(Watching The) WATCHMEN! Reviews & Spoilers!

New movies! Old movies! B-movies! Discuss discuss discuss!!!

(Rating The) WATCHMEN!

10
3
6%
9
8
15%
8
11
21%
7
11
21%
6
11
21%
5
4
8%
4
0
No votes
3
0
No votes
2
1
2%
1
0
No votes
Waiting for the DVD/Blu-Ray Director's Cut
1
2%
If I wanted to see blue dongs, I'd watch Siberian pr0n!
2
4%
 
Total votes : 52

Re: (Watching The) WATCHMEN! Reviews & Spoilers!

Postby Leckomaniac on Wed Mar 18, 2009 12:17 am

TheBaxter wrote:
Ribbons wrote:IPAMPILASH

In the 5-hour director's cut we'll see the alternate version of his speech to Rorshach and Dan, where he says "And Blake had to die because, well... that fucker burned my map."


it will make more sense when it's revealed that, on that map, was a giant X which marked the location of the secret pirate treasure horde.
that would piss off anybody enough to blow up a bunch of major cities.


I read that exchange and had a flashback to Blair Witch Project.

"Where's the map?"

"I kicked that fucker in the creek!"
Image
User avatar
Leckomaniac
AIRWOLF PLUS
 
Posts: 11031
Joined: Sat Aug 13, 2005 9:32 pm
Location: Chicago, IL

Re: (Watching The) WATCHMEN! Reviews & Spoilers!

Postby Maui on Wed Mar 18, 2009 12:28 am

TheBaxter wrote:
Maui wrote:
TheBaxter wrote:if i had my way, the whole movie would have been scored with cheesy 80s pop music

Culture Club "Do You Really Want to Hurt Me" during the comedian-silk spectre rape scene
Frankie Goes To Hollywood - "Two Tribes" during any scene with nixon or nukes
Wang Chung - "Everybody Wang Chung Tonight" whenever there's blue wang all over the screen
Madonna - "True Blue" for any other scene with dr. manhattan
Wham! - "Wake Me Up Before You Go-Go" during the owl ship sex scene
Cyndi Lauper - "Time After Time" when manhattan's on mars reminiscing about his past
Corey Hart - "Sunglasses at Night" when nite owl is showing laurie his owl visor
The Go-Go's - "Our Lips Are Sealed" during the scene where they agree to keep Veidt's plot a secret



Don't forget "Rape Me" by Nirvana.


i'm pretty sure that's not a cheesy 80s pop song.


My bad - Nirvana has never been cheesy or pop, late 80s though. Still "Rape Me" would have been oddly amusing.

I really didn't like the soundtrack at all - I think a high school music teacher could have done a better job. The only song that I felt somewhat worked was the opening credit with Dylan.
User avatar
Maui
WoWie
 
Posts: 7625
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 10:19 pm

Re: (Watching The) WATCHMEN! Reviews & Spoilers!

Postby DennisMM on Wed Mar 18, 2009 12:45 am

You know, this talk has knocked my discussion of McLuhan and palimpsests and subtext right out of my head.
Image
User avatar
DennisMM
NOT PARTICULARLY MENACING
 
Posts: 16813
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2005 5:02 pm
Location: Watchin' the reels go 'round and 'round

Re: (Watching The) WATCHMEN! Reviews & Spoilers!

Postby Ribbons on Wed Mar 18, 2009 1:23 am

I'll palimpsest you!
User avatar
Ribbons
SQUARE PEG
 
Posts: 14134
Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2005 2:00 am

Re: (Watching The) WATCHMEN! Reviews & Spoilers!

Postby Retardo_Montalban on Wed Mar 18, 2009 1:30 am

Awesome Vietnam era songs:

War - Edwin Starr
Break on Through - The Doors
Primitive - The Groupies
Volunteers - Jefferson Airplane
Beach Party Vietnam - The Dead Milkmen
I wanna be Your Dog - Iggy & The Stooges

Awesome 80's tunes

Blue Monday - New Order
Something's got a hold of my heart - Nick Cave & The Bad seeds
Bullet The Blue Sky - U2
Four horsemen - The Clash
Ashes to Ashes - David Bowie
Modern Day Cowboy - Tesla

The options are endless. I understand using all along the Watchtower, but there are tons of other versions of that song that could have been used. It's a heavily covered song. There is also the original Bob Dylan version. The Neil Young version is awesome and I think it was recorded in the 80's. There's also a grateful dead version.

The thing about using popular music as a soundtrack in a movie, is that the song has to be used in an original way that makes it feel like part of the movie. A lot of these songs have baggage from being part of a memorable movie or just over used in general.

The Nat King Cole wasn't distracting and fit with the lounging in a bathrobe mood. I just wish that Cat burglar didn't Sally The comedian through the window like that. I mean, jeez, put a little back into it.
Image
User avatar
Retardo_Montalban
doubleplusungood
 
Posts: 3682
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2005 12:28 am

Re: (Watching The) WATCHMEN! Reviews & Spoilers!

Postby tapehead on Wed Mar 18, 2009 2:01 am

Maui wrote:
TheBaxter wrote:
Maui wrote:
TheBaxter wrote:if i had my way, the whole movie would have been scored with cheesy 80s pop music

Culture Club "Do You Really Want to Hurt Me" during the comedian-silk spectre rape scene
Frankie Goes To Hollywood - "Two Tribes" during any scene with nixon or nukes
Wang Chung - "Everybody Wang Chung Tonight" whenever there's blue wang all over the screen
Madonna - "True Blue" for any other scene with dr. manhattan
Wham! - "Wake Me Up Before You Go-Go" during the owl ship sex scene
Cyndi Lauper - "Time After Time" when manhattan's on mars reminiscing about his past
Corey Hart - "Sunglasses at Night" when nite owl is showing laurie his owl visor
The Go-Go's - "Our Lips Are Sealed" during the scene where they agree to keep Veidt's plot a secret



Don't forget "Rape Me" by Nirvana.


i'm pretty sure that's not a cheesy 80s pop song.


