Yeah, my wife and I went to see Watchmen yesterday – and then spent a couple of hours talking about it and trying to decide how we feel about it. Neither one of us have read the books, so nothing to compare there. We did finally decide, however, that we loved the movie because we “got it.” If you don’t get it, you’re not going to like it.
I loved how pretty it was. Most of my other feelings about it are complicated, hahaha. And… Well, the “NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!” made me very, very sad inside. >:
(My boyfriend loved that bit… Which made me even sadder inside… )
haven’t seen this one yet, but my basic feeling on a lot of these movies (The Golden Compass and all the Harry Potters frinstance) is something like, “oh, what a nice set of illustrations for the book.”
essrose asks:
“So does that mean I loved the movie?”
Technically, No.
I believe it was the recently late Paul Harvey who noted that when children tried to reread a Harry Potter book after seeing the movie it was based on, their imaginations were constricted.
But wouldn’t that be the same said about comics in general? If we are given a picture of what the characters look like, and the setting they are in, and frames of the story, does this not have the same effect?
Of course, comics are intentionally described through pictures as well as words. Books on the other hand, allow the mind to wonder. The reader has their own image of what the characters look like and where places are, and what is going on in the story. That is where the readers’ imagination kicks in. While not the same as the writer’s idea, the readers create their own idea of what the writer is trying to explain. Thus, in order to constrict the imagination, the writer must be very concise in their description of the character. What is more concise than pictures?
Of course, a single picture cannot tell the back story or the events occuring in the picture all the time. Why does the Mona Lisa smile? It is uncertain. Why is a firefighter dressed up in their fireman’s gear in Life Magazine? He’s about to rush into a burning building.
In short, it is up to the writer to decide how much he wants his readers’ imaginations to wonder.
im suffering from comic book movie fatigue, so i will not be seeing this movie ever…and also I dont like 300, one thing that bothered me was in fact the cinematography so Im pretty sure I wont like Watchmen. Why does every movie coming out these days have to be based on something? Why cant a movie be based on an original idea?
I thought there was something off about the film, but I couldn’t quite put my finger on it… Thinking about it now, it kind of seems like the actors were just going through the motions; which they are, obviously, since they’re actors… But it’s not meant to seem like it!
I suppose it’s somewhat like having a changeling – it might look the same as your own brat, but there’s something off about it. Like the feeling it might one day shoot you in the chest with a grappling hook. Nasty.
That was . . . disturbing. The cartoon, I mean.
Yeah, my wife and I went to see Watchmen yesterday – and then spent a couple of hours talking about it and trying to decide how we feel about it. Neither one of us have read the books, so nothing to compare there. We did finally decide, however, that we loved the movie because we “got it.” If you don’t get it, you’re not going to like it.
I loved how pretty it was. Most of my other feelings about it are complicated, hahaha. And… Well, the “NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!” made me very, very sad inside. >:
(My boyfriend loved that bit… Which made me even sadder inside… )
proest click zone
I want a mask like Rorschach’s… don’t we all?
haven’t seen this one yet, but my basic feeling on a lot of these movies (The Golden Compass and all the Harry Potters frinstance) is something like, “oh, what a nice set of illustrations for the book.”
essrose asks:
“So does that mean I loved the movie?”
Technically, No.
I believe it was the recently late Paul Harvey who noted that when children tried to reread a Harry Potter book after seeing the movie it was based on, their imaginations were constricted.
But wouldn’t that be the same said about comics in general? If we are given a picture of what the characters look like, and the setting they are in, and frames of the story, does this not have the same effect?
Of course, comics are intentionally described through pictures as well as words. Books on the other hand, allow the mind to wonder. The reader has their own image of what the characters look like and where places are, and what is going on in the story. That is where the readers’ imagination kicks in. While not the same as the writer’s idea, the readers create their own idea of what the writer is trying to explain. Thus, in order to constrict the imagination, the writer must be very concise in their description of the character. What is more concise than pictures?
Of course, a single picture cannot tell the back story or the events occuring in the picture all the time. Why does the Mona Lisa smile? It is uncertain. Why is a firefighter dressed up in their fireman’s gear in Life Magazine? He’s about to rush into a burning building.
In short, it is up to the writer to decide how much he wants his readers’ imaginations to wonder.
im suffering from comic book movie fatigue, so i will not be seeing this movie ever…and also I dont like 300, one thing that bothered me was in fact the cinematography so Im pretty sure I wont like Watchmen. Why does every movie coming out these days have to be based on something? Why cant a movie be based on an original idea?
Incredible.
I thought there was something off about the film, but I couldn’t quite put my finger on it… Thinking about it now, it kind of seems like the actors were just going through the motions; which they are, obviously, since they’re actors… But it’s not meant to seem like it!
I suppose it’s somewhat like having a changeling – it might look the same as your own brat, but there’s something off about it. Like the feeling it might one day shoot you in the chest with a grappling hook. Nasty.
Keep up the good work A., looking forward to #69.
Skrapyard, there has been a Watchmen film in some sort of pre production ever since the late eighties.. it’s not really a new thing..
Heck comic book movies aren’t even a new idea, it’s just that no one remembers things like The Flash and Nick Fury because the were horrible..