Patton Oswalt Hits Out At Premature Critics

WATCHMEN = Comic book movie of the decade!!!

(If ya didn't know lol).

He's right on. I've been saying this for a while too, it sucks that fanboys are so overly and prematurely critical that that's what we're known for.

So, yeah Patton is right. He's still not funny, but he's right. (There I go. Another fanboy being critical)

Correctamundo Mr. Oswalt.

I'm so glad he brought up Watchmen, that is the best example of the premature judging a lot of people do. Everyone got so pissed off once they heard Snyder got rid of the squid, and they said it would be horrible and it's not the "real" Watchmen, without even seeing it.

TYLER & DarthMulder: Go check out my Ultimates Fan Cast when you get chance! :)

I'm in complete agreement here. Too many times are our precious CBM's beat down before they even make it into a theater. And it's all because something changed somewhere along the way, hey, if you want an exact copy of your favorite comic book story... read the comic again.

Kablamo @ : D

BRETT RATNER?! WHERE?!

*Horror scream*

But he doesn't mean making informed decisions on what a movie PROBABLY will be like, I mean we all think things look good and things look bad, he means the type of person that hears about a movie, maybe who's directing it..maybe a cast member..and immediately assumes it will be shit. Now, in fairness, If it happened to be Stephen Sommers new movie starring Channing Tatum, I would probably make that assumption too!

thanks jazz, and notice the things you pointed out, all minor changes or choices that more than likely either helped or didnt affect the movies in any way whatsoever.

I beg to differ. There are some things that come out on the Internet before a movie comes out that absolutely verify beyond any shadow of a doubt that it's going to suck. I do wait for things to be verified and substantiated before passing judgment. Too many people fly into full panic mode over any crazy rumor about a film. Remember the Fox/Warner Watchmen lawsuit? Anyone who knows anything about lawsuits knew that the whole thing would be settled before the release date. Fox just wanted a cut of the action.

For the Watchmen movie, I knew it was going to suck when the rumors of a squidless ending were verified as true. Some of you may like that ending, and I'm not intent on reopening that discussion. I'm a purist on filming stories that were previously written. I don't mind tweaking stories and clipping out parts for the sake of exposition or running length, but changing the ending, and really rendering most of the story pointless is something I vociferously dislike. I went to go see the movie anyway to give it a fair chance, because I am also a fair-minded person, and I had a LOT of problems with it beyond the altered ending.

lol @ Aroyalspider

@ Rorschach01: I stand corrected.
Remember the time I said i doubted the existence of any true comic book purists? Well the fact is that at that point I had never really read a post like comicB00kguy's before. Here's an example.
You were right and I was wrong =(

Jazz, there are some things you cited that would make a purist like myself say that a movie will suck before it comes out.
No dispute about the casting of Ledger or Downey. Casting someone who CAN play the part requires waiting to see the film to see if he pulls it off.That said,
-the idea of turning the Kingpin black was the result of lazy casting. Nothing against Michael Clarke Duncan, who is a fine actor, but why not use a fat white guy as the character has been written for over thirty years?
-Spider-Man's organic webbing is the result of lazy writing. Ultimate Spidey explains the webbing in a logical way for those who can't handle a super-smart teenager concocting the web formula on his own. Why not use that? Peter Parker is one of Marvel's smartest characters. Why not show that?
-no argument about the Hulk being CGI. I grew up with the old TV show and loved it, but it wasn't really the Hulk as we know him in the comics. I had no problem with the show because it did the best it could with the limitations of technology. I'd rather have a CGI Hulk that can throw boxcars with one hand than a guy in green makeup throwing paper mache rocks around.
-Using the Ultimate universe can be a different story. I love Ultimate Spidey and enjoyed Ultimate X-Men (had some problems with it, but I let them go to enjoy the story). I do NOT like Ultimate Avengers or Ultimate Cap, especially that crappy outfit the Ultimate WW2 Cap wears. There are a lot of things floating around right now about the Avengers and Cap movies, and the right thing to do with them is wait until things are verified, not just idle internet speculation.

@Darth, haha, I toldja dude! They are out there.

@Aroyalspider...Yeah I agree, it made more sense for the movie in every way really. It only worked in the comic because of the sub plots and hints throughout with the psychics, the genetic research etc..and even at that, to be honest I wasn't crazy about it. It felt like a different story, like I was watching an episode of The Outer Limits or something(Which is what Moore was homaging anyway). Some people love the squid for that very reason...different strokes I guess.

