Home    General Stuff    General Media
#1

WATCHMEN Discussion

Archive: 95 posts

After seeing the very first trailer, I have been addicted to this amazing, epic, outstanding tale. When I saw the trailer, I instantly got the comic book, and loved it. Now if you haven't a clue what this movie is about:

Watchmen is set in an alternate reality which closely mirrors the contemporary world of the 1980s. The primary point of divergence is the presence of superheroes. Their existence in this iteration of America is shown to have dramatically affected and altered the outcomes of real-world events such as the Vietnam War and the presidency of Richard Nixon. In keeping with the realism of the series, although the costumed crime fighters of Watchmen are commonly called "superheroes", the only character who possesses obvious superhuman powers is Doctor Manhattan. The existence of Doctor Manhattan has given the U.S. a strategic advantage over the Soviet Union, which has increased tensions between the two nations. Additionally, superheroes have become unpopular among the public, which has led to the passage of legislation in 1977 to outlaw them. While many of the heroes retired, Doctor Manhattan and the Comedian operate as government-sanctioned agents, and Rorschach continues to operate outside the law.

The whole story is amazing, because of how Alan Moore, made every character superbly realistic. Everyone acts how they should act, and the Superheroes are thought of a joke.

Theres a whole wiki on Watchmen here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watchmen).

Heres the trailer so you can see the amazing work that Zack Snyder has created:
Watch it in HD on Youtube for the best result!
YouTube - Watchmen 3rd Trailer & BONUS Content. Watch in HD

Also, watch this awesome review by Blunty3000, who saw a special screening of the movie:
Watch it in HD on Youtube for the best result!
YouTube - WATCHMEN Movie Review - PonderPop - Blunty3000

Thanks to Teebonesy for posting this: (For you kids!)
YouTube - Saturday Morning Watchmen

Watchmen is out!!! I'm getting it for Blu-Ray, when it comes out, so I can watch it and watch it!		2009-03-04 00:13:00

Author:
Kog
Posts: 2358

Doesn't look that good...

Seriously though, I'm really hyped for this movie! Maybe that's a bad thing.		2009-03-04 00:18:00

Author:
Killian
Posts: 2575

My brother got the comic a few years ago, and I read it last summer when I was mature enough. completely awesome

also... I was worried about thesquid , but they got rid of it only because it would take 30 or more minutes to build up to, so they won't ruin the main villains plot, just make it something that doesn't need as much buildup		2009-03-04 00:24:00

Author:
RockSauron
Posts: 10882

Doesn't look that good...

Seriously though, I'm really hyped for this movie! Maybe that's a bad thing.
Lol because it isn't obvious by looking at your Avatar and Signature...

Also, @RockSauron, Blunty3000 said that the ending had changed, but it was much better than the comics ending, and it put all the pieces of a massive puzzle together.		2009-03-04 00:24:00

Author:
Kog
Posts: 2358

To me, everything looks stupid about this... the game and the movie2009-03-04 01:59:00

Author:
Unknown User

To me, everything looks stupid about this... the game and the movie
:O The movie looks great, sounds great, and will be great! How could you say such a thing about this greatness???
I don't really care about the game, as it does look stupid.		2009-03-04 02:04:00

Author:
Kog
Posts: 2358

To me, everything looks stupid about this... the game and the movie

... you mind if I ask if you know what you're talking about? >_<		2009-03-04 02:28:00

Author:
RockSauron
Posts: 10882

As a fan of the comic for many a good years, I fear I must agree with Yuper. The trailer very much failed to captivate me.2009-03-04 16:07:00

Author:
Morrinn3
Posts: 493

I saw an early screening of it last night here in Milwaukee and I don't think it comes close to the comic. It's visually stunning and has a few moments that are funny and a few that are heartbreaking but overall it's pace is dragging, the dialogue is very choppy and dry and anyone not familiar with even the most basic plot of the the graphic novel will be lost.

Having said that - as someone who lived though the 80's and remembers a lot of it - the revisionist history point of view is interesting and some of the reminders of the movers and shakers of the age in an alternative time line was interesting.

They really pushed the R rating too. Some of the violence is really graphic (I'm ok with it but it's not for everyone.) and the sexual visuals are extremely graphic. A lot of the crowd was audibly uncomfortable at a few points.

Overall - I enjoyed the movie - but I'd say, don't expect too much from it.


EDIT: btw - Killian - you'll be happy to know the Dr. Manhattan is done very well visually and has some great scenes.		2009-03-04 16:55:00

Author:
Morgana25
Posts: 5983

I saw an early screening of it last night here in Milwaukee and I don't think it comes close to the comic. It's visually stunning and has a few moments that are funny and a few that are heartbreaking but overall it's pace is dragging, the dialogue is very choppy and dry and anyone not familiar with even the most basic plot of the the graphic novel will be lost.

Having said that - as someone who lived though the 80's and remembers a lot of it - the revisionist history point of view is interesting and some of the reminders of the movers and shakers of the age in an alternative time line was interesting.

They really pushed the R rating too. Some of the violence is really graphic (I'm ok with it but it's not for everyone.) and the sexual visuals are extremely graphic. A lot of the crowd was audibly uncomfortable at a few points.

Overall - I enjoyed the movie - but I'd say, don't expect too much from it.


EDIT: btw - Killian - you'll be happy to know the Dr. Manhattan is done very well visually and has some great scenes.

So, do you recommend a newcomer to the series checks out the graphic novel ahead of time? I was holding off until after I saw the film, but this worries me a bit.

Glad they pushed the R rating. Bring on the gratuitous content! 		2009-03-04 17:00:00

Author:
supersickie
Posts: 1366

the only reason i have any interest was the soundtrack:

YouTube - My Chemical Romance Desolation Row (HQ) OFFICIAL VIDEO

epic win 		2009-03-04 17:02:00

Author:
Unknown User

So, do you recommend a newcomer to the series checks out the graphic novel ahead of time? I was holding off until after I saw the film, but this worries me a bit.


I think it depends on if you're the kind of person who likes to know what's going to happen next in a movie or do you want to experience the film as it is for the first time. If the movie is not impressing the novel fans I'd probably recommend seeing the film without reading the book first. That way you won't have anything to compare it to and will probably enjoy it more. I still haven't read a Harry Potter book because I want to see all the films first as I've heard the books are much better.

It's really a personal choice though. I'd vote for movie first - book second.		2009-03-04 17:10:00

Author:
Morgana25
Posts: 5983

I think it depends on if you're the kind of person who likes to know what's going to happen next in a movie or do you want to experience the film as it is for the first time. If the movie is not impressing the novel fans I'd probably recommend seeing the film without reading the book first. That way you won't have anything to compare it to and will probably enjoy it more. I still haven't read a Harry Potter book because I want to see all the films first as I've heard the books are much better.

It's really a personal choice though. I'd vote for movie first - book second.

Thanks. I'll wait to read it as originally planned. You just worried me there for a bit when you said the newcomer might be easily lost...		2009-03-04 17:38:00

Author:
supersickie
Posts: 1366

Thanks. I'll wait to read it as originally planned. You just worried me there for a bit when you said the newcomer might be easily lost...


Some of the back story would help but maybe "lost" wasn't the best choice of word. Confused might be a better description. Eventually things start to make sense but having the full story from the book would help connect the dots easier. I think you'll have no problem following it. 		2009-03-04 18:25:00

Author:
Morgana25
Posts: 5983

Tragically I'm old enough to have bought the separate issues on release (first printing). On the lighter side my issue #1 is signed by Dave Gibbons and Alan Moore.

