ComicBookMovie.com Start A Fansite!
You are not currently logged in. Login

Patton Oswalt Hits Out At Premature Critics

No, I don't mean that kind of premature! The comedian and sometime comic book writer weighs in on those that bash before they see--in particular all of those folks that were just so sure Watchmen was going to suck.
MTV have an interview with Oswalt(who many will recognize from King Of Queens) in which he follows up on this blog post from back before the movie was released...

“Zack Snyder STEPPED UP, motherf---ers, Watchmen was going to get made, one way or another. And instead of bleating on his Facebook status updates or Tweeting about how s---ty the upcoming adaptation's going to be, he TOOK THE BULLET and tried to do it right.”

Oswalt continued by saying that adaptations by nature cannot incorporate every single element from their source material. His advice to the nay-sayers who still don’t care for the film?

“Crack the tab on a frosty can of Go F--- Yourself and go see the movie,"

Indeed sir. Here is the follow up vid..



"Once the movie comes out and you have a feeling about your experience, that's fine. But I just got so, I guess, depressed," said Oswalt. "I am a big comic book fan. Are we always going to be represented as the people that rip into things before they see them and are proud to criticize things that we don't know anything about? Maybe Watchmen sucked for some people, maybe it was great for some people, but you can't sit there and pass judgment before the thing comes out. That's so sad."

"Even sports fans, which in a weird way are even more far gone than comic book fans, they don't sit there and say, 'Yeah, the Yankees are gonna suck this season. I haven't seen them play a single game and I've decided they're gonna suck,'" he explained. "Even they wouldn't have that arrogance. So that's all I was trying to point out. Have any opinion that you want. Don't go off about it before you've seen it."

Pretty dead on, I would say. There's nothing quite as annoying as listening to someone talk sh** about a movie that doesn't even have a trailer yet!
3 Yes
0 No
RorMachine
12/2/2009
mtvsplashpage.com

DISCLAIMER: This posting was submitted by a user of the site not from Comic Book Movie editorial staff. All users have acknowledged and agreed that the submission of their content is in compliance with our Terms of Use. For removal of copyrighted material, please contact us HERE.

67 Comments

Well that'll be most of you CBMers here then lol!!! ; D
LEEE777 - 12/2/2009, 3:42 PM
WATCHMEN = Comic book movie of the decade!!!

(If ya didn't know lol).
LEEE777 - 12/2/2009, 3:44 PM
I concur whole heart-idly. It amazes me when people rip into things we haven't seen yet.
thwhtGuardian - 12/2/2009, 3:45 PM
He's right on. I've been saying this for a while too, it sucks that fanboys are so overly and prematurely critical that that's what we're known for.

So, yeah Patton is right. He's still not funny, but he's right. (There I go. Another fanboy being critical)
gibbyblaylock - 12/2/2009, 3:46 PM
The guy is completely right!

Man, I loved King of Queens...that was a [frick]ing awesome show! :)
JoshW - 12/2/2009, 3:49 PM
Correctamundo Mr. Oswalt.

I'm so glad he brought up Watchmen, that is the best example of the premature judging a lot of people do. Everyone got so pissed off once they heard Snyder got rid of the squid, and they said it would be horrible and it's not the "real" Watchmen, without even seeing it.
InTylerWeTrust - 12/2/2009, 3:52 PM
I always knew Watchmen would be great and it was.


There have been some that I expected would stink and they did. I actually can't think of one time when my judgment was off, really.

Another thing too: this guy probably doesn't follow the development of these movies as closely as we do.

A lot of times, guys like us that follow every single snipet of information and hear all the juicy spoilers are often in a unique position to know what's coming. Does that make any sense?
SixSixteen - 12/2/2009, 4:04 PM
TYLER & DarthMulder: Go check out my Ultimates Fan Cast when you get chance! :)
JoshW - 12/2/2009, 4:05 PM
WOW! That is sooooo true! and he's a comicbook fan
(I already new that) but I still think thats awesome!

Yep the king of queens was a great show!


*make sure you guys go check out my new VIDEO in FAN-FIC
"A Tribute To Marvel"*
peterparker420 - 12/2/2009, 4:06 PM
I'm in complete agreement here. Too many times are our precious CBM's beat down before they even make it into a theater. And it's all because something changed somewhere along the way, hey, if you want an exact copy of your favorite comic book story... read the comic again.
aroyalspider - 12/2/2009, 4:08 PM
@Darthmulder - Your makin a lot of sense, i remember readin on here about borigins script with magic bullets and right then thinking, if thats true, its going to suck donkey balls...low and behold
Kablamo - 12/2/2009, 4:13 PM
Kablamo @ : D


LEEE777 - 12/2/2009, 4:20 PM
good point his f-ing right. but then again we have to pass judgment too cause what happens if Brett Ratner
does another comic book movie i.e. Captain America :-o
jazzman - 12/2/2009, 4:25 PM
BRETT RATNER?! WHERE?!