My bad - Nirvana has never been cheesy or pop, late 80s though.


Sorry Mauis, In Utero came out in '93.
User avatar
tapehead
BALLS!!!
 
Posts: 9427
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2005 2:13 pm
Location: OZ

Re: (Watching The) WATCHMEN! Reviews & Spoilers!

Postby Retardo_Montalban on Wed Mar 18, 2009 2:27 am

Bleach came out in '89, so Nirvana, the band came out right on the cusp. Perhaps Mr. Moustache for a Comedian scene?
Image
User avatar
Retardo_Montalban
doubleplusungood
 
Posts: 3682
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2005 12:28 am

Re: (Watching The) WATCHMEN! Reviews & Spoilers!

Postby Pacino86845 on Wed Mar 18, 2009 9:51 am

About a Girl during the attempted rape scene!!

EDIT: Negative Creep during any Rorschach scene!!!!
User avatar
Pacino86845
EGYPTIAN LOVER
 
Posts: 14064
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2005 5:20 am

Re: (Watching The) WATCHMEN! Reviews & Spoilers!

Postby Maui on Wed Mar 18, 2009 10:00 am

Pacino86845 wrote:About a Girl during the attempted rape scene!!



How about "Closer" by Nine Inch Nails?
User avatar
Maui
WoWie
 
Posts: 7625
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 10:19 pm

Re: (Watching The) WATCHMEN! Reviews & Spoilers!

Postby Maui on Wed Mar 18, 2009 10:01 am

tapehead wrote:

Sorry Mauis, In Utero came out in '93.


Bah, it was all a haze back then anyways. ;)
User avatar
Maui
WoWie
 
Posts: 7625
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 10:19 pm

Re: (Watching The) WATCHMEN! Reviews & Spoilers!

Postby Spandau Belly on Wed Mar 18, 2009 10:08 am

Man, living through that early 90s grunge-alternative rock era once was bad enough. I think if somebody lined a soundtrack with tunes from that era my head would explode. I'm kinda scared that a comeback for that type of music is looming around the corner now that Lady Gaga has brought back that whole early 90s Ace of Base / La Bouche dance craze the only thing left is that grunge stuff.

I'll deal with it the same way I did the first time: hiding at raves.
Image
User avatar
Spandau Belly
self-fellating peacock
 
Posts: 7396
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2008 9:15 am
Location: ????

Re: (Watching The) WATCHMEN! Reviews & Spoilers!

Postby Maui on Wed Mar 18, 2009 10:11 am

When a movie's soundtrack is discussed more than the actual movie, well, that just speaks VOLUMES to me.

I wasn't a fan of this movie, it was just OK.
User avatar
Maui
WoWie
 
Posts: 7625
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 10:19 pm

Re: (Watching The) WATCHMEN! Reviews & Spoilers!

Postby Retardo_Montalban on Wed Mar 18, 2009 10:12 am

Maui wrote:Bah, it was all a haze back then anyways. ;)


I hear ya, sister. I was was 11 when In Utero came out and I chipped my teeth pretty badly from all the meth and ecstasy I was taking. It's a good thing those were baby teeth, or else I would have had to pay a fortune in dental repairs.
Image
User avatar
Retardo_Montalban
doubleplusungood
 
Posts: 3682
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2005 12:28 am

Re: (Watching The) WATCHMEN! Reviews & Spoilers!

Postby Pacino86845 on Wed Mar 18, 2009 10:14 am

I think I'm finally old enough to say BAH!!! Kids these days...
User avatar
Pacino86845
EGYPTIAN LOVER
 
Posts: 14064
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2005 5:20 am

Re: (Watching The) WATCHMEN! Reviews & Spoilers!

Postby Spandau Belly on Wed Mar 18, 2009 10:15 am

Maui wrote:When a movie's soundtrack is discussed more than the actual movie, well, that just speaks VOLUMES to me.

I wasn't a fan of this movie, it was just OK.


I'm on the same page with you there. It wasn't a terrible movie, and I think a lot could be done with the existing footage to improve it. No re-shoots necessary.

And it shows how the music kinda dominated the movie.

Despite being kinda disappointed by the movie, I think I'll still keep busting out the blue paint and making public apperances as Doc Manhattan until I get arrested.
Image
User avatar
Spandau Belly
self-fellating peacock
 
Posts: 7396
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2008 9:15 am
Location: ????

Re: (Watching The) WATCHMEN! Reviews & Spoilers!

Postby TheBaxter on Wed Mar 18, 2009 10:25 am

overall, the soundtrack didn't work because it was so scattershot that it became distracting. if you're sitting there in the theater, trying to figure out why a certain song was playing during a certain scene, then it takes you out of the movie.

see: Donnie Darko* for a film that is set in the 80s and knows how to use songs from that era effectively



* not the director's cut, though.
Image
User avatar
TheBaxter
Carlos Danger
 
Posts: 19470
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2005 5:00 pm

Re: (Watching The) WATCHMEN! Reviews & Spoilers!

Postby Spandau Belly on Wed Mar 18, 2009 10:39 am

I've seen lots of movies that effectively use songs from different eras and genres. The Big Lebowski is a good example. But I think Watchmen should've stuck with songs from the era in which the scene taking place was set. But, yeah, I'll make an exception for 'Unforgettable' because The Comedian is older and I think that song was just playing on an advert on his television while he was being beaten. And the Bob Dylan for the openning was fine since it was a multi-era sequence.

But the rest of the movie I just kept forgetting it was the 80s until they'd show some technological device like an oldschool computer with the 3.5 diskettes 'n some of the cars.
Image
User avatar
Spandau Belly
self-fellating peacock
 
Posts: 7396
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2008 9:15 am
Location: ????

