WATCHMEN Movie Discussion (book SPOILERS)

Collector Freaks Forum

Help Support Collector Freaks Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Exactly... and Barbelith... Why are you so negative all the time? You seem to stick in this section of the board and just cry about everything...

I'm pretty sure I've only been in three threads in this section and the only negativity I've expressed is in this one toward 300. :rolleyes:
 
But how is putting nipples on the Batman costume selling out exactly?



Can you explain what precisely is being deconstructed with the nipples and how that deconstruction is taking place?

Because its from a movie that was made to sell toys.
 
We must not allow the WATCHMEN thread to dive into the flamefests that infect the rest of the boards! :lecture

That said, in regards to reasoning behing nipples on Ozy's suit: Told ya so. ;)
 
Because its from a movie that was made to sell toys.

But how do nipples on a Batsuit sell toys?

Irish Jedi said:
We must not allow the WATCHMEN thread to dive into the flamefests that infect the rest of the boards!

Why does examining a theme = flamefest? Or even having a disagreement, for that matter?

That said, in regards to reasoning behing nipples on Ozy's suit: Told ya so.

I don't doubt Snyder thinks he's deconstructing comic book movies by putting a visual allusion to the Schumacher Batman movies in Watchmen. I just disagree that visual allusion = deconstruction. What precisely is being deconstructed and how?
 
I don't doubt Snyder thinks he's deconstructing comic book movies by putting a visual allusion to the Schumacher Batman movies in Watchmen. I just disagree that visual allusion = deconstruction. What precisely is being deconstructed and how?

Shouldn't we wait until we see the movie before examining that question in full?
 
Been working on my Comedian costume for Dragon*Con. Here are some teaser pics:

comediancostume_01.jpg


comediancostume_02.jpg


The dog tags are exact replicas of the ones in the movie. A set will come with the gun set from DC Direct, but the ones shown above are mine. I took a close-up pic of the props at SDCC so I knew exactly what to put on them when I had a set made for the costume.
 
Been working on my Comedian costume for Dragon*Con. Here are some teaser pics:

comediancostume_01.jpg


comediancostume_02.jpg


The dog tags are exact replicas of the ones in the movie. A set will come with the gun set from DC Direct, but the ones shown above are mine. I took a close-up pic of the props at SDCC so I knew exactly what to put on them when I had a set made for the costume.

Cool. So are you going sans mask or full on bondage Comedian?:D
 
I actually found a "bondage" mask in a store in Little Five Points (Atlanta) that with some work would probably do the job. But I'm now leaning towards just the eye mask (which I'm almost done with) and/or no mask at all.

In the book, Blake is always wearing some kind of mask when he's The Comedian. Obviously in the movie that's not always the case. Which is fine. JDM looks kick ass in that Vietnam shot. But my initial costume is not going to be a 100% accurate replica of the movie one (there is just not enough time... that's for down the road). It's more of an amalgam of the one from the book and the movie suit. So we'll see as far as headgear goes. Right now, I'm aiming towards wearing the eye mask.
 
Shouldn't we wait until we see the movie before examining that question in full?

Of course, which is why I've been careful to say things like "300 doesn't fill me with confidence" rather than "This movie I haven't seen obviously sucks." But since a few people have pointed to the nipples as part of an orchestrated deconstruction of the comic book film milieu rather than a simple visual allusion which might not have a lot of thought put behind it, I figured they might, you know, have something to back that up with.

Good luck with your Comedian costume. You seem to be off to a great start!
 
Of course, which is why I've been careful to say things like "300 doesn't fill me with confidence" rather than "This movie I haven't seen obviously sucks." But since a few people have pointed to the nipples as part of an orchestrated deconstruction of the comic book film milieu rather than a simple visual allusion which might not have a lot of thought put behind it, I figured they might, you know, have something to back that up with.

Good luck with your Comedian costume. You seem to be off to a great start!

i would find it hard to believe that they would do anything in this movie with "little thought behind it" unfortunately the movie hasn't been released yet so we don't have the whole story on "the nipples." And as far as 300 is concerned it may not have been the deepest film in the world but it was still visually stunning and Zack's first movie the Dawn of the Dead remake was a good movie (and i hate remakes - generally) so all in all this guy hasn't made a bad movie yet so i'm a little less worried than i was when others were at the helm of this movie.

