(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

(Watching The) WATCHMEN! Reviews & Spoilers!

Postby MasterWhedon on Mon Feb 23, 2009 9:58 pm

Well, I've seen it and I vote for "The film will only solidify your prejudices/preconceived notions." I sent a review in to the main site last week but it's clear they're not going to run it. Here are some excerpts:

For my money, it's a very good, streamlined version of the Watchmen story that has moments of filmmaking brilliance. It also, however, has some notable flaws, some of them of the "major-ish" variety. I'd say it's about 80-90% narratively faithful to the comic, and the elements that have been changed/invented for the movie work mostly well in my opinion. I guess the main irony of Watchmen as a film is that while it's rather long, characters often have to speak to the point--and to the underlying themes--a bit quicker and more directly than sometimes feels natural. There's just too much information to cover in such a short time. Further, the movie directly addresses some of the comic's subtext and unspoken themes, which, I'm sure, will result in the biggest criticism of the movie being, "It's a dumbed-down Watchmen" or "Diet Watchmen" or "Watchmen for Dummies"--but I never felt as though the movie was talking down to me.

Full disclosure: I've read the comic twice and found it pretty exceptional, though I can't for the life of me begin to care about The Black Freighter. In general, I respect the comic more than I actually like it, and I'm firmly in the camp of "Alan Moore is a pompous douche." I kinda, sorta understand why the hardcore fans are so fundamentally insulted by the very idea of this movie--or, at least, this version of the movie--but I think some of the changes greatly help the movie version of Watchmen. Take the new ending. As pretty much everyone knows at this point, the squid is gone and it's been replaced by a Dr. Manhattan frame-up. I know that's a dealbreaker for a lot of folks but, for me, I say they earn the change by introducing a sub-plot in which Adrian and Manhattan work to replicate Manhattan's energy in order to create clean, free, sustainable energy to eliminate our dependence on foreign oil (topical!). As I understand it, this was supposed to have happened in the comic's past, which is why the vehicles in Watchmen's 1985 are all electric--but I rather like that the movie chooses to give focus to this element, since it drastically differentiates their world from ours. And the moment at the end of the film where you see an electric car parked outside the New Frontiersman further sells the idea that this is a changed world, a world changed by Adrian.

I know a lot of people are waiting to rip on Snyder for his visual flourishes--and, sure, there are times the slow-mo is perhaps overused--but I'm quite a fan of his, and there's a whole lot more to what he's doing than shooting a pretty picture for the sake of shooting a pretty picture. He plays out the Rorschach/Manhattan-narrated vignettes as a sort of rolling montage--one shot per mini-scene--and as we cut through time and space it all feels like a bleak poem, with some unsettling tension building the whole time. These are the best parts of the movie, IMO.

The fight scenes will elicit some anger, mainly because it's superhero fighting from folks who have no superpowers. It's all beautifully choreographed and I quite liked it, but I get the complaint here that it's wrong for the movie. Still, the opening bout between Blake and You Know Who is f-ing brutal, and beautifully cut to "Unforgettable." (I dug the source music all throughout, but my buddy didn't.)

The Dr. Manhattan effects are flawless at times and merely very good at others. There are a few beats where his mouth movements aren't quiiiiiiite right, but every time he's in a big close-up it's just beautiful stuff. Nixon isn't very good--both the make-up and the actor's impression. And he's in the movie A LOT. The guy Rorschach kills for butchering the little girl kinda drops the ball on his end in what should be a really gripping scene--but then his death comes and it's fucking awesome, in a horrendous way. The big Nite Owl/Silk Spectre sex scene is awesome (they allow that many thrusts in an R-rated movie?), while The Comedian's attempted rape of Sally Jupiter is... not--which is a compliment for the scene, because it's hard to watch. Surprisingly I liked both Malin Akerman and Matthew Goode, though I'm sure most will hate them. Patrick Wilson and Jeffrey Dean Morgan were both quite strong, and the standout, obviously, is Jackie Earl Haley. He just absolutely nails it.

One more note on the end: They don't have the moment of Adrian asking Manhattan if he did the right thing. It's a small beat, but kinda crucial. I always thought the last issue of the comic was oddly structured and a little qweird (Dan and Laurie have sex in the bad guys lair? WTF?!) and they do their best to consolidate the key moments, but it doesn't entirely work. Especially transferring Manhattan's "Nothing ever ends" line to Laurie and giving her and Dan a "they all lived happily ever after" Honeymooners scene to wrap it all up.

Anyway, I'm still processing a lot of the movie and I really want to see it again soon to see how it plays a second time. I do think this is about the best Watchmen movie that could ever get made, and I got from it pretty much exactly what I was expecting. Ultimately, I don't find Watchmen to be all that entertaining of a comic, and I think they did their damndest to make this an entertaining movie--so make of that what you will.

It's a solid 8/10 for me.
User avatar
MasterWhedon
KEEPER OF THE PURSE
 
Posts: 9473
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2005 9:07 pm
Location: Los Angeles

Re: WATCHMEN (SPOILERS FOR REALIES!): Now w/ poll

Postby Bloo on Mon Feb 23, 2009 10:23 pm

thanks for the review MasterWhedon

it'll certainly be interesting to see
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: WATCHMEN (SPOILERS FOR REALIES!): Now w/ poll

Postby Retardo_Montalban on Mon Feb 23, 2009 10:24 pm

Well, I have been trying to keep an open mind about the movie. It's just that all the changes that seem to be happening are the things that I really want to see in the movie. Master Wheadon's review threw a couple extra nails into the coffin for me. The ending sounds super cliche and lame. I was hoping that if I don't get the squid at least I'd still get an ending that was part of the original watchmen plot (for example, maybe Rorschach or Nite Owl succeed in defeating Veidt and end up dooming the world to Nuclear war instead). I also loved the idea of a tubby out of shape super hero. What I saw of The Comedian being chucked out of a window looked like a couple of guys swinging on wires. I'm also not a fan of exposition. This is the type of thing a directors cut can't remedy. I like to watch movies over and over again and if there are a few things hidden that I get out of further viewing, then the movie becomes that much better. From what I gleam, I'll watch this movie and I'll probably like it, but I probably won't buy it and I'll probably only watch it if it's playing on cable. Scratch that, I'll watch it with the Black Freighter bit, because I'm hoping that the magic of movies could splice the freighter scenes in a way that would perfectly mimick the psychological state of Veidt as the movie progresses.
Image
User avatar
Retardo_Montalban
doubleplusungood
 
