Take a look at this....
http://www.ropeofsilicon.com/article/watchmen_trailer_to_comic_comparison/
There's more at the site. What do you think?
Posted on 07/21/2008 4:15:19 PM PDT by netmilsmom
It's not a comic book movie.
That's the first thing you should know when your kids ask to see "The Dark Knight," this summer's biggest blockbuster. The film is vastly more true to Frank Miller's famous alternative view of The Batman than to the zap-pow camp of Adam West's TV portrayal and sanitized DC comics that filled our childhood.
So how do you answer? Should your children see "The Dark Knight?" We turned first to our resident film fanatic and visual designer, Chuck Kim, the first of the Yahoo! Kids team to see the box office smash.
"I would not take a kid to see 'The Dark Knight,' said Chuck. "The Joker and Two-Face alone could give a kid nightmares." The oft-mentioned violence is not of one of gore, he says, but more of the heart—and thus potentially more terrifying. "The main thing is that it is a very dark movie," Chuck concludes."There's no ray of hope for the city." He recommends kids be 14 or older to see the film.
(Excerpt) Read more at kids.yahoo.com ...
Teens and up only. (and think hard about the younger teens.
My personal view is that it is NOT appropriate for sub-teen and may not be appropriate for teen depending on their maturity.
NO. I saw it. Great psychological (or just plain psycho!) movie for adults, but it's not for kids.
Not if you believe kids should be allowed to enjoy their innocence, anyway.
It`s not even for adults.
Totally disjointed movie with no overarching dramatic link,only a series of chaotic violent scenes strung together in desperation.
And the clincher,the usual moral equivalency argument from Hollywood, the place with no morals.
Yeah, no.
I’m no film critic, but I would say the previous movie — Batman Returns — was better. This movie was just okay in my book.
>>Totally disjointed movie with no overarching dramatic link,only a series of chaotic violent scenes strung together in desperation.<<
I totally disagree. I felt it was far from disjointed and Heath Ledger was brilliant.
I actually agree, the first Bale Batman was superior.
I stopped counting the dramatic holes, characters popping up and disappearing, hundreds of barrels of oil magically appearing all done with no one noticing, a bloated bomb laden jailbird and not one cop searched the guy,the joker left dangling by his foot, etc,etc.etc.
Even Gary Oldman let his feelings be known about this abysmal script by mumbling his lines !
Do you mean “Batman Begins”?
This quote demonstrates just how warped Hollywierd is -- that a sadistic, violent and disturbing motion picture is considered one of the year's best.
Pathetic.
Nope,
easier to play over the top than it is subtle,distinct,unequivocal.
The essance of the movie, moral equivalency, seems to be the most favored theatrical weapon of the left in Hollywood. The good guy who dares punish evil lowers himself to the same level as the bad guy. Total BS.
Well, that’s your opinion and you’re entitled to it.
I disagree.
So the movie`s main point was not moral equivalence!?
>>— that a sadistic, violent and disturbing motion picture is considered one of the year’s best.<<
It is.
Please understand that this movie could be easily taken as the story of GWB and the OBL. There is even a scene where Alfred the Butler is talking to Bruce Wayne where he states that some people are not in it for the money or power. They kill because they are plain and simple, evil.
Right down to a kidnap video that mirrors a YouTube kidnap vid from the ROP.
We are so used to the Hollywood left lightening up and rationalizing that when we see simple good and evil, we don’t recognize it.
>>So the movie`s main point was not moral equivalence!?<<
Holy crap! Did you stay until the end?
Under no circumstances is this movie for kids. My 22 yr. old son saw it last night and told me about some of the scenes. I wouldn’t subject any kid under 18 to this movie. Very disturbing and graphicly sadistic. This is a warning to parents of young kids who may want to see it. I’ve never seen any of the Batman movies, but I know kids have seen those, and that’s probably okay. Apparently, though, this one is not like the other Batman movies. To me, it explains why Heath Ledger went over the edge.