*Horror scream*





InTylerWeTrust - 12/2/2009, 4:37 PM
@InTylerWeTrust82

LOL dont worry i would B!t*h Slap "The Ratner"

@aroyalspider

your so right. couple of things i notice that some people on the net complain about before the movie comes out.

- Heath Ledger shouldnt been casted to play the Joker
- Spider-Man dont have organic webbing
- why they casting Robert Downey Jr to play Iron Man
- Superman symbol is too small
- The Incredible Hulk should of been played by a man in a green suit instead of using CGI Hulk LOL
- why the character is been played by a black actor i aint going to watch the movie LOL
- they better dont use Ultimate Universe in the movie

The list goes on and on.
jazzman - 12/2/2009, 4:41 PM
But he doesn't mean making informed decisions on what a movie PROBABLY will be like, I mean we all think things look good and things look bad, he means the type of person that hears about a movie, maybe who's directing it..maybe a cast member..and immediately assumes it will be shit. Now, in fairness, If it happened to be Stephen Sommers new movie starring Channing Tatum, I would probably make that assumption too!
RorMachine - 12/2/2009, 4:53 PM
haha i love how when an article makes sense, everyone changes their opinion and says they've always agreed w/ the person who makes sense. ah.... human beings... we're so flawed lol
ManOfIron - 12/2/2009, 4:58 PM
thanks jazz, and notice the things you pointed out, all minor changes or choices that more than likely either helped or didnt affect the movies in any way whatsoever.
aroyalspider - 12/2/2009, 4:58 PM
I would like to point out this though. Twilight, when I heard they were making a movie, my first thought was that it would suck, because you cant make a story that bad look good no matter what medium you use. That is unless they wanted to drastically change the story, and everything else about it.
aroyalspider - 12/2/2009, 5:01 PM
I beg to differ. There are some things that come out on the Internet before a movie comes out that absolutely verify beyond any shadow of a doubt that it's going to suck. I do wait for things to be verified and substantiated before passing judgment. Too many people fly into full panic mode over any crazy rumor about a film. Remember the Fox/Warner Watchmen lawsuit? Anyone who knows anything about lawsuits knew that the whole thing would be settled before the release date. Fox just wanted a cut of the action.

For the Watchmen movie, I knew it was going to suck when the rumors of a squidless ending were verified as true. Some of you may like that ending, and I'm not intent on reopening that discussion. I'm a purist on filming stories that were previously written. I don't mind tweaking stories and clipping out parts for the sake of exposition or running length, but changing the ending, and really rendering most of the story pointless is something I vociferously dislike. I went to go see the movie anyway to give it a fair chance, because I am also a fair-minded person, and I had a LOT of problems with it beyond the altered ending.
comicb00kguy - 12/2/2009, 5:02 PM
@comicb00kguy

I'm half tempted to get into a debate about Watchmen, but i believe that that movie in particular was received very differently by just about every one who watched it. Personally, I love both the book and movie equally. But I cant rightfully argue with someone who didnt like the movie though.
aroyalspider - 12/2/2009, 5:08 PM
He's talking about a few guys on this site. We know who you are you bitches.
SirPrize - 12/2/2009, 5:09 PM
@comicbookguy...Thats fair enough..at least you went to see it. Personally I loved it, sans squid and all(Exactly how did its exclusion render the preceding story pointless by the way?) But I have to ask you, as an admitted purist, do you like any CBM? Because not one of them has remained completely faithful to the source story..and not one ever will.
RorMachine - 12/2/2009, 5:10 PM
lol @ Aroyalspider

@ Rorschach01: I stand corrected.
Remember the time I said i doubted the existence of any true comic book purists? Well the fact is that at that point I had never really read a post like comicB00kguy's before. Here's an example.
You were right and I was wrong =(
SixSixteen - 12/2/2009, 5:13 PM
@rorschach01

