Recommended Posts

Yes. I smell indisputable ass-kickery.

Although I'm interested in these sentient boobs firghting werewolves...any news on production?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That reviewer's surface excitement pretty much sums up why I'm not really interested at all in this movie. It seems like I'm the only person ever because all my friends are super excited and think the trailers are the best things ever.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
all my friends are super excited and think the trailers are the best things ever.

But those trailers are extremely well done :ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, it's beginning to bug me that it's looking like 100% action just for the sake of action. I'll still see it, but I'm not quite as excited as I was a few weeks ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah, it's beginning to bug me that it's looking like 100% action just for the sake of action. I'll still see it, but I'm not quite as excited as I was a few weeks ago.

eh, I guess I'm not alone. The trailer really just screams testosterone and loud noises and I don't expect anything more than that from the movie. The only "well done" part, that gets me about all the trailers/ads, is the rebuttal to the arrows blotting out the sun.

The production value is great but it hasn't shown me anything to make me think highly of it as a movie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see where your coming from, the trailer does give it the feel of a purely action orientated movie. I guess maybe that's why I'm looking forward to it. A pure action movie is good every now and then.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I just saw a movie that’ll give your eyes boners, make your balls scream and make you poop DVD copies of THE TRANSPORTER. It’s called 300. I don’t know what the title has to do with the movie, but they could’ve called it KITTENS MAKING CANDLES and it’d still rule.

It’s about these 300 Greek dudes who stomp the sugar-coated shit out of like a million other dudes.

Nice little contradiction there. Or maybe he just has a ridiculously small attnetion span. :P

Still a funny article, though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pause the trailer around the 1:52 mark. You'll need fast fingers, as it last for a brief instant. :w00t:

Scroll down if you weren't able to stop it in time.

rorschach-s.jpg

300 director Zack Snyder's next project is Watchmen, and this is a test shot of Rorschach, which he included in the trailer as an Easter Egg. (By the way, click the image for a much larger version.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just saw the movie about an half an hour ago.

Man the action scenes were awesome and the comic-esque narration didn't detract from the movie at all

(not that I was expecting it to).

Also, did anyone else see the Spider-Man 3 trailer with a couple of Venom shots in it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
rorschach-s.jpg

300 director Zack Snyder's next project is Watchmen, and this is a test shot of Rorschach, which he included in the trailer as an Easter Egg. (By the way, click the image for a much larger version.)

Holy Shit!!!!!

I have Rorschach as my picture on MySpace. I want to be him for Halloween, but can't figure out how to make the mask. That pic looks like they made it out of a heavy material, like burlap.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just saw the movie about an half an hour ago.

Man the action scenes were awesome and the comic-esque narration didn't detract from the movie at all

(not that I was expecting it to).

Also, did anyone else see the Spider-Man 3 trailer with a couple of Venom shots in it?

The camera work was really good. I thought the narration really destroyed the tone of the movie. The action was indeed awesome, but that is pretty much all it ended up being. There was nothing surprising and I really think you will like or dislike the movie depending on what you expect going into it.

I put my spidey 3 trailer notes in the spidey 3 thread for those interested

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Never read the graphic novel, but that movie was AMAZING. :w00t:

A graphic novel is something that was originally produced in one volume, such as A History of Violence, The Death of Captain Marvel and Sin City: Family Values. A collection of work originally published as individual comic books is a trade paperback, like 300, Watchmen and The Crow. I understand it sounds more prestigious to say "inspired by the graphic novel," but it slays me because it isn't right and it's nothing more than the media attempting to give credibility to a medium that doesn't need it. Hell, if comic books needed credibility, if the words "comic" and "book" seen side by side are so repulsive to Hollywood, why are they leeching properties left and right? If this art form is so damn despicable, why have adaptations grossed Hollywood 6.3 billion dollars since 1998? (And that's simply the box office numbers. Add in DVD sales, including those of cartoons such as JLU and Teen Titans, and that number explodes.)

See that's what pisses me off; they're willing to take our money, but not the name from which this billion-dollar cash cow was spawned.

(James, this isn't directed towards you. I'm simply venting over the media's improper use of the phrase.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Never read the graphic novel, but that movie was AMAZING. :w00t:

A graphic novel is something that was originally produced in one volume, such as A History of Violence, The Death of Captain Marvel and Sin City: Family Values. A collection of work originally published as individual comic books is a trade paperback, like 300, Watchmen and The Crow. I understand it sounds more prestigious to say "inspired by the graphic novel," but it slays me because it isn't right and it's nothing more than the media attempting to give credibility to a medium that doesn't need it. Hell, if comic books needed credibility, if the words "comic" and "book" seen side by side are so repulsive to Hollywood, why are they leeching properties left and right? If this art form is so damn despicable, why have adaptations grossed Hollywood 6.3 billion dollars since 1998? (And that's simply the box office numbers. Add in DVD sales, including those of cartoons such as JLU and Teen Titans, and that number explodes.)

See that's what pisses me off; they're willing to take our money, but not the name from which this billion-dollar cash cow was spawned.

(James, this isn't directed towards you. I'm simply venting over the media's improper use of the phrase.)

No worries. It helps to vent sometimes. I know. :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

300 director Zack Snyder's next project is Watchmen, and this is a test shot of Rorschach, which he included in the trailer as an Easter Egg. (By the way, click the image for a much larger version.)

Holy Shit!!!!!

