I will read it some day, but I can't say the movie makes me want to rush out and get it.
WATCHMEN - Movie Discussion and Grading (SPOILERS)
- Thread starter Dream
- Start date
I will read it some day, but I can't say the movie makes me want to rush out and get it.
Ugh, where do I begin?
Let me start with what I liked: It looks pretty.
Uhm.
Yeah, it looks pretty.
Stuff that didn't work for me.
The story, pretty much from beginning to end.
I couldn't fathom why the characters were so invested in the Comedian's death when he was a rapist asshole and completely unsympathetic.
I couldn't figure out why the Comedian would cry about Ozymandias's plan, and why he would need to be killed over it.
None of that added up.
I couldn't understand why this world seems so miserable if the Vietnam War has been won? Or why Superheroes would have been banned if they just won that same war for everyone. There's just no logic there.
Learning about the characters as the story unfolded was okay, I wasn't completely sold on it, but it made it hard to really support any of them, when they spent so much of the film wandering around feeling miserable for themselves. By an hour in I really didn't care about any of them one way or the other.
The visual homages to things like Dr. Strangelove were fine but they didn't really go anywhere, or tie up with the characters. They could have cut many of those scenes and the film wouldn't have been hurt.
The overall message is very 1980s. An outside threat, nuclear war, unites Earth. 9-11 proved that's not true just between Democrats and Republicans.
The problem is, the cold war was so long ago, most people don't remember the fear of war that existed.
Overall it was very disjointed, and not in a clever way that made me go "Ohhhh," at the end, but rather "Eh."
I don't know. Maybe fans of the comic see something I don't. But as a pure spectator with no dog in the fight, it was not a good film.
Chick in the latex was hot though.
I guess I underestimated how confusing the film would be to bystanders.
Well, I haven't read or heard many bystanders who found it this confusing.
Plenty of people in this topic who didn't read the comic liked the movie. It really wasn't that confusing.
The plot of Watchmen could be described with one sentence. Of course you'll also be leaving out a ton of stuff.
I may just have problems with the way Alan Moore puts a story together, because I really disliked V for Vendetta too. Though I enjoyed From Hell.
But again, this is all based on the movies, not the comics.
They're not totally banned. They just can't work independently anymore. The Comedian was still active for years after the Keane Act because he was willing to work for the government. However, Nite Owl & Silk Spectre decided to voluntarily retire rather than work for the government. Rorschach just kept working underground and hoped the cops wouldn't catch him.
And from what I've heard, the movie version of From Hell, other than being a Jack the Ripper story, has nothing at all to do with the graphic novel. It's still thought of as a good movie in its own right but in no measure faithful to the source material.
But then, that helps illustrate my point that sometimes fidelity to the source material isn't enough. Like Alan Moore himself has always said, different mediums do different things well. What makes a good comic book won't necessarily make a good movie and vice versa.
Ugh, where do I begin?
Let me start with what I liked: It looks pretty.
Uhm.
Yeah, it looks pretty.
Stuff that didn't work for me.
The story, pretty much from beginning to end.
I couldn't fathom why the characters were so invested in the Comedian's death when he was a rapist asshole and completely unsympathetic.
I couldn't figure out why the Comedian would cry about Ozymandias's plan, and why he would need to be killed over it.
None of that added up.
I couldn't understand why this world seems so miserable if the Vietnam War has been won? Or why Superheroes would have been banned if they just won that same war for everyone. There's just no logic there.
Learning about the characters as the story unfolded was okay, I wasn't completely sold on it, but it made it hard to really support any of them, when they spent so much of the film wandering around feeling miserable for themselves. By an hour in I really didn't care about any of them one way or the other.
The visual homages to things like Dr. Strangelove were fine but they didn't really go anywhere, or tie up with the characters. They could have cut many of those scenes and the film wouldn't have been hurt.
The overall message is very 1980s. An outside threat, nuclear war, unites Earth. 9-11 proved that's not true just between Democrats and Republicans.
The problem is, the cold war was so long ago, most people don't remember the fear of war that existed.
Overall it was very disjointed, and not in a clever way that made me go "Ohhhh," at the end, but rather "Eh."
I don't know. Maybe fans of the comic see something I don't. But as a pure spectator with no dog in the fight, it was not a good film.
Chick in the latex was hot though.
I conceed that there's no one here who can (or should try to) change your opinion. That's just not gonna happen. However, if I may address some of your problems with the film, you might understand where the filmmakers were coming from on certain issues/scenes.
I agree wholeheartedly that the Comedian was an unlikeable bastard. Won't bother disputing that comment one bit. The reason he cries about Adrian's plan is that, as bad a man as he knew himself to be, even he did not think himself capable of what Adrian was about to do. Adrian killed him because he couldn't afford anyone knowing his plan and therefore wielding the power to affect its outcome. It's explained a bit better in the graphic novel, and may yet be better explained by the Director's Cut/Ultimate Edition.
The world is in fact worse off because the US won the Vietnam War. Tensions with the Soviet Union are much higher than they ended up being in real life. The US government is essentially under a dictatorship, with Richard Nixon being President for Life, so that also has people a bit uneasy. Ultimately, superheroes are outlawed because, well, they're vigilantes.... and you can't very well run a "dictatorship" when your handpicked police and military aren't the ones rounding up the lowlifes. That's why The Comedian and Dr. Manhattan were allowed to continue, because they agreed to work for the government.
