Watchmen (Part 1), Lost in Adaptation ~ The Dom
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 7 сен 2024
- In this episode of Lost in Adaptation The Dom tries his hand at graphic novels for the film time with the critically acclaimed Watchmen.
Support the show on Patreon: www.patreon.co...
Dom on Facebook: www.facebook.c...
Dom on Twitter: / dominic__noble
Buy Lost in Adaptation Teeshirts: www.teepublic....
Contact me: lostinadaptationrequests@gmail.com
Intro music by: / djilneige
Royalty Free Music: incompetech.com/
Mail stuff to Dom:
225 Simi Village Dr
PO Box 941750
Simi Valley, CA
93094 
Кино
4 minutes in and "the almost non-sequitur comic" line just stabs me in the heart: The comic is about a man lost at sea who lives through horror. He finally arrives at a town and kills someone to avoid discovery only to find it's his wife. The evil town he had found was his own. It's about madness and how we can give up our morals and lose our minds...like Ozymandias did. Like Rorschach did. Like the Comedian did. Like Doctor Manhattan did....
is that what you truly believe? in your heart of hearts?
“I should not have hung up on him” takes on a new meaning when you know a channel awesome creator was fired for being late to a skype call.
That's shitty
@@aliasofgray2854 That's how a job works.
@@thedopdeity They fired Allision a mere 15 minutes after inviting her to that call. Is that reasonable to you?
@@thedopdeity spoken like someone who doesn't work xD
Who got fired?
The only thing that comes to my mind about the ending:
"Let's put our differences behind us. For Science.
You Monster."
6:30 The Comedian's get-up is meant to look like a gimp mask. Part of the arc that the story makes clear with him is that he's into heroics because he gets a sexual kick out of the violence, and he becomes increasingly depravedly brazen in his pursuit of it as he gets older. It's the main reason why the other heroes make no secret of how much he disgusted them, and so few of them are willing to mourn his passing.
It's a not-too subtle jab at the US government too, with the way they enable and encourage his fetishization of violence throughout Vietnam and his ongoing work as a black ops spook.
Changing that part of his characterization outright missed the point of the reason it was a stylistic choice in the first place. You might as well say that the protagonist of The Metamorphosis should turn into a kitten, because cockroaches are icky.
It gets to the point where he rapes the original Silk Spectre.
Ha! Fantastically apt comparison.
I agree completely with nearly all u said, but I think the gimp mask would’ve looked a little too silly in live action and might’ve taken away from the horrifying scenes he’s in. Besides I feel Jeffrey Dean Morgan (I think that’s him I mix him up sometimes) conveyed enough of the disturbing feelings he has through his acting
I don’t think that that style of mask was largely associated with BDSM in 1985. It was just a cold weather clothing item or a Mexican wrestling costume. Even the term “gimp” just meant a person with a lame leg until “Pulp Fiction.”
@@aramiscalcutt Pulp Fiction didn't invent the use of the term "Gimp", its just that BDSM was really underground back then because people were more uptight about that stuff
I love the fact that Alan Moore has apparently only approved of one adaption of his work, the Justice League Unlimited episode "For The Man Who Has Everything", despite it changing many details (but keeping the tone).
I agree the film's ending was better--FOR THE FILM. The final panels of the book include a bit of dialogue from the intro to the 1963 TV series "The Outer Limits". One episode of that show is about scientists who transform a human into a grotesque alien in order to stoke fears of an interplanetary invasion...with the hopes of bringing humankind together against a common enemy.
So the very ending of the book reveals the entire story was a massive setup for an almost absurdly obscure joke. In short when The Comedian says, "It's all a joke" this is a meta-comment on the story itself.
Whether this works in the book depends on your tolerance for that sort of thing. In the film I think it would have been too easy to miss.
Sorry for coming late to the party.
I guess I'm one of those with the low tolerance then. Because while I think that the Comedian's meta-humor is pretty clever, the idea that the whole ending is just an obscure reference joke makes it WAY less profound... And kind of irritating, actually.
At least the film's ending made Dr. Manhattan's understanding and approval of Ozymandias' plan a little more personally significant and weighty. It also makes him seem more reasonable (or less, I suppose, depending how you look at it) for doing what he does to Rorschach.
You can think it's meta all you want but if you actually look it up you'll find it was just a joke between Alan Moore and Len Wein. It works that way but it's simply just a nod of the hat.
I didn't mind the ending in the film but now that the original ending has been shown on the Watchmen TV show you see how much more powerful it is.
Didn't veid tell us that he has the idea from the show but the people in the show weren't thinking big enough to let it work....
Well might be my memorie but I'm not sure if this was in watchmen or before watchmen
One thing I'm glad they kept in, because it would be so easy to overlook, is Rorschach's line "Paranoid? Is that what they're saying about me?". I did a double-take and went back a few pages again when i realised that it was a subtle joke.
I actually love both versions of the Watchmen story. I I like how the film told everything that essentially needed to be told and did it in a visually stunning way with great casting and great costumes and a great soundtrack. And I prefer the film's ending too just because the genetically engineered Squid was an unimportant detail that Ozymandias had happen in my opinion. Any unearthly cataclysm would have done the trick, but having it be Dr. Manhattan just really ties things together in a clever way.
Night-owl was supposed to be a reference to a lesser know DC hero the Blue Beetle. Note the the one that we follow in watchman is actually the second incarnation of the hero. Batman at the time of the book being written wasn't a legacy type superhero while Blue Beetle totally was. And the second Night-Owl and the Second Blue Beetles gadgets and equipment were basically the same just change the color and animal motif. But since you are a non-comic reader I understand the mistake.
Oh sorry didn't watch the guide. I didn't think it was necessary since I read the book. But hey I liked your video and I even agree with you about the ending, it made more sense than the comicbook. Oh yeah you should probably fix the link on channel awesome.
***** They all were old Charlton comics characters based, actually Moore wanted to use them unaltered, but DC then had acquired the rights and didn't allow that in case they had plans for using them ever again.
