Characters that improved on television compared to their original comic counterpart

Characters that improved on television compared to their original comic counterpart.

Pic related for me.

Other urls found in this thread:

cinemablend.com/new/30-Best-Superhero-Movies-Ranked-128797.html?story_page=8
ranker.com/crowdranked-list/the-best-superhero-movies-ever-made
filmschoolrejects.com/51-best-superhero-movies-ever/4/
imdb.com/list/ls032971261/
pastemagazine.com/articles/2017/01/the-100-best-superhero-movies-of-all-time.html?a=1
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

Snyder fucked the costume designs except for Rorschach. He had to streamline them but THAT IS NOT THE POINT

Also you're wrong

I'd like to hear your reasoning before I call you names, you filthy casual

In my opinion Nite Owl's and Silk Spectre's costumes were much better in the movie than in the comic.

The fact that characters like Nite Owl or Ozymandias look "cooler" in the movie is entirely missing the point. They're supposed to look garish and stupid.

Dan is supposed to look like a fat man playing at a child's dream because that's his character.

Ozy is supposed to look like a flamboyant gay pretending to be an emperor.

Silk Spectre is supposed to look revealing, with no identifiable personality or distinctive costume of her own, because hers is a legacy title of a 50's sex symbol that Laurie didn't want in the first place.

How is that an improvment?

Kys yourself

Shouldn't you be defending JL right now, Zack?

That's because you're a casual

I'm not saying they look necessarily cooler, just better designed. It makes more sense to me that a super hero that relies on gadgets etc. like Nite Owl would have a more high tech suit like he had in the movie.

And I don't necessarily like the movie costume for Silk Spectre, but in the comic she looks like she's wearing a weird pajama or something.

>kill yourself yourself

Good job, newfag.

Moore's underlying point with Watchmen was that if superheroes are put in a "real world" context, they look absurd and silly. That's the major thing the movie misses, because it tries to make the costumes look sleek, the fights slo-mo and cool, and the ending to be less ridiculous. In doing that, they miss the whole point.

Like, of course Silk Spectre's costume looks like weird pyjamas, look at any female superhero costume. Of course Nite Owl doesn't look tactically sound, his tactics involve a giant floating owlship and snow-segways.

There's a difference between things that look good just as a costume design, and things that fit the theme of the piece it's set in. The Watchmen film absolutely missed the mark when trying to get the tone of the comic book down, because it was embarrassed to look stupid, when the stupidity is the point of Watchmen.

I think one of the things that I liked the most about the movie was that Nite Owl actually tried to stop Rorschach and Dr. Manhattan in the final showdown. In the comic he's simply having sex with Silk Spectre while his friend dies and doesn't give a shit about the rest.

Couldn't disagree more.
Pudgy, retired hero look fits him way better.

>Moore's underlying point with Watchmen was that if superheroes are put in a "real world" context, they look absurd and silly
Watchmen takes itself very seriously throughout, so that's clearly not the case.

>but THAT IS NOT THE POINT
This is arguably the simplest way to sum up his Watchmen. He missed the point of damn near everything, which is almost impressive given its almost a shot for shot adaptation.

You can all hate on his movie, it's still considered one of the best super hero movies ever.

By fucking who? Retards? It's literally the best superhero story of all time, and Snyder still managed to fuck that up. It should be in the high 90s on RT and it hovers around 60. Fuck that Hack and FUCK YOU for being a supporter.

Given that the source material was dubbed to be "unadaptable" or "unfilmable", I say it was above decent.

I'd agree with him. Not so much as to them looking silly, but yes to them being absurd. They're all meant to be psychologically damaged people playing at heroism. I mean shit, Niteowl's running around in a furry suit and has erectile dysfunction. That's not subtle.
But whatever. This is a bait thread anyway.

>it's still considered one of the best super hero movies ever.

>he fell for the Sup Forums meme

It's not bait, sweety, there are people with different opinions on this world.

