TF Views

http://www.apple.com/trailers/wb/watchmen/

So, are we psyched, or are we psyched? Who's psyched? I'm psyched.

Been waiting for this one. Let's see what 300's director can do with a screenplay that's not just lots of Epic and Fight Scenes and Pretty Cinematography. Can you tell I didn't like 300? Mmyeah. Watchmen, however, being - as the trailer states - the most celebrated graphic novel of all time, well, that's a lot to live up to. Looks like it should, too.

I would've raved about how great the toys will inevitably be, until it occurred to me that as a DC property, Mattel will likely get the license. Oh boy, I cannot wait for the Many Neon Doc Manhattens, and Rorschach with Ridiculously Large Missile Launcher. All sporting a dandy five points of articulation! Gnn.

Trailer's slick, anyhoo, with a snazzy song choice to top it off.

I'm psyched.

Yeah, the trailer is slick.
But that's not really a good thing.

What made Watchmen so revolutionary was that it WASN'T slick or cool. It was real. The superheroes weren't invincible demi-gods who always had the wind blowing their hair just so or were struck in such a light as to make them look badass or mysterious.

They were people running around in funny clothes fighting criminals. No glamour, no pasazz.
Nite Owl had a small weight issue, Rorshcach's trenchcoat had decades-old bloodstains on it because he NEVER washed it.

This looks too much like every other superhero flick. Lots of slo-mo and cool poses.

And Doc Manhattan looks kinda weak. I really hope that's a pre-render, he looks like a video game cinematic.
And if you look at the guy Manhattan blows up RIGHT before, you can tell it's either a dummy or a really sloppy render. He has a total mannequin face.

Sorry to be the resident troll, people...

onslaught86 wrote: Oh boy, I cannot wait for the Many Neon Doc Manhattens, and Rorschach with Ridiculously Large Missile Launcher. All sporting a dandy five points of articulation!

See, the difference between you and me is, when you say this, you're being sarcastic. I seriously cannot wait for it...because an actual Rorsarch figure with a gas-powered-grappling-gun accessory? Oh, that's hilarious.

I'm sort of torn between both viewpoints, though. On one hand...okay, this director (I can not believe I forgot his name) did give me my beloved Dawn of the Dead 2004. On the other, though...can Watchmen be properly adapted into a film? I mean, I guess successful Alan Moore adaptations like "Leauge of Extraordinary Gentlemen"..bad example, "From Hell"..um.."V for..."

Yeah, I could really see this not working out very well. But, screw it, I'm still going, and still kinda psyched.

138 "Please, please toy gods...Lil' Watchmen?" Scourge.

It looks good, but it looks too good. It looks like they'll nail the visuals but I worry the story is gonna get botched. That being said, everything looks so good it's guaranteed to have my ass in the theater.

I can't conceive how one can fuck up Watchmen, as long as they stick close enough to the story. It's that good.

I'm impressed just by the presentation. Superhero movies of this ilk tend to do crazy stuff like reinventing logos and stuff. (Why the awesome 90s Spider-Man logo wasn't used for the movies, I'll never know.) But here we've got the precise same yellow-backed logo we all know and enjoy.

They wouldn't mess this up--not after Sin City. Comic books are finally being taken pretty damn seriously as Good Movie territory. Sure, you'll get the occasional clunker like Fantastic Four--but that's because Fantastic Four pretty much sucks in the first place. No amount of Hollywood polish will make that look good.

Onslaught Six wrote:Sure, you'll get the occasional clunker like Fantastic Four--but that's because Fantastic Four pretty much sucks in the first place. No amount of Hollywood polish will make that look good.

I agree that the movies sucked hard.
But I think good FF movies are very possible.
Did you ever read Mark Waid's run as writer? It played down the superhero angle slightly in favor portraying them as a family of science-adventureres. "Imaginauts". It made for some great reading. Near the end they met God...

Hey, Skywarp, for another good FF run (the best one outside of Kirby's, I kinda think) check out Walt Simonson's run on FF. It's essentially one long, awesome, fast-paced, time and dimension-hopping story. And it has Death's Head in it.

I believe it's due to be collected soon in one of those "Marvel Visionaries" things, too. Failing that, the back issues of that run tend to be pretty cheap.

And hell yeah, there could have been great Fantastic Four movies. If they'd, say, just started with the Mole Man and his army of giant crazy monsters? Who wouldn't want to see that?

As for the 90's Spider-logo not getting movie use...I'm guessing that's because Marvel just kinda wants to pretend 90's Spider-Man just didn't happen. Who can blame 'em?

138 Scourge wrote:As for the 90's Spider-logo not getting movie use...I'm guessing that's because Marvel just kinda wants to pretend 90's Spider-Man just didn't happen. Who can blame 'em?

I don't see why. Spidey: TAS was great stuff. No idea what was going on in the actual 'comics,' but c'mon, that's a sweet-ass logo.

Plus, then I wouldn't have to see them use the font on the PS3. I *hate* recognizing fonts.