Posts: 3682
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2005 12:28 am

Re: WATCHMEN (SPOILERS FOR REALIES!): Now w/ poll

Postby Seppuku on Mon Feb 23, 2009 11:11 pm

I hate to be all douchey to a fellow mod, but Wheders is a bit of an Event junkie. He also gave Superman Returns and Cloverfield 10/10 at the time they came out, but would he still rate them that today? (Dude also writes great reviews, otherwise I wouldn't have remembered his ratings).
Dale Tremont Presents...

Image
User avatar
Seppuku
SWINGING PLASTIC LION
 
Posts: 7872
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2005 2:52 am
Location: Limeyland

Re: WATCHMEN (SPOILERS FOR REALIES!): Now w/ poll

Postby Retardo_Montalban on Mon Feb 23, 2009 11:38 pm

Whedon's a word magician. I shudder to think what evils would befall mankind if Goebbels ever got his hands on that talent.
Image
User avatar
Retardo_Montalban
doubleplusungood
 
Posts: 3682
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2005 12:28 am

Re: WATCHMEN (SPOILERS FOR REALIES!): Now w/ poll

Postby burlivesleftnut on Tue Feb 24, 2009 12:50 am

Seppuku wrote:I hate to be all douchey to a fellow mod, but Wheders is a bit of an Event junkie. He also gave Superman Returns and Cloverfield 10/10 at the time they came out, but would he still rate them that today? (Dude also writes great reviews, otherwise I wouldn't have remembered his ratings).


Knowing Whedon, I doubt he would change his ratings on those movies at all. There is nothing wrong with being exuberant about something.
Image
User avatar
burlivesleftnut
I <3 PACINA
 
Posts: 10626
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2005 10:28 am
Location: Port Angeles, WA

Re: WATCHMEN (SPOILERS FOR REALIES!): Now w/ poll

Postby MasterWhedon on Tue Feb 24, 2009 1:08 am

burlivesleftnut wrote:
Seppuku wrote:I hate to be all douchey to a fellow mod, but Wheders is a bit of an Event junkie. He also gave Superman Returns and Cloverfield 10/10 at the time they came out, but would he still rate them that today? (Dude also writes great reviews, otherwise I wouldn't have remembered his ratings).


Knowing Whedon, I doubt he would change his ratings on those movies at all. There is nothing wrong with being exuberant about something.

Just for accuracy's sake, I actually gave both Superman Returns and Cloverfield 9/10. Cloverfield--I'll stand by. SR--I saw three times in theaters and each time I realized my memories of the movie were better than the movie itself. I wanted to like it so much more than I actually did, and that's why my review was so positive. (I think it's more like a 6/10, all things considered. Enthusiam = 3 points!)

The 8/10 I gave Watchmen is based on one viewing and a lot of conversation with friends who've seen it--but only two friends, so I haven't gotten that diverse a spread of opinion yet. Like I said, I'm really itching to see it again and to get feedback from everyone else once it's in release since I'm not entirely, 100% convinced of how I feel about it all just yet. I think the 8/10 will stand, mostly because, for me, about 80% of the movie works.

And, yes, I am an Event Movie junkie. :wink:
User avatar
MasterWhedon
KEEPER OF THE PURSE
 
Posts: 9473
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2005 9:07 pm
Location: Los Angeles

Re: WATCHMEN (SPOILERS FOR REALIES!): Now w/ poll

Postby Leckomaniac on Tue Feb 24, 2009 1:51 am

MasterWhedon wrote:
burlivesleftnut wrote:
Seppuku wrote:I hate to be all douchey to a fellow mod, but Wheders is a bit of an Event junkie. He also gave Superman Returns and Cloverfield 10/10 at the time they came out, but would he still rate them that today? (Dude also writes great reviews, otherwise I wouldn't have remembered his ratings).


Knowing Whedon, I doubt he would change his ratings on those movies at all. There is nothing wrong with being exuberant about something.

Just for accuracy's sake, I actually gave both Superman Returns and Cloverfield 9/10. Cloverfield--I'll stand by. SR--I saw three times in theaters and each time I realized my memories of the movie were better than the movie itself. I wanted to like it so much more than I actually did, and that's why my review was so positive. (I think it's more like a 6/10, all things considered. Enthusiam = 3 points!)

The 8/10 I gave Watchmen is based on one viewing and a lot of conversation with friends who've seen it--but only two friends, so I haven't gotten that diverse a spread of opinion yet. Like I said, I'm really itching to see it again and to get feedback from everyone else once it's in release since I'm not entirely, 100% convinced of how I feel about it all just yet. I think the 8/10 will stand, mostly because, for me, about 80% of the movie works.

And, yes, I am an Event Movie junkie. :wink:


:P

Another one has fallen to the dark side of the force.
Image
User avatar
Leckomaniac
AIRWOLF PLUS
 
Posts: 11031
Joined: Sat Aug 13, 2005 9:32 pm
Location: Chicago, IL

Re: WATCHMEN (SPOILERS FOR REALIES!): Now w/ poll

Postby Lord Voldemoo on Tue Feb 24, 2009 2:11 am

MasterWhedon wrote:And, yes, I am an Event Movie junkie. :wink:


So am I. I think i gave Cloverfield an 11/10.

