What is Digg?73 Comments
- apothekari, on 08/01/2008, -6/+76Basically this *****'s argument is:
"It can't be the comic, Never , never ever, and the comic was too good, well not that good, the ending sucked and the new Batman is better so there"
The Watchmen is THE comic all others aspire to; the ending is genius and apt and the sexual component of the novel was way above this guy's head.
I want this to be as good as the book, it may not be but there is hope.
But the author of this article is a doofus, and should go back to reading kid stuff. - VinnieDaMac, on 08/02/2008, -1/+38This guy sounds like one of those guys that will bash anything if it's popular.
- palewook, on 08/02/2008, -1/+24article makes some leaps of judgment on a film that isn't even out and the author of the article hasn't even seen yet. so let me judge his article, which i have seen and read, not a fan of it.
- tikal2k, on 08/02/2008, -0/+18I just want the Watchmen movie to be ***** awesome.
Make it happen. - SirBruce, on 08/02/2008, -1/+19While I disagree with most of the author's pessimism, I do share the concern that while Watchmen was extremely powerful in its day, it may lose something when exposed to modern audiences. The maturation of superhero comics has been a gradual process with roots back into the 60s and 70s, but it was really the mid-80s when they transformed into modern storytelling vehicles. Comics like Watchmen and The Dark Knight Returns were harbringers; lamp-posts guiding the way for others.
Superhero movies followed suit. After the demise of the first Superman franchise, we got the first Tim Burton Batman and Batman Returns. Sure, we got sidetracked again for a few years, but with Marvel's X-Men and Spider-Man movies, followed by Superman Returns and Batman Begins, superhero movies have already gone through this process. Seeing Watchmen now will be similar to seeing The Godfather for the first time after you've already seen The Sopranos, or Star Wars: A New Hope after seeing modern sci-fi. It could still be a fun experience, but it won't have the same emotional impact and cultural relevance. - SirBruce, on 08/02/2008, -0/+18See my post below, but Watchmen was one of the first comic book series to treat superheroes seriously and realistically. It also deconstructed the myths and conventions of the superhero mythos. Why dress up in flashy tights to fight common crooks? Why spend millions on high-tech crimfighting equipment to bust hookers and bank robbers? Does the existance of superheroes provide to catalyst for supervillains to exist? What gives these people the right to be vigilantes? What sorts of psychological problems must such people have to be compelled to be superheroes? What is the emotional toll their activities place on themselves, their friends, and their family? How would the average citizen really feel about them? How would the government really respond?
- VdgX, on 08/01/2008, -3/+20.... Did he just say the Dark Knight was unsatisfying?
- LeeDoyle, on 08/02/2008, -3/+20I'm only digging this so people can see what a dick this guy is.
- Jonnywin, on 08/02/2008, -0/+16NERDRAGE.
- bosssmiley, on 08/01/2008, -2/+18Intelligent. Superhero. Movie. What more do you need?
Article makes a couple of good points, but with a snide tone that does it no favours. - f54280, on 08/02/2008, -1/+15The movie cannot be faithful the books.
Watchmen is maybe the best graphic novel ever made (I use the term graphic novel to encompass American Comics, Jananes Mangas and French/Belgium Bande Dessinee). American Super-Heroes Comics are usually mediocre (IMO, but I'll get dugg down for that --such is life) but Watchmen is brilliant in so many levels in its use of the medium.
For instance, the section on Rorschach is symmetrical: the first page maps the last, the second maps the one before the last, etc, etc up to the central image, which is of course, symmetrical. That symmetry is treated on several levels at the same time (ie: if someone that face the reader in the first part, may be shown from the back, some peoples angry at each other will be in love, etc). That reflection is also present in the composition of each page (first image of the page to the last, etc, with different twists), and in the colors used. Lastly, elements in the frames themselves often also have symmetrical touch (triangles, lots of mirrors, etc).
This is just one example of the things that made Watchmen astounding. I don't think this can be transfered to the big screen.
But it doesn't mean that the movie cannot be good on its own.
