WATCHMEN - Movie Discussion and Grading (SPOILERS)

I like Tim Buckley!









Oh wait, it's probably not the same!

 

Just saw the movie tonight, I thought it was horrible. Very depressing ending too, I walked into the theater with excitement and walked out feeling sad and depressed.

 

This movie sucked donkey ass. What a waste of money.

 

A+

I was blown away. Read the book about 20 years ago, and am in the process of rereading it now.

I don't get why some critics are complaining about the movie being too slavishly adapted from the book because it isn't, particularly the ending and a key relationship revelation, from what I can recall.

I thought the costuming, acting, and action scenes were top notch. Though I think Synder amped up their powers. The actress playing Silk Spectre was probably the weakest link, but I still thought she did pretty good and she filled out that yellow costume quite nicely.

I even liked the changed ending. I didn't care for the original ending in the graphic novel. I thought that ending was stupid anyway.

One thing I didn't care for was the make up for Nixon and the McLaughlin Group. For the McLaughlin Group the voice imitations were pretty good.

 

A lot of people have been saying this. I don't get it. They prevented a nuclear war and made the world a better place. That's a happy ending.

 

It was how it was done, plus the general mood of the movie is a very depressing 'want to shoot myself in the head end it all now cause humans suck' kinda movie.

 

But it's a peace bought at the cost of thousands or millions of lives, and a fragile one resting on a foundation of lies and misunderstandings. I'm not so sure that's a better place.

 

Wow. One damn good movie. Was concerned going in about the changes from the graqphic novel that I'd heard about. Still not too sure about the way they tweaked the ending, but that is more than overshadowed by the rest of the movie. Spot on visuals, good cast (for the most part), and there are too many places to list that you could freeze-frame the film and have an exact representation of a panel from the graphic novel. Don't have the same complaint that some reviewers do about Malin Ackerman as Silk spectre II, but thought Ozymandias was a bit off. Can't really put my finger on it. Just seemed odd to me somehow.

However, Haley's Rorshach and Cruddup's Dr. Manhatten couldn't have been any better realized, IMO. Just wonderful in any way I could describe.

Nice to see Matt Frewer in his role. And Patrick wilson was a pretty good Nite Owl.

I think this movie complements the source material, and visa versa. If you partake in one, you owe it to yourself to sample the other.

My current list of the Three Best superhero Movies Ever (in chronologial order)is:

Superman - The Movie (1978)
The Dark Night (2008)
Watchmen (2009)

 

Uh...how do you think the original comic ended?

 

Awesome movie!!!
Any idea how it did in terms of number?

 

It did $25.1million for Friday and that figure includes the aforementioned midnight showings.

 

That's the big problem I had with the graphic novel too. The whole ends-justify-the-means philosophy leaves a bitter taste in my mouth. (For that matter, that kind of idea is the same reason why I didn't like end of The Dark Knight either.) I suppose it wouldn't bug me quite so much if at least they gave us the small consolation prize of someone killing Ozymandias. I hate the idea of that smug prick continuing to rule his rich little domain in his new utopia after having so much blood on his hands.

As for changing the means of Ozymandias' plan, I'm 50-50 on that. On the one hand, I think that the giant squid was a bit more creative. On the other hand, I think the Dr. Manhattan plan is a bit more plausible and would have a better chance of actually working. In its way, it portrays Dr. Manhattan as sort of Anthony Fremont (the creepy kid who wished people away into the "cornfield" on The Twilight Zone).

Bit factoid: It was kinda freaky seeing one of the main American military generals being played by the guy who played Col. Chekov, the Russian military representative on Stargate SG-1.

 

I know it was different, but I believe it brought about a similar effect on the world.

That doesn't make either ending a happy one, though.

 

For me the biggest problem with the film was that it sort of confused the fact of why Dr. Manhattan was so unique. He's the ONLY person with superpowers. He represented a fundamental shift in how people percieved the "masks." That's totally lost in this film. The film also glossed over the Keane Act. Its kind of vague why they stopped being heroes.

There are some sequences that seem out of place given that certain plot points were dropped. For instance, during the rape scene, The Comedian alludes to Hooded Justice's joy of hitting people. But the comment has no context.

One quick question though.....am I remembering correctly that in the book there was NEVER any group called "The Watchmen?"

 

For the record, I've never heard of Watchmen before this movie, so I had no idea what it was about other than from the previews. There are most likely a lot of people in this situation, not knowing what it was before going in, expecting something different from what the previews depicted, and disappointed in what they saw. It isn't a good or bad thing, it is just a reality. It seems people that knew about it going in like it better than people who haven't.

 

A lot of people seem to have gone in expecting a typical comic book movie with 'splosions and one-line zingers, where the good guy wins in the end and everything's all hunky dory.

Clearly they haven't done their research.

 

Correct. "The Crimebusters" was the name of Captain Metro's failed superteam. "Watchmen" was literally a reference to the old phrase, "Who watches the Watchmen," which appears in the story on Keene Act protest/support posters and graffiti, and it's also complimentary to the theme of the story.

 

This is probably part of the reason why many people have said that this can't translate very well to the screen, besides the fact that there's too much material to capture or express on celluloid.