Watchmen is regarded by many to be one of the greatest graphic novels of all time. For years, fans have been able to put Alan Moore's creation on a pedestal, and many are afraid that Zack Snyder's upcoming film adaptation can only disappoint. In conjunction with the movie's release is a video game tie-in, which should be cause for more concern, considering the poor quality of most licensed video games.
In theory, Watchmen: The End is Nigh, should be able to overcome the typical woes of movie-game development due to its distribution method. As a downloadable game, it doesn't need to offer the depth expected out of a retail box. However, it's clear that The End is Nigh simply isn't ambitious enough to do the franchise justice. Although much emphasis has been placed on the game's expansion of the franchise's canon, the core game experience simply isn't very satisfying. It can be summed up in just three words: beat-em-up.
The End is Nigh certainly does a lot of things right, and it's these dressings that make the game worthwhile for Watchmen fans. The visuals are absolutely gorgeous; the dark, rain-drenched cities of the graphic novel are accurately recreated in the game. Multiplatform digital releases very rarely, if ever, look this good. Each chapter begins with an animated introduction that fleshes out this prequel's story. While the production values don't match those of the Watchmen digital comic, these animated shorts do an admirable effort in recreating the look of the original graphic novel. Fans will certainly appreciate being able to see Rorschach and Nite Owl as crimefighters, not the condemned outcasts they become in the original story.
While it's easy to get swept away by the impressive presentation, the gameplay is thoroughly uninspired. Players can play as either Rorscach or Nite Owl, but the choice seems largely inconsequential. Ultimately, all players have access to are a generic combination of punches and kicks. Nite Owl can do electric attacks, and Rorscach can enter a "rage mode." However, these attacks are neither visceral nor cinematic.
Our preview featured only one kind of enemy: generic thugs that can also punch, kick or grab your character. Perhaps more enemy types will appear in the later areas of the game, but what we've seen so far has been disheartening.
The gameplay of The End is Nigh cannot get any more primitive. The beat-em-up genre hasn't progressed very far over the years, and it's clear that The End is Nigh makes no effort in changing the status quo. We're disappointed that some obvious features, like online cooperative play, won't be included with the game's release. Another obvious feature that's absent from the game: cooperative attacks. Although two players can play the game together offline, the lack of cooperative attacks limit the multiplayer aspect of the game. There's no way to do combos in tandem, nor is it possible to attack the same enemy with the two heroes. The multiplayer aspect is, essentially, two single player modes that happen in tandem.
Considering the entire game can be beaten in less than two hours, WBIE is going to have to price this game quite delicately. (Certainly nothing more than $10!) From what we've seen so far, Watchmen fans may want to keep their eyes on the game, not because of the gameplay, but because of the impressive production values and compelling story.
Reader Comments (74)
Posted: Feb 11th 2009 12:09PM MC Double Def DP said
It might be a simple beat'em up, but doesn't the fact you're laying the smackdown as Rorscach count for something?
Reply
Posted: Feb 11th 2009 2:50PM Vegeta has a ps3 said
No. Most fanboys have since agreed that the movie will be amazing.
Reply
Posted: Feb 11th 2009 2:54PM (Unverified) said
Agreed. Also, since when was Watchmen a downloadable game? I must have missed the train when I first heard there was a game. Microsoft must have upped the Arcade limit for this game because there is no way its going to fit within 256 MB.
Reply
Posted: Feb 11th 2009 3:56PM Vegeta has a ps3 said
And how do you know that? Because everythiing I've seen of the movie thus far points to the opposite.
Reply
Posted: Feb 11th 2009 7:28PM (Unverified) said
Vegata-most of us "fanboys" have read the horrible horrible things that the director has said....for instance, he doesn't seem to give a shit about "accuracy" in all reality, or else he wouldn't have drastically changed the ending. He also seems to think that fans shouldn't care how it ends, we should be concerned with minor details such as The Comedian shooting a pregnant woman or not, and whether or not adding in scenes like Comedian assassinating JFK is cool or not.
