I think it's the right move. Anyone who hasn't read the book would've panned the squid ending, and I'm sure most of us would've complained about the adaptation of the scene as well.
Also, just setting it up would've been prohibitively long and ultimately taken valuable time away from more entertaining scenes.
I think it's the right move. Anyone who hasn't read the book would've panned the squid ending, and I'm sure most of us would've complained about the adaptation of the scene as well.
Also, just setting it up would've been prohibitively long and ultimately taken valuable time away from more entertaining scenes.
I don't mind personally, although I'm not totally sold on the alternative they seem to be going with. Still, I'll go see the movie regardless and ultimately decide for myself
I think it's the right move. Anyone who hasn't read the book would've panned the squid ending, and I'm sure most of us would've complained about the adaptation of the scene as well.
Also, just setting it up would've been prohibitively long and ultimately taken valuable time away from more entertaining scenes.
His son gets to be young Leonidas and young Rorschach?
Man, my parents only ever gave me a Michelangelo halloween costume.
I'm fine with the change, as far as I know so far.
oh, y'know, i saw that avengers next animated flick last weekend. it was pretty decent. i'd say 7/10, probably better the closer you get to being eight years old.
The rocketeer is an awesome film... are the comics any good? (it's recent news to me that there ARE comics)
I was in a similar boat. I always figured they were based on comics, but of like that time era, serials or pulp stories. Quite surprised to find out they were written in the 80's. The art is really good, and if I'm correct, that iconic poster was drawn by the artist.
Guh, I don't mind if they change the Watchmen ending a bit, but I hope it's not the one they theorize in that article.
Blaming whatever crisis there is on Dr. Manhattan instead of an alien attack changes the whole context of the ending. It just seems to me like it wouldn't inspire the same kind of action on the part of governments, and would in fact serve to separate them further, instead of unify them. Whatever the cause of the crisis, it has to be external to the earth.
I just read the David Hayter 2003 watchmen script, and am dying to discuss it. This will be full of potential spoilers for Snyder's movie, since they resurrected enough of Hayter's script in the shooting script for him to receive a credit on it. It will also, more obviously, be full of spoilers for the original book and spoilers for Hayter's script, itself.
The way he fit it into modern times was really impressive; not only was it pretty effortless, but it really didn't effect the story at all in any negative way.
He simply substituted Russia for a number of nuclear and near-nuclear countries, setting up a conflict that definitely feels like a realistic threat. India and Pakistan go to war, Isreal is attacked by an Arab coalition (including egypt), North Korea is on the move, China is looking to do something, and Russia is cracking the whip on all the soviet satellites. The tension builds, and it spirals out of control. Did not mind the change at all.
Almost all of the dialogue included, up until the final act, was word-for-word from the book. Even when situations are changed or condensed, the included lines are exactly the same. There are some bits added to help speed things up, or make transitions, and they were kind of awkward at times, but extremely rare in the over-all scope of it. The story is pretty much unchanged as well, although a few things are added to make a situation more drastic, or to add more clarity.
Hayter's bigger changes that either definitely won't be in Synder's film:
Jon makes a magic mirror early on, to help make Laurie's flashbacks more tangible (she can see... into herself!) Also, Jon gives her the power to shoot balls of energy, and because of this her name is Slingshot, and 'Silk Spectre" is never said in the entire script. Also, a lot of the older superheroes are never seen or mentioned, beyond Hollis and Sally.
How the bystander characters are treated:
They all make appearances, but the appearances are extremely abridged. The knotheads are almost completely left in tact, but everyone else is cut way back. The newspaper vendor and the comic boy appear often in the background, but the paper guy only has a couple lines. The police shrink only shows up once, later than he does in the book, and his entire arc is condensed into a single interview, so there's no real impact, and he isn't changed by it. The New Frontiersman editor and intern are still there for two or three scenes.
