Blog

This past week, comic fans were treated to the first look at the actors in costume for the film adaptation of the Watchmen comic book series, coming out in 2009.

I have not been looking forward to this film.

Many of you familiar with me might find that unusual. I tend to look forward to comic films, and am quite often disappointed not merely because they aren't good, but because I've also built the film up in my head, knowing how good it could be.

Superman Returns, anyone?

Watchmen, though, you have to understand, is different for me.

Watchmen was written by Alan Moore, who is quite vocal about his comics not being meant for film translation. And, in truth, they don't usually fair well in the process. One need only look at the unwatchably bad League of Extraordinary Gentlemen to see that.

See, Alan Moore makes no apologies for writing for comics. As such, he actually writes FOR comics, using the advantages of the medium - pacing, visual cues and tricks, textual emphasis, etc. The fact is, many of those advantages can't be translated to the big screen, making a film adaptation inherently disadvantaged.

So, you may ask, why am I okay with Batman and Spider-Man and others being translated to film? Why am I far more hopeful with those?

Those characters, by virtue of coming out in multiple monthly doses, tend to not use the craft of the comic medium to the extent that one time, limited series do. I mean, Spider-Man comes out with 22 pages, three times a month! Watchmen was a twelve issue limited series. The characters were used only for those twelve books, and that was it.

It isn't to say that all Batman or Spider-Man stories can be adapted for film. There are prestige projects and limited series that DO use the medium. Off hand, Return of the Dark Knight (Batman) and Kraven's Last Hunt (Spider-Man) are two stories that I don't think should ever be attempted in other forms than on a comic page.

In my opinion, and just mine, Watchmen is probably the one piece of comic literature that takes full advantage of the comic medium.

Yeah, I'm say that Watchmen is the best example of what a comic book can be.

Others don't agree, and that is fine. For me, though, I've never seen anything that uses the medium better. There is a reason I own only one Absolute Edition hardcover of a comic project, and there is a reason that it is Watchmen.

(By the way, yeah, it is beautiful. These Absolute Editions are pretty amazing.)

And, right now, I'm sitting here, realizing that this wasn't even what I was going to talk about in this blog. Let us get back on track, and I'll close out. In case you haven't seen the images of the costumes from the movie, here is a look.

Rorschach in the movie:

Rorschach in the comic:

Okay, really, the only way they could ruin this one was to put the character in spandex. Regular clothes, an overcoat, a Fedora, and a mask is all they needed, and, thankfully, that is what they went with. I've heard that the constantly changing shapes in the mask will be CGI, and I'm curious about how that will look on the screen.

The Comedian in the movie:

The Comedian in the comic:

I'm actually pretty pleased with this. It is nearly identical, and Jeffrey Dean Morgan looks like he can pull this off. I do hope that the white hair at the temples doesn't look quite as sprayed on in the film, but given these are still promo shots, it is easy to pick up on problems like that.

Silk Spectre in the movie:

Silk Spectre in the comic:

The first major departure from the original material. Understandable, really. The costume in the comic is essentially a swimsuit under a translucent raincoat. Not that the movie costume looks any less ridiculous, but I can see that it may come across better on screen.

Ozymandias in the movie:

Ozymandias in the comic:

Another major departure, and this one I do have a little bit of a problem with. Don't get me wrong - the comic costume probably wouldn't work in the movie. That much gold/yellow would probably look bad on the bigscreen (which is the reason you'll never see Wolverine in his yellow costume in a film). The problem is that the movie costume is TOO dark. It needs to be a lot lighter. In the comics, there seemed to be a reason for this, never overtly mentioned, but one I percieved. The dark kinda ruins that. (And, yeah, I'm being vague on purpose, so I don't spoil anything for anyone wanting to read the comic or see the movie.)

Nite Owl in the movie:

Nite Owl in the comic:

Wow, HUGE departure here. I understand it, but, wow. The comic costume was too plain for the movies and that cowl/cape probably would have hindered the actors vision. Still, this was the schocking costume for me. Kinda Batman-ish. It seems a little much to me, but I'm willing to give it the chance. Maybe it will grow on me.

