I found that I enjoyed the Director's Cut of the movie quite a lot more than I liked the theatrical. Those added beats and character insights really added a lot.
Watchmen film....and Zack Snyder....
- Thread starter Joel_Kirk
- Start date
I've never read the graphic novel, but enjoyed the movie, and followed it easily enough.
I seem to remember being relatively interested while watching the movie, but after ... well, it didn't exactly stick with me. But honestly, I can say the same for the book. I remember reading it in the 80s, and it seemed groundbreaking (Watchmen was actually my introduction to comics beyond the few I'd read as a kid) and deep for its deconstruction of the hero archetype. But I was 16 and just grappling with such ideas. Now it all has a haze of nostalgia, but I can't rouse much in the line of real interest in it. As an adult I know that the dark side of power is hardly a radical notion, and the story itself is largely only interesting in terms of Dr. Manhattan. I seem to recall the book handling him a good deal better than the movie did. I've been thinking about rereading it, just to see what I'd think of it now.
As for Snyder, all I can say is he really, really, REALLY needs to get over his love affair with slo-mo. That got real tedious after the first 85 shots of it.
As for Snyder, all I can say is he really, really, REALLY needs to get over his love affair with slo-mo. That got real tedious after the first 85 shots of it.
I was surprised at just how good it was and that not only was it an affectionate adaption but a good film in it's own right.
No matter what you think of the final product, you can't seriously deny that it could have been much, much, MUCH worse. Every tried watching 'League of Extraordinary Gentlemen', 'The Avengers' or (dare I say) 'Batman & Robin'? 'Nuff said.
No matter what you think of the final product, you can't seriously deny that it could have been much, much, MUCH worse. Every tried watching 'League of Extraordinary Gentlemen', 'The Avengers' or (dare I say) 'Batman & Robin'? 'Nuff said.
It's a sad reflection of the times where we give marks to a film because we all know it could have been worse.
about the film itself; Malin Ackerman has to be the worst actress working now.
about the film itself; Malin Ackerman has to be the worst actress working now.
"Dawn of the Dead", "300" and "Watchmen" are all films I own and enjoy, so Snyder is a director who obviously has a finger on my pulse (I plan to sue for sexual harassment). I find his movies connect at multiple levels, always stylish and atmospheric, great to watch and think about.
To "Watchmen" specifically, I love it. I think a lot of the changes made to the source material were pretty judicious, in terms of 'adaptation' at a level with Jackson's modifications to LotR. The characters, the history, the way it's told through interrupting short stories, the action, the overall feel of the movie... great. I sometimes pop in the DVD just to watch the opening credits, which I adore. Where else can one actually adore a movie's credits, so chuck full of story themselves? I guess the only other ones I would think of would be the summary-paintings of "Spider-Man 2" and (Snyder again) the great Johnny Cash/spliced footage intro of "Dawn of the Dead", though I've never watched those alone. Anyway, the man's got verve.
Fictitiously yours, Trent Roman
To "Watchmen" specifically, I love it. I think a lot of the changes made to the source material were pretty judicious, in terms of 'adaptation' at a level with Jackson's modifications to LotR. The characters, the history, the way it's told through interrupting short stories, the action, the overall feel of the movie... great. I sometimes pop in the DVD just to watch the opening credits, which I adore. Where else can one actually adore a movie's credits, so chuck full of story themselves? I guess the only other ones I would think of would be the summary-paintings of "Spider-Man 2" and (Snyder again) the great Johnny Cash/spliced footage intro of "Dawn of the Dead", though I've never watched those alone. Anyway, the man's got verve.
Fictitiously yours, Trent Roman
I enjoyed Watchmen. I was never deeply infatuated with the graphic novel but I did appreciate it on some level. The movie version was very well-made... it was superbly atmospheric with good acting from Jackie Earl Haley, Patrick Wilson, and Jeffrey Dean Morgan, but I guess I just couldn't connect with it for some reason. It was "hit or miss" with me.
I'm a fan of the book, but my reaction to the movie ranged from "meh" to "omigodi'msosickofHallelujah" to "Malin Ackerman sucks"
It coulda been worse (LoEG) but overall it just didn't do it for me.