But dammit, I had a lot of fun watching that movie. With some films I think the initial reaction is actually worth more than the view in retrospect.
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: WATCHMEN (SPOILERS FOR REALIES!): Now w/ poll

Postby Ribbons on Tue Feb 24, 2009 2:51 am

Co-third!
User avatar
Ribbons
SQUARE PEG
 
Posts: 14021
Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2005 2:00 am

Re: WATCHMEN (SPOILERS FOR REALIES!): Now w/ poll

Postby Pacino86845 on Tue Feb 24, 2009 11:48 am

I gave Cloverfield a 5/10, and I too stand by my initial reaction!
User avatar
Pacino86845
EGYPTIAN LOVER
 
Posts: 14064
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2005 5:20 am

Re: WATCHMEN (SPOILERS FOR REALIES!): Now w/ poll

Postby Cpt Kirks 2pay on Tue Feb 24, 2009 11:52 am

I should be seeing this at the weekend. Ferrchrissakes, I hope its worth it, I'm so wound up about it if you were to touch me (there) I'd unravel so fast you'd tihnk you're witnessing a new movie by the Wachowskis.
User avatar
Cpt Kirks 2pay
The Dark Tower
 
Posts: 16623
Joined: Fri Jul 22, 2005 10:49 am

Re: WATCHMEN (SPOILERS FOR REALIES!): Now w/ poll

Postby Lord Voldemoo on Tue Feb 24, 2009 11:56 am

Cpt Kirks 2pay wrote:I should be seeing this at the weekend. Ferrchrissakes, I hope its worth it, I'm so wound up about it if you were to touch me (there) I'd unravel so fast you'd tihnk you're witnessing a new movie by the Wachowskis.


back for 10 seconds and already with an image burned into my consciousness...

Welcome back Kirks!
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: WATCHMEN (SPOILERS FOR REALIES!): Now w/ poll

Postby Cpt Kirks 2pay on Tue Feb 24, 2009 12:01 pm

I'd say it's good to be back, but some have been besmirching Ellen in my absence. THERE WILL BE JUSTICE!!!

Personally I'll be watching this hoping to get a glance at blue dude's cock and will rate it solely on that.
User avatar
Cpt Kirks 2pay
The Dark Tower
 
Posts: 16623
Joined: Fri Jul 22, 2005 10:49 am

Re: WATCHMEN (SPOILERS FOR REALIES!): Now w/ poll

Postby Worst Part's Almost Over on Tue Feb 24, 2009 12:34 pm

Welcome back Kirk!! :D

Can someone do me a huge favour? I'm at work and the Empire website won't load on these computers for some reason. Would some lovely bugger please copy and paste their review to the thread for me?? Please??
Image
User avatar
Worst Part's Almost Over
AIRWOLF
 
Posts: 1585
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2005 6:35 am

Re: WATCHMEN (SPOILERS FOR REALIES!): Now w/ poll

Postby Seppuku on Tue Feb 24, 2009 12:38 pm

Empire wrote:Recently quizzed on his expectations for the movie adaptation of his hallowed graphic novel Watchmen, Alan Moore — shaman, philosopher, citizen of Northampton and visionary comic-book auteur — was heard to sigh. “Do we need any more shitty films in this world?” he grumbled not-unreasonably. After all, a muddled V For Vendetta and the gigantic snafu that was The League Of Extraordinary Gentlemen had led him to finally cut all ties (including financial) with the movie world. Let them do what they will, just don’t involve me. He concluded his diatribe with the simple remonstration that Watchmen, his masterwork, was “inherently unfilmable”.

Which is not exactly encouraging for a director attempting their dream project. But Zack Snyder, hot from his stylised-if-juvenile adaptation of Frank Miller’s 300, is a determined man. Even if Moore had turned his back, Snyder was one of the faithful, Watchmen his Bible, and would treat it with a care unprecedented in the annals of Hollywood screw-ups. Every sinew of directorial effort has been bent on proving the author wrong.
Equal parts celebration, parody and exotic dissembling of an entire industry, the novel is dizzy with storytelling devices: not just comic-strips, but biographical chapters, diaries, newspaper reports, poetry quotations, medical files and a warped, ultra-violent story-within-a-story called Tales Of The Black Freighter (sensibly siphoned off by Snyder into an accompanying animated DVD release). It was less the Citizen Kane of graphic novels than the Ulysses — a vortex of astonishing ideas that could take you years to fully compute. Stick that into two hours of family entertainment then, Zack…

In this gloomy, alternative Nixonian America, an outcast superhero has been tossed out of his apartment window. Still, The Comedian, former member of the disbanded Watchmen, has some ugly secrets. Rorschach, a paranoid sleuth whose ink-blot mask eerily ebbs and flows with his moods, can smell conspiracy, but his fellow ex-Watchmen are hard to convince. Ultra-brain Ozymandias is locked away in his ivory tower solving the energy crisis, Nite Owl and Silk Spectre are fretting over freakish pasts, while Dr. Manhattan — the only genuine superhero, having been blasted in a freak atomic accident — has become detached from human emotion, capable of knowing his future and travelling to Mars on a whim.
It’s a whodunnit, although what exactly has been done is hard to say. It’s an action movie heavy on dialogue, although the movie styles up the punch-ups into slow-mo montages slickly edited to effective if anomalous tunes — a Snyder predilection that can lean towards the wearily hip. It’s an origin story, or rather five origin stories flashbacking through time. It’s a bleak, rangy tale of a planet beset with disorder, a parable about power, and a superhero soap that shuttles between multiple story arcs that almost divides the film into comic-book cells.

Greater reputations than Snyder’s have wrestled with the beast to no avail. Terry Gilliam, no stranger to whirling structures and otherworldliness, couldn’t figure it out. Paul Greengrass, no stranger to political subtexts and propulsive action, was abandoned by a sceptical studio. Amid the mud-hurling of the recent court case, the script was accused of being an “unintelligible piece of shit”.

