New V for Vendetta Posters

[hagren 5]

We had two: Adrian Brown and ACXchan.

Both quite liked it.

[TestosteRohne 1]

Jonathan Ross ripped the movie to shreds last night on Film 2006...but he's a wanker anyway....

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Well yes, but unfortuantely he does secretly know his shit.

He made the claim on Tele that Alan Moore was the most underated artist (in any field i believe) out there.

So add that context.

 

But hey I'm first in the lines come friday.

[electricinca 89]

A FOR ALAN, Pt. 1: The Alan Moore interview

[Abhimanyu 20]

A FOR ALAN, Pt. 1: The Alan Moore interview

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

THanks for that, Matt. Fascinating. And depressing.

[Mark 333]

He made the claim on Tele that Alan Moore was the most underated artist (in any field i believe) out there.

 

When did he say that? I know Ross is a huge comics nerd (it's hardly a secret), but in his review of V For Vendetta, he actually mentioned thinking that the original comic is slightly overrated. Was that what you were thinking of, or was it from a different programme?

[Mark 333]

A FOR ALAN, Pt. 1: The Alan Moore interview

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

THanks for that, Matt. Fascinating. And depressing.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I can never decide if I think Moore's an admirably principled man of integrity, or a petulant child. Probably a bit of both.

[TestosteRohne 1]

He made the claim on Tele that Alan Moore was the most underated artist (in any field i believe) out there.

 

When did he say that? I know Ross is a huge comics nerd (it's hardly a secret), but in his review of V For Vendetta, he actually mentioned thinking that the original comic is slightly overrated. Was that what you were thinking of, or was it from a different programme?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

He said that on the Culture show last week, a third of the program was about Alan Moore.

But it was painfully done. IE drawings of Alan come to life etc.

It wasn't really penetrating either.

[Trace 0]

It wasn't really penetrating either.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Try more lube.

 

But seriously, that article was interesting. I can understand Moore's distrust of the Hollywood machine based on LoEG, and even his reluctance to work with Joel Silver a notorious cut-throat producer, but Chist Almighty, he should've given the V scripts a chance. And to request the removal of his name from the books simply because in their most recent printing they're tied to the film? That's ludicrous. Even if he saw the film and hated it, it doesn't change what he originally wrote in the comic. It's particularly maddening when you consider the fact that he repeatedly states how proud of the comic he is. And Lloyd had no problem with the film.....

 

Moore's an admirably principled man of integrity, or a petulant child. Probably a bit of both.

I think that sums him up accurately.

[TomC 0]

I can never decide if I think Moore's an admirably principled man of integrity, or a petulant child. Probably a bit of both.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

As are we all. He just has a better beard.

[Mark 333]

Hey! No-one has a better beard than m...

 

 

Oh, wait. Scratch that. Almost everyone has a better beard than me. Including many women.

[Abhimanyu 20]

Normally I'd consider the petulant child option too but given the extent to which his beloved creations have been hitherto bastardized, I don't hold his behaviour with regards to V against him. I can't even imagine how it must feel to have such tremendous work stolen from me and twisted in such a horrendous way. I wouldnt be thinking straight.

[TestosteRohne 1]

Normally I'd consider the petulant child option too but given the extent to which his beloved creations have been hitherto bastardized, I don't hold his behaviour with regards to V against him. I can't even imagine how it must feel to have such tremendous work stolen from me and twisted in such a horrendous way. I wouldnt be thinking straight.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Ditto.

[Zarathustra 0]

But seriously, that article was interesting.  I can understand Moore's distrust of the Hollywood machine based on LoEG, and even his reluctance to work with Joel Silver a notorious cut-throat producer, but Chist Almighty, he should've given the V scripts a chance.  And to request the removal of his name from the books simply because in their most recent printing they're tied to the film?  That's ludicrous.  Even if he saw the film and hated it, it doesn't change what he originally wrote in the comic.  It's particularly maddening when you consider the fact that he repeatedly states how proud of the comic he is.  And Lloyd had no problem with the film..... 