Re: (Watching The) WATCHMEN! Reviews & Spoilers!

Postby Nachokoolaid on Wed Mar 18, 2009 12:31 pm

Spandau Belly wrote:
Maui wrote:When a movie's soundtrack is discussed more than the actual movie, well, that just speaks VOLUMES to me.

I wasn't a fan of this movie, it was just OK.


I'm on the same page with you there. It wasn't a terrible movie, and I think a lot could be done with the existing footage to improve it. No re-shoots necessary.

And it shows how the music kinda dominated the movie.

Despite being kinda disappointed by the movie, I think I'll still keep busting out the blue paint and making public apperances as Doc Manhattan until I get arrested.


To me, it wasn't that the music dominated the movie. I felt that the movie got mostly everything right, EXCEPT the music, hence the discussion.
User avatar
Nachokoolaid
THE DORK KNIGHT
 
Posts: 5606
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2005 4:00 am
Location: Gotham City

Re: (Watching The) WATCHMEN! Reviews & Spoilers!

Postby BlueHawaiiSurfer on Wed Mar 18, 2009 1:57 pm

Nachokoolaid wrote:
To me, it wasn't that the music dominated the movie. I felt that the movie got mostly everything right, EXCEPT the music, hence the discussion.


/agree
Image
User avatar
BlueHawaiiSurfer
TOMBOY BEANPOLE
 
Posts: 32
Joined: Tue Jan 06, 2009 11:40 am

Re: (Watching The) WATCHMEN! Reviews & Spoilers!

Postby Nachokoolaid on Thu Mar 19, 2009 1:11 am

Image

IPAMP!

So true. I was just reading Rolling Stone's review, and while they liked it, Travers couldn't stop mentioning the blue weiner (as he puts it).
User avatar
Nachokoolaid
THE DORK KNIGHT
 
Posts: 5606
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2005 4:00 am
Location: Gotham City

Re: (Watching The) WATCHMEN! Reviews & Spoilers!

Postby Nachokoolaid on Thu Mar 19, 2009 2:07 am

I've mentioned a few times in this thread that I think that when we look back on this film in a few years, we'll be appreciative of what we received, for the most part.

It could have been worse:

http://www.cracked.com/blog/watchmen-how-it-could-have-been-a-lot-worse/

And some other excerpts:

EXT - WHITE HOUSE GROUNDS - DAY

DR MANHATTAN and JFK are shaking hands

DR MANHATTAN: I’m very pleased to meet you Mr President, I can’t tell you how… Mr President? Mr President! Eyes up here please…

DR MANHATTAN becomes impatient, cut to blue penis morphing into the shape of DR MANHATTAN’s face

DR MANHATTAN: Now that i have your attention…


INT - ARCHIE - NIGHT

RORSCHACH: *sniff* It smells like fuckin’ sex in here!

SILK SPECTRE II and NITE OWL II steal a quick glance.

NITE OWL II: Eh… Um… How do you know?

RORSCHACH: Are you kiddin? I’ve just been in jail, I’d know that smell anywhere!


:lol: :lol: :lol:

And don't forget that we were spared a training montage!
User avatar
Nachokoolaid
THE DORK KNIGHT
 
Posts: 5606
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2005 4:00 am
Location: Gotham City

Re: (Watching The) WATCHMEN! Reviews & Spoilers!

Postby DennisMM on Thu Mar 19, 2009 10:23 pm

Except that R would say, "This vehicle reeks of fornication - cheap women and false love." And Laurie would give him a glare.
Image
User avatar
DennisMM
NOT PARTICULARLY MENACING
 
Posts: 16813
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2005 5:02 pm
Location: Watchin' the reels go 'round and 'round

Re: (Watching The) WATCHMEN! Reviews & Spoilers!

Postby Lord Voldemoo on Thu Mar 19, 2009 10:33 pm

BTW, I saw this when I was in Hawaii.

I've been meaning to write a review...but i haven't had time to do a decent job (or at least decent for me) and I fear that everything I'll say has been said at this point.

I haven't read thru these yet. I expect discussion on the ending, which I want to get into later...and will when I have some time to think.

In short, I was pretty disappointed in it overall, though I felt it had some very nice moments. I don't think the disappointing parts were necessarily ALL Snyder's fault, honestly. I think the story does not adapt particularly well to the screen. Other than that, the pacing of the ending felt off. It was very, very long which doesn't bother me except that at times it felt very, very long. Some of the acting/dialogue was stilted...but some of that is the "fault" of the original work.

6/10

SPOILERS if you haven't seen the movie or read the book....well just go shoot yourself.

I will say this...Manhattan as the Squid makes much more sense, is more plausible, and flows more organically from the story than the Squid itself does, which I always felt was just this side of "dumb"

*runs*
Image
User avatar
Lord Voldemoo
He Who Shall Not Be Milked
 
Posts: 17645
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2005 1:18 pm
Location: Pasture next to the Red Barn

Re: (Watching The) WATCHMEN! Reviews & Spoilers!

Postby RogueScribner on Thu Mar 19, 2009 10:44 pm

My wife's mom and sister were visiting opening weekend and then we were both ill this past weekend, so hopefully this weekend we'll finally be able to see it!
My eye isn't lazy; it's ambidextrous!
User avatar
RogueScribner
The Dork Avenger
 
Posts: 9607
Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2005 3:52 am
Location: Melbourne, FL

Re: (Watching The) WATCHMEN! Reviews & Spoilers!

Postby Nachokoolaid on Thu Mar 19, 2009 11:43 pm

I notice a lot of people keep saying that they won't say something about the film because it's probably been said already. Well, WHO CARES!?! Say it anyway. I want to see what everyone has to say. I have to admit, I've been mostly disappointed in this thread because I expected discussion to explode like wildfire, and it hasn't even really gotten farther than a pilot light or something. Most of the posts have been relatively short.