It`s a chaotic nihilistic sadistic movie pasted together in jumbled parts. The Hong kong scene, not even required. Ledger couldn`t even pin down his own character because of motivation beyond that of anarchy.His voice constantly changes indicating he was still searching for the Joker in almost every scene.Bale`s Batman voice is hammier and sillier than ever.
The cherry on top of this mess is when Batman has qualms about snuffing out the lives of psychopaths out to kill him first for fear of violating their civil liberties.
The Dirty Harry movies were better at it`s moral equivalence messages.
My kids loved it. I thought it was way too long.
But you hit my main problem. Gordon couldn't lie about Harvey, but they could lie about Batman. Makes no sense.
Uh-huh. Yeah sure, if you say so.
I saw a different movie than you for sure and you walked out early...
Gordon didn’t make the decision.
And please don’t give away any more without a spoiler alert.
AND you have no clue about the history of the character.
Dive a while into some DC history and the movie will mean more to you.
I disagree with him saying it’s not a comic book movie. It most certainly IS a comic book movie, but comic book movies are growing up just like comic books did. And of course one of the big steps of comic books growing up was the Dark Knight series, and now here the Dark Knight movie (both based and not based on the comics) taking the same step in comic book movies. And next May comes Watchmen, based on the comics that were coming out in parallel with Dark Knight which also contributed to the growing up of comics.
I think PG-13 works, it’s kind of on the edge but it works. I was 16 or 17 when Dark Knight and Watchmen hit the comic book scene and rewrote the concept. It’s a little grim but teenagers can handle it.
You must have gone to the bathroom a lot. You gott the movie 100% bassackwards. There’s a solid dramatic link and the is NO moral equivalency in the movie.
He did NOT lower himself. Exactly the opposite. Even the bad guy noticed that Batman is incorruptible. Funny how you missed it.
He could lie about Batman because Batman volunteered.
http://www.ropeofsilicon.com/article/watchmen_trailer_to_comic_comparison/
There's more at the site. What do you think?
Thank you!
One of the grandkids has already seen it - and wants to go back a second time.
How old is your grandson?
My nephew runs a movie theater. His kids see most PG13 movies. He had no problem with Iron Man or Hulk.
He said NO WAY would his sons to see this. Even the oldest who is 11
*************Warning Spoilers************
*****************************************
*****************************************
*****************************************
*****************************************
*****************************************
*****************************************
*****************************************
*****************************************
*****************************************
Gordon did lie about Harvey at the end, and thus the lie that Batman kill those 5 people.
***********End spoiler****************
The Joker even had a line stating how Batman was incorruptible.
I cheered during the Watchmen trailer, when the watchmaker disintegrated I yelped “Watchmen”. I’ve been watching the Watchmen (accidental play there but I’ll take it) wallow in development hell since before the series finished being published. I love the series/ novel. I remember cracking open the first issue, I used to hit the comic store on my way home from school and I’d frequently read some of the comics while I walked home (ahh youth, if I tried to read and walk now now I’d get killed). I read those first three panels on the first page and went “woh, this need total concentration”, for the next year the most important thing of every month was the Watchmen issue. I would buy the next issue, take it home, reread last month’s issue then read the new one. I’ve read the whole series through at least a dozen times since then, I think it’s handily one of the greatest stories ever told in comics.
I was really happy when Snyder got attached to Watchmen and it finally looked like it was going to get out of development hell. He did such a great job on 300. My one worry still is that Watchmen is thick, it’s 12 dense issue with a very complex plot. I don’t know how it can be done in one movie. But even with that worry I am so looking forward to it. He certainly nailed the look, and seems to have nailed the feel, and in May we’ll find out if he got the spirit.
17 - not a “kid” kid anymore...
Snyder has gone on record saying that the movie will be roughly 3 hours long because he does want to fit in everything.