I agree.
Moore fucked up by showing Dan having sex while Rorsach(sp?) dies.
That was out of left field and really dumb.

It takes its story seriously, but never its subject matter. There's a difference there, and that's why it works as a deconstruction. Moore and Gibbons didn't have the reverence for the superhero genre that American writers did.

>You may have your opinions, but other people, who compare this film to the yearly corporate excretions of quips and/or grimdark, consider it good.

And good for them. I masturbated to the sex scene a lot.

>Good on them for making a half-decent film of an unfilmable work, all they had to do was alter the basic approach to the material and miss the point entirely

>people who thought Rorschach was "a total badass"

He was supposed to be a disgusting psychopath - disgusting both physically and mentally. Anyone who thought he was a total badass and someone to look up to missed the point really fucking badly.

>and that's why it works as a deconstruction.
But it doesn't. Ozy only being comic book smart is trying to have the cake and eat it too. It breaks the story by making the whole thing nonsensical and ONLY working on a meta level, not a narrative one.

Moore takes HIMSELF very seriously, but he doesnt take the entire "superhero" thing seriously at all, especially not in Watchmen

Just stay on Sup Forums you fucking casual retard

It's called juxtaposition

Uhm, no, the one who missed the point in this case was Moore. Even in the comic Rorschach was easily the most "badass" and likeable character. You could actually sympathize with him and many, I'd say most people agreed that Veidt's idea was fucking retarded.

It's because Dan doesn't care about Rorschach and wants to get his dick wet.

>Ozy only being comic book smart is trying to have the cake and eat it too

How do you mean? I'll admit the octopus comes out of left field a bit, but I'm pretty sure that was kind of the point. There's a massive mystery going throughout the narrative to set it up, and the climax has to be suitably dramatic to stop the drawn-out cold war. Aliens are silly, but as silly as a nuclear god?

You'd be very surprised.

THANK YOU.

But that doesn't jive with his character up to that point.

>Even in the comic Rorschach was easily the most "badass" and likeable character.
That's not Hollis Mason.

Ozy's scheme was blatantly intended to have flaws. Not least that he, despite avoiding other pitfalls of it, assumes the 'comic book logic that the day can be saved once and for all, despite as Manhattan says that ''nothing ever ends''.

>Anyone who thought he was a total badass and someone to look up
and that would be Snyder

I'm pretty sure the whole point of that is that they've both seen things that have horrified them and they seek solace in each other's arms. Rorschach makes his choice, he couldn't live in Veidt's new world. Hell, he could barely live in the one he was in. Rorschach was a sick dog, in pain, driven by a moralism that clashed with the world he lived in. He would never find a moments peace, and Dan knew that about him.

It would have been nice, though, if they'd had a goodbye.

The costumes in the movie don't look "cooler" they're updated to modern standards.

Dan in the movie looks cool in the suit, but is still a dork outside of it based on fashion sense.

Silk Spectre still wears a revealing outfit, except it's tight latex with garters and stockings to draw attention to the full thighs and ass. I'm not sure how this could be improved, aside from putting Silk Spectre in high cut leotard and leg warmers to capture the feel of the 80s.

Ozy is still dressed like an emperor, albeit one that is upfront about being a tyrant instead of bullshitting people with breads and circuses to keep the masses content.

And here I thought the character we were supposed to sympathize with was the Comedian.

Yup, but Moore wanted Ozy to be likeable and Rorschach to be unlikeable, but failed miserably. Rorschach is the most popular character of Watchmen.

Personally, I hated Ozy's character since the beginning.

Here's the problem: Moore's version of the Watchmen doesn't really hold up in modern times because people nowadays are aware that superheroes in the real world would be goofy.

He became more "likeable" towards the end.

He made the mistake of making Rorschach the driven underdog and Ozy the (seemingly) passive Corporate Media type.

Rorschach is likeable because he doesn't commit mass murder for the greater good, or his ideals. All the people he tortured were eviler than him with exception to the Moloch.