This isn't an attack on you in fact i'm glad that there's a voice of dissention in here because it makes everyone examine the material a little harder before making broad commits. Let's keep the discussion going!:banana
 
Without seeing the film it's difficult to say with any confidence what the "nipples" mean. But for me, it's just shorthand for the character of Ozy - it's a callout to the Schumacher Batmen which evokes a certain reaction in a film-goer. Even if you don't register it consciously, it can work on an unconscious level and gives you a frame of reference for what we, the audience, is supposed to think about Ozy.
 
And as far as 300 is concerned it may not have been the deepest film in the world but it was still visually stunning and Zack's first movie the Dawn of the Dead remake was a good movie (and i hate remakes - generally) so all in all this guy hasn't made a bad movie yet so i'm a little less worried than i was when others were at the helm of this movie.

My concern is that Snyder has yet to show he has a solid grasp of character or narrative in film and those are far more important to this movie than any number of cool FX shots or "clever" allusions to contemporary superhero films that may or may not have the deliberation and depth of the deconstruction Moore levied at its comic book equivalent. I agree that 300 is visually impressive but Watchmen isn't actually a visually impressive book for many of those unfamiliar with the medium and that's (as usual with this book) a very important element of what it's actually about. That's deliberate, and so the money shots in the trailer (and I fully recognize they could be sexed up specifically for the trailer) make me think only a very surface level of thought has been put into this, because his other films only work on a surface "cool" level.

Even if you don't register it consciously, it can work on an unconscious level and gives you a frame of reference for what we, the audience, is supposed to think about Ozy.

I can see the logic behind that line of thinking with the minor flaw that we're not actually supposed to see Ozymandias as a camp joke.
 
My concern is that Snyder has yet to show he has a solid grasp of character or narrative in film and those are far more important to this movie than any number of cool FX shots or "clever" allusions to contemporary superhero films that may or may not have the deliberation and depth of the deconstruction Moore levied at its comic book equivalent. I agree that 300 is visually impressive but Watchmen isn't actually a visually impressive book for many of those unfamiliar with the medium and that's (as usual with this book) a very important element of what it's actually about. That's deliberate, and so the money shots in the trailer (and I fully recognize they could be sexed up specifically for the trailer) make me think only a very surface level of thought has been put into this, because his other films only work on a surface "cool" level.



I can see the logic behind that line of thinking with the minor flaw that we're not actually supposed to see Ozymandias as a camp joke.

Point taken....but when you read 300 and watch 300 you'll see that the adaptation is spot on so if we follow this to the logical conclusion then we should feel comfortable that Watchmen should be adapted (as close as you can adapt something so dense) very well.

Now I'm not saying lets love the movie blindly before seeing it, i'm just that with the information we have been given of the film so far that it's closer to the book then any other script that had been floating around hollywood for the past 15 years.
 
Point taken....but when you read 300 and watch 300 you'll see that the adaptation is spot on so if we follow this to the logical conclusion then we should feel comfortable that Watchmen should be adapted (as close as you can adapt something so dense) very well.

Now I'm not saying lets love the movie blindly before seeing it, i'm just that with the information we have been given of the film so far that it's closer to the book then any other script that had been floating around hollywood for the past 15 years.

These are both very good points. I've read some terrible Watchmen screenplays! :horror
 
OH ^^^^!!!! Kevin Smith (One of my gods!!!!) has seen Watchmen!!!! LUCK SOB!!!!

Kevin Smith said:
"I saw Watchmen. It's ^^^^ing astounding. The Non-Disclosure Agreement I signed prevents me from saying much, but I can spout the following with complete joygasmic enthusiasm: Snyder and Co. have pulled it off. Remember that feeling of watching Sin City on the big screen and being blown away by what a faithful translation of the source material it was, in terms of both content and visuals? Triple that, and you'll come close to watching Watchmen. Even Alan Moore might be surprised at how close the movie is to the book. March can't come soon enough."

Here is the full article from Firstshowing.net:

Kevin Smith Has Seen Watchmen: "They Pulled It Off"
 
Back
Top