This is "Sin City" and the lack of Jessica Alba's character's nudity all over again-one shouldn't pat themselves on the back for "hard work" in making something %100 accurate when you change major plot or character points. Peter Jackson was wise to not bullshit about the major liberties taken with adapting Lord of the Rings, and I think that's a big part of why many people were ok with the minor details being shuffled around-the major points were there and there was no bullshit about it being anything else.
In short, he's completely backasswards WRONG about this, and even if %99 of the movie is "accurate", it won't matter without the proper ending.
So no. Everything points to this movie LOOKING fantastic, but being another misguided adaptation by someone who doesn't see WHY it is so popular, they just see that it IS popular.
SPOILERSPOILERSPOILER
What's changed in the ending? Long story short, no squid. One of the main characters-a smurf of sorts-destroys Manhattan. In fact, if you dig up the Japanese trailer, you can even see it.
Reply
This is "Sin City" and the lack of Jessica Alba's character's nudity all over again-one shouldn't pat themselves on the back for "hard work" in making something %100 accurate when you change major plot or character points. Peter Jackson was wise to not bullshit about the major liberties taken with adapting Lord of the Rings, and I think that's a big part of why many people were ok with the minor details being shuffled around-the major points were there and there was no bullshit about it being anything else.
In short, he's completely backasswards WRONG about this, and even if %99 of the movie is "accurate", it won't matter without the proper ending.
So no. Everything points to this movie LOOKING fantastic, but being another misguided adaptation by someone who doesn't see WHY it is so popular, they just see that it IS popular.
SPOILERSPOILERSPOILER
What's changed in the ending? Long story short, no squid. One of the main characters-a smurf of sorts-destroys Manhattan. In fact, if you dig up the Japanese trailer, you can even see it.
Posted: Feb 11th 2009 9:23PM Vegeta has a ps3 said
"he doesn't seem to give a shit about "accuracy" in all reality"
Oh wow. Now this definitely shows that you have not been reading any of the articles or keeping up with the movie at all. He never even said anything like that. What he did say was that if he had kept the squid in, in order for it to make sense you'd need all of the foreshadowing for the Squid. Without it the squid makes no sense whatsoever alienating viewers. Snyder's view was that if he kept all that in, he'd have to sacrifice character development of characters in order to keep it at a certain length
" minor details such as The Comedian shooting a pregnant woman or not"
You claim that Snyder doesn't get Watchmen, but this statement shows that you don't really understand it yourself, especially if you don't see why that scene is important. It's important for one of two reasons, two show how much of a joke Comedian feels life is(and also the event gives him his scar) but more importantly it shows an example of Dr. Manhattan losing his humanity. And yeah fanboys do want to see scenes like that.
The fact is is that the squid itself isn't important, it's what it does which is important and what's going to shock the audience. It doesn't matter what it is, whether it's a Squid a bomb, or something else, the end result is still exactly the same.
If you honestly believe the Squid is more important than the character development of the actual characters, my advice to you is to re-read the book again because obvious you don't understand it.
Reply
Oh wow. Now this definitely shows that you have not been reading any of the articles or keeping up with the movie at all. He never even said anything like that. What he did say was that if he had kept the squid in, in order for it to make sense you'd need all of the foreshadowing for the Squid. Without it the squid makes no sense whatsoever alienating viewers. Snyder's view was that if he kept all that in, he'd have to sacrifice character development of characters in order to keep it at a certain length
" minor details such as The Comedian shooting a pregnant woman or not"
You claim that Snyder doesn't get Watchmen, but this statement shows that you don't really understand it yourself, especially if you don't see why that scene is important. It's important for one of two reasons, two show how much of a joke Comedian feels life is(and also the event gives him his scar) but more importantly it shows an example of Dr. Manhattan losing his humanity. And yeah fanboys do want to see scenes like that.
The fact is is that the squid itself isn't important, it's what it does which is important and what's going to shock the audience. It doesn't matter what it is, whether it's a Squid a bomb, or something else, the end result is still exactly the same.
If you honestly believe the Squid is more important than the character development of the actual characters, my advice to you is to re-read the book again because obvious you don't understand it.
