1. How come it's always the naked ass one that gets shown?

Posted at 11:07PM on Aug 13th 2008 by Batzarro

2. I wouldn't mess with Dr. Manhattan's nudity if I were you. He could toast your ass with a thought...;)

Posted at 11:14PM on Aug 13th 2008 by Mr. R

3. Sure, it's visually impressive, but recreating a frame in a live action situation does not mean that it's going to stay all that true to form. There's a good reason Alan Moore refuses to acknowledge the movies based on his stories.

Personally, I don't think this will translate well to film. For a start there's those charming costumes that will look ridiculous on a big screen. Nolan brought Batman back from the brink of campiness and Watchmen will push it back out there. Don't get me wrong, it really should, but to an audience not knowing the comic it might look completely stupid.

And of course the biggest issue is that you can not cram the entire Watchmen into one movie. I think this should have gone the (supposed) Preacher route and been shown on tv. A longer period and time to cover everything. With shows like Lost, Heroes, Deadwood, et al. there's really no reason why complex stories like this should get the Hollywood bite-size treatment.

Posted at 6:12AM on Aug 14th 2008 by b0ring

4. B0ring, the movie will be 3 hours long, Gibbons and Snyder and all involved have in more than one occasion stasted how close and faithful this adaptation will be to the graphic novel...Really guys what more do you want? A word by word, comma by comma replica? That's not what an adaptation is. An adaptation, in whatever medium, has to conform to the story telling form it's been adapted to.
The Godfather and Apocalypse Now are adaptations. But now you'll tell me they're bad too.
And, no, Alan Moore, if you ask me, is starting to sound more and more like Harlan Ellison. He's cranky for the sake of being cranky...

Posted at 8:57AM on Aug 14th 2008 by seraphflux

5. I'm impressed Snyder is truly a director for fanboys, He
tries he's hardest to keep things the way they are and not skip out on anything, making sure nothing's left out and everything is in the right place, I believe Zack Snyder knows what he is doing.

Posted at 10:13AM on Aug 14th 2008 by THe Kid

6. seraphflux, i agree with you!! I tend to think that a majority of people don't understand what an adaptation means. Its not meant to be a word by word incarnation of the current medium, its an ADAPTATION, and hopefully it captures the soul and essence of the original. Now i was skeptical at the very beginning, as far as how this will be translated over, but as time has surpassed, I can't remember the last time i was so enthralled about a movie that i needed to find out any little thing that i could about it and its production. With snyder being a fanboy, his attention to detail, and a impressive resume, i believe that this is going to be an absolute work of art!! with all who are involved with this pic, and how snyder is fighting for every little thing that he can, in order to make this the BEST THAT IT CAN POSSIBLY BE, be assured this will not dissapoint . The movie is going to be 3 hours long and is going to have an "R" rating, plus things are so spot on( watch the video journals from the set). And as alan moore is concerned, he's nothing more than a cynical, bitter,egotistical, old man who has lost touch with the world!! I REALLY WISH THAT PEOPLE WOULD LOOK INTO THINGS DEEPER THAN THE SURFACE, BEFORE THEY MAKE A STATEMENT CRITICIZING THINGS..

Posted at 12:53PM on Aug 14th 2008 by ICON!

7. You and I are on a level playing field here since the movie has not yet been released. You are coming from an opinion of optimism, I'm coming from mild concern, but neither of us is right.

My criticisms are based purely on my own opinion, which I'll clarify for the sake of going deeper. My concern about the costumes, yes that's surface but you can't really go deeper on costumes. I did say that the costumes should remain true to the comic, but was just saying that people going into a superhero movie without knowledge of the comic and seeing a man dressed as an owl that resembles a "Batman Forever" throwback, especially after "Iron Man" and "Dark Knight", might be a little...confusing or, well, lame.

Regarding fitting the movie into a three hour slot, sure it's possible and sure it can still be good, but it will require a lot of editing of the original story. A story which was filled to the brim with good reason, I thought. Yes, I know that adaptations won't stay identical to the original but then I just question when adaptations are really needed. "Fight Club" was an amazing film and surpassed the book, but then the book was hardly that long to begin with. Ditto to "300".

Snyder's impressive resume? I see "Dawn of the Dead" and "300", and "Dawn.." didn't impress me at all. Sorry. Hayter has "X-Men", okay I'll give him that. Tse has, well, nothing?

Meanwhile "From Hell", "V For Vendetta" and "League of Extraordinary Gentlemen" have all failed to capture the original tones of the comics. Moore may be bitter and egotistical, but maybe it's not without reason.

Posted at 5:57PM on Aug 14th 2008 by b0ring

8. I don't know, man. Was Apocalypse Now needed as an adaptation? It differs a lot from Heart of Darkness...
Hell, The Godfather is an adaptation of a mighty long book...I'd say it turned out to be fine...
The point is that Moore anti-adaptations stance is flawed and doesn't stand close scrutiny. I'm sorry, but that's how it is.

Posted at 11:10AM on Aug 15th 2008 by seraphflux