Discussion in 'Entertainment Forum' started by airik625, Sep 21, 2017.
looks like he's done it again!
I've seen the first six episodes and oh boy, ya'll are not prepared for this. It's wild. And I'd suggest that you read the book before watching the show, you might be lost without knowing the source material.
Definitely have been meaning to read the book again. It's been ages. Thanks for the heads up @Kal El
It is watchable without knowing the material but there are references to events, characters and things from the book and I'd say that deep and intimate knowledge of it is almost a prerequisite to enjoying the thing.
For those who aren’t into Graphic Novels, personally I find Snyder’s Adaptation (minus the ending which works on its merit) to be pretty damn faithful to the book if you prefer to just watch that before starting this..
I would never, under any circumstances, recommend that someone watch that film.
The show leans heavily on the book ending. Just throwing that out there.
And mercifully so.
After reading that review, I have a question about the TV show. I haven't read the graphic novel yet - I've only seen the Synder film. Maybe I'm missing something from the source material. I'll put the question in spoiler tags since it has to do with the show's plot, and some people may not want to know that yet.
What is it about Rorschach's character that would draw his likeness to be the symbol of a white supremacist group?
I saw this quote from a different review that sums it up pretty well:
“Rorschach, the T-shirtiest Watchmen icon for a generation of lonelyboy anger, exists here as a symbol for straight-up white supremacy.”
If you think about lonelyboy anger in 2019, the biggest example is probably alt right nazis on the internet.
That sounds like something you'd find on 8chan
I don't get how Snyder's Watchmen wasn't faithful to the book, aside for the ending and flashy costumes. But it's been a long time.
I've noticed a really large hatred of the movie from people who adore the graphic novel. I've read the novel and watched the movie and enjoy both in their respective mediums. I also enjoy Snyder's aesthetic, but I realize I may be in the minority in that regard.
I'll never forgive Synder for taking the "nothing ends, nothing ever ends" line away from the Dr Manhattan and giving it to freaking Malin Akerman (who was one of the worst elements of that film)
Series looks quite good based on the few trailers and a couple reviews ive seen.
I feel like the only major complaint in here other than what I already mentioned is too many badass fight scenes? And Rorschach being an antihero.. which he was in the book from my memory
But I was just a kid when I watched it and read the book so I'll have to dive back in
The article complaining that Synder didn't adapt it to more modern-day problems is a pretty dumb complaint in a period piece imo
Not to belabor this point, but I simply have no tolerance for any defense of Snyder's film as an adaptation of Moore and Gibbons' novel. If someone enjoys Snyder and what he offers, that's cool. To each their own. But it is something else entirely to say that Snyder succeeded at adapting the novel.
Yes, Snyder's film does compose most of his shots in a way that references the comic book frames...and if you just kinda look at it without context or detail it can look like a relative straightforward and faithful adaptation. But in context it is obvious that Snyder hilariously misunderstood so much about the book.
I mean, the slow motion action sequences. Yes, there are some fight scenes in WATCHMEN. But the intention of WATCHMEN is not to tell a bad ass superhero story. Just the opposite. And so, translating those fight scenes to the screen in a way that is meant to be exciting and entertaining and cool misses the entire point and tells an entirely different story. And the entire movie unfolds this way. Almost every choice made by Snyder in actually adapting the still frames into motion is one that undermines or inverts the intention of the novel.
And it'd be one thing if Snyder was actually trying to make an interesting point with these choices. I think of Starship Troopers, where Verhooven took an earnestly pro-military novel and adapted it for film in a way that faithfully adheres to the material but inverts the themes entirely. But Snyder isn't doing that. He just wants stuff to look cool.
the movie has a whole host of issues. from pacing, to the soundtrack, to the editing/cutting of certain sequences and elements of the story, to the way in which synder films scenes that tend to glorify the aspects that Moore was trying to condemn, and Akerman is dreadful in it.
this is not to say that everything is bad about it, there are certainly a bunch of quality scenes that he gets right.
Okay, this definitely clears up my question. It makes absolute sense. Thanks!
Ten minutes and I’m already all in
Oh shit forgot this was on tonight
Some fascinating Easter eggs in the background of the classroom scene in the posters
Reviews seem pretty happy with it, so I'll give it a watch. totally didn't know it was out tonight haha
This is my most anticipated show for the rest of the year