Previous Entry Share Next Entry
(no subject)
john watson - weep little lion man
aitakute wrote in 35minutes_ago
This is not to instigate any sort of war and I believe we're all sensible enough to not engage in one anyway. ;) But mod, feel free to delete this if inappropriate. ^^;;

I am wondering, what are your thoughts about the differences between comicverse!Adrian and movieverse!Adrian? Any form of opinions welcomed, on any aspect of the man himself - be it the personality or the demeanour and actions. (Okay not so much the absolute senseless, to keep to the comm guidelines - no omgliekhe'ssohot comments. LOL.)

This came across my mind as, to be truthful, I am introduced to Watchmen via the movie. While watching the movie, I am indifferent to all characters, but upon reading the comic, my heart goes out to Adrian (comicverse). I will say that I do not not like the movieverse!Adrian - it is just that he comes across as a slightly different person - hence, the prompt. I'd like to hear other people's thoughts on this matter. :)

  • 1
Thanks for providing the opportunity to discuss on that subject; I wanted to share my thoughts about that but had no idea where to do so. :)

I was introduced to the graphic novel about a year ago, read it once and never re-read it until after seeing the movie. Can't stop reading it now =_=


I think that the book version of Ozymandias is a much more complete character, much more believable than the movie version. I find him much more intense in a way; we know just enough of him to understand everything. I really loved the movie version as well, but he felt like he had a hint of parody of a parody to him. The plastic suit (with Bat!nipples), the BOYS folder, the changes to the character's look were not necessarily bad things, but they completely change the way we perceive him. It's much less subtle in approach.

The graphic novel version projects this golden shiny image, perfect, should-be-happy, successful... The twist at the end comes as much more of a shock. It's like watching a train wreck in slow motion, hypnotizing yet painful to look at. You can't look at anything else. In the movie, I thought the character projects a more greyish image from the beginning, and you suspect him already of having some kind of agenda.

I'm also very fan of the last scene with Jon in the book and I'm kinda sad that they rewrote it to partially happen with Laurie instead.

To boil down all that rambling to a sentence or two, I guess I could say that I love both versions for different reasons. There's not one version that is truly better than the other and I'm not so sure that comparing them helps to find the "better version", if such a thing exist.

thanks for this. I hated how I felt bludgeoned by Adrian's "goodness" in the film, the way he had that confrontation with the businessmen in the movie... and then the boys folder. He was less subtle. The accent thing puzzled me as well, are they saying he was raised in Germany before he went over? I wasn't sure that was needed. Personal bias.

On the other hand, I see what they did with the whole celebrity thing, and how they couldn't have done that with the Roth interview.

I guess I'm saying I prefer graphic novel Adrian. He's more of a subtle character, and looks more the part. He looks like he has worked on his physique. They played up the spiritual side of him more as well, as opposed to the businessman

But I guess that was appropriate to the medium.

  • 1
?

Log in

No account? Create an account