I have Rorschach as my picture on MySpace. I want to be him for Halloween, but can't figure out how to make the mask. That pic looks like they made it out of a heavy material, like burlap.

I did a quick shadows / highlights tweak to make the mask a bit more visible, thought everyone might enjoy seeing it as well...

Rorschach.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I understand it sounds more prestigious to say "inspired by the graphic novel," but it slays me because it isn't right and it's nothing more than the media attempting to give credibility to a medium that doesn't need it. Hell, if comic books needed credibility, if the words "comic" and "book" seen side by side are so repulsive to Hollywood, why are they leeching properties left and right? If this art form is so damn despicable, why have adaptations grossed Hollywood 6.3 billion dollars since 1998? (And that's simply the box office numbers. Add in DVD sales, including those of cartoons such as JLU and Teen Titans, and that number explodes.)

Actually, I believe it could also be cheaper to print Graphic Novel then say, Four Issue Comic Book Limited Series* in advertisments

*I believe 300 was four issues, I may be wrong.

Doesn't make it right, but it could be another reason.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The term graphic novel to me(and most people it seems) is not restricted to whether or not it was released as 1 part or many. Watchmen is widely referred to as a graphic novel even though it was released in different parts originally. The term refers to the fact that they are made from higher quality materials, and usually involve one long storyline with a beginning and end.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graphic_novel

I use the analogy that graphic novels are like movies, and comics are like television shows. Either way, I don't see why anyone would get upset over this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The term graphic novel to me(and most people it seems) is not restricted to whether or not it was released as 1 part or many. Watchmen is widely referred to as a graphic novel even though it was released in different parts originally. The term refers to the fact that they are made from higher quality materials, and usually involve one long storyline with a beginning and end.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graphic_novel

I use the analogy that graphic novels are like movies, and comics are like television shows. Either way, I don't see why anyone would get upset over this.

I agree with you and took that side in an argument in a thread a little while back. I don't remember the topic and am too lazy to look it up right now but there were valid points on both sides. I'm still on the side that the bound collection of 300 on my shelf is a graphic novel and have no problem with movies like League of Ext..., 300, Sin City, etc..., being referred to as "based on the graphic novel."

http://forums.earth-2.net/index.php?showto...l=graphic+novel

Edited by TheRetreater

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I understand it sounds more prestigious to say "inspired by the graphic novel," but it slays me because it isn't right and it's nothing more than the media attempting to give credibility to a medium that doesn't need it. Hell, if comic books needed credibility, if the words "comic" and "book" seen side by side are so repulsive to Hollywood, why are they leeching properties left and right? If this art form is so damn despicable, why have adaptations grossed Hollywood 6.3 billion dollars since 1998? (And that's simply the box office numbers. Add in DVD sales, including those of cartoons such as JLU and Teen Titans, and that number explodes.)

Actually, I believe it could also be cheaper to print Graphic Novel then say, Four Issue Comic Book Limited Series* in advertisments

*I believe 300 was four issues, I may be wrong.

Doesn't make it right, but it could be another reason.

I'm not proposing they note the number of issues (five, by the way); all I'm asking is that they say "comic book" in regards to the source. Because...

The term graphic novel to me(and most people it seems) is not restricted to whether or not it was released as 1 part or many. Watchmen is widely referred to as a graphic novel even though it was released in different parts originally. The term refers to the fact that they are made from higher quality materials, and usually involve one long storyline with a beginning and end.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graphic_novel

I use the analogy that graphic novels are like movies, and comics are like television shows. Either way, I don't see why anyone would get upset over this.

I hold firm that a graphic novel contains original content (i.e. Jew Ganster, The King, Owly: Flying Lessons), and a collection of previously published content (i.e. Civil War, Punisher: Born, Kingdom Come) is a trade paperback. Either way, they're both comic books. What makes that term so dirty?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It really just comes down to who has the power of defining a term. The understanding of words changes all the time depending on the uses that get saturated through society. I've never had a problem with 300 or Watchmen being "graphic novels" when it is in that collected book format. It is a story: beginning, middle, and end.

So who gets to define the term? the industry? the fans? or the general population? The industry seems to be fine with this use of graphic novel or it wouldn't be showing up in the movies as such. Using our little sample, the fans are split. Being divided into halves, I'm not sure that the people opposed to its use can affect society enough to restrict the term. The general population is a flock of sheep. This isn't always a bad thing. It keeps things, like language, consistent. Language is fluid, go with the flow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Saw it last night and I've got to say it's the best summer blockbuster type flick I've seen in years. The ONLY one I've seen in a decade that I feel I NEED to see again. It was better than if they took out all of the 'I've never been this far away from the shire before, Frodo" bullshit from all three LotR films and condensed the best into 2 hours. Better than that. I was supercharged after leaving the theatre.

Lena Headey made me slack-jawed every time she was on screen and Butler was fucking fantastic in spite of his Edinburgh accent.

I can only think of one better way to spend 2 hours but that involves chocolate syrup and Monica Bellucci.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Saw it last night and I've got to say it's the best summer blockbuster type flick I've seen in years.

Too bad it is winter.

I'm not really a huge fan of 300 but I feel the LotR comparison is unfair. I despise LotR in their movie (and book) forms. 300 was better than that. Nerd blasphemy I know, but LotR compares to Star Wars in that aspect. The source materials create great stories... but are told horribly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.