Watchmen - Spoilers like a Psychic Undersea Gargant!

Rot your brains, then rot our boards

Moderators: SecondTalon, Moderators General, Prelates

Klapaucius
Posts: 712
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2008 11:00 pm UTC

Re: I am joyous. (Watchmen.)

Postby Klapaucius » Mon Feb 23, 2009 11:25 pm UTC

Jack Saladin wrote:... It is a damn good book, but it's hugely overhyped. Especially so on xkcd, for some reason. It's not even close to being as intelligent, deep, and most especially original as a lot of people claim it is.

But if all the comics you've read are Spiderman and Action Comics, I guess it would seem like the best thing around.
I feel the same way about xkcd. It's a damn good comic, but hugely overhyped. Especially so on xkcd, for some reason. It's not even close to being as intelligent, deep, and most especially original as a lot of people claim it is.

But if all the comics you've read are Garfield and Dilbert, I guess it would seem like the best thing around.
500%!

User avatar
mosc
Doesn't care what you think.
Posts: 5403
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 3:03 pm UTC

Re: I am joyous. (Watchmen.)

Postby mosc » Mon Feb 23, 2009 11:31 pm UTC

Stabable Offense wrote:I think that watching the movie before reading the book is always a good bet. That way when you're watching the movie you don't have the burden of oh this isn't nearly as good as the book even if it would be good on its own. So instead of the book just being good you can enjoy both.
The Fellowship of the Ring blew me away in ways I could not imagine. Seriously. That wouldn't have been possible if I hadn't read the book before. I think the only reason this movie is not even more highly regarded is because when it came out, many people had/have not read the book. When I was leaving the theatre, there were SEVERAL people who said "That's it?". Obviously they had no idea what the books were.

Fellowship was staggering in how it was able to take things from the book and bring them to life. The scene near the beginning where the hobbits first encounter the black rider is so amazing. The road warping to it's dark will. The ring calling out and it's inexplicable pull on frodo. The "wraith world" he sees when he puts it on. Blew me away.

I guess you could say it was cool for people who had never read the book(s) too but I certainly appreciated the awesomeness of that scene on many more levels knowing what was to come of frodo and his magic ring as the story progressed. Similarly, when watchmen starts, I will be waiting for them to show John in action. It seems a very challenging task. I will be waiting for the "impossible to get right" ending to be played out too. I can't seem them getting that right but hey, I couldn't see them getting ring wraiths right either and they fucking NAILED that one.
Title: It was given by the XKCD moderators to me because they didn't care what I thought (I made some rantings, etc). I care what YOU think, the joke is forums.xkcd doesn't care what I think.

User avatar
Various Varieties
Posts: 505
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2008 7:24 pm UTC

Re: I am joyous. (Watchmen.)

Postby Various Varieties » Tue Feb 24, 2009 12:08 am UTC

Lew Stringer posted this on his blog earlier today:

(Spoilered for image size, not because it's a spoiler for either the movie or comiic.)

Spoiler:
Image



Jack Saladin wrote:... It is a damn good book, but it's hugely overhyped. Especially so on xkcd, for some reason. It's not even close to being as intelligent, deep, and most especially original as a lot of people claim it is.

But, but... mirrored panel content in "Fearful Symmetry"! Layer upon layer of repeated compositional symbols and motifs like "Hiroshima Lovers"! Ironic juxtaposition of captions with images! Foreshadowing! And various other annotation-worthy techniques that mark it out as capital-L-Literature!

More seriously, Watchmen unquestionably uses a massive range of flashy (some might say self-indulgent) trickery that must have taken a hell of a lot of coordination between Moore and Gibbons. Whether that makes it "deep", I dunno, and it ain't a debate I want to get into. I just know that for me at least it makes it very interesting, a very impressive achievement, and very rereadable.