That Snyder has gotten a version to the screen at all is a triumph. He has found a way — although this is 160 minutes of a dense, geek-orientated blockbuster for grown-ups. Inevitably, but hardly catastrophically, it fails to truly capture the cascade of ideas and bracing cynicism of Moore’s writing. Yet there is a challenging, visually stunning and memorable movie here, moored halfway towards achieving the impossible.

It will also inevitably be judged from two angles: what it means for those that have read the comic-book, and those who will enter the cinema unequipped, say, with the history of the Minutemen, predecessors of the Watchmen, or the nature of Bubastis, Ozymandias’ genetically mutated lynx. Snyder nearly manages a film for both, but errs to the former. While necessarily filleting down the vast story to something palatable for human bladders, he is slavish to the original text. In his desire to encompass the novel’s strands, storylines and their payoffs are short-changed, leaving the film emotionally subdued, more an intellectual mystery than natural thriller.
And there is no compromising for the junior dollar: arms are snapped, heads hatcheted, and Viet-Cong splattered like flies by Dr. Manhattan, while Silk Spectre keeps her kinky boots on during mid-flight coitus. The entire atmosphere, dunking the cleaner lines of the novel into a pungently vivid, rain-sloshed superhero noir, lacquered in blood stains and midnight shadows, is superbly realised, a true world-unto-itself far more stimulating than Iron Man’s Windowlened sparkle or even The Dark Knight’s shimmering, Michael Mann-ish nightscapes.

In boldly keeping the book’s (then contemporary) 1985 setting fraught with Cold War paranoia — the plot teeters on the brink of nuclear war — the film becomes a less urgent period-piece. The political spine is now cute, as America taunts the Soviets as it has Dr. Manhattan as the ultimate deterrent. A hairless blue man with it all hanging out, he comes care of a mo-capped Billy Crudup that’s about 70 per cent successful — much better in close-up than the distracting mid-shots dominated by his blurry-blue CG cock.

Of all the Watchmen, it is Rorschach and Nite Owl who are most successful. Jackie Earle Haley finds the leery, psychopathic heartbeart of the faceless Bogart, and you half-wish Snyder might have stuck with Rorschach as protagonist rather than spreading the net so wide. No doubt the purists would have wailed. Patrick Wilson, too, is just right as the tortured Owl, a hero bereft in his own identity. It is Mathew Goode as oddball Ozymandias, and Malin Ackerman as Silk Spectre who botch line-readings, ill-at-ease in latex that is part suit and part joke.

Which should tell you Snyder has caught the novel’s provocative mindset. Fundamentally, Moore was asking how a universe of costumed crime fighters might actually work. A quest borrowed by Nolan for his Batman rethink. Here, though, there is dark satire: Batman (now Nite Owl) can’t get it up, impotent without his suit on; Wonder Woman (now Silk Spectre) carries the mountain of her mother’s guilt (a previous Silk Spectre marooned in old age); Superman (now Dr. Manhattan) has taken on the unreachable guise of a god. Best of all, there is Philip Marlowe (now Rorschach), with his do-or-die morality and Taxi Driver voiceover, the most hideously human of the bunch. Holed up in the clink, the inmates try to dispose of the despised crime-fighter. Unmasked and dead-eyed, Earle Haley turns to his foe and, shortly before dousing him in boiling chip studly, chillingly delivers Moore’s deathly magic: “None of you understand. I’m not locked up in here with you. You’re locked up in here with… ME!” And he’s the hero.

Verdict
Okay, it isn’t the graphic novel, but Zack Snyder clearly gives a toss, creating a smart, stylish, decent adaptation, if low on accessibility for the non-convert

4/5 Empires.
Dale Tremont Presents...

Image
User avatar
Seppuku
SWINGING PLASTIC LION
 
Posts: 7872
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2005 2:52 am
Location: Limeyland

Re: WATCHMEN (SPOILERS FOR REALIES!): Now w/ poll

Postby Worst Part's Almost Over on Tue Feb 24, 2009 12:50 pm

I love you Sep!! :mrgreen:
Image
User avatar
Worst Part's Almost Over
AIRWOLF
 
Posts: 1585
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2005 6:35 am

Re: WATCHMEN (SPOILERS FOR REALIES!): Now w/ poll

Postby Pacino86845 on Tue Feb 24, 2009 1:08 pm

That's a pretty good review, so was Whedo's in fact... I think at this point I *might* be satisfied with the end product, which for a film adaptation of Watchmen is probably the best we can get. Bonus points if it holds up as its own film... it's been a while since I've (re)read the graphic novel, so hopefully I'll be able to have a mildly fresh perspective on the film.
User avatar
Pacino86845
EGYPTIAN LOVER
 
Posts: 14064
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2005 5:20 am

Re: WATCHMEN (SPOILERS FOR REALIES!): Now w/ poll

Postby Lord Voldemoo on Tue Feb 24, 2009 1:09 pm

Pacino86845 wrote:That's a pretty good review, so was Whedo's in fact... I think at this point I *might* be satisfied with the end product, which for a film adaptation of Watchmen is probably the best we can get. Bonus points if it holds up as its own film... it's been a while since I've (re)read the graphic novel, so hopefully I'll be able to have a mildly fresh perspective on the film.


you've touched upon my dilemma...

to re-read or not to re-read. That is the question...

I was talking earlier about wanting a fresh perspective as well...but I'm still leaning toward re-reading the GN before the film comes out.
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: WATCHMEN (SPOILERS FOR REALIES!): Now w/ poll

Postby MasterWhedon on Tue Feb 24, 2009 1:33 pm

The first thing I wanted to do once I left the theater was checking out the comic again. Unfortunately, it's still loaned out to a buddy who I'm fairly certain will never return it.

