Hey guys, Watchmen comes out tomorrow, who's going to see it? I'm going to a special screening tomorrow night at around midnight, can't wait to see if it lives up to the hype or not. Dunno much about the graphic novel, but it's got a great director, and the trailers look great, so I've got high hopes. What are your thoughts?
I'm no comic geek, but the graphic novel is great stuff. I first read it when it came out, and recently reread it. I think the hardcore guys won't like the necessary changes, but as long as it hangs together it should be pretty good. I have tickets for the 11:00 showing tomorrow morning. I figured that was early enough to miss the crowds, and they guys who paint themselves blue will be at the midnight showing tonight
Im in for the midnight show tomorrow. Ive read the script and know the changes and I think almost all of them are for the best. Some things simply dont translate well. But yes there will always be some ubergeeks who are never happy. What Im curious to see is if the general public 'gets it' and it does good B.O. beyond the first week or so. Im expecting an instant classic and I cant stand Snyders 300.
Ok, for fans of the graphic novel and bad 80s TV cartoons http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YDDHHrt6l4w No, it's not an official anything, but funny as heck.
Saw it.. Fantastic show! Aside from the numerous Crank Shots, I Really Liked it! BTW.. Im beginning to think The Director loves naked men!
Has anyone who read the graphic novel watched it yet? What are your impressions? I don't think the movie will manage to aptly replicate the complicated plot of the graphic novel, but it'll still be awesome to see Rorschach kicking butt.
I've haven't seen it yet, this was one of the first "graphic novel' I got into as a kid besides Frank Miller's the Dark Knight.
Saw it tonight. Didn't like it. I guess not ever reading the novel/comics or even ever hearing the name before, it was hard to really get into it and relate. Bust my balls all you want, felt like it was hyped a lot.
I have to say I'm disappointed. Not because of any difference between the movie and the comic, because I haven't read the whole comic. At the core, there was a great storyline. While I disagree with the overarching morality of the storyline (probably due to my fundamental differences with the mind of Alan Moore), growing up in the 80's I "get" the sentiment and the whole US/USSR/die by nukes stuff. There were some great martial arts fight scenes and some good story turns. The quality of production is high, although there were 4-5 CGI cityscape shots that were actually not that well rendered and lit (looked like 1999's CGI). That said, there were several scenes of violence and sexual content that were far too graphic - moreso than the story needed. I think people are getting into the graphic gore these days with all the cheap horror that is popular. The Dark Knight had lots of violence but it was shot in a way that didn't show the gore, and I think that lets you re-focus on the story, rather than the shock of watching someone's arms sawed off. And while not sexual, yes, for some reason they have 329 shots of Dr. Manhattan's penis. Ok, he's naked. Got that. But every scene didn't need it all out there. It's called framing the shot - aim the camera from the waist up if you had to. Ultimately, I wouldn't recommend it to anyone. Then again, maybe I should have known what I was dealing with, since I saw about 10 minutes of 300 and wouldn't recommend that to anyone either, for the same reasons I say pass on The Watchmen.
I am sorry to say but this movie sucked. It was so bad that I actually left the movie about 3/4 into it.
From my understanding, the character's didn't have any 'superpowers', it seemed they were just incredibly strong.
Ive been a fan of the graphic novel since it came out and I saw the film last night. I loved it. I especially love that they didnt water it down to cater to the general public. Its a dark story told without a typical Hollywood resolution. Its a story that is not black and white, but portrays everything in shades of gray. I find it ironic that this story about superheroes portrays humans much closer to real life than most films set in real life. Having said that, this is a film that should have never been made. It is not for general audience consumption. Problem is most people want to see a superhero film not a social commentary. The trailers are misleading to get butts in the seats and I heard a lot of grumbling about how slow it was. Many people found Manhattens nudity distracting...and I agree with Ryan they should have framed it out more, however (and I know Ryan understands this) the point was to show how disconnected from humanity he is. Unfortunately most people arent going to get it. Watchmen is probably the most expensive art film ever made. Reminds me of Lynchs Dune in many ways. As a creative person I applaud the balls it took to make it...as a business person I would fire whoever greenlit it.
Thats really incidental. Watchmen was created as a social commentary and an examination of the human condition wrapped in the deconstruction fo the super hero genre.
I had another beef with it, which I am going to venture to propose that Jerry will agree with me: there was WAY too much CGI use for SFX that didn't need it. Particularly the blood - all blood appeared to be computer generated. And even the broken bones - I mean, come on, Steven Seagal made an entire career snapping prosthetic arms the 'wrong' way, you're telling me in a $100m+ movie they have to simulate broken bones in a fight with computer (and not very well blended, either)?
Yeah but I expected it. Snyder is one of those directors that needs to control every element in every frame...even drops of blood.
This Wired review sums it up for me more professionally: In fact, that last paragraph was my exact thought as I walked out of the theater, and looked at the people (mostly 20-30 males) who were gushing about how awesome they thought the movie was. I don't think they "got" the elements of the human nature commentary, they saw some dude have his arms sawed off. I don't know why it bothers me so much, but I just feel duped as someone who read the storyline online, a few of the issues, and had watched the Apple Store trailer a dozen times in eager anticipation. Snyder took something that was supposed to be cerebral and ethically challenging, which is what I had been anticipating, and turned it in to 'torture porn.'
Id have to disagree. The gore, while not always necessary, certainly didnt diminish the story that was there in full. It was still cerebral and ethically challenging. And violence IS not pretty and I think Snyder felt that was an important subtext. I think if the gore took you out of the movie you might be more sensitive to it than most people in the Watchmen demographic. I for one didnt really notice anything over the top except for the arm bit. They rest I felt served the story.
The movie was WAYYYY toooo long, and dull. I couldn't wait for it to end. Now, my friends, who are watchmen geeks, loved it. I thought it was very boring. I guess it is supposed to be the work that changed comics, but for something so important it left me feeling like I wasted 3 hours.....
+1 It was a good popcorn flick. I would see it again. I think too many people are taking it too serious... its a "Comic Book" most people who didnt like the movie would rather read the NY Times then a good brainless comic! .02
The problem stems from the fact that Watchmen is over 20 years old and everyone and their grandmother has now ripped it off to where its not 'groundbreaking' to people just discovering it in 2009. But in 1986...man that was lifechanging to a teenager like myself.
Saw the movie last night, I have not read the series. There were a lot of things I enjoyed about the movie and some I didn't: - First off: after about the third time, I found Dr. Manhattans big blue dong rather distracting. Yes, Mr. Snyder, we get that becoming omnipotent would make anyone out of touch, but it became gratuitous. -I LOVED the way many shots were framed. Having never read the book (I started today) there were some shots that I could tell were ripped straight from panels. -Maybe it's it a function of the source material but I thought the pacing was rather disjointed it seemed to speed up and slow down on a whim -The opening credits were AWESOME, really drew me into the world and was just really well done piece of film. Just my two cents. I think I'm going to have to see it again to take it all in.
Well, I haven't seen it yet, but I was able to talk my wife into going with me only BECAUSE I told her there were gratuitous big-blue-dong shots. Seriously I plan on seeing it tomorrow or early this week, just have to arrange babysitters. Never read the GN, but it looks really good.