ED!T: Jonathan Ross has posted a few comments about the film on Twittter:
Watchman probably the most faitful adaptation of a comic to the big screen. Ending changed very much for the better.
Great sets, costumes, special effects - Rorshach especially good.
Downside - too long, too reverential, lacks pace and feels a little dull at times. In short - I love it and at same time am unimpressed !
Very graphic at times and then oddly crap at others ! Inconsistent.
Opening montage sequence to watchman just brilliant though. Had me grinning from ear to ear.
Non comic fans will be a bit confused. Dara O Brian was there and he said a lot of it went over his head.
The action beats are exactly as they occur in the novel. The problems lie elsewhere. i'll go into it on Film 2009.

User avatar
Macbi
Posts: 941
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 8:32 am UTC
Location: UKvia

Re: I am joyous. (Watchmen.)

Postby Macbi » Sat Feb 28, 2009 4:04 pm UTC

In the U.K. the film's been given an 18 rating. This sucks from my point of view, but it just goes to show that nothings been censored from the film. To quote the BBFC:
In WATCHMEN however there are a number of scenes that focus on strong detailed violence and its gory result. In one such example, a man is stabbed through the arm, with it forcefully twisted and broken as the knife is shown penetrating his arm and emerging from the other side. In another, a man is shown being struck in the head with a meat cleaver followed by repeated bloody sight of the cleaver striking the head. Both of these scenes, in addition to one or two others, were considered inappropriate at ‘15’ and better placed at the adult ‘18’ where detail of strong violence is permitted.

WATCHMEN also contains an attempted rape scene, strong language and sexual activity without strong detail.

Then again, neither of those scenes were in the book.
    Indigo is a lie.
    Which idiot decided that websites can't go within 4cm of the edge of the screen?
    There should be a null word, for the question "Is anybody there?" and to see if microphones are on.

Mr. Sluagh
Posts: 12
Joined: Sat Feb 14, 2009 5:00 am UTC

Re: I am joyous. (Watchmen.)

Postby Mr. Sluagh » Sun Mar 01, 2009 5:47 am UTC

Just saw an interview with Snyder and the main cast along with an extended clip of the beginning at WonderCon. Eerily accurate. Opens with a montage that was blatantly made for fans. It looks like the whole thing was made for fans. Jackie Earle Haley is a gushing nerd.

I am suspicious of everything about Ozymandias, though. Snyder tried to address the revamp of his costume (basically said the original was too fruity), but failed to explain the utter absence of the eye in the pyramid.

EDIT: Then again, personality-wise, Ozymandias was probably the least interesting and well-developed main character in Watchmen (relatively speaking).

Oh, and the rape scene was in the book, IIRC.

User avatar
smw543
Posts: 1248
Joined: Thu Oct 23, 2008 4:45 am UTC
Location: Orlando, Florida

Re: I am joyous. (Watchmen.)

Postby smw543 » Sun Mar 01, 2009 6:21 am UTC

Mr. Sluagh wrote:Oh, and the rape scene was in the book, IIRC.

Indeed. But I assumed that the "neither" referred to the two violent scenes. (It wouldn't make much sense otherwise.)
Spoiler:
LE4dGOLEM wrote:Now you know the difference between funny and sad.
Ubik wrote:But I'm too fond of the penis to let it go.
gmalivuk wrote:If you didn't want people to 'mis'understand you, then you probably should have tried saying something less stupid.

Ubik
Posts: 1016
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2007 3:43 pm UTC

Re: I am joyous. (Watchmen.)

Postby Ubik » Sun Mar 01, 2009 11:07 am UTC

Two newer videos from past: http://www.youtube.com/user/thenewfrontiersman Those videos spoils things a little (characters of the movie to be more exact), so beware if you don't want to know anything before seeing the movie. Which also means that reading this thread is not necessarily a good idea.

There is also something less spoilery - Real men use VEIDT. It's one of the winners of an advertising contest.

User avatar
Various Varieties
Posts: 505
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2008 7:24 pm UTC

Re: I am joyous. (Watchmen.)