I'm curious what you thought of the ending? I preferred the movies ending over the comics, it seemed to me that it was more obvious to the world that Dr. Manhattan was at fault. Rather than a giant squid...
aroyalspider - 12/2/2009, 5:17 PM
Jazz, there are some things you cited that would make a purist like myself say that a movie will suck before it comes out.
No dispute about the casting of Ledger or Downey. Casting someone who CAN play the part requires waiting to see the film to see if he pulls it off.That said,
-the idea of turning the Kingpin black was the result of lazy casting. Nothing against Michael Clarke Duncan, who is a fine actor, but why not use a fat white guy as the character has been written for over thirty years?
-Spider-Man's organic webbing is the result of lazy writing. Ultimate Spidey explains the webbing in a logical way for those who can't handle a super-smart teenager concocting the web formula on his own. Why not use that? Peter Parker is one of Marvel's smartest characters. Why not show that?
-no argument about the Hulk being CGI. I grew up with the old TV show and loved it, but it wasn't really the Hulk as we know him in the comics. I had no problem with the show because it did the best it could with the limitations of technology. I'd rather have a CGI Hulk that can throw boxcars with one hand than a guy in green makeup throwing paper mache rocks around.
-Using the Ultimate universe can be a different story. I love Ultimate Spidey and enjoyed Ultimate X-Men (had some problems with it, but I let them go to enjoy the story). I do NOT like Ultimate Avengers or Ultimate Cap, especially that crappy outfit the Ultimate WW2 Cap wears. There are a lot of things floating around right now about the Avengers and Cap movies, and the right thing to do with them is wait until things are verified, not just idle internet speculation.
comicb00kguy - 12/2/2009, 5:18 PM
@comicb00kguy

these are the things we are talking about.

-they had a dispute about the casting of Ledger or Downey. people complain why they casted Brokeback Mountain to play the Joker i seen it on the net from comic book fans and other people. also comic book fans did complain about RDJ been casted as Iron Man.

- did Kingpin been played by a black actor stop you from watching the movie to make a proper judgement. plus they did explain they tried to look for a white actor who has that size of Kingpin.

- "Spider-Man's organic webbing is the result of lazy writing". i dont think so it made more sense on a live action movie.

- the Ultimate universe story line was used in Iron Man and The Incredible Hulk. they did introduce Ultimate Nick Fury in Iron Man. in the The Incredible Hulk they had references to the Ultimate universe also with the supersoldier project. the marvel movies used the classic Marvel storyline and Ultimate story in one movie.
jazzman - 12/2/2009, 5:30 PM
@Darth, haha, I toldja dude! They are out there.

@Aroyalspider...Yeah I agree, it made more sense for the movie in every way really. It only worked in the comic because of the sub plots and hints throughout with the psychics, the genetic research etc..and even at that, to be honest I wasn't crazy about it. It felt like a different story, like I was watching an episode of The Outer Limits or something(Which is what Moore was homaging anyway). Some people love the squid for that very reason...different strokes I guess.

Comicbookguy...actually the Spidey organic web shooters was the result of smart writing I thought. Even as a kid I always thought it was silly that Parker gains Spider strength, he can stick to walls..but when it comes to shooting webs..he has to make them?? Never sat right with me. If the point is to show how smart he is then show him being smart! The movies managed that without sticking to the home made web shooters. After all, if sticking so rigidly to the original origins of these characters was such a big deal, then Wolverine would be running around as a Hulk villain with Whiskers and sewn on claws.
RorMachine - 12/2/2009, 5:31 PM
I'm beginning to believe Captain America is going to be CGI.


I agree with Oswalt, there are a bunch of people that talk themselves into disliking a movie before it ever comes out. If they could try a lttile harder to keep an open mind they may find a Hell of allot of things more enjoyable.


As for The Watchmen, I liked the movie just as much as the book.
Hawksblueyes - 12/2/2009, 5:33 PM
I thought Snyder's Watchmen ending was all round much better - from Nite Owl witnessing Rorschachs death and beating on Ozymandias to getting rid of the stupid squid (which IMO was ridiculous in the book and would have been laughable in a movie) it was just much, much better.

As for Spider-Man's web shooters, it was only lazy in the respect that in a comic book you can explain Peter making his web shooters in a few panels and we'll accept it - in a movie we'd see him build them, test them etc taking up from as little as 15 to as much as 30 minutes of the movie. I think it was both a sensible and logical move on their part to make things easier for the audience and from a storytelling perspective to just make the webbing organic.

As I've said numerous times before - the right blend of classic and Ultimate influences will help the Marvel movies succeed. Making Hawkeye a member of SHIELD for example helps to eliminate the need for a load of backstory and means we can still see the characte rhopefully with the 616 universes personality etc!