And, btw, the ending of Watchmen is absolutely genius. "I did it thirty-five minutes ago". Genius. If they change that, the movie will be crap. Inside of me I hope they will have the balls to keep the ending exactly as it is.
But, of course, we will watch The Watchmen. If we didn't, Who Would Watch The Watchmen? - inactive, on 08/02/2008, -2/+15He was talking about the ending.
And I hate being honest, but he's _somewhat_ right. The ending could have been a notch or two better. - Chainheart, on 08/02/2008, -2/+14Careful, you've just criticized the majority of Digg
- Taedirk, on 08/02/2008, -0/+12Have you paid any attention to Hollywood in the past 5 years? They haven't had an original idea to call their own for quite some time now. You get sequel after sequel, material someone else has already published in another medium, and the closest thing to originality in the theaters is coming from everywhere but there.
- dickardwa, on 08/01/2008, -3/+14Tell you what,the visuals look perfect.
- BrownManUPS, on 08/01/2008, -1/+11Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
- lamiaconfitor, on 08/02/2008, -2/+12Because it is going to be awesome. The guy who wrote this article is a douche.
- Chainheart, on 08/02/2008, -1/+11The only real problem I had with the trailer was the "Visionary Director" *****. 300 was nothing visionary, just eye candy.
I admit somewhat guiltily, and hundreds of others must as well because it was sold out EVERYWHERE, I went out and got a copy of Watchmen shortly after seeing the trailer just because of that one line lauding it as the most celebrated of all time. - inactive, on 08/02/2008, -0/+10He was visionary in that he realized he could make the movie adaptation and be faithful to the source. That's something right out of left field for hollywood.
- lamiaconfitor, on 08/02/2008, -1/+10You were just waiting for that one, weren't you? You should have polished it up a bit... you know, try to make it funny.
- drqshadow, on 08/02/2008, -0/+8"...ridiculous ending that seemed so daring two decades ago, but now seem clunky and awkward next to Chris Nolan's more complex (if ultimately as unsatisfying) Batmovie?"
Whaaat? The ending to Watchmen remains one of the single greatest "Holy S***" moments I've enjoyed in any medium. The ending to the Dark Knight was more like "eh, I wonder if Two Face will be back anyway..." - SirBruce, on 08/02/2008, -1/+9Thank you for confirming some of my thoughts in my post below. Watchmen is still good but you've gorwn up with mature comics and anti-hero comics so it's not as groundbreaking to you.
- xkingADROCKx, on 08/02/2008, -0/+8Watchmen is set in 1985, in an alternate history United States where costumed adventurers are real and the country is edging closer to a nuclear war with the Soviet Union (the Doomsday Clock is permanently set at five minutes to midnight). It tells the story of a group of past and present superheroes and the events surrounding the mysterious murder of one of their own. Watchmen depicts superheroes as real people who must confront ethical and personal issues, who struggle with neuroses and failings, and who—with one notable exception—lack anything recognizable as super powers. Watchmen's deconstruction of the conventional superhero archetype, combined with its innovative adaptation of cinematic techniques and heavy use of symbolism, multi-layered dialogue, and metafiction, has influenced both comics and film.
- g0tistt0t, on 08/01/2008, -1/+8L2pen tool who ever photoshopped that one pic
- inactive, on 08/02/2008, -0/+6Take the hype from The Dark Knight, apply it to Watchmen, and we've got our Digg frontpage stories already settled for the next couple of weeks!
- klitzbtc, on 08/02/2008, -0/+6***** this guy, I'll continue to "worship" the Watchmen movie until it gives me a good reason not to. The comic was just too insanely epic to act any other way towards the movie adaptation.
- InfinitySnatch, on 08/02/2008, -0/+54. ???
5. cry about something that doesn't matter. - emeraldclaw4, on 08/02/2008, -0/+5blogs have a formula
1. cry about something that doesn't matter.
2. cry about something that doesn't matter.
3. cry about something that doesn't matter. - themindoverall, on 08/02/2008, -0/+5The Marvel people will do no such thing.