Postby Various Varieties » Sun Mar 01, 2009 1:01 pm UTC

Macbi wrote:Then again, neither of those scenes were in the book.

Re: the meat cleaver:
Spoiler:
It's in the comic, in Rorschach's flashback to the case of the kidnapped girl, but there we just see the knife lifted up in his hand - we don't see it fall.


Very positive Empire review
Even more positive CHUD review
Even more positive comments from Kerraig on Rllmukforum. Then again he saw Indy 4 early and loved that, too... :|

Also, recent Wired interviews with Alan Moore and Dave Gibbons; and an Observer profile of Moore.

User avatar
Macbi
Posts: 941
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 8:32 am UTC
Location: UKvia

Re: I am joyous. (Watchmen.)

Postby Macbi » Sun Mar 01, 2009 1:09 pm UTC

Various Varieties wrote:
Macbi wrote:Then again, neither of those scenes were in the book.

Re: the meat cleaver:
Spoiler:
It's in the comic, in Rorschach's flashback to the case of the kidnapped girl, but there we just see the knife lifted up in his hand - we don't see it fall.

Spoiler:
But that's the dogs, not the man. He gets burnt to death.
    Indigo is a lie.
    Which idiot decided that websites can't go within 4cm of the edge of the screen?
    There should be a null word, for the question "Is anybody there?" and to see if microphones are on.

User avatar
mstrzerg
Posts: 76
Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2008 3:49 pm UTC
Location: Lexington Park, Maryland

Re: I am joyous. (Watchmen.)

Postby mstrzerg » Sun Mar 01, 2009 10:21 pm UTC

Well, just got back from seeing it. It was good, though not earth-shattering. It is entertaining and I would definitely recommend reading the original before you go. It's fun to pick out all the little Easter Eggs.

Spoiler:
The ending change works ok I suppose. I can understand that a giant squid might look cheesy, but the new ending merely shifts the blame for the holocaust.


Also, NOT a kids movie. God I get annoyed at people that bring kids to this stuff. There was a baby crying in the front row during a sex scene. WTF parents?

User avatar
charliepanayi
Posts: 1531
Joined: Sat Sep 27, 2008 7:26 pm UTC
Location: London, UK

Re: I am joyous. (Watchmen.)

Postby charliepanayi » Sun Mar 01, 2009 11:15 pm UTC

mstrzerg wrote:Also, NOT a kids movie. God I get annoyed at people that bring kids to this stuff. There was a baby crying in the front row during a sex scene. WTF parents?


In the UK it's been rated an 18, makes me kind of glad for our rating system really!
"Excuse me Miss, do you like pineapple?"

"I don't want to achieve immortality through my work, I want to achieve it through not dying"

User avatar
Macbi
Posts: 941
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 8:32 am UTC
Location: UKvia

Re: I am joyous. (Watchmen.)

Postby Macbi » Mon Mar 02, 2009 7:12 am UTC

charliepanayi wrote:
mstrzerg wrote:Also, NOT a kids movie. God I get annoyed at people that bring kids to this stuff. There was a baby crying in the front row during a sex scene. WTF parents?


In the UK it's been rated an 18, makes me kind of glad for our rating system really!
I've read the book, but it's illegal for me to watch the film. Does that make sense?
    Indigo is a lie.
    Which idiot decided that websites can't go within 4cm of the edge of the screen?
    There should be a null word, for the question "Is anybody there?" and to see if microphones are on.

Ubik
Posts: 1016
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2007 3:43 pm UTC

Re: I am joyous. (Watchmen.)

Postby Ubik » Mon Mar 02, 2009 7:54 am UTC

I got a funny thought. We'll know that Randall has seen the movie when we get a comic titled "Rorschach's Twitter."

Edit: Somehow I'm feeling even more thankful they didn't try fit it into today's world.

annals
Posts: 330
Joined: Fri Mar 21, 2008 11:24 pm UTC

Re: I am joyous. (Watchmen.)