Talking of The Ultimates - go check out my fan cast under "Fan Fic"! :)
JoshW - 12/2/2009, 5:42 PM
Who gives a f*#k what he thinks of premature critics. I said this about the Batman franchise, i don't need to see another cop in armour... ROBOBAT sucks. Watchman, I saw it and ZACKOFF Synder was way off the mark! So screw him too. I liked Spidey and the old bucket head movie, Marvel is doing a better job than DC, but both still don't work for me. They should just do animation DVD, after all, comic art characters work better in animation.
'Nuff said!
docnoc - 12/2/2009, 5:42 PM
Rorschach: My purism is a lot more for filming written stories than for characters. I don't like changing the ending of an established story. Would you change the end of Gone with the Wind to see Rhett sweep Scarlett off her heels and go marry her? Have Dorothy decide to stay in Oz and overthrow the Wizard? Have Frodo decide to keep the Ring and face Sauron in a climactic showdown? These things change the whole point of the story. Everything in the Watchmen comic was building up towards that squid. Taking it out changes the whole context of many scenes in the story. I've got to pull my book out to cite specific examples.

To answer your other question, I have enjoyed quite a few comic book movies, actually. The first two Spideys had their flaws, but I enjoyed them enough as a longtime Spidey fan to look past them. I love the 1978 Superman and its first sequel (far moreso the Donner cut). Look past the crappy leather outfits, and the first two X-Men films were a lot of fun. I also LOVED the Hellboy films. Iron Man was excellent, and I also really enjoyed the Incredible Hulk (the Norton one). Can't forget the Rocketeer or the Phantom (the Billy Zane one). Those films all captured the essence of what made the character great and fun. I also enjoyed the second FF film. Hated "cumulogalactus", but loved the interplay between the team, especially Ben and Johnny. Fun movie! My favorite comic movie though would be the Incredibles. That film has everything that makes comics fun in it. I know I'm missing a couple I liked here somewhere... To address them, I enjoyed Batman Begins for its clever explanation of how Batman got his gadgets, but am honestly not the huge fan of it or Dark Knight that most here are. I loved Ledger's performance, but saw some real holes in the story.

Sorry to all for being so long-winded, but these questions needed a little more time to answer right.
comicb00kguy - 12/2/2009, 5:44 PM
@Rorschach01 and joshw24

you guys are so right.
jazzman - 12/2/2009, 5:49 PM
word, patton. word.
CaptainAmazing - 12/2/2009, 5:52 PM
But see, Iv had this conversation about the ending before. Your examples are completely different to what Snyder did because he didn't change what happened, he just changed how it happened. The Squid was just a means to an end..that end being the death of millions..and the subsequent uniting of the world in peace against the imagined alien threat. The same thing happened in the movie! They just changed the means..not the end. Its funny you mention the LOTR, because Jackson did the exact same thing. At the end of the book, after Gollum bites FRodo's finger off he dances about and is so exited that he slips and falls into the fire. Jackson had Frodo and Gollum throw each other in, but Frodo hangs on. Big difference in how it happens, but the same ending is achieved.

Anyway, you can't be too much of a purist to enjoy some of those movies you mention so I would just say your.. hesitant!


RorMachine - 12/2/2009, 5:54 PM
Ok I'll go back and read comments. I gotta say, I waited patiently for Watchmen, saying only good encouraging things, and it still wasn't that good. It didn't suck, but it wasn't worth sitting there in the theater either. It actually made me doubt that it's a good story in the first place.
Betty - 12/2/2009, 6:41 PM
Yo Darth, I was gonna make another avatar for you. Yours is a really fun combo. I was gonna do a Darth Maul/Mulder mash up. That'll still work right?
Betty - 12/2/2009, 6:52 PM
Wow, he just described half the people on here!

Everyone panned Watchmen and thought Wolverine would be good before the trailers came out, then when they came out most people, I know I was, were blown away by Watchmen; and when the Wolverine workprint hit teh web, everyone shot it down!
THEHAWK - 12/2/2009, 7:10 PM
comicb00kguy: You're using a straw-man argument there, I'm afraid. Lord of the Rings (and many, many other movie adaptations of novels and other media) made far more changes from the books than Watchmen did. Magnitudes more. Ask a Tolkien purist - they'll bore you for hours listing all the deviations...

Watchmen didn't change the ending in a story sense much at all - peace was still forced upon the world through a lie. Only the means was changed to all intents and purposes.

