HorrorMovieFans.com

Tiggnutz wrote:Watchmen is undervalued for Superhero movies

It is my favorite.

Watchmen is top notch. Shame it gets slammed just because Zack Snyder's name on it (he's far better than he's given credit for)

i didn't really care for watchmen. maybe i need to give it another go. but my favorite snyder superhero flick is batman v.superman. i should say the only one that i actually enjoy.

Havok wrote:

Foo wrote:this is what I don't get. You have a character like Batman. You have much of the sets built. Why not make a street level Batman that is a low budget detective story to give him some depth and the audience a different story? Just pick an old Sherlock Holmes story and plug Batman into it. Don't make it some epic about destroying the city. Maybe make it a simple heist he foils. That would be so refreshing.

Then people would actually give a shit about the character when you do the bigger ones, rather than looking at some CGI Sprite bouncing all over the screen with explosions all over the place!

As far as I know, there were plans of doing something like that in the upcoming "The Batman" film.

That's the hope, and I think that's what Ben was originally doing, but since he left directing and writing duties and Matt Reeves jumped in, we know nothing to date. I watch Batman productions like a hawk

DancesWithWerewolves wrote:Watchmen is top notch. Shame it gets slammed just because Zack Snyder's name on it (he's far better than he's given credit for)

It really is. Stylish, great characters, and a unique story.

Foo wrote:

DancesWithWerewolves wrote:Watchmen is top notch. Shame it gets slammed just because Zack Snyder's name on it (he's far better than he's given credit for)

It really is. Stylish, great characters, and a unique story.

The only complaint I let slide is that it wasn't able to cram all 13 volumes into one movie. Granted that was an impossible feat, but those fanboys...lol

DancesWithWerewolves wrote:

Havok wrote:

Foo wrote:this is what I don't get. You have a character like Batman. You have much of the sets built. Why not make a street level Batman that is a low budget detective story to give him some depth and the audience a different story? Just pick an old Sherlock Holmes story and plug Batman into it. Don't make it some epic about destroying the city. Maybe make it a simple heist he foils. That would be so refreshing.

Then people would actually give a shit about the character when you do the bigger ones, rather than looking at some CGI Sprite bouncing all over the screen with explosions all over the place!

As far as I know, there were plans of doing something like that in the upcoming "The Batman" film.

That's the hope, and I think that's what Ben was originally doing, but since he left directing and writing duties and Matt Reeves jumped in, we know nothing to date. I watch Batman productions like a hawk

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat- ... ie-1017253

I'll believe it when I see it folks.

Headhunter wrote:

DancesWithWerewolves wrote:

Havok wrote:

Foo wrote:this is what I don't get. You have a character like Batman. You have much of the sets built. Why not make a street level Batman that is a low budget detective story to give him some depth and the audience a different story? Just pick an old Sherlock Holmes story and plug Batman into it. Don't make it some epic about destroying the city. Maybe make it a simple heist he foils. That would be so refreshing.

Then people would actually give a shit about the character when you do the bigger ones, rather than looking at some CGI Sprite bouncing all over the screen with explosions all over the place!

As far as I know, there were plans of doing something like that in the upcoming "The Batman" film.

That's the hope, and I think that's what Ben was originally doing, but since he left directing and writing duties and Matt Reeves jumped in, we know nothing to date. I watch Batman productions like a hawk

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat- ... ie-1017253

I'll believe it when I see it folks.

And still we know nothing. No idea if he's stuck with that, no idea if it's even staying within the same cinematic universe, we got nothing.

Oh, except the rumors of him wanting Jake Gyllenhaal (eh...), but even that was never confirmed.

I actually expected to start hearing things after he was done pushing War for the Planet Of The Apes a couple months ago, but it's been very silent. I'm suspecting a lot of things are frozen with Justice League bombing as hard as it did.

Or....

...he's got a tight freak'n lid on it and after witnessing the media scrutinization of Zack's productions he's handling it differently. I hope that's the case, because drama behind the scenes getting out I think causes preconceived notions.

Court of Owls would be interesting though, if they were going to pull from a specific story.

No, can't dwell fan theories...it'll blow up in my face when they don't come true, and I won't like what the authors put up just like Last Jedi!

I dug watchmen, the only complaint I remember having was limp-dick having a lot of screen time (not the character, but the actual dick ) A few less shots of god-crotch and I don't think I would have had any complaints, it just added nothing to the movie and seemed like it was trying too hard to be edgy. If his crotch or nudity contributed to the story at all, okay, but it really didn't add anything and was mostly just distracting. But it's a pretty minor complaint in my opinion.

It was mostly Zack proving how close he was sticking to the source (before the source got censored and black speedos were drawn in place).

DancesWithWerewolves wrote:It was mostly Zack proving how close he was sticking to the source (before the source got censored and black speedos were drawn in place).

I haven't read any of the comics, but I mean, that's a pretty minor thing to pull from the source and flaunt. Did his nudity play into the plot of the comics or was it just there to be there?

Dream wrote:

DancesWithWerewolves wrote:It was mostly Zack proving how close he was sticking to the source (before the source got censored and black speedos were drawn in place).

I haven't read any of the comics, but I mean, that's a pretty minor thing to pull from the source and flaunt. Did his nudity play into the plot of the comics or was it just there to be there?

The character pretty much felt he was above clothes. That's about it.

Unless there's some radiation thing I missed where he couldn't wear clothes anymore.

Dream wrote:

DancesWithWerewolves wrote:It was mostly Zack proving how close he was sticking to the source (before the source got censored and black speedos were drawn in place).

I haven't read any of the comics, but I mean, that's a pretty minor thing to pull from the source and flaunt. Did his nudity play into the plot of the comics or was it just there to be there?

If you think of all the reasons people wear clothing, none of them apply to Dr. Manhattan. He needs no protection from the elements or physical injury. He has no reason for modesty or shame. He would only wear something for the benefit of others.

Foo wrote:

Dream wrote:

DancesWithWerewolves wrote:It was mostly Zack proving how close he was sticking to the source (before the source got censored and black speedos were drawn in place).

I haven't read any of the comics, but I mean, that's a pretty minor thing to pull from the source and flaunt. Did his nudity play into the plot of the comics or was it just there to be there?

If you think of all the reasons people wear clothing, none of them apply to Dr. Manhattan. He needs no protection from the elements or physical injury. He has no reason for modesty or shame. He would only wear something for the benefit of others.

and one shot would establish that as a character development thing. Most of the scenes I can recall him being on display would have worked just as well from the waist up and the dick was just a distraction from everything else happening in the scene. It's like subtitles, in some flicks they are easy to follow and work well, but in other flicks they just fuck up the flow of action on screen and I'd rather have it dubbed. I didn't say it needed to be completely without god-dick, just that how often it was shown was distracting and it didn't add anything to the plot. It didn't ruin the movie for me or anything, it was just a minor annoyance that came across as trying too hard to do something edgy and new.

Tiggnutz wrote:Watchmen is undervalued for Superhero movies

I thought that sucked.

Dream wrote:

DancesWithWerewolves wrote:It was mostly Zack proving how close he was sticking to the source (before the source got censored and black speedos were drawn in place).

I haven't read any of the comics, but I mean, that's a pretty minor thing to pull from the source and flaunt. Did his nudity play into the plot of the comics or was it just there to be there?

I think it's just another example of his detachment from humanity but I also didn't think it was needed.

Big ole blue dick, folks.