Posted: Feb 11th 2009 11:18PM (Unverified) said
Right, the Comedian shooting her IS vital-which is why for a director to refer to it as a "minor" detail shows that he's clueless. Dig up the interviews with him-watchmencomicmovie.com is a great resource (where you can also find him referring to The Comedian's background as a "minor detail" and asking why anyone should care if they change the ending). You'll also find reports from a full screening in Portland. Hit up Aint It Cool, too, and dig up reports from what screened here in Austin-you'll find the same:it LOOKS great. And it does, it LOOKS fantastic.
Snyder historically doesn't HAVE a "character development" department in his movies. Dawn of the Dead was entertaining, though empty; 300 was gorgeous though gutted and empty (amazing how little there was TO gut); and Watchmen looks to be another case of "looks nice, isn't awful, but misses the mark".
Are you even old enough to remember these books coming out? Everything you've said about the movie or the book seems very regurgitated from press.
Reply
Snyder historically doesn't HAVE a "character development" department in his movies. Dawn of the Dead was entertaining, though empty; 300 was gorgeous though gutted and empty (amazing how little there was TO gut); and Watchmen looks to be another case of "looks nice, isn't awful, but misses the mark".
Are you even old enough to remember these books coming out? Everything you've said about the movie or the book seems very regurgitated from press.
Posted: Feb 12th 2009 12:42AM Vegeta has a ps3 said
Aaah so that's pretty much your entire argument. Typical.
"WAAAAH BECAUSE SNYDER MADE 300 AND A ZOMBIE MOVIE HE CAN'T POSSIBLY DO A MOVIE BASED ON WATCHMEN"
Funny that you gave me that site since there's an article of the preview shown at Comic-con(which I'm guessing you haven't) I'll just quote this one sentence from it that pretty much explains the entire article:
"Are there some omissions and embellishments? Absolutely. But they’re not even worth mentioning because the truth is — Zack just plain got it right."
Sure you can act like Moore and bitch because IT'S NOT 100% LIEK THE COMICS WAAAAAAH. But the fact of the manner is, most fans have gotten over the fact that the squid won't be in and understand that there has to be sacrifices in order to bring a comic book to the movie screens. If you can't fit the squid in without sacrificing time on the actual characters, then don't even bother putting it in and I'm glad that Snyder did that.
Ah yes the old because I'm not old enough to have read the book when it first came out I must not know what I'm talking about. HURRR DURRR. Jesus you're proving more and more that you're a mindless drone.
Oh and here's an actual review of the film claiming that the movie is damn faithful to the book. Though of course I don't expect you to change your mind since you seem content on hating this movie.
http://latinoreview.com/news/exclusive-first-watchmen-readers-review-6166
Reply
"WAAAAH BECAUSE SNYDER MADE 300 AND A ZOMBIE MOVIE HE CAN'T POSSIBLY DO A MOVIE BASED ON WATCHMEN"
Funny that you gave me that site since there's an article of the preview shown at Comic-con(which I'm guessing you haven't) I'll just quote this one sentence from it that pretty much explains the entire article:
"Are there some omissions and embellishments? Absolutely. But they’re not even worth mentioning because the truth is — Zack just plain got it right."
Sure you can act like Moore and bitch because IT'S NOT 100% LIEK THE COMICS WAAAAAAH. But the fact of the manner is, most fans have gotten over the fact that the squid won't be in and understand that there has to be sacrifices in order to bring a comic book to the movie screens. If you can't fit the squid in without sacrificing time on the actual characters, then don't even bother putting it in and I'm glad that Snyder did that.
Ah yes the old because I'm not old enough to have read the book when it first came out I must not know what I'm talking about. HURRR DURRR. Jesus you're proving more and more that you're a mindless drone.
Oh and here's an actual review of the film claiming that the movie is damn faithful to the book. Though of course I don't expect you to change your mind since you seem content on hating this movie.
http://latinoreview.com/news/exclusive-first-watchmen-readers-review-6166
Posted: Feb 11th 2009 12:36PM gatorboi352 said
The end of gaming gets nigher everytime another game is made for the 360.
