b&jy77VjiKn$#F
Member
Funny. Arrival reminds me of Watchmen in a lot of ways.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Wonder Woman and the Mystery of the Missing Marketing.
- Thread starter Bobby Roberts
- Start date
- Status
Funny. Arrival reminds me of Watchmen in a lot of ways.
Bobby Roberts
Banned
Gonna have to expand on that one. I'm not seeing it at all.
Arrival's giant squids work in very, very different ways than Watchmen's do. It's not really a case of "open movie, drop squid."
Arrival's giant squids work in very, very different ways than Watchmen's do. It's not really a case of "open movie, drop squid."
b&jy77VjiKn$#F
Member
Spoiler for Arrival.
I may have exaggerated a bit by saying "a lot of way". Also, my writing is sloppy due to the headache I'm currently having.
In the end of both Arrival and Watchmen, war is prevented.
There is a segment of multiple news screens in Arrival that's reminiscent of Veidt's ultimate weapon.
The main character of Arrival can see time nonlinearly by the end of the film, which is similar to Dr. Manhattan.
There is a segment of multiple news screens in Arrival that's reminiscent of Veidt's ultimate weapon.
The main character of Arrival can see time nonlinearly by the end of the film, which is similar to Dr. Manhattan.
These are the ones that come to my head as of now.
Bobby Roberts
Banned
I can see that, sure
b&jy77VjiKn$#F
Member
oh you mean how the squid of arrival is similar to that of watchmen, not the film itself. mybad
Bobby Roberts
Banned
No, I mean I understand what you're getting at! I agree, I can see those three similarities between the films.
But I think using Arrival as some kind of counterargument for Watchmen's "mistake" in rewriting its ending isn't super-convincing though, because the movies aren't trying to do the same things with their space squids, and Villenueve's film is obviously a lot more surefooted about what it's trying to be and do, and the squids occupy a very different place in the storytelling. Plus there's just the general tone of both pieces being pretty different, and the levels in execution of that tone also being disparate.
I mean, people argue for Snyder leaving the squid in, but would you trust Zack Snyder to get that shit right?
Zack didn't.
But I think using Arrival as some kind of counterargument for Watchmen's "mistake" in rewriting its ending isn't super-convincing though, because the movies aren't trying to do the same things with their space squids, and Villenueve's film is obviously a lot more surefooted about what it's trying to be and do, and the squids occupy a very different place in the storytelling. Plus there's just the general tone of both pieces being pretty different, and the levels in execution of that tone also being disparate.
I mean, people argue for Snyder leaving the squid in, but would you trust Zack Snyder to get that shit right?
Zack didn't.
sankt-Antonio
:^)--?-<
1) No time to blame anyone if a GOD started to revolt against mankind, US included. The Leaders of the earth leave their petty shit aside an work together against whatever godlike creature may roam the earth next. Works the same, imo, even more then in the comic. While Dr.M has no desire to meddle with earthlings any longer, why would people be afraid of a giant squid after they witnessed Dr. Manhattan, they would just have to "call" him somehow to help, no need to work together. (At least thats a way to see things imo, would gladly be corrected)
2) Again, a worldwide attack by a once allied being is much more of a "we together now!" sentiment then a crapy Squid that many would just shake of as some strange experiment gone wrong. Or what have you.
I may have missed something more important from the comic, its been years since i read it, but i am not seeing "it missing the point".
As someone else said (and like you've said about Rocket Racoon), movie audiences are willing to buy all kind of things as long as the people making the movie are committed. Arrival was an Oscar-nominated drama that had alien squid-like creatures that see through time but no one cared if that sounded kind of silly on paper. As for Watchmen, I loved it (though I haven't seen it in forever, so I'm not sure if it holds up) and had no problem with the ending being changed but I just think that the people who say that there's no way that audiences would accept a giant alien squid aren't recognizing that movies have had crazy shit in them pretty much from the start.
the problem with the squid, imo is not that the audience wouldnt accept it, but that it requires the most blunt, weird and boring exposition in the comic book. it's not artfully placed in the story, it's jarring and then requires ozymandias/manhattan to literally and painfully spell it all out AND justify it. which they do simply by stating that it worked. to do that smoothly and believably in a movie you'd have to seed it throughout the film and radically change the flow of the story.
