*** Official WATCHMEN Discussion Thread - Page 6

Re: *** Official WATCHMEN Discussion Thread

For what it's worth, I was referring to the Leonard Cohen version (which due to his distinctive voice is pretty different from all the others) but if everyone else was referring to other versions, I stand corrected.

Re: *** Official WATCHMEN Discussion Thread

i like the Buckley version.

anyways, for anyone interested, there is a 100min. interview with the writers of Watchmen on the Creative Screenwriting podcast.

Re: *** Official WATCHMEN Discussion Thread

whats your fav scene from the movie?

Re: *** Official WATCHMEN Discussion Thread

All the scenes of Rorshach in the prison. Here is this little meeky guy who even under the worst situations doesn't back down and is still in control.

Re: *** Official WATCHMEN Discussion Thread

Loved his scenes. The man has a obvious death wish.

Re: *** Official WATCHMEN Discussion Thread

Good podcast with the guys from Slashfilm and Kevin Smith:

The /Filmcast Blog Archive /Filmcast Ep. 41 - Kevin Smith and the /Filmcast Review Watchmen

It's about 90 minutes long or so.

Re: *** Official WATCHMEN Discussion Thread

The credit montage was great, as was the killing of the Comedian. Ditto for Rorschach in prison. And although usually sex scenes in movies don't do much for me, that scene in Archie was an exception--I loved the fiery climax, and laughed out loud.

Thanks to EricW for the tip on the podcast with the screenwriters.

--Jefferson Morris

Re: *** Official WATCHMEN Discussion Thread

I liked the movie, although I think it's going to have a tough battle ahead of it. It seems like in order to appreciate it you have to be familiar with the novel, but if you read the novel, then you pick it apart because it isn't the novel. I have read the graphic novel, and watching the movie I felt that there was so much left out of the movie that I felt it would be very confusing for people who haven't read the novel.

Ozy's character suffered the most in this regard. If I hadn't have read the novel first, I'd have had no clue who he really was, and what his empire was. All the history and backstory of the the Minutemen and how the second generation of the Watchmen came around really suffered too.

I also felt the climax of the movie with the bombs going off everywhere lacked any kind of emotional payoff. Instead of "Holy Crap, he really did it, Oh my god, so many people killed", you feel nothing and just go "wow, cool special effect". Then it's just kind of forgotten for the rest of the movie.

It may sound like I'm trashing the movie, but I really did love it. I also didn't mind most of the music choices, except "99 Luftbaloons". That one seemed really odd. And it just stopped right as it was getting going. Very odd.

Also as an aside, did anyone sit through the credits? I have to say are those the shortest credits in recent history or what? I was shocked when the WB logo popped up so quickly!

Re: *** Official WATCHMEN Discussion Thread

See, I thought that fiery blast was another example of juvenile filmmaking, along with the excessive violence and the slow-motion shots. I liked the movie very much but if you're going to make an R-rated superhero flick, leave the schoolyard theatrics at home.

Re: *** Official WATCHMEN Discussion Thread

jeff you didn't mention if you saw an imax screen or regular.
i saw egular and the credits were long enough, it has already been
mentioned why the imax credits were so short.

Re: *** Official WATCHMEN Discussion Thread

FWIW, that was in the book...

Re: *** Official WATCHMEN Discussion Thread

Oh. I saw it in the IMAX. I read through this entire thread and didn't see any mention of the IMAX credits being shorter. I think this actually is the first time I've ever heard of the two versions being different in that regard.

Re: *** Official WATCHMEN Discussion Thread

Hmm, Someone mentioned it. May have edited the post.
The movie was too long for IMAX so they shortened
The credits.

Re: *** Official WATCHMEN Discussion Thread

Funny that you mention that the IMAX version was cut short. Or at least, just the credits. I was thinking about this and Dark Knight being longer movies yet played full length in IMAX. No actual movie content is cut, as far as I've heard. Yet, back a few years ago, Apollo 13 was re-released in IMAX format and had about 20 mins cut out from it.

IIRC, Apollo 13 was shorter than both of these theatrically. Guess those IMAX projectors have bigger platters these days.

Re: *** Official WATCHMEN Discussion Thread

Originally, the platters for IMAX could only accomodate 120 minutes of film. After the cuts imposed on Attack of the Clones drew a lot of media attention, the platter capacity was increased to 160 minutes. While films longer than 160 minutes have been shown in IMAX theaters, they've been projected using regular 35 mm projectors and are not marketed as "The IMAX Experience".

Re: *** Official WATCHMEN Discussion Thread

My "IMAX" viewing was a little disappointing. It may have been IMAX format, but it wasn't on a proper, 5-story IMAX-sized screen--just a largish screen that had been converted at my local gigaplex (AMC Hoffman 22 in Alexandria, Va., if you're interested). The picture was crystal-clear, but I'm probably not going to bother with "IMAX" at that particular theater again.

--Jefferson Morris

Re: *** Official WATCHMEN Discussion Thread

Sadly, that's the only option I have in my entire state for feature films (well, other than films like Madagascar 2). The sound system is impressive though...

Re: *** Official WATCHMEN Discussion Thread

It's the new IMAX Digital format. Personally, I think it was a mistake not to brand it differently from the full 65mm IMAX theaters. Those who haven't experienced "real" IMAX won't see what the fuss is all about. We got one here in Albany a few months back, too. The sound is fantastic, all 22,000 watts that you get at the full IMAX. The screens are a bit larger than average for a multiplex (using be a retrofit of the largest screen at a given theater), which actually causes problems since IMAX decided to go with Christie 2k projectors instead of the new Sony 4k projectors. Even the smaller digital IMAX screens are large enough to reveal the limitations of 2k digital projection in a way the a normal digital theater won't. You're just too close to the screen for 2k.

That being said, it's still the best presentation in the area for me, though not to the substantial degree real IMAX is.

Re: *** Official WATCHMEN Discussion Thread

Ah, I never even got the distinction between digital IMAX and the real deal. But you're right, I think IMAX is diluting its brand name.

Meanwhile, it's unfortunate that 'Watchmen' is taking such a tumble at the box office. Unfortunate, but perhaps not unexpected, given the challenging nature of the material.

--Jefferson Morris

Re: *** Official WATCHMEN Discussion Thread

Wasn't the capacity previously even shorter than this? I recall reading that Disney's Fantasia 2000 ran just shy of 75 minutes specifically because that was the maximum running time of an Imax movie. That would be sufficient for the type of documentary pictures typically shown in Imax, but it obviously had to be increased once they started showing Hollywood movies.