Look at the prison fight scene in the comic, then look at the movie. It's blatantly pornographic and drawn out to be a sweet fight scene. Updating the suits to pass in the modern day, again, defeats the purpose. If you think these suits were the height of design in 1985, you're sorely mistaken, they were dated and silly then too.

Well, duh. Anybody over 12 knows that superheroes in the real world would be stupid. Watchmen is 90% of the reason that cape comics went nuts trying to be taken more seriously in the 80s-90s.

it speaks to how good the comic is that even a shit ass adaptation made by a hack simpleton can still be considered great storytelling

>All the people he tortured were eviler than him with exception to the Moloch.
Dropping the harmless masochist down an elevator shaft is fucking retarded too user.

But it is his very ideals that blinds him to the scale?

but he's unlikable because he'd allow mass murder to take place for "justice" for a lesser murder. the damage had already been done, he could've killed ozy and been done with it, but he was a dumb and broken. he's also a huge asshole in general when he's not being an grimy edgelord. you can shower and fight crime, it's possible.

By who? Chucklefucks like you on Sup Forums? It's a decent film sure but it's not by any means one of the best anythings ever, even as an adaptation it doesn't work.

that's like bragging about eating the tastiest piece of shit.

don't knock it till you try it

It honestly isn't except by Reddit and Snyder cocksuckers on Sup Forums

Who cares about the comic. If Snyder copied the tone of Moore's work, then the movie would look too similar to Kick Ass and Super in terms of tone and pacing.

The masochist had it coming for trying to get superheroes to beat him up to satisfy his urges. That's pretty minor compared to Ozymandias, who committed a blatant act of terrorism to end the Cold War.

Then your opinion is fucking wrong, and absolutely no one agrees with you because you're a drooling retard.

>Who cares about the comic.
Fucking idiot
>The masochist had it coming for trying to get superheroes to beat him up to satisfy his urges.
Are you for fucking real?

Hurm

>It's literally the best superhero story of all time
I mean it's certainly up there, but no.

Snyder apparently cares since adapted the comic almost shot for shot. The problem is Snyder makes everything so over the top and cool when Watchmen is supposed to be more realistic and absurd, kinda like Super or Kick Ass.

How does it feel to be this delusional/contrarian. The movie was clearly a success and well liked by the vast majority of people. Literally every DC fan I know in real life loved it as well.

>64 percent
>71 percent
>good

>64/71%
>Widely considered one of the best super hero movies ever
Nice job proving yourself wrong you fucking retard

Really my man?

>Why would I examine something objectively when I have Rotten Tomatoes and local comic book nerds to tell me what to think?

I dragged friends to see this, they no longer trust my movie judgment and recommendations. I am waiting till 2019 so I can say "COME ON GUYS THAT WAS 10 YEARS AGO"

I'm not sure if Multiversity is the best comic ever, but there are plenty that are better than Watchmen.

I don't think you know what "tone" or "pacing" mean. You'd have to work pretty damn hard to make Watchmen into a crude teen comedy.

7.6 on imdb and 71% on rotten tomatoes, that's better than average. It also won an award for best comic book movie.

Saying there's an objective best of any medium or even any genre is stupid, because taste is subjective and as such there can be no agreement on one piece of media being superior to all others.

>It also won an award for best comic book movie.
>Implying awards mean fuck all

The one thing, and I mean the ONE thing, the movie did right was show Dan actually giving a shit about Rorschach's death. And even then it was a flawed, melodramatic scene, but fuck it, it was cathartic.

>Why would I ever consider that something I don't like could be liked by many other people.

Ah yes, a solid D to C- obviously means it's the best comic book movie ever. It's not like there are any other award winning comic book movies with a higher score than that.

So you're saying that roughly 70% of people haven't read/didn't understand the Watchmen comic?

When was it ever said it's the best comic book movie, reread the post and you'll notice it says one of the best super hero movies. And if you look up best super hero movies you'll notice it often comes up in the top 20.

