GodThingFormerly
A Different Kind of Asshole
^ Ah. 
TGT

TGT
Did you even read my post? He did not use the names and titles of other people's works and put his own name on it. He used archtypes created by others gave them his own names and wrote his own story to go with it. Doc Manhattan wasn't blamed in the book and shouldn't get the blame in the film. It would be like ending Return Of The King by having Sam destroy the ring.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.
Did you even read my post? He did not use the names and titles of other people's works and put his own name on it. He used archtypes created by others gave them his own names and wrote his own story to go with it. Doc Manhattan wasn't blamed in the book and shouldn't get the blame in the film. It would be like ending Return Of The King by having Sam destroy the ring.
I can understand cutting parts out for time constraints but I cannot support putting in parts that never occurred in the established story.
Using characters from other works in a new story is not the same thing as using an existing story and altering it.Did you even read my post? He did not use the names and titles of other people's works and put his own name on it. He used archtypes created by others gave them his own names and wrote his own story to go with it. Doc Manhattan wasn't blamed in the book and shouldn't get the blame in the film. It would be like ending Return Of The King by having Sam destroy the ring.
I can understand cutting parts out for time constraints but I cannot support putting in parts that never occurred in the established story.
I wasn't talking about The Watchmen. I was talking about his League of Extraordinary Gentlemen series.
I take it you're being ''sarcastic''?^ I know exactly what you mean! I was so pissed at Steven Spielberg when he made Jaws! I mean Hooper lives at the ending of the movie? What happened to him getting bit in half? What the fuck was up with Chief Brody blowing the shark up? Didn't Spielberg read the book? The shark died slowly from wound incurred over the course of the shark hunt. AND WHAT THE FUCK WAS UP WITH QUINT? He didn't get bit in half in the book. He wasn't a survivor of the Indianapolis tragedy in that book. And that speech. THAT FUCKING SPEECH! THAT WASN"T IN THE BOOK! IT RUINED THE WHOLE FUCKING MOVIE FOR ME! How dare Spielberg put in parts in the movie that weren't in the book. Fuck what's cinematic! He shoulda been a slave to the material!
And that's really the only thing that matters.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.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.
I'm glad to see you are giving the movie the benefit of the bout and waiting to actually see it before making any judgment.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.
Rorschach? Is it you?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.
Viedt's actions may have been beyond brutal, but considering Humanity was hours away from nuking itself into extinction I personally couldn't turn away from begrudgingly accepting his actions.
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.