Fun Stuff > ENJOY
Will you watch these Watchmen?
Johnny C:
--- Quote from: pilsner on 27 Jul 2007, 11:41 ---Snyder + Warner Brothers = Huge Budget
--- End quote ---
Actually Warner wanted to cap the budget at $100 mil. Still big but not huge by any stretch of the imagination.
Ravenbomb:
Wilson is a good choice for Nite Owl, and if Crudup gets the stardom he should've gotten off of Almost Famous, then I'm all for it. But I still say Knepper would've made a good Rorschach.
Ozymandias:
The idea that anyone thinks this movie is a good idea makes me want to vomit. It is inherently not a good idea. There is no conceivable way to do justice to the book in a movie. Especially not with a director whose only talent is making stylish action movies that don't suck. For all the great style and special effects of Dawn of the Dead and 300, they both had as much depth as a saucer.
CookedHaggis:
--- Quote from: TheFuriousWombat on 26 Jul 2007, 08:34 ---Not sure how I feel about Snyder directing. He doesn't have much experience and he hasn't proven he can direct serious material. Grand, stylized action flicks aren't the same as the dystopian drama of Watchmen. I'm not familiar with all the actors but I am glad they didn't cast a bunch of big names who can't really act. Too often this happens and the film generally suffers as a result. This cast seems pretty decent to me and has me more excited for the film than I was, albeit still cautiously optimistic.
--- End quote ---
Snyder.... it's like setting Guy Ritchie loose on an adaptation of Crime & Punishment. I like Lock Stock, I like Snatch, but making two comical, stylised caper films does not qualify you for psychological depth. Ditto Snyder. That's something of a forced analogy though.
Snyder does more than make stylised action flicks. Much more. He managed to depoliticise Dawn of the Dead, managed to suppress the entire point of the film. That takes skill and not a small amount of arrogance. To have a motely collection of characters from various social backgrounds, to have institutional authority figures in a world without institutions, to have mass collective unquestioning thought, to have a context where conventional morality becomes questionionable, to have all the elements of satire and NOT have any identifiable political commentary....that's an achievement. To have a downbeat, violent, depressive ending that makes no kind of statement at all...that's simply incredible.
Of course, the thinking behind the choice of Snyder as director is obvious. He has made two commercially successful films, both stylised, both fantastical. Here's a comic book needing to be added. A stylish comic book. Stylish, stylised. What's the difference? You've got to wonder if anyone actually read the thing. Which would be worse; that they didn't and employed him based on statistics, or that they did and simply didn't understand it?
The thing is, I quite enjoyed Dawn of the Dead, I quite enjoyed 300. They were entertaining. But nothing else. Most obviously so in the case of 300; pure visceral action with a bare minimum of framing, a simple excuse for simple destruction. In itself not insidious since cinema can't all be involved and involving. Though you can't help but wonder if other people saw a different film. But to give that director the helm of something like Watchmen? Now, I don't agree with Alan Moore's idea that his work is somehow unadaptable - get over yourself man, what's good enough for Austen or Shakespeare or Dickens or Burgess etc... - but in the hands of Snyder... I just don't see it working. Maybe I'm just too pessimistic, but from what I've seen, while Snyder might have the talent to bring the pages of Watchmen to life, he just doesn't have the nous to bring the point of Watchmen to life.
Ozymandias:
--- Quote from: CookedHaggis on 28 Jul 2007, 17:11 ---Now, I don't agree with Alan Moore's idea that his work is somehow unadaptable - get over yourself man, what's good enough for Austen or Shakespeare or Dickens or Burgess etc...
--- End quote ---
Well, Austen, Shakespeare, and Dickens were all dead before the advent of moving pictures so they couldn't really complain.
And Shakespeare was a playwright anyway.
And Burgess had the good fortune of having Kubrick make the only major film adaptation of any of his books.
Alan Moore has had three major books of his turned into movies and they were all disappointments to him. David Hayter actually came up with a script that Moore didn't hate, but that has obviously died. That was also before League and V were destroyed.
Honestly, can't they just leave Moore's work alone? WB needs to be stopped.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version