What Is The Last Film You Watched? (Older Films)

[A24 4,333]

Film is a visual, literary, sound, etc medium

Visuals alone account for very little

That's true for most movies, yes. However, in some movies, such like 2001: ASO, Blade Runner, 300 or Watchmen, the imagery does take the center stage. If Watchmen looked like the next movie or like a Marvel movie I wouldn't have liked it so much. The same goes for the other titles I mentioned.

[crocodile 8,013]

No, I do understand that you might not like the drawing/colouring style. It's very much a product of its time. Kind of like special effects of any era in films.

The thing is, everything that's great about the Watchmen has very little to do with style in itself. It's more about how they use it for storytelling. Does it make more sense? The composition, sequence, it's all one big intricate clock.

Karol

[KK 3,307]

Well, weren't the comics written in the 80s? You'd be hardpressed to expect the polished visuals of the film. I'm sure it's quite evocative in the comic book language it uses.

Judging from the film alone, the translation of that look to visual film imagery is particularly impressive and admirable.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Sure, and IMO the film has all that too, and looks great!

[Romão 2,274]

Even the title of the work has a double (or triple) entendre

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Yes, i know

[A24 4,333]

No, I do understand that you might not like the drawing/colouring style. It's very much a product of its time. Kind of like special effects of any era in films.

It's wrong to compare style and FX, you comic book reader!

[Romão 2,274]

I hate this era of computer colloring and splash page after splash page. Give something like Watchmen any day of the week

[crocodile 8,013]

It does mimic a lot of panels, yeah. But, by doing that, it loses some context. Sure, it might create a new one. And that's actually ok.

I have no issues with the visuals of this film. Other than that, on occasion, it contradicts its source material's intention. And it does that blatantly.

So it's not that Zack Snyder is not a talented visual artist. Quite the contrary, he can shoot a film and make it look engaging. But the same style pushes creates a lot of contradictions, makes the illusion of realistic world somewhat less realistic than a 1980's comic book in garish colours.

No, I do understand that you might not like the drawing/colouring style. It's very much a product of its time. Kind of like special effects of any era in films.

It's wrong to compare style and FX, you comic book reader!

FX is part of a visual style, surely.

Karol

[A24 4,333]

FX is part of a visual style, surely.

Karol

You compared style with FX, which doesn't make sense. FX can have a certain style but style is not FX.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

It is to many kids today

[crocodile 8,013]

FX is part of a visual style, surely.

Karol

You compared style with FX, which doesn't make sense. FX can have a certain style but style is not FX.

No, I compared drawing style to technical ability and sensibilities of any given era. And special effects are a good example of this.

Karol

[A24 4,333]

Again, the style of Watchmen comic book wasn't limited by the technology of the '80s. They simply went for the style they went for, that's all.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

You have a childish understanding of special effects, Karol

[crocodile 8,013]

It's not entirely true. Modern comics are beind produced with very different tools. Colouring is one obvious difference.

Karol

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

True

[KK 3,307]

It's not entirely true. Modern comics are beind produced with very different tools. Colouring is one obious difference.

Karol

Yes. And you have to take into consideration the zeitgeist of the comic book language of the time.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Visually it was pretty piss poor in those days. Before Todd McFarlane revolutionised it.

[Romão 2,274]

McFarlane actually revolutionised for the worst, in my view, but that's just me, that can't stand that sort of Jim Lee style

Neal Adams was doing terrific stuff way before McFarlane

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

McFarlane's style completely turned me off Spider-Man.

I found it awful

[A24 4,333]

It's not entirely true. Modern comics are beind produced with very different tools. Colouring is one obvious difference.

Karol

I don't see how different tools have led to the style of Watchmen. As if they couldn't do it in another style! In the end, it's about the drawings, how they color it doesn't matter. Style and FX, it's simply not the same.

[crocodile 8,013]

I liked when McFarlane's Spider-Man but, other than that, it was rather underwhelming. His Spawn is the biggest con and a big example how you don't do comics for mature readers.

Karol

[A24 4,333]

Anyway:

If you don’t understand that “Watchmen” is an experience, then you don’t understand “Watchmen” - Zack Snyder

[crocodile 8,013]

Isn't that true of any film? Or any work of art, for that matter?

Karol

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Well said. alex

[Brónach 1,302]

I don't think Watchmen is a bad movie, not all (unlike the other Moore adaptations, which are all horrendous). I just don't think there's anything there for someone who has read the Graphic Novel. The work is very intimate and restrained. And the most visually striking sequence of the whole work, the one that might actually justifiy a big screen adaptation, they cut out of the movie

The reason they did it is simply to make it shorter, I believe. A more literal adaptation, which Snyder would have been perfectly able to pull off (this guy did that very silly 300 thing, ffs), would have needed a load of more minutes, and a different pacing.

Here's what I meant before. I prefer the endings of the book because the differences in a lot of details crate striking differences in tone between the book and the film. And the tone of the book there is much weirder and random and I like it like that. From the colours of Ozymandias' lair being completely changed, to Ozymandias' presence, to the meaning of Bubastis, to the idea that Dan and Laurie are having sex while Rorscharch dies, to the completely out of nowhere but repeatedly foreshadowed psychic (which is psychic for a reason) "squid" (Moore suddenly screams, yes this is still a silly thing about superheroes), etc. It's less Hollywood. The vision of the million of splashed bodies dripping blood is Hollywoodized into a sort of simple disintegration. The idea of people having fears psychically introduced into their minds is deleted too.