So please, post any thoughts, if they've been said or not.
User avatar
Nachokoolaid
THE DORK KNIGHT
 
Posts: 5606
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2005 4:00 am
Location: Gotham City

Re: (Watching The) WATCHMEN! Reviews & Spoilers!

Postby DennisMM on Fri Mar 20, 2009 12:33 am

Nacho, this is all I've got, so far. Perhaps more to come, if I can get past the wall and into a more general review.

Reading the Watchmen

In 1986, director Jean-Jacques Annaud adapted Umberto Eco's The Name of the Rose for the screen. In the opening titles he referred to the film, credited to four writers, as a palimpsest of Eco's novel. A palimpsest is a document from which the original content has been erased and overwritten, but on which traces of the older text may still be read. Eco's novel, heavily concerned with the interpretation of events in context and with text itself, became on film a straightforward mystery featuring a number of exciting action sequences.

Zack Snyder's Watchmen is a palimpsest – a well-meaning one, and an efficient compression of the original comic's plot line – but still an overwriting, one in which most of the original has been lost. It squeezes the core events of the comic, including some of the flashback sequences, into 150 minutes. In doing so, writers David Hayter and Alex Tse accomplished what Terry Gilliam and Charles McKeown decided 20 years ago they could not. Rather, Gilliam and McKeown decided they should not, that Watchmen was better unfilmed. They may have been right.

The problem with Watchmen isn't that it's a bad movie. It's not. Snyder has made a seriously flawed but entertaining film that's filled with interesting images and which features several fine performances. It's much better than 300 - far less self-indulgent than that film and much less dependent upon gimmicks. But Snyder has taken Watchmen, the Ulysses of masks and capes, and turned it into just another superhero movie. I enjoyed Watchmen on the level it was willing to operate, most of the time. The two and a three quarter hours were diverting. But when it was done, I wished they'd never made the movie, because it's empty. It tries to be more than it is, but it lacks even the emotional depth of a Spider-Man 2.

As the old jazz musician said to his student, "You played all the notes, but the song wasn't there."

Watchmen the comic, like Eco's novel, is concerned with its plot only on the surface. As significant as the events Alan Moore and Dave Gibbons recount is the subtext contained by the plot. Much is made of Watchmen the comic being a deconstruction of superhero comic books. The tropes and images of classic superheroes were part and parcel of the project, down to employing Dave Gibbons – as much a silver-age artist in his look as any penciller of his generation. Even the book’s engine of destruction was a variation on classic monsters-from-the-stars. The film’s version of deconstruction appears to stop with making Nite Owl's costume look like something Christian Bale might wear and putting nipples on Ozymandias's Schumacher-style armored suit. Perhaps it doesn’t stop there – perhaps fast-cut action sequences, utterly brutal violence and giant explosions were employed to examine the nature of modern superhero stories. But it didn’t feel that way.

Central to the book is the tone of doom that often permeated the 1980s. The nuclear brinksmanship of Ronald Reagan and several Soviet premiers is at the heart of the story. As a result, the popular culture of the book is suffused with motifs of death and horror, from mmmeltdowns candy to the bands Krystalnacht and Pale Horse (led by Red D'eath) to the graffiti, seen more than once, “ONE IN EIGHT GO MAD.” At the same time, we're presented with a retreat into an idealized past, as represented by the ads for Veidt's Nostalgia perfume and aftershave. While the film touches on the topic, it's more a McGuffin than a theme. Nixon plays Dr. Strangelove games. Nena's “99 Luftballons” plays in a restaurant. Dan Dreiberg dreams of a nuclear detonation. Rorschach theorizes the mask killer is out to stop the “Watchmen” from preventing nuclear war – as if half a dozen people in funny suits could somehow prevent a nuclear conflict. The Rorschach of the book plays it straight – soon there will be war, he says, and millions will burn. He can do nothing to stop it and, in the end, he refuses even to try. (On this key point, Snyder allows his Rorschach to agree, as he must for the story to continue. And the true irony of both versions is that one person in a funny suit does prevent the war.)

The conflict in tone between book and film creates, I believe, the biggest problem with the changed ending. Dr. Manhattan as perceived villain can work if the audience accepts certain prerequisites. I didn't accept them, but as most of the world seems to have done so, I'll give the plot device a pass for now. Veidt's bombs destroy midtown New York and other cities, but in their aftermath, we are left without horror. If Snyder meant to evoke the aftermath of Ground Zero, the crater in the great city, I believe he failed. As Jon and Laurie stand at the edge of the destruction, they look over rubble, jagged and burned but generally tidy. They could be standing on the edge of a volcanic crater. There is no “Hiroshima with bodies,” as Moore put it, just blackened wreckage. The briefly seen news vendor and teenager don't lie piteously amidst the devastation, with Dr. Long's and others' bodies scattered about. It’s just a hole in the ground.

To learn that Adrian Veidt has killed fifteen million people is to hear a statistic. To see even a handful of people we've come to care about, lying dead, would have been to know a tragedy.

This reticence on Snyder's part seems odd given his embrace of crudity generally throughout the film. At times the director seems to be reaching for sentiment, but his reach exceeds his grasp. Moore's brutal but realistic fights, suggested sex and occasional profanity were not sufficient, so Snyder settles from crass. Eddie Blake liberally drops the word, "fuck" as if it were an all-purpose modifier. Dan and Laurie, in Dan's dream, cast off their false selves to reveal the heroes below; the shells, however, come away accompanied by disturbing tearing sounds, their interiors suggesting raw meat. The two hump frantically, straining for an elusive simultaneous orgasm, as a dirge-like version of Leonard Cohen’s “Hallelujah” pollutes the soundtrack. Laurie shoves a knife through a man's neck and uses him as a shield against bullets. One of the Big Figure's henchmen dismembers the other with a circular saw. Rorschach repeatedly hacks a man in the skull with a cleaver.