Reply
Posted: Feb 11th 2009 1:37PM Vegeta has a ps3 said
Please explain to me how a game would ruin Watchmen? If this game is released is it now impossible to read and enjoy the original comic book?
And if you're implying that the movie will ruin the comic, my advice is to go educate yourself by watching the journels and seeing the pictures. Snyder got alot of it right and if he has his way, Snyder is going to prove Moore wrong.
Reply
And if you're implying that the movie will ruin the comic, my advice is to go educate yourself by watching the journels and seeing the pictures. Snyder got alot of it right and if he has his way, Snyder is going to prove Moore wrong.
Posted: Feb 11th 2009 1:50PM TheDarkWayne said
I don't see why people think this game will ruin watchmen. Rorscach and Nite Owl were crime fighters, they fought crime, with their fists, and that's what you do in the game
Reply
Posted: Feb 11th 2009 2:29PM (Unverified) said
I think he's talking about the watchmen IP. The comic has been a hallmark of excellence for a long time and this developer had the chance to take something original and fantastic and turn it into an interactive experience. Instead of putting effort into creative game design, they made a beat em up. Seriously, this is one of the most beloved comics there is and they made a fucking beat em up
Reply
Posted: Feb 11th 2009 3:00PM Roto13 said
The only other Snyder movie I've seen was 300 and I hated it, but at the same time, it was a really faithful adaptation of the comics, which were also studpid because Frank Miller is a hack. :P
"Please explain to me how a game would ruin Watchmen? If this game is released is it now impossible to read and enjoy the original comic book?"
I used to feel the exact same way about stuff until the second and third Matrix movies retroactively ruined the first one. xD But yeah, I don't think a crappy game based on a movie/comic is enough to ruin that movie/comic. It's not like this would be the first crappy video game adaptation of a movie.
Reply
"Please explain to me how a game would ruin Watchmen? If this game is released is it now impossible to read and enjoy the original comic book?"
I used to feel the exact same way about stuff until the second and third Matrix movies retroactively ruined the first one. xD But yeah, I don't think a crappy game based on a movie/comic is enough to ruin that movie/comic. It's not like this would be the first crappy video game adaptation of a movie.
Posted: Feb 11th 2009 3:08PM Vegeta has a ps3 said
"Frank Miller is a hack. :P"
Someone here hasn't read DKR or Batman Year One.
Reply
Someone here hasn't read DKR or Batman Year One.
Posted: Feb 11th 2009 3:56PM Vegeta has a ps3 said
I'm now curious to see what you've read by Frank Miller since it sounds like you haven't read much by him.
Reply
Posted: Feb 11th 2009 4:27PM Roto13 said
Sin City (the original Violent Marv story was good but the rest of it bordered on violence porn), 300 (homoerotic testosterone-fuled penis-compensation), The Dark Knight Returns (not bad, but not great either), and I also vaguely remember reading something by him that had a picture of someone with a giant hole in their torso on the cover. That was undeniable violence porn.
I also read a few issues of All Star Batman because I'd heard it was so bad, it was good. No. It was just bad. I don't see how something that terrible could possibly come from a writer that has anything that remotely resembles skill. It's impossible.
Reply
I also read a few issues of All Star Batman because I'd heard it was so bad, it was good. No. It was just bad. I don't see how something that terrible could possibly come from a writer that has anything that remotely resembles skill. It's impossible.
Posted: Feb 11th 2009 4:30PM Roto13 said
@Rocketboy: Maybe. I think the problem was that the second and third movies expand the relatively small universe built in the first movie, and the expanded universe is ridiculous. And once you see it, you can't UNsee it. When I try to watch the first Matrix movie now I can't help but think of all of the stupid shit going on in the real world and that's what ruins it for me. "Hey, let's have a rave!" "COOLS!"
Reply
Posted: Feb 11th 2009 7:01PM Vegeta has a ps3 said
"Sin City (the original Violent Marv story was good but the rest of it bordered on violence porn),"
Now I know you have absolute no idea what you're talking about, especially since out of all the Sin City stories(not just the ones in the movie), Marv's story is the most violent one and makes the other characters(Dwight and Hartigan) seem like good natured souls.
Let's list Marv's violent activites during his arc:
1. Beginning of the story he kicks the shit out of a room full of cops
2. Crushes a man's skull by slamming it into a brick wall
3. Shoots a man and then shoots him in the gut and then finally shooting him point blank in the face
4.Proceeds to torture multiple people in order to gain information
5. shoots a priest at point blank
6. Goes on a rampage on an entire squadron of cops using an ax
7. Tortures the captian by cutting off his limbs using the ax before finally killing
8. Uses a saw to cut off a person's limbs, allows a dog to rip out their intestines, and then finally Marv decapitates him using said saw.
9.Brings the head to the person to ordered the hit on Goldie and kills him in a very brutal fashion
And some how none of this fits your requirements of what Violence porn is, yet the later stories(which are much tamer in comparison to The Hard Goodbye) do?
Also only reading a handful(like three books) of frank Miller stories isn't enough to even classify him as a hack. You don't like the guy? That's fine, and that's your opinion. But calling him a Hack? That implies you've read most his stuff and it's obvious that you haven't.
Reply
Now I know you have absolute no idea what you're talking about, especially since out of all the Sin City stories(not just the ones in the movie), Marv's story is the most violent one and makes the other characters(Dwight and Hartigan) seem like good natured souls.
Let's list Marv's violent activites during his arc:
1. Beginning of the story he kicks the shit out of a room full of cops
2. Crushes a man's skull by slamming it into a brick wall
3. Shoots a man and then shoots him in the gut and then finally shooting him point blank in the face
4.Proceeds to torture multiple people in order to gain information
5. shoots a priest at point blank
6. Goes on a rampage on an entire squadron of cops using an ax
7. Tortures the captian by cutting off his limbs using the ax before finally killing
8. Uses a saw to cut off a person's limbs, allows a dog to rip out their intestines, and then finally Marv decapitates him using said saw.
9.Brings the head to the person to ordered the hit on Goldie and kills him in a very brutal fashion
And some how none of this fits your requirements of what Violence porn is, yet the later stories(which are much tamer in comparison to The Hard Goodbye) do?
Also only reading a handful(like three books) of frank Miller stories isn't enough to even classify him as a hack. You don't like the guy? That's fine, and that's your opinion. But calling him a Hack? That implies you've read most his stuff and it's obvious that you haven't.
Posted: Feb 11th 2009 7:32PM (Unverified) said
Roto, 300 was FAR from a "really faithful adaptation". Where was Stumblios, for instance?
Reply
Posted: Feb 11th 2009 9:29PM Vegeta has a ps3 said
Faithful adaptation does not equal EXACTLY LIEK MAH COMICS!!!
Reply
Posted: Feb 11th 2009 9:56PM Roto13 said
"And some how none of this fits your requirements of what Violence porn is, yet the later stories(which are much tamer in comparison to The Hard Goodbye) do?"
Violence doesn't automatically equal violence porn. The Violent Marv story was definitely violent, but I liked the whole Goldie thing, and it would have been able to stand on its own if the violence was toned down. Hell and Back was also ok, I guess, but the rest of Sin City is just violence with excuses for more violence and if you took the violence away, there'd be nothing left.
"Also only reading a handful(like three books) of frank Miller stories isn't enough to even classify him as a hack. You don't like the guy? That's fine, and that's your opinion. But calling him a Hack? That implies you've read most his stuff and it's obvious that you haven't."
I've read enough of his stuff to know he writes more shit than any good comic book artist would. I'm not going to sit down and read his entire bibliography for the sake of cementing my opinion that his work is crap. I'm not a masochist.
"Roto, 300 was FAR from a "really faithful adaptation". Where was Stumblios, for instance?"
Movies based on books and comics always cut stuff out that was in the source material to keep from being like eight hours long. A hundred different adaptations of 300 probably wouldn't bring a more faithful one than Snyder's.
Reply
Violence doesn't automatically equal violence porn. The Violent Marv story was definitely violent, but I liked the whole Goldie thing, and it would have been able to stand on its own if the violence was toned down. Hell and Back was also ok, I guess, but the rest of Sin City is just violence with excuses for more violence and if you took the violence away, there'd be nothing left.
"Also only reading a handful(like three books) of frank Miller stories isn't enough to even classify him as a hack. You don't like the guy? That's fine, and that's your opinion. But calling him a Hack? That implies you've read most his stuff and it's obvious that you haven't."
I've read enough of his stuff to know he writes more shit than any good comic book artist would. I'm not going to sit down and read his entire bibliography for the sake of cementing my opinion that his work is crap. I'm not a masochist.
"Roto, 300 was FAR from a "really faithful adaptation". Where was Stumblios, for instance?"
Movies based on books and comics always cut stuff out that was in the source material to keep from being like eight hours long. A hundred different adaptations of 300 probably wouldn't bring a more faithful one than Snyder's.
Posted: Mar 2nd 2009 9:20PM Mognet T said
Dunno why this came up in a Watchmen post but Frank Miller sucks and is a total hack. All of Miller's males are written Chunks (different flavors on the Marv archetype) and all his women are WHORES.Go read All Star Batman & Robin to see what I mean: he turn Batman into Marv and Black Canary into a whore. Why? Are you dense? Are you retarded or something? Because he's the goddamn Frank Miller!
Edgy.
Reply
Edgy.
Posted: Feb 11th 2009 12:14PM AwesomeTown said
You can't even grab a guy so that your partner in co-op can beat on them? Wow, Streets of Rage seems more modern than this.
Reply
Posted: Feb 11th 2009 12:45PM gatorboi352 said
Bro! There's no time for nonsense like that! We must devote more of the team to the advanced shaders and texture working in the backgrounds, not to mention the normal mapping omg so ubercoolz!!1!
Reply
Posted: Feb 11th 2009 12:19PM Levi Partridge said
They went about this game the wrong way. They should have made the game about The Comedian and Dr. Manhattan blowing up the Vietcong. I'd love to play that.
Reply
Posted: Feb 11th 2009 12:22PM (Unverified) said
The concept that Alan Moore was worried about Watchmen becoming a money-printing monster seem all the more valid now. Thanks, WB, for making more sub-par tie ins. Why don't they ever commission a good studio, like Konami or Capcom or something? I don't get it. We might actually get games if that were the case.
Reply
Posted: Feb 11th 2009 1:38PM Vegeta has a ps3 said
After reading his latest interview, I agree.
Reply
Posted: Feb 11th 2009 2:22PM (Unverified) said
@ Roto13:
While I concur Alan Moore to be frequently curmudgeony, it seems like the film might be genuinely of quality while the game continues to underwhelm. I'm awaiting Rorschach masks of low grade quality as shilled by WB execs. I didn't mean to imply Alan Moore a godlike entity rather than the subhuman vicious charlatan he frequently proves he is.
Reply
While I concur Alan Moore to be frequently curmudgeony, it seems like the film might be genuinely of quality while the game continues to underwhelm. I'm awaiting Rorschach masks of low grade quality as shilled by WB execs. I didn't mean to imply Alan Moore a godlike entity rather than the subhuman vicious charlatan he frequently proves he is.
Posted: Feb 11th 2009 4:33PM (Unverified) said
Okay, Juno Loire, I'll bite-
What makes Alan Moore a "subhuman vicious charlatan"? I mean, that phrase could be accurately paraphrased as "bloodthirsty con-man", and I just don't get how it applies to Alan Moore.
I agree that his disdain of all things Hollywood gets tiresome at times...but if you had your work turned into the excrement that was "League of Extraordinary Gentlemen", "From Hell", and "V for Vendetta", wouldn't you eventually say, "Enough is enough," and give up on adaptations, as well? Either way, I'm not trying to start something, I just don't get why the particular descriptors you chose are applicable, and am merely looking for clarification. Is there something about the man I don't know?
Reply
What makes Alan Moore a "subhuman vicious charlatan"? I mean, that phrase could be accurately paraphrased as "bloodthirsty con-man", and I just don't get how it applies to Alan Moore.
I agree that his disdain of all things Hollywood gets tiresome at times...but if you had your work turned into the excrement that was "League of Extraordinary Gentlemen", "From Hell", and "V for Vendetta", wouldn't you eventually say, "Enough is enough," and give up on adaptations, as well? Either way, I'm not trying to start something, I just don't get why the particular descriptors you chose are applicable, and am merely looking for clarification. Is there something about the man I don't know?
Posted: Feb 11th 2009 6:31PM Vegeta has a ps3 said
I think Neil Gaiman said it best, if he cares so much about this films. Why does he allow hollywood to destroy his films? It makes absolutely no sense and is the reason why many view him negatively as a person. He bitches and complains about how Hollywood mistreated him and his movies, yet he also refuses to do absolutely anything about him.
I mean lets look at the most recent Marvel movies. I think we can all agree that those movies were much better because Marvel took an active role in the production of said films. And lets look at Watchmen. Not only is Zack snyder a complete comic book fanboy(in one of his interviews he stated to his crew to treat Watchmen as if it was the Bible) but he also employed Dave Gibbons to help with the movie as well.
Moore has decided to continually ignore this fact and continues to keep on bitching like an old bitter man.
Reply
I mean lets look at the most recent Marvel movies. I think we can all agree that those movies were much better because Marvel took an active role in the production of said films. And lets look at Watchmen. Not only is Zack snyder a complete comic book fanboy(in one of his interviews he stated to his crew to treat Watchmen as if it was the Bible) but he also employed Dave Gibbons to help with the movie as well.
Moore has decided to continually ignore this fact and continues to keep on bitching like an old bitter man.
Posted: Feb 11th 2009 11:28PM (Unverified) said
He refuses to do anything about it, Veg? So, expert, what SHOULD he do about it? Having created it doesn't give him any legal control over it by default. If he didn't want anything to happen to his babies, he shouldn't sell them to publishers, period. It's not like the contract was switched out under his nose. He can bitch with the rest of us about the adaptations, but he's the one who gave up control.
Reply
Posted: Feb 11th 2009 12:29PM (Unverified) said
I'm glad that the movie is at least bringing attention to the novel; everyone should be required to read it.
Kudos to you for reading it BEFORE seeing the movie, as I fear millions might do, thus ruining pretty much the entire novel.
Reply
Kudos to you for reading it BEFORE seeing the movie, as I fear millions might do, thus ruining pretty much the entire novel.
Posted: Feb 11th 2009 12:24PM (Unverified) said
beat em up? well to me I'm in... and thats coming from a streets of rage, yakuza, fatal fury, original goldenaxe, double dragon fanboy. I think though you'll be looking at $14.99 or $19.99 for this though
Reply
Posted: Feb 11th 2009 1:06PM JasperLoons said
Ha! Double Dragon is exactly what I was thinking. Yep, I will pick this up just for the nostalgia and chance to kick people's asses as Rorschach.
Reply
Posted: Feb 11th 2009 12:25PM (Unverified) said
A video game adaptation really does woefully display the fundamental misunderstanding, or perhaps an immature understanding, of the manner in which fiction functions and appeals. This is something which has been applied (successfully) to many films and comics based on the assumption that they attract primarily children. It makes virtually no sense, however, when applied to an adult work like Watchmen. The idea that one would be drawn to a Watchmen game is founded on the assumption that the appeal of the comic book can be transposed simply by duplicating its imagery.
Reply
Sorry, you must be logged in to leave a comment.
Featured Stories
The most popular posts
in the last 7 days
- Vita 'UMD Passport' won't be offered in US 220 comments
- Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning review: A tempting fate 153 comments
- David Jaffe leaves Eat Sleep Play, layoffs hit developer [Update] 108 comments
- Don't call it a remake: Final Fantasy X is a 'remaster,' to be clear 95 comments
- Battleship movie adapted into FPS by Double Helix 93 comments












