Watchmen Movie

[Reply #120 on:]

@Ralph: Regarding Ozymandias, his thin build didn't bother me for it's own sake, but in a film where most of the actors seem to have been carefully chosen for their resemblence to the orignal comic characters, he stuck out to me. Comic Ozy was a fairly bulky man. Not a weightlifter, but a big guy. He looked a bit better in  the suit though. Actually, I much prefer the movie suit to the comic one, which looked a little too, er, festive...

PS - Watchmen Saturday Morning Cartoon

[Reply #121 on:]

- Not enough Babastis!

That's my biggest complaint. They showed him too late and didn't explain him, everyone in the theater who hadn't read the book was like, 'What the hell is that?'

It's awesome dammit.

[Reply #122 on:]

Seen it last night, was amazing

9/10

Few things that irked me a little:

Show spoiler

They should have kept "Nothing ever ends" as Jon's line, not Laurie's.
Laurie's acting was pretty stiff, but it done the job
LACK OF BABASTIS FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
Should have had the original Desolation Row during the credits or maybe just silence.

[Reply #123 on:]

PS - Watchmen Saturday Morning Cartoon

Mwuhahahaha.

[Reply #124 on:]

JON WILL GIVE YOU CANCER AND TURN INTO A CAR

[Reply #125 on:]

I liked it overall, the mucked around with a few scenes but meh, whattyagonnado.

Silk Spectres Sandwich pls.

[Reply #126 on:]

If Saturday Morning Watchmen was real...I might poop myself with excitement. That was very funny. I especially loved Ozy saving the Comedian from being thrown out the window. Lawls all around!!!

Anyway, I am dreading to hear backlash for this movie. I understand that it's really not the kind of film that an average movie goer can go see and completely understand in one sitting. But that should enable them to go read the book, right? I mean last night there were 14 of us who went to see the movie (and we all somehow managed to go home in only two cars...) but only five of us had previously read the book. And honestly, it's the kind of film that makes you think, and that's what my friends who didn't read it liked about it.

But I know that there are going to be people who are going to bitch about how it doesn't work for an average movie goer. Isn't that the point? I mean isn't that why Alan Moore hates movie adaptions of his work? Because the movies never accurately follow them? Well here is Watchmen, I think it is a damn good adaption, probably the best. But somehow, there are gonna be people who will not be pleased by this. Someone should blow them up with a retardefied squid...

Final question: Why do parents bring their children to see movies that aren't appropriate for them? I mean my boyfriend pointed out a little girl in the front row of the theater last night watching the movie. One thing is for sure: She learned how babies were made. But I think, how lazy is a parent to either just hire a babysitter or wait until they can be alone and not have to deal with the kid. [Scuddworth]Unacceptable![/Scuddworth].

[Reply #127 on:]

I'm fourteen and they just let me in without anyone with me.

My theater sucks/is awesome.

[Reply #128 on:]

Maybe the parents felt that the piece was powerful enough to leave a lasting memory for their child as a moment that would never occur again. 

Sometimes, things that seem inappropriate for children can be the most defining factors in our growing lives.

[Reply #129 on:]

This movie gets its own thread, but my The Boy Who Could Fly thread gets deleted??! 

[Reply #130 on:]

I just saw it then. I thought it was good, but one thing I learned while watching the movie is not to take my friends to anymore MA movies 

A

[Reply #131 on:]

Bianca, you didn't give it an A + for the lack of vampires?

[Reply #132 on:]

No, it wasn't that. It was the fact my friends kept talking through the thing so I missed some of the plot.

[Reply #133 on:]

Giggling at the 2-foot blue penis.

[Reply #134 on:]

giggling, making up dirty jokes, that kind of thing.

[Reply #135 on:]

[Reply #136 on:]

I watched that episode yesterday and thought what if Tobias played Manhattan.

[Reply #137 on:]

I didn't read the novel so I came in with an open mind.  It surpassed my expectations.  But when people have asked me what I thought about it, my first response is always "It was long."  And I'm sure they left a lot of stuff out too.  I did really enjoy the story and everything but I'd have to be mentally prepared to sit through it again.  I don't want to come off as I'm putting this down because I really liked how it flips the whole conventional "Superhero" idea on you.  I just came out thinking about all these scenes that could have been left out IMO.

Show spoiler

Anyways the thing that got me upset was when Dr. M killed Rorschach.  To me it just seemed unnecessary.  I mean NO ONE was listening to him through out the whole movie anyways so why would anyone believe him now.  I could see him telling people about the "truth" and their response being "Aren't you supposed to be in jail?"  Maybe its different in the novel but I just didn't think the people would take him as a credible source.

[Reply #138 on:]

LayZ

Show spoiler

Even if only one person believed him, they may investigate which would cause them to find out what really happened behind the mass genocide.

Also, it's good to hear that you didn't read the novel and still enjoyed it.



Edit: Since you didn't read the book, it seems that the film being too long would be a fair comment but for people who have read the book these scenes can fan favorites and we would scream rape if Zack Snyder had taken them out.


And another thing I forgot to mention, HOLY BALLS ZACK SNYDER MADE A MOVIE THAT DIDN'T MAKE ME WANT TO KILL MYSELF

[Reply #139 on:]

I really liked the Dawn of the Dead remake. And 300 wasn't bad.

[Reply #140 on:]

It's odd because the movie felt short to me. The Dark Knight seemed longer, yet it was 11 minutes shorter, which is a lot in movie time. I remember getting up to use the bathroom a lot during TDK but I didn't even have the urge during Watchmen; a true showing of length. I really didn't notice the length until I got out of my 10:25pm movie at 1:20am.


I was looking up the cast of the film and was amazed by their credentials despite being relative unknowns. I had already known Billy Crudup (Manhattan) from Big Fish, but didn't know that Patrick Wilson (Nite Owl II) has won an Emmy, Golden Globe, and Tony; Jackie Earle Haley (Rorschach) was an Academy Award nominee in 2007; I've actually seen Jeffrey Dean Morgan (Comedian) in stuff before; and the other two are total unknowns that haven't done anything.

[Reply #141 on:]

My thoughts:

1) The Nite Owl/Silk Spectre sex scene was indeed too long; it was a nice change to see some naked female flesh by that point, but yeah; it may have been sensual, but it got awfully close to softcore (nor not-so-softcore). More on naked manflesh later.

Actually, that they removed the a chunk of the reason that NO was impotent was annoying; yeah, he was scared, but the fact he felt helpless (impotent) about it all being the reason he was physically impotent was importent as a plot point, I thought. Anyway.

2) Was a bummer to see the Black Freighter substory removed, as that was such an effective parallel to what Ozy was doing. At least they haven't ignored it entirely.

3) I don't know why, but I kept thinking that the guy playing the Comedian was Robert Downey Jr., even when I knew it wasn't.

4) The ending was interesting, especially the use of Mozart's Requiem. The speech NO does about mutilating humanity was neat, though I thought his reaction to Rorschach's death was a little histrionic. It's nice that he cared, but in the comic, he's too busy sexxn' Spectre to even notice.

5) The thing that got me was that the movie heavily implied that the whole scheme of Ozy's would fail, because the guy at the New Frontiersman (a section of the story that was almost entirely removed, so it became 'Oh, and here's this newspaper we have to include because if we didn't, it wouldn't make sense as to how Rorschach's journal might/not get into print') would definitely put the journal into the paper. The comic was a lot more ambiguous about that, which I felt was better; it's up to the reader to decide whether they wanted the 'happy' ending where the truth gets out (which wouldn't be that happy an ending), or the realistic ending (where the truth probably never got out, or was suppressed even if it did). It somewhat undercut the whole 'turn the superhero genre on its head' idea to imply that the truth would come out. Meh.

6) Someone on LJ called Watchmen 'The Billy Crudup Blue Penis Movie'. The scary thing is that I agree entirely; I realise that Manhatten doesn't wear clothes that much in the story, but the comic was far more discreet about it. Like I said at the beginning, there was some naked womanflesh as well, but the amount of naked man-buttock and wing-wang action that movie had was...disturbing. (It may sound like I'm obsessing, but it was just...there. It was inescapable, like being in a locked room with a car wreck; you didn't want to look...) The pity of it was, they sacrificed plot/story-time for a lot of that nakedness - or at least it felt that way.

7) One last thing: it bothered me that Rorschach seemed a lot more athletic in the movie, and it was never really shown how he got that way, and the comic doesn't go into the matter. (I guess that's why so much of his backstory is gone, even though that is annoying; if he's a unemployed former unskilled garment worker, where did he get the time to learn martial arts?) It wasn't a major thing, but it was somewhat distracting.

Anyway; overall? Pretty good. As with any Alan Moore adaptation, if you want the best version, read the book. (Though to be honest, after Moore appeared in the Simpsons with that comicbook writers/superhero joke, it's a bit rich for him to complain about selling out.)

[Reply #142 on:]

Dude, put in spoiler tags

[Reply #143 on:]

Pfft, spoiler tags... it's the watchmen thread, the film is out now, just stray from the thread till you've seen it. Like I do for the LOST thread.

I'm seeing it again on Thursday, and then hopefully sometime over the weekend. Now i'm starting to get excited for the Extended and Uber-Directors Cuts. My sparkly gif raised a good point, of not wanting to watch The Black Freighter when it comes out on its own, but rather watch it when it's spliced back into the actual film.

[Reply #144 on:]

I seen it, Chay. :3

It was amazing...

[Reply #145 on:]

Everybody's had an opportunity to read the novel for twenty years now, there aren't much spoilers to have.

[Reply #146 on:]

I've actually never heard of Watchmen until people started talking about the movie.

[Reply #147 on:]

Same here, I was told it was a good movie, so I saw it.

[Reply #148 on:]

Not sure if he's entirely serious but...

"Watchmen: The Movie: The Book"

[Reply #149 on:]

Book of a movie based on a book? Once again, a great graphic novel is slighted by the literary scene.

[Reply #150 on:]

http://gizmodo.com/5164202/104-ways-to-hilariously-ruin-the-watchmen-movie
lolz

[Reply #151 on:]

Thought it was a pretty damn good movie! Stayed pretty true to the book, and the changes fit as appropriate cinematic changes to keep the overall story intact. They did a good job.

Rorschach is beyond amazing, I honestly wish someone like him runs around at night and seriously fucks up the deserving criminals.

Problems? Not many, but could have done with significantly less dick. I get Dr Manhattan is  sort of beyond things like clothes, but... come on now.

Actually one thing I wondered was why does Dr Manhattan explode people? couldn't he think of a less messy way to accomplish the task. Maybe re-arrange their matter into an atheistically pleasing plant?

Poor Rorschach, He had the best quotes in the story.

"The world will look up and shout "Save us!" And I'll look down and whisper "No."

"Never compromise, even in the face of Armageddon"

Sadly the last one is an idea that breaks down the larger the scale.

[Reply #152 on:]

Though to be honest, after Moore appeared in the Simpsons with that comicbook writers/superhero joke, it's a bit rich for him to complain about selling out.

I don't think any of Moore's complaints about adaptations of his work had to do with selling out.

Or has he been misquoted again? 

[Reply #153 on:]

Silk Spectres Sandwich pls.

Original Silk Spectre FTW... except for the hair.

Anyway, I thought it was throroughly enjoyable, even for someone who hadn't read it before such as myself. I don't have too many criticisms, because I was very pleased with what I saw, however:

• Silk Spectre II sucks at acting, and her "mom" is hotter. That was a bad wig, too
• It was clear that I was missing things, and that there was a lot more to the story, if only they had the time. I suppose that should encourage me to go out and read the original.

You dudes need to stop complaining about the blue penii and Nite Owl's derriere. 99.9% of movie nudity is female, so I can deal with a little male nudity. Except for the blue color, it's nothing you haven't seen before.

Oh, I did have a couple more questions...

• Why do only the male heroes wear masks?
• How did Silk Spectre remove her outfit without taking off the thigh-high boots?

[Reply #154 on:]

Oooh, read something on Wiki about the film. Snyder cut about 12 minutes from the film by removing this hollis mason murder. So it'll be in the directors cut, and i'm probably not going crazy and DID see the knot-top in the bar that NO glances over at.

[Reply #155 on:]

Silk Spectres Sandwich pls.

• How did Silk Spectre remove her outfit without taking off the thigh-high boots?

Who cares? :flirt:

The movie and graphic novel both peg SSII as being around 40 years old.  Damned, I wish my 40 year old wife looked that good.

[Reply #156 on:]

Except for the blue color, it's nothing you haven't seen before.

Heh, ever go skinny dipping in cold water?

[Reply #157 on:]

Well jsut got back from the film adn I did enjoy it which is good although there were a few things that irked me.

First I'll just get out of the way was something not directly in the film but in it's rating as an 18 in the UK, don't get me wrong I thought this was a good thing as it would keep immature kiddie winks from seeing it. Unfortuantly I sometimes forget that age does not always bring maturinty when i heard tittering when we first saw Dr M full on. Well that was not the movies fault.

I did like alot of things. The music was good and the film was visually very impressive. Dr Manhattan looked impressive, i like the transluceny of his skin especially and at first I was a little thrown by Billy Crudup's performance but as the film went on I could see it really worked and gave abit more empathy for the character (unlike another characterI will talk abut later). Same with Rorschach whose gravely voice worked alot better thana certain dark knight's.

The main problem with this film (the rest I feel are minor and don't need to be rambled about)  at that would Ozymandius. I fekt no empathy for the character and dispite what he claimed it seems he had no empathy for anyone else. In the comics Ozy was calm collected and you could see he cared in the movie he often came off as vindictive and a little bit of and arse.

Part from that gripe it was enjoyable and much like the comics It will require a few reviewings to see all the little details.

edit

Just thought of something. Yes it was a shame that there was far to little Bubastis but now I think of it since they changed the ending her inclusion makes little to no sense at all. Without the need for the genetically enginneered alien here would be no need to have created Bubastis as a trial.

Also I wonder if they added multiple countries to the attack and New York being attacked alone by an outside power might still be soar point for some people.

[Reply #158 on:]

Oh! That reminds me... a few of the music choices didn't seem appropriate, especially The Sound of Silence. A don't think that can be used in any movie except for The Graduate, it's become too deeply  associated with that film.

[Reply #159 on:]

I associate it more with Will Ferrell falling into a pool.