The Watchmen

[Rackhir]

Guess I'm the odd one out here... Watchmen had some nice bits, but changing the ending would be only the first thing to be done to make me have an interest in seeing it as a film. I read the graphic novel all at one wack, which might effect my feelings on it, but I was simply annoyed at it, especially the ending.
Kahuna Burger

I have a friend who actually maintains that the only way to really get the full impact of the Watchmen WAS to read it one issue at a time over the course of the year. There are a number of subtle things in the series that wouldn't be quite the same if you got it all in one whack.

The Blood oozing down the back cover.
The parallels between Ozymandias and the pirate story.
The clock advancing towards midnight.
The slow movement towards war.
The background characters interactions as things ground towards the climax where most of them are killed by the creature Ozymandias created.

There are a lot of subtle undercurrents, parallels and plot threads
going on in Watchment. It really does reward rereading and careful analysis. Alan Moore almost never does a book in which everything that is going on is obvious or where there are meaningless background details. Almost everything he has going on has some meaning, implication or parallel to something else going.

Give it another read and go through it slowly this time. It is well worth it.

PS. I really can't see Watchmen getting adapted into a movie or TV series worth a damm. Short of someone who has the clout of Steven Spielberg+Tom Cruise, with a rabid determination to do the source material justice.

 

[Kahuna Burger]

I have a friend who actually maintains that the only way to really get the full impact of the Watchmen WAS to read it one issue at a time over the course of the year. There are a number of subtle things in the series that wouldn't be quite the same if you got it all in one whack.

The Blood oozing down the back cover.
The parallels between Ozymandias and the pirate story.
The clock advancing towards midnight.
The slow movement towards war.
The background characters interactions as things ground towards the climax where most of them are killed by the creature Ozymandias created.

I actually read it for a class and went back over thing. Aside from the back covers, I noticed just about everything you mention. As I found myself saying to so many of my ex's jokes, I GET it, I just don't LIKE it. (the reason I think I might have liked it more with a longer investment is cognitive dissonance, but thats another topic.) I don't like stories where you are slowly invested in characters or plot threads which turn out to be completely meaningless. I'm sure it can make excellent art, but I don't feel it makes a good story. The only way I would have enjoyed Watchmen is if someone had told me - "this is a performance art comic book, don't treat it like a story you're reading, because it will fail as that."

Kahuna Burger

 

[Starman]

Anyone know who wrote it? (Please be Alan Moore, please be Alan Moore, please be Alan Moore.)

David Hayter (of X-Men fame) is writing it (with an eye on directing if I'm not mistaken). He said that he changed the ending because he didn't think anyone would bankroll a movie with that type of ending. He also said that he has chatted with Moore about his script and that Moore understood the difference in the mediums that can require changes and gave the draft his blessing. We'll see, I guess.

I know Wizard casted the Watchmen movie a long time ago, but I can't find the issue. Of the top of my head they picked David Caruso for Rorshach, Charlton Heston for the original Nite Owl, Demi Moore for Laurie, and Robert Redford for Ozymandias. I don't remember the other roles.

Starman

 

[Tarrasque Wrangler]

What part of the ending are they changing? There were a lot of twists there as I recall















spoiler space, I guess



No mass murder in New York? I guess people might be a little sensitive post-9/11, but there's a big difference between terrorist hijackers and a hideous mutant/alien/psychic octopus. I trust people to know that that's a movie, not a metaphor.

No giant octopus monster? How else would they end the potential war?

No Ozymandias getting away with it? It made sense in the comic, so I hope they don't feel they have to cater to an audience's revenge fantasies.

No Rorshach's journal? I guess I could live with that, although that was a cool way to end the comic.

 

[Endur]

Ozymandias = Arnold Schwarzenegger
The Comedian = Russell Crow (younger) or Al Pacino (older)
Rorschach = Kevin Spacey
Night Owl = Gabriel Byrne
Dr. Manhatten = computer generated (a la the Hulk + Gollum)
The girlfriend (name?) = Carrie Moss or Bridget Moynahan

I'll admit my choices are influenced by The Usual Suspects, LA Confidential, and a few other movies. Ozymandias is on top of the world. A superhuman CEO. Somebody like Arnold would be perfect for the role.

My personal hope is that the script keeps the super-hero action without modification, but deletes the pirate story stuff.

Tom

 

[Olive]

They BETTER get it right.

But they won't. I mean look at From Hell: the movie that had almost nothing to do with the comic on which it was based, or the trailer for LXG...

Alan Moore is perfectly entitled to make more cash off his work, but I don't see any reason that I should take part in that process with the history of it all.

As for Arhold for Ozy, well... all I can say is that Ozy is supposed to eb charming. I don't think I've ever seen Arhold as charming...

 

[Starman]

What part of the ending are they changing?

I'm not sure. Hayter said in the interview that no studio would fund a movie with an ending as bloody as Watchmen. He did not say how he would rewrite it.

Starman

 

[el-remmen]

I've said it before and I'll say it again - not everything needs to be a movie. . .

I only wish that there was more freedom of format not only in the major Hollywood studios - but in what audiences would accept - but they've been brainwashed to accept the same thing over and over.

 

[Starman]

I only wish that there was more freedom of format not only in the major Hollywood studios - but in what audiences would accept - but they've been brainwashed to accept the same thing over and over.

I agree. My mom is always teasing me about the weird movies I like and con her into watching. Anytime I hear about a movie being described as weird, different, hard to follow, or anything similar I am instantly interested.

I can (and do) watch a lot of movies that come out and enjoy them for the two hours of mindless entertainment, but I am becoming more and more jaded. It's rare that I watch a movie that simply blows me away and makes me think about it for the next few weeks and makes me want to watch it multiple times. Many of my favorite movies tend to be those that bombed, because they were not typical Hollywood fare.

Starman

 

[Wormwood]

Unfilmable.