Postby annals » Mon Mar 02, 2009 9:28 am UTC

Macbi wrote:
charliepanayi wrote:In the UK it's been rated an 18, makes me kind of glad for our rating system really!
I've read the book, but it's illegal for me to watch the film. Does that make sense?
Jeez, you can't have a parent/guardian sign you in or something? That sucks.

Jack Saladin
X is kiss
Posts: 4445
Joined: Thu Jun 15, 2006 8:22 am UTC
Location: Aotearoa

Re: I am joyous. (Watchmen.)

Postby Jack Saladin » Mon Mar 02, 2009 6:27 pm UTC

I'm pretty sure it's not illegal for you to see it, it's just illegal for someone to sell you a ticket. Get an older family member to buy you a ticket, or a friend, or whatever. Or put on a deep voice and try a few cinemas. Or just sneak in without a ticket.

Seriously, dude, if you can't even get into an R18 movie, you're never going to get anywhere in life. How do you expect to get alcohol? Don't tell me you're planning to go through teenagehood without drinking or Imah slap you.

Mr. Sluagh
Posts: 12
Joined: Sat Feb 14, 2009 5:00 am UTC

Re: I am joyous. (Watchmen.)

Postby Mr. Sluagh » Mon Mar 02, 2009 7:21 pm UTC

Jack Saladin wrote:I'm pretty sure it's not illegal for you to see it, it's just illegal for someone to sell you a ticket. Get an older family member to buy you a ticket, or a friend, or whatever. Or put on a deep voice and try a few cinemas. Or just sneak in without a ticket.

Seriously, dude, if you can't even get into an R18 movie, you're never going to get anywhere in life. How do you expect to get alcohol? Don't tell me you're planning to go through teenagehood without drinking or Imah slap you.


Really. I mean, in England, any fifteen-year-old can walk into a pub and ask for a pint and no one will blink. I'm astonished that anyone worries about getting into an 18-rated film there.

(Unless Macbi is in another country that rates films "18".)

User avatar
Macbi
Posts: 941
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 8:32 am UTC
Location: UKvia

Re: I am joyous. (Watchmen.)

Postby Macbi » Mon Mar 02, 2009 8:06 pm UTC

Jack Saladin wrote:I'm pretty sure it's not illegal for you to see it, it's just illegal for someone to sell you a ticket. Get an older family member to buy you a ticket, or a friend, or whatever. Or put on a deep voice and try a few cinemas. Or just sneak in without a ticket.

Seriously, dude, if you can't even get into an R18 movie, you're never going to get anywhere in life. How do you expect to get alcohol? Don't tell me you're planning to go through teenagehood without drinking or Imah slap you.
Oh I can get in, I'm just pissed off on principle. The easiest method is just to buy a ticket for another film and then walk into the other film. (although I'm sure that that is illegal.) It's not really in the cinema's best interest to stop me getting in.
    Indigo is a lie.
    Which idiot decided that websites can't go within 4cm of the edge of the screen?
    There should be a null word, for the question "Is anybody there?" and to see if microphones are on.

User avatar
Malice
Posts: 3894
Joined: Sat Jul 21, 2007 5:37 am UTC
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Contact:

Re: I am joyous. (Watchmen.)

Postby Malice » Mon Mar 02, 2009 9:00 pm UTC

Hm... Well, it depends on the other film. When you buy one ticket to see a different movie, you're skewing Watchmen's box office down and the other movie's box office up. The distributor (and studio, and filmmakers) of Watchmen won't like that because you're losing them that money, and so they might get mad at the theater for having lax enforcement of the policy. However, that may be offset by the fact that the theater may get more money out of a different film than Watchmen. What's more important than the individual deals per film is that the deals get significantly better for the theater over time. So if you go see Watchmen but buy a ticket for a movie that's been there for a month, you're doing the theater a favor that probably outweighs any ire they'd get from the distributor.
Image

User avatar
Actaeus
Posts: 606
Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2008 9:21 pm UTC
Location: ZZ9 Plural Z Alpha

Re: I am joyous. (Watchmen.)