Even when lower-key, the violence is highly stylized, on the edge of ludicrous. Middle-aged and out-of-shape, Dan and Laurie not only hit like Bruce Lee but can fling opponents ten feet with a simple side kick, wire work being all too obvious at times. They break bones effortlessly and graphically, taking down dozens of Riker's Island prisoners - including one with a strong resemblance to Oh Dae-Su – with hardly a deep breath. Dan even stands up to the world’s greatest fighter for a short while, trading a flurry of kicks, punches and spins not to be taken seriously by anyone who has read the comic or ever watched a martial-arts-based fight.



There's more to come, discussing why adapting comics to film isn't always a good idea, how film is a hot medium and comics a cold one, how it's actually easier to express ideas through the comics form than through film because of the greater attention needed to interpret comics, and so forth. But who knows when it will be ready?
Last edited by DennisMM on Fri Mar 20, 2009 12:36 am, edited 1 time in total.
Image
User avatar
DennisMM
NOT PARTICULARLY MENACING
 
Posts: 16813
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2005 5:02 pm
Location: Watchin' the reels go 'round and 'round

Re: (Watching The) WATCHMEN! Reviews & Spoilers!

Postby Ribbons on Fri Mar 20, 2009 12:35 am

Nachokoolaid wrote:I notice a lot of people keep saying that they won't say something about the film because it's probably been said already. Well, WHO CARES!?! Say it anyway. I want to see what everyone has to say. I have to admit, I've been mostly disappointed in this thread because I expected discussion to explode like wildfire, and it hasn't even really gotten farther than a pilot light or something. Most of the posts have been relatively short.

So please, post any thoughts, if they've been said or not.


You're not the boss of me! :x
User avatar
Ribbons
SQUARE PEG
 
Posts: 14134
Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2005 2:00 am

Re: (Watching The) WATCHMEN! Reviews & Spoilers!

Postby RogueScribner on Fri Mar 20, 2009 12:58 am

Really good (partial) review, Dennis. I look forward to reading more when (and if) you get around to it.

I'm really anxious to see this movie. I've heard so many divergent opinions on it I don't know what to expect anymore.
My eye isn't lazy; it's ambidextrous!
User avatar
RogueScribner
The Dork Avenger
 
Posts: 9607
Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2005 3:52 am
Location: Melbourne, FL

Re: (Watching The) WATCHMEN! Reviews & Spoilers!

Postby Lord Voldemoo on Fri Mar 20, 2009 1:09 am

Nachokoolaid wrote:I notice a lot of people keep saying that they won't say something about the film because it's probably been said already. Well, WHO CARES!?! Say it anyway. I want to see what everyone has to say. I have to admit, I've been mostly disappointed in this thread because I expected discussion to explode like wildfire, and it hasn't even really gotten farther than a pilot light or something. Most of the posts have been relatively short.

So please, post any thoughts, if they've been said or not.


I'm going to, I'm going to! I just haven't had time! I swears!

as an aside, I could have written Dennis' review for him 2 years ago. :D

Well...it wouldn't have been written as well, but the gist would have been there... :wink:
Image
User avatar
Lord Voldemoo
He Who Shall Not Be Milked
 
Posts: 17645
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2005 1:18 pm
Location: Pasture next to the Red Barn

Re: (Watching The) WATCHMEN! Reviews & Spoilers!

Postby instant_karma on Fri Mar 20, 2009 5:11 am

I saw this on Wednesday, and also intend to write a review when I get my thoughts in order and also catch up on this thread which I've been avoiding since the movie came out. But one thing I can definately say right now is that Nixon's nose was very distracting. I know the guy had a distinctive nose, but it wasn't that big! He looked like a Dick Tracy bad guy.
User avatar
instant_karma
Comes in 4 exciting flavours
 
Posts: 2863
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 2:57 am
Location: Thereabouts

Re: (Watching The) WATCHMEN! Reviews & Spoilers!

Postby Gerald Fried on Fri Mar 20, 2009 5:27 am

Nachokoolaid wrote:I notice a lot of people keep saying that they won't say something about the film because it's probably been said already. Well, WHO CARES!?! Say it anyway. I want to see what everyone has to say. I have to admit, I've been mostly disappointed in this thread because I expected discussion to explode like wildfire, and it hasn't even really gotten farther than a pilot light or something. Most of the posts have been relatively short.

So please, post any thoughts, if they've been said or not.

Perhaps the film just didn't seem worth the effort of a lengthy posting, especially when proper masterpieces have gone ignored in the past.

It was okay with some decent bits and dodgy ending...the decent bits being straight page-to-film translations.
User avatar
Gerald Fried
STEAK-A-BABY
 
Posts: 161
Joined: Thu Oct 09, 2008 6:16 am
Location: Fried Gold when he's at school.

Re: (Watching The) WATCHMEN! Reviews & Spoilers!

Postby Brit Pop on Fri Mar 20, 2009 7:17 am

I've watched the Watchmen.... and just read the Readmen - sorry, Watchmen graphic novel.

I gave the film 8 / 10. Its cult standing seems, for some people, to require paragraph after paragraph of indepth critique.

I thought the film was very good, comparisons to the novel will always make it 'less than it could have been'.

Greenhorns who have no interest in the original story will either like it as a standalone action movie... or hate it because its bloody long, bloody complicated... and some knowledge of the backstory is required to 'get it' properly.

My only major gripe (reverberated by others I'm sure) - is the ending.

Obviously in this day and age its possible to CGI a bloody great tentacled alien into a city... so why not do that?? I admit to fully incorporate the brain / secret island / inter-dimentional alien stuff would have required a running time of nearer 4 hours.... it was just a shame to demonise Jon in place of a foreign invader.
Image
User avatar
Brit Pop
AIRWOLF
 
Posts: 1355
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2005 11:54 am
Location: Heart Of England

Re: (Watching The) WATCHMEN! Reviews & Spoilers!

