Balls and Walnuts
more than you ever wanted to know
OMFG . . . Watchmen.
I’ve been trying to write one of those dcr-style meta-posts where you construct an entire post out of links to your friends’ blogs. In the course of doing so, I found Invisible Lizard’s review of The Dark Knight, wherein he mentions
I came out of the theater feeling exhausted. Sure, it could be the 152 minute running time, the 20 minutes of previews (Watchmen, yeah!) and the 20 minutes of pre-show ads . . .
Watchmen? Watchmen?
(I’ll try to restrain my trepidation that Zack “300” Snyder is directing, and my disgust that Alan Moore is listed as “uncredited.”)
Looks amazing, doesn’t it?
D.
← Thinner
It’s a little fussy; I suspect a lot of folks are trying to download this at the same time.
(a) You hadn’t heard there’s a Watchmen movie in the works? What kind of geek are you?
(b) Alan Moore refuses to be credited for any movie adaptation of his works; I think he’s been burned by bad movies in the past. >cough< LXG >cough<
I stumbled across the trailer, quite by accident.
I don’t know what to think.
It looks… okay. Just okay.
As one of those fanboys who have been waiting for 15 years to see this movie made (Remember back when they were courting Swarzenegger for Ozy and David Carusso for Rorschach?)at this point I realize they can do no right. The hype expectations are just too insurmountable.
The costumes and vehicles and tone are true to the comic. Some of those scenes from the trailer were perspective-true to the identical shots from the comic panels. Buuuuuut… The art in the comic was pretty awful. The success of Watchmen was all about Moore’s writing. Those costumes look pretty over-the-top from the perspective of my jaded modern eye.
And the decision to go with virtual no-name D List actors?
Jackie Earle Haley from the original Bad News Bears as Rorcharch? Whuuuut?
I dunno, man. I’m rooting for success, but I’ve got a bad vibe.
Thanks for the link. Can’t wait to see what you come up with! Then again, maybe I should be afraid. Very afraid.
Nah, it’s gonna be great.
Zach Snyder heard that Warner Bros had possession of the script, then went out of his way (cut fee) to direct. He adores the comic book and didn’t want to see anyone fuckin’ with it. Apparently the idea being bandied about was to “update” the theme from the Cold War to the War on Terror, and make it a “big message” movie. Snyder said no, just tell the damn story and it’ll be great. He did just fine with 300, perfectly bringing the comic feel and style to the screen, so this should be a nice updating of the artwork with what looks like awesome effects and production design.
The only part they’re leaving out is the comic book about the shipwreck, but it’s being released as a pre-movie or post-movie marketing extra, all animated. Everything else is being told straight-forward.
The decision to cast no-names was intentional too. They know they have a) the best comic book story ever, b) 10 bazillion fanboys and girls who’ll see it no matter what, and c) Snyder’s past success with 300 to keep the hype high, the critics interested, and public lagging along. Why cast Arnie or the moder-day equiv only to see it all ganked up with big name no-talents? These actors were cast intentionally to match the comic book (the BBC version of casting), rather than changing the story to fit a certain star (the American version).
And finally, Alan Moore decided to take his name off all projects because he believes NO movie can capture comic books. Comic books, for him, are the highest art form. So while Snyder sees his work as a crusade to create a proper Watchman adaptation, Moore sees the whole process of adapting it to screen as an abomination. No discredit or credit to Snyder by his decision; it’s just the stance he’s taken.
Source: my husband, and far too many movie blogs.
Pat: a very, very busy geek. And I didn’t think LXG was all that bad (comic better, of course).
Dwight, I have to agree with Carrie — no-names are the right way to go. Mid-level stars would have been fine (see for example V for Vendetta), but the big box office types would ruin a movie like this.
Dan: not that afraid. It’s a rather limiting form.
Carrie: thank you for the info. I’m glad we’ve got a director on board who’s a fanboy himself. Gives me hope for the final product.
tell bruh, u a real geek LOL
If I have a complaint about the trailer (already? – yes, already!) it’s the slick modern look to the costumes. One of the things I liked about “Watchmen” the comic book is that the art tended toward realism (Well, as close as you can get in a simple comic format without being Alex Ross). Will Night Owl have a paunch?
Jackie.
Earle.
Haley.
Respectfully, you can NOT defend that casting choice without drinking some variation of fanboy Kool-Aide.
Now, prove me wrong, Jackie. Make me a jackass naysayer. PLEASE, prove me wrong, I beg of you.
Laura and I saw the trailer when we went to Dark Knight the other day and we both went…
“Um. No.”
Sorry. It looks stupid to me, and I’m a comic fan, especially anything by Frank Miller (I LOVED the Ronin Limited Series and I probably still have them packed away somewhere). But this just looks…
Um. No.
Sorry.
“I could pee?” Anti-climatic. I could not without that part.
microsoar: I hear ya.
Dwight: stop dissin on Jackie Earle. Consider the actor who had an early role as “Jungle Boy” on Gilligan’s Island, who went on to appear in Disney’s “The Horse in the Gray Flannel Suit” and “The Computer Wore Tennis Shoes,” and who seemed doomed to TV hell until John Carpenter gave him a new career, thanks to “Escape from New York,” “The Thing,” and “Big Trouble in Little China.”
And now folks see him as an action hero (“Stargate,” “Soldier,” “Tombstone”) and have forgotten Quano from “Lost in Space”.
Kurt Russell. ‘Nuff said. Give Jackie Earle a chance.
Tam, just curious if you’ve read the original. What is it in the trailer you found disagreeable?
CD: I skipped the blather at the end. Don’t know the dude, don’t care what he thinks.
Never read them. I remember seeing the comics way back when – I was a comic collector in the 80’s – but I never read them.
I dunno for sure what it was about the trailer. The stylistic discord between the MC and the setting? The fact that all of the women seemed to have porno-star names and attitudes? The WTF are they trying to show here?!? lack of concept cohesion for those not familiar with the storyline?
Just… Um, no. Nothing about it – other than the graphic black white and red which I ALWAYS like – appealed to me as a moviegoer.
Skip the movie, then, and get the book. It really is superb. Karen said it best when she tried explaining to Jake our excitement: the book revels in moral ambiguity, and there’s a degree of nuance to the characterization that you don’t often see in fiction.
#2:
As noted in my blog post a year ago, there’s an old script (that probably isn’t being used)that you can read on the web here. It has a different, possibly more accessible ending to the comic….
Dwight: This would be the Jackie Earle who was nominated for an Oscar and a Screen Actors Guild award for best supporting actor for Little Children, yeah?
But you know, he was a child actor, so he probably just fluked it. Just like Christian Bale does. I mean he’s OK and everything, but I can’t get over his role in Newsies.
Tambo: If you collected comics in the 80s and didn’t read Watchmen you were obviously collecting the wrong ones 🙂