Also, just thought I'd point out that the clips they've released are not 100% the film version. I noticed in the Rorschach vs. cops clip and the Nite Owl/Silk Spectre vs. burning building clip that they both play out a little longer in the film version. The action is the same, but they trim a few frames here and there to make it a 90-second clip when it probably really plays out at something like 105 seconds. It's not that big a difference, but the scenes do flow a little better at their proper length. (I've noticed this same trend in other movie as well.)
User avatar
MasterWhedon
KEEPER OF THE PURSE
 
Posts: 9473
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2005 9:07 pm
Location: Los Angeles

Re: WATCHMEN (SPOILERS FOR REALIES!): Now w/ poll

Postby Worst Part's Almost Over on Tue Feb 24, 2009 1:42 pm

Lord Voldemoo wrote:to re-read or not to re-read. That is the question...


I re-read Watchmen at least once every 3 months. Never plan to, just seem to be compelled to do so. It never gets old or dull to read, for some reason.
Image
User avatar
Worst Part's Almost Over
AIRWOLF
 
Posts: 1585
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2005 6:35 am

Re: WATCHMEN (SPOILERS FOR REALIES!): Now w/ poll

Postby tapehead on Tue Feb 24, 2009 5:48 pm

I'll loan you some new books if you like.
User avatar
tapehead
BALLS!!!
 
Posts: 9427
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2005 2:13 pm
Location: OZ

Re: WATCHMEN (SPOILERS FOR REALIES!): Now w/ poll

Postby Heyoucantlaughatthat on Tue Feb 24, 2009 6:40 pm

Tomatometer is filling up, for those who are interested!

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/watchmen/

I'm thinking Watchmen will settle in the mid-80's range. That's where it is now.
Image
User avatar
Heyoucantlaughatthat
CHEETS ON HIS WIFE
 
Posts: 306
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 2:59 pm

Re: WATCHMEN (SPOILERS FOR REALIES!): Now w/ poll

Postby Seppuku on Tue Feb 24, 2009 6:51 pm

Heyoucantlaughatthat wrote:Tomatometer is filling up, for those who are interested!

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/watchmen/

I'm thinking Watchmen will settle in the mid-80's range. That's where it is now.


Considering the one negative review comes from The News of the World, I'd say that counts as 100% right now.
Dale Tremont Presents...

Image
User avatar
Seppuku
SWINGING PLASTIC LION
 
Posts: 7872
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2005 2:52 am
Location: Limeyland

Re: WATCHMEN (SPOILERS FOR REALIES!): Now w/ poll

Postby Leckomaniac on Tue Feb 24, 2009 8:47 pm

H@rry and Quint were fans.

Shall we now start an official review thread?
Image
User avatar
Leckomaniac
AIRWOLF PLUS
 
Posts: 11031
Joined: Sat Aug 13, 2005 9:32 pm
Location: Chicago, IL

(Watching The) WATCHMEN! Reviews & Spoilers!

Postby Seppuku on Tue Feb 24, 2009 8:56 pm

Done! And with a rather fitting first post if you ask me.

I'll leave the poll and the cleaning up to someone a little more awake.
Dale Tremont Presents...

Image
User avatar
Seppuku
SWINGING PLASTIC LION
 
Posts: 7872
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2005 2:52 am
Location: Limeyland

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

Postby RogueScribner on Wed Feb 25, 2009 1:47 am

Mori's and Quint's reviews are getting me psyched for this movie. I own the graphic novel, but I won't be rereading it before I see the movie. A movie should be an experience unto itself. It needs to work as an experience first and faithful adaptation second.
My eye isn't lazy; it's ambidextrous!
User avatar
RogueScribner
The Dork Avenger
 
Posts: 9609
Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2005 3:52 am
Location: Melbourne, FL

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

Postby Cpt Kirks 2pay on Wed Feb 25, 2009 4:12 am

I've decided to review this without any previous knowledge of the comic book or film in SLOW MOTION!!!

WHAATTAMOVIE. It has everything from action to commmmmmedy, to high drama, and everything in betweeeeeeeeeeeeeen. Some superhero dude gets killed, and then a buuuuuuuuuuunch of ironic other superheroes with a passssssssssing resemblence to other actual suppppppperheroes (except not actual because they don't exist), get all emotional and a bunch of fellas get killed in sloooooooooooooooooooooooooooow motion. A few chiiiiiiiiiiiiiiicks in tight suits feel up the blue dude, who's a scientist who had an accident that turned him into a Gooooooooooooood, and he acts all disinterested yet still manages to get invooooooooooooolved. Some other duuuuuuuuuuude is rich and pretends to be a superhero, another guy dressffffffffffffffes as an owl and gets a bit confused, another guy has a face that won't FARKING SIT STILL FOR MORE THAN A FARKING SECOND!!! WHAT THE FUXXAKES IS HE MEANT TO BE? IS HE SUPER? He's psychotic and does looooooooooooads of shit and his face looks like Ellen Page for a few seconds before turing into that chick from Vicky Christina Barcelona. Then his head comes ooooooooooooooff and rolls around on its own, someone flies a spacecraft, and loads of cool shit happens in SLOW MOTTTIOOOONNNNN!!!!!!! AT NO POINT DURING THIS FILM DID MY ARSE FEEL UNCOMFORTABLE, because I didn't see it with Lugzy and haven't seen it yet.

I GIVE IT FIVE OUT OF FIVE PANCAKES!!!!!ELLEN BE PRAISED!!!!!!
User avatar
Cpt Kirks 2pay
The Dark Tower
 
Posts: 16623
Joined: Fri Jul 22, 2005 10:49 am

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

Postby Pacino86845 on Wed Feb 25, 2009 11:53 am

Cpt Kirks 2pay wrote:another guy has a face that won't FARKING SIT STILL FOR MORE THAN A FARKING SECOND!!! WHAT THE FUXXAKES IS HE MEANT TO BE? IS HE SUPER? He's psychotic and does looooooooooooads of shit and his face looks like Ellen Page


Funny, we say the same thing about you.
User avatar
Pacino86845
EGYPTIAN LOVER
 
Posts: 14064
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2005 5:20 am

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

Postby Cpt Kirks 2pay on Wed Feb 25, 2009 12:23 pm

That my face looks like ellen page?