There you have it. The first look at the characters in the film. I'm still doubtful about the movie, even though I know the makers of the film are trying desperately to stay close to the original material. But, give me credit - I am trying to hold off judgment.

It isn't easy.

I'll type at you later.

The other day, I was listening to NPR (yes, National Pretentious Radio), which I do on occassion.

Now, mind you, I was barely paying attention to the radio at the time, so I have no idea what show was on or any vital details to pass along that might help you find out more about this story. Sorry.

Anyway, I was listening, and they were talking to a man who was one of two men that conducted surveys a while back that, theoretically, tested how honest people were with themselves.

What they did was assemble a bunch of statements that were highly embarassing, incredibly intrusive, possibly offensive, and potentially criminal. All were true and false statements. I can only remember to of them - one embarassing ("I really enjoy my bowel movements.", and one offensive ("I've fantasized about raping someone and/or being raped").

The men who did the survey worked from the assumption (and, it is a big one) that if a person answered "false" to any of the questions - *any* - they were lying to themselves.

Like I said, BIG assumption.

Now, why did I bring that up? Well, the radio program continued, and talked about, if I remember correctly, a swim coach from a few years back that issued the survey to her swim team at the beginning of a season. At the end of the season, she compared the responses on the survey to the swimmers' performance throughout the season.

Down the line, with no exceptions, the best performers turned out to be the ones that the survey insisted were least "honest" with themselves.

In interviews with the students on the swim team, they talked about how, when they were at a swim meet, they believed they were the best there, that the could not be beat. Or, as the survey would have us believe, they were lying to themselves.

And, because of that, they performed better. According to the original composer of the survey, this had been proven true regardless of the field a person was in - medicine, business, sports, etc.

Further, it was also noticed that the people who were supposedly less honest with themselves also turned out to be happier people.

That's right - more successful AND happier.

The program ended talking about how the more honest a person was with themselves, the more they see the limitations and dark truth in the world, which accounts for the diminished happiness.

First off, I don't buy the whole thing. I think starting with assumptions of what would be "universal" truisms in the survey is what makes the study bunk. But, that isn't my biggest gripe.

Back in high school, I had a history teacher that talked about P.M.A. - Positive Mental Attitude. He really believed that if you went into taking a test with a positive mental attitude, you would do better than if you believed you would fail.

I think that the correlation between the survey and the swimmers has more to do with having a positive mental attitude, rather than insisting the participants are lying to themselves.

In my mind, there is a subtle difference.

Because, see, those that performed well, the ones that "lied" to themselves? Yeah... hate to use circular reasoning, but they actually did NOT lie to themselves... because, when all was said and done, they actually met their own expectations. They believed they were the best, and guess what?

They were.

Do we lie to ourselves? Sure. I just find that this faulty survey and the correlating results are a massive stretch. I don't find that being positive is equal to lying to myself.

I just don't buy it.

Having a positive mental attitude helps us to rise to the occassion. I would argue that a negative attitude actually hinders us from what we can do by convincing us that we can't handle something.

Now, that, to me, sounds like a person lying to themself.

Type at you later.

I've pulled a lot of muscles in my lifetime, but I don't think there are any worse to pull than those in your lower back.

I made the big statement about releasing myself from my daily blog commitment so that I could work on a lot of other stuff that needed doing... and, this past week, I do something to my lower back.

Not to say I haven't worked on the other things. I have. Actually, I've done a lot. Unfortunately, I also intended to post blogs a couple of times this past week, to show I wasn't completely abandoning it.

That didn't work out so well.

I spent most of my free time this last week searching for that one single position in which I could sit or lay without having any pain. You know - that elusive position you are sure exists, that you think you almost had a couple of times, but then you had to cough, or clear your throat, or breathe... and, poof, it disappeared?

Yeah.

With it being in the lower back, it just seems like every single thing I do irritates... and I simply have to ride it out.

You may be wondering what it was that I was doing that caused my pain. You may even guess that it was the swimming.

You would be wrong.

No, sadly, nothing that taxing. I simply fell asleep on the couch. Then, when I woke up, and I started to get up, pain shot through my entire body.

It is a sad day when sleeping causes this much pain.

Oh well. The pain has to let up sometime, right?

Type at you later.