RE: Masterpiece?

Follow @empiremagazine

Forum Home

Register for Free!

Log In

Moderator Tickets

FAQ

Users Online

RE: Masterpiece?

Logged in as: Guest

Printable Version

All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Movie News >> RE: Masterpiece?

Page: << < prev 1 [2]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Masterpiece? - 30/1/2009 12:10:20 PM

igotnewlegs

Posts: 5063
Joined: 11/9/2006
From: The big blue velour marble

quote:

ORIGINAL: UGonnaBarkAllDayDog?

Must I simply?

My point is that you shouldn't really go round calling something a 'Masterpiece' until you have actually viewed it..

Oh, and just because the book is a materpiece (agreed) doesn't mean the film will be. That you even think about mentioning that in a post is very worrying!

Erm... Dan Brown? Stephen King?

PLUS.. Watchmen the novel is a masterpiece as it blends genres together. One min its a comic, the next a novel, the next a comic within a comic, the next police notes.(etc). How that transfers to Film will be interesting!

No it won't.

_____________________________

Life is full of misery, loneliness, and suffering - and it's all over much too soon.
Woody Allen

I may not have gone where I intended to go, but I think I have ended up where I needed to be.
Douglas Adams

(in reply to UGonnaBarkAllDayDog?)

Post #: 31

RE: Stunning/Ridiculous - 30/1/2009 3:55:07 PM

KeithM

Posts: 862
Joined: 31/7/2008

Yes it will.

quote:

ORIGINAL: lorcan86

...depends on your mentality I suppose. Personally I'd like Zach Snyder to get back to making entertaining zombie video-games rather than these mildly irritating homo-erotic comic book based video-games. And I'm gay.

Indeed it does depend on your mentality. If you'd rather see a zero-credibility piece of rubbish rather than a film-maker attempting a bona-fide masterpiece then you are, most definitely, of a completely different mentality to me.

I suppose for some, ignorance is indeed bliss. Even if it does make one look rather stupid to the more knowledgeable.

(in reply to lorcan86)

Post #: 32

RE: Stunning/Ridiculous - 30/1/2009 4:19:57 PM

KeithM

Posts: 862
Joined: 31/7/2008

Interview with Watchmen Portraits photographer, Clay Enos.

(in reply to KeithM)

Post #: 33

RE: Masterpiece? - 30/1/2009 9:32:51 PM

KeithM

Posts: 862
Joined: 31/7/2008

quote:

ORIGINAL: UGonnaBarkAllDayDog?
Must I simply?

Yes, you simply must. I don't know if the film will actually be any good or not, but one thing I absolutely do know 100% - it ain't no Batman & Robin. I want you to realise once you've seen it why even saying it makes you sound very, very silly (I have to ASSume you've never read the book or you'd know why). Even a watered down Watchmen (which this doesn't seem to remotely be) would still be a million miles away from B&R. Don't be fooled by the campy early costumes - the very fact that they are campy is integral to the plot and makes the 'wake up call' those old heroes and villains get all the more powerful. The book shows how naive 'middle aged men dressing up to fight crime' really is. It's a DELIBERATE analysis and deconstruction of the 'putting on tights and a mask' trope.

quote:

My point is that you shouldn't really go round calling something a 'Masterpiece' until you have actually viewed it..

Except I didn't say that. I said the book is and the film should be. If done properly.

quote:

Oh, and just because the book is a materpiece (agreed) doesn't mean the film will be. That you even think about mentioning that in a post is very worrying!

Again, see above. I didn't say it will be. I said it should be.

quote:

Erm... Dan Brown? Stephen King?

Erm... Jeffrey Archer? James Herbert?

Sorry, I'm not sure what game we're playing here. Is it name a shitty author and a best selling horror writer with otherwise no relevance whatsoever to what we're talking about? If you're trying to use those people as examples of people who have written a masterpiece work of fiction that didn't translate to screen all that well, then:

1) Dan Brown?! You seriously have to be fucking kidding me! The man is an absolutely awful writer. Man can't even do his research properly. Popular on the best-sellers list does not equate to it being a masterpiece. Dear oh dear oh dear. Almost tempted to ditch the conversation right here, because if any of his work is what you consider a 'masterpiece' then we really are talking about entirely different standards.

2) Stephen King has had both good and bad adaptations of his work on screen, but what that has to do with this is completely escaping me.

How about Lord of the Flies, No Country for Old Men, Goodfellas, The Godfather trilogy, LotR? All masterpieces of fiction translated well to the big screen and those were straight off the top of my head without even thinking about it. Again, though, none of this has anything do with this adaptation - it stands or falls on its own.

quote:

PLUS.. Watchmen the novel is a masterpiece as it blends genres together. One min its a comic, the next a novel, the next a comic within a comic, the next police notes.(etc). How that transfers to Film will be interesting!

No, it's a comic all the way through. Doesn't matter what techniques it uses to tell the story - it's still always a comic... I agree it will be interesting how Snyder attempts to convey all those pieces, but we already know how the comic within a comic device will work (cell animation blended in seamlessly into the movie where they're supposed to be), we already know about the Under The Hood documentary, and we've already seen a bunch of supplementary material which provides background information and colour about the Watchmen world. Every possible critique, short of actually seeing the finished movie, has been answered by Snyder and Co. beautifully. Of course, that final acid test is still a month away, but judging by EVERY SINGLE THING WE HAVE SEEN, the attention to detail, faithfulness to the novel and sheer craft that's gone into it already augurs well for the final outcome.