It coulda been worse (LoEG) but overall it just didn't do it for me.
I liked it a lot. As someone who read the graphic novel for the first time in preparation for the movie and was blown away by the graphic novel, I was very, very satisfied with the adaptation. The main thing that bugged me was Ozymandias. I thought the guy playing him didn't have enough presence for what was supposed to be an imposing figure and was too much of a one-dimensional asshole from the beginning.
I thought he was a much more subtle and well-rounded character in the graphic novel, making it seem like he makes a surprising change in character over the course of it, whereas in the movie he's just the same from start to finish. It was a little too long while at the same time excluding some bits that it might have been better off including and expanding some things that didn't need expanding (I don't know what the hell was with Richard Nixon getting so much screentime), but aside from the casting of Ozymandias, I thought all the actors were well-chosen (especially Rorshach, who is by far the highlight of the movie), and the production design was awesome.
I thought he was a much more subtle and well-rounded character in the graphic novel, making it seem like he makes a surprising change in character over the course of it, whereas in the movie he's just the same from start to finish. It was a little too long while at the same time excluding some bits that it might have been better off including and expanding some things that didn't need expanding (I don't know what the hell was with Richard Nixon getting so much screentime), but aside from the casting of Ozymandias, I thought all the actors were well-chosen (especially Rorshach, who is by far the highlight of the movie), and the production design was awesome.
Except that's not what most of us are saying.
Although of the many ways it could have been worse, one is that it could have revolved around a giant squid.
The biggest problem of the film is that Zack Snyder is too wedded to the source material. He should have done more... y'know... adapting.
IMO the best parts of the film were the segments that were not verbatim (or close enough) from the graphic novel - namely the opening and the revised ending. All the middle stuff could have used another rewrite to make the film stand on its own better.
IMO the best parts of the film were the segments that were not verbatim (or close enough) from the graphic novel - namely the opening and the revised ending. All the middle stuff could have used another rewrite to make the film stand on its own better.
Well yeah, and that was a problem for the studio. No way they were going to pile up all of those corpses in the streets of say, New York City...
Except that's not what most of us are saying.
Although of the many ways it could have been worse, one is that it could have revolved around a giant squid.
I never read the Graphic Novel - but kept hearing that they changed the ending in the film drastically (although two friends of mine who had read it thought the film ending worked better) - but what the hell did a Giant Squid have to do with the GN stoyline and ending? (If anyone is willing to elaborate).
I liked it but Ozymandias' point-of-view was robbed of his plausibility and Dr. Manhattan and Silk Specter's character moments near the end could have been much better, they seemed to just quickly happen.
Disliked 300 though, for glorifying militarism, combat and being so flashy about it.
Disliked 300 though, for glorifying militarism, combat and being so flashy about it.
Just your standard comic book plot. Villain clones brain of psychic into genetically-engineered monster, blows it up by teleporting it into New York, causing its psychic bomb to kill most of the city, hence making the world believe an alien invasion is imminent, hence causing it to unite together against a common foe.
Watchmen's giant space squid...
The end was borrowed from an old Outer Limits episode, "The Architects Of Fear (and possibly from the novel Wild Card).Ozy creates a fake alien invasion - involving a giant space squid - to scare humanity into making peace with itself. Kills a whole mess of people in the process.
I was a fierce defender of this film at the time, but am losing my enthusiasm for it as time passes.
For a pretty simple reason: When I think of this story in my head, I still see the comic panels. Just about nothing from the film has imposed itself over my mind's eye view of the comic. And that's definitely not true of other comic adaptations - the original Christopher Reeve Superman supercedes any comic depiction of him; there are a couple of film Batman's standing between me and the comic now; etc. But not in this case. I was very taken with the film when I first saw it, but it has just shrivelled up and blown away for me with time.
For a pretty simple reason: When I think of this story in my head, I still see the comic panels. Just about nothing from the film has imposed itself over my mind's eye view of the comic. And that's definitely not true of other comic adaptations - the original Christopher Reeve Superman supercedes any comic depiction of him; there are a couple of film Batman's standing between me and the comic now; etc. But not in this case. I was very taken with the film when I first saw it, but it has just shrivelled up and blown away for me with time.