Postby Actaeus » Wed Mar 04, 2009 2:09 am UTC

At first I thought the movie was impossible, then I was unsure, and now I think it's going to be awesome....
Although it won't quite live up to the original. The symbolism and subtly of the novel is going to be hard to mimic.

Still, the movie's gonna be awesome Image

User avatar
cephalopod9
Posts: 2029
Joined: Sat Dec 02, 2006 7:23 am UTC

Re: I am joyous. (Watchmen.)

Postby cephalopod9 » Wed Mar 04, 2009 4:03 am UTC

Various Varieties wrote:
Macbi wrote:Then again, neither of those scenes were in the book.

Re: the meat cleaver:
Spoiler:
It's in the comic, in Rorschach's flashback to the case of the kidnapped girl, but there we just see the knife lifted up in his hand - we don't see it fall.


Very positive Empire review
Even more positive CHUD review
Even more positive comments from Kerraig on Rllmukforum. Then again he saw Indy 4 early and loved that, too... :|

Also, recent Wired interviews with Alan Moore and Dave Gibbons; and an Observer profile of Moore.

Are there any bad reveiws? Those are almost always more informative. (I would search but I don't want any more spoilers)
Image

User avatar
smw543
Posts: 1248
Joined: Thu Oct 23, 2008 4:45 am UTC
Location: Orlando, Florida

Re: I am joyous. (Watchmen.)

Postby smw543 » Wed Mar 04, 2009 5:43 am UTC

cephalopod9 wrote:Are there any bad reveiws? Those are almost always more informative. (I would search but I don't want any more spoilers)

Rotten Tomatoes has a few. Some of them seem to raise legitimate complaints (e.g.: Snyder tried too hard to be faithful to the comic - one critic said the movie was "embalmed"), but some seemed to be complaining just because they have a quota for negative reviews (a critic from the New Yorker said, "Incoherent, overblown, and grimy with misogyny, Watchmen marks the final demolition of the comic strip, and it leaves you wondering: where did the comedy go?" Wtf does that even mean?)
Spoiler:
LE4dGOLEM wrote:Now you know the difference between funny and sad.
Ubik wrote:But I'm too fond of the penis to let it go.
gmalivuk wrote:If you didn't want people to 'mis'understand you, then you probably should have tried saying something less stupid.

User avatar
TheAmazingRando
Posts: 2308
Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2008 9:58 am UTC
Location: San Diego, CA

Re: I am joyous. (Watchmen.)

Postby TheAmazingRando » Wed Mar 04, 2009 6:41 am UTC

The New Yorker is the only magazine I subscribe to, and most of their articles are excellent, but their film reviews are hit-and-miss enough that, while I find them interesting, I don't usually trust them. That quote makes more sense once you've read the rest of the review, even if it is a bit of a contrived summary.

User avatar
aaron
Posts: 663
Joined: Sat Oct 27, 2007 2:43 am UTC

Re: I am joyous. (Watchmen.)

Postby aaron » Wed Mar 04, 2009 6:58 am UTC

smw543 wrote:
cephalopod9 wrote:Are there any bad reveiws? Those are almost always more informative. (I would search but I don't want any more spoilers)

Rotten Tomatoes has a few. Some of them seem to raise legitimate complaints (e.g.: Snyder tried too hard to be faithful to the comic - one critic said the movie was "embalmed"), but some seemed to be complaining just because they have a quota for negative reviews (a critic from the New Yorker said, "Incoherent, overblown, and grimy with misogyny, Watchmen marks the final demolition of the comic strip, and it leaves you wondering: where did the comedy go?" Wtf does that even mean?)


because watchmen is supposed to be hilarious

User avatar
cephalopod9
Posts: 2029
Joined: Sat Dec 02, 2006 7:23 am UTC

Re: I am joyous. (Watchmen.)