For what it's worth, Moore's ending drew criticism the first time around because dna and compositional analysis alone would have revealed the 'squid' to be entirely terrestrial - a technical feat that would have been no problem in Watchmen's 1985, probably - certainly enough to bring up the possibility of fakery and hence shattering the peace almost immediately as old suspicions arise tenfold (even without the unplanned R's diary). Adrian would have known that, surely, so it was a bit of a fudge by Moore in order to allow him to cover the comic-book alien invasion trope in the book. In many ways, Adrian's scheme in the movie is a lot cleverer than his counterpart's in the book. :ducks:

I understand why, as a purist, you'd want to have seen the squid, but then it really would have been a five-hour movie (and I agree, if he'd had that luxury it might have been worth it for the head[frick] alone), so using Manhattan was more elegant for the purposes of serving the story in the admittedly limited movie format (we all know a mini-series would be ideal, but that wasn't a realistic proposition).

Surely, as an appreciator of the art of writing, you can see how that was an elegant means of dealing with the problem, at the very least, even if you really didn't like the movie anyway?
KeithM - 12/2/2009, 8:01 PM
Keith: I do love me some LOTR, but I ain't no Tolkien purist, that's for sure! If you want the full story, read the books. If you want the abridged edition, watch the movies. They are a splendid adaptation of the books; although, I will admit that Arwen and Aragorn love thing kinda drove me up a wall after watching it over and over and over and over again.

Watchmen was a great adaptation I had doubts at first, I mean it's Watchmen, but after I heard Snyder was onboard my fears were pretty much put at rest. Now, a lot of people hate Snyder, that's fine, I think he's an O-K director but for adaptations, the man is pretty damn good. In fact, adaptations are (almost) specifically all he's done his entire career as a director. The film has changes. What adaptation doesn't? But like Keith pointed out, the story was still intact. All we lost was some exposistion that made the story richer. But I didn't feel like anything was really lost without the Squid. I like to see it, the adaptation, as a sort've companion to the book in many ways. Not the real deal, but pretty damn close, and still good all the same.
IrvineGray - 12/3/2009, 12:57 AM
I agree.
I say:<>.
superheromoviefan - 12/3/2009, 1:20 AM
@ BETTY!! [frick]ing A man! That would be outstanding! Please do!
SixSixteen - 12/3/2009, 6:36 AM
COULDN'T HAVE BEEN SAID ANY MORE CLEARER
GUNSMITH - 12/3/2009, 7:22 AM
Keith and Ror: I had my problems with LOTR, especially the second one, but my point is that Jackson didn't change the ending that much. Gollum and the ring wound up falling into the fire. Changing the ending to Frodo deciding to claim the ring at the Cracks of Doom and fight Sauron in a climactic battle would have been a drastic change to the ending that would have ruined the whole point of the quest.

As for the ending of Watchmen: I disliked the new ending and thought that it destroyed the whole point of the story. Uniting the people of Earth against a perceived ALIEN threat makes sense. All of the nations of Earth put aside their differences to fight off a common enemy. Think back to the Cold War. America and Russia were bitter enemies who each had the power to wipe the other off the face of the planet. It took an OUTSIDE threat like the squid to force both sides to put aside their differences. Using Dr. Manhattan to achieve this end does NOT have the same effect. The Russians and other enemies of America think the whole thing was an American plot to force them to yield to America's unquestionable superiority, and it only stiffens their resolve against them. They won't be bullied into submission. Our allies are scared to death. They live in fear of America, because they don't want America siccing Dr. Manhattan on their country and wiping them out. There isn't the UNIFYING of ALL people of Earth and real WORLD PEACE that was the ULTIMATE GOAL of Adrian's plan. They may be united in FEAR of an ANGRY GOD, but is THAT the key to REAL world peace? Of course not!

And Keith, I don't think it would have made the movie any longer to do the squid ending. I certainly understand cutting parts out of the middle of a story for better narrative flow (like Tom Bombadil in LOTR), but don't see changing the ending of an established story as necessary.

And the worst part about the ending ruining the story was that SO MUCH of the Watchmen was DEAD ON PERFECT. I just wish that the squid had at least been offered as an alternate ending. I wanted so much to love this film, but that ending just killed it for me, especially as I took time to think about it more.


comicb00kguy - 12/3/2009, 7:51 AM
I know there are more things that need a response. Please allow me to do so later today after work. I don't want anyone thinking I'm ignoring them.

