Cathryn (formerly catslash) (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
remindmeofthe) wrote2009-03-06 11:14 pm
remindmeofthe) wrote2009-03-06 11:14 pm
Entry tags:
(no subject)
omg. Watchmen, you guys. Was so pretty.
I've only read the book, like one and a half times, and I don't really remember enough to comment on changes in any depth, but a couple that struck me:
*Rorschach's shifting mask. I am undecided. On one hand, it LOOKED SO COOL. On the other hand, it was clearly done for no reason other than to LOOK SO COOL, which is annoying. But it succeeded so well! I don't know. I stand corrected! Nothing to see here, move along to the next bullet point. (That LOOKED SO COOL.)
* New ending = win. The original involved, like, a tentacle monster, right? I remember going, ". . . okay, then" when I read it. The new ending doesn't have that hokey weirdness factor, and makes sense with the rest of the story - it feels like a logical culmination of Jon's increasing isolation, and is a clever (Veidt's cleverness, to be specific) use of public sentiment turning against him with the cancer set-up. AND, as promised, the messy bleakness is preserved. I approve.
* I also approve of the portrayal of violence. It isn't the clean harmless Comic Book Movie Violence we've gotten used to. Blood is shed, bones break, and worse (I nearly gagged when little Walter bit that kid's ear off, and I've never had my gag reflex almost tripped by movie violence before). It makes sense with the point of the story, the subversion of the superhero fairytale, and while it never occurred to me to think about what the violence in the movie might look like, I realized pretty quickly that anything cleaner would have undermined the story. It's gross and somehow much worse than watching nastier things happen in slasher movies, but nothing else would make any damn sense.
* And a bit that doesn't need to be under a cut - I ♥ Jeffrey Dean Morgan. We all knew that.
(Also, seriously, so pretty. Regardless of what you think of the story, you have to admit it was all fucking gorgeous.)
Then after the movie I stopped off at a bar for a quick beer and ended up listening to part of a live musical set that included two Tenacious D covers. Geek night: complete success.
I've only read the book, like one and a half times, and I don't really remember enough to comment on changes in any depth, but a couple that struck me:
*
* New ending = win. The original involved, like, a tentacle monster, right? I remember going, ". . . okay, then" when I read it. The new ending doesn't have that hokey weirdness factor, and makes sense with the rest of the story - it feels like a logical culmination of Jon's increasing isolation, and is a clever (Veidt's cleverness, to be specific) use of public sentiment turning against him with the cancer set-up. AND, as promised, the messy bleakness is preserved. I approve.
* I also approve of the portrayal of violence. It isn't the clean harmless Comic Book Movie Violence we've gotten used to. Blood is shed, bones break, and worse (I nearly gagged when little Walter bit that kid's ear off, and I've never had my gag reflex almost tripped by movie violence before). It makes sense with the point of the story, the subversion of the superhero fairytale, and while it never occurred to me to think about what the violence in the movie might look like, I realized pretty quickly that anything cleaner would have undermined the story. It's gross and somehow much worse than watching nastier things happen in slasher movies, but nothing else would make any damn sense.
* And a bit that doesn't need to be under a cut - I ♥ Jeffrey Dean Morgan. We all knew that.
(Also, seriously, so pretty. Regardless of what you think of the story, you have to admit it was all fucking gorgeous.)
Then after the movie I stopped off at a bar for a quick beer and ended up listening to part of a live musical set that included two Tenacious D covers. Geek night: complete success.