The Watchmen is a movie that inspires a lot of opinions from a lot of people, including director Zack Snyder and former director attached to the film, Terry Gilliam. Now, producer Joel Silver is criticizing Snyder’s version, calling him a “slave to the material,” and saying he liked Gilliam’s ending much better. But what was Gilliam’s version, and would that too have “ruined” the movie? What is the real way to make a comic book movie, and did Snyder do it correctly? Kim Horcher, Tim Frisch, and Jason Inman (comic reviewer youtube.com/jawiin) discuss!
****************************************
SUBSCRIBE and you won’t miss a single Nerd Alert!http://dft.ba/-5yMt
ON TWITTER:
@NerdAlertTYT
@Kimscorcher
@timmyfrisch
@Jawiin
Nerd Alert: Bringing you tech news, gaming, geek culture and more every day of the week with host Kim Horcher and friends. Part of the TYT Network of shows.
http://youtube.com/user/nerdalert
Comments
1. You can’t make generalizations about “all comic book movies”, the stories are just too different. 2. It also depends on if you are doing an origin story or not. And 3. Not only does it depend on the writers and the director, but it also depends on who the cast is.
So I’ll start by saying Zack Snyder has never made a “great movie” in his life, Man of Steel and 300 were good, and Watchmen was okay. Also you guys said that comic book movies are “mainstream” now because of Watchmen? BAHAHAHA, oh that’s funny….. NO! Comic book movies, and graphic novel movies are mainstream for three reasons: 1. It started with Christopher Nolan’s and Christian Bale’s Dark Knight Trilogy. 2. Followed by the Iron Man trilogy, 3. And finally having the idea to make The Avenger movie (out of which came Captain America, and Thor, and the Hulk remake (that one still sucked though).
Also I believe that a comic book movie has to decide whether or not it is going to follow the comic book exactly or it is going to go a different way, and then stick with one or the other, but not both. So for example The Dark Knight Rises and Iron Man 3 were both successful and great movies because they captured the spirit of the comics but came up with their own storyline.
Also as I said before sometimes it just comes down to casting, Watchmen did a good job with that, Christoper Nolan’s Batman did a great job with that, Christian Bale is the Only actor to do a Batman film that actually helped his career instead of hurt it or destroyed it entirely (George Clooney and Val Kilmer anyone?), also look at the 2000’s Spiderman (with Toby Mcguire really?) and the 2010’s Spiderman (100X better casting), so thing goes with the Hulk movies: people could see Eric Bana as Bruce Banner but not as The Hulk, where as people saw Eward Norton as The Hulk but not Bruce Banner, where as Mark Ruffalo can be seen as great as both. Then there is the problem with “type casting” as well (i.e. Christopher Reeves) maybe with the exception Captain America none of the superhero movies have that problem, yes Christian Bale will always be Batman, Robert Downey will always be Iron Man, and Chris Hemsworth will always be Thor but we can see them playing other roles as well (and we will think of the actor, instead of “oh there’s the superhero doing another film”). The writers and producers can make or break a comic book film as well, that was one of the problems with Watchmen, it was too long of a movie, and the dialogue was not strong enough. Another example of this is “Man Of Steel” the Nolan brothers are the 1st people to Ever make Superman story interesting and something people want to watch, on the other side of that we have the 2005 Superman film (how many people even remember that was a thing? I know Kevin Spacey likes to think it never happened.
I could talk about this subject for hours, but I think you see my point.