I don't know whevva to take that as a complement or start trying to bone my nostrils.
User avatar
Cpt Kirks 2pay
The Dark Tower
 
Posts: 16623
Joined: Fri Jul 22, 2005 10:49 am

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

Postby Seppuku on Wed Feb 25, 2009 12:25 pm

Cpt Kirks 2pay wrote:That my face looks like ellen page?

I don't know whevva to take that as a complement or start trying to bone my nostrils.


Wait, so you're tapehead too? Just how many alts do you have?!
Dale Tremont Presents...

Image
User avatar
Seppuku
SWINGING PLASTIC LION
 
Posts: 7872
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2005 2:52 am
Location: Limeyland

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

Postby Cpt Kirks 2pay on Wed Feb 25, 2009 4:14 pm

I SEE WHAT YOU'RE DOING!!! Trying to turn the conversation in on itself so it's about MEEEEE.

Well tough! I won't stand for this kind of attention whoring any longer!!! Let's talk about the Watchman - think there'll be camel toe?
User avatar
Cpt Kirks 2pay
The Dark Tower
 
Posts: 16623
Joined: Fri Jul 22, 2005 10:49 am

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

Postby DennisMM on Wed Feb 25, 2009 10:34 pm

I propose an automatic post deletion for anyone who refers to this movie (or the book) as Watchman or The Watchmen.

C'mon, mods, back me up.
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 tapehead on Wed Feb 25, 2009 11:36 pm

Seppuku wrote:
Cpt Kirks 2pay wrote:That my face looks like ellen page?

I don't know whevva to take that as a complement or start trying to bone my nostrils.


Wait, so you're tapehead too? Just how many alts do you have?!


I resemble that implication.
User avatar
tapehead
BALLS!!!
 
Posts: 9427
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2005 2:13 pm
Location: OZ

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

Postby Docventure on Thu Feb 26, 2009 4:46 am

I'm just curious on whether or not Rorschach's death gets the attention it deserves. In the novel, I hated how after Rorschach died, hehehe,, there was no mention, no reaction from Nite Owl, just Dr. Manhattan walking away like he just took the dog out to pee. I've always wanted a chance to grieve Rorschach and I hope the movie focuses on it a bit more than the novel did. Will we feel the heartbreak? The wrenching? Will people who have never read the novel cry out in despair upon seeing Rorschach atomized? How bloody will it be?

Questions questions! I can't freakin wait. Quint and Harry's reviews made it hard to sleep last night.
Nothing of me is original. I am the combined effort of everybody I've ever known.
Image
User avatar
Docventure
GLIB
 
Posts: 8
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2009 4:07 am
Location: Anaheim, CA

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

Postby Cpt Kirks 2pay on Thu Feb 26, 2009 8:08 am

Your cock in my ass made it hard for me to sleep last night. OR WAS IT YOU? OR WAS IT TAPEHEAD!!! NOOOOOO!!! GET OUT OF MY ASS!!!! I don't want your pimply ozzie cock infecting my anal regions, it's purely for the COLANAL LUGZZZZZZZZZZZ!!!!

Out tomorrow. It'll be shit. LIKE EVERY FUCKING FILM THIS FORUM CLAMOURS FOR!!! YOU'LL SEE!!!
User avatar
Cpt Kirks 2pay
The Dark Tower
 
Posts: 16623
Joined: Fri Jul 22, 2005 10:49 am

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

Postby ukkoparis on Thu Feb 26, 2009 12:15 pm

I've seen it and I'm a huge fan of the graphic novel. I really enjoyed it. Check this out!

(No spoilers)

http://volume124.wordpress.com/2009/02/ ... ck-snyder/

8-)
ukkoparis
GLIB
 
Posts: 2
Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2008 6:30 am

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

Postby BlueHawaiiSurfer on Fri Feb 27, 2009 11:32 am

Ok I'm not as smart as most of you (I'll spell a few words wrong, lol) and I don't write reviews but I just watched about 8 clips from different scenes in the movie and I'll tell you (spoiler free) what I liked and didn't like. Like Harry I was in high school when the original books hit. His comments about what it was like to wait for each issue sort of took me back to that time, very cool stuff. I love the Watchmen, have read it many times over the years but I'm not one of these guys who can quote every line or obsesses over every small point in the books. Here are the scenes I saw.
About three different clips of Rorschach talking to the Owl. These were probably my favorite scenes. They seem to really capture the characters and how I pictured they would look/sound on the big screen. The LOOK of the film is never an issue, I'll get to the rest in a bit. These two actors seem to really play naturally and interact well with each other. Jack Haley BY FAR is the best actor from what I have seen.
There were 3 or 4 scenes of Dr. Manhattan. One scene of him lifting the tank and taking it apart. This happens exactly the way I remember it from the book and looks stunning. Billy Crudup also seems to do a really nice job with the character. Once again most of these scenes, some from the trailer just lengthened, play out exactly as I remember them. Still no worries.
There were two scenes with the Comedian. Now here is where the worm starts to turn, for ME anyway. Jeff Morgan seems to do a nice job with the role, not exactly what I pictured but the over the top style seems to fit well with the character. It's just "OK" for me. The scene with the original Crimebusters where he burns the map, not bad.
The scene that really bothered me and made my hopes drop was Laurie visiting her mother during Eddie's funeral. The acting by Carla Gugino (Silk Spectre I) was just awful. It took me right out of the scene and gave me a horrible depressing feeling.
The other scene I didn't care for, which I should have, was the owl ship (Arnie? That what they named him? I always forget) dropping down to do riot control with the Comedian. The music playing was Boogie Man, the old 70's disco hit. Once again, took me right out of the scene. The music just seemed REALLY out of place and didn't work for me.
Once again I'm no expert movie reviewer or Watchmen fanbois but I'm seeing signs now that this isn't going to be what I thought it was. Not horrible, but I think some opportunities were missed with directing the actors and selecting the music to set the mood in some of the scenes I saw. So there ya go, light me up, lol. I'll still be there opening day on IMAX but I'm starting lose my "GEEK ON" for this project.
Image
User avatar
BlueHawaiiSurfer
TOMBOY BEANPOLE
 