Glass Rebel
Member
The biegest problem Watchmen has
and this is something I wanted to write in the DCEU community thread as a response to Bleepey but I couldn't be arsed to find the original post after being away for a while and it's not like he was going to reply in a meaningful way anyway
And then you have Zack Snyder put on these overly choreographed fight scenes that practically glorify violence. Sure, purely as action scenes removed completely from context they look dope as hell. Like most Zack Snyder action scenes. But they are completely out of place in Watchmen. And I don't even think Snyder necesarrily misunderstood this, he just doesn't know how to go about it.
And of course there's other deviations concerning Rorschach and Ozymandias that are to the detriment of their characterization. And don't even get me startend on the sex scene.
sankt-Antonio
:^)--?-<
Stylized fight choreography is not the movie "missing the point" nor is it integral to the tone of the movie, the film gets shit for being a frame by frame retelling of the comic and the portions that are not, get shit for not being like the comic.
Zack got goodwill from me for doing Watchmen justice... around five bad movies of goodwill.
Zack got goodwill from me for doing Watchmen justice... around five bad movies of goodwill.
Glass Rebel
Member
Stylized fight choreography is not the movie "missing the point" nor is it integral to the tone of the movie, the film gets shit for being a frame by frame retelling of the comic and the portions that are not, get shit for not being like the comic.
Zack got goodwill from me for doing Watchmen justice... around five bad movies of goodwill.
Great dismissal and beautiful strawman, would read again 👌🏼👌🏼👌🏼👌🏼👌🏼
sankt-Antonio
:^)--?-<
Compelling argument.
Glass Rebel
Member
Thanks. When are you gonna bother presenting one?
I'm legitimately questioning if you actually read the comic. Snyder doesn't need you to defend him, really. Manhattan wasn't going to be bailing anyone out, he did not care for humanity, we were just a mass of atoms.
The movie is criticized when it deviates form the source material and doesn't do better, which is what happened. Doesn't make it turrrrible or anything, just awkward. It gets praised for what it does right too.
Edit: The fighting is quite missing the point, actually. But i can let that slide as studio interference. (We want it to be VISCERAL)
The movie is criticized when it deviates form the source material and doesn't do better, which is what happened. Doesn't make it turrrrible or anything, just awkward. It gets praised for what it does right too.
Edit: The fighting is quite missing the point, actually. But i can let that slide as studio interference. (We want it to be VISCERAL)
sankt-Antonio
:^)--?-<
Nah im good, I'm here to argue comic books and movies, if you can't take the back and forth without being a dick about it - thats on you.
I think writing that the movie didn't "get the point" is quite a negative thing to say.
If the movie could only be considered good if it was better then one of the best comics ever written, man that's a tall order to fullfill, isn't it. But you are right, i did get caught up on the negative side of things.
Like i wrote, correct me if im wrong. I did read the comic, albeit many years ago.
I think writing that the movie didn't "get the point" is quite a negative thing to say.
If the movie could only be considered good if it was better then one of the best comics ever written, man that's a tall order to fullfill, isn't it. But you are right, i did get caught up on the negative side of things.
Like i wrote, correct me if im wrong. I did read the comic, albeit many years ago.
Glass Rebel
Member
There was neither a discussion nor a "back and forth". I presented an argument and explained why, you disagreed without explaining why, "just because". That's on you.
So you're problem is that Watchmen made the violence in the comic look cool? That's a weird criticism. In the film, characters like Roarshach and the Comedian are stil horrible people and if you thought someone getting hacked with a cleaver is cool well that's all on you. The intro to Watchmen Imo in the 5 or so minutes it's shown show the potential, social, cultural and political impact superheroes would have on society and it has some of the best story telling I have seen on film and all this without a single word being said. I do find it funny that Snyder is being criticised for not being cynical and deconstructive enough in how he approached a superhero film lol.
That said people think that the Watchmen ending makes no sense because people feel that a boogeyman the is created who had attacked cities all around the world and caused a large unprecedented attack on NYC would bring the world together in a war against some terror is completely unrealistic is something that I can barely finish typing without laughing.
Kenzodielocke
Banned
I love this thread. It has basically nothing to do with Wonder Woman's marketing anymore.
sankt-Antonio
:^)--?-<
Yeah, and my argument is, that stylized fighting scenes do not alter the tone of a movie in any significant way (to be more precice, the way it was done in this movie). Thats as much of a statement as "overly choreographed fight scenes that practically glorify violence".
Supes kissing Louis in the ruins of Metropolis in Man of Steel is a disaster regarding the tone of the movie, it actually breaks the movie, the fighting in Watchmen is not, imo of course.