 

But it really has no effect on whether he likes the scripts or not, none of these properties belong to him so he doesn't have any influence on any part of the movie. He was accused of and threatened to be sued for supposed plagarism with the LoEG flick, so I don't think he's particularly tenable to giving anyone in the entertainment industry a chance when it comes to making his works into movies.

[TestosteRohne 1]

I've mentioned before that i think a film adaptation of something does change the original, or atleast public perception and consciousness of it.

 

From Hell adaptation was quite simply the worst adaptation of anything i can remember, ever.

Honestly.

(Although do give suggestions I may have missed something.)

 

Apparently the film itself has merits of it's own, that I personally couldn't see past it's MTV style.

As an adaptation, it makes LOEG look grand in comparison.

 

So if because of From hell, if he were to shave his legs and dye himself blue it would be fair enough in my accounting ledger.

 

Furthermore, Joel Silver pulled that stunt where he falsely declared to the press that Alan had either watched the film or read the script and was happy etc.

So add that to the equation.

 

Personally, almost any response no matter how bewildening, childish, petty, and self destructive on is part is justified.

 

What Hollywood doesn't seem to understand is that even if they do a "faithful" film adaptation, and they get a decent script.

There aren't many directors (especialy in conventional Hollwood) that could make the film to movies, what the comic was to comics.

 

Page 1 of Watchmen is already unfilmable.

It plays on the anonymity of comic dialogue, already shafting film language.

 

At best, Hollywood could make a competant adaptation (and from reports like Ade's that maybe the case), but as far as matching it and fuck me improving upon it.

Well...

[Guest spiderlegs]

I guess when you have authored some of the consensus landmark works of a genre, and then watch incredulously as a first time film director, or a pair of flaky brothers, or even a respected filmmaker then takes those works and powders their respective buttocks with them, you might feel like you've been given that universal nod to act the petulant child.

 

Alan Moore is, however, one of those creators about whom I don't usually read interviews because they all tend to follow the same course--whether it's the interviewer's fault or his really doesn't matter. Wozza has the same effect on me. I prefer to read their fiction to their fact. Lie to me, Alan, Wozza--don't you DARE tell me the truth!

[Christian 890]

I like "From Hell" as a movie!

I distanced myself from the comic when I saw it. It's nothing like the comic, but I think it stands on its own right as a good film.

LOEG is just god-awful! It's a travesty as an adaptation (only overshadowed by Constantine in this department) and it's an awful film!

Maybe because "From Hell" is such a prolific work of writing, it stands out all the more striking about how far from the source material the movie strayed?

 

Alan Moore is the guy who took the fit because DC wanted to put parental advisories on this books. If that's the best reason you can find to not want to work with DC any longer, you're simply not trying very hard!

[A. Heathen 1,211]

For all my comments about TAF, there is NO WAY it is worse than LoEFUB.

 

I share your views on From Hell which truly works as a Ripper film for Americans.

And takes as many liberties with characters as Alan Moore did.

[Trace 0]

Because no one said anything on the movie thread, i post it here too:

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I think people are waiting to see the movie themselves before commenting on your post..... at least I am.

 

Patience, Grasshopper.

[Abhimanyu 20]

Because no one said anything on the movie thread, i post it here too:

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I think people are waiting to see the movie themselves before commenting on your post..... at least I am.

 

Patience, Grasshopper.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Yeah, I didnt even read all of your post since you said it has spoilers in it.

[JasonT 482]

UNKNOWNSOLDIER:

And to request the removal of his name from the books simply because in their most recent printing they're tied to the film? That's ludicrous.

 

[in Blackadder voice:] Or it would be... if it were true. [/blackadder] His motivations were more complex than that.

 

Thanks for the cracking Beat interview link, btw, Inca. The second part was published on the 16th.

Edited March 19, 2006 by JasonT

[Trace 0]

Well, having now seen the film and having read the articles and interviews, I've changed my mind and now I say that I can't and don't blame him.

He still acts childish at times though.

[hagren 5]

I dunno.