Posts: 32
Joined: Tue Jan 06, 2009 11:40 am

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

Postby Spandau Belly on Fri Feb 27, 2009 12:01 pm

I'm pretty excited to see this, I'm already a bald bodybuilding type guy so I think I'll show up dressed as Doc Manhattan and just go au natural with some blue body paint and ensure a nice three row buffer around me in the cinema.
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 Peven on Fri Feb 27, 2009 5:55 pm

so now we are reviewing movies based on promotional clips? what is next, a review based on the initial teaser?
Image

perversely contrarian since 2005
Peven
Is This Real Life?
 
Posts: 14701
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2005 10:45 am
Location: Group W bench

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

Postby Spandau Belly on Fri Feb 27, 2009 6:26 pm

Peven wrote:so now we are reviewing movies based on promotional clips? what is next, a review based on the initial teaser?


I thought the font they wrote "coming soon" in was total bullshit and a cop-out to pander to the illiterate masses. Epic fail.
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 Fri Feb 27, 2009 6:30 pm

WATCHMEN

Australian/NZ release: March 5

Before I get started, I'm going to give a very brief rundown for those who don't want to read the entire review: it's very, very, very good. Not a sublime work of perfection, but probably as close to brilliant as we're likely to get. 9 out of 10, verging on the high end of 9.

Now to the review proper. I'm afraid I have no deep, personal story about how "Watchmen" shaped my childhood. As a matter of fact, I didn't really read any comics until a couple of years ago when I became friends with some comic geeks who introduced me to the best of the genre. "Watchmen" was amongst them, and reading it was certainly the key moment when I realised that comic strips could be literature.

That said, I have no particular emotional tie to the source material. I didn't think we'd see it made into a film because I simply couldn't see how that story would be properly condensed without being either convoluted or a pale imitation of what made the book great. Director Zack Snyder and screenwriters David Hayter and Alex Tse deserve a lot of credit for managing to avoid both extremes. The film rockets along, and even the small moments feel exciting and dangerous. One of the reasons I've softened on TWILIGHT -- god, am I really name-checking TWILIGHT in a WATCHMEN review? -- is that TWILIGHT managed to create a real sense of place. It's not an easy thing to do, which is why we've seen the same version of New York in hundred of different films. WATCHMEN has a tremendous sense of place (but, unlike TWILIGHT, also makes the rest of the movie good as well), thanks to the unparalleled production design of Alex McDowell. Remember the other week when I was talking about non-directors being so good at what they do, they are essentially auteurs? (Thomas Newman in composing, Thelma Schoonmaker in editing, Charlie Kaufman in writing, etc...) I should have included McDowell on that list; the work he's done over his career, from THE CROW to FEAR AND LOATHING IN LAS VEGAS to FIGHT CLUB to THE TERMINAL, has been jaw-dropping, and THE WATCHMEN stands as a contender for his best work ever. It's truly stunning.

The casting, too, is largely brilliant. Billy Crudup's otherworldliness in portraying Dr Manhattan is neither over-the-top nor underplayed. It's such a perfect balance. The character could have been a parody, or they could have made him human and let his facade slip a little, but they didn't. They walked the line flawlessly; both in terms of FX and performance, Dr Manhattan is the standout of the film. Jeffrey Dean Morgan, Carla Gugino (even when her makeup makes her look like Stockard Channing), Malin Akerman, and especially Jackie Earle Haley are perfect in their roles. Haley is an inspired choice for Rorschach, and as with Comedian and Dr Manhattan, his character is not toned down at all to appeal to the masses. It's something I think I took for granted in the film, but as I write about it, I'm becoming aware of how many potential bullets this film avoided. It's actually quite remarkable how well they did it. The same goes for Patrick Wilson. I really dig Patrick Wilson, but I couldn't see him as Nite Owl. The casting just didn't fit for me. Boy, was I wrong. Wilson is unrecognisable; Nite Owl is exactly as he was in the book.

Matthew Goode as Adrian Veidt is very good, but I wish he was ten years older. There's nothing wrong his performance at all, but he's too young, too slim. This is a role that should have gone to a Jude Law or even a Tom Cruise; someone who still looks movie star immaculate, but looks like they've gone through the ringer a bit. This is one of the few roles that would have benefitted from Cruise's baggage. Still, Goode is... I don't want to make the nominative pun, but he is very, very surname. Just a tad miscast.

I'm glad I've been able to rave about the film for so much of the review. My tendency is, sometimes, to focus on the negative, even if that negative makes up an incredibly small percentage. As I said, I didn't realise how good the film is while I was watching it, because I expected it. I expected the Comedian to be violent and psychopathic; generally things only stand out when they're done wrong. So full credit to the 98% of the film that gets it right.

Zack Snyder really is the real deal, and the majority of his work in this is sublime. It's not perfect, however. For every The Times They Are A Chanin' montage, there's a sequence in Vietnam with Ride of the Valkyries over it. Really? Ride of the Valkyries? Is it a completely inappropriate homage, a lazy piece of direction, or a placeholder you forgot to change before release? It's a bizarre choice because it's so uniform and cliched, and stands out because the rest of the film isn't. And though I don't really love the use of the ramp-up, ramp-down style used to appropriate effect in 300, it doesn't overwhelm the film.

I am left to wonder how well this film is going to do. Not to be uber-cynical about it, but it's almost too good for the masses. I really don't know how it's going to play to people who haven't read the book and don't really know what to expect. Do people really want a big budget deconstruction of superheroes with moral ambiguity and unanswered questions? Even if it is as violent as this?