Finally, the issue of whether or not nuclear war unites the world. 9/11 didn't involve nuclear war, although I presume you just meant the "outside threat" part. It certainly proved that an attack on the city of New York (which is the ONLY part of the world that gets "attacked" in the GN) isn't gonna unite us, except maybe for 24 hours. A global attack.... which I hope and pray we NEVER have to deal with.... might stand a better chance of accomplishing this. But it's rather ambiguous. Indeed Laurie tells Dan that Jon would say, "Nothing ever ends." And at the New Frontiersman newspaper office, Rorschach's journal is seen amongst the "crank file," which indicates that there's a chance that Adrian's plan may yet still be exposed.
Again, I know I'm not changing anyone's opinions, but I hope that clears up a couple of the problems you had with the movie.
You're right, I overstated my point. I guess I don't find Moore's view of humanity quite so pessimistic, though, since while there is a great deal of unpleasantness going on in Watchmen, there's also an amount of simple kindness. (I will concede, however, that it's been a while since I read the book, and may be over-remembering those elements of the narrative.)
I don't think the movie ever really makes the point that costumed heroes (or, as stated more elegantly by someone else, any concentrated power) is a bad thing. The film revels in the Watchmen's actions, especially their more sadistic moments, and I didn't feel like the film ever effectively made the point that this was not a good thing. Ozymandias is turned into a supervillain, but in the book he was never a villain; he was just doing what all the other heroes were doing, he was trying to fix the problem as he saw fit.
Yeah, the world turns against the capes in the movie, but I don't Snyder sympathizes with the world in that moment, whereas Moore does.
I agree with this. Snyder may have felt it more important that the audience see Veidt as a villain and the heroes as sympathetic than maintaining a greater degree of ambiguity.
Not saying that's a good thing, just saying.
I get the 80s stuff, it was a scary time to live through, with Reagan and Nixon and the attitudes and policies of any US administration at the time.
I am willing to concede that I could be viewing Watchmen through the nihilistic lens of the novel that doesn't have any of the redemption which is also in the novel, according to Moore. David Itziss of the New York Times wrote:
OTOH, Adrian's actions betray the assertion that he is the smartest man on Earth. I'm adamant about that. And don't ask me what I'd do. I'm not the smartest man on Earth either.
I am willing to concede that I could be viewing Watchmen through the nihilistic lens of the novel that doesn't have any of the redemption which is also in the novel, according to Moore. David Itziss of the New York Times wrote:
OTOH, Adrian's actions betray the assertion that he is the smartest man on Earth. I'm adamant about that. And don't ask me what I'd do. I'm not the smartest man on Earth either.
In the book several characters use the smartest man in the world line to describe Adrian but that doesn't make it true. There are so many holes in his master plan that it isn't funny. Adrian himself joked that people only thought he was the smartest man in the world because he has a good PR team. It really felt like something the media came up with.
But there shouldn't be any argument that Adrian isn't an extremely intelligent person when you consider everything he managed to accomplish in the comic.
In a way, Dr. Manhattan should be the smartest man on Earth.
Here's something to ponder. Imagine Rorschach, The Comedian, Viedt, or Mothman with Dr. Manhattan's abilities.
Dr Manhattan is the smartest person in the world after he was "born" but the title probably just stuck to Ozymandias after being used for him for years.
But it's probably not fair to call Dr Manhattan that because he shouldn't be considered human anymore considering everything he can do. Would you call a human the smartest termite in the world?
He was their friend and their college. When you work with a guy every day for years, can't help but feel some attachment to him. Sure, he was an asshole, but he was their asshole.
Saw the film last night. Thought it was excellent. It evoked the 80s for me in a new and disturbing way. I haven't read the graphic novel but I am going to.
The Cold War of the 80s seems two minutes ago to me. A lot of people my age will remember being so afraid of nuclear war as children and teenagers that they couldn't sleep. That isn't something you forget very easily. It seems so recent to me that this film re-awakened it in a heartbeat. I don't know whether I wish I'd read the graphic novel or not at the time.
Forgot to mention the awesome soundtrack. It was awesome.
The Cold War of the 80s seems two minutes ago to me. A lot of people my age will remember being so afraid of nuclear war as children and teenagers that they couldn't sleep. That isn't something you forget very easily. It seems so recent to me that this film re-awakened it in a heartbeat. I don't know whether I wish I'd read the graphic novel or not at the time.
Forgot to mention the awesome soundtrack. It was awesome.
Last edited:
I figured out what bugged me about the actor that played Ozzy, he has some kind of alight speech impediment. Like a light lisp or affectation or something. It bugged me throughout the movie.
A. I've read the comic twice, and Snyder did a fantastic job capturing what seemed like an unflimably introspective story. I thought there were perhaps a few too many unintentionally funny moments (Rorschach declaring he was eating beans and the prisoner getting his pants set on fire, and waiting for his shirt to be on fire to react, stand out.) I thought the ending was a little too unfaithful--not so much the Big Plot, but in small ways like Silk Spectre saying "Nothing ever ends" instead of Dr. Manhattan, things like that. And the metafictional element was vastly toned down, but I was happy to see Snyder did throw in some references to other movies and other genres--I'm thinking of the Ride of the Valkyries scene and to the blood and gore in the prison.
So, TLDR--good movie, has a few odd moments.
So, TLDR--good movie, has a few odd moments.
Similar threads
- Poll
- Sticky
- Poll
