|
|
Post by Warmonger on Nov 22, 2015 20:34:27 GMT -5
I don't think it was terrible, but I have a serious disdain for Zack Snyder. Dude is one of the biggest hacks in the movie business. And the whole sex scene between Night Owl and Silk Spectre with "Hallelujah" playing in the background is some of the most awkward, cringeworthy crap I've ever witnessed in a movie. Not as cringeworthy to me as the "play fight" scene at the playground between Daredevil and Elektra in the Dardevil movie or in Spiderman 3 when Toby Maguire "struts" down the street to that corny background music playing  Well...sure. I mean, those are two of the worst Marvel movies in existence. I just personally would've loved if the movie was left in more capable hands. Someone like George Miller or Terry Gilliam directing Watchmen would've been awesome IMO. |
|
|
|
Post by Slam_Bradley on Nov 22, 2015 20:40:58 GMT -5
Zack Snyder is a one-trick pony and the trick stopped being interesting a LONG time ago.
The movie is incredibly facile.
|
|
|
|
Post by Warmonger on Nov 22, 2015 20:58:36 GMT -5
Zack Snyder is a one-trick pony and the trick stopped being interesting a LONG time ago. The movie is incredibly facile. I still think his best movie was the Dawn of the Dead remake...which is still VASTLY inferior to the original. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 22, 2015 21:09:17 GMT -5
Zack Snyder is a one-trick pony and the trick stopped being interesting a LONG time ago. The movie is incredibly facile. I still think his best movie was the Dawn of the Dead remake...which is still VASTLY inferior to the original. Eh...I hated the Dawn of the Dead remake but then I'm partial to VERY few remakes. |
|
|
|
Post by berkley on Nov 22, 2015 21:26:21 GMT -5
Haven't seen Watchmen but I thought 300 ended up being a huge disappointment after having been excited by the trailer, which I still think is the best thing Snyder's ever done. I wonder who edited it.
|
|
|
|
Post by batlaw on Nov 22, 2015 21:31:28 GMT -5
I like the movie a lot too and don't understand all the hate I don't think it was terrible, but I have a serious disdain for Zack Snyder. Dude is one of the biggest hacks in the movie business. And the whole sex scene between Night Owl and Silk Spectre with "Hallelujah" playing in the background is some of the most awkward, cringeworthy crap I've ever witnessed in a movie. See, watchmen was what really brought Zach Snyder to my attention. hearing he was going to be doing superman I was thrilled! Then of course I saw man of steel.. and realized how they were handling the dccu.. And started hearing Snyder talk. And yeah, a piece of me has died. |
|
|
|
Post by Warmonger on Nov 22, 2015 21:31:37 GMT -5
I still think his best movie was the Dawn of the Dead remake...which is still VASTLY inferior to the original. Eh...I hated the Dawn of the Dead remake but then I'm partial to VERY few remakes. So am I The only remake I can think of off the top of my head that was really great was John Carpenter's '82 remake of 'The Thing'. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 22, 2015 22:12:46 GMT -5
Eh...I hated the Dawn of the Dead remake but then I'm partial to VERY few remakes. So am I The only remake I can think of off the top of my head that was really great was John Carpenter's '82 remake of 'The Thing'. Yes Carpenter's The Thing is one of my absolute favorite movies of all time...the special effects still hold up very well today...I'm not a fan of all the CGI usage in movies today. I love almost anything directed by Carpenter. I would add 1978's Invasion of the Body Snatchers, Cronenberg's The Fly and 1988's The Blob as the only other remakes that I have enjoyed. The Thing remake was absolute garbage. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 22, 2015 22:20:39 GMT -5
^I also remember there being a PlayStation 2 continuation of The Thing movie in videogame form. Based on what I remember when I played it many years ago it was pretty good. Also a certain cast member from the movie makes an appearance...but I won't say who as it may spoil things if you ever get a chance to play it.
|
|
|
|
Post by tingramretro on Nov 23, 2015 2:28:25 GMT -5
Zack Snyder is a one-trick pony and the trick stopped being interesting a LONG time ago. The movie is incredibly facile. I really don't think that's fair. I can't honestly see how anyone could ever really have done Watchmen justice in a movie, but this was a pretty good attempt, and far from "facile". As for Zack Snyder, this is the only movie of his that I've ever seen so it's the only one I can judge him on, but I'd say he did a good job. |
|
Confessor
CCF Mod Squad
Not Bucky O'Hare!
