reading them" - Azzarello should know this is a pretty poisoned chalice.

Andrew Farrell, Wednesday, 1 February 2012 14:20 (2 years ago) Permalink

I'm sad that Darwyn Cooke is doing this, most especially because it means yet another year in which Darwyn Cooke is not doing his own comic

Θ ̨Θƪ (sic), Wednesday, 1 February 2012 14:28 (2 years ago) Permalink

actually also bcz it's going to make me less likely to want to read that if he ever does get around to it

Θ ̨Θƪ (sic), Wednesday, 1 February 2012 14:29 (2 years ago) Permalink

Cooke does have another Parker book out soon.

EZ Snappin, Wednesday, 1 February 2012 14:30 (2 years ago) Permalink

I'll just stick w/Morning Glories and Locke & Key. They're the only things I've read in the last year that have really been any good.

You got to ro-o-oll me and call me the tumblr whites (Phil D.), Wednesday, 1 February 2012 14:36 (2 years ago) Permalink

the parodies of this are going to be much better than the comic, imo

mh, Wednesday, 1 February 2012 14:40 (2 years ago) Permalink

Suede - the fabric, not the band (DL), Wednesday, 1 February 2012 14:45 (2 years ago) Permalink

Len Wein?! ;askldfj;vauwnpoeiv .qajfasdjahfffffffffuuuuuuuuu

Not that I'm interested in these anyway, but Len fuckin' Wein?! He's terrible!

Steamtable Willie (WmC), Wednesday, 1 February 2012 15:03 (2 years ago) Permalink

If you want a comic that reads like it could have come out in the 60s he'll be fine.

EZ Snappin, Wednesday, 1 February 2012 15:04 (2 years ago) Permalink

Parker is not Cooke's character fyi

I'll just stick w/Morning Glories and Locke & Key. They're the only things I've read in the last year that have really been any good.

man this is just insane an odd non-sequitur

Θ ̨Θƪ (sic), Wednesday, 1 February 2012 15:08 (2 years ago) Permalink

Len Wein + John Higgins = look folks, we have half the original creative team from Watchmen in EVERY ISSUE!

Θ ̨Θƪ (sic), Wednesday, 1 February 2012 15:08 (2 years ago) Permalink

I think both Darwyn Cooke and Len Wein have done some great comics, but I can't see how anyone thought either of them would be a good choice for a Watchmen comic, since they both predate the deconstruction era (Cooke in spirit, Wein in his actual career) that Watchmen kicked in.

Azzarello probably can do the grim & gritty deconstruction thing, but if his Joker mini (which was an awful attempt to take the Heath Ledger "edgy emo Joker" TO THE EXTREME) is anything to judge by, his Watchmen will have all of the grittiness and none of the humanism of Moore's original.

Tuomas, Thursday, 2 February 2012 08:47 (2 years ago) Permalink

5 months pass...

Just watched the Ultimate cut of Watchmen out of curiosity. The Black Frieghter stuff is jarring and not-that-well integrated, but the added other (live-action) material def helps flesh out the universe a bit, makes the whole thing into a more agreeable shape. Also, I'd forgotten just how perfect Patrick Wilson and especially Billy Crudup are in it.

Simon H., Saturday, 28 July 2012 20:40 (1 year ago) Permalink

The violence, unfortunate old-age discrepancies (JDM's supposed to be pushing 70?) and awkward dialogue lifting still the principal issues for me. Still a fair sight better (not to mention more fun) than, say, TDKR.

Simon H., Saturday, 28 July 2012 20:47 (1 year ago) Permalink

did these ever come out then? i was almost going to drag myself to the comics shop for a guilty flip-through but i was afraid my rubbernecking might be mistaken for actual interest.

big-mammed punisher (strongo hulkington's ghost dad), Saturday, 28 July 2012 21:08 (1 year ago) Permalink

Mr. Moore, who has disassociated himself from DC Comics and the industry at large, called the new venture “completely shameless.”

Speaking by telephone from his home in Northampton, England, Mr. Moore said, “I tend to take this latest development as a kind of eager confirmation that they are still apparently dependent on ideas that I had 25 years ago.”

Love you, Alan.

Fig On A Plate Cart (Alex in SF), Saturday, 28 July 2012 21:10 (1 year ago) Permalink

you know something is heinous when you're worried about how flippng through it will make you look in the eyes of the denizens of a fuckin comic book store.

big-mammed punisher (strongo hulkington's ghost dad), Saturday, 28 July 2012 21:11 (1 year ago) Permalink

same reason i never picked up Lost Girls

Nhex, Saturday, 28 July 2012 23:00 (1 year ago) Permalink

^this

I dont even know that I think this sucks per se (forksclovetofu), Sunday, 29 July 2012 14:02 (1 year ago) Permalink

love to see how you'd "flip through" a box set of three slipcased hardcovers in the shop tbh

¥╡*ٍ*╞¥ (sic), Sunday, 29 July 2012 23:57 (1 year ago) Permalink

one displayed, unboxed

I dont even know that I think this sucks per se (forksclovetofu), Monday, 30 July 2012 00:12 (1 year ago) Permalink

WHERE THE HECK ARE OUR WATCHMEN?

― Squirrel_Police (Squirrel_Police), Sunday, June 25, 2006 9:27 PM (6 years ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

funny-skrillex-bee_132455836669.gif (s1ocki), Monday, 30 July 2012 01:29 (1 year ago) Permalink

WHERE THE HECK ARE OUR WATCHMEN?

Nutri Grane (some dude), Monday, 30 July 2012 03:23 (1 year ago) Permalink

same reason i never picked up Lost Girls

That book is why I can't get too worked up over anything DC does with Watchmen.

LISTEN TO THIS BRAD (Nicole), Monday, 30 July 2012 03:43 (1 year ago) Permalink

Good point, Lewis Carroll had spent 1971-1991 repeatedly fucking Moore and his close friends over before he took his revenge, gr8 analogy

¥╡*ٍ*╞¥ (sic), Monday, 30 July 2012 03:52 (1 year ago) Permalink

This thread might be of help: those Before Watchmen comics

Elvis Telecom, Monday, 30 July 2012 04:37 (1 year ago) Permalink

WHERE THE HECK ARE OUR WATCHMEN?

funny-skrillex-bee_132455836669.gif (s1ocki), Monday, 30 July 2012 04:40 (1 year ago) Permalink


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.