HBO Watchmen remake

Skimmiing the preview website, did not see any supergirls, but maybe they still have Silk Spectre under wraps..  www.hbo.com/hbo-news/watchmen-casting-all-you-need-to-know

Official website www.hbo.com/watchmen
Trailer on youtube and official website

Guess any season length show will have diiffent pace than a movie

As far as I understand it this is an original story. It appears to be a sequal of sorts. what the Watchmen world would look like today. 

Its pretty much Watchmen-in-name-only. 

I think it refers to characters and events, but its pretty much its own thing from what I understand.

Peace.

/K

Looks like it might be a modern day sequel of the movie without most of the former Watchmen characters www.gq.com/story/hbos-watchmen-looks-lik...the-show-of-the-fall.  A few more hints in editorial.rottentomatoes.com/article/eve...-watchmen-tv-series/  
"Alan Moore and Dave Gibbons’ landmark 12-issue series debuted in 1985 to immediate acclaim. Based on the Charlton Comics characters DC Comics
acquired in 1983, Moore and Gibbons envisioned a world in which costumed
heroes surfaced in the 1930s and changed the course of history.".
"The story itself is set after the various mystery men have all retired, died, or found themselves on the wrong side of the law."
(Jean) "Smart is playing FBI Agent Angela Blake, who in a former life was the hero known as Silk Spectre."

"Unlike many comic book adaptations these days, Watchmen will not feature input or even the approval of writer Moore. The notoriously
cantankerous author had a bad run with Hollywood thanks to projects like
V for Vendetta and League of Extraordinary Gentleman, leading to him refusing credit on subsequent films and even the money
owed to him from those adaptations and sending the profit participation
off to artists like Watchmen’s Dave Gibbons."

watchmen.fandom.com/wiki/Category:Watchmen_(TV_series)_cast
watchmen.fandom.com/wiki/Erika_Manson

so far none of the sequel stuff to Watchmen seems to actually get the point.

DC had some comics and I ignored them (and they all end up washing up in dollar bins at comic book shows).

Even Doomsday Clock which has some good creative talent behind it isn't really doing it for me.  It's not bad, it's just OK.  We'll see how they stick the landing.  I don't think Watchment and normal line DC heroes mix well.   Watchmen used comics to make a comentary on society and comics books while subsequently also being a comic book.  Normal continuity DC comics (even ones with well written stories) are not meta like that (and that's not a knock either).  Nor do I think Watchmen would have worked as an on going series -- not if it wanted to do what it actually did.

Pretty much all the sequel things are just comic books and miss that extra dimension. Everything feels like a pale shadow and comes across to me as someone trying to make a buck first rather than someone making art and good story.  (Nothing wrong with making money from Art just that if  you drive the art to make money as the primary goal you tend to make somehting not too great.)

I'm not sure this rises above the other attempts.  It does look like it could be well made and well written ... but it probably didn't need the "Watchmen" label to tell the story it wanted to tell.   It probably would have been a BETTER story if they'd done that as well because while I think they may have managed to dodge some of the "only making this for money" aspect, I'm not sure they completeld dodged it.  Jetisoning the Watchment name would have ensured that.  They would have had to work harder to define the story and that work would have made it better.

I don't have HBO now, and I doubt I'll turn it on to watch this.  Once something builds up on HBO, or I get really bored, or I hear it's fantastic, I'll turn HBO and watch some. But right now there is simply too much other stuff (that I'm already paying to stream) to watch that I'm probably not going to get around to it. 

The Boys would have fallen into the same camp but I already had Amazon Prime.  It ended up being much better than I expected (having read the original comic). This might be too.

But then  I didn't think they should make the Joker movie .... only everyone involved seems to have the right attitude and amazingly DC/WB let them have the freedom to make something interesting.  Most of my skeptisism comes from "this isn't a story that is easy to tell, and if you aren't going to do it REALLY WELL you shouldn't bother and since I don't think you will ... you shouldn't bother".  That's sort of the reaction I'm having to this Watchmen series.   Did they REALLY take the time to do the idea justice?  When I watch it I'll try not to judge it as a Watchmen property but as it's own thing first.  I suspect it'll fail at being up to "Watchmen" but succeed at being an ok show to watch.

I suppose given the surprising success of The Boys, we will see more edgy types of comics-based dystopianism. 

But I don't think this Watchman-inspired show is that, but I'm betting that the relative acceptance of violence and sexual exploitation within superhero stories, even when the writers probably worried they were going too far on The Boys, means that Watchman and other related shows will probably amp up similar things. And the original Watchmen pushed a lot of boundaries. 

Beyond that original Watchmen, I tie it all back to Game of Thrones. Fantasy had always been gentle and polite, if you will. Especially high fantasy like Tolkien, but others too. They had body counts, but the gore was pretty much PG. Same for Marvel and DC movies and shows. And then along comes GOT and suddenly fantasy has naked women, rape on screen, stomach-twisting gruesome violence and torture, and the idea of routinely killing off fan-favorite characters to shock the audience. 

Some SF had previously crossed over into Horror (thanks to Alien/s), but fantasy pretty much kept the blood and guts, rape, nudity and extreme language toned down. 

Now, all those things are just fine for the GOT audience who are out there looking for new forms of fantasy to enjoy. And now they've got a foot-hold in comicbook/superhero stories thanks to Watchmen the movie and far more so, The Boys. They don't need child viewers to fill an audience. Adults are more than willing to watch and enjoy in sufficient numbers to make a show successful. 

One thing that's clear about Hollywood... if something works, they keep pushing boundaries to produce more of the same until they finally run it off a cliff.  

And with the huge number of streaming services that will be pushing out a bunch of "mature"  content these next few years, you can bet a lot of it is going to try and emulate some of the success of GOT.  

Personally, I like this new dimension. The Boys was shockingly entertaining despite blowing my hair back. I thought I was going to hate it. I ended up loving it. Now that I've digested that, I'm up for more "reality". Because in reality, powerful people have used extreme violence, rape, etc, as tools from day one of the human condition.

We live during a time when there are no more lines to keep the coloring inside, and the human condition is shown in all its glory as well as its naked horror. Nothing hidden or painted over with bright colors to hide it. 

Or... alternative view, this is just training and preparation for the coming end of civilization. <just kidding--- I hope.>

Shadar

You make some good points Shadar, and I think you are right tbh.

There does seem to be a audience for "mature" and/or "R-rated" content.  I can't even remember the amount of times I have read on movie forums people saying "MAKE X R-RATED! OR NOT AT ALL".

Personally, I don't see what the level of violence, sex, etc. has to do with the "maturity" of a show/film,  Is it just bragging rights, as in "Look at us, we are so edgy!"?  Maybe.

The themes, characters and actual STORY, need to be mature for me to consider a piece mature.  Splashing loads of blood on the screen, and flashing female breasts ain't enough for me.

Sure, one could say its a more "realistic" depiction, and for sure there is some sort of social commentary being made.  Having said that, IMO (I stress this ) I think there are other genres better equipped for telling stories along those lines.

The Boys is a good example.  I watched the first episode or two, and realized this isn't what I want from my comic book shows/films.  I want to escape reality with my entertainment, not be reminded of how shitty the world is.  I can just turn on the news and watch that if thats what I want.

Fantasy, and sci-fi to a certain extent, should be about tales of other places, magical acts of heroism and so on.  Ofc, this is delving into the area of personal taste, and I am sure people will and do disagree.  And thats fine.  This is just my take on it, and there are plenty of offerings out there.

But to tie it back to the original point, you are quite right Shadar, there is a distinct change in the tone of fantasy shows, and one could argue it is indeed GOT (the TV show) that made that change.

Will Watchmen be any good?  Who knows.  I thought the film was fantastic, as well as the comic book.  But I never once thought "You know what, I want more stories about these characters".  The story worked for what it set out to do, and didn't/doesn't need more.

I'm with Twice, in that I think the show should have ditched the "Watchmen" tag, and struck out and be its own thing.  By branding it "Watchmen" (yet having very little else in relation to the comic or film), tarnishes the product.  It comes across as exactly what it is - marketing and brand recognition.  Would have been much better for it to tell its own tale (like The Boys).

Just my 2 cents.

Peace.

/K