Snyder!

[andrewducker]

[Poll #1597903]

Comments

[andrewducker]

Dawn Of The Dead - had to stop watching half an hour in, because I am a great big wuss.
300 - Made Of Awesome.
Watchmen - A valiant attempt that sadly failed to understand the point of what Alan Moore was saying. Pretty though.
Legend of the Guardians - looks like a good, fun, kids adventure film. With owl-related combat.
Sucker Punch - looks like Terry Gilliam armed with machine guns. Can't go wrong there :->

[broin.livejournal.com]

"Watchmen - A valiant attempt that sadly failed to understand the point of what Alan Moore was saying. Pretty though."

Mr Moore made his point and Mr Snyder made a different one.

[andrewducker]

I'm not sure what point Mr Snyder was making then. And why he used Watchmen to make it. He seemed to think he was making something utterly faithful, from what I read.

[broin.livejournal.com]

How many times have we had this conversation? :D

For starters, you can't make anything 100% accurate, because it's a different time, different place, and different medium. That actors are involved rather than just Dave Gibbons's somewhat static art means everyone interprets the material in unexpected ways.

For example, you could try and reproduce the 9-panel layout, or the recurring symbols, but it would look incredibly heavy-handed and gimmicky in film.

For me, the movie was much more about secret history, which wasn't something I'd really gleaned from the book, even over multiple readings. cf that gorgeous credit sequence. The book lacked that stuff, and seeing that theme explored was enjoyable. And while the movie tackles questions of power and control, Veidt is much less of a Bill Gates character in the movie. In the comicbook, he has amazing influence so it's a shock when we find out his plans. In the movie, it's not such a surprise.

Y'know, they do different things in different ways.

[broin.livejournal.com]

Or here's another one - with 25 years of violent cinematic anti-heroes, Rorschach seems almost cuddly. You can't revisit what a shock he is in the comics in movie form, because we even find ourselves rooting for cannibals.

[gonzo21.livejournal.com]

It was pretty much a scene by scene conversion wasn't it? With a few changes at the end because the comic book ending had already been ripped off by Heros.

(In that way that Heros ripped off pretty much everything.)

I'm not sure though, it's many years since I last read the comic.

[cybik.livejournal.com]

300 is good in certain ways. I own it because it's enjoyably ridiculous, but I think that those who say it is terrible have a point.

[andrewducker]

Terrible? Naah, can't see it.

Cartoonish, ridiculous and over the top? Sure.

[cartesiandaemon.livejournal.com]

I think when I voted, I said that in my opinion 300 was 49% pretty awesome and 51% horribly offensive (and this is ME talking, I'm not typically very sensitive and typically very willing to look past flaws to see the good stuff), so I balanced 49% and 51% and voted for terrible, but that doesn't mean there wasn't a lot to like.

[gonzo21.livejournal.com]

Ah, I hadn't realised he was the guy behind the Dawn Of The Dead remake. Thought he did a tremendous job of that, it's far superior to the original.

[a-pawson.livejournal.com]

Ooh ooh burn the heretic. He sullies the name of our zombiemeister - the great lord Romero!!!!

[andrewducker]

It's a shame Romero hasn't done anything good in 25 years.

[gonzo21.livejournal.com]

Your great lord Zombiemeister Romero sullied himself! Need I mention the dire words, City Of The Dead? Hmmm?

[a-pawson.livejournal.com]

Not heard of that one? Do you mean "Land of the Dead" or "Diary of the Dead". I thought both of those were decent enough films. Not as groundbreaking as his earlier ones true, but not terrible.

[kvlt-kitty.livejournal.com]

I must say, I'm shocked how many people haven't seen Dawn of the Dead :P!

[natural20.livejournal.com]

I was going to say something about Watchmen and the taste of your lj friends, but then I saw the conversation with broin and decided not to. :)

It wasn't so much that it was bad as devoid of any passion, energy, point, pathos, emotion or life. And yes, I know I'm basically repeating myself there, I felt I needed to for emphasis. :)

[broin.livejournal.com]

Ha! The option was a Duckeresque GOOD or BAD. If I could have scored it as a percentage, I'd probably have agreed with the overall score here.

It did lack passion and energy. But... I'm struggling to think of the emotion in the comic. Apart from Rorschach's general RAEG and maybe Laurie's whining.

[natural20.livejournal.com]

Pshaw, you clicks your button, you takes your chances, we all knew what we were getting into. :)

But really, I'd disagree, I think all of the characters were certainly emotional in different ways, even Dr Manhattan. They also displayed passion and energy at different times. I just never got that from the screen. But hey, it's subjective. You enjoyed it, I didn't. On other days I'd debate for hours, but not today. :)

[major-clanger.livejournal.com]

I think there are lots of ways you can rate 300, but a simple good/bad axis isn't one of them...

[ashfae.livejournal.com]

DofD: Horror movies + Ashfae = bad, so I skipped it.
300: want to see it but haven't gotten around to it yet
Watchmen: ditto, though I'm wary
Owls: 50-50. It could be good, it could be crap; I'm willing to give it a shot. Owls are nifty.
Sucker Punch: Hadn't heard of it before your mention.

[wg.livejournal.com]

I know nothing about the owls, except I saw a trailer before Inception the other night and something about them rather creeped me out, hence the bad vote. I generally in favour of talking animals, but that seemed a bit wrong.

[captainlucy.livejournal.com]

Dawn of the Dead: A decent enough remake, as far as modern remakes of anything goes (damning with faint praise there, I know). I liked it, but not nearly as much as the original.

300: Utterly ridiculous, but wonderfully over-the-top and visually stunning. About as good a transfer of comic-to-screen as you're likely to get. And, as I keep saying, may well have toned down just how much of a brutal killing machine the Spartan army was at Thermopylae.

Watchmen: Again, visually stunning, and I thought sufficiently respectful to the source material for a mainstream movie (again, perhaps a hint here of damning with faint praise.) I can understand why most of the changes between source and movie were made, even if I don't agree with all of them and think it might have been a better movie without some (such as the sexed-up fight scenes you mention in one fo the comments above. I thought the change at the end makes much more sense from a movie perspective).

Legend of the Guardian: Don't know anything about this, will look it up on FaceTube later

Sucker Punch: Looks utterly preposterous and wonderfully silly. Hopefully it doesn't share the same relationship to 300 etc that The Spirit did to Sin City.

[johnbobshaun.livejournal.com]

Dawn of the Dead: A brilliant, exciting piece of film-making that I was totally prepared to hate and didn't.

300: Camp as 60's Batman and kind of wonderful.

Watchmen: It's been over a year, I've watched it half a dozen times and I still haven't decided. I'm willing to give it a pass for the titles, the Watchmaker sequence and Rorschach generally but it's slavish and bloated and filled with curious choices that bugged me. Kind of wish we got the Paul Greengrass version instead. But I would have whined about that too.

That owl thing: Yeah, okay, I guess I'll watch that.

Suckerpunch: MY EYES! WHAT'S GOING ON NOTHING MAKES SENSE I THINK I'M HAVING A STROKE

[broin.livejournal.com]

"I THINK I'M HAVING A STROKE"

Please don't do that in the cinema.

[missedith01.livejournal.com]

Um ... I think you should disregard my comment as I'm now fairly convinced that the filum I was thinking of is Shaun of the Dead ...


:-D


Bloody good film tho.