***** Yep, Nite Owl = Blue Beetle. Rorshach = The Question. Silk Specter = Nightshade + Phantom Lady. Ozymandias = Thunderbolt. The Comedian = Peacemaker + Nick Fury. Doctor Manhattan = Captain Atom.
Though, in DC's defense, they did wind up using Blue Beetle, The Question & Captain Atom for some pretty dang good series.
Robert Brown "Lesser known". Hah!
Although I will admit I'm more familiar with Jaime Reyes than the previous incarnations.
It is even more understandable of a mistake if you know batman has an owl themed version of him in another dimension
The biggest problem with Snyder’s adaptation is that it seems like he ended up missing the point on a lot of regards.
The whole point of the Watchmen comics was to show that superheroes in real life would NOT BE A GOOD THING. And that all the characters in Watchmen ARE NOT iconic and inspiring figures, but pathetic, sad, and flawed individuals like the rest of us. It was to be a deconstruction of the entire superhero genre, (specifically the über objectivist, Steve Ditko created, Charlton Comics heroes).
By going so far as to make everything so “badass” and make all the characters “cool”, and to exaggerate or glorify all of the superheroics of the characters, Snyder missed the point.
That’s why fans don’t like the adaptation.
Agreed. Also evidenced by the fact that the book focuses way more on the normal day-to-day side characters, like the newsstand vendor and the psychiatrist. They're regular people living regular lives, which the Watchmen refuse to do because they think they're special.
I didn't read the book or watch the movie, so correct me if I'm wrong. Apparently a big mistake with the movie was that it was dark and gritty, when the comics still showed some good in the world. I heard this movie was partially to blame for the DC cinematic universe being grimdark and bad.
@@coyraig8332 The graphic novel was about as gritty as the movie. It just wasn't as stylistically gritty as the movie makes it out to be which is apparently a bad thing but really should have been expected when considering what superhero movies usually tend to look like nowadays. I'm a big fan of both the movie and the graphic novel but it's stupid to expect any sort of superhero comic book being translated into a big screen adaptation and have it not be totally stylized and over the top. That's the main appeal of these sorts of movies. Even the introspective ones features a lot of stylization. Hell, even the tv show that is supposed to be a sequel to the graphic novel and not the movie features a lot of the same sort of characteristics and qualities found in the movie. Stupid to complain about the movie being too dark or too over the top when the graphic novel indulged in the same sort of things albeit to a lesser degree.
Turd Ferguson Well, you can enjoy what you like. It doesn’t stop Zach Snyder from being a talentless hack who makes bad movies.
His DCEU films missed the point of Superman and Wonder Woman as well. Superman's supposed to be a light hearted hopeful character but Snyder made him a brooding Batman clone whose dad Jonathan Kent tells him to let a school bus full of kids die just so he doesn't reveal his powers in Man of Steel. Jonathan also commits suicide by walking into a tornado while telling Clark not to save him. And Wonder Woman is an ambassador for peace who only kills as a last resort but Snyder says the DCEU version's costume is covered in the blood of her enemies. He's basically an edgy teenager in a grown man's body who thinks a film having a dark tone automatically makes it good even if it doesn't fit the story or characters. The fans of his films are as pretentious as he is and have deluded themselves that he's a misunderstood filmmaking genius and that anyone who dislikes his films is supposedly just too stupid to understand them.
I'd argue the biggest change from the book to the movie is the characters. Not really their look, most of them look close enough, or even their personalities, which there are changes, but that's not too bad. It's the fact that most of the heroes seem superhuman rather than all except for Dr. Manhattan being purely human. They all take massive beating regular people couldn't even take, or do things a regular person normally couldn't.
The pirate comic story the kid by the news stand was reading was relavent in the comic. It was one of the stories that got turned into a nightmare and beamed by the giant squid to the earth's potential psychics. Ozzymandias metions right at the end of the comic that he's just started having that nightmare, suggesting that he's also been psychically awakened.
With the exception of Manhattan and Comedian, I felt like the portrayal of the rest of the main cast was off. For example, the scene where Rorschach goes crazy with the butcher cleaver destroys his character for me. Rorschach is supposed to be questionably sane because of how calm and methodical he usually is. He does have outbursts in the book, but the moment where he "becomes" Rorschach is not one of them. Lighting the building on fire and then standing and watching it burn with the pedophile inside is incredibly important to showing the reader what this guy is really about. Changing that to murder onset by uncontrollable rage just isn't Rorschach, and was one of my major complaints with the film.
Ian Osorio I once heard someone describe comic!Rorschach as being cold and (outwardly) unfeeling who'd snap without a moment's notice, while movie!Rorschach was an angry terrier that was just waiting to tear into others. However, I never thought as comic!Rorschach as sane (well, maybe in the past, but after he saw what the dogs were eating, he was just gone--sane people don't butcher dogs up like that); methodical, yes, but also dead inside.
@@lasthaven7 yeah cause the scene where he finds out what happens to the girl pushes him to his breaking point which is why in the adrian flashback at Eddie's funeral roshack talks like a normal person because that's before it happens where as when it does he ends up sounding like batman a little bit.
Honestly, the problem with the ending isn't the lack of squid and changing that aspect. It's the fact that the film leaves out a good half of Ozymandias's speech and his entire backstory. The lack of the villain's perspective makes the conflict less complex, and simplifying one of the most complex villains in a graphic novel seems ... wrong. I know it's 2019. This is still bothering me.
Just putting out why people dislike the movie even though it's loyal. Its because Zac Snyder didnt adapt the *point* of watchmen.
The pirate story may seem out of place but actually it's a perfect metaphor for Adrian and his moral decay. A man does horrible things to save people and ends up a murderous monster.