Rorschach ends up looking worse and more unhinged in the film than he does in the comic as a result of the hacking. Gotta agree with Bleepey there.
I've only read the comic once, but I've always thought Snyder captured the essence of it well until the ending where he tries to stick some Hollywood hope in a story that was about being cynical and staying cynical. Nite Owl should be fucking Silk Spectre in all his moodiness and self-pity instead of yelling a corny as fuck 'no' when his friend gets vaporized. The Doctor Manhattan thing is fine, since it accomplishes the same feat, but it's everything surrounding it that clashes with the tone.
It's still one of the top three superhero/comic book movies for me tho.
I've only read the comic once, but I've always thought Snyder captured the essence of it well until the ending where he tries to stick some Hollywood hope in a story that was about being cynical and staying cynical. Nite Owl should be fucking Silk Spectre in all his moodiness and self-pity instead of yelling a corny as fuck 'no' when his friend gets vaporized. The Doctor Manhattan thing is fine, since it accomplishes the same feat, but it's everything surrounding it that clashes with the tone.
It's still one of the top three superhero/comic book movies for me tho.
This is neogaf.gif. There should be a Marvel or DCCU cinematic thread cycle because lord knows I like things to flow from point to another. Somewhere in the cycle I need to say "fuck Marvel" and somewhere calls me a Snyder zealot or DC apologist. Don't forget Thor 2, Iron Man 2, AoU and Martha!!
Glass Rebel
Member
Snyder changing the depiction of violence in and an adaptation that deals with violence is a weird criticism? And I am obviously not talking about Rorschach and The Comedian but Nite Owl and Silk Spectre. Look at the fight during the Dr. Manhattan TV interview and the Rorschach prison break. You get extreme closeups of very graphic violence and in the latter NO and SS looking at each other and smiling before beating up a bunch of thugs in the typical Snyder way. Compare that to chapter III and VIII in the graphic novel. How anyone can even argue that this doesn't change the tone and thus the effect on the viewer is inconceivable to me.
And I don't know why you keep bringing up that silly squid in replies to me. You did it in the DCEU thread as well even though I didn't mention it with a single word. I'd appreciate if you'd at least focus on the topic at hand.
Sure, you're ignoring a visual element in a visual medium though.
sankt-Antonio
:^)--?-<
NO and SS, who in the comic kill a gang in a backstreet much more violently then anything they did in the movie, and laughing about it, like literally "hahaha" plastered all over is not glorifying violence, them looking at each other smiling and nodding after beating some goons in the prison is? If anything the movie is being consistent, with NO and SS enjoying their comeback, as it was in the comic.
Still, i still think that it would make no difference in them jumping around or straight walking and striking their opponents aka fight choreography, actors expression feelings, such as smiling while fighting, does change the tone. In the case of NO and SS they are, imo, in line with the source material.
Still, i still think that it would make no difference in them jumping around or straight walking and striking their opponents aka fight choreography, actors expression feelings, such as smiling while fighting, does change the tone. In the case of NO and SS they are, imo, in line with the source material.
Glass Rebel
Member
I know you're messing with me now.
sankt-Antonio
:^)--?-<
I'm not, grab the comic if you have it nearby or ask Slayven.
Wait, i just looked at it myself :/
That changes things lol.
Glass Rebel
Member
I have the comic on my iPad. They are not laughing.
sankt-Antonio
:^)--?-<
Point taken. My mistake.
Ah I get the "missing the point" argument now. Remember I have not read the comic, and I need to rewatch the movie. But has Moore said it's supposed to be a deconstruction of superheroes? Or is it blatantly obvious that that was the point of the comic? When I watch superhero movies I take it at face value and I saw Watchmen as just another superhero movie
TangoAlphaLima
Member
Which one?
Strider_Blaze
Member
Went to the market today and this is all the specially marked Dr. Pepper boxes that I saw.
Comparing to the amount of GotG Vol. 2 Doritos bags I saw.
Bonus image! I'm surprised there is still BvS candy being sold!
Though to get a little more seriousness, WB really needs to step up their game in regards to the advertising. After the the previous trailers before the new TV spots, really hope the advertising increases more. Really am hoping that this manages to succeed, though that is if I also end up being impressed with the film.