Postby cephalopod9 » Wed Mar 04, 2009 7:40 am UTC

To be fair, he said from the "comics strip" so he could mean the genre as the whole.
TheAmazingRando wrote:That quote makes more sense once you've read the rest of the review, even if it is a bit of a contrived summary.
I found it, but only skimmed it.
Anyone who can't reveiw a movie without giving away major plot points should be fired. Seriously, dude really doesn't seem like he read the book before hand, and then gives away the ending like 5 times.

Irrate reveiws are the best. Fans tend to ruin things for me, but finding people who vehemently despise something I like, or hope to like, can be so very sattisfying.
Image

Jack Saladin
X is kiss
Posts: 4445
Joined: Thu Jun 15, 2006 8:22 am UTC
Location: Aotearoa

Re: I am joyous. (Watchmen.)

Postby Jack Saladin » Wed Mar 04, 2009 8:53 am UTC

Anyone who can't reveiw a movie without giving away major plot points should be fired.
That would require mass lay-offs of, like, the entire film reviewing industry. I never, ever read newspaper reviews for that reason.

Well, that, and they suck.

Joeldi
Posts: 1055
Joined: Sat Feb 17, 2007 1:49 am UTC
Location: Central Queensland, Australia
Contact:

Re: I am joyous. (Watchmen.)

Postby Joeldi » Wed Mar 04, 2009 1:00 pm UTC

mstrzerg wrote:Well, just got back from seeing it.


Maryland's in the US, right? Aww man, I thought it was coming out in Australia before America and I was going to feel all awesome by seeing it tomorrow and posting about how I got to see it before youse guys Damn.

Anyway, it convinced Margaret Pomeranz to go out and buy the book, and one look at her will tell you she's not a comic book kinda gal.
I already have a hate thread. Necromancy > redundancy here, so post there.

roc314 wrote:America is a police state that communicates in txt speak...

"i hav teh dissentors brb""¡This cheese is burning me! u pwnd them bff""thx ur cool 2"

User avatar
SecondTalon
SexyTalon
Posts: 26518
Joined: Sat May 05, 2007 2:10 pm UTC
Location: Louisville, Kentucky, USA, Mars. HA!
Contact:

Re: I am joyous. (Watchmen.)

Postby SecondTalon » Thu Mar 05, 2009 12:02 am UTC

smw543 wrote:
cephalopod9 wrote:Are there any bad reveiws? Those are almost always more informative. (I would search but I don't want any more spoilers)

Rotten Tomatoes has a few. Some of them seem to raise legitimate complaints (e.g.: Snyder tried too hard to be faithful to the comic - one critic said the movie was "embalmed"), but some seemed to be complaining just because they have a quota for negative reviews (a critic from the New Yorker said, "Incoherent, overblown, and grimy with misogyny, Watchmen marks the final demolition of the comic strip, and it leaves you wondering: where did the comedy go?" Wtf does that even mean?)

It means "I have no idea what a comic book is and assume, by the name, that Watchmen must be some kind of comic wherein a Mickey Mouse style character gets into wacky capers in a watchmaking shop."
heuristically_alone wrote:I want to write a DnD campaign and play it by myself and DM it myself.
heuristically_alone wrote:I have been informed that this is called writing a book.

User avatar
Briareos
Posts: 1940
Joined: Thu Jul 12, 2007 12:40 pm UTC
Location: Town of the Big House

Re: I am joyous. (Watchmen.)

Postby Briareos » Thu Mar 05, 2009 4:54 am UTC

SecondTalon wrote:It means "I have no idea what a comic book is and assume, by the name, that Watchmen must be some kind of comic wherein a Mickey Mouse style character gets into wacky capers in a watchmaking shop."
I would watch that.
Sandry wrote:Bless you, Briareos.