Exactly, I don’t see how anybody that saw the final showdown between Batman and Joker can not realize that Batman transcended. He doubts himself throughout the movie, not due to moral equivalence but due to horror at consequences, and he learns his lesson and does his thing.
3 hours might be able to pull it off. Obviously that means dropping all the “non-comic” parts of the book (the back story after the chapters). And I’d bet the pirate ship goes away, because that part is pretty confusing on the first read. Could be done. Hope they let him keep the cut.
My one sadness is I doubt this movie will make any money. I don’t really think there are that many Watchmen fans in the world. I hope I’m wrong, and of course I’ll do my part, but I just don’t see it breaking even.
There is no moral equivalency in this movie.
Everyone has a personal line. The Joker’s philosophy is when the chips are down, anyone can become a murderer like him. Batman wants to maintain a level of personal integrity, indeed the majority of the city does too. Did you see the look on the Joker’s face when neither ship blew up? One of the few brief moments of panic in him.
Batman takes the rap for Harvey because Gordon and Batman couldn’t let the Joker win. Dent was a shining ray of hope for the city. To let it become public would have crushed the public spirit and just given Joker even more gratification. All the Joker cares about is corrupting good men. Dent was the idolized hero the city needed at that point, but Batman turns out to be the hero the city actually deserves.
I think the rating is spot on. 13 and above. Kids that age and above can handle it, thought it certainly depends on the level of maturity in each particular case. Preview the movie and make an informed decision. Parenting, imagine that. heh
The Watchmen trailer looked great. Me, I’ve been looking forward to the Will Eisner’s The Spirit movie since I heard it was being discussed, but the new trailer looked lame. But then, 300’s trailers didn’t interest me, and I love that film. Fingers crossed for The Spirit-and its Christmas release sounds promising. And ditto for the Jonah Hex movie, expected in 2010.
Sorry. That was stupid of me. I wrongly thought everyone on the thread had seen it.
Oh you’re right, 17 is not really a kid.
That’s an adult in “waiting”!
>>My one sadness is I doubt this movie will make any money<<
Honestly, I think that it WILL make money. The Comic genre is huge and Marvel will make it easy for anyone who puts out quality to make money. Seems Marvel is going for quantity and DC for quality.
Remember, Marvel has announced it’s plans through 2011.
From IMDb - Iron Man 2 has been scheduled for April 30th 2010. Matthew Vaughn’s take on “Thor” is also set for release on June 4th 2010. “The First Avenger: Captain America” will swing his shield on May 6th 2011. The much anticipated superhero team-up “The Avengers” has been scheduled for July 2011. The company’s “Ant-Man” and “The Sub-Mariner” remain in development with no fixed release dates. Their “Wolverine” film remains on course for next May.
People like you who know the history of these stories and people like me who are just getting into them, are geeked. Anything that comes out will feed the need.
Watchmen, if promoted correctly will pull a new audience. Wolverine (which has Hugh Jackman in control and his strings pulled by Marvel) will be out before Watchmen with an early summer release. (then Marvel takes an intentional break with the next coming in 2010) By the time Watchmen comes out, the graphic novel will be rereleased and those who clamor for the Comic-verse movies will eat Watchmen up.
IMO!
Yeah I’m not too sure on Spirit. Of course part of the problem is that Frank hasn’t really done anything good as top director. We’ve always blamed the 2nd and 3rd Robocop movies on what the studio did to his scripts, we’ll find out if that’s true in December.
No moral equivalency in the moive !? You obviously become too engrossed in a movie to ‘see’ the movie:
“The Dark Knight” is “Dirty Harry” stripped of Don Siegel’s ambivalence and ambiguity. Here again, one madman (Christian Bale’s Batman/Clint Eastwood’s Harry) is posited as the only effective way of combating another (Heath Ledger’s Joker/Andy Robinson’s Scorpio). The two figures are identified as morally equivalent (”You complete me,” says Ledger to Bale, nastily referencing “Jerry Maguire”), but where Siegel’s camera literally recoils in horror at the moment Harry leaps into madness (when he steps on Scorpio’s wound in the football stadium), Nolan seems to embrace, and even romanticize, his hero’s obsessive, abusive behavior.” DUH !
DaveKehr
“...sets up what he calls a social experiment that’s meant to show the malign essence of human nature.” DUH!
WSJ
“gives us enough multilayered subplots to at least fool us into thinking this is a work of intellectual and moral complexity. But as a piece of visual storytelling, from shot to shot, “The Dark Knight” is a mess. Characters disappear from one locale and show up inexplicably in another, thanks to the magic of editing. At one point, we learn two characters have been abducted, but Nolan doesn’t bother to show us who did it or how. (Later, he explains the “who did it” with dialogue — the lazy way.) At the end, a major character is left hanging, literally, as we are figuratively. If this is genius, give me hackery... But what the Nolans have come up with here is just more pretentious poot, dumped onto the screen in a style that pretends to be fresh and energetic but is really only semicoherent... There’s no dramatic arc in “The Dark Knight” — only a series of speed bumps. The moments in the movie that should be the most dramatic are glanced over so quickly that we barely have time to register what has happened. I’m not sure the actors know what’s going on, either.
“The Dark Knight” may be somebody’s idea of a masterpiece, but I doubt it would be Hitchcock’s. Nolan may want us to believe in the darkness that lurks within each of us, but instead of leading us to it visually, he chops it up and sets it out in front of us, a grim, predigested banquet. The difference between Nolan and his idol is that Hitchcock demanded that we trust ourselves; Nolan demands that we trust only him. “
Salon
“The Dark Knight is all fits and starts—fitfully suspenseful, fitfully scary, one jerky episode after another with jolts of brutality to keep you revved up.”
NY Mag.
” The narrative isn’t shaped coherently to bring out contrasts and build toward a satisfying climax. “The Dark Knight” is constant climax; it’s always in a frenzy, and it goes on forever. Nothing is prepared for, and people show up and disappear without explanation; characters are eliminated with a casual nod.”
New Yorker
The comic genre is huge but there are still some that are too off the beaten track to make the money. Constantine and Electra both tanked, of course they also both had issues within the movie. I thought 300 was gonna tank for the same reasons I think Watchmen will, and I was very happy to be wrong about that.
I don’t know if it’s quantity vs quality. Iron Man was awesome and Hulk was quite good ( a TON better than the Ang Lee crud version). Marvel right now is recreating their unified universe in the movies. Which I think is a smart move, Marvel always excelled at guest shotting which would make fans of one character by a different book for 1 month and maybe they liked it. The first two “internal” Marvels did guest shots too, a good way to get Iron Man fans to watch Hulk and SHIELD fans to watch both movies.
Of course I’m a Marvel guy so I’ll see them all anyway. Batman is my all time favorite but outside of that Marvel was my house. Heck I even saw both Fantastic Four movies and they stunk (did get to see Jessica Alba in just undies though... pretty much the only redeeming quality of either movie). I’m only buying the ones that are characters on my faves list, Iron Man, Spidey, Thor, Avengers because it’s got Iron Man and Thor, X-Men, Wolvie. See that’s how it goes for a comic geek, you make a sentence with the word “only” and then produce a big list. But I am a Marvel guy.
I don’t think DC has moved things in house so they don’t have that much control over what movies get made. They can sell the rights but that’s where their control ends.
It certainly is a great time to be a comic book nerd, new or old. Lotta of good to great movies being made from comics, spawning more interest in the books, definitely some neat stuff happening in the books.
The Spirit COULD truly be the greatest comic book movie of all time-Will Eisner is one of comicbookdom’s unquestioned greats . Even critics who despise comics as simplistic kid stuff consider his works to be “art in sequential paneled form” , not comics. The “my city screams” trailer is better than this newest one-it makes it look like a lame romantic comedy with weird cinematography. Looking at is as a person who knew nothing of Will Eisner or the Spirit, I don’t think it would make anyone want to see it. But with a Christmas release (like for the LOTR films) it appears as if the studio thinks it’ll be big, so....