I actually heard a different story on why Moore doesn't put his name on movies adapting his work - namely its another adaption that went back a little further than V For Vendetta - The League Of Extraordinary Gentlemen. Not only did he have to put up with a film adaption of his work that basically made a mockery of not only it but Sean Connery's acting career (as, for a while, that was his last film) but someone filed a lawsuit against the filmmakers saying "you bastards stole my idea" which, as his name was on it, he had to go through the lawsuit as well and justify why his work was his own idea. While the filmmakers and Moore won the case, he made the distinction of "no matter what the film, I do not care what they're adapting, just take my name off it". Which is why even in the V For Vendetta film, his name is seen nowhere in the opening or end credits.
That doesn't mean he didn't hate V For Vendetta though, I heard he tore up the film script in front of the filmmakers and...while I do like the graphic novel and prefer the graphic novel, I don't mind the film.
the V for Vendetta movie changed SOOOOO much. Tons of dropped threads and storylines,
+ECL28E As I said, I prefer the Graphic Novel over the film. However, that stuff with League Of Extraordinary Gentlemen I mentioned is actually a true to life account on why Moore didn't want his name on any more of his work adapted to film.
And even then, as films, if you compare them, League is SO MUCH WORSE than V For Vendetta.
The filmmakers didn't win the case. The studio decided to settle, probably for a very good reason, as the actual film resembled the supposedly plagiarated work a lot more than Moore's graphic novel, with which it basically just had a few of the characters in common.
League of Extra-ordinary Gentlemen...Man I wanted that movie to be good. I should read the comics. I'm sure I won't, I've already got a massive stack of unread comics.
I can see why people hate the film. (I love both personaly) but I still think natalie Portman and hugo weaving's performances are still spot on.(especially hugo's cause when I read the book I gave V a similar voice)
Just gonna point this out...
I'm a huge Comic book fan.
I'm a huge Watchman fan....
I love this movie.
No really, This is the Best Comic book adaptation ever made... so far.
People who complain about this, are just not going to be able to with a adaptation at all.
The end basically saved this as a movie. There is no way around the fact that the end of this would make a terrible ending in a movie.
Agreed, wholeheartedly. It was almost as loyal as Sin City's movie adaptation was to its series (Except the sequel which kinda sucks)
Also, this movie still has one of the best opening credits sequences ever
I couldn't agree more and I really can't understand the hate.
The problem is that the movie is trying really hard to be clever, but was made by an idiot and it shows in every damn frame. You're admiring the recreation of the 'obsolete models a specialty' panel, and then the camera zooms in on the side and you can fucking hear Zack Snyder going, 'Get it? GET IT? DO YOU SEE WHAT I DID THERE I'M SO FUCKING CLEVER' and it's just punchable. Also framing the rape scene so it's like the Comedian is asking Sally if being brutalized gets her hot when he's actually talking to Hooded Justice. That was fucking disgusting.
Love this film. And I was never confused about who the Comedian was talking to it's obvious considering that Hooded Justice had just punched his ass.
WilliamM. Laowai by day. It was a terrible adaptation, Zack Snyder doesn't understand watchmen.
Y'know what, I can see why Dom would consider the film's ending better than the book, and from a purely technical-narrative perspective, he's totally correct.
The squid is a bit ridiculous, but it made sense in the book.
My only beef with the Dr. Manhattan scheme is, how in the hell does America and Russia hope to match a god-like being like Dr. M?
I know the whole point was to create a threat so big that the superpowers would have no choice but to unite against it, but this seems like creating a threat so big that there was no way mere mortals could hope to match it.
What if the world powers had simply thrown up their hands and said "fuck it! we're boned!"?
Just seems a bit short sighted for the world's smartest man.
Jebbtube I honestly never thought of it that way. What if they recreate the failed experiment in order to make a full army of Dr. Manhattans, leaving us with a world FULL of super beings who will soon overthrow the inferior race that created them?
Jebbtube Think of it this way. It's so big that, if there is a chance, they've got to work together. If there isn't a chance... well... that plans for itself.
Jebbtube The squid makes sense in the book a lot more because there's time to develop it as part of the mystery, and what is being created is hinted at subtly along the way. The film hasn't got room for that.
That's what bothers me, Manhattan is showed as an unstoppable force, how are we supposed to stop him? Even if we unite do we even have a fucking chance against him? Probably not. Also, he was the US' toy, there's no way in hell someone wouldn't blame the US and result in even more bickering and arguing as well as insults regarding their karma that one of their own cities got destroyed after all the shit the country did.
The Alien? No alignment, don't know what the fuck it is but it's dead, we know we can kill it, we saw it lifeless, we know we have a chance and it being from the outside means we don't really have a source to blame, we just know it's our enemy and we have to be ready and prepare for another possible attack.
+berry Box yup, the Squid is the fear of the unknown, and it becomes a global threat, not part of the Cold War-if anything it was Ozymandias creating an idea that made the notion of the Cold War suddenly irrelevant. The Dr.Manhattan doesn't do that for me, I'm guessing other nations would blame the US partially for his attack.
I honestly really love how well they recreated shots and scenes in this movies because they are beat for beat from the comic. The issue is that it kinda misses the point.
For example how characters like Ozymandias are treated compared to Rorschach. Rorschach, in the film is a Punisher type of character. Brutal in his treatment of criminals and never backing down from his own ideals. His vision of the world is literally black and white and in the end, he dies a martyrs death because he refuses point blank to let an evil deed go unpunished, that evil deed being the fact that Ozymandias basically nuked the city of New York and stopped an impending nuclear war. Details be damned, this is the same in both versions.
The issue, however, is how these two are treated. In the film, Rorschach is depicted as a hero, his actions are right and good and Ozymandias's actions are band and wrong. The ending is bitter sweet because the bad guy wins. In the book, this is FAR more ambiguous. Because, yes, Ozymandias has just murdered a whole city full of people but in doing that, he's literally saved everyone else on the planet and the book doesn't shy aware from the emotional toll this has taken on him. The ending is bittersweet, not because the bad guy wins, but because we're left realising that there IS no bad guy. There is no evil super villain because the world doesn't work in absolutes. The characters basically just playing dress up and going out to fight crime in the wake of literal Armageddon. Hell it was literally foreplay for them. The real issues at hand are beyond them and by the end, they all realise this and just have to accept it. All but Rorschach, who in the comic dies not as a martyr, but as a relic of a bygone ere unwilling to compromise is a situation where you need to, a slave to his own inability to see the world in any way than black and white.
Watchmen asks the question, What would it be like is superhero's existed in real life.
The book's answer is, "Not that great. Good in theory. Bad in practice."
The movie's answer is "FUCKING AWESOME"
That I feel is the issue.
Man this was longer than I intended.
I agree, the devil is on the details and Snack Snyder has a very surface level understanding of everything, like an edgy teenager.
@@ReinBelmont
True. Though o can't deny it wasn't fun.
"Ozymandias has just murdered a whole city full of people but in doing that, he's literally saved everyone else on the planet"
That is not what happens at all. Manhattan even implies as much.
He's just stalled what will eventually happen anyway.
Heck, even the name Ozymandias itself is a reference to the fact that Veidt solution is not gonna last.
Mary Shelley's Ozymandias:
"'My name is Ozymandias, king of kings:
Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!'
Nothing beside remains. Round the decay
Of that colossal wreck, boundless and bare
The lone and level sands stretch far away"
Horace Smith:
"The King of Kings; this mighty City shows
The wonders of my hand."- The City's gone,-
Naught but the Leg remaining to disclose
The site of this forgotten Babylon."
"A central theme of the "Ozymandias" poems is the inevitable decline of rulers with their pretensions to greatness"
@@soveryumble7250
Meh. Point still stands.
"Reginald, do the thing!"
Beautiful as always. Also, you could make a mint putting up classes on multiple self sketches, your timing is uncanny.
I always thought the ending was the weakest part of the book, too. I was fine with it at first, but it didn't really hold up for me as I reread it. (Though "I did it thirty-five minutes ago" still ranks as one of my all-time favourite lines of dialogue.)
I'm in agreement with the Dom. As much as I love Moore and his work, the movie Ending and Ozymendiaz's plot to frame John as the destroyer of earth makes much more sense than artificially creating a giant Lovecraftian Shoggoth that brainfarts and kills everyone.
"Graphic novel film adapters have a clear advantage when it comes to understanding the original vision of the author." Now I want you to do a Lost in Adaptation on Avatar: The Last Airbender. Nothing has ever fucked up an opportunity quite like they did.
I'm conflicted about the change from the giant squid. I think both the novel ending and the film ending have their own pros and cons.
I mean, leaving aside the question of aesthetics and silliness, let's think this over. On one hand, I really like how /global/ the film plan was. The giant squid thing was very America centric, and it kind a little bit strained that upon it's appearance, the entire world would just toss aside this whole Cold War thing in order to stand together. This is partly because while I do like Adrian's original plan (that people would think this was an alien/inter-dimensional threat that they'd have to fight), I don't think he'd planted enough evidence to make it seem as though this would be a reoccurring problem.
So the fact that the movie's climax has death occurring all around the world, AND forces the American government to confess to their terrible international policies makes that team-up feel a lot more believable. That said...they're under the impression that it was Doctor Manhattan who did it, not a giant squid. And part of me wonders if people wouldn't just go, "Well, what can we do? There's no way we're going to be able to fight an omniscience, omnipotent being! Might as well give up now."
Anyway, this was a really strong review, Dom, and I can't wait to see the next part. :D
I’m so glad you allowed graphic novels so we got your brilliant Scott Pilgrim vids
Even though i've been a massive fan of the watchmen since the '80s, A agree with your last point 100%
As a fan of both, I have to say, I like the film a lot more. People say that it 'missed the point' of the original book in order to be a supposed 'dark parody', but I never really got that. I think it was just more of superheroes being more existential and introspective, having actual realism applied to something as goofy as a superhero. In my opinion the Nolan Batman films and Watchmen are movies that simply wanted to take a more realistic approach to the concept of superheroes, which is, in and of itself, a parody of golden age comics. If you view the watchmen film as a satire of another golden age comic book, like superman 1or 2, then I feel it can more easily deemed a 'parody'. I love both, but I like the movie a lot more.
I agree. the only things that muddled the movie are 1) the inclusion of Bubastis, who, in the novel, is a test creature for the Squid and has no point to exist in the movie, and 2) Veidt's moment of self-doubt to John, where he's not sure if he made the right choice, and John replies something along the lines of he's not sure, but he understands why he did it. I think part of John's quote is in the film, but that one line by Veidt is SO important to his character, and it's just omitted.
I got into Bob Dylan because of this movie's opening credits scene.
I'm eternally grateful.
Oh my god. Using hallelujah in the beginning is more meta than you might think, hallelujah is a song about a crisis of faith and then Christians co-opted it into a religious song and the the watchman movie co-opted the graphic novel into something it wasn't
Love what you do. Proud to be a new subscriber. I completely AGREE with you about the ending. I am a HUGE comic book/graphic novel lover of multiple publishers, and feel that the movie ending to Watchmen is better than the comic version.
You are not alone! :) Keep up the great work sir.
I love Watchmen, really it's my favourite comic book EVER and... the movies ending really is much better
I'm a huge fan of the graphic novel, but I still love the movie. And I like both endings. For me, Watchmen is still the best comic adaptation.
Awesome!
I agree with you in liking the film's ending better, mainly because the comic's seems to come out of nowhere with psychics and the like. For a film especially, the non-alien ending also keeps everything in-universe, as it were. Mind you, the comic's ending was well done, a and nicely set up, but even on first viewing I like the change to the film's version a lot.
Great sketch at the end, Dom.
"EXPLOSIONS! WOOH! JUMPING! AAAAAGH! I WILL EXTINGUISH YOUR FIRE WITH BULLETS!" made me laugh like a loon and scare my coworkers. Thank you for that bit of joy, Dom :)
So excited that you're doing Watchmen!