Just trust me on this. - bluesnowmonkey, on 08/02/2008, -2/+6*HUGE SPOILERS*
I get that Watchmen had a lot of cool things going for it (like characters, storytelling, style), but the plot was some of the stupidest ***** I've seen in my life. Let's count the ways the ending made no sense. There's no way to do this without spoilers, but I'll try to limit them.
The whole thing starts with the murder of The Comedian. The mystery of his murder is a core component of the plot. We find out that he had discovered a horrible secret, but the explanation of HOW he found out makes no sense. How could he possibly have understood what he was seeing and its implications?
There's another mystery surrounding the disappearance of the world's most creative people. The explanation for why it was happening makes little sense and contributes nothing to the storyline. He really did nothing with it. I think the author had read Atlas Shrugged and decided it would be interesting to have people disappearing.
Then there's the ultimate plot. It hinges on advanced genetic engineering and teleportation. The "villain" perpetrates a huge hoax based on no one in the world realizing that they were possible. But each is just another emerging technology at that point in the storyline. A few years down the line, wouldn't people look back at the hoax and go, "Hey, that was about the time they invented teleportation. I wonder if we got tricked." Then everything unravels, and the world is worse off than before.
Why did the three Vietnamese guys have to die? With so many other holes in his plan, why bother covering up the murder of three completely loyal servants in the middle of nowhere? No one is going to be digging around in the snow investigating this *****. Just throw them in an incinerator and say they left. Why destroy the greenhouse in the process? Why was the greenhouse built with an incredibly elaborate opening mechanism that you would never, EVER use?
With all the heaploads of deus ex machina in Watchmen, why is Dr. Manhattan such a relative non-factor? He has god-like powers, apparently only limited by "tachyon emitters." Why did he not notice these tachyon emitters before? Were they turned off? Did he not notice them being built and tested? He's completely inconsistent, as a character. Sometimes he knows everything, other times he gets surprised (when it's convenient for the story). Sometimes he gets torn up trying to please people, other times he has no sense of the value of human beings. - Ayavaron, on 08/02/2008, -0/+4While the symmetrical element of that chapter was incredibly cool, I am not convinced that one would really lose a whole lot in its omission. It's a beautiful visual and it reinforces the themes and symbols of the story but it's not vital to the power of the story. Watchmen is a source material strong enough to work even when it has lost its fanciest bells and whistles.
- yairagat, on 08/02/2008, -3/+7Seriously though - I don't know that comic. At all. Can someone PLEASE explain to me what's so exciting about another comicbook movie? from seeing the visuals and characters it seems just like another superhero movie (Nolan's Batman movies are not in that category since they were made to be believable, unlike most other superhero movies - hence why i think they're great).
Please, Enlighten me. - IG64, on 08/02/2008, -0/+4With words like "hype" and "fanboy" or this article's "fangasm" it's amazing that excitement hasn't simply been banned all-together.
- plecostomus, on 08/02/2008, -1/+5I thought the trailer looked kind of stupid (i.e. the costumes). But I've never read the comic book so I don't have that particular high-sugar glaze over my eyes. I did think some of the visual effects looked interesting and that's probably why I'll go see it. As to the plot, I only know anything now because I read the Digg posts above me. Before I was like "hey look, bad X-Men rip-offs."
- TonyTheTerrible, on 08/02/2008, -0/+3Cry more.
- halfwayentropy, on 08/02/2008, -0/+3So.... people want comic book movies to be like the books, but not too much. The author can make the stories their own... but the characters and plot need to be accurate. It's true: you can't please everyone. Perhaps you can't even please most people. Whatever the case, I'd like to see the author of the blog attempt something as complex and huge as a Watchmen adaptation.
- innocentsinner, on 08/02/2008, -0/+3You're gonna be pretty disappointed, then.
- Tyviris, on 08/02/2008, -0/+3I think the comment about how watchmen is too much for the fans is a genuine problem in the marketing department. If I didn't know what watchmen was, I would've been unable to tell what the watchmen movie was about besides people in tights based on the trailer.
- capndan, on 08/02/2008, -0/+3Read some of the other articles on this site. All this guy does is bitch about how everything can't be as good as he wants it to be.
/Ignored - uselessexpert, on 08/02/2008, -0/+3All I hope for the Watchmen movie is to stay as true as possible to the book itself. When I read the book about 15 years ago, the ending blew me away!
I just hope the movie has that same effect it did 15 years ago!
And from what I've seen so far it looks like it might.
I've recently dusted off my copy and began to read it again to refresh my memory on some of the less important details of the story.
Can't wait until March '09. - ijake, on 08/02/2008, -0/+3I used to love io9... but lately they've seemed to be a little "holier than thou" about a lot of stuff for no good reason at. Really starting to turn me off of reading that blog.
- mattlohkamp, on 08/02/2008, -2/+5First you should READ the watchmen - then you should see the movie. I'm pretty optimistic about it, but even if it kinda sucks, knowing what the graphic novel is like should help shore it up.
- f54280, on 08/03/2008, -0/+2@Ayavaron : We mostly agree while disagreeing on small points. There are a lot of subtleties of the medium that cannot be transfered to the big screen, and, in that sense the movie cannot (and must not) be faithful. On the other hand, the movie can be successful on its own.
Stories often reach higher status (for me), when there is a blend between the message and the use of the medium.
For instance, Memento is about someone not knowing what he just did, and place the viewer in the exact same position. Without this, it would be a ***** movie. With it, it is a classic.
A more complex/interesting example is Stalker, which is a story about a guy that bring people in a place so they can meditate and (re)discover their faith. The movie is in fact doing exactly the same thing to the viewer. Tarkovsky is the stalker, the movie is the Zone, and in the final scene of the girl, the glass and the train is the question, where we are left to ponder our faith. We can choose to beleive or not, and it'll bring two different interpretation of the movie, neither of which can be proved right, which was exactly the point. That is very powerful.
Such blend is present everywhere is The Watchmen (and is particularly visible in the Rorschach chapter). This have to be transposed on the screen for the movie to be good (and not in the same form of the book, obviously. what work in books doesn't in movies. but movies have the use of time and movement which they can use to transpose). Faithfully doing the story will not be enough.
So, I think that, for instance, most of the symmetry of Roschach have to go away, it is an effect that is linked to the book 2 dimensional status (you can compare an image to the next). Of course, they also have to cut down the story, because if they try to put everything, it will ends up frenetic and boring, like Dune was. But they have to make a good movie, and for that, they will need more than a "X-men with overweight people telling the exact story of the book" - eviephenomena, on 08/03/2008, -0/+2"...so now the movie can make everyone realize that superhero movies aren't kids stuff either," missing out that... well, we already have The Dark Knight, thanks very much."
Oh. So we have one whole super hero movie that is directed towards adults. That's all we really need. Why bother producing equally good movies with similar subject matter? We have the Dark Knight! - InfinitySnatch, on 08/02/2008, -0/+2bluesnowmonkey, the answer to all of those questions is Minovsky Particles. That is all.
- apothekari, on 08/02/2008, -0/+2I agree.But there's always hope I guess.
- twotimesthru, on 08/02/2008, -0/+2I have to say, I had never heard of the Watchmen until I saw the trailer on Digg... then before the Dark Knight. I immediately went online, read the synopsis and was totally hooked... bought the book this week. So, I think the movie will definitely attract new audiences to the original, at least it has in my case.
- rowlodge, on 08/02/2008, -1/+3wish more movies like Dune where out there, these are from comic books that 12 year olds read, not saying i don't like this stuff, but theres gotta be good sci-fi writers out there somewhere.
- inactive, on 08/02/2008, -0/+2Its going to be exactly like 300.
- vichussmith, on 08/03/2008, -0/+2No film is completely faithful to its source literature. Few come really close, but never exact. Stop whining about it.
-
Show 51 - 73 of 73 discussions
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is