Comicbookguy...actually the Spidey organic web shooters was the result of smart writing I thought. Even as a kid I always thought it was silly that Parker gains Spider strength, he can stick to walls..but when it comes to shooting webs..he has to make them?? Never sat right with me. If the point is to show how smart he is then show him being smart! The movies managed that without sticking to the home made web shooters. After all, if sticking so rigidly to the original origins of these characters was such a big deal, then Wolverine would be running around as a Hulk villain with Whiskers and sewn on claws.

I thought Snyder's Watchmen ending was all round much better - from Nite Owl witnessing Rorschachs death and beating on Ozymandias to getting rid of the stupid squid (which IMO was ridiculous in the book and would have been laughable in a movie) it was just much, much better.

As for Spider-Man's web shooters, it was only lazy in the respect that in a comic book you can explain Peter making his web shooters in a few panels and we'll accept it - in a movie we'd see him build them, test them etc taking up from as little as 15 to as much as 30 minutes of the movie. I think it was both a sensible and logical move on their part to make things easier for the audience and from a storytelling perspective to just make the webbing organic.

As I've said numerous times before - the right blend of classic and Ultimate influences will help the Marvel movies succeed. Making Hawkeye a member of SHIELD for example helps to eliminate the need for a load of backstory and means we can still see the characte rhopefully with the 616 universes personality etc!

Talking of The Ultimates - go check out my fan cast under "Fan Fic"! :)

Rorschach: My purism is a lot more for filming written stories than for characters. I don't like changing the ending of an established story. Would you change the end of Gone with the Wind to see Rhett sweep Scarlett off her heels and go marry her? Have Dorothy decide to stay in Oz and overthrow the Wizard? Have Frodo decide to keep the Ring and face Sauron in a climactic showdown? These things change the whole point of the story. Everything in the Watchmen comic was building up towards that squid. Taking it out changes the whole context of many scenes in the story. I've got to pull my book out to cite specific examples.

To answer your other question, I have enjoyed quite a few comic book movies, actually. The first two Spideys had their flaws, but I enjoyed them enough as a longtime Spidey fan to look past them. I love the 1978 Superman and its first sequel (far moreso the Donner cut). Look past the crappy leather outfits, and the first two X-Men films were a lot of fun. I also LOVED the Hellboy films. Iron Man was excellent, and I also really enjoyed the Incredible Hulk (the Norton one). Can't forget the Rocketeer or the Phantom (the Billy Zane one). Those films all captured the essence of what made the character great and fun. I also enjoyed the second FF film. Hated "cumulogalactus", but loved the interplay between the team, especially Ben and Johnny. Fun movie! My favorite comic movie though would be the Incredibles. That film has everything that makes comics fun in it. I know I'm missing a couple I liked here somewhere... To address them, I enjoyed Batman Begins for its clever explanation of how Batman got his gadgets, but am honestly not the huge fan of it or Dark Knight that most here are. I loved Ledger's performance, but saw some real holes in the story.

Sorry to all for being so long-winded, but these questions needed a little more time to answer right.

word, patton. word.

Ok I'll go back and read comments. I gotta say, I waited patiently for Watchmen, saying only good encouraging things, and it still wasn't that good. It didn't suck, but it wasn't worth sitting there in the theater either. It actually made me doubt that it's a good story in the first place.

Wow, he just described half the people on here!

Everyone panned Watchmen and thought Wolverine would be good before the trailers came out, then when they came out most people, I know I was, were blown away by Watchmen; and when the Wolverine workprint hit teh web, everyone shot it down!

Keith: I do love me some LOTR, but I ain't no Tolkien purist, that's for sure! If you want the full story, read the books. If you want the abridged edition, watch the movies. They are a splendid adaptation of the books; although, I will admit that Arwen and Aragorn love thing kinda drove me up a wall after watching it over and over and over and over again.

Watchmen was a great adaptation I had doubts at first, I mean it's Watchmen, but after I heard Snyder was onboard my fears were pretty much put at rest. Now, a lot of people hate Snyder, that's fine, I think he's an O-K director but for adaptations, the man is pretty damn good. In fact, adaptations are (almost) specifically all he's done his entire career as a director. The film has changes. What adaptation doesn't? But like Keith pointed out, the story was still intact. All we lost was some exposistion that made the story richer. But I didn't feel like anything was really lost without the Squid. I like to see it, the adaptation, as a sort've companion to the book in many ways. Not the real deal, but pretty damn close, and still good all the same.