Blriaraisghaasghoasufdpt.
Oregonaut wrote:Briareos is my new bestest friend.

User avatar
Clumpy
Posts: 1883
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 4:48 am UTC
Contact:

Re: I am joyous. (Watchmen.)

Postby Clumpy » Thu Mar 05, 2009 4:59 am UTC

SecondTalon wrote:
smw543 wrote:
cephalopod9 wrote:Are there any bad reveiws? Those are almost always more informative. (I would search but I don't want any more spoilers)

Rotten Tomatoes has a few. Some of them seem to raise legitimate complaints (e.g.: Snyder tried too hard to be faithful to the comic - one critic said the movie was "embalmed"), but some seemed to be complaining just because they have a quota for negative reviews (a critic from the New Yorker said, "Incoherent, overblown, and grimy with misogyny, Watchmen marks the final demolition of the comic strip, and it leaves you wondering: where did the comedy go?" Wtf does that even mean?)

It means "I have no idea what a comic book is and assume, by the name, that Watchmen must be some kind of comic wherein a Mickey Mouse style character gets into wacky capers in a watchmaking shop."


Not that I want to accuse The New Yorker of bias against mainstream-but-not-necessarily-terrible movies, but they can be relied upon to bite their thumb at any superhero flick that dares to come out on their watch. Odd for somebody who hates comics so much to sound like this:

Image
" 'Watchmen' is one of the most putrescent excuses for cinema that I have had the unpleasantness of viewing. Were I blessed with four thumbs I'd point them all downward."

User avatar
kellsbells
Queen of Cupcakes
Posts: 1166
Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2007 11:26 pm UTC
Location: The Land Beyond Beyond (Seattle)
Contact:

Re: I am joyous. (Watchmen.)

Postby kellsbells » Thu Mar 05, 2009 7:30 am UTC

Well, I just saw it. Hurray for sneak previews.

First impressions are: I quite liked it. It really did feel like the book put to screen rather than a completely different interpretation. Maybe not mind-blowing, but fun to watch. Now I'm going to go read some reviews and process my thoughts a bit more (I never read reviews first, they always skew my perception when I do see the movie).
A good pun is its own reword.
L wrote:A day without kells is a day not worth living.

annals
Posts: 330
Joined: Fri Mar 21, 2008 11:24 pm UTC

Re: I am joyous. (Watchmen.)

Postby annals » Thu Mar 05, 2009 10:12 am UTC

I just got back from it too. Hurray for working at a movie theater.

I was really surprised at how close it stayed to the original. Almost verbatim in most parts. The best part for me was seeing it with just a few people in the theater, none of whom had read the comic book. They really got into it, even screaming "NO!" when
Spoiler:
Rorschach dies.

My main complaint was the music; it didn't fit a lot of the time. Also I thought some of the acting was pretty stilted, especially from Night Owl (though that got better towards the end).

User avatar
Marleen
Posts: 53
Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2008 9:17 am UTC
Location: Germany

Re: I am joyous. (Watchmen.)

Postby Marleen » Thu Mar 05, 2009 10:51 am UTC

I saw it last night (Germany) and I loved it.

Here’s what I think.
Spoiler:
Film vs book:

Very true to the book! The dialogue is there, the music is there, the details in the background are there (so I guess I will watch the film again… and again… and again… until I’ve picked up all the lovely details). Rorschach’s journal - lovely. Rorschach’s “hurm” - spot-on.

Well, there had to be changes. Some will complain. But I agree with most of them.
Side storylines had to go (pirates, film crew, newstand, psychologist’s home life - although most of them are either mentioned or the characters briefly shown) and the main story had to be shortened of course. As it is, the film is over 3 hours long (the director’s cut is said to be 4 hours). The small changes include, for instance, that Dr. Manhattan does not take the detour to the military site to pick up the photo of Jon and Janey, but rather that he carried it with him to the interview in the first place, before beaming to Mars. Stuff I can absolutely live with. Sex and fighting scenes seeemed slightly longer than in the book.
There is one big change to the book - the squid. So Adrian’s destruction isn’t blamed on a giant brain but on Dr. Manhattan. I would have liked to SEE the squid, but at the same time, the Manhattan thing makes sense, too, maybe even more than the original, or at least that’s what I think right now. It just works… especially when they say “people will behave as long as they feel Dr. Manhattan is watching them”.

