Watchmen: Graphic Novel vs. Movie comparison
Uploader Comments (GlumPhoenix)
Top Comments
-
This is true, but I don't think Snyder could have done significantly better. The thing that made the book brilliant is that it did things only a graphic novel could do.
All Comments (319)
-
it wasnt a bad movie by any means, but it really took away some of the most important moments, i still prefer the graphic novel eitheir way
-
alan moore is lucky that he didn't waste his time watching this piece of shit.
-
I haven't read the GN yet, although planning on it. This movie is pretty much one of a kind, and the only reason it did not hit big in the box office is because they didn't butcher it like they do in most adaptations. The movie was subtly brilliant; I was left with the feeling of relief and of sorrow that such a wonderfully genius movie was made, yet would be misinterpreted/undervalued by the masses of ignoramuses. One of my all-time favorite movie, truly art.
-
All the song lyrics included in the graphic novel were incorporated into the film via the soundtrack. The actors even damn well looked just like the characters in the comic. SO, they changed the ending. That's completely understandable in my book. The general public, those unfamiliar with the graphic novel, would be turned off my the giant squid. They would think it was random and nonsensical. The bomb just made more sense for the film. But otherwise? The film was spot on. Haters gonna hate.
-
Ok, I TOTALLY disagree with people hating on this movie. I don't see how you could really hate it without hating it for the sake of hating something. I think some people just expected it to fail them, and so they dug for things to dislike. This movie was fantastic. The graphic novel had been one of my favorites for a long time, and the film did not let me down. They took scenes and lines DIRECTLY from the graphic novel. CONT...
-
What is the name of the song used in this video? i've been trying to find out. Any ideas?
Btw i think watchmen was a great adaptation, they transitioned what they could and the parts they did take over were executed well enough.
I feel like by changing that ending, and not leaving the viewer grappling with morality which is far beyond their heads they really tore the heart and soul out of the GN. I believe this moral complexity is what the entire GN was about, and if you take that away with a "You're a monster, Adrian" the movie watching experience losses something important. I was astounded they chose to do it, considering they replicated some lines word for word and I had enjoyed the movie decently up to that point.
Lifegoesongundam 9 months ago
@Lifegoesongundam: I see what you're saying, and I understand feeling that way. But here is why I didn't have a problem with it:
1) This is movie, not a book. I think you have to view the film compared to other superhero MOVIES, not superhero comic books. In superhero movies, the villains almost always die. When Dan is slowly running at Adrian, I think we're supposed to think "right, here's the part where the villain dies.....WHAT?? They're going to let him live??"
CONT...
GlumPhoenix 9 months ago 4
CONT...
I also think Matthew Goode's performance has a Christ-like quality to it. He sees his actions as self-sacrifice. Someone had to do it. He clearly admits he has done something indescribably terrible, but believes it was the right decision under the circumstances.
2) In the next scene, Dan has accepted Adrian's "new world." He seems okay with it.
For these reasons, I believe the ambiguity was preserved, but in a different way.
GlumPhoenix 9 months ago 2
For me, the most interesting moral question the book left me with was what Dan, Laurie, Rorschach, and Doc should do. Should they expose Adrian? It feels wrong to just remain silent and let the world remain in the dark....but at the same time, exposing Adrian will destroy the peace that has been created. I think this bit from the film sums it up perfectly:
Dan: "Peace based on a lie."
Adrian: "But peace nonetheless."
GlumPhoenix 9 months ago 4