Make no mistake, the film is violent. There's violence, there's sex, there's naked Dr Manhattan. It really is truly impressive how much they've managed to keep from the book. Hat tip to Warners for not watering it down. Between this and the freedom they gave Christopher Nolan on DARK KNIGHT, DC properties might just have a chance to bounce back and rival Marvel.

Undoubtedly, this is THE comic book film of the year. I can't imagine the film being done much better than this, and even though I have minor quibbles, they are minor, and don't detract from what is a truly terrific film.
User avatar
Nachokoolaid
THE DORK KNIGHT
 
Posts: 5588
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2005 4:00 am
Location: Gotham City

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

Postby BlueHawaiiSurfer on Sun Mar 01, 2009 12:23 pm

He lost me at "they should have used Tom Cruise".
:o|
Image
User avatar
BlueHawaiiSurfer
TOMBOY BEANPOLE
 
Posts: 32
Joined: Tue Jan 06, 2009 11:40 am

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

Postby Seppuku on Sun Mar 01, 2009 1:25 pm

BlueHawaiiSurfer wrote:He lost me at "they should have used Tom Cruise".
:o|


Oh yeah, can you imagine Tom Cruise of all people playing a guy so isolated from the world he thinks he's the mouthpiece for the rest of humanity? :roll:

You've gotta admit, the dude can put in a good performance every now and then. I'm having trouble imagining him with blonde hair, though.
Dale Tremont Presents...

Image
User avatar
Seppuku
SWINGING PLASTIC LION
 
Posts: 7872
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2005 2:52 am
Location: Limeyland

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

Postby Retardo_Montalban on Sun Mar 01, 2009 1:57 pm

Peven wrote:so now we are reviewing movies based on promotional clips? what is next, a review based on the initial teaser?


I can review the movie based on a dream I had where Zack Snyder was lovingly raping Ron Moore, and Dennis was crying in the corner clutching his hard cover definitive Watchmen legacy edition of Watchmen.
Image
User avatar
Retardo_Montalban
doubleplusungood
 
Posts: 3682
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2005 12:28 am

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

Postby Peven on Sun Mar 01, 2009 2:01 pm

Retardo_Montalban wrote:
Peven wrote:so now we are reviewing movies based on promotional clips? what is next, a review based on the initial teaser?


I can review the movie based on a dream I had where Zack Snyder was lovingly raping Ron Moore, and Dennis was crying in the corner clutching his hard cover definitive Watchmen legacy edition of Watchmen.


that is a review i would be interested in reading
Image

perversely contrarian since 2005
Peven
Is This Real Life?
 
Posts: 14701
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2005 10:45 am
Location: Group W bench

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

Postby Spandau Belly on Sun Mar 01, 2009 4:33 pm

Seppuku wrote:
BlueHawaiiSurfer wrote:He lost me at "they should have used Tom Cruise".
:o|


Oh yeah, can you imagine Tom Cruise of all people playing a guy so isolated from the world he thinks he's the mouthpiece for the rest of humanity? :roll:

You've gotta admit, the dude can put in a good performance every now and then. I'm having trouble imagining him with blonde hair, though.


I actually thought Cruise would've been a good choice for Roarschach. Cruise is good at playing assholes. He can play several different types of asshole. He can play the poser failure scumbag douche like in Rain Man, or the aggressive hugely insecure brand of dick like in Magnolia, or the schmucky yuppie asshole type like in Jerry Maguire, or the maniac mouthpiece like in Tropic Thunder, or the psycho fuckup asshole like in Collateral, or the cocky shit-eating grin asshole like in Interview With The Vampire. It goes on and on. He's got maniacs and assholes well covered.

But I'm cool with the casting choices they made for this movie. Pauly Shore might've been good as Doc Manhattan's penis, but other than that, it looks like a good roundup. I'll probably see it the week after it comes out so that I can avoid these trench-coat wearing ponytail types with no senses of humour that will be there ripping it to shreds while I'm trying to enjoy myself.
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 Pacino86845 on Sun Mar 01, 2009 6:19 pm

Peven wrote:
Retardo_Montalban wrote:
Peven wrote:so now we are reviewing movies based on promotional clips? what is next, a review based on the initial teaser?


I can review the movie based on a dream I had where Zack Snyder was lovingly raping Ron Moore, and Dennis was crying in the corner clutching his hard cover definitive Watchmen legacy edition of Watchmen.


that is a review i would be interested in reading


Does that dream have anything to do with the upcoming Watchmen/Battlestar Galactica cross-over?
User avatar
Pacino86845
EGYPTIAN LOVER
 
Posts: 14064
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2005 5:20 am

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

Postby Retardo_Montalban on Sun Mar 01, 2009 7:02 pm

Pacino86845 wrote:
Peven wrote:
Retardo_Montalban wrote:
Peven wrote:so now we are reviewing movies based on promotional clips? what is next, a review based on the initial teaser?


I can review the movie based on a dream I had where Zack Snyder was lovingly raping Ron Moore, and Dennis was crying in the corner clutching his hard cover definitive Watchmen legacy edition of Watchmen.


that is a review i would be interested in reading


Does that dream have anything to do with the upcoming Watchmen/Battlestar Galactica cross-over?

Hahaha, Oh shit, Dennis will never respect me again after that Freudian slip. that should be amended to Alan Moore. Then again, seeing as both Ron and Alan are long haired beardy men, I could easily confuse the two in a dream state. They both write bitchin' sci-fi as well.
Image
User avatar
Retardo_Montalban
doubleplusungood
 
Posts: 3682
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2005 12:28 am

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

Postby DennisMM on Sun Mar 01, 2009 8:20 pm

Nah, I just wondered about the crossover. And I wouldn't be crying. I'd be slamming my Absolute edition against Snyder's ear.
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

Next

Return to Movie Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

cron