Though at the same time, there is also the matter of the competition that will come around the film release, that could hinder WW BO performance. The month of June alone will have 3 animated family films (one of which will be released on the same day as WW), the Mummy (though I have doubts that will be successful), and Transformers. Not to mention Pirates 5 being released a week before WW.
And that's also compounded by the previous films being a case of "love it or hate it" from general audiences and the panning of BvS & SS. And of course if word-of-mouth turns out negative.
Which is why I also feel WW could still be torpedoed, even if WB would up the advertising the weeks prior to its release.
At the very least, the TV spots were an improvement from the previous trailer. Her theme song suddenly blaring at the end of the previous trailers was annoying to hear.
Comparing to the amount of GotG Vol. 2 Doritos bags I saw.
Bonus image! I'm surprised there is still BvS candy being sold!
Though to get a little more seriousness, WB really needs to step up their game in regards to the advertising. After the the previous trailers before the new TV spots, really hope the advertising increases more. Really am hoping that this manages to succeed, though that is if I also end up being impressed with the film.
Though at the same time, there is also the matter of the competition that will come around the film release, that could hinder WW BO performance. The month of June alone will have 3 animated family films (one of which will be released on the same day as WW), the Mummy (though I have doubts that will be successful), and Transformers. Not to mention Pirates 5 being released a week before WW.
And that's also compounded by the previous films being a case of "love it or hate it" from general audiences and the panning of BvS & SS. And of course if word-of-mouth turns out negative.
Which is why I also feel WW could still be torpedoed, even if WB would up the advertising the weeks prior to its release.
At the very least, the TV spots were an improvement from the previous trailer. Her theme song suddenly blaring at the end of the previous trailers was annoying to hear.
And we get also something at the MTV Movie Awards this sunday. Like a full clip.
So its all ramping up just fine. 5 weeks before release.
Bobby Roberts
Banned
Then you probably don't really get the argument.
Astral Dog
Member
Maybe they forgot the movie existed
I would if you had answered the second half of my post instead of stopping to be a smartass. There's been enough explanations in this thread for even an amateur like me to understand the argument. Just wanted clarification on whether or not the "deconstruction of a superhero" concept was intended by the original author or not.
Glass Rebel
Member
There's a ton of casual and academic writing on Watchmen deconstructing the genre. So yes, anyone familiar with the tropes and willing to think about it critically immediately noticed it.
It wouldn't be the first time that fans gave a piece of work more credit than it was due. I was just wondering if that was confirmed to be intended by the author, that's all.
I've literally never heard of an author that publically announced "I am going to deconstruct this genre"
They don't say it. They just do it.
You've never seen a director or an author in an interview discuss what they were going for in a body of work?
"Mr. Moore, I noticed that you did this and this, tell me about that"
"Yea, I wanted to show this and this by doing this and this"
Obviously I didn't mean a literal announcement when writing the comic. But I figured with Watchmen being as big as it is, there would be an interview or two about his intentions with it. Don't see why that's so ridiculous to assume.
Messofanego
Banned
The hell does Watchmen got to do with Wonder Woman? lol
I think DC are starting to understand that they will never beat Marvel at their own game and have lost their morale
You cant win em all. Marvel has a lock on the MCU, in the same way DC has a lock on the DCAU. Marvel could never make a cartoon franchise as iconic as that in a million years and on the flip side DC, despite their attempts will never be able to clone MCU's success
You cant win em all. Marvel has a lock on the MCU, in the same way DC has a lock on the DCAU. Marvel could never make a cartoon franchise as iconic as that in a million years and on the flip side DC, despite their attempts will never be able to clone MCU's success
I don't know. I know he has given some interviews about it where he talked about it. But author's do that even when not deconstructing a genre.
I mean, deconstruction itself is a kind of wonky term wherein most people know what you mean, but it's hard to pin it down with an actual set definition. It's mostly just "How would these concepts work out if they played out in real life" and not only are there a lot of different answers to that depending on the work, it might not actually break the tropes it's using.
So I honestly don't know if you'll find anything like "Yes, I was trying to break Superhero tropes" or anything. I'm just saying I don't see why it matters. Moore could outright deny that he was trying to deconstruct the genre with Watchmen, it wouldn't change that that's what he did.
That makes sense, thanks. It doesn't really change anything in the long run, I was mostly just curious. Always like to hear authors or directors talk about why they did something. It's why I like Snyder and his films even though sometimes they miss the mark.
As always haha. But then we miss the fun of armchair marketing people saying that WB wants WW to fail for some extreme weird reason haha.
- Status