*** Official WATCHMEN Discussion Thread (1 Viewer)

[Ron-P]

This film on Blu and an EE version of it, I'll pick that up the day it streets.

 

[SilverWook]

Thanks for the clip, Andy. I haven't seen the movie yet, and that was still hysterical!

 

[RobertR]

I was pretty much convinced to see this film, but now I have doubts. Ebert's opinion is utterly worthless to me. Maybe I'll watch the Blu Ray.

 

[Ron-P]

Go see it Robert. Some of the comments above, i.e. the music and some of the casting worked quite well and was not a distraction at all, for me. I did not find the music distracting or loud but rather very well fitted for the scenes.

I plan to see it a second time next week.

 

[Raasean Asaad]

 

[Chuck Mayer]

Count me as another viewer left pretty cold by the experience.

Raasean, I have a better one. But plot holes aren't my problem with the film.

Some of the film is great, and some of the film is mediocre. Never quite gels into a cohesive.

And Goode as Veidt is terrible casting. And too much Nixon. Distracting and pointless. The escalation could have been shown in a more meaningful way.

 

[TonyD]

Well i loved it, thought it was great and a well done adaption.

Definetly see it again on an Imax screen.

I liked the end of this more then the end of the comic book series.

When it was over I wanted to see more so when the longer version hits
blu i'll be waiting in line for that.

 

[Jim_C]

I enjoyed it and will likely buy an EE of the film. There were parts that bothered me but overall I was glad I went. I was concerned about the changed ending but believe it or not I think it may be better than the one from the book.

 

[TheBat]

I liked sin city, v for vendetta. 300 was just okay.. this movie was fucking brilliant. it also had a better pace then dark knight. if you read the comic book, the characters were very detached.. once it takes off then it never quits. I thought it was a superhero meets end of the world with political overtone. I loved it. zack snyder is a better director then michael bay will ever be in his lifetime. I highly recommend it.
I was not hyped up for the movie. .only read a bit of the comic book. sometimes when you are not hyped up for a movie then it can surprise you on how good it was.. which my reaction to it.
Jacob

 

[Derek Miner]

I actually agree. Thematically, I think it's a stronger idea.

 

[Eric F]

I liked it a lot but I thought the ending was a bit convoluted and confusing. I also found it odd that people were laughing at parts that I didn't find funny at all, and just assumed that those were folks who didn't read the book and didn't know what was going on.

I think once the Director's and Ultimate cuts come out with the Black Freighter and Death of Hollis Mason bits edited in, and other parts left on the cutting room floor, it will make it a more complete movie.

Even at 160 mins, it just didn't seem complete...Understandable when you're dealing with a 400+ pg novel as Watchmen.

If I had to give it a number...I'd say I'd give it a 8/10.

 

[TonyD]

i see this laughing at odd times during movies a lot.
Happened several times in watchmen, oddly i
didn't hear it the first time Dr manhatten showed his shloinker.

I did hear it when Rorschach splashed the guy with the hot oil.
again when the pregnant woman confronted Comedian, but that one
quickly stopped when he responded to her.

 

[Eric F]

Yeah, well, I saw it on a standard flat 6-story IMAX screen. It's hard not to be shocked by a 3ft glowing blue cock. I din't find anyone laughing at that either. Just stunned silence.

Yeah, Tony, I agree, when the pregnant Vietnamese woman confronted the Comedian and some of the audience laughed I was like, "What the fuck?"
But then I realized it was just sort of like a nervous laughter; they sensed the calm before the storm. They knew what was coming...

In that sense it was a masterful scene, performed and shot masterfully. For people to say the movie wasn't done well, they need to look at individual scenes like this and realize what an achievement it is. Beautiful, and brutal, all at the same time. I will be looking forward to see the Ultimate cut in the fall.

 

[Steve Y]

It appears there are really a wide range of reactions to this movie, from "incoherent" to "gripping". It's pretty much impossible to gauge a movie based on an almost even split (65% at Rotten Tomatoes last I checked). I have pretty much decided not to see it right away, just because I read the comic for the first time this week, and I need to "think it over" before I contaminate it with a potentially unsuccessful movie adaptation.

To really appreciate the film, it sounds like you have to be familiar with the source material. But then it's easy to be disappointed or disoriented by all the changes once you read the comic. Most everyone seems to agree that Goode's take on Ozzy is all wrong for the film, which is a huge disappointment for me, because his character is so important to the ideas raised in the story. What a shame.

I am looking forward seeing what they will add to the "ultimate" version, which we will probably see within the year?

 

[rich_d]

 

[Chuck Mayer]

My angst with the film is not at all frustration with changes from the source material. I watched it as a movie, not an adaptation. Ebert loved it on those terms, but I did not. There are fantastic scenes, some exceptional acting, and some very dense undertones.

But I don't think it truly and effectively gels into a complete work. That is my concern. Not story beat fidelity.

 

[Raasean Asaad]

Watchmen is a movie that I really just hoped for a best guess type of imagining of it, really it is like LOTR in that there isn't really a way to tell the story without having a 15 hour movie which would be great for me but not for everyone else so much. It has its flaws and things that aren't going to make sense without some backstory.

 

[Jeremiah]

About the ending, how could peace be brought to Earth after what Veidt(sp?) did to NY? Was it his plan to bring peace at the exspence of millions or did he want to be a leader of all? It is just 1 event, people would go back to doing what they do soon enough, it never would of stuck.

I don't know what to think of the movie, some stuff was good, some stuff was eh.

 

[Chuck Mayer]

I've read here and elsewhere about the new ending and why it is better than the "squid" ending. I'm here to defend the squid ending a bit. The point of that ending had been addressed earlier in the book as well, building up to an event significantly more "alien" than the film. The mechanism of Veidt's plan to unite humanity required more than just a physical threat. It required something specifically alien and unknowable (and therefore something impossible to defend against, something impossible to quantify) to KEEP humanity focused and dedicated to unity.

The "squid" wasn't the important element, but rather the psychic damage caused by the creatures "dimension shift". Beyond the death toll, it elicited significant psychic trauma worldwide. Frankly, I think the results of that action would be much longer-lived than a physical attack by a known threat.

My opinion. That said, the movie ending worked just fine. I'm not attacking it in the least. It's cleaner, removes a subplot, and requires less exposition. It works very effectively. I just don't think it is "better".

 

[TravisR]

On a long enough time line, I suppose so. However, when there was millions dead and a fear that the 'evil' Dr. Manhattan could return at any time, I think people would spend alot more time hating and worrying about Dr. Manhattan rather than hating each other. Plus, the problems that nearly drove them to nuclear war would be put aside for a while and by the time, they started thinking or talking about them again, they'd look at the problems through eyes that had seen mass destruction and would want to avoid repeating that.