And it isn't a masterpiece because it blends genres together - it's a masterpiece because it's a fucking amazing story, well told, by a writer and artist at their absolute peaks working together with some almost magical synergy and lots and lots of hard work and craft. All the pieces matter. That's what makes it a masterpiece.

(in reply to UGonnaBarkAllDayDog?)

Post #: 34

RE: Masterpiece? - 30/1/2009 10:38:44 PM

UGonnaBarkAllDayDog?

Posts: 131
Joined: 10/11/2006
From: Southend

Oh Seriously?

Listen, I've read the book... countless times.... I just don't sit clapping my hands watching every film preview going "This MUST be amazing! Hollywood won't let me down!"

After Indy, SW.. jesus, every hyped film bar TDK, I just don't think its right to label a film a masterpiece before its seen! Fuck the 'source material'.... it obviously CAN fail. I HOPE it won't but, in Hollywood history, in prob will.

THATS. ALL.

Oh... and don't compare it to the Godfather, you tit.

'Nuff said.

(Thought you would enjoy that comic quote.)

_____________________________

Soose Beep. Anybady gotta bottleo Oran goose?

(in reply to KeithM)

Post #: 35

RE: Masterpiece? - 30/1/2009 11:56:54 PM

KeithM

Posts: 862
Joined: 31/7/2008

I didn't compare it to the Godfather - I was making a point to counter your silly attempted comparison which I clearly stated does not compare in any way to this adaptation. I clearly stated that this movie will either stand or fall on its own merit and your attempts at comparison with anything is irrelevant and silly.

Where do I say that the film 'must be amazing' - I said the signs were good, but that we will have to wait another month to know for sure.

This is all about you saying it might be another Batman & Robin, which is a very stupid comment to make. Period.

Finally - because you're clearly almost terminally stupid, I'll put it in bolded capitals:

I DID NOT SAY THIS FILM WILL BE A MASTERPIECE. I'm not psychic, unlike you, so I don't know that, which is precisely why I DID NOT SAY IT.

Now go get your ears and head cleaned out.

(in reply to UGonnaBarkAllDayDog?)

Post #: 36

RE: Masterpiece? - 31/1/2009 12:13:36 AM

KeithM

Posts: 862
Joined: 31/7/2008

quote:

ORIGINAL: KeithM

Yes, you simply must. I don't know if the film will actually be any good or not, but one thing I absolutely do know 100% - it ain't no Batman & Robin. I want you to realise once you've seen it why even saying it makes you sound very, very silly (I have to ASSume you've never read the book or you'd know why). Even a watered down Watchmen (which this doesn't seem to remotely be) would still be a million miles away from B&R. Don't be fooled by the campy early costumes - the very fact that they are campy is integral to the plot and makes the 'wake up call' those old heroes and villains get all the more powerful. The book shows how naive 'middle aged men dressing up to fight crime' really is. It's a DELIBERATE analysis and deconstruction of the 'putting on tights and a mask' trope.

Except I didn't say that. I said the book is and the film should be. If done properly.

Again, see above. I didn't say it will be. I said it should be.

Sorry, I'm not sure what game we're playing here. Is it name a shitty author and a best selling horror writer with otherwise no relevance whatsoever to what we're talking about? If you're trying to use those people as examples of people who have written a masterpiece work of fiction that didn't translate to screen all that well, then:

2) Stephen King has had both good and bad adaptations of his work on screen, but what that has to do with this is completely escaping me.

How about Lord of the Flies, No Country for Old Men, Goodfellas, The Godfather trilogy, LotR? All masterpieces of fiction translated well to the big screen and those were straight off the top of my head without even thinking about it. Again, though, none of this has anything do with this adaptation - it stands or falls on its own.

No, it's a comic all the way through. Doesn't matter what techniques it uses to tell the story - it's still always a comic... I agree it will be interesting how Snyder attempts to convey all those pieces, but we already know how the comic within a comic device will work (cell animation blended in seamlessly into the movie where they're supposed to be), we already know about the Under The Hood documentary, and we've already seen a bunch of supplementary material which provides background information and colour about the Watchmen world. Every possible critique, short of actually seeing the finished movie, has been answered by Snyder and Co. beautifully. Of course, that final acid test is still a month away, but judging by EVERY SINGLE THING WE HAVE SEEN, the attention to detail, faithfulness to the novel and sheer craft that's gone into it already augurs well for the final outcome.

There you go, I've highlighted the relevant bits for you, because I'm not completely insensitive to the hard of thinking.

(in reply to KeithM)

Post #: 37

RE: Masterpiece? - 1/2/2009 12:32:18 AM

shawshank prisoner

Posts: 1650
Joined: 20/4/2006
From: Norwich

I think you lad(ie)s should calm the fuck down, really...

Meanwhile, has anyone else checked out Total Film's exclusives? They're rather good, too, y'know... They've got Nite Owl's snow costume.

(in reply to KeithM)

Post #: 38

RE: Masterpiece? - 1/2/2009 1:14:28 AM

KeithM

Posts: 862
Joined: 31/7/2008

I would have remained calm if the silly man hadn't kept arguing over and calling me a tit for something I didn't actually say.

I posted links to some of the photos in the future films forum. I'd say they looked really good, but apparently it's frowned upon in these forums to say anything positive, so be warned.