HTF BLU-RAY REVIEW: Watchmen: Director's Cut - Page 2

I believe that was only going to be part of a special bundled package that would cost more. It was never going to be included with the standard blu-ray. I scanned Amazon for the bundle but can't seem to locate it. The game is also downloadable, and available as a standalone retail disc, I believe.

I watched the DC last night, and I think my home theater collection has a new crown jewel--it looked great, sounded great, and the extra material makes a great movie even better, IMO. It's dense, demanding stuff--like the source material--but the rewards are there. Tonight I'm going to re-spin it with the supplements turned on.

If you were put off by the violence in the TC, you'll be even more put off by the longer cut, which has a few choice bits of added brutality. I have no problem with the violence, generally speaking, although I am still a bit puzzled by the brutality of the street fight with the knot-tops. Dan and Laurie's dispatching of their clearly overmatched opponents still seemed somewhat excessive...although I suppose it does give the gang plenty of motivation for their later killing of Nite Owl 1.

--Jefferson Morris

That was my take when I reviewed the SD DVD as well.  They added a lot of stuff that was interesting, but nothing that was really necessary.  I would have preferred them as deleted scenes rather than cut back into the film.

Regards,

Basically, I agree but I do think the movie is slightly more violent than the comic book. However, that "added violence" is no more (and maybe even less) than the profanity that was added to the movie from the comic.

I do agree that the film expands upon the violence, but it's based right from the novel.

I guess where we're "agreeing to disagree" on the whether the gore is warranted from the source material is this: one or two frames of gore or horror on a graphic novel does not to me translate to anything "Tarantino-esque" onscreen. They may be sourced from the same scene, the same act or implied act, but seeing one or two drawn comic frames is often much less visually traumatizing as seeing the exact (or similar) thing fleshed out onscreen. A lot is implied in the novel but is rarely shown in its full, grotesque detail.

Now there are gory graphic novels (i.e. many frames depicting violence/gore and doing so explicitly, as in showing sexual assault, beheadings, brutal and graphic drawings of bodily injuries, etc.) but I don't seem to recall anything of that nature from the Watchmen graphic novel.

Now that said, I'm just going on what people here have said about the heightened gore of the DC, I have yet to see it myself. I have a pretty high tolerance of gore so I may end up watching it and thinking "hmm, that was much ado about nothing." Hoping to screen it this weekend.

I never really understood why the lackey had to be killed the way the graphic novel presented it.  It seemed kind of pointless, as they just got around him anyway, even though he was still tied up there.

In the movie, it actually makes sense the way they need to get him out of the way.

It's been awhile since I read it, anyhow I ordered the Blu ray from Amazon so it came bundle with an on demand viewing, being that I can do On demand on my Bravia I took advantage of it to watch the SD Theatrical cut. I liked the movie alot, they got right more than they got wrong. I agree that rorshack was great in this, His "Your Locked in here with me" scene reminded me of the scene in Batman Begins where Wayne gets himself imprisoned. I agree the characters are pretty dispassionette, yet thats not a negative for me. I can't wait to see the DC in Hi Def, but I'm glad I checked out the TC first.

Screenwriter David Hayter said he originally changed this in part because something similar happened in the first Mad Max film. He probably made that change circa 2000. Since then, the Saw movies have come out and made that situation even more cliche for viewers. The cleaver solution is perhaps not the most imaginative solution, but it gets the point across.

         --Jefferson Morris

That is it's own separate edition with an MSRP of 49.99.  The packaging on it looked rather neat at Best Buy with it's translucent plastic slipcover and digipak-ish case.

Cameron - Spot on review, in every regard. I watched this for the first time over the weekend and was extremely impressed. I found the whole experience fascinating and was utterly engrossed the whole way through. There were flaws for sure, but in an odd way they made the film better (I could explain what I mean, but I would need to write a whole new review). Overall, excellent film and one that I look forward to watching again and again.

To put it mildly. Not to mention the Black Freighter. Well, I suppose if you love EC Comics you know where Moore is coming from when he wrote that part.

No trailers? Fail.
No viral videos? Fail.

Sure, two of the viral videos are on the BD-Live, but it's not like there isn't room for them.

Worse yet (imho) is the UK disc (also released in AUS) was announced as having the four viral videos. It doesn't. It has one. At least announce the damn disc correctly.

At least I got the theatrical cut in 1080p as well as the DC. Sure, it took two copies from two countries, but hey, that's life.

 Wow, last time I ever listen to anyone on this forum :)  What a bad movie.  Bad acting, bad directing, worse writing - I don't care about the graphic novel and whether it was better or worse - this thing is just amateur night, and I'm astonished anyone likes anything about it - but maybe you have to be real young or something.  The disc certainly looks good, but the sound is weird and low, especially the dialog, although that didn't matter since I couldn't understand one word anyone was saying.  I'm glad some people like this sort of thing - for me, a complete waste of time, and nosing around on the internet it looks like critics didn't take to it too much and I guess it was a box-office disappointment, too, so I am not alone, I suppose.

It's a pretty faithful adaptation, so I doubt you'd like the graphic novel much. Consider it a difference in taste.

You can certainly have any opinion but this was not a bad movie, it was a movie YOU didn't like, this is not the definition of "bad movie".

the acting was very good.

I especially like Crudup's Manhattan.
I'm surely not real young or something.

Did you think I was speaking for somebody else.  Unlike others who frequent these forums, I only speak for myself, so I'm glad I can have any opinion, which in this case is quite negative as regards this film.

Yes, it's rather obvious that you're very glad with that. Even to the point that you want to publish your opinion on boards like this forum (which of course were indeed created for that exact purpose, amongst others).

You even seem so glad with your opinion that you deem it fit to express it in terms that are derogatory and condescending to others who happen to have a different opinion (liking the movie Watchmen, for example). It almost looks as if you look down on those opinions and those people and that you're not so glad they have an opinion too.

One of the other things this forum was created for, is to intelligently discuss opinions. Your wording of yours seems to be aimed at practically closing that door.
That's a pity.


Cees

Going to hold off on this until the UCE comes in December. Glad to see The Bits' confirmation of that, and that it will include both Black Freighter and the motion comic. Here's hoping the package looks like a mini version of the Absolute hardcover edition of the graphic novel.

FWIW, I thought the theatrical version was pretty darn good.

this because of the volume or because you just didn't get the story? i had no problem with dialogue on my set up.

I said that maybe you have to be real young to like this movie.  I don't find that condescending or derogatory, just how I feel.  If some older folks like this one, great (which is what I said).  I can't really discuss it beyond that point because I loathed every minute of the film.  Perhaps if I had been born in the 1990s or 1980s and responded to this sort of thing, maybe I'd love it, hence my comment about maybe having to be young.  And for the record, I don't like the current Batman movies (and that includes The Dark Knight) or any of these angst-ridden superhero films.  My idea of a good superhero film is Richard Donner's Superman. 

It's because the dialogue was a little low, but also because the actors in this film (and others like it) mumble so much that, for me, it's really hard to understand what they're saying.  I have this problem with a lot of today's actors - and never have the problem with that sort of thing even from ten years ago.  It's a now actor thing, this deep-voiced mumbling, and I don't like it.  

I have no problem with someone not liking this film, and for the very reasons Billy mentions. It's not gonna be to everyone's tastes.

Critics reviews were a bit mixed, and box-office reception was rather lukewarm.  But this is the kind of film that will divide critics and audiences me thinks.  Roger Ebert actually gave it his 4-star rating like he also did for The Dark Knight (along w/ many other critics in that case), which you also didn't like.  Then again, Ebert also gave a 4-star rating to The Cell (w/ Jennifer Lopez from a while back) for the other extreme as far as his 4-star ratings go -- and that film also had a certain visually stunning, stylized look to go w/ a certain shock value too.

Of course, that's the whole thing w/ reading/listening to reviews/opinions.  You cannot merely take the ratings shorthand or a thumbs-up/down and skip the actual worded reviews.  Have to find out what/why/how/etc. a reviewer likes or dislikes about the film and figure out whether you're likely to agree or not.  That's why the better critics (like Ebert) generally do not like using such ratings systems.  For myself, I tend to agree w/ Ebert most times (more or less), but there are exceptions (like The Cell or even The Graduate ) although I can understand why Ebert likes/dislikes those also.  I still need to revisit at least a few "great films" (in Ebert's estimation amongst many others) because tastes can also change over time (for better or worse ).


Exactly.  Most films are just not gonna be received the same way by everyone (or even by the same people everytime).  Opinions will often vary widely.  I'm sure even very well-liked films like the various animated Pixar ones have their detractors.

Personally, I still haven't decided whether I actually like Watchmen -- at least the theatrical version when I saw it the one time -- and it's not because I don't care for this type of comic book/graphic novel films either.  But I'll find out soon enough about the director's cut...

_Man_

while I agree that watchmen is not for everyone. its certainly better then 90 percent of the movies out there this summer. I did like the theatre version, however I found the directors cut to be much better.

Jacob

Time to turn up the hearing aid, grandpa.

Or better yet, get a director who's not afraid to tell the actors not to mumble.  Funny, I don't have this problem when watching Al Pacino, Jack Nicholson, Cary Grant, James Stewart, Robert Ryan, William Holden, Audrey or Kathryn Hepburn, Bette Davis, Joan Crawford, Robert Redford, Paul Newman, Randolph Scott, Joel McCrea, John Wayne, and about a thousand other good actors.  No, I only have this problem from actors in the last decade - both in films and on TV - it's become the "style" and it's just bad.  When I saw The Dark Knight, I literally had to rewind each scene to listen again so I could try to figure out what the hell Christian Bale was going on about.  Terrible.

the watchmen hasa DTS HD track. it set at 24, which mean the sound is a bit low or something. its more about the mastering of the bluray then actors mumbling..

dark night is a different story.

Jacob