Date: 2009-03-08 08:43 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] gothick-matt.livejournal.com
So, bearing in mind that I don't usually have the cinematic attention span for normal-length films, do you think it's worth me trying to cope with two-and-three-quarter hours of Watchmen? Or should I just try to stretch my pretty-much-annual re-read of it out that long?
Edited Date: 2009-03-08 08:43 am (UTC)

Date: 2009-03-08 10:22 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] nmg.livejournal.com
I've not seen it, but I doubt that it can be worse than some of the worthy-but-dull foreign language arthouse that I've seen over the years. Probably not a good idea to drink too much before you go in, though.

Date: 2009-03-09 01:48 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] tlrmx.org (from livejournal.com)
per my post to Chris' blog, I'd rate it best adaptation of an Alan Moore comic.

I can't say if it's actually a good /movie/, I'm too close to the comic book. But Caroline liked it (she hasn't read the comic) and so did Mischa (ditto). The divergence Hitler is angry about is the only goof as far as I'm concerned in the adaptation, every other change is entirely reasonable, or even necessary. It's a big goof, but it's nothing compared to the hatchet job done of V. You could watch 15-20 contiguous minutes of Watchmen and see nothing but Moore's ideas on screen. If you have a favourite line of dialogue or even scene, there's a good chance it's in the movie more or less intact.

(I now await people's lists of exceptions, someone out there no doubt really loved the poor chap stencilling "Radiation hazard" onto Jon's apartment door in the military base, or the stuff about Ozy's hybrid cat named Bubastis, both cut for time, though the cat itself remains, unmentioned but present).

Profile

nmg: (Default)
Nick Gibbins

September 2012

S M T W T F S
      1
2345678
9101112131415
16171819202122
23 242526272829
30      

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Jun. 20th, 2025 09:52 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios