Pidesco on 2/6/2008 at 18:53
I have to say that talk of 3 hour movies not working is a big load of bull. They are harder to make, of course, but certainly not in any way impossible to pull off.
That being said, I also think Snyder is a bit of a hack, (even if Dawn of the Dead wasn't too bad) and as such there's no way in hell he can pull off a 3 hour movie.
Stitch on 3/6/2008 at 00:47
Quote Posted by Pidesco
I have to say that talk of 3 hour movies not working is a big load of bull. They are harder to make, of course, but certainly not in any way impossible to pull off.
Thanks for settling the score on that one, dude.
Scots Taffer on 3/6/2008 at 05:11
Quote Posted by Stitch
Of course it would, but that's not the point. This is supposed to be a
movie. The very qualities that make Watchmen such an excellent comic don't inherently translate into a watchable movie.
Here's hoping they're merciless in their adaptation so we wind up with a great
movie, as opposed to a film that manages to pack everything in but loses any sense of narrative flow in the process.
Wow, it's like you and I were having the exact same conversation in different timezones.(
http://www.ttlg.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1737877#post1737877) [1]
However, this...
Quote Posted by Stitch
I'd argue the opposite. I love the extended editions because I'm a huge LotR nerd, but the theatrical cuts are superior
movies. The pacing is better suited to the single-viewing medium of film, whereas the extended cuts basically push things into miniseries territory. Nothing wrong with that, except that they aren't really movies.
...is so wrong and you know it. The EEs work far more than each of the Theatrical Cuts (with perhaps the exception of ROTK, which is just too fucking long anyway) as movies because character motivations, continuity and simple sense of place all work better. I hated LOTR (the books) and found the EEs far superior as flicks, my wife hated FOTR in the cinema and really loved the DVD. All anecdotal evidence, and my suppositions about 'what works', indicate that the EEs are in fact the superior movies at telling the LOTR tale.
I've realised though that you may have been speaking about what's best in a "mainstream cinema release" sense, which is fair enough but I'd rail strongly against that notion - it's that notion that gave us Transformers after all (and a sequel in the pipeline). ;)
N'Al on 3/6/2008 at 08:40
Good news:
This thread inspired me to pick up the book at the weekend.
Bad news:
I'm only on Chapter 3 now, and I can already tell that Zack Snyder will fuck this up.
quinch on 3/6/2008 at 11:15
I think the main problem isn't the length per se but who on earth (besides some posters in this thread) is going to want to sit though a 3 hour film based on an obscure comic book. It's not Lord of the Rings or The Godfather and there doesn't appear to be anyone famous in it.
So er, i guess it could be rather good :erg: and I will be able to really spread out and put my feet up at the cinema.
Screen shots look marvellous but I'm disturbed by Nite Owl 1940 - put some trousers/tights on at least :eww:
Tintin on 3/6/2008 at 12:59
The graphic novel is very good but I'm not sure how this is going to translate to film - there's just too much detail.
This movie will get an 'R' rating no doubt. It wouldn't work as a PG-13.
The Magpie on 3/6/2008 at 21:08
Quote Posted by quinch
but who on earth (besides some posters in this thread) is going to want to sit though a 3 hour film based on an obscure comic book.
Well, this
particular "obscure comic book" happens to be the only sequential artwork appearing in TIME's (
http://www.time.com/time/2005/100books/0,24459,watchmen,00.html) list of the 100 Greatest English Language Novels from 1923 to the Present (2005). Make of that what you will.
--
L.
Tintin on 4/6/2008 at 07:26
"Obscure?" Watchmen is anything but obscure.
Where do you live - Antarctica?
quinch on 4/6/2008 at 08:25
Way too obscure for the average cinema goer to stay put for three hours.
Interesting comment earlier about bringing back intermissions. I would welcome this but I think it might just prolong the agony for a lot of people unfortunately.
Aerothorn on 11/6/2008 at 17:50
You guys are using differing definitions of obscure. Watchmen is, of course, very famous among readers of graphic novels. But most folks don't read graphic novels - the only really "famous" graphic novel in the mainstream right now is Persepolis, and maybe a few with films (300 and Sin City). Hence, it is obscure to the mainstream.
Walk out on the street and ask random people if they're familiar with Watchmen. You're going to get a lot of nos.