And I'm a purist only in that I want to see a character done right. Don't make drastic changes in the origin (like Doom being on the rocket with the FF), or drastic changes in the costume (where to begin with that?). Tweaking things is fine, like changing the spider that bit Peter Parker to a genetically modified one. Characters should also act right (Sandman does NOT turn into a huge guttural monster- he can still talk). It's not hard to get things right. There are any number of great animated series out there that do it. I'm NOT one of these guys that has to have every little detail perfect. I know a few, and respect their opinions, but that's not me.
comicb00kguy - 12/3/2009, 8:03 AM
ALSO is this stupid f&#K NOT GUILTY of being a premature critic?
docnoc - 12/3/2009, 8:39 AM
i admit i though iron man was guna fail cus RDJ was stark very happy to say i cudnt of been more wrong i dnt think any 1 els could pull it off now same with the joker i didnt think ledger would do such a good job and again cudnt be more wrong but then again im sure alot of you though wolverine would be awesome but it was such a bad film but that was mainly due to the story .
Roscoe182 - 12/3/2009, 8:53 AM
@Comicb00kguy

I get where you're coming from, but I think that it's also important to remember that many of these characters have already have multiple variations of themselves for generations before the movie even came out.

Watchmen is an exception to this rule, obviously, but I don't think that's any reason to not give it a start.

If anything, the BEST version of Watchmen ever was Saturday Morning Watchmen. I mean c'mon! Dr Manhattan turned into a CAR int hat one!
MovieTheaterLad - 12/3/2009, 8:57 AM
Darth- You bring up GREAT points. WE, the internet comic book movie community, are MILES away from being oblivious [frick]s that know nothing of what we are talking about. We base our opinions on the source material and whatever tid bits are reveiled of it's adaptation. "Some" of us do go overboard but sometimes, logic is logical and common sense is sensible. We normally don't pass judgement until we've seen a trailer long enough to reveil effects, acting and plot. For instance, in the case of Dragonball or Avatar, we voice our opinions no matter how negative they are and rightfully so even if we haven't seen the film because it's our personal tastes at stake. If they hype avatar to a point were the trailer can simply not deliver the goods, then it's over hyped and we don't need to see the full film to realise it. If Dragonball's trailer had shitty fighting sequences, shitty effects and shitty acting then how could the full film be any better?

People that merely hate haters in general don't go to the full extent to learn WHY some of us bitch about a film we haven't seen yet. They don't seem to realise that in order for a film to be appealing to the public, it needs to be sold to us in an appealing way. If the production team of the film fails to sell it to us, why would we spend our hard earned money on a film that isn't interesting to us? That's what rentals and 5$ bins at Wal-Mart are for. Granted some people just come on the web to hate for the sake of hating. To follow the trend of internet trolling. But when we do have a reason to bitch and we can back it up with valid arguments, why the hell not? It's no more a crime to bitch about a film we haven't seen yet(provided we have the arguments) than it is to blindly follow the herd of sheep that spend impulsively to be mildly entertained.
Shaman - 12/3/2009, 9:07 AM
"And I'm a purist only in that I want to see a character done right. Don't make drastic changes in the origin (like Doom being on the rocket with the FF), or drastic changes in the costume (where to begin with that?). Tweaking things is fine, like changing the spider that bit Peter Parker to a genetically modified one. Characters should also act right (Sandman does NOT turn into a huge guttural monster- he can still talk). It's not hard to get things right. There are any number of great animated series out there that do it. I'm NOT one of these guys that has to have every little detail perfect. I know a few, and respect their opinions, but that's not me."

I understand man. I have thoughts like that.

I have often said that there are several things that film makers need to leave alone and keep "as is" when making them into a movie. Specifically they need to keep the powers and the personality exactly the same is ain the book. They need to keep the origin story close, but with tweaks where ever necessary to modernize or to make it more logical.

SixSixteen - 12/3/2009, 9:14 AM
Oswalt is right guys, never pass judgement on a movie before it comes out, including Avatar. And don't forget, people thought that District 9 was going to fall hard, but it didn't! So those of you going harsh on Avatar, don't pass judgement just yet, wait until it comes out.
airbeyonder18 - 12/3/2009, 9:33 AM
airbeyonder18- District 9 looked very decent to me even though i never saw it. Avatar still looks like shit to me. What if i'm right about both? Those are my opinions and my tastes. The movie doesn't look a single ounce as good as they fluffed it out to be. I don't like the plot nor do i like the CGI. What on earth could make me change my mind? I'm still waiting for a good trailer or logical reasons that are proven by facts.
Shaman - 12/3/2009, 9:41 AM
Sometimes facts aren't enough, you just gotta go out and see it for yourself. And I respect your opinion and tastes. But just hear me out: Why would James Cameron(Terminator and Titanic great movies, Titanic most successful movie ever) come out of retirement after so long just to make this film unless he had a good reason.
airbeyonder18 - 12/3/2009, 9:46 AM
@ Shaman: Thanks for noticing man.