I've got to say, the movie's ending is a lot 'neater' from a narrative perspective than the comic's ending, but in terms of what strikes me as a more effective means of ideologically shocking the world into shifting their perspective on human conflict, the squid works way better. I saw the film before reading the comic, and so favoured the film ending for a long time, but I eventually changed my mind on the matter. The cliff notes version being:
1) It's hard to mobilise any response to Dr. Manhattan, because they know he's indestructible. If he has decided humans should die, it's hard to imagine how you could resist him, or why he stopped at only attacking a handful of cities.
2) Dr. Manhattan simply isn't 'scary' to a world that has had decades to come to terms with his existence, he's no longer all that alien to everyone.
3) The psychic nature of the squid attack, and the implication that it is a being from another dimension accidentally called over to our dimension by that research institute in New York has that 'blameless tragedy' element to it that truly does inspire the most empathy and sympathy from other people, likely even enough to overcome the Cold War hostilities, and most of all...
4) The world doesn't really understand Dr. Manhattan's mental state, and why he left Earth, so the timing of his disappearance (knowing he can see the future) and appearance of the 'alien' would really make it seem to the world like Dr. Manhattan FLED Earth to get away from the coming of the squid. They know he's indestructible, but has near-human mind, so it's plausible to believe that he could be harmed by the psychic attacks of the creature. The only thing scarier than a well-understood indestructible god-man is the freaky unknown entities that the indestructible god-man is afraid of!
From a meta-fictional perspective, it's also wonderful to see a really sober, sensible rendition of the kind of ridiculous mad-scientist plot that has been the bread-and-butter of comic books since the beginning. In Watchman, a supposed genius thinks killing innocent people by genetically engineering a giant, horrifying monster will somehow make the world a better place.... And he was right! It saves the world, he was a genius! Huh!
Definitely hard to work it into a movie's run-time though, so I can't feel mad about the decision to change it.
You know it’s gonna be interesting, when the video starts with Dom saying “The f*ck!” 😂😂
You really speak volumes about your true colors: “I often take the authors opinion and throw it off as my own”
that ending build up was hysterical
The squid relied on the audience having an intimate understanding of comic book tropes. Funnily, the 2010's Trope of sky beams has actually made the film's climax retroactively even better.
you saying that Alan Moore looked like a crazed hobo made my day
I saw the film once when it first came out and don't remember it too well. I adored all the flashbacks, especially the montage at the beginning and Jon's transformation. I also really liked the casting for Rorscach and the Comedian. What I remember most though is face palming hard when Laurie set off the flame thrower during sexy times with Dan.
I agree with you 100% on the Comedian's costume change. So much better.
If you're doing graphic novels do Akira
Technically it's a manga.
Yeah not the manga was finished before the movie
I dont think thatd be a good idea
@@vintheguy ? The manga was finished before the adaptation. The author, who also directed the film specifically only adapted part of the manga, and made a few changes to fit it into a 3 hour movie.
@@TheQuashingoftheTub
the manga was not finished before the movie was made
you fucking idiot
One of the best episode and considered the quality of your work it is impressive, would love to see you do more graphics novels related contents in the future especially Moore's works
Love your stuff! Lost in Adaptation is great!
Fantastic cliffhanger ending!
Hilarious!
And also one that I KIIIIIND of agree with you on. Probably for the same reasons you'll get into in the next half of your review.
here is something to think about. I showed the film to an old friend of the family who had never seen the film or read the graphic novel and used to work as a professional movie critic. his response, the movie was great until the ending...because Ozymandias's plan worked. he thought the movie would have been perfect if in the end after everything they failed to stop Nuclear war, not only that a world with superheroes is a darker more violent world(with prez for life Nixon) but superheroes actually destroyed the world.
***** Good point.
***** That ambiguous ending has hope for either option you want to be the real one. Throughout the book, the paper that Rorschach leaves his journal in, is sited as a "Right wing conspiracy nut paper." So, even if you imagine the journal were printed in its entirety, the masses would probably dismiss it. Both because the paper is disreputable as well as convicted-law-breaker-prison-escapee-nut-case Rorschach is twice as untrustworthy. I have thought about this book a lot in the years since i read it and I have to say, I think Oz's plan works.
I can't see a way the world believes him. Even if some do, they will be the minority, the ones who society dismisses due to them being zealots of an unpopular ideology. Think of it in real world terms. Imagine some huge event like 9/11 happened all over the world. Presumably from a former human turned god that just became so detached from his kind that he saw wiping them out as a viable option.
Then, despite all the information and proof to the contrary, some right wing rag starts spouting off about a nigh unbelievable story of intrigue, assassination, deception on a grand scale. All perpetrated by one of the most revered people in the world, who now, will look like the best possible option to fight this threat of Dr. Manhattan/space monsters once again attacking the world. I say we all say, "Nope!" and take none of it seriously. If for no other reason than human nature.
but....but....but
Nostalgia Critic Came😉
NeilSonOfNorbert but that's not the point. The point was he sacrificed millions to save billions. He had accomplished peace
That would've been a good ending.
I liked both endings, actually. The comic ending works because they had time to set up all the information in the background. The first time I read the books I was confused; where did it come from? Wait a minute, didn't I see that... in a painting... here? I went through and re-read everything, including the background notes, and suddenly the entire thing just popped together. Moore never came out and SAID there was a giant squid coming. Rather, artists and psychics and marine biologists went missing. You learned this by reading headlines, watching the news or listening to the TV in the background. Reading Watchmen really helped me learn to write better, how to hide things in plain sight.
The movie ending works because setting up the comic ending would be too difficult to get out there without banging people in the head with it. The audience would wonder why the camera was watching the news while Specter and Owlman were undressing. There's too much to set up without making it massively longer.
All in all this is one of my favorite book and movie. I like the adaptation very much. But honestly, I'm not sure which ending I like better. I like the movie ending because it's so sharp and clean. I like the comic because giant giant squid.
I like old dom videos, sure today modern dom would hate it but I love them.
Although changing the ending did create some plot holes (namely, what was so horrific to make movie!Comedian break down and then leads to his death), I have to say I agree with you that I prefer the movie's ending. This might be because I watched the movie before reading the comic, but for one, I don't know if audiences just would have accepted the squid ending.
But more than that, I liked that by pinning the destruction of MULTIPLE cities all on Dr. Manhattan, it creates a situation were the nations of the world would agree to support and protect each other, rather than having Ozy hoping that Russia would try to be helpful instead of trying to take advantage of the chaos of having only one city destroyed. (Yes, psychic mental trauma for everyone, no one really wants to go to war, but it's still pining a lot of hope on generosity that might not be there.)
That aside, this movie has, if nothing else, a bitching soundtrack. The only thing that would have made me happier would have been if they added that song from the trailer--The End is the Beginning is the End.
lasthaven7 I thought the Comedian's breakdown was caused by him knowing that Veidth planned to build peace off the slaughter of countless American citizens and the idea horrified even someone as violent and merciless as the Comedian.
And I agree that the soundtrack is perfect.
I like both versions. The version in the book could still work even when most other plans regarding the other Watchmen fails (and is done quite well), while the film version only works when they can be convinced to keep quiet. But yes, the film version seems less absurd and more easy to believe that this happened. So, both versions have their merits.
I didn't read the graphic novel, but that original ending seems kind of silly to me
thelastgermanfan It works in the comic, but it was built up rather well, and quite a few interesting implications more than the movie version could have.
thelastgermanfan That's probably because it was a reference to Silver Age comics where that kind of thing (giant monsters from space attacking Earth) were pretty common. It's silly now, but at the time (mid-1980s) it was probably pretty clever.
thelastgermanfan It seems silly in describing it, sure. I think the reaction as part of the plan is what makes it work. Instead of some danger that's tied to the endless stalemate of Cold war politics, this is a threat to everyone on Earth (if it's just the first of an alien invasion, as people think). It's a threat beyond politics. The issue I had with the film is 'would the US's superweapon going AWOL really unite the world? Wouldn't the communist countries attacked view it as an act of war or blame them?
*****
I think it's kind of like with enders game, with the world being united under a common enemy
thor30013 It was also a reference to Ronald Reagan's repeated discussions of how an alien invasion would likely unite the world -- from 1984 to 1987 or so, it was a pretty popular talking point of his.
Are you ever going to do The Golden Compass, or if you're not from the USA, The Northern Lights? There's lots of fun comparisons to be made.
***** do the adaptation of the crow please
***** I love the godfather and I don't much about the book so I think that could be interesting
Now THAT is what I call a cliffhanger.
I've read Watchmen almost once a year since I first bought it in the 90's. It's one of my favourite works of literature and I don't mind the movie ending. What I don't like is that while the book is sort of a realistic take on superheroes, the movie is a stylized slow-motionfest with this weird blue-gray Zack Snyder hue. In my mind the movie should look like the Netflix Daredevil series when it comes to realism and grittiness.
nite owl was more of a blue beetle Ted Cord combined with a tiny bit of batman
Not in the movie, Synder went full on Batman
You should do No Country For Old Men and True Grit, the Coen brothers make obscenely accurate adaptations
Who the fuck skipped the Black Freighter storyline? It's completely integral to the entire meaning of the book.
I mean, I like the Black Freighter storyline, but I wouldn't say it's completely integral... It underscores the events of the book as they play out, and it's an interesting/clever narrative device in that regard, but you can easily pick up and understand what's happening in the book without it.
Regarding the ending I have 3 opinions I want to share.
1. The comics ending hits way harder because we grow to know the newstand people so when it cuts to them showing the damage it no longer feels like just the number of people but more personal.
2. The alien space squid makes way more sense in the comic since there's lots of smaller storypoints of psychic powers existing and Ozy studying them.
3. The movie ending makes sense given the other changes in the movie, but Manhattan nuking cities makes no sense from the character. Manhattan was losing interest with humanity but that doesn't translate to wanting to murder people(especially given there's evidence of him being on Mars building stuff so he'd have no reason to attack Earth), the justification just feels badly thought out which makes it a terrible plan from "the smartest man in the world"(even though Ozy wasn't as smart as he thought he was such fatal flaws are not something he'd miss).
I'm with you about the ending. The ending in the graphic novel worked perfectly for the graphic novel, but it was just too silly for the film, and honestly making our God stand-in Dr. Manhattan the looming threat that unites mankind works better on so many levels.
No mater what happens, when something gets adapted into a new medium, especially something that inspires as much nerd-love as Watchmen, some people will hate it. Not because the film was written, shot, edited, or marketed in some unfaithful way (Watchmen is pretty damned close to shot-for-shot accurate to the graphic novel), they will hate the film because it exists at all.
Alan Moore is mind-bogglingly talented, but on onriest principle hates the idea of anyone playing with his toys in even the most painstakingly reverent way.
I like the film ending better, the whole bully thing makes sense
I like the film ending more too.
There is something that I think they should have changed: Remove from the movie the big purple cat.
Naratively the cat serves three functions
1) Ozzy is a huge jackass that demands having a giant purple cat.
2) It serves to illustrate the gene splicing technology that Ozzy has access to in order to create the squid
and
3) It intimidates Rorschach into not attacking Ozzy so that the plot can be explained.
In the movie the cat shows up too late for 1, the squid isn't in the movie so 2 is out, and Ozzy explains the plot while fighting so 3 doesn't happen. So having it around is pointless.
I didn't even remember he explained it when he was fighting in the film. I think that's what made the "I did it 32 minutes ago" reveal more shocking in the comic-- he hadn't even really started the fight yet, he was still at the "villainous monologue" part of the final showdown, but they'd already lost. It felt very still in the comic and yet continuously moving like a clock's hand ticking. Probably part of the reason it has long been considered unadaptable.
I think that standalone graphic novels are easier to adapt than books, but comic books can be just a difficult for very different reasons, especially if trying to make a faithful adaption. Comics really follow a serial format which, like television, can be difficult to faithfully adapt into a self contained film.
A few points about the adaptations.
1. there is a scene where Rorschach tells his psychiatrist about his attack on a Child molester. In the film he kills him with a meat cleaver. In the book he handcuffs the guy, sets the building on fire and gives him the option of either cutting his own hand off or burning to death. Rorschach says he didn't see anyone get out.
2. While the book make sit clear that only Dr.Manhattan is superhuman, the film shows fights with the "non powered" characters to be unrealisticly brutal, such as Nite owl almost ripping a man's arm off or sending a man crashing into a dumpster from many feet away.
3.The film is generally more violent, for example in the book Rorschach bites someone's cheek. In the movie he rips the cheek off. In the book, a gunman tries to kill Viedt and accidently kills a reporter. In the film, the gunman kills several people including a slow motion close up of a guy having a bullet go through his hand.
I clicked the like button as soon as you said the movie ending was better. I have always thought so too.
The "HERE'S your storyboad..
*tap* *taptaptap*" really got me
I saw the movie before I read the book, and I like the movie more because it has always felt easier to get through and I like how the ending was changed. That being said, I still greatly enjoy the book, and not only is it one of my favorite graphic novels, but it's one of the reasons why I love making my own comics.
Great video! Awesome background music choice too.
Before I even play the video,
just want to say that I LOVE this movie.
You said the Nightowl was supposed to be a Batman parody but he's actually a Blue Beetle Parody. Moore originally wanted to write the story with a bunch of characters DC purchased from Charleston Comics but the head of DC at the time said no. Because of this, Moore twisted the characters into new ones with different backstories but their over personalities and premise stayed more true then most realize. The whole thing was kinda a bash on the Golden Age comics as a whole.
Love your comparison videos. Keep up the great work.
I am only just now getting into graphic novels and comics. I wasn't able to get them as a kid. But I love them and am growing a collection
I'm sure others have pointed this out but storyboards and comics are very different. I highly recommend Scott McCloud's comics about comics to anyone who wants to better understand the medium.
My dad made me watch this film when I was about 11 and I’ve yet to forgive him. Shudder.
I agree with you, sir. I agree the film's ending was better,
The main parts I found annoying and betraying the source material's theme were the action/fighting sequences. I can believe Rorschach fights like he does, he's a hardened active vigilante, but Nite Owl is meant to be a middleaged out of shape guy, so it's a little odd he'd suddenly be able to fight like Bale's batman for me. Overall I think the adaption gets the details right, but seems to miss the thematic richness of the comic, which Snyder either didn't quite grasp or just isn't the kind of filmmaker who is interested in that.
I really want him to do a Lost in Adaptation on League of Extraordinary Gentleman after watching this one and his episode on Bram Stoker's Dracula. I'm curious if his views on Alan Moore's graphic novels and re-imaginings of Mina Harker will play as big a part in it.
you what... after 5 years of filled with rage and anger about the ending... you´re right.
The not setting fires may be a small difference in Rorschach's presentation from a practical standpoint, but it's hugely significant in its implications: in the book, Rorschach is a stereotypical bed-wetting, fire-starting, animal-mutilating, oedipal, sexually confused signature killer who just happens to have chosen violent criminals as his targets. That particular aspect of his character isn't nearly as explicit in the movie.
Totally with you Dom. & now my room is exploding.
On Alan Moore and Hollywood: Alan has had a very uneasy relationship with Hollywood, but it wasn't as hostile as it is now until LXG. League of Extraordinary Gentlemen is the straw that broke the camel's back (not V for Vendetta). When LXG came out two writers sued Fox saying it was similar to a script they had previously pitched the studio. Alan participated in early testimony in defense of Fox, but eventually Fox settled out of court. The settlement really pissed off Alan as he felt that it made him look bad and he was denied a chance to defend himself. After that is when he took on the more militant attitude towards Hollywood adaptions of his material.
I feel the movie is a very loyal adaptation, but only to the surface visuals and overall storyline. The ending change is debatable.
But what the film fails to realise is that with the exception of 2 characters in the entire story, no-one is actualy a super hero. Only Dr. Manhatten and Ozymandias are a league apart from your average man, everyone else is just a vigilanty thug in a colourfull costume. So how come they're all capable of superhuman acts of physical strength, survive lethal injuries and feel more like the character archetypes they were holding a dark mirror to, than the characters in the comic?
TL DR: As many others are doubtless saying, Snyder just didn't get it. That may be a lazy way to say it but that's how it seemed
That... was great. I love you man.
The tonal differences are very subtle overall, even taking into account the few drastic scene and plot changes therein, but speaking as one of many who read and reread Watchmen for years before the movie came to fruition, they're easy to see and easier to see through.
Zach Snyder is an individual with a certain objectivist world view, and his general opinion of superheroes and superhero stories is quite clear from anyone who watched his later movies, but Watchmen was the first indicator of this overall perspective.
The book was written as parody, as satire, as a sort of deconstructive tear down of not just supers in general but their world. Their existence. And for all his talk of "deconstructing" superheroes, Snyder simply put too much actual personal investment in the action, the badassery, the pure driving superheroism of Watchmen. He gets the action, he understands what makes a panel frame well when adapted to a movie, and he has a great cinematography throughout this film, but where is the original source only pretended to glorify the concept of these heroes, Zack Snyder follows through. It's written in everything from minor dialog tweaks to the entire ending change.
When someone watches this movie and scoffs when comparing it to the graphic novel, that's most often why.
Probably my very favorite comic book movie.
We both have the same Ringtone !!
this is easily becoming one of my favorite series from channel awesome keep at it Dom !!
I would really like you to do Mary Poppins. Seeing how the writer was so mad about the movie she said she never let them do another one.
the black freigther mirrors OZymandias journey.
It's not a non sequitor, but I could see where the meaning and depth are easily glossed over :)
Dear Dom
I like your videos and I am a watchman fan. This is not an attack, I want to tell you my thoughts out of respect for your videos. I cannot wait to see the next part. So here is my opinion that I want to share with you. The squad was not the only change to the ending. (I will call Rorschach Inky because it is shorter, etc)
1. In the book Doc M kills Inky without the knowledge of any of the others. Ozzy does not want to kill Inky because he figures no one will believe him. Owl and Silk do not know and all that is left of Inky is a blood stain. The only hint at who died was his mask that he had taken off before he died. The book begins with a murder mystery and it ends with a murder mystery.
2. Jon leaves Earth only telling Ozzy he will create life. Both men are compared to Gods. Ozzy created a new kind of cat and a physic living "alien." Jon is leaving to create life on another plant. Jon will actually be making "aliens." The world now hates aliens. If humans ever meet Jon's alien life there will be another war. That is why Jon tells Ozzy there is no ending. Peace cannot last.
3. The Watchmen book is meta fiction. There are paper clips attached to articles at the top of text pages reading "with permission of the author and publishers." The comic book is a book within the watchmen universe that is exposing Ozzy. Now, Seymour might be the author of this book, but Owl and Silk are who I think are the real authors.
4. In the movie, Silk and Owl keep their identities as Laurie and Dan and their sex life. In the book, they change into different people because they are "transformed by the architects of fear." Silk looks out the window saying she is "nervous waiting around." They still want a family and everything, but this is important to the ending. Who are they afraid of? Doc M has left earth. Ozzy is the one they must be afraid of. Why? They said they would not tell anyone so they should have nothing to fear right? Wrong, I think they collected information and put the book Watchmen together because they decided to tell the truth when they found Inky's blood in the snow next to his mask. Ozzy knows and he is looking for them. That is why they changed their identity and are on the run. All the clues are there to support this theory though I cannot prove it for sure. The movie misses this ending. Misses the clues because it does not question why they are afraid and on the run in the book. Silk and Owl are the real heroes and the movie goes and gives Silk's cool lines that she says to other characters. It ruins the moment those two take a stand against Ozzy and that is not right.
You can draw your own ideas from what I said. I hope you will give my ideas the thought that I have given yours. Keep making videos, they are really good.
I think the ending was a reasonable change in my opinion.
Honestly, my biggest problem with the movie was the lack of the recurring motifs - the blood-stained smiley face and the "five minutes to midnight", which are kind of the same thing in a way.I was even okay with the change to the ending, as it did streamline things a bit.
Hail Zordon! I actually thought that was my phone. Same awesome ringtone!
What makes the book better in my opinion is the small things like how Lauries and Dr. Manhattans relationship is actually broken up and she and Dan forms their own. Not like in the movie where I am always left with the feeling that she only with Dan because he is a human. It is a very dumb ending. I mean I will say that attacking multiple points rather than one is better but still the threat of the unknown is not present since DR. Manhattan is a very known property. Which leaves the question of what will happen when Dr. Manhattan is away to another universe after a while. Much of the tone is different while the comic book is decontructing and celebrating superhero tropes the movie is just a reguritation of the same tropes. Watchmen is one of those artworks that will never fit in a another medium because it is so ingrained in everything about its medium. From storytelling to themes. It is just never achievable. Also I get zero regret from Ozymandias in the film since his scene with Dr. Manhattans gone also I did not need Nite Owl yell because Rorschach died since at best they were acquaintances not best friends.
In the end it was a passable movie that happens to be based on one of the most famous and historically significant works in the comics medium. It was never going to be as good or even near the book. I read the book after the film so people do not assume I went in to the film with this opinion.
I have to disagree with you there. I found that the film almost perfectly replicates and in some cases surpasses the source material.
The film's look at the relationship between Dan and Laurie does show she initially leaves because of Manhatten's detachment bu the end, she does have a genuine connection to Dan.
Also, I feel your belief that it's "unadoptable" is clouding your mind. Watchmen the comic is a comic that deconstructs comics, while the film does a similar thing for Comic Book Films. The film takes the ideas from source material and puts them into film both in a story way and in a meta way
ruclips.net/video/WfDR3JR3-rI/видео.html
Heavy Metal Collector pretty sure Rorschach says in both the book and film that Dan is the only one that ever put up with his shit and seemed like he genuinely cared about him so they were most definitely good friends
I like the films ending better, it set up the plot well to accommodate the new ending and fit the tone of the film, with the theme of war being better then an alien plot would have
ANIMALFLYER456 It wasn't an alien plot, it was a fake alien plot concocted to scare world leaders out of their political rut.
Yes, but the public thought it was a real alien,they didn't know it was fake, i do have both the book and the movie, and i just like the movie better
Liked for the vid and the awesome cameo
If you're doing graphic novels now too..Could you add PERSEPOLIS to your list? It's one of my favorite books ever.
Totally agree with you, Dom. Adaptations are not suicide pacts. Sacrifices must be made to translate things from page to screen, and to do that, the Squid can't be in the picture. It works in the book, but would fall flat on the screen.
I like the flim more than the comic for a couple of reasons.
1) I can hear everything the characters say rather than having to peer at almost illegible fonts at times.
2) The ending. THE ENDING. Giant psychic bio-engineered squids ... I'm going to chalk that up to some really good drugs Alan Moore had access to because that makes almost no sense at all.
Anywho really good video so far, loved Doug's completely unexpected appearance a lot.
I was binge watching this show a while back, but for some reason there was some sort of region lock or copyright strike or something. Oh well, I'm glad because it's alive!
I've both read the Graphic Novel and seen the film. I love both for different reasons, yes the film is different I get that, but, it's still good and still interesting. I think the film lives up to the original novel.