I especially liked:

The actors were good. Especially Rorschach and Dan Dreiberg were just right.
The eighties look of fashion, make-up, and jewellery was there, without overdoing it.
The news collage in the beginning.
Eyecandy.
We watched the German (dubbed) version, and both the translation and the German voice track seemed okay enough.

Not so much though:

Everyone looked 10 years too young and a little too sexy.
Old and young Sally were played by the same actress - so she really didn’t look much like 67…
the score was… well, it wasn’t bad, but it left no impression on me at all, and I don’t have the feeling that I want to buy it, so there’s at the very least potential wasted there.

I’ll watch it again, and then in English, and then the director’s cut, and then… uh… yeah you get the idea. I liked it!

User avatar
el_loco_avs
Posts: 1294
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2008 1:14 pm UTC

Re: I am joyous. (Watchmen.)

Postby el_loco_avs » Thu Mar 05, 2009 11:55 am UTC

YES! TONIGHT!!
You go your way.
I'll go your way too.

User avatar
mstrzerg
Posts: 76
Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2008 3:49 pm UTC
Location: Lexington Park, Maryland

Re: I am joyous. (Watchmen.)

Postby mstrzerg » Thu Mar 05, 2009 1:30 pm UTC

Joeldi wrote:
mstrzerg wrote:Well, just got back from seeing it.


Maryland's in the US, right? Aww man, I thought it was coming out in Australia before America and I was going to feel all awesome by seeing it tomorrow and posting about how I got to see it before youse guys Damn.

Anyway, it convinced Margaret Pomeranz to go out and buy the book, and one look at her will tell you she's not a comic book kinda gal.


Like those above me I somewhat cheated. I work for the Navy and they had a free sneak preview at the local base theater on Sunday. Sometimes government jobs do have their perks. :D

Seeing it with people who had never read the comic was very entertaining. Though at least one of my friends 'didn't get it' though he still enjoyed it. I was slightly amused that they didn't censor or cover up Dr. Manhattan. He was out there in all his blue glowing glory. I wonder if that's the first time someone has had to model that particular piece of anatomy for a major film.

User avatar
Marleen
Posts: 53
Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2008 9:17 am UTC
Location: Germany

Re: I am joyous. (Watchmen.)

Postby Marleen » Thu Mar 05, 2009 2:20 pm UTC

mstrzerg wrote:Seeing it with people who had never read the comic was very entertaining. Though at least one of my friends 'didn't get it' though he still enjoyed it. I was slightly amused that they didn't censor or cover up Dr. Manhattan. He was out there in all his blue glowing glory. I wonder if that's the first time someone has had to model that particular piece of anatomy for a major film.


To me it felt like there is surprisingly little penis actually displayed in the film (I mean, it was on screen how many times, 3 or 4?) (And I'm not talking about close-ups!)

And it felt very natural. I mean, so Dr. Manhanttan feels comfortable without any clothes. Big deal. There was nothing sexy or sleazy about it. Actually, if anything, a bit of understatement. I was quite happy with it.

User avatar
mstrzerg
Posts: 76
Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2008 3:49 pm UTC
Location: Lexington Park, Maryland

Re: I am joyous. (Watchmen.)

Postby mstrzerg » Thu Mar 05, 2009 6:21 pm UTC

Marleen wrote:And it felt very natural. I mean, so Dr. Manhanttan feels comfortable without any clothes. Big deal. There was nothing sexy or sleazy about it. Actually, if anything, a bit of understatement. I was quite happy with it.


I completely agree. The