To be honest (why wouldn't I be) I have serious doubts about this movie. Not because I'm a diehard fan who starts foaming at the mouth whenever someone else puts their spin on something I consider sacred (and Watchmen is sacred), but because I thought that 300 was complete and utter **** - I've seriously never been that bored in the cinema in my life - and I watched the sequel to the Fantastic Four at the cinema (which is unintentionally hilarious). Even the unwitting homosexual subtext wasn't amusing (which it is in Rocky III).

I can't believe that Zack Snyder is being referred to as a 'visionary'. When Paul Greengrass was touted for it I was stoked, but then he dropped out and Snyder was brought in - they might as well have got Brett Ratner to do it.

I really hope that it is good - Alan Moore's contribution to popular culture deserves considerably wider renown than the pitiful efforts to convert his work to film thus far have earned him, but I'm not impressed by the trailers I've seen (all of them), and that PonderPop video is the worst review of all time. Blunty3000 is clearly a gibbering idiot, whoever stole his lighting equipment was probably trying to do him a favour - it was probably his mum.

I didn't mean for this post to turn into a rant - sorry.		2009-03-05 15:53:00

Author:
Boogaloo
Posts: 254

...To be honest (why wouldn't I be) I have serious doubts about this movie. Not because I'm a diehard fan who starts foaming at the mouth whenever someone else puts their spin on something I consider sacred (and Watchmen is sacred), but because I thought that 300 was complete and utter **** - I've seriously never been that bored in the cinema in my life - and I watched the sequel to the Fantastic Four at the cinema (which is unintentionally hilarious). Even the unwitting homosexual subtext wasn't amusing (which it is in Rocky III)...

...I didn't mean for this post to turn into a rant - sorry.

This type of thing makes me very nervous. I enjoyed 300, but it's not by any means an amazing film. I actually own a recut version that leaves out everything that happened back in Sparta a remixes NIN's "Just Like You Imagined" over all the battle scenes. Better than the original cut at least...

Seriously, thanks for the rant; now I'll know to give the original issues a read even if I find the film to be a bust. Hope it's not though...		2009-03-05 16:05:00

Author:
supersickie
Posts: 1366

This type of thing makes me very nervous. I enjoyed 300, but it's not by any means an amazing film. I actually own a recut version that leaves out everything that happened back in Sparta a remixes NIN's "Just Like You Imagined" over all the battle scenes. Better than the original cut at least...

Seriously, thanks for the rant; now I'll know to give the original issues a read even if I find the film to be a bust. Hope it's not though...

Hehehe - I will redact the rant ever so slightly - 300 isn't that bad, but I did find the visual style and virtually non-existent plot wearying after 45 minutes.

Where did you get the NIN cut from? That sounds pretty cool.		2009-03-05 16:59:00

Author:
Boogaloo
Posts: 254

It's an 18.
WAAAAAAAAAAAAA
How the hell can it be an 18!? When Dark Knight was a 12 or something?
If I wathced the Dark Knight at 12 I'd still be shaking now...		2009-03-05 17:36:00

Author:
Pinchanzee
Posts: 805

Anyone going to a midnight showing? I'm not gonna be able to make it tonight, but might try to drag my wife to it early tomorrow. I'm excited.2009-03-05 17:40:00

Author:
mrsupercomputer
Posts: 1335

It's an 18.
WAAAAAAAAAAAAA
How the hell can it be an 18!? When Dark Knight was a 12 or something?
If I wathced the Dark Knight at 12 I'd still be shaking now...


Do you mean the rating system?

If so - the sex scenes and some nudity and probably the depictions of some of the more graphic violence earned it the R rating here in the states. I was pretty emotionally jarred at some of the scenes so I don't have a huge problem with the R rating.		2009-03-05 18:39:00

Author:
Morgana25
Posts: 5983

...I was pretty emotionally jarred at some of the scenes so I don't have a huge problem with the R rating.

"Emotionally jarred"? Really? Where does it rank in comparison to Reservoir Dogs?		2009-03-05 21:36:00

Author:
supersickie
Posts: 1366

As a fan of the comic for many a good years, I fear I must agree with Yuper. The trailer very much failed to captivate me.


To be honest (why wouldn't I be) I have serious doubts about this movie. Not because I'm a diehard fan who starts foaming at the mouth whenever someone else puts their spin on something I consider sacred (and Watchmen is sacred), but because I thought that 300 was complete and utter ****

I agree whole-heartedly. At the same time I can't help but be excited to see this movie. I'm such a huge fan of the book, I just can't help it. To see SOME vision of it as a film. I've always followed the movie history of this movie. Did you know that Terry Gilliam was on-board at one point to do it? He's gone on to say that it just wouldn't work as a single film, but maybe a miniseries. I agree. I wish to God Terry Gilliam made a Watchmen miniseries.

It's just sad to me that Zach Snyder is this huge deal. A Dawn of the Dead remake, a 300 adaptation, and that's it. And he's a go******** God to 13-year-old 300 fans all over the place.

From the very first seconds of the very first Watchmen trailer, I was slapping my forehead. And I love that Smashing Pumpkins track! But it's CLEAR that something crucial was lost in translation there. it's so clear from early on in the book that these superheroes are complete jokes. They're washed up and live life in the wake of what they feel is a kind of embarassing profession (except for Rorshach obviously, who is probably the ULTIMATE Terry Gilliam character). But the trailers make it all out to be this slow-motion bad-*** action movie. Everything's so COOL. Cool music, speed-ramping explosions, COOL voice-over. I have no doubt that Zach Snyder is a genuinely huge fan of the book. I have no doubt that he did his absolute best to adapt it to the screen. But what I'm saying is that when he looked at the art, and read the words of that book, he just didn't got the movement, the life, the animation that's crucial in order for the book to work as a film.

Judging by metacritic (currently a score of 58) and rottentomatoes (65%), it looks like he definitely didn't pull off anything close to a masterpiece. I like these sites because they're usually a very accurate gauge for a film. I find if it's in the 60s and 70s it's probably not very good. If it's a 50, it might be amazing (mixed reviews - a movie you love or hate). If it's down amongst the 30s or lower, it's nothing but trouble.		2009-03-05 23:17:00

Author:
Teebonesy
Posts: 1937

"Emotionally jarred"? Really? Where does it rank in comparison to Reservoir Dogs?

I didn't see Resevoir Dogs all the way through so I can't compare it. There are a few alternate historical timeline parts that jarred me - You'll understand when you see it. There are also a few ways people are dispatched that really got me too.

Maybe I'm too sensitive?!? I'm not sure. I can only speak for my experience with it.		2009-03-05 23:49:00

Author:
Morgana25
Posts: 5983

It's an 18.
WAAAAAAAAAAAAA
How the hell can it be an 18!? When Dark Knight was a 12 or something?
If I wathced the Dark Knight at 12 I'd still be shaking now...

Rape scene plus other graphic violence.		2009-03-06 11:08:00

Author:
Rabid-Coot
Posts: 6728

With no offense to our younger members here, if the Watchmen gets cut in order to get an easier rating, it's probably going to kill it for me.2009-03-06 14:22:00

Author:
Morrinn3
Posts: 493

With no offense to our younger members here, if the Watchmen gets cut in order to get an easier rating, it's probably going to kill it for me.

Quite the contrary, they apparently pushed the rating this far to ensure the younger audience would have no choice but to stay away. Not for the little ones, I'm afraid.		2009-03-06 14:57:00

Author:
supersickie
Posts: 1366

For anyone who hasn't seen this, it's absolutely amazing.

Note that this contains MAJOR WATCHMEN SPOILERS. If you haven't read the book or seen the movie, you'd better hold off.

For everyone else... Enjoy... Enjoy... Enjoy...

YouTube - Saturday Morning Watchmen		2009-03-06 21:09:00

Author:
Teebonesy
Posts: 1937

Do you mean the rating system?

If so - the sex scenes and some nudity and probably the depictions of some of the more graphic violence earned it the R rating here in the states. I was pretty emotionally jarred at some of the scenes so I don't have a huge problem with the R rating.


Rape scene plus other graphic violence.

Suppose = but still.. I was really looking forward to this
And why the hell was it advertised when I went to see Benjamin button then?
"These trailers are suitable for the audience" does that just mean its ok because there's no nudity or such in the trailer?		2009-03-06 22:01:00

Author:
Pinchanzee
Posts: 805

For anyone who hasn't seen this, it's absolutely amazing.

Note that this contains MAJOR WATCHMEN SPOILERS. If you haven't read the book or seen the movie, you'd better hold off.

For everyone else... Enjoy... Enjoy... Enjoy...

YouTube - Saturday Morning Watchmen (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YDDHHrt6l4w)

... that was the BEST THING EVA! seriously!		2009-03-06 22:35:00

Author:
RockSauron
Posts: 10882

And why the hell was it advertised when I went to see Benjamin button then?
"These trailers are suitable for the audience" does that just mean its ok because there's no nudity or such in the trailer?

Just means that the images in the trailer were ok for viewing by that particular audience. Trailers are rated separately.		2009-03-06 22:38:00

Author:
Morgana25
Posts: 5983

I'm going to see this in IMAX next weekend...

I want to make sure I get the best out of the movie, it looks fantastic.		2009-03-07 01:34:00

Author:
Sack-Jake
Posts: 1153

For anyone who hasn't seen this, it's absolutely amazing.

Note that this contains MAJOR WATCHMEN SPOILERS. If you haven't read the book or seen the movie, you'd better hold off.

For everyone else... Enjoy... Enjoy... Enjoy...

YouTube - Saturday Morning Watchmen (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YDDHHrt6l4w)
That was awesome, I'll post it on the main post.

Also, I'm going to see Watchmen tomorrow! I'm going with several friends. My teachers actually know a kid from the movie, Its the kid who plays the young Jon Osterman.

The newspaper gave Watchmen 3 and a half stars. Which is pretty good, but I can bet they are just being stupid, and it deserves much higher.

I can't wait to see it!		2009-03-07 01:47:00

Author:
Kog
Posts: 2358

**** you Teebonesy, I've been having a few drinks tonight and thanks to that **** video, I'm bound to have a few trippy dreams when I pass out.2009-03-07 06:10:00

Author:
Morrinn3
Posts: 493

**** you Teebonesy, I've been having a few drinks tonight and thanks to that **** video, I'm bound to have a few trippy dreams when I pass out.
Lol.

Also, if anyone doesn't know about this, there is a special DVD coming out on March 24th. It's called 'Tales of the Black Freighter'. If you are a hardcore fan like me, you'll remember The Black Freighter from the comic in the comic. It's the story of a Captain battling his psychotic nature, and a fear of 'The Black Freighter'. Its animated and Gerard Butler is the voice of the Captain. It looks sweet, so I'm probably going to get it.

Theres also two albums on ITunes for Watchmen. There's the original soundtrack, with the many songs made by Tyler Bates, and then theres the Various Artists album, that has many artists preforming songs. I'm probably going to get the Original sountrack.		2009-03-07 06:37:00

Author:
Kog
Posts: 2358

I saw it on Friday along with my wife and I enjoyed it. It's not the best movie ever made or anything like that, but I thought it was a pretty good adaptation of the book. I did feel the length a bit, but I appreciated all the backstory Synder managed to include. My wife, who knew absolutely nothing about the Watchmen, was pleasantly surprised. I'm curious if other newbies to Watchmen will feel the same.2009-03-07 06:49:00

Author:
mrsupercomputer
Posts: 1335

Well that's good.

Also, Morrinn3, can you tell me why my signature thing won't update? I added some trophies to it, and then pasted the new link, but it still isn't showing up. I need help. I saw your signature and thought it was cool, so I got one myself.		2009-03-07 07:13:00

Author:
Kog
Posts: 2358

Personally I'm not a fan of any of this guys films... so I'm not expecting too be blown away. Like Boogaloo... I was around for the first printing as well and working in a comic store at the time. It was many moons ago so I don't remember all the details but I do remember that over all it was an amazing graphic novel.

I still have my sealed collectors 4 button set, which I think I'm going to throw up on Ebay now that the movie is here.		2009-03-07 07:54:00

Author:
Rustbukkit
Posts: 1737

Ok... this is like a totall n00b question.. I mean i this 'Watchmen' thing everwhere, but is it only a movie or is there also a game or something?

Yeah <__>		2009-03-07 19:06:00

Author:
Yarbone
Posts: 3036

Not sure about this movie, after watching Deliverance, I am disturbed by rape scenes. O_O

Seriously, it looks pretty good though.		2009-03-07 19:43:00

Author:
Bear
Posts: 2079

Ok... this is like a totall n00b question.. I mean i this 'Watchmen' thing everwhere, but is it only a movie or is there also a game or something?
Watchmen is an enormously popular 1987 comic book series by Alan Moore. You should check it out, it's good stuff.


...can you tell me why my signature thing won't update? I added some trophies to it, and then pasted the new link, but it still isn't showing up....
What I'm guessing is your browser hasn't refreshed the image. Go to the link to where your picture was:
http://pfcdn.net/site/trophy_widget/psn/Cog.png
And refresh it.

Everyone else should already be seeing the picture correctly.		2009-03-07 20:58:00

Author:
Morrinn3
Posts: 493

Not sure about this movie, after watching Deliverance, I am disturbed by rape scenes.

There's only 1 and it's not as bad as the Deliverance one imo. The Watchman one is violent but much shorter in terms of screen time.		2009-03-07 21:15:00

Author:
Morgana25
Posts: 5983

I just started reading the graphic novel today... can't wait to see this movie.2009-03-07 21:42:00

Author:
Thegide
Posts: 1465

Yes, yes, yes! I finally saw Watchmen, and it was GREAT! I absolutely loved it! It was a great recreation, each character had the perfect actor for them self! Argh! It was so good, and beautiful. They had almost every scene from the book, except for several, that weren't really missed. You guys MUST see this movie!

I can't wait to get Tales of the Black Freighter!		2009-03-08 04:19:00

Author:
Kog
Posts: 2358

I heard that the main female actor in the movie received death threats. :eek:

Anyone know anything about this?		2009-03-08 18:38:00

Author:
Killian
Posts: 2575

I heard that the main female actor in the movie received death threats. :eek:

Anyone know anything about this?
You mean Malin Akerman? The one who plays The Silk Spectre II? Or someone else, cause there are a lot of other women in the movie. And no, I don't know anything about this.

Also, I just saw Jackie Earl Haley, the one who plays Rorschach, and he doesn't really look like the guy from the movie. They really changed him up, and they did it really well!		2009-03-08 23:13:00

Author:
Kog
Posts: 2358

I didn't like the movie at all seriously, half the movie was all talk, there were a few good action parts, the story line was confusing ( for me, I never read any MARVEL comics or comics at all for that matter )

The R rating was underated in my opinion, it should've been rated that NR-17 or whatever, meaning that even if you have parents with you, if your under 17, you cant watch it.

Seriously, about 30 minutes of the movie had so much sexual references like, they showed everything... It was really weird, costume wearing people having a go at it...

Then comes the blood and gore, I loved that bit, the slow mo's at the perfect moments, and there was a bit of comedy in it as well.

Would I recommend watching it?

If your a MARVEL fan, sure why not.

If you're just not that into those comics or MARVEL movies, I wouldn't recommend watching it in the theatres, wait until it comes out for renting. Or watch it at a friends.		2009-03-08 23:35:00

Author:
Whalio Cappuccino
Posts: 5250

whaaaaale... this isn't a marvel film. KNOW WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT!

And yeah, Watchmen is supposed to be more about story then full on action, so that is good for me .

... My brother saw it the other night, when my other brother gets back from Flordia sometime this week he will take us both to see it, so yeah :/.		2009-03-08 23:38:00

Author:
RockSauron
Posts: 10882

I guess I didn't know what i was going to go see - but I hated it... Good in terms of over all idealism, but just dragged on and on, and some characters were just forgettable, including the bad guy - which is a huge no no... he was lame! Not a fan, imho.2009-03-08 23:55:00

Author:
LuckyShot
Posts: 713

The R rating was underated in my opinion, it should've been rated that NR-17 or whatever, meaning that even if you have parents with you, if your under 17, you cant watch it.

Seriously, about 30 minutes of the movie was full on porn, like, they showed everything... It was really weird, costume wearing people having it...


That's a bit of an exaggeration in my opinion. What scenes are you referring of specifically?		2009-03-09 01:46:00

Author:
mrsupercomputer
Posts: 1335

"I'm not locked in here with you, you're locked in here with me!"2009-03-09 03:23:00

Author:
Voltiare
Posts: 646

"I'm not locked in here with you, you're locked in here with me!"
Heard a joke once: Man goes to doctor. Says he's depressed. Says life seems harsh and cruel. Says he feels all alone in a threatening world where what lies ahead is vague and uncertain. Doctor says "Treatment is simple. Great clown Pagliacci is in town tonight. Go and see him. That should pick you up." Man bursts into tears. Says "But, doctor...I am Pagliacci." Good joke. Everybody laugh. Roll on snare drum. Curtains		2009-03-09 03:27:00

Author:
Kog
Posts: 2358

That's a bit of an exaggeration in my opinion. What scenes are you referring of specifically?

The scene were they are in that weird floating thing in the air, and you can pretty much see everything, and then were she takes over at the house, or were they're in the bed. I mean there are a few other parts, but they seriously showed everything...

EDIT: Now that I re-read my explanation, I did over exxagerate it a little, but what I'm trying to say is.

They pushed the rating to the limit, I mean a little more and it wouldn't be rated R.		2009-03-09 05:26:00

Author:
Whalio Cappuccino
Posts: 5250

No. Not even in the face of Armageddon. Never compromise.


(loved that one too)



The scene were they are in that weird floating thing in the air, and you can pretty much see everything, and then were she takes over at the house, or were they're in the bed. I mean there are a few other parts, but they seriously showed everything...

EDIT: Now that I re-read my explanation, I did over exxagerate it a little, but what I'm trying to say is.

They pushed the rating to the limit, I mean a little more and it wouldn't be rated R.



I understand that opinion Whaaaaale - it's the same one I had the day I saw the film and the day after I saw the film. I still think it pushed way to close to the NC17 line for my liking but I think we might be in the minority on this. Wasn't the main reason I wasn't totally loving the film.		2009-03-09 05:31:00

Author:
Morgana25
Posts: 5983

No. Not even in the face of Armageddon. Never compromise.


(loved that one too)






I understand that opinion Whaaaaale - it's the same one I had the day I saw the film and the day after I saw the film. I still think it pushed way to close to the NC17 line for my liking but I think we might be in the minority on this. Wasn't the main reason I wasn't totally loving the film.


Meh, the other 4 friends I went with too totally agree, so we might not be in a small of a minority as you think, I just think it was way too much nudity, especially that blue dude, like wtf... I don't want to see that, even if its some mutated freak. 		2009-03-09 05:50:00

Author:
Whalio Cappuccino
Posts: 5250

The scene were they are in that weird floating thing in the air, and you can pretty much see everything, and then were she takes over at the house, or were they're in the bed. I mean there are a few other parts, but they seriously showed everything...

EDIT: Now that I re-read my explanation, I did over exxagerate it a little, but what I'm trying to say is.

They pushed the rating to the limit, I mean a little more and it wouldn't be rated R.

You really thought that was more explicit than than sex scenes in other R rated films? During the sex scenes, there was female nudity, but there was no actual penetration or even a penis. I also didn't find Dr. Manhattan's nakedness to be explicit either as it was totally non sexually and fit the personality of his character completely.

If anything was pushing the film toward a NC-17, which I think still think it's far from, it should be the violence. People getting cleaved in the head, blown apart, and having arms severed are more disturbing than a nipple or a blue penis in my opinion.		2009-03-09 14:32:00

Author:
mrsupercomputer
Posts: 1335

I've added a new poll, called "Who's your favourite WATCHMEN Character?". Vote now!2009-03-09 23:50:00

Author:
Kog
Posts: 2358

Saw this the other night... Was mostly pleasantly surprised. For fans of the book, it's hard to hate it too much, as it involves some INCREDIBLY faithful re-creations, or renderings, of the book. hard to even call it an adaptation at times.

A lot of it is over-stylized music video crap. It takes little scenes from the book and balloons them into these hyper-violent super-cool slow mo action set pieces. I rolled my eyes often at all the gratuitous violence in this movie. I kept hearing it was gory from people - and wondered how? The book has a bit of blood here and there, but it isn't gory by any stretch of the imagination.

Well there you have it. The filmmakers crammed, crudely, as much explicit violence and gore in as they could, at every possible opportunity. For no appropriate reason.

The sex scene was also gratuitous. It took the same event from the book and turned it into a hokey Hollywood sex scene with a punchline. Ridiculous.

I had a hell of an enjoyable time watching a film rendering of a graphic novel I really love. Jackie Earle Haley was incredible. Rorschach, sprung to life right out of the book. the guy deserved the role so much. I know he really wanted it. He hasn't done many films - he was a child actor (Bad News Bears), and seemed to disappear for decades, then came back in Todd Field's Little Children. He desperately wanted to play Rorschach. I couldn't possibly imagine anyone else doing this role the service he did.

Billy Crudup was spot on as Manhattan as well. But what was with the penis?? Jesus Christ!! In the book he has a Michaelangelo's David penis. This classic-beauty infantile package, so small it's barely noticeable. They gave him this swinging, full-grown man-penis in the movie. Its jiggling is so distracting it's hard to look anywhere else when he's onscreen. What the hell.		2009-03-10 05:34:00

Author:
Teebonesy
Posts: 1937

Billy Crudup was spot on as Manhattan as well. But what was with the penis?? Jesus Christ!! In the book he has a Michaelangelo's David penis. This classic-beauty infantile package, so small it's barely noticeable. They gave him this swinging, full-grown man-penis in the movie. Its jiggling is so distracting it's hard to look anywhere else when he's onscreen. What the hell.

Just came back a few hours ago from seeing it and LOVED it! Not sure why everyone is making such a big deal over a penis though. As for being a full-grown man-penis.. I guess that would make total sense seeing as Manhattan is a full-grown man... with a penis. I had no trouble at all ignoring it... it's just another part of the human body. Speaking of which, I thought the love scene was realistic yet tastefully done and not too raunchy. Also, I have to admit that seeing some of Malin Akerman's naughty bits was certainly an unexpected but fully welcomed treat.

I think every scene (including those with nudity) only served to illustrate the story's point about humanity, and it's take on super heroes being just as flawed and screwed up as the rest of us.

Did I mention I really enjoyed seeing Malin Akerman in the buff? :hero:		2009-03-10 08:46:00

Author:
Rustbukkit
Posts: 1737

So I saw it...
I was pleasantly surprised...
I went to see it with zero expectations, and as a long term fan of the comics (Published by DC comics, not MARVEL), I was totally satisfied with the ending and the omitting of the giant telepathic Squid.

The opening credits were just amazing... the way they cram a lot of the Minutemen backstory and fanservice into the credits roll was exhilarating.
I found myself watching it over and over (I found the clip online (http://pixelatedgeek.com/2009/03/watchmen-opening-credits-video/)).

Another thing I found awesome was the lack of star studded celebrities in every major role. Except maybe for Billy Crudup there were only a handful of others who's names I knew.

Truth be told, I'm quite perplexed regarding my feelings on this film... I was so certain it was going to be terrible I guess it had nowhere to go but up for me.		2009-03-11 05:32:00

Author:
Morrinn3
Posts: 493

The opening credits were just amazing... the way they cram a lot of the Minutemen backstory and fanservice into the credits roll was exhilarating.



That part of the film I found to be extremely well done. It's the sequence that really sticks in my mind from the film. The musical choice was cool and the alternative history really made me think about the "what if" nature of history.		2009-03-11 05:35:00

Author:
Morgana25
Posts: 5983

Lol Morrin, I noticed that the video you kept watching had been taken down due to copyright laws. Lol.

Also, Rorschach seems to be dominating the poll, so I thought I give you guys a little thing you might find interesting about the name Rorschach gave himself, and Rorscachs history.

In the movie, when Rorschach has been sent to jail, Dr. Malcolm Long shows Rorschach several pictures, that look like splotches of ink. Well those are splotches of ink are known as 'The Rorschach Inkblot test'. This test allows Psychiatrists to learn about their patients mental, and emotional state. The Doctor would ask their patient what it looked like, and the patient would answer. Depending on what the patient said, the Doctor would know what the patient is like, and their health.

But how did Rorschach get his mask?

At the age of 16, Walter (Rorschach) began to work as an Unskilled Manual Worker, in the garment industry. One day there was a special order for a dress in new Dr. Manhattan spin-off fabric. Vicious fluids between layers latex, heat and pressure sensitive. But in the end the girl didn't want it, and said it looked ugly. But Walter liked it, he liked the moving black shapes that didn't blend into a gray. Walter took it home, and using heated tools he cut a large piece off. He later forgot about it. One day in the newspaper he noticed the girls name. The girl has been raped, tortured, and murdered outside of her apartment as her neighbors, watched, and did nothing to stop it. After that incident Rorschach found the piece of the dress, and turned it into a face. He later joined the Watchmen.

Hope you liked that! (Because I typed all that out from memory, and didn't paste anything.)		2009-03-11 23:53:00

Author:
Kog
Posts: 2358

Lol Morrin, I noticed that the video you kept watching had been taken down due to copyright laws. Lol.

Also, Rorschach seems to be dominating the poll, so I thought I give you guys a little thing you might find interesting about the name Rorschach gave himself, and Rorscachs history.

In the movie, when Rorschach has been sent to jail, Dr. Malcolm Long shows Rorschach several pictures, that look like splotches of ink. Well those are splotches of ink are known as 'The Rorschach Inkblot test'. This test allows Psychiatrists to learn about their patients mental, and emotional state. The Doctor would ask their patient what it looked like, and the patient would answer. Depending on what the patient said, the Doctor would know what the patient is like, and their health.

But how did Rorschach get his mask?

At the age of 16, Walter (Rorschach) began to work as an Unskilled Manual Worker, in the garment industry. One day there was a special order for a dress in new Dr. Manhattan spin-off fabric. Vicious fluids between layers latex, heat and pressure sensitive. But in the end the girl didn't want it, and said it looked ugly. But Walter liked it, he liked the moving black shapes that didn't blend into a gray. Walter took it home, and using heated tools he cut a large piece off. He later forgot about it. One day in the newspaper he noticed the girls name. The girl has been raped, tortured, and murdered outside of her apartment as her neighbors, watched, and did nothing to stop it. After that incident Rorschach found the piece of the dress, and turned it into a face. He later joined the Watchmen.

Hope you liked that! (Because I typed all that out from memory, and didn't paste anything.)

Yeah pretty cool thanks, at first I was like what the hell are those weird moving blots of ink on his mask, then I was like omg they're the same shapes as those pictures! Pretty cool, and also when Walter blows up towards the end, did anyone notice that the blood was shaped like one of the inkblot shapes? Or was it just me?		2009-03-12 00:03:00

Author:
Whalio Cappuccino
Posts: 5250

Yeah pretty cool thanks, at first I was like what the hell are those weird moving blots of ink on his mask, then I was like omg they're the same shapes as those pictures! Pretty cool, and also when Walter blows up towards the end, did anyone notice that the blood was shaped like one of the inkblot shapes? Or was it just me?
I thought it looked like a person lying down, but it might of been an inkblot.		2009-03-12 00:28:00

Author:
Kog
Posts: 2358

I'm going to see it this weekend. Never read the novel. I guess that won't matter too much though?2009-03-12 00:32:00

Author:
ryryryan
Posts: 3767

Yeah pretty cool thanks, at first I was like what the hell are those weird moving blots of ink on his mask, then I was like omg they're the same shapes as those pictures! Pretty cool, and also when Walter blows up towards the end, did anyone notice that the blood was shaped like one of the inkblot shapes? Or was it just me?

I thought It looked like a butterfly. Didn't he say to the shrink that one of the test photos was a "pretty butterfly"... If I remember right it's the one where he flashed to the dog he killed. Sort of a comparison of how the "bad" guy viewed him in the end. Just a dog to be put down. Could be wrong about that but I'm pretty sure it's an intentional visual metaphor.		2009-03-12 00:34:00

Author:
Morgana25
Posts: 5983

As for being a full-grown man-penis.. I guess that would make total sense seeing as Manhattan is a full-grown man... with a penis.

My gripe about Manhattan's Manhattan-sized penis is as a fan of the book. He's logical, cold, but maintains a hint of humanity. He has tastes in things - he finds beauty in the miniscule mechanics of the universe. He has respect for honesty, particularly in the case of The Comedian. He gradually sheds his clothes over the years because he's so uncomfortable in them. His body is not shaped like his former human self - it's a "beautiful" form that he himself has crafted. In the book, he looks very much like a Renaissance statue, or a classical Greek God. Large and powerful; bulging muscles; tiny genital package.

The filmmakers made a distinct stylistic choice to greatly enhance this part of his anatomy. There's no doubt whatsoever that the "enhanced" version is far more distracting - it has animated jiggles and swings for God's sake!

I just hope that when the DVD comes out, the round table discussion the filmmakers and producers had on Manhattan's penis size is included in the special features.		2009-03-12 09:49:00

Author:
Teebonesy
Posts: 1937

filmmakers made a distinct stylistic choice to greatly enhance this part of his anatomy. There's no doubt whatsoever that the "enhanced" version is far more distracting - it has animated jiggles and swings for God's sake!


It may jiggle a tad, but isn't that what a penis does when a man moves? Mine certainly does. I don't think the filmmakers "enhanced" Dr. Manhattan's penis anymore than they "enhanced" Rorschach's mask with it's movements. This isn't the comic page, but live action, which requires more detail for the realism of the characters.

I think that some may find it distracting simply because we're not used to seeing a penis on screen in films like this. Personally, I wasn't distracted by it at all.		2009-03-12 15:36:00

Author:
mrsupercomputer
Posts: 1335

Saw it last night- AWESOME!

Personally, I liked the squid replacement- fit better into the story flow, although the squid DID make him seem more... well... Insane.

I also liked the montage, and with the Comedian with the gun about to shoot Kennedy... liked all those little touches there.

And, uh, yeah, I liked it .		2009-03-14 17:56:00

Author:
RockSauron
Posts: 10882

I just finished the comic this morning, going to see it in like 10 minutes, Ill tell everyone what I think when I get back!

EDIT: Nevermind, im going to see it tomorrow. Ill tell everyone my thoughts after I see it,		2009-03-14 20:25:00

Author:
Gondito
Posts: 1082

Wait a minute, who here's favorite ISN'T Rorschach? He was so awesome! But I didn't like that his face...he was too ugly. They should have never taken off his mask!

Dr. Manhattan was okay but later in the movie he really did seem like an ***. I hated how he knew everything....But I loved how he just pwn'd you know who at the end.

Wasn't too fond of the end. I think that there's a lot that doesn't add up.		2009-03-14 23:01:00

Author:
qrtda235566
Posts: 3664

Wait a minute, who here's favorite ISN'T Rorschach? He was so awesome! But I didn't like that his face...he was too ugly. They should have never taken off his mask!

Dr. Manhattan was okay but later in the movie he really did seem like an ***. I hated how he knew everything....But I loved how he just pwn'd you know who at the end.

Wasn't too fond of the end. I think that there's a lot that doesn't add up.

What is it you don't like about the end, exactly?

And awesomemans... his mask IS his face? 		2009-03-14 23:06:00

Author:
RockSauron
Posts: 10882

What is it you don't like about the end, exactly?

And awesomemans... his mask IS his face?

Feel that There was no reason Veidt couldn't have explained his plan beforehand, or act like an evil ****. Seriously....

And, rorschach called his mask his face...but it wasn't. His mask was awesome. His face wasn't.		2009-03-14 23:11:00

Author:
qrtda235566
Posts: 3664

Feel that There was no reason Veidt couldn't have explained his plan beforehand, or act like an evil ****. Seriously....

And, rorschach called his mask his face...but it wasn't. His mask was awesome. His face wasn't.

Ok, let me get this straight...

there is no reason why Veidt shouldn't have announced to the world that he was planning to frame Dr. Manhatten and kill MILLIONS of people in an instant? How exactly would one go about telling people his plan to save the world when, if ANYONE knew, they could spoil it and ruin the only chance to save the world? How could he tell anyone? Those who had any idea he killed so that they wouldn't tell anyone cause they couldn't.

And in the movie version he was technically more of a good guy... the comic gave more of a connotation that he framed an alien invasion just t fill his own ego that HE saved the world, whereas the movie gave more of an impression he saved the world to actually save the world.

So, yeah. Who could he tell that he was going to kill millions that there wouldn't be a chance of them slipping and thus ruining his plans of saving the world?

Although I must say the cat thing served no purpose in the movie... In the novel it was a predecessor to the squid, but in the movie it just appeared then was killed...		2009-03-14 23:37:00

Author:
RockSauron
Posts: 10882

Wait a minute, who here's favorite ISN'T Rorschach?
I love Rorschach, but my favorite is Dr. Manhattan. His contemplation on Mars is probably my favorite moment in both the book and the movie.		2009-03-15 03:59:00

Author:
mrsupercomputer
Posts: 1335

I like the character of Rorschach as a really interesting and complex character. For the poll I picked him and he really is my favorite in terms of him being entertaining, funny, dark and flawed.

That being said - I'm fascinated by Dr. Manhattan but it a very different way. I'm not sure if everyone has this reaction to the characters in Wachmen but when I saw the film I really tried to see the other characters and the world through each of their eyes. Dr. Manhattan's perspective on the world really made me think more so than any other character. If I had to pick a character I understand the most in terms of how he sees the world I think I'd have to go with Night Owl (Dan) though.		2009-03-15 06:26:00

Author:
Morgana25
Posts: 5983

yea I just watched it... Very cool.. 9.5 outta 10.

I remember flipping through the books like a long time ago. didn't really remember much of it though so it was like I was experiencing it for the first time.

The movie was brilliant though. Loved the use of repetitive symbols and stuff. Like the recurring smiley faces.

the music was awesome.

the graphics were top notch.

I really want to make a Rorschach mask, but doubt that its possible right now.

and was it just me or... was that one of the Hottest sex scenes in like Forever??? I mean really well done to, like super hot without being boderline pornographic.

anyway loved the movie, now im going to go look through my old comics and see if I can find the originals.		2009-03-15 10:58:00

Author:
Madafaku
Posts: 738

Just saw it like 10 minutes ago. Incredible. 9 out of 10

The Comedian and Rorschach were the best in the film imo.
The acting by Rorschach near the end, right before he died, was incredible. the suttle face twitches and the lighting was incredible in that scene.

Jeffrey Dean Morgan as the Comedian was incredible, he is the perfect person for that role.

I DO think the ending is much better in the movie, The ending of the comic book with the Squid is just too random, and seemed unneccesary.

Im sad Jon didnt teleport everyone out of the studio, I thought it was a great scene in the Novel, and its a shame they couldnt make the movie 20 seconds longer to incorporate it.

Im detracting from my score because of Malin Ackermans acting, and becuase they didnt show enough of Bubastis. xD that kitty is so cool, i want one!

The Soundtrack was great. the Simon and Garfunkle song is great in the cemetary, and Desolation Row was great in the credits. its a great song to give the audience that after-the-movie hype.

I wasnt really distracted by Dr Manhattans junk. thankfully. Billy Crudup was perfect for Jon. Facial structure and all.

p.s. I want a Bubastis!		2009-03-15 23:53:00

Author:
Gondito
Posts: 1082

http://i39.tinypic.com/nqpvo0.jpg2009-03-16 09:36:00

Author:
Rabid-Coot
Posts: 6728

........Lol!2009-03-16 14:00:00

Author:
Boogaloo
Posts: 254

Guilty as charged!2009-03-19 10:39:00

Author:
Teebonesy
Posts: 1937

Were you guys really that distracted/infatuation with Manhattan's genitals? I can honestly say that I noticed them but didn't find anything there worth discussing after the film had ended. I understand that full-frontal male nudity is something we're still new to here in America, but it's not that big of a deal, is it?2009-03-19 15:01:00

Author:
supersickie
Posts: 1366

Were you guys really that distracted/infatuation with Manhattan's genitals? I can honestly say that I noticed them but didn't find anything there worth discussing after the film had ended. I understand that full-frontal male nudity is something we're still new to here in America, but it's not that big of a deal, is it?

Didn't bother me after I knew it was going to keep happening on screen. First time I was sort of like woa - but after letting my brain work on it, it makes sense. Why would Dr. Manhattan care if he was naked? He wouldn't - so I just accepted it as another one of the ways the film shows us how different he is from us regular "OMG there's nudity on the screen" people. (IMO)		2009-03-19 18:04:00

Author:
Morgana25
Posts: 5983

You guys are totally missing the point of Manhattan's penis! I've posted long diatribes here about it, and really, it's not worth spending too much discussion about, but I have my things to say about his penis. It has everything to do with the decisions these filmmakers made in adapting this book. If you want my thoughts on this, just find my posts elsewhere in this thread.

But the main thing is that it's symbolic of the overall adaptation. this over-inflating, over-stylizing, over-doing of everything that misses the greatest nuances of the book. And these aren't things that wouldn't have worked on the screen - parts of this book were PERFECTLY adaptable to a film medium, but instead, here, Snyder decides to overdo so much.

People keep assuming that my problem with Manhattan's penis was that it was THERE. That I have some kind of western sensitivity to nudity. Not the case at all. More nudity in movies PLEASE!

It was the style of the adaptation. The decisions made. Have you looked at the book lately?		2009-03-19 23:27:00

Author:
Teebonesy
Posts: 1937

It was the style of the adaptation. The decisions made. Have you looked at the book lately?

I understand that your not sensitive to the nudity itself so much as the decision to go away from the "classical" genital appearance seen in the graphic novel. However, others definitely seem worked up over the fact that it was on screen period.

Curious as to if you think Snyder specifically chose to go with a more modern look rather than the classical look as seen in the novel. While he certainly chose one over the other, do you think he really put a great deal of thought into it? Are there other examples in this film that fit this same pattern? In other words, did Snyder stray too far away from things that Alan Moore purposely created?

Not sure that came across perfectly clear, but I can elaborate if need be. 		2009-03-20 02:00:00

Author:
supersickie
Posts: 1366

Here's another example of something Snyder treated much as he treated the "big blue dong":

Violence. He took something that certainly existed in the book in a somewhat brutal fashion, and over-inflated, over-stylized, and over-gorified it to extremes. There's buckets of gore where there shouldn't be. The scene where Nite Owl and Silk Specter beat up the "knotheads" in the alley - the movie turns it into this massive, gorey, brutal, murderous affair, we seem to be meant to smile and wince and go "OOOHHH!!" at each hit and bone-jutting brutality, and at the end of the scene, the two characters do the whole post-coital thing.

The movie over-does the abilities of our regular human vigilantes, making them all seem like superheroes not too unlike the Doctor himself. Rorshach seems to somehow be able to run up walls Crouching Tiger-style. At over 70 years old, The Comedien punches through a stone wall for God's sake. These people aren't human! One of the ENTIRE major points of the book is that they're real humans, with the exception of 2: Dr. Manhattan is an accidental superhuman, and Ozymandias is a self-made superhuman.

Music-video interludes. The book contains quotes from songs that fit each chapter. The movie takes this cue to ridiculous extremes, for example, launching into an extended, out-of-place music video for Jimi Hendrix because it has the line "Two riders are approaching".

the sex scene - Ridiculously gratuitous Hollywood sex fantasy. Could have been done tastefully, without the ridiculous music, without the ridiculous punchline, without the hokiness. Took a scene from the book and turned it into an overdone, super-stylized Hollywood mess.

The movie spends a lot of time on all this gratuity, at the expense of much better scenes. This time could have been spent perhaps revealing the REAL gravity of the situation after Manhattan leaves Earth. In the book, you get the idea that as soon as he leaves, **** goes BANANAS. I mean bananas. Everyone is CONVINCED the world is over. In the movie, you practically forget all about it. It's somewhere in the background.

Is the big blue dong a big deal? Not really on its own - but it MUST beg the question: WHY? Why do it? Why make it a huge flopping wiggler, when it clearly isn't in the book? Why? To shock? To try to make Manhattan that much more intimidating?

Why make Rorschach drive a hatchet into the dude's face over and over and over, when it clearly isn't in the book? To shock? To try to make Rorschach that much more psychopathic?

The biggest departures from the book all fall into the categories of hyper-stylization and shock value. It says something for the director, I think, and I don't get that he's particularly confident with the subject matter by making the choices he did, and by otherwise sticking SO CLOSELY to the book that it hurts his movie. There's plenty that needs to change in order for the book to make a workable transition to the screen, but here, the only changes he bothered to make were ridiculous cartoony ones.		2009-03-20 04:15:00

Author:
Teebonesy
Posts: 1937

All valid points I must say. Like I said, I haven't read the graphic novel but plan on doing so very soon.

Another question, Teebonesy: do you think Alan Moore - even though he apparently will have nothing to do with this adaptations anymore - feels better or worse about this movie's outcome in comparison to The League of Extraordinary Gentleman?

EDIT: To clarify, I'm sure Mr. Moore isn't too happy with either adaptation. My question pertains to whether or not he is understanding of certain liberties Zack Snyder chose to take when bringing the story to a larger, more diverse audience.		2009-03-20 12:02:00

Author:
supersickie
Posts: 1366

To be honest, I think Alan Moore likes to stick his fingers in his ears and go "la la la la" any time someone tries to tell him about Zach Snyder's Watchmen. I'm not sure he's even aware of what's been changed, and how many liberties were taken in this one compared to Extraordinary or From Hell. I don't think he'll even allow himself the requisite information needed to make an informed opinion on Watchmen vs League.

Although you'd think it would make sense to assume this - it's actually NOT safe to assume that somewhere deep down inside, he would be less upset about Watchmen's adaptation than League's - there's no doubt it's a more loyal adaptation, but at the same time, it has a special place in the medium, and for Alan Moore himself, so much so that this adaptation, if he did sit down and watch all of "his" movies, may even be the most upsetting of the batch.

He's just such an eccentric character, that Alan Moore, so much unlike anyone else out there. The only thing we can assume is that he's real-deal crazy about this ****, that all of his "venom" is coming from ACTUAL glands that he ACTUALLY has in his mouth, likely as a supernatural biological result of that weird-*** snake god he worships.		2009-03-20 23:05:00

Author:
Teebonesy
Posts: 1937

To be honest, I think Alan Moore likes to stick his fingers in his ears and go "la la la la" any time someone tries to tell him about Zach Snyder's Watchmen. I'm not sure he's even aware of what's been changed, and how many liberties were taken in this one compared to Extraordinary or From Hell. I don't think he'll even allow himself the requisite information needed to make an informed opinion on Watchmen vs League.

Although you'd think it would make sense to assume this - it's actually NOT safe to assume that somewhere deep down inside, he would be less upset about Watchmen's adaptation than League's - there's no doubt it's a more loyal adaptation, but at the same time, it has a special place in the medium, and for Alan Moore himself, so much so that this adaptation, if he did sit down and watch all of "his" movies, may even be the most upsetting of the batch.

He's just such an eccentric character, that Alan Moore, so much unlike anyone else out there. The only thing we can assume is that he's real-deal crazy about this ****, that all of his "venom" is coming from ACTUAL glands that he ACTUALLY has in his mouth, likely as a supernatural biological result of that weird-*** snake god he worships.

Learned a lot about Alan Moore there.

I guess there's bound to be at least some disappointment when anything you create is adapted to another format; it's going to change to same degree no matter the reason. He seems like he might be the type of dude that's just upset by the fact someone would even think to mess with his creations. But - as you've said many times before in this thread - perhaps he has great reason to be upset given the products From Hell, The League of Extraordinary Gentleman, and now Watchmen...		2009-03-21 15:51:00

Author:
supersickie
Posts: 1366

Here's another example of something Snyder treated much as he treated the "big blue dong":

Violence. He took something that certainly existed in the book in a somewhat brutal fashion, and over-inflated, over-stylized, and over-gorified it to extremes. There's buckets of gore where there shouldn't be. The scene where Nite Owl and Silk Specter beat up the "knotheads" in the alley - the movie turns it into this massive, gorey, brutal, murderous affair, we seem to be meant to smile and wince and go "OOOHHH!!" at each hit and bone-jutting brutality, and at the end of the scene, the two characters do the whole post-coital thing.

The movie over-does the abilities of our regular human vigilantes, making them all seem like superheroes not too unlike the Doctor himself. Rorshach seems to somehow be able to run up walls Crouching Tiger-style. At over 70 years old, The Comedien punches through a stone wall for God's sake. These people aren't human! One of the ENTIRE major points of the book is that they're real humans, with the exception of 2: Dr. Manhattan is an accidental superhuman, and Ozymandias is a self-made superhuman.

Music-video interludes. The book contains quotes from songs that fit each chapter. The movie takes this cue to ridiculous extremes, for example, launching into an extended, out-of-place music video for Jimi Hendrix because it has the line "Two riders are approaching".

the sex scene - Ridiculously gratuitous Hollywood sex fantasy. Could have been done tastefully, without the ridiculous music, without the ridiculous punchline, without the hokiness. Took a scene from the book and turned it into an overdone, super-stylized Hollywood mess.

The movie spends a lot of time on all this gratuity, at the expense of much better scenes. This time could have been spent perhaps revealing the REAL gravity of the situation after Manhattan leaves Earth. In the book, you get the idea that as soon as he leaves, **** goes BANANAS. I mean bananas. Everyone is CONVINCED the world is over. In the movie, you practically forget all about it. It's somewhere in the background.

Is the big blue dong a big deal? Not really on its own - but it MUST beg the question: WHY? Why do it? Why make it a huge flopping wiggler, when it clearly isn't in the book? Why? To shock? To try to make Manhattan that much more intimidating?

Why make Rorschach drive a hatchet into the dude's face over and over and over, when it clearly isn't in the book? To shock? To try to make Rorschach that much more psychopathic?

The biggest departures from the book all fall into the categories of hyper-stylization and shock value. It says something for the director, I think, and I don't get that he's particularly confident with the subject matter by making the choices he did, and by otherwise sticking SO CLOSELY to the book that it hurts his movie. There's plenty that needs to change in order for the book to make a workable transition to the screen, but here, the only changes he bothered to make were ridiculous cartoony ones.


Sorry to bring back an old topic, but I needed to respond to this.

The alleyway scene was gory in the graphic novel, and at the end, they do that whole poise thing. It was to show that they still had their vigilante spirit in them.
There's nothing superhuman about punching through a wall. It looks great on screen, and it really isn't all that tough. Many years ago, my brother and a friend were play fighting and my brother pushed his friend into our wall. The wall was severely dented, and that was a strong wall and relatively weak push.

This is more of a personal preference, but I loved the musical interludes.

The sex scene I agree with someone else was well done for the most part. It wasn't overly graphic, and was intimate like in the graphic novel. The music was a little cheesy, I agree, but the whole thing with the fire shooting out of the ship was in the graphic novel as well (I'm assuming that's what you meant by the ridiculous punchline?).

I agree, the whole impending nuclear war could have been played up, and the fear. That is one thing I wish was more prominent.

Sure, the penis was bigger, but it didn't bother me. They did upsize that from the graphic novel, but it's not the worst thing in the world.

Rorschach does some pretty graphic stuff in the graphic novel, and while I don't remember if the hatchet scene was in the graphic novel, it's not like there weren't many other very violent scenes involving Rorschach.

Overall, I really loved the movie and liked the unique style that it had. There weren't very many slow-motion scenes, and what there was fit well in my opinion. I read the graphic novel pretty much right before I saw the film, and I think you have to think of the film as a companion to the novel. The film is good by itself, but if you apply everything you know about the characters in the graphic novel to the film, you get the best experience.

I think you need to read the graphic novel again. Or maybe I do, but I think I got most of my facts straight.

But each to his own


Also, I was wondering if anyone's seen the animated short that depicts the comic within the comic (I think it's called "Tales from the Black Ship" or something).
I can't wait until the DVD comes out with the director's cut!		2009-05-06 04:06:00

Author:
hilightnotes
Posts: 1230

Also, I was wondering if anyone's seen the animated short that depicts the comic within the comic (I think it's called "Tales from the Black Ship" or something).
I can't wait until the DVD comes out with the director's cut!
I got it 4 weeks ago and still haven't watched it, I'm probably going to watch it tomorrow.		2009-05-08 05:15:00

Author:
Kog
Posts: 2358

Its Tales of the Black Freighter, a Comic within a comic in the original Watchmen. It will also be narrated by Gerald Freaking Butler. I think it'll be sweet.
Trailer
YouTube - Tales of the Black Freighter Official Trailer (HD)		2009-05-08 14:59:00

Author:
Morrinn3
Posts: 493

sorry i'm bumping a real old threat, but only a couple of days and then the DVD and BLU-Ray comes out, anyone else going to get this movie once it's out on the market2009-07-17 18:26:00

Author:
Frank-the-Bunny
Posts: 1246

I'll be picking it up on the 21st. 2009-07-17 18:30:00

Author:
Morgana25
Posts: 5983

Yep. I am getting the special edition on Blu-ray which gets my a dooms day clock key chain! 2009-07-17 18:31:00

Author:
Kog
Posts: 2358

which special edition, the 75$ one, i'm getting the blu-ray version director's cut, can't wait it's gonna be crazy AWESOME,l heard the director's cut is even better then the movie2009-07-17 19:01:00

Author:
Frank-the-Bunny
Posts: 1246


LBPCentral Archive Statistics
Posts: 1077139    Threads: 69970    Members: 9661    Archive-Date: 2019-01-19

Datenschutz
Aus dem Archiv wurden alle persönlichen Daten wie Name, Anschrift, Email etc. - aber auch sämtliche Inhalte wie z.B. persönliche Nachrichten - entfernt.
Die Nutzung dieser Webseite erfolgt ohne Speicherung personenbezogener Daten. Es werden keinerlei Cookies, Logs, 3rd-Party-Plugins etc. verwendet.