Superhero Filmmakers: Where's Our Watchmen?

Why?

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

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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!

http://www.fortunecity.com/tatooine/niven/142/img/op4401.jpg

UPDATES:

-Filming allegedly begins in September with a modified (inferior, apprently) modification of David Hayter's script.
-No one is cast yet, but Gerard Butler will still be in the film, Cruise still possible for Veidt, and maybe: Thomas Jane, Keanu (Dr. Manhattan?), Jude Law (Veidt).

I want Mel Gibson for the Comedian.

yes, a modified modification.

Jesus H. Just film it, release it direct to DVD and ignore it.

one displayed, unboxed

WHERE THE HECK ARE OUR WATCHMEN?

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

http://sugarbushsquirrel.com/image/33554923_scaled_427x480.jpg

WHERE THE HECK ARE OUR WATCHMEN?

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.

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

This thread might be of help: those Before Watchmen comics

http://hilariousworld.webs.com/photos/Funny-Pictures/squirrel_on_motorcycle.jpg

WHERE THE HECK ARE OUR WATCHMEN?

...really?

http://collider.com/watchmen-tv-series-hbo-zack-snyder/

yuck

But with Game of Thrones‘ end looming in the next couple of years

really?

Jesus christ. This is just layer upon layer of unnecessary and stupid. I'd honestly rather watch a documentary series chronicling the myriad of creative methods employed in destroying all of the money would have otherwise been used to fund an inadvisable Watchmen television series.

If they want to adapt some Moore property, why not Top 10? Unlike Watchmen, the concept is tailor-made for a TV series. Though I guess the whole premise would be too expensive to produce for television?

If they did do Top 10 though, I'd love to see the flame wars that'd follow the transporter accident episode: "OMG, they stole that light vs. darkness monologue from True Detective!".

"Too expensive" isn't really an HBO problem. GoT ain't cheap and Westworld won't be either.

Halo Jones would be ideal for a TV series. So perfect that there's no way it would happen.

I'd prefer to see a tv show based on literally any comic that isn't a finite story which has already been adapted, in full, by the dude who's trying to adapt it a second time.

aren't the ABC things like top 10, promethea, tom strong more likely to be owner-controlled? wasn't that whole thing creators' rights based?

(would like to see them try to get promethea green-lighted...)

If Top 10 was creator-owned, I doubt Moore would've allowed DC to do two different sequel series to it without his involvement.

Wasn't it always the idea with the ABC titles that he'd pass them on to other creators?

From here:

He had developed The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen idea earlier, originally for Kevin Eastman’s Tundra outfit, with Simon Bisley slated to draw, but the idea expanded and turned into something else and veteran 2000 AD artist Kevin O’Neill became Moore’s collaborator on the creator-owned project.

The rest of “America’s Best Comics” weren’t creator-owned. Moore struck a deal with Jim Lee that would allow Moore and the artists to get up-front payment which gave Wildstorm ownership of the characters they would create in Tom Strong, Promethea, Top 10, and Tomorrow Stories. But soon after Moore signed the contract, Wildstorm was bought out by DC, and Moore was stuck working for a company he vowed never to work with again. As he told George Khoury in The Extraordinary Works of Alan Moore, “For better or worse, I decided that it was better to forego my own principles upon it rather than to put a lot of people who’d been promised work suddenly out of work.”

Moore and his “America’s Best” collaborators continued their comic-book-making, and Jim Lee mostly kept DC at a distance, although a few cases of publisher interference would annoy Moore enough to remind him that the large corporate publisher hadn’t changed much since he had last worked with them. Moore and the artists were able to produce over 100 issues of high-quality comics before he walked away from Wildstorm and DC for good, effectively closing down the “America’s Best” line even if a few series still trickled out under various non-Alan-Moore writerly guidance.

So LoEG is creator-owned (which of course explains why Moore and O'Neill were able to take it to another publisher), the other ABC titles weren't.

with Simon Bisley slated to draw

Pretty glad it was O'Neill in the end!

I hope the leak was an hbo exec at a restaurant loudly expressing their disbelief zack Snyder brought up watchmen at a meeting

LoEG was developed for Homage, not ABC, Lee just sold both lines to DC before anything came out.