Posts: 10,220 
|
Post by Confessor on Nov 23, 2015 12:05:53 GMT -5
Zack Snyder is a one-trick pony and the trick stopped being interesting a LONG time ago. The movie is incredibly facile. I really don't think that's fair. I can't honestly see how anyone could ever really have done Watchmen justice in a movie, but this was a pretty good attempt, and far from "facile". As for Zack Snyder, this is the only movie of his that I've ever seen so it's the only one I can judge him on, but I'd say he did a good job. Yeah, I agree. I think that, while it's inferior to the book (of course!), the Watchmen movie was better than we had any right to expect a Hollywood adaptation of the book to be. Facile's not a word that I would have chosen to describe it either, I must say. the whole sex scene between Night Owl and Silk Spectre with "Hallelujah" playing in the background is some of the most awkward, cringeworthy crap I've ever witnessed in a movie. It was supposed to be intentionally tongue-in-cheek though. Didn't the over the top, laughably obvious ejaculation symbolism of the jet of fire spewing out of the Owlship as the pair reached climax raise a laugh from you? Or even a wry smile? |
|
|
|
Post by Slam_Bradley on Nov 23, 2015 12:13:55 GMT -5
I'm going to stick with my guns. Facile: appearing neat and comprehensive only by ignoring the true complexities of an issue; superficial.
I'm not convinced anyone could have made a film of Watchmen that wasn't superficial. There's simply too much there and far too much subtext to be able to make a two hour film that doesn't gloss over the complexities of the original work. Terry Gilliam ultimately agreed with Alan Moore that Watchmen was unfilmable. I guess they were proved wrong, in that Watchmen exists as a film. But it's not a particularly good film and it's a spectacular failure at invoking the flow and the subtext of the original work.
|
|
Confessor
CCF Mod Squad
Not Bucky O'Hare!
Posts: 10,220
|
Post by Confessor on Nov 23, 2015 12:28:21 GMT -5
I'm not convinced anyone could have made a film of Watchmen that wasn't superficial. There's simply too much there and far too much subtext to be able to make a two hour film that doesn't gloss over the complexities of the original work. Terry Gilliam ultimately agreed with Alan Moore that Watchmen was unfilmable. I guess they were proved wrong, in that Watchmen exists as a film. But it's not a particularly good film and it's a spectacular failure at invoking the flow and the subtext of the original work. I actually agree with almost all of what you've written here, but I still think that the movie had a fair bit of depth for a Hollywood superhero film. It just wasn't anyway near as dense or ripe for different interpretations as the comic was. I thought that it was one of the better superhero films of recent years though. However, I agree that the book is probably unfilmable in the way that a reader encounters it on the page, which is why I think that what we got was a lot better than fans had any right to expect. In that respect, it's somewhat similar to the Lord of the Rings movies. Are they perfect? Are they good as the books? Hell, no...but considering how unbelievably bad a Hollywood adaptation of Tolkien's work could be, the films were fine and fans should count their blessings that the makers at least had some kind of desire to stay faithful to the source material. |
|
|
|
Post by Ozymandias on Nov 23, 2015 14:56:33 GMT -5
the whole sex scene between Night Owl and Silk Spectre with "Hallelujah" playing in the background is some of the most awkward, cringeworthy crap I've ever witnessed in a movie. It was supposed to be intentionally tongue-in-cheek though. Didn't the over the top, laughably obvious ejaculation symbolism of the jet of fire spewing out of the Owlship as the pair reached climax raise a laugh from you? Or even a wry smile? I you're talking about the comic panel, I found it to be an elegant metaphor. The movie sequence actually made me feel embarrassed. Other things I didn't like were: the version of Ozymandias they showed, and the addition of action scenes, just for the sake of it. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 23, 2015 15:01:36 GMT -5
It was supposed to be intentionally tongue-in-cheek though. Didn't the over the top, laughably obvious ejaculation symbolism of the jet of fire spewing out of the Owlship as the pair reached climax raise a laugh from you? Or even a wry smile? I you're talking about the comic panel, I found it to be an elegant metaphor. The movie sequence actually made me feel embarrassed. Other things I didn't like were: the version of Ozymandias they showed, and the addition of action scenes, just for the sake of it. Ozymandias, I did not care for that version at all. I totally agree with your assessment here. |
|
