june gloom on 15/3/2009 at 03:43
no
june gloom on 15/3/2009 at 05:14
Played the demo for the game. It's nowhere near as deep a fighter as The Warriors but the novelty of playing Rorschach makes up for it.
Angel Dust on 15/3/2009 at 06:02
Geez you guys, I never said that my brother was enjoying the film up until that shot sent him into a frothing nerd rage. Instead a labouriously going over the details of what he liked/didn't like, he just picked that shot as a microcosm of what he thought of the film: It looks the part and it's heart is in the right place but it is ultimately a hollow experience due undeveloped characters, needless fan service and a director/screenwriter with no idea of how to adapt from one medium to another.
Now I don't want to get into an argument, especially one that isn't really even mine, but it seems to me that Synder perhaps should have taken a leaf out of Peter Jacksons book. When Jackson decided Tom Bombadill wasn't going to work in the LOTR film version he completely removed him. He didn't include a cameo shot or two for the fans because that would have been pointless and been a reminder of what is missing from the story. There is a time for sneaky salutes to the fans, Transformers while being pretty awful had a few cool fan salutes, but replicating a powerful moment in the story without the background for it is not how you do it. I understand the director's cut will develop those characters but he chose to cut that from the theatrical version and he should have removed that shot too, fans be damned. Maybe that shot didn't really resonate with you guys a lot but for me and my brother it was precisely those little details that made 'Watchmen' so great and to see it fall flat on the big screen compared to how it hit you in the comic was, for my brother, another reminder of emotional punch that was lacking from the film.
Fafhrd on 15/3/2009 at 07:14
Quote Posted by Scots Taffer
Can people stop giving the film a pass on the basis of its cutting room floor parts and what may make an extended DVD version please. It's a fucking useless and irritating argument.
I'm not giving the FILM a pass for it (I already said the theatrical cut doesn't quite work. Though it worked better for me the second time), I'm giving the DIRECTOR a pass for it. Because it's
not the Director's Cut.
It's irritating that people keep saying 'It's clear that Snyder doesn't get the material because x and y are missing, but z is present, even though z doesn't work without x and y.' It'd be like somebody saying Ridley Scott is a terrible director based on the theatrical cuts of Blade Runner (which I know you don't like anyway, but bear with me) and Kingdom of Heaven (where the DC is so different as to be a completely different, and significantly better, film).
Scots Taffer on 15/3/2009 at 07:24
Sure, but I think his point about the boy and old man at the news vendors stands as it did make the final theatrical cut and at least on the information presented to him (in the theatrical cut) it did give him the impression that Zack gets images but not emotion. You're giving the director's cut the benefit of the doubt already.
Anyway, not wanting to quibble terribly over a film I haven't seen yet but I hope to do so the start of this week, THEN I'll let you know what I think. ;)
Chimpy Chompy on 15/3/2009 at 13:59
Saw the film, was pretty awesome. Never read the comics. Liked the take on the "what if superheroes really did exist" question. Rorschach's a sociopath, Nite Owl's a bit flabby but tries to live up to the Heroic thing, the only genuine Super hero loses interest in humanity.
There are probably deeper themes going on, and I should read the comic sometime. Right now I'm kinda happy tho i can enjoy the film without wrangling over whatever's been changed.
Also I've noticed how to spot fans of the comic, they keep referring to all the characters by their first names.
Renault on 15/3/2009 at 17:44
I also just saw the movie, and had never read the novel. I thought the movie was very good, much better than I thought after reading a few reviews. Even at almost three hours, it didn't feel too long. I loved the flashbacks on each character, and as the movie progressed I felt myself very much looking forward to Dr. Manhattan's in particular. It didn't disappoint.
Just after, I picked up the novel, and read through chapter 1 so far. At this point, everything in the novel seems to almost be a frame by frame and word by word match, so it'll be interesting to see how the two differ as I go along.
I've always wondered, all other things being equal, is it better to read the book or see the movie first? I tend to agree with Chimpy in that seeing the movie first, I had no preconceptions and was able to sit back and enjoy it. Now I can follow it up with the source material. But how different would I feel if I had read the novel first, say a day or so before the movie?
june gloom on 15/3/2009 at 18:31
Looks like I won't be going today :( :( :(
Good news is, though, is I get to see it Thursday- possibly for free- and I'll have company.
Scots Taffer on 15/3/2009 at 23:13
I'm going tonight. PREPARE YOURSELVES.
Scots Taffer on 16/3/2009 at 13:37
that sure was a big blue dong alright