Well, I have to say that I lean toward Marvel (see my tagline). LOVED Iron Man (it’s coming out on DVD 9/30) and although Hulk was not as fun, I really have to say that it was on par with Iron Man only in a different way. My nephew (the one with the “in” to the movies) that there are 130 minutes cut from Hulk. All of that will be included on the DVD. Yes!!!
As for the “quantity vs quality” I meant that DC is going for a more artful kind of film while Marvel is looking to please the fanbase. Again IMO, I love pleasing the fanbase. Elektra was so awful because they totally disregarded who she was in the actual Marvelverse. We just watched it for the first time this weekend. Wow, was it bad. They even cut the one scene with Daredevil. Bad move.
Same with X3. They didn’t listen to the fanbase, let the movie be made at a time when Rebecca Romijn, Bryan Singer and James Marsden all had other contracts (although both Marsden and Romijn said that they would reprise their roles for free if need be) AND not replacing Nightcrawler with someone who could take the make-up. The fanbase said wait, Fox said no and it basically bombed. It made money, but not like the first two. Marvel will do it right when they get the rights back.
The girls like Wolverine and Tony Stark. I know of more women who are into this because of those characters (I’m a James Marsden fan myself). I know women to saw Hulk JUST to catch Tony at the end!!! With every one of these movies, the base is building. By the time that the Avengers comes out, it will be HUGE.
And just to throw this in, I really want Aaron Eckhart (Harvey Dent) to play Thor. What do you think??
Personally, I felt like it was 2 movies pushed into 1. I think they could have finished the movie when:
SPOILER AlERT::::
Rachel dies. Then the 2nd movie could have been about 2 face and the joker. There wasn’t much time spent on the bad cops. It felt long and rushed at the same time.
No I actually watched the actual movie instead of putting my own need to get angry at Hollywood in between my eyes and brain.
******************SPOILERS****************
Actually Dirty Harry is one of the many many characters ripped from the Batman mold. Batman is not the only effective combating force. A MAJOR theme of the movie is that Harvey Dent is on a path to render Batman obsolete, he’s the White Knight that’s leading the People to rise up against the bad guys. And Batman and Joker are not identified as morally equivalent, they’re identified as opposite parts of the coin, while they both take extreme measures they do it for opposite reasons and with opposite intent. Joker wants to hurt people because he doesn’t like them and doesn’t consider them capable of good. Batman needs to hurt bad guys in order to help people because he actually does like people and does consider them capable of good. And BTW Batman actually explained all this to Joker in their final showdown, again you weren’t paying attention. Joker says Batman completes him because Joker can’t function without an opponent, someone to hate, someone to hate him. It’s not a moral equivalency, it’s a psychological flaw in Joker.
Yes Joker sets of a social experiment meant to show the malign essence of human nature. And what happens to his social experiment? Nobody blew each other up. Joker’s experiment failed and showed the GOOD essence of human nature.
The Salon guy must have spent a lot of time in the bathroom too. We actually do see how both Rachel and Dent are kidnapped. The camera lingers no Dents driver and shows the corrupt cop giving Rachel the message that gets her where the bad guys need her. As for Joker being left hanging they show the cops getting him. And there’s a major arc in the movie about the citizens of Gotham learning to fight the criminals, learning to be good, learning even how to sacrifice their very lives to fight evil. So that kind of wipes out Salon’s no arcs and Nolan believing darkness lurks in all of us.
And the others are just as wrong.
Maybe you should use YOUR OWN words. Tell me why YOU think there’s moral equivalency in the movie. Don’t quote media morons, why do YOU THINK THAT. Or is it just because media morons think it.
The Spirit has potential. It’s an neat character with some cool stories. We’ll see in December.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.