There are some of us that are habitually in the know about these movies long before they come out.. always abreast of all the latest spoilers and insider info on what's going on with the production. Hell that's what this site is here for!

and Damn right... if there is anyone in the world has a reason and a right to bitch or to say whether or no something will be good or not it's us. Because we are the ones that know what we are talking about.

Hollywood, and a lot of the more casual, passive fans have trouble with, and often flat out deny something very important:

That WE MATTER! Fanbois and fangurls DO have REAL clout.
Especially us who watch closely day after day.
I don't know about you guys, but freinds, family, coworkers, etc always come to ME to ask what I think about CBMs because they know I know about it.

And what do I tell them? If I like what the film maker is doing, (Spider - Man 1, TDK) I say " It's gonna RULE! You HAVE to see it. If I don't like what the film maker is doing (Wolverine, FF) then I tell them "It SUCKS. Don't bother"
See how that works? We. do. matter.
SixSixteen - 12/3/2009, 9:51 AM
airbeyonder18- Believe me bud, i've heard that argument more times than i should've. It's the same thing as saying "he's broken records before so let's all suck his dick and think that all the man touches is gold". If that's not a sheep argument, i have no idea what is. I personally "enjoyed" Aliens, T2 and True Lies(only because of Tom Arnold). None of those BLEW MY MIND actually, they were mearly enjoyable films. The rest is shit to me. Cameron is nowhere near godhood no matter how many sheep whent to see Dicaprio go down with the ship. And no matter how many sheep went to spend their money on TDK, I still enjoyed Ironman WAY WAAAAYYY more. Box office profits mean nothing to me. Cameron came back of retirement to bring an innovative way of filming to incorporate CGI, period. It still doesn't make Avatar any better. The plot is still bland and unoriginal and the effects are still average. The movie has NOTHING that holds interest to me in the slightest. Don't get me wrong, it doesn't mean that Avatar will be utter shit. It could be just as enjoyable as any other 5$ bin movie at Wal-Mart. I'm just saying it's been overhyped up my ass so much that it's leaving a bad taste in my mouth and i wouldn't spend 30$ on an Imax ticket to see the film no matter how revolutionnary the filming process for it was. NOW, if he had come out of retirement with his revolutionnary way of filming and had done the next SPIDER-MAN film, THEN i'd be psyched like a pre-pubescent teenaged Twilight girl!!! But such is not the case unfortunitely.

Darth- EXACTLY!!!
Shaman - 12/3/2009, 10:21 AM
pattons right..watchmen was great, what more could you want? people need to realize, there is only so much time per film!like spidys web shooters...if they explained how peter invented them that would be like 20 mins you wouldnt have him swingin around! its compremise and sacrifice!i will admit i was against heath,but only because he said(i dont really like comics).but god was i wrong, but when you do the pre research we all do....i think we are aloud too bitch a little.... i mean its what we do!?...right?
ProfOJ - 12/3/2009, 12:12 PM
Well I can understand your points and I respect that. Even I don't think Cameron is in the director godhood. Ha ha.
airbeyonder18 - 12/3/2009, 12:19 PM
shamen....i agree ironman was every bit as good as tdk.its like thor..thats gonna be a hard one,but as long as its close we need too stand by it! theres alot riding on that movie,thor and cap! both are going too be very hard too translate ther costumes in the real world....but if there different are we gonna shun them? we almost cant! this is what we all have dreamed of since diapers, and our stupid little bitches cant,DONT compare too the big picture! i think ALL the marvel movies at least were decent,even hulk,daredevil and spidy and x3....ther more than we could of hoped for as children!!
ProfOJ - 12/3/2009, 12:24 PM
ProfOJ- AMEN!

airbeyonder18- Well no movie can please "everybody" so i hope you have a great time watching avatar. I sincerely mean that :)
Shaman - 12/3/2009, 2:04 PM
I'm against Heath Ledger 100%, he's not really much of an actor and I really don't think dying should garner anyone an Oscar.
aroyalspider - 12/3/2009, 4:12 PM
Darth: It's nice to find someone who understands what I'm saying. You're dead-on right, my friend.