Postby Al Shut on Fri Mar 20, 2009 7:27 am

Two additional thoughts that struck me since seeing the movie.

The NY crater reminded me of AKIRA more than anything else.

It seems a bit strange for Laurie to freak out like that in the multiple MAnhattan scene. After all he's not working on some boring science shit that only he cares about but is desperately trying to help Veidt save the world. Another reason why I don't like Manhattan beeing involved in Veidts plan like that (not the Manhattan plot itself).
Note to myself: Fix this image shit!
User avatar
Al Shut
THE LAUGHING ZONER
 
Posts: 6239
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2005 1:57 pm
Location: Oberhausen, Germany

Re: (Watching The) WATCHMEN! Reviews & Spoilers!

Postby Gerald Fried on Fri Mar 20, 2009 8:13 am

The change of ending, and of Veidt's plot device, produces a myriad of inconsistancies in and implications for elements which weren't changed.
User avatar
Gerald Fried
STEAK-A-BABY
 
Posts: 161
Joined: Thu Oct 09, 2008 6:16 am
Location: Fried Gold when he's at school.

Re: (Watching The) WATCHMEN! Reviews & Spoilers!

Postby Bloo on Fri Mar 20, 2009 8:56 am

I still haven't seen it and my theatre still hasn't brought it in
Image
User avatar
Bloo
ROOFIED BY RAYLAN
 
Posts: 9668
Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2007 4:26 pm
Location: Kansas, home of the Bacon Explosion

Re: (Watching The) WATCHMEN! Reviews & Spoilers!

Postby Brit Pop on Fri Mar 20, 2009 10:36 am

Gerald Fried wrote:The change of ending, and of Veidt's plot device, produces a myriad of inconsistancies in and implications for elements which weren't changed.


Thats pretty much all one needs to say about the film. You sir, have condensed excessive reviews into one easy to read statement! Well done!
Image
User avatar
Brit Pop
AIRWOLF
 
Posts: 1355
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2005 11:54 am
Location: Heart Of England

Re: (Watching The) WATCHMEN! Reviews & Spoilers!

Postby Nachokoolaid on Fri Mar 20, 2009 6:39 pm

Gerald Fried wrote:The change of ending, and of Veidt's plot device, produces a myriad of inconsistancies in and implications for elements which weren't changed.


Such as?
User avatar
Nachokoolaid
THE DORK KNIGHT
 
Posts: 5606
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2005 4:00 am
Location: Gotham City

Re: (Watching The) WATCHMEN! Reviews & Spoilers!

Postby tapehead on Fri Mar 20, 2009 8:22 pm

I'm hoping the inevitable book vs. film finale discussion does start up in this thread - In very general terms,for me, the book's ending is uncanny, startling, full of comic and horror movie logic and is quite stunning and unique - plus it produces a real moral conundrum. the film's ending, by comparison, is a plot function foreshadowed very early on - there's no horrific scenes of dead and damaged, no awe inspired, and no question who has done wrong and who will face the blame - it's weaksauce.
User avatar
tapehead
BALLS!!!
 
Posts: 9427
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2005 2:13 pm
Location: OZ

Re: (Watching The) WATCHMEN! Reviews & Spoilers!

Postby TheBaxter on Sat Mar 21, 2009 12:16 am

Nachokoolaid wrote:
Gerald Fried wrote:The change of ending, and of Veidt's plot device, produces a myriad of inconsistancies in and implications for elements which weren't changed.


Such as?



well, for one, i'm still not clear on exactly HOW comedian found out about veidt's plan. i think they TRIED to explain it in the film, but it made so little sense that i don't even know how to re-explain it here.

not that the version in the book is much better. comedian just happens to be flying by veidt's secret island and decides to check it out. what a coinkydink... and seems kinda silly that veidt's brilliant master plan that he'd put into motion over a decade previously could (potentially) be undone so easily and randomly.
but... at least there WAS an explanation.
Image
User avatar
TheBaxter
Carlos Danger
 
Posts: 19470
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2005 5:00 pm

Re: (Watching The) WATCHMEN! Reviews & Spoilers!

Postby The Vicar on Sat Mar 21, 2009 12:18 am

The Comedian was hired by the government ( Nixon ) to shadow the Watchmen - that's how he found out about Ozzy's plan.
.
........................................
Image
User avatar
The Vicar
Fear & Loathing in the Zone
 
Posts: 16179
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2005 10:21 am

Re: (Watching The) WATCHMEN! Reviews & Spoilers!

Postby DennisMM on Sat Mar 21, 2009 12:27 am

He managed to penetrate the depths of the Veidt organization to learn the secret? I found that even weaker than the idea of him looking out the window of an airship and seeing unregistered activity on Veidt's island. In the book there was at least this huge, bizarre, total horror going on, which supposedly made Blake crack. I got the feeling from the movie that Blake would have just told Nixon about the plan. Someone would have believed him. It's easier to buy than the psychic squid, that's for sure.
Image
User avatar
DennisMM
NOT PARTICULARLY MENACING
 
Posts: 16813
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2005 5:02 pm
Location: Watchin' the reels go 'round and 'round

Re: (Watching The) WATCHMEN! Reviews & Spoilers!

Postby TheBaxter on Sat Mar 21, 2009 12:38 am

or, y'know... he could've told dr. manhattan himself, being that they were co-workers and all. that would've pretty much nipped it in the bud.
Image
User avatar
TheBaxter
Carlos Danger
 
Posts: 19470
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2005 5:00 pm

Re: (Watching The) WATCHMEN! Reviews & Spoilers!

