Wardrobe malfunction! I think your confirmation bias may be showing a little.
(But also please don't use profanity here, even if you disguise it).
Unless it's in Klingon.
-
The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice (Oh dear...)
- Thread starter horacethegrey
- Start date
Unless it's in Klingon.
Watched the first hour or so of the extended edition of Snyder's Watchman last night. Haven't revised it since I saw the theatrical run. Two things stood out.
One, it's damn good. There's more distictive style/voice in one hour of Watchman than any 5 Marvel superhero films -- excluding season 1 of Daredevil on Netflix, which really nails Daredevil-as-a-neo-noir.
Two, it's tonally very different from Man of Steel. Like night and day, despite Snyder's bag of technical tricks being on full display. The idea that Snyder is super-limited in range, or makes everything "grimdark" --insert your favorite overused, ambiguous, probably-nicked-from-TVTropes-or-wherever, pseudo-criticism term here-- is kinda, well, wrong.
So I hold out hope BvS will be interesting, if not actually good/great.
One, it's damn good. There's more distictive style/voice in one hour of Watchman than any 5 Marvel superhero films -- excluding season 1 of Daredevil on Netflix, which really nails Daredevil-as-a-neo-noir.
Two, it's tonally very different from Man of Steel. Like night and day, despite Snyder's bag of technical tricks being on full display. The idea that Snyder is super-limited in range, or makes everything "grimdark" --insert your favorite overused, ambiguous, probably-nicked-from-TVTropes-or-wherever, pseudo-criticism term here-- is kinda, well, wrong.
So I hold out hope BvS will be interesting, if not actually good/great.
It isn't Snyder who does that, no. My understanding is that is DC's call - they've required that their movies be Serious.
horacethegrey
First Post
Wardrobe malfunction! I think your confirmation bias may be showing a little.
(But also please don't use profanity here, even if you disguise it).
I don't hate Zack Snyder. I've given him numerous chances to prove me wrong. As I said before, I enjoyed 300. Watchmen however, left me cold. And I still watched Man of Steel in theaters in the hopes that critics were being unusually harsh on it. Boy was I wrong, that movie was a pain to watch.
The last thing I wanted was for BvS to receive the critical savaging that it's been getting. Like I said, I want DC's Extended Universe to be a thing that goes up against the MCU. But I guess hoping against hope that Zack Snyder would listen to the complaints regarding MOS was too much.
I'd give more credit to the original source material rather than Snyder. While Watchmen isn't my favorite work from Alan Moore, it's still a fantastic graphic novel on it's own and there's a goldmine of stuff that would translate well onscreen.
But man, did Snyder mess up in adapting some scenes from the book. Whatever subtlety and carefully constructed symbolism Moore inserted into it Snyder seems happy to take a wrecking ball and smash it down.
Like when Walter Kovacs finally loses it and becomes Rorshach full time. A scene which plays out like silent mental breakdown from Rorshach's perspective, but Snyder films it like Rorshach finally succumbs to his bloodlust and kills the guy by hacking his head.
The scene where Laura Juspeczyk (Silk Spectre 2) finally discovers the truth regarding her and the Comedian is also another misfire. In the book Laura has her revelation by piecing together all the snippets from her memory, but in the movie it's through some quantum magic via Dr. Manhattan that she finds out. I thought that was such a lazy copout and really undermined Laura's character.
And lest we forget, did we really need that extended sex scene between Night Owl and Silk Spectre?
I could go on and on about why I think Snyder's Watchmen is such a poor adaptation, but I'll leave saying that I thought the opening credits were cool.
To you. I know several people who find that (what the view as) the complete lack of humor in MoS has the result of making it pretty darned grim and dark, especially considering how the movie ends.
Yes, to me, Obviously. I'm in the habit of giving my own opinions.
What do you think? Are the tones of the two films comparable? If you disagree with my assertion, let's talk about it.
edit: I definitely agree MoS had very little humor. To it's detriment. But that didn't really affect the overall tone too much.
Last edited:
Heh... I could counter going on and on I why I think Snyder's Watchman was successful. But I'll spare us both that! Instead I'll just say -- to me!!-- the film got right what it needed to get right, and yes, those credits were cool. Genius, even.
About whose opinion is more reliable, and why, really.
Remember that Hollywood is strongly (but not entirely) driven by the box office take of a movie. When you buy a movie ticket, even if you never see the movie, you are voting, "I want to see more of this," as far as Hollywood is concerned. You are, in effect, casting a vote for more of a thing *you haven't yet seen*.
In addition, it isn't like movie tickets are cheap, and that home video is still crappy. Waiting for it to come out on Netflix is a viable option. Or, really, how much are you missing if you just take a pass?
So, it isn't like, "Do I go to see this?" is a no-brainer question. Asking whether it is worth the time and money isn't irrational. Looking for information to help answer that question isn't foolish or pointless. Taking *hours* pouring over reviews trying to decide is probably foolish - if you spend more time reading reviews than seeing the movie, you've got a problem. So, it becomes a question of who has the more reliable opinion, so you can look someplace quickly and get an idea of whether it is worth it.