MovieLad: I'd have to agree that Saturday Morning Watchmen was the best version of that comic! I'm also certainly aware that most long-running characters have had multiple variations of themselves before any movie came out. That's what makes these characters so great! The basic formula of what they do stays the same, but the character changes to mirror the times of the story. The essence of the character- what makes him/her interesting and unique- remains the same, though.

Now, would someone explain to me HOW it would take twenty minutes to explain Parker coming up with his web formula? That scene should only take two minutes or so tops as Peter devises the formula for it (or just plays around with his Dad's formula, if we use the Ultimate version), and could provide a good funny scene as Peter tries to keep Aunt May from discovering his room/basement full of web fluid he just shot out. I know I've seen this done before. Anyone who reads old Spidey stories knows that this was one of the fun elements of the stories- how often did Spidey run out of fluid during a big fight, and have to improvise something to win? It adds an extra little element of drama, and requires a little cleverness on the part of the writers. Not just being a lazy hack and saying "oh, he can shoot out enough webbing to cover the Brooklyn Bridge and stil have plenty to fight the entire Sinister Six." All I ask from a comic movie is that it be fun and that it capture the essence of what makes the character interesting. Is that asking too much?

Which leads to another question: How do so many writers for animated superhero series get the characters right, or at least close enough that the show is still good, but these live-action guys so often miss the mark?
comicb00kguy - 12/3/2009, 5:10 PM
comicb00kguy- That's cause the holloywood studios start out with one question in mind: "How can we modify this and still keep it good?" Kinda retarded isn't it??? As if "comics" are only for the "special people" reading them.
Shaman - 12/4/2009, 6:12 AM
Great point, Shaman! Comics have always been looked down upon by the "serious intellectual" types who think that the stories lack any of the elements of legitimate literature and "mature adult" types who see comic books as mere fodder for children. Look at how adults who read and enjoy comics are usually portrayed in TV and movies. Immature and stupid. That has always disgusted and angered me. Directors and writers with this attitude almost never deliver a good comic movie when stuck with one by their studio. Let them do something else, and leave these movies to people who love and understand the wonderful characters who inhabit comics.
comicb00kguy - 12/4/2009, 7:47 AM
Sorry dude, but for me, and Im pretty sure many people, what made Spider man interesting was not where he was going to find his next batch of frigging web fluid! In fact, I always thought it was downright repetitive and silly.."Oh ow, he's ran out of web fluid again!..MMM, I wonder at what point the dude is just going to start, yknow, CARRYING MORE"
RorMachine - 12/4/2009, 8:08 AM
Well there are plenty of stuff that i wished they kept from the comics but in regards to Sipdey, i'm with Ror on this. I never liked his web shooters and how he always missed out on some. I mean, if he's smart enough to invent it, he's surely smart enough to make himself a utility belt filled with cartriges. IMO, it was a week point of the character and i was glad that they fixed it in the films. Plus, the videogames would've sucked even more if you had to run around town to grab more cartriges left right and centre in order to get to the missions in time. To much chalenge is like not enough IMO.
Shaman - 12/4/2009, 10:29 AM
THAT'S A PERFECT EXAMPLE WHY PEOPLE WERE SAYING DONT GO SEE PUNISHER WARZONE WAY BEFORE IT EVEN CAME OUT AND THEN NO ONE WENT AND SAW IT. THAT TO ME IS STUPID!! I'M A PUNISHER FAN AND HAVE COLLECTED THE COMICS FROM THE OLD TO CURRENT PUNISHER MAX AND THAT MOVIE PAID TRIBUTE TO THE PUNISHER AND WAS THE PERFECT PUNISHER FILM AND WAS ACCURATE UNLIKE THOMAS JANES FILM WHICH WAS NOT EXACTLEY LIKE THE COMIC THOUGH IM A FAN OF ALL THREE PUNISHER FILMS INCLUDING DOLPH LUNGREN IT HAD EVERYTHING FROM THE OLD TO CURRENT MAX STUFF WRITTEN ALL OVER IT AND I HOPE TO GOD IT HAS A SEQUEL COMING SOON. PEOPLE WERE SAYING DONT GO SEE IT AND IT WASNT EVEN FINISHED BEING MADE. IT WAS STILL IN PRODUCTION.
ladder7 - 12/4/2009, 3:43 PM
Darth, it works ok. I don't think it'll make a good avatar. Can't really tell it's Mulder's face when it's small. It's DarthMaulder!

Betty - 12/6/2009, 11:27 AM

Please log in to post comments.

Don't have an account?
Please Register.