I said previously in this thread, "good for the people who liked it, I enjoyed jacking it to Malin Ackerman's tits". This movie gave me my thigh-highs fetish. We all take different things away from it.

You aren't saying "Well, I like it no matter what you say", you're saying, "I like it because other people say it's good". Your opinion is worth less not because it conflicts with mine, but because it isn't your opinion, it's RT's.

I was 16 when this came out and I begged my mom to see it with me on my birthday because she likes gritty neo-noir movies and I hyped the comic up for her so she actually got excited about it.

It's been almost a decade later and I'm still embarrassed.

There's no other way to properly adapt Watchmen from Comic to Film, unless DC goes full blown self aware parody. Somewhere around Galaxy Quest, or Tick levels of parody, but that requires too much effort in finding the right actors to play the right characters and getting the tone right.

Nah. Any thread defending Snyder is bait. He's to Sup Forums what Trump is to Sup Forums and what Bendis is to Sup Forums.

Batman 89 has a better score and did more for the genre than this shit ever did.

>better than average
>Widely considered one of the best super hero movies ever
Stop embarrassing yourself by trying to damage control and just admit you've fucked up with your statement, literally almost all MCU films have higher scores than that.
And even if we would assume that it is indeed considered on of the best cape movies ever, what competition does it even have? It's almost the only superhero story that tries to be somewhat serious instead of just another cliché action flick. And it still managed to completely fuck up the adaptation part. Big fucking achievement

>I'd say most people agreed that Veidt's idea was fucking retarded.
Of course it was fucking retarded. His name is Ozymandias!

Imagine if the Watchmen movie was released today in the current capeshit climate. The shitposting would be unbearable.

Sweet Jesus I'm glad you didn't direct this film. Like, I thought Snyder fucked it up, you just put in perspective how dumb some people's creative choices can be.

I'm not trying to damage control. It is considered one of the best super hero movies whether it triggers you or not. Random google search first page:

17th place out 30
cinemablend.com/new/30-Best-Superhero-Movies-Ranked-128797.html?story_page=8

19th place out of 188
ranker.com/crowdranked-list/the-best-superhero-movies-ever-made

13th place out of 51
filmschoolrejects.com/51-best-superhero-movies-ever/4/

17th place out of 123
imdb.com/list/ls032971261/

29th place (out of 100)
pastemagazine.com/articles/2017/01/the-100-best-superhero-movies-of-all-time.html?a=1

Get over it.

I'm pretty sure you aren't the original user and you're just pretending to rub salt in the wound.

Uhm, why would I not be the original user and waste time doing a fucking research like that?

Because malice is a good enough motivation for most people.

And those people either never read the comic and just enjoyed it as a gritty superhero movie, or did read the comic and missed the point
Just like you

@96856437
>Who cares about the comic

I am not only the original user, I am also the OP of this thread. All I did was try to state something in a more or less constructive way, while all the anons in there got triggered and attacked me from every side. It has nothing to do with malice, user.

Then you brought it onto yourself, and should concede.

Yeah, I like Multiversity, but no

I agree, but it's still not watchmen.

I don't think it's the best, but it's better than watchmen.

I think Pax Americana is as impressive, technically.

it's really quite incredible that snydercucks haven't scurried back underneath the rocks whence they came.

>Moore's underlying point with Watchmen was that if superheroes are put in a "real world" context, they look absurd and silly.
watchmen was a deconstruction that was meant to feature actual DC/charlston characters. Since DC wouldn't ok that, he made knockoffs instead. Rorschach and Owl are straight up chinese bootlegs of their inspirations.

not because "hurr they were supposed to look silly"

because looking silly has always been a part of comic book superheroes. It wasn't until Watchmen and Dark Knight Returns that Superheroes slowly stopped being "silly" and started becoming "realistic", culminating in the edge and grit of the 90's

Even more surprising no one's posted the Hollis death scene yet to use it as "proof" in their argument for the movie's quality.