Discussion in 'Science Fiction & Fantasy' started by Obiwanshinobi, Jan 30, 2011.
As in the movie. Glad we got that cleared up.
Not really. At least not good movies based on books. An effective adaptation realizes that books and movies are different media and knows what to leave out and what to keep.
This says it best, I think. The very downbeat, naturalistic style of the comic was no where to be found in the movie, and the characters were suddenly presented in the flashiest, most stylized way imaginable. As if they were a bunch of freakin rock stars or something.
It just seemed to completely miss the point of the book.
Except when they are. That's what happens when "translating panels" means that the depicted events are the same in either version.
I think you mean "it failed at the box office", which is all that really matters these days.
I liked the Watchmen movie. Actually, I enjoyed it more than the comic. Then again, I was never really "wowed" by the comic to begin with.
Thus is the problem with fanboys. If Snyder took more liberties with the source material to streamline the comic into a workable movie, then NERDRAGE would happen. Snyder, instead, went to great lengths to make it as faithful as possible (especially with the extended cut [and the extended cut of the extended cut]) and what did he get? NERDRAGE! He was never going to win.
^ Once again I agree with Broc.
I've never seen an actor who couldn't make a lame bit of dialogue at least a little better than it reads on the page. Not even in community theater. Hell, not even Denise Crosby.
Snyder did an excellent job with Watchmen, and based on that I'm looking forward to this.
Maybe the "no emotions" line is supposed to be read as sarcasm? It could work that way.
Meet Anakin and Padme. Then again, perhaps nothing could save that first clip. Even the annoying "comments" overlaying the video.
It's because I'm fucking awesome.
Generally speaking, a script would indicate that. I suppose it makes no difference now considering it was debunked.
^ It also has to do with you being right I think we both share similar viewpoints on "Watchmen". I loved the movie, and am only a moderate fan of the book.
Generally speaking? No. Some writers insert a lot of parentheticals into their dialogue but the practice is not really loved by directors or actors so most use them very sparingly. If delivery isn't indicated by context then it's pretty much open.
Don't actors sometimes re-write their dialogue or come up with new dialogue depending on who they are? I think a few audio commentaries I've viewed, writers or directors have mentioned this and in very few cases have spoken positively about it. I forgot we are still talking about that debunked scene still lol.
Yes, Dennis, I realize that. It's also what I meant - generally speaking in those cases where its deemed necessary, such as the line in question.
I thought my indication was clear in that regard. Apparently not.
Which is often and always.
This is why nerds are the worst audience. Fuck nerds.
I was disappointed with the film Watchmen. That said, in the world we live in, it was probably the best film possible from the book. The film was faithful to the book, except where it wasn't, and some of the ways it wasn't faithful, obviously minor to some people, ended up being pretty major to me.
But back on topic, that good news/bad news is really beside the point, as none of that need have any bearing on what Man of Steel will be like. Using Watchmen as a gauge of what to expect doesn't go very far, especially since we aren't, AFAIK, discussing the adaptation of a previous single work, as we were in Watchmen.
Pretty much agree here, hardcore fans of the source material cannot support film franchises you need a wider base but you need to strike a balance like Nolan did (BB & TDK).
Literally, fuck them. Please?
Why isn't the practice loved?
Most basically, because no one - actors, directors or short-order cooks - likes to be told how to do what they do.
If the essential meaning of dialogue can't be derived from context, most of the time it's badly written.
For example, there are some well-known screenwriters who do put a great deal of camera direction, etc. into their scripts but that too is exceptional - almost any director is going to ignore that kind of thing. Yet beginning writers tend to get the idea that this is somehow the standard and to imitate that idiosyncracy, too.
I'm no hardcore Watchmen fan (and only actually read the thing a couple weeks before the movie came out), but the movie still struck me as having the completely wrong tone and style from the book.
Separate names with a comma.