Remembered how I said those awesome Watchmen posters are very delibrate recreations of the original DC house ads that ran in the comics?
Well, someone created a Watchmen Poster Comparison just for this.
[via LMG]
Categories
Remembered how I said those awesome Watchmen posters are very delibrate recreations of the original DC house ads that ran in the comics?
Well, someone created a Watchmen Poster Comparison just for this.
[via LMG]
5 replies on “Watchmen Poster Comparison”
I think the slight differences are very telling.
You notice how the Doctor changed? Instead of long muscles and a leonardoesque “perfect” body, he now has the bulging texture of a bodybuilder and his posture is shot to hell. Look how high the knees, how stressed the shoulders… All but lost is that air of serene power he has in the comic. And check out his gluteals – it doesn’t even look like he is sitting on something anymore (which he isn’t, of course, but that’s the whole point).
Gibbons has one hell of an eye for anatomy, and for it’s emotional value. I wonder if he ever tried yoga.
You can tell its a Hollywood poster by the way the Comedian גונב למצלמה since he should get paid for emoting and not just showing his back.
OK, great, you pick ’em from the right and I’ll pick ’em from the left. And with Manhattan out of the way, it don’t get much more left-wing than good old Raw Shark. Hurm…
Anyway, the bum seems to be gone from the poster. Bums are not generally allowed in major motion pictures unless they have a big funny role. Real bums bum people out.
The writing on the wall is more legible, which is very metaphorical, but also makes real sense. It’s not just that movie goers far denser than comic readers, but mostly that rewinding and pausing are not half as mature as flipping pages or looking carefully at a picture.
The main difference, though, is again the posture. The movie Rorschach looks way aware of his coolness. Much more collected than the SCHLOCH we see in the book. And that misses a lot.
Honor, like the hawk, must sometimes go hooded, and when it does you can’t rely on facial expressions. Not even when you have a changing mask. That is why form and posture are so very important, and it’s something Hollywood (and its adaptation of comic books) still needs to learn.
about Raw Shark: I’m not sure the bum is gone. Look at the big sized poster – isn’t that a bent knee of someone wearing jeans propped against the wall? Also, it’s not a bum – if someone’s lying on the ground in an alley Rorschach is just leaving, odds are he was put there by R.
Also, with all due honor to Mr. Gibbons’ wonderful anatomy, his Rorschach was normal proportions, while the movie actor presumably has real actual short person proportions, or at least movie actor proportions. And looser trousers.
If to nitpick, where is the geodesic dome and the electric car?
There are also issues with the amount of detail – in art, you can subtract a lot of detail, only draw the dramatic shadows, etc. In movie, even if CGI, you have to build all this in 3D, and you can’t skip the rendering or the lightning, which does force them to make changes in composition.
Like, Nite-Owl. This is perhaps a historical moment, the first case I remember when a superhero costume in the movie looks cooler than in the comic. Which misses the point of Nite-Owl, I know.
The POV in the original is lower than in the movie poster, so much less flattering. Also, the actor doesn’t seem to have a proper belly. I’d argue that the lightning is part of the reason for this. The basement is dark, and you wouldn’t see anything from the original viewpoint, not unless you amped up the lights.
Silk Spectre: Harder to tuck in your legs when you’re wearing latex tights instead of just having your bare gams to ward the draft from your tush. The original was
looking aside, removing (or putting on) her earing, but the actress is staring straight at her reflection, for no good reason. I’d argue that the OOC reason for that is to focus our gaze into that mirror, where the reflected background is much more detailed – the costume of the original Silk Spectre and her photo.
Yeah, the Comedian is definitly mugging for the camera. Not even wearing his full-face leather mask (which I think they’ll just drop in the movie).
Ozymandias I leave for the person who can handle watching 15 TVs at once, but I note just that the character and his surroundings all look less impressing and heroic.
Right you are about the bum (Rorschach’s, not Specter’s). I found uncropped versions of the original ads, and it seems the guy has the same weird triangular pattern worn by knot tops. Closest frame in the book, BTW, is a beaten up Graffiti artist with an incomplete “Who Watches”.
Whatever it is, if you need to get a higher res pic just to speculate that it might be a bent knee then it’s missing.
As for proportions, Gibson’s R. is wearing elevator shoes which, along with the long coat, make his shanks appear very long. A trench coat that ends right above the knee, although it clearly is not supposed to, is practically Rorschach’s trademark.
It also makes his outfit seem the wrong size, which makes him look more like a derelict. The live-action R. is all in shadow, but his clothes look reasonably expensive. His hat doesn’t even look like it was found in the trash, let alone in the trash under something heavy.
No dome, no funny car, no Nostalgia ad, no end is nigh or posters on the wall. And don’t get me fucking started on the Owl’s lack of belly. As a bellied person myself, this has been a ray of sunshine in my life, and no fucking movie is going to take it away!
To be continued…