Watchmen (Alan Moore)

**PapaZeb** · 12th February 2007, 5:06pm

http://www.superherohype.com/news/topnews.php?id=5207

Short and sweet story of it is... Production likely to begin this year, Zack Snyder (300) is attached, and the studio is waiting on the public reaction to Snyder's 300 before figuring out how much money to give the guy for spending on cast/set

Now...when I initially read Frank Miller's 300, I was mostly at a loss. It was interesting, but kinda flat (I had just finished the entire series of Preacher at the time, so in comparison, 300 fell by the wayside) - after seeing what I have of Snyder's film version of 300, I am crotch-grabbingly excited to see this film.

Let's apply that kinda feeling towards The Watchmen, a series I found was dull and listless. Alan Moore's combination of Silver Age era illustration combined with rehashing of pulp fiction or eons old literary ideas always put me to sleep. Lost Girls I found bearable as, for once, he wasn't just regurgitating other peoples storylines like some Hollywood director.
The Watchmen struck me as a nice combination plate of 1930's-1950's pulp trashy detective novels...sort of a superhero Untouchables kinda feel. I can only hope that Snyder's involvement in the project gives it the sort of spin to make it watchable.

No release date on The Watchmen, nor any attached stars, but this is about the farthest it seems to have gotten in production over the years and with people like Snyder attached, it can only mean that hopefully the damned thing'll get made and we can move on to awaiting a Sandman film to round out that particular era of famed comics -> movies.

Deadboy · 13th February 2007, 2:20pm

I have to argue with you here - Watchmen is a work of genius, and the only comic I can think of apart from Maus that's a genuine work of literature.

It sounds like the director actually has a good grip on the core values of the story, but no matter how good the movie is it's never going to match the incredible depth of the comic.

And what's the point anyway? Watchmen was written to be a comic. As a comic, it's as close to perfect as a work of art as I think you can get. Why make a movie out of it? Why mess with it at all? Why not just read the comic?

poprock · 13th February 2007, 2:42pm

You can’t make all that much money out of a comic. A movie, on the other hand …

Deadboy · 13th February 2007, 2:48pm

God damn your dollar shaped soul, Tony. I'm talking about aaahhht. AAAHHHT, dahling.

poprock · 13th February 2007, 2:50pm

Get back to your garret, daaahling.

Deadboy · 13th February 2007, 2:54pm

Oh you BITCH!

**PapaZeb** · 13th February 2007, 3:35pm

Art + lit is always subjective. I'm not going to argue your right to be wrong in my eyes

*Charlie Parker* · 13th February 2007, 3:43pm

These things are getting fucking boring, new fad please

**PapaZeb** · 13th February 2007, 3:48pm

To be fair, they've been kicking around a film version of The Watchmen since before comic book films started getting good again (Spiderman 1/XMen) - might as well keep plowing along with it.

MarkMono · 13th February 2007, 5:40pm

Its one of those famous 'Movies that never quite get made' isn't it?

Like AVP...

Posh · 16th February 2007, 8:51pm

'Watchmen' is a comic about comics which features a comic-within-a-comic. What part of that suggests it would work as a film?

RandomFactor · 16th February 2007, 9:15pm

It's going to be appalling. Moore himself has stated it to be "unfilmable", and was last seen putting a very big fucking distance indeed between himself and the movie project.

*Charlie Parker* · 17th February 2007, 11:21am

Moore looks like he has bad BO

RandomFactor · 17th February 2007, 12:35pm

Yup. And possibly woodland animals living in his beard.

MarkMono · 17th February 2007, 12:36pm

Its the penance beard that does it.

Advertisement