I like two things about the film version. That Ozymandias uses gloves, and the splat of blood after Rorscharch is murdered. That was nice. Book-esque.

The ending would have more impact if we had spent more time with the people who die, maybe. Maybe Laurie's mother should have been placed in New York and died with the rest.

As for the discussion about colors: the colors of the book are on purpose. They did these colour combinations because they were unusual among superhero comic books of the USA, at the time, I believe (I barely read superhero stuff). And it adds to the tone of the book that the film only captures every now and then.

The book is nice. It's probably creative, even if it's through deconstruction and parody. It wouldn't rank about my favourite comic books, though. I feel similarly about the film, just less enthusiastic about the film.

[A24 4,333]

Isn't that true of any film? Or any work of art, for that matter?

Karol

Maybe for you, but I only know of a few movies that I can call an experience. The others are just movies.

[KK 3,307]

That's because few movies actually succeed in that regard. But every film, or any other work of art, should aim to be an experience.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

90% of everything is superfluous!

[Brónach 1,302]

I'm not sure I understand the difference. Do you mean the films that make you want to stop it for a moment and jump around revisiting something awesome that you've seen, like reading a great book? The ones that end and you're shaking for a while, like when you wake up and the good/bad dreams take minutes to disappear from your mind?

Because I like that.

Watchmen isn't one, though.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

I beg to differ!

Watchmen opened my eyes in many ways. Its an astonishingly good film

[Dixon Hill 4,234]

I've read the graphic novel. I prefer the film. I believe it's on my top 20 list.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Good man!

[A24 4,333]

That's because few movies actually succeed in that regard. But every film, or any other work of art, should aim to be an experience.

Maybe ... but judging by the way most movies are set up, I'm not sure if every director is going for that. Most just keep it to telling a story and they do very little (just the basic stuff) to deport or transport the viewer into total immersion.

[Dixon Hill 4,234]

That's because few movies actually succeed in that regard. But every film, or any other work of art, should aim to be an experience.

Maybe ... but judging by the way most movies are set up, I'm not sure if every director is going for that. Most just keep it to telling a story and they do very little (just the basic stuff) to deport or transport the viewer into total immersion.

Yep. There's a difference between making movies and utilizing the whole cinematic medium to make an experience.

[crocodile 8,013]

I've read the graphic novel. I prefer the film. I believe it's on my top 20 list.

Traitor!

Karol

[Brónach 1,302]

[Uni 306]

Loved Watchmen. Liked (didn't love) V for Vendetta. Hated League of Extraordinary Gentlemen.

Robocop—The original, not the reboot (I don't have much desire to see that one). One of Verhoeven's great, satirical gore epics of the 80s, with Peter Weller at his character-acting best. I was watching it with my daughter—she'd never seen it—and we both took note of how easy it would've been to make this just a run-of-the-mill action flick with the protagonist constantly kicking ass. The inner conflict Murphy endures, along with being made a puppet of the war between the police department and its corporate handlers, makes this a superior story with a moving and sympathetic character at its center. It's just a great, fun movie.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Visually dated, as almost all Verhoeven films. Yet with a timeless appeal.

A great Superhero film!

[BloodBoal 7,538]

The reboot is actually quite decent!

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Yeah....decent.

Not that bad...

Could have been worse...

[BloodBoal 7,538]

Better than the Prequels...

[crocodile 8,013]

Is there anything that isn't?

Karol

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Not much

[Koray Savas 2,251]

Loved Watchmen. Liked (didn't love) V for Vendetta. Hated League of Extraordinary Gentlemen.

That was naughty.

[Koray Savas 2,251]

Haywire

It's got an excellent cast and Soderbergh's signature style, but the script and Carano's performance leave a bit to be desired. Understandable, considering she's a fighter and not an actor, but on the whole it wasn't really anything special. Loved David Holmes' score though. The whole package was pretty much Ocean's Eleven reformatted for an action thriller.

[filmmusic 1,829]

Just learned about this 1975 Norwegian animation film and I would love to watch it.

Thor, is it that good?

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0073000/

Flåklypa Grand Prix is the biggest selling and most watched film of all time in its homeland of Norway. In fact, its ticket sales in Norway is greater than the population of Norway: which should tell you a lot. It is a cultural phenomenon in Norway that is just as popular 30 years after its arrival, which was proved by the video game based on the film that became the biggest selling video game of all time in Norway: 25 years after the films debut

this is interesting:

This film has had influence on Hollywood without the major public knowing about it. From Back to the Future to Star Wars Episode I, which pod racing scene is almost an exact copy from Flåklypa Grand Prix.

[BloodBoal 7,538]

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

The Big Lebowski

Not only endlessly quotable but also endlessly uplifting. While there may be several Coen brothers films that are more highly regarded, or awarded, this is probably the one which will live on the longest.

Certainly several cast members play their most famous roles here, with Bridges who is in pitch perfect condition as the stoned lay about The Dude and John Goodman who is simply hilarious as Walter.

One of those films thats still as funny the 20th time you've seen as as your first.

**** out of ****

[filmmusic 1,829]

Just learned about this 1975 Norwegian animation film and I would love to watch it.

Thor, is it that good?

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0073000/

Yeah, sure, it's a Norwegian film, so Thor, being Norwegian, must have seen it!

How more cliché can you get?

My question didn't take as granted that he has definitely seen it.

It was more like "have you seen it and it's that good" or "have you heard that it's that good"?

Of course since it is said that it's so huge and the most famous film ever in Norway, the chances of having seen it would be large.