Hayter's ending:
Veidt builds a giant space death-ray, and then anonymously sends a one-way messaging transmitter to every world leader. He tells them to cease their fighting, vaporizes New York City, and then says that if they don't stop fighting, then each of their capitols will have a similar fate. He sets it up to look like Adrian Veidt has died in NYC, so that he can control the Earth from his antarctic base without anyone knowing, and make sure it stays a just place. He pretty much becomes dictator of the Earth. Initially, everyone plays out their role exactly how they did in the comic. Then, suddenly Dan has a change of heart, and has a duel-to-the-death with Veidt. Dreiberg initially gets his ass kicked, but then somehow fools Veidt with an owl-shaped boomerang that is initially dodged, but forgotten on its come-around. Due to the time skip, there was a reference to a really lame Beatles song line early on, and Dreiberg sends it over the anono-box, before destroying it with the entire Veidt retreat, and then later he manages to destroy the entire company. He escapes with Laurie, they adopt their new identities, but she becomes a stay-at-home mom, and he continues to live as Nite Owl because it's where he gets his jollies. The Beatles lyric he sent out at the last minute has somehow ended war entirely, in every nation. Super Lame.
So, yeah, went from being a really straight adaption to completely veering from the end.
KNOWING THIS, and knowing that Hayter got to keep a screenwriter credit, and that in interviews he's been hinting they kept some of his ending, my guess for the Snyder ending is:
Veidt still builds his solar-space-death-beam, and still hands out the anonymous dictation boxes. He still obliterates NYC. The aftermath reverts to being word-for-word from the comic, rather than Hayter's crazy deviation.
Okay, in my drive not to read spoilers about the film, your post is going to annoy me for a solid 4 months.
Just so you know.
The first two aren't happening in the final draft. I assume most of Hayter's draft has been discarded, but that doesn't leave a lot to give him credit for beyond scene transitions and his ending. I read it mostly because 1. it's solid snake, 2. Alan Moore said he actually liked the script, 3. I wanted to see how much it had to be changed to be modernized, and 4. I read an interview in the last couple days where both the interviewer and Hayter suggested that part of his ending was used.
I thought Hayter's script was the one that ended with Rorshach, Laurie and Dan being shunted into an alternate universe where there weren't any superheroes.
Guh, I don't mind if they change the Watchmen ending a bit, but I hope it's not the one they theorize in that article.
Blaming whatever crisis there is on Dr. Manhattan instead of an alien attack changes the whole context of the ending. It just seems to me like it wouldn't inspire the same kind of action on the part of governments, and would in fact serve to separate them further, instead of unify them. Whatever the cause of the crisis, it has to be external to the earth.
I see nothing wrong with them blaming the attack on Manhattan. The only way that it would separate the nations is if Manhattan was seen as the U.S. overstepping its boundaries, but he blew up New York, so it's clear he would have no national alliance.
It essentially boils down to the same thing, there is a threat to all nations equally that is greater than what any one nation could handle. No one would know when Manhattan would potentially attack again or where, just as no one would know when giant space-vadge would attack again or where.
Guh, I don't mind if they change the Watchmen ending a bit, but I hope it's not the one they theorize in that article.
Blaming whatever crisis there is on Dr. Manhattan instead of an alien attack changes the whole context of the ending. It just seems to me like it wouldn't inspire the same kind of action on the part of governments, and would in fact serve to separate them further, instead of unify them. Whatever the cause of the crisis, it has to be external to the earth.
I see nothing wrong with them blaming the attack on Manhattan. The only way that it would separate the nations is if Manhattan was seen as the U.S. overstepping its boundaries, but he blew up New York, so it's clear he would have no national alliance.
It essentially boils down to the same thing, there is a threat to all nations equally that is greater than what any one nation could handle. No one would know when Manhattan would potentially attack again or where, just as no one would know when giant space-vadge would attack again or where.
But Manhattan was an american citizen and a major part of their military and nuclear defense plan. If he went crazy, blew up a city and threatened to do so elsewhere, america would get a lot of flak and blame for that, especialy if Veidt's news campaign against Manhattan still takes place.
It wouldn't have anywhere near as unifying effect as the giant-space-squid-vagina. If it were just Veidt blowing up cities anonymously it wouldn't be so bad, but framing Manhattan changes that a lot.
Guh, I don't mind if they change the Watchmen ending a bit, but I hope it's not the one they theorize in that article.
Blaming whatever crisis there is on Dr. Manhattan instead of an alien attack changes the whole context of the ending. It just seems to me like it wouldn't inspire the same kind of action on the part of governments, and would in fact serve to separate them further, instead of unify them. Whatever the cause of the crisis, it has to be external to the earth.
I see nothing wrong with them blaming the attack on Manhattan. The only way that it would separate the nations is if Manhattan was seen as the U.S. overstepping its boundaries, but he blew up New York, so it's clear he would have no national alliance.
It essentially boils down to the same thing, there is a threat to all nations equally that is greater than what any one nation could handle. No one would know when Manhattan would potentially attack again or where, just as no one would know when giant space-vadge would attack again or where.
But Manhattan was an american citizen and a major part of their military and nuclear defense plan. If he went crazy, blew up a city and threatened to do so elsewhere, america would get a lot of flak and blame for that, especialy if Veidt's news campaign against Manhattan still takes place.
It wouldn't have anywhere near as unifying effect as the giant-space-squid-vagina. If it were just Veidt blowing up cities anonymously it wouldn't be so bad, but framing Manhattan changes that a lot.
Agree. I rather see something like Hayter's ending, because realistically speaking(and despite a lot of things, Watchmen is suppose to be slightly realistic) I could imagine the whole Manhattan thing to actually bring war closer to us. If nothing else, I couldn't see it being sustained for long before bitterness and blame started.
Posts
Olga Kurylenko
That sounds past tense. Did it get canned?
...Ollie?
dunno how i feel. October Sky is great, and Hidalgo is good fun, but Jurassic Park 3 is an abomination
The Rocketeer
Also, just setting it up would've been prohibitively long and ultimately taken valuable time away from more entertaining scenes.
https://twitter.com/Hooraydiation
This is why I have a glimmer of hope.
His son gets to be young Leonidas and young Rorschach?
Man, my parents only ever gave me a Michelangelo halloween costume.
Although, there were so many things wrong with Jurassic Park 3 that to single the directing out as a flaw is probably a bit unfair
Anyone remember this part in the movie?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pMQwT9z0Jyc
"a new beginning!"
"today europe, tomorrow the world!"
that's a good sign
Ozymandia's design reminds me way to much of Batman and Robin.
I was in a similar boat. I always figured they were based on comics, but of like that time era, serials or pulp stories. Quite surprised to find out they were written in the 80's. The art is really good, and if I'm correct, that iconic poster was drawn by the artist.
I thought that was the point.
That was the point.
The way he fit it into modern times was really impressive; not only was it pretty effortless, but it really didn't effect the story at all in any negative way.
Almost all of the dialogue included, up until the final act, was word-for-word from the book. Even when situations are changed or condensed, the included lines are exactly the same. There are some bits added to help speed things up, or make transitions, and they were kind of awkward at times, but extremely rare in the over-all scope of it. The story is pretty much unchanged as well, although a few things are added to make a situation more drastic, or to add more clarity.
Hayter's bigger changes that either definitely won't be in Synder's film:
How the bystander characters are treated:
Hayter's ending:
So, yeah, went from being a really straight adaption to completely veering from the end.
KNOWING THIS, and knowing that Hayter got to keep a screenwriter credit, and that in interviews he's been hinting they kept some of his ending, my guess for the Snyder ending is:
Just so you know.
4 months? Please.
His posts have been annoying everyone else for five years.
The first two aren't happening in the final draft. I assume most of Hayter's draft has been discarded, but that doesn't leave a lot to give him credit for beyond scene transitions and his ending. I read it mostly because 1. it's solid snake, 2. Alan Moore said he actually liked the script, 3. I wanted to see how much it had to be changed to be modernized, and 4. I read an interview in the last couple days where both the interviewer and Hayter suggested that part of his ending was used.
Seriously?
It's an interesting idea, but I don't think there are enough superhero films to sustain a commentary on the sub-genre.
https://twitter.com/Hooraydiation
It essentially boils down to the same thing, there is a threat to all nations equally that is greater than what any one nation could handle. No one would know when Manhattan would potentially attack again or where, just as no one would know when giant space-vadge would attack again or where.
It wouldn't have anywhere near as unifying effect as the giant-space-squid-vagina. If it were just Veidt blowing up cities anonymously it wouldn't be so bad, but framing Manhattan changes that a lot.