Postby Retardo_Montalban on Sat Mar 21, 2009 12:55 am

The new plot twist made Blake into a total pussy. What kind of Nancy cries, over some Hiroshima-esque shenanigans? The main problem I had with the new ending is that it's not perverse enough. You need something really sick and violating to make a dude who shot his pregnant baby mama in the pregnant belly crack. Maybe if Veidt had a program where he would dose farm animals with Manhattan radiation and make some Manhattan clones rape said farm animals into creating a super blue farm animal race that could enslave humanity, then I'd understand Blake snapping. Milk spills best when teetering on the edge.
Image
User avatar
Retardo_Montalban
doubleplusungood
 
Posts: 3682
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2005 12:28 am

Re: (Watching The) WATCHMEN! Reviews & Spoilers!

Postby Al Shut on Sat Mar 21, 2009 7:23 am

DennisMM wrote: I got the feeling from the movie that Blake would have just told Nixon about the plan. Someone would have believed him. It's easier to buy than the psychic squid, that's for sure.


TheBaxter wrote:or, y'know... he could've told dr. manhattan himself, being that they were co-workers and all. that would've pretty much nipped it in the bud.



As I undrtstood it the Comedian didn't want to stop Veidts plan because of the whole nuclear holocaust thing thteratening to happen.

See also the comic :" though appaled, exposing my plan would precipitate greater horrors preventing humanity's salvation. Even Blake balked at that responsibility, telling only Moloch who he knew wouldn't understand"
Note to myself: Fix this image shit!
User avatar
Al Shut
THE LAUGHING ZONER
 
Posts: 6239
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2005 1:57 pm
Location: Oberhausen, Germany

Re: (Watching The) WATCHMEN! Reviews & Spoilers!

Postby instant_karma on Sat Mar 21, 2009 10:11 am

Nachokoolaid wrote:
Gerald Fried wrote:The change of ending, and of Veidt's plot device, produces a myriad of inconsistancies in and implications for elements which weren't changed.


Such as?


For me, one of the main problems with making Dr Manhattan Veidt's patsy is that I don't really buy the world being united against him as a common enemy so easily, as compared with the alien threat from the GN.

Given that Manhattan had been a tool of the US government for so many years, I don't buy the US's cold war enemies just accepting that Manhattan has gone rogue and not suggesting that the attacks on the cities by Manhattan were done under orders of the US, with the attack on New York being an attempt to deflect blame.
User avatar
instant_karma
Comes in 4 exciting flavours
 
Posts: 2863
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 2:57 am
Location: Thereabouts

Re: (Watching The) WATCHMEN! Reviews & Spoilers!

Postby TheBaxter on Sat Mar 21, 2009 10:55 am

Al Shut wrote:
DennisMM wrote: I got the feeling from the movie that Blake would have just told Nixon about the plan. Someone would have believed him. It's easier to buy than the psychic squid, that's for sure.


TheBaxter wrote:or, y'know... he could've told dr. manhattan himself, being that they were co-workers and all. that would've pretty much nipped it in the bud.



As I undrtstood it the Comedian didn't want to stop Veidts plan because of the whole nuclear holocaust thing thteratening to happen.

See also the comic :" though appaled, exposing my plan would precipitate greater horrors preventing humanity's salvation. Even Blake balked at that responsibility, telling only Moloch who he knew wouldn't understand"


again, not as a criticism solely of the movie, it doesn't make much sense that ozy would take out comedian if he knew he wasn't going to expose his plan. especially since he was willing to let rorshach walk out the door, knowing full well rorshach WAS going to expose the plan and try to undo everything he did. even manhattan wasn't willing to take that chance (in the gn or the movie). that was something i never really bought in the gn.
Image
User avatar
TheBaxter
Carlos Danger
 
Posts: 19470
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2005 5:00 pm

Re: (Watching The) WATCHMEN! Reviews & Spoilers!

Postby TheBaxter on Sat Mar 21, 2009 11:01 am

instant_karma wrote:
Nachokoolaid wrote:
Gerald Fried wrote:The change of ending, and of Veidt's plot device, produces a myriad of inconsistancies in and implications for elements which weren't changed.


Such as?


For me, one of the main problems with making Dr Manhattan Veidt's patsy is that I don't really buy the world being united against him as a common enemy so easily, as compared with the alien threat from the GN.

Given that Manhattan had been a tool of the US government for so many years, I don't buy the US's cold war enemies just accepting that Manhattan has gone rogue and not suggesting that the attacks on the cities by Manhattan were done under orders of the US, with the attack on New York being an attempt to deflect blame.


i think it would have been less of a problem if veidt had only targetted NYC, like in the book. if you compare to 9/11, we were the sole victims of an attack by a weapon of our own creation (al-qaeda and bin laden having received weapons and training from us all during the soviet-afghan war) which turned on us, and brought us worldwide sympathy, at least until we invaded iraq. other than a few conspiracy-theory loonies, no one ever seriously thought we'd engineered the attack on ourselves.

add in a hint that manhattan might go off on another city or country next, and it becomes more plausible that he could serve as the "worldwide threat" that unites the earth. it's not totally plausible, but neither is the interdimensional space alien... at least manhattan had been around awhile and people probably already had an underlying fear of what he was capable of if he turned on us.
Image
User avatar
TheBaxter
Carlos Danger
 
Posts: 19470
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2005 5:00 pm

Re: (Watching The) WATCHMEN! Reviews & Spoilers!

Postby TK-421 on Sat Mar 21, 2009 1:51 pm

I saw the film on Wednesday at an early premiere (living in Denmark means delayed premieres). I cringed during the film, but then I've got the comic in a piedestal (and a velvet cushion, inside the hardcover case) and I'd just finished re-reading it. I'm thinking I probably shouldn't have, because I noticed every little rewrite and they all seemed more or less pointless.

For those of you that haven't seen the film, don't read the following paragraphs. Or, indeed, anything in this thread. Why are you even here?

I'm pro-squid, and I didn't think the new ending worked as well. It played out well in the context of the film, but it wasn't as powerful as the original, and can't have been as frightening. Besides which, is Veidt banking on nobody noticing where the blast originated, and who profited off it? (notice how Ground Zero had Veidt Enterprises written all over it?)

Carla Gugino's acting was bad, the Nixon make-up was ludicrous and cramming heroes into every single historical event they could think of felt contrived - why would all of the world revolve around them? Even before the Keene Act, public relations must have been strained.

The fight scenes were, as mentioned, hyperbolic and completely unrealistic, which pretty much defeated the purpose of the film. Sure, these people are exceptionally fit and strong (with Laurie and Dan being obvious exceptions), but they're not superhuman. The obsession with visual flair damaged the film, and the only reason it's there is to pander to a demographic that won't actually understand it anyway.

Sally Jupiter's line towards the end of the film, about her forgiving The Comedian because "he gave me you" was not just cheesy, it simplified the relationship between the two immensely. Much more layered in the comics.

Dan's outbreak when Jon kills Rorschach was idiotic. How stupid is he, really? He knew the guy would never compromise his ideals by going along with the hoax, killing him is the only way to ensure that he remains silent. Also, his line about Ozymandias 'crippling' humanity? Didn't sit too well with me.

One of my favourite scenes from the graphic novel, and the one I knew had to work in the film for it to be succesful, was his investigation of the little girl's kidnapping. It's one of the most emotional, gripping and disturbing scenes I've ever read, and while half of it works in the film, the other half is horribly butchered. The guy confessing because he figured he'd be safe in police custody? I prefered the simpering idiot of the comic to the sneering jerk of the film. Rorschach's line about Kovacs closing his eyes and muttering 'Mother' while killing the dogs, only to open them as Rorschach was nowhere to be found, either. His nihilistic speech remained, more or less, but we never saw the impact it had on Dr. Long - another great character that got chopped.

I fully support the argument about Zack Snyder being an excellent comic book film director because technically, he's excellent. Not only that, he knows how to ape the style of comics and transfer it to the screen - point in case, 300, which worked well visually even if it lacked horribly in terms of plot and character development. The thing is though, Watchmen isn't so much a comic book as it's an unraveling of comic book trends, forsaking visual prowess to focus on telling a story, and doing it well. It was the other way around with the film, chop go the story and let's chuck in some more wire-fighting.

The music is another problem with the film, and while I don't necessarily agree that it felt out of place, I will contend that it wasn't edited properly. Take All Along the Watchtower for example; the track starts out playing hella loud, only to be more or less muted 20 seconds later in order to fit in some dialogue. The change in volume was extremely annoying.

Oh yeah, and how about Doc Manhattan's new magic powers? A tap on the forehead isn't just the on/off button for amnesia, it's a quick way to settle the grand questions in life. Dammit, I'd been looking forward to the entire conversation on Mars, the viewer becoming gradually aware of the twist would have worked much better. Darn time constraints!

I was actually hoping to keep my complaints popping up a few at a time, but I sort of got in the mood here. I'm pretty sure there are plenty more, but before I go on another round of self-indulged nitpicking, let me say that a lot of things did work in the film. The opening montage, with Bob Dylan on the soundtrack, was excellent (sans the before-mentioned cramming heroes in everywhere). Rorschach's scenes were mostly good - Jackie Earle Haley is an excellent actor, and the same goes for Patrick Wilson. All of the small details just bugged me, but I'd quite like to see it again when I've distanced myself a bit from the comic, see how well it stands on its own. I saw it with a couple of friends, and they both liked it without having read the book (although one felt something was 'missing').

Anyway, looking forward to the DC.
TK-421
PRIMITIVE SCREWHEAD
 
Posts: 82
Joined: Sat Nov 22, 2008 9:32 am

Re: (Watching The) WATCHMEN! Reviews & Spoilers!

Postby Ribbons on Sat Mar 21, 2009 1:58 pm

TheBaxter wrote:again, not as a criticism solely of the movie, it doesn't make much sense that ozy would take out comedian if he knew he wasn't going to expose his plan. especially since he was willing to let rorshach walk out the door, knowing full well rorshach WAS going to expose the plan and try to undo everything he did. even manhattan wasn't willing to take that chance (in the gn or the movie). that was something i never really bought in the gn.


I may have misunderstood the explanation at the end of the movie, but the impression I got was that Veidt actually invited the Comedian to Karnak because he was one of the few people he thought wouldn't have any moral qualms about his impedning plan, but then he cracked. As for the Rorshach thing, I got the impression that -- in the movie anyway -- Ozymandias was ASKING Manhattan to go kill Rorshach for him as he walked out the door. Granted that also doesn't make a whole lot of sense since he could have easily killed him with his bare hands (and already had killed several people with his bare hands).
User avatar
Ribbons
SQUARE PEG
 
Posts: 14134
Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2005 2:00 am

Re: (Watching The) WATCHMEN! Reviews & Spoilers!

Postby Al Shut on Sat Mar 21, 2009 2:40 pm

instant_karma wrote:Given that Manhattan had been a tool of the US government for so many years, I don't buy the US's cold war enemies just accepting that Manhattan has gone rogue and not suggesting that the attacks on the cities by Manhattan were done under orders of the US, with the attack on New York being an attempt to deflect blame.


If they wouldn't accept Manhattan gone rouge there wouldn't have been any action in Afghanistan and Pakistan and no imenant threat of nuclear armaggedon in the first place. The Russians have probably simmilar psychological profiles about Manhattan to the ones Veidt has.
Note to myself: Fix this image shit!
User avatar
Al Shut
THE LAUGHING ZONER
 
Posts: 6239
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2005 1:57 pm
Location: Oberhausen, Germany

PreviousNext

Return to Movie Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests