Official Watchmen movie thread

[dbk]

it was terrible... way too long yet didn't explain a lot of the stuff.

p.s. I haven't read the graphic novel.

 

[AkumaX]

the watchmen was whack

 

[Koing]

I'm excited about he movie and I rarely get excited about movies

I haven. Read he book but it looks sweet! I'm a big fan of comic to films

Koing

 

[Platypus]

I went into it cold, having never read the graphic novel, and I thought it was great.

I saw the ending coming though, but I do have one question..


*spoiler*



If John can see his future (despite that one scene where he said his vision was clouded of the future), why doesn't he realize what Ozy is doing the entire movie until the very end? Is that one scene I mentioned supposed to explain that?

And what was different about the ending in the book versus what they did in the film?

 

[toekramp]

that was a miserable movie experience. and i have not read the book.

 

[oznerol]

I didn't read the book.

The movie was mediocre.

The soundtrack was terrible.

The sex scenes were terrible.

It just seemed like the movie didn't know what it wanted to be. It had some really gritty moments which were done great. Rorschach in particular was very interesting. His scene in the prison was probably the highlight of the movie - from the interview with the psychiatrist to his encounters with other inmates. Very well done.

But then it had very whimsical and fantasy scenes that weren't done well at all. Most of the scenes with Dr. Manhattan were done this way and it was completely uninteresting. To top it off, the soundtrack to the entire movie was ridiculous and felt completely out of place. It was like they just licensed some songs from that era and threw them in wherever.

And as I mentioned before - the sex scenes were awful - particularly the one between the Silk Spectre II and the Nite Owl II in the ship. Yes, she's naked! Great. Big deal. It was tacky and done in poor taste. It completely contrasted (and not in a good way) the rest of the movie. And to top it off, the ridiculous ending of the scene - with the fire shooting out of the ship - I would have loved to been in the storyboard meeting for that one where everyone agreed that would be a good idea. If that was detailed in the book, then it was either one of those things that works in print but doesn't translate well into film - or more likely, was just as absurd in both forms.

It felt long. It was long. But it was decently entertaining. I would like to have seen Frank Miller direct this. I think he has a better grasp of the comic film-noir genre.

 

[amdhunter]

Originally posted by: toekramp
that was a miserable movie experience. and i have not read the book.

I couldn't agree with you more. I couldn't imagine reading a book about this movie either...lol

Sitting through this movie was pure torture.

 

[hans030390]

Originally posted by: Alex C
...the end of the book is amazing and really comes out of nowhere...

I thought the ending kinda sucked.

 

[Ruptga]

Originally posted by: Platypus
I went into it cold, having never read the graphic novel, and I thought it was great.

I saw the ending coming though, but I do have one question..


*spoiler*



If John can see his future (despite that one scene where he said his vision was clouded of the future), why doesn't he realize what Ozy is doing the entire movie until the very end? Is that one scene I mentioned supposed to explain that?

And what was different about the ending in the book versus what they did in the film?

Jon can see his own future, not necessarily everyone else's, also Ozy was jamming him.

In the book it was only New York that was devastated, but Jon wasn't blamed. In the book it was a multidimensional psychic alien that exploded upon entering our reality, but that was also a hoax by Ozy. Also, there was very little foreshadowing in the book, the ending was much more of a surprise there than in the movie.

 

[Aikouka]

Heh, a faux Saturday morning cartoon opening to "Watchmen"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YDDHHrt6l4w

Originally posted by: ducci
But then it had very whimsical and fantasy scenes that weren't done well at all. Most of the scenes with Dr. Manhattan were done this way and it was completely uninteresting. To top it off, the soundtrack to the entire movie was ridiculous and felt completely out of place. It was like they just licensed some songs from that era and threw them in wherever.

They changed some of Dr. Manhattan's scenes to condense them... he tends to go back and forth in time in his dialogues and I doubt they wanted to do that in the movie. They also condensed quite a few of his scenes and some things didn't even make sense because of it. Like when he went to Mars? In the comic, he's outside of his room at the research facility and just says that he's going to Mars and disappears. In the movie, he says nothing, but they know he's on Mars .

They also changed the photo thing. Dr. Manhattan never had that photo and he actually went to Gila Flats Research Facility before he left for Mars to get it. Not a huge deal, but there's no reason Dr. Manhattan would have that picture before his interview where he was reminded of Janie.

They also changed how he ended up in the chamber . When the photograph was taken, the strap on Janie's watch was supposed to break and some fat man stepped on the watch. Jon was supposed to repair it, but he accidentally left his lab coat (and the watch) in the room. He goes back to get it and bam. Doesn't sound like a big deal, but it fits into Jon's talking while he's on Mars where he mentions one little watch causing it and such.

Originally posted by: ducci
And as I mentioned before - the sex scenes were awful - particularly the one between the Silk Spectre II and the Nite Owl II in the ship. Yes, she's naked! Great. Big deal. It was tacky and done in poor taste. It completely contrasted (and not in a good way) the rest of the movie. And to top it off, the ridiculous ending of the scene - with the fire shooting out of the ship - I would have loved to been in the storyboard meeting for that one where everyone agreed that would be a good idea. If that was detailed in the book, then it was either one of those things that works in print but doesn't translate well into film - or more likely, was just as absurd in both forms.

I thought it was kind of amusing in a way. I don't know if Hallelujah was meant to be like "hallelujah, I finally lost my virginity!" But the one thing I noticed quite quickly was that the sex scene was drawn out in the movie. In the comic it's only a couple panes if that (I'd have to look). Also they did not do the fire thing in the comic.

Originally posted by: ADDAvenger
Also, there was very little foreshadowing in the book, the ending was much more of a surprise there than in the movie.

There was a decent amount, but it didn't tie together very well. It's one of those situations where everything is right in front of your face and once you see the result, you say "Ohhhhh that's what A, B, C and D were for!"

Also, I think they kinda made Adrian look like a bit of a nut for Alexander the Great early on . The whole book up until Rorschach and Nite Owl go to Veidt's office is pretty much showing how nice or strong Adrian is. The strength in the book is one reason why Goode seemed like such an odd role. He seems almost too weak to be doing the stuff he did.

 

[dbk]

Originally posted by: ducci
I didn't read the book.

The movie was mediocre.

The soundtrack was terrible.

The sex scenes were terrible.

It just seemed like the movie didn't know what it wanted to be. It had some really gritty moments which were done great. Rorschach in particular was very interesting. His scene in the prison was probably the highlight of the movie - from the interview with the psychiatrist to his encounters with other inmates. Very well done.

But then it had very whimsical and fantasy scenes that weren't done well at all. Most of the scenes with Dr. Manhattan were done this way and it was completely uninteresting. To top it off, the soundtrack to the entire movie was ridiculous and felt completely out of place. It was like they just licensed some songs from that era and threw them in wherever.

And as I mentioned before - the sex scenes were awful - particularly the one between the Silk Spectre II and the Nite Owl II in the ship. Yes, she's naked! Great. Big deal. It was tacky and done in poor taste. It completely contrasted (and not in a good way) the rest of the movie. And to top it off, the ridiculous ending of the scene - with the fire shooting out of the ship - I would have loved to been in the storyboard meeting for that one where everyone agreed that would be a good idea. If that was detailed in the book, then it was either one of those things that works in print but doesn't translate well into film - or more likely, was just as absurd in both forms.

It felt long. It was long. But it was decently entertaining. I would like to have seen Frank Miller direct this. I think he has a better grasp of the comic film-noir genre.

You hit it on the nail.

 

[jalaram]

According to Deep DVD Discount, this will be released on 3/24.

Watchmen - Tales of the Black Freighter & Under the Hood
Widescreen
Actor/Actress: Carla Gugino , Matt Frewer , Stephen McHattie
Director: Daniel Delpurgatorio , Mike Smith , Eric Matthies
Year: 2009
Runtime: 0
Rating: Not Rated
Color: Y
Closed Captioned: N
UPC: 883929037513
Item Number: WBD042643
Other Formats: Blu-ray Disc(WS)


Text

 

[PingSpike]

Originally posted by: torpid
Low marks in metacritic, mediocre on RT, but Roger Ebert gave it 4 stars, if that still means anything. A lot of the mediocre reviews indicated that it's dense and less enjoyable if you haven't read the graphic novel, which I have. I'll be seeing it early Sunday morning.

How exactly can a reviewer compare this...they have either read the novel before hand, or they haven't.

I liked it. My only beefs really were that it was a little slow sometimes and it felt a little obvious from the beginning that ozmandias was behind it.

 

[jpeyton]

I'll wait for the Blu-Ray. The fact that it's getting demolished on RT Top Critics is not a good sign.

 

[SarcasticDwarf]

I dunno, I was kinda torn on it. I am a huge fan of sci-fi/fantasy movies but this one was just odd.

* There were odd plot gaps where it seemed you had to have read the book to understand what was going on
* The Veidt character was just developed...wrong
* Who/what Mr. Manhattan was needed to be explained WAY earlier
* The sex scene was just too long. Halfway through it you were thinking "Am I supposed to masturbate because this is a frigging porno?!"
* I LOVED the blood aspect of the film. It is so rare that any movie (much less a mainstream one) semi-accurately displays blood and guts.
* Every character ability seemed attributable to a human and logical (including Mr Manhattan), but WHAT THE HELL was with the mask?
* Someone elses post above explained the fire in the basement thing...which had confused the hell outta me.
* WHY did the guy go back into that chamber? There seemed no real logical reason for it...

 

[Ackmed]

I didnt care for it at all. I dont know much about the history of the comic, but I dont have to. Without ruining it for people who havent seen it and going into detail why, Ill just say it was average at best. Probably subpar.

 

[dbk]

The camera work was terrible..constant zooming out and all the cgi slow mo stuff.

What the hell was the deal with Ozymadias' dog?
What about Rorschach's hood/mask. It was constantly changing, but how?

 

[RaistlinZ]

Wow, you guys are butchering this film. I enjoyed it, personally. No, I haven't read the graphic novel and nor did I want to for fear that it would ruin my movie going experience. Now that I've seen the movie and been entertained by it I'll likely go read the novel and get even more out of it.

Yeah, it is a long movie, 2:45 min but I didn't feel *bored* like some of you have said. Since I haven't read the novel I was trying to piece the whole story together, which kept me engrossed in what was going on.

I do wish that I didn't have to see Dr. Manhattan dong in every other scene though, heh.

 

[UpgradeFailure]

Originally posted by: dbk
The camera work was terrible..constant zooming out and all the cgi slow mo stuff.

What the hell was the deal with Ozymadias' dog?
What about Rorschach's hood/mask. It was constantly changing, but how?

Yeah I don't know why they didn't explain those things. I can't recall ozy's animal thing (Just think science and weird experiments made it) but about the mask. When Rorschach was younger he worked at a womans garment shop and a famous lady ordered a dress with a new material Doc Manhattan made with liquids in it that would mix but not combine. The lady didnt like the dress so she just left it there, then later on she was murdered and it helped show Rorschach how bad the world was. He took the dress home and made a mask out of it

 

[dbk]

Originally posted by: UpgradeFailure

Originally posted by: dbk
The camera work was terrible..constant zooming out and all the cgi slow mo stuff.

What the hell was the deal with Ozymadias' dog?
What about Rorschach's hood/mask. It was constantly changing, but how?

Yeah I don't know why they didn't explain those things. I can't recall ozy's animal thing (Just think science and weird experiments made it) but about the mask. When Rorschach was younger he worked at a womans garment shop and a famous lady ordered a dress with a new material Doc Manhattan made with liquids in it that would mix but not combine. The lady didnt like the dress so she just left it there, then later on she was murdered and it helped show Rorschach how bad the world was. He took the dress home and made a mask out of it

I really need to read the comic then watch this again...
Hopefully a director's cut...jeez

 

[UpgradeFailure]

Originally posted by: dbk

Originally posted by: UpgradeFailure

Originally posted by: dbk
The camera work was terrible..constant zooming out and all the cgi slow mo stuff.

What the hell was the deal with Ozymadias' dog?
What about Rorschach's hood/mask. It was constantly changing, but how?

Yeah I don't know why they didn't explain those things. I can't recall ozy's animal thing (Just think science and weird experiments made it) but about the mask. When Rorschach was younger he worked at a womans garment shop and a famous lady ordered a dress with a new material Doc Manhattan made with liquids in it that would mix but not combine. The lady didnt like the dress so she just left it there, then later on she was murdered and it helped show Rorschach how bad the world was. He took the dress home and made a mask out of it

I really need to read the comic then watch this again...
Hopefully a director's cut...jeez

Yeah, I'm really glad I read the book first. I read it last week and it really made the movie better since I knew all the little details they left out

 

[Goosemaster]

Originally posted by: dbk

Originally posted by: ducci
I didn't read the book.

The movie was mediocre.

The soundtrack was terrible.

The sex scenes were terrible.

It just seemed like the movie didn't know what it wanted to be. It had some really gritty moments which were done great. Rorschach in particular was very interesting. His scene in the prison was probably the highlight of the movie - from the interview with the psychiatrist to his encounters with other inmates. Very well done.

But then it had very whimsical and fantasy scenes that weren't done well at all. Most of the scenes with Dr. Manhattan were done this way and it was completely uninteresting. To top it off, the soundtrack to the entire movie was ridiculous and felt completely out of place. It was like they just licensed some songs from that era and threw them in wherever.

And as I mentioned before - the sex scenes were awful - particularly the one between the Silk Spectre II and the Nite Owl II in the ship. Yes, she's naked! Great. Big deal. It was tacky and done in poor taste. It completely contrasted (and not in a good way) the rest of the movie. And to top it off, the ridiculous ending of the scene - with the fire shooting out of the ship - I would have loved to been in the storyboard meeting for that one where everyone agreed that would be a good idea. If that was detailed in the book, then it was either one of those things that works in print but doesn't translate well into film - or more likely, was just as absurd in both forms.

It felt long. It was long. But it was decently entertaining. I would like to have seen Frank Miller direct this. I think he has a better grasp of the comic film-noir genre.

You hit it on the nail.

couldn't agree more.


Perhaps it is a testament to the novel that I am now going to read it... (was on the fence)

 

[LS21]

never seen the comic but i loved the movie. also enjoyed all of the songs becuz i knew them

 

[Aikouka]

Originally posted by: SarcasticDwarf
* There were odd plot gaps where it seemed you had to have read the book to understand what was going on

I'm curious what these are. Note that I'm not saying you're wrong by any means.

Originally posted by: SarcasticDwarf
* The Veidt character was just developed...wrong

The movie developed him oddly where the book tries to show him as this great and wonderful guy and then bam. The end shows he's a fuckin' loon.

Originally posted by: SarcasticDwarf
* The sex scene was just too long. Halfway through it you were thinking "Am I supposed to masturbate because this is a frigging porno?!"

It was nearing skinimax quality! It definitely lasted a lot longer than in the comic, but I think that was just to give the fanbois something to look at.

My friend went to see it yesterday and afterward he told me how there were kids (less than 10 years old) in there. He wanted to turn to the parents and say, "You know there's sex in this movie, right?" But he didn't say anything... I bet they were sure surprised :laugh:.

Also, was the Hallelujah song supposed to represent, "Hallelujah, I finally lost my virginity!" :Q

Originally posted by: SarcasticDwarf
* WHY did the guy go back into that chamber? There seemed no real logical reason for it...

I mentioned why he did this in the comic earlier. His father was a watchmaker by trade and Jon wanted to follow in his footsteps. When the atom bomb was developed, Jon's father refused for him to be a watchmaker and told him he had to become a nuclear physicist, because that was the future and not watches. That time when they were out at the carnival getting their photo taken, Janie's watch strap broke, the watch fell onto the ground and a fat guy stepped on it. Jon fixed it for her after a couple weeks. When she inquired about it, he realized he left the watch in his lab coat, which was in the chamber. He went to go get it and the thing locked him in.

During that part of the comic, there's a lot of talk about causality and how the fat man stepping made him that way... how the watch made him that way, etc.

 

[DanTMWTMP]

Originally posted by: Aikouka

Originally posted by: SarcasticDwarf
* WHY did the guy go back into that chamber? There seemed no real logical reason for it...

I mentioned why he did this in the comic earlier. His father was a watchmaker by trade and Jon wanted to follow in his footsteps. When the atom bomb was developed, Jon's father refused for him to be a watchmaker and told him he had to become a nuclear physicist, because that was the future and not watches. That time when they were out at the carnival getting their photo taken, Janie's watch strap broke, the watch fell onto the ground and a fat guy stepped on it. Jon fixed it for her after a couple weeks. When she inquired about it, he realized he left the watch in his lab coat, which was in the chamber. He went to go get it and the thing locked him in.

During that part of the comic, there's a lot of talk about causality and how the fat man stepping made him that way... how the watch made him that way, etc.

YA!! i was bummed out they left that part out. They completely took out Dr. Manhatton's point of view. He views everything in his life simultaneously, and i think they failed to show that in the movie.


I also didn't like how Roschach killed that child-murderer. In the comic, he had the guy handcuffed, gave him a saw, and lit the place on fire. In the movie, he just whacked his head.