Watchmen movie ending blows...

[Kaijufan]

dru wrote:

---

Because a cold war America's enemies wouldn't instead take that moment to gang up on the country but instead would unite with America? Sure...

I'm not even a fan and even I can see the new ending is lame.

According to the spoilers I've read Veidt has multiple Doctor Manhattan bombs which he detonates in cities around the world, so yes it would unite the world against Doctor Manhattan.

[The Evil Dead]

^
Yup, it turns it into a global catastrophe.

I'd have enjoyed the visual of the squid in downtown New York, I've seen New York zapped with lasers before, but I can see from how the new ending might enhance the story. I will wait and see what I think of it this weekend, but I understand why they changed it and am open to the concept.

A friend of mine here in Toronto worked on the IMAX transfer of the film and said the film is very good, so I'm optimistic. He got to see Star Trek the other day... sonofa...

[dkehler]

T'Baio wrote:

---

Spoiler alert. Duh.

I just read how Snyder has changed the ending, from the Squid thing to making bombs from Dr. Manhattan's powers, bombing cities and uniting the world against Dr. Manhattan?

That fucking sucks.

Best decision they could have possibly made.

[JacksonArcher]

The Evil Dead wrote:

---

^
Yup, it turns it into a global catastrophe.

I'd have enjoyed the visual of the squid in downtown New York, I've seen New York zapped with lasers before, but I can see from how the new ending might enhance the story. I will wait and see what I think of it this weekend, but I understand why they changed it and am open to the concept.

A friend of mine here in Toronto worked on the IMAX transfer of the film and said the film is very good, so I'm optimistic. He got to see Star Trek the other day... sonofa...

He did?! And...?

[Skywalker]

Gah, I wish I hadn't clicked on this thread. Oh well, not a big deal. I knew the movie wouldn't be a faithful adaptation. This is a change that I actually don't mind. Hopefully they executed it well.

[Agent Richard07]

Leroy wrote:

---

All I'm going to say without seeing the movie is that if you just see the movie and don't read the book or don't plan on reading the book, SHAME ON YOU!

I've never read it, but I just got it. It doesn't look like I'll get through it by Thursday though.

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Fuck the Squid. Moore's ending is lifted from at least two other places anyway.

[bigdaddy]

How about we WATCH the movie first before bashing it to pieces?

[Davros]

When translating a work from page to screen there should be an obligation to be true to the original work.

If you want to change the story, then don't use the same title because you are not telling the same tale.

[Lowdarzz]

Not really surprising. Hollywood lives to make things "gritty" and more "realistic" these days. Hell a gigantic genetically designed creature capable of sending out a psionic wave that kills most of the people in New York could never fit in a film with a blue naked dude that has the power to do about anything.

[Thrall]

Davros wrote:

---

When translating a work from page to screen there should be an obligation to be true to the original work.

If you want to change the story, then don't use the same title because you are not telling the same tale.

Tell that to Alan Moore when he turned characters from classic works of literature into sexual and social deviants and had the audacity to try and pretend it was art.

[Norrin Radd]

Thrall wrote:

---

Tell that to Alan Moore when he turned characters from classic works of literature into sexual and social deviants and had the audacity to try and pretend it was art.

You might have a case if Moore was adapting "Alice in Wonderland", "Peter Pan", or "Wizard of Oz". He wasn't. He came out with an entirely new story with an entirely different title that featured the characters.

Countless authors have done this. I mean, does every crazy book that features the character of Dracula somehow detract from the original Bram Stoker novel?

[dkehler]

Davros wrote:

---

When translating a work from page to screen there should be an obligation to be true to the original work.

If you want to change the story, then don't use the same title because you are not telling the same tale.

Ridiculous. And from what I've heard, the spirit of the story remains intact. Probably more so than just about any comic adaptation to date.

[dkehler]

Lowdarzz wrote:

---

Not really surprising. Hollywood lives to make things "gritty" and more "realistic" these days. Hell a gigantic genetically designed creature capable of sending out a psionic wave that kills most of the people in New York could never fit in a film with a blue naked dude that has the power to do about anything.

That's just it. I think the big, blue, naked demigod that vacations on Mars is more than enough of a fantastic element for moviegoers. Piling on a gigantic alien squid with psionic powers would be too much. In fact, I thought it was too much in the graphic novel and I couldn't be happier with what they came up with instead.

[Thrall]

Norrin Radd wrote:

---

You might have a case if Moore was adapting "Alice in Wonderland", "Peter Pan", or "Wizard of Oz". He wasn't. He came out with an entirely new story with an entirely different title that featured the characters.

Countless authors have done this. I mean, does every crazy book that features the character of Dracula somehow detract from the original Bram Stoker novel?

I wouldn't normally bitch about it, but Moore is the biggest hypocrite in the world for constantly saying how Hollywood rapes is characters and stories. And then he goes and writes LOEG, in which he literally and figuratively does that to much beloved characters written by authors who would no doubt disapprove of the filth he drags their characters into. He has no right to bitch about The LOEG movie. Because they weren't his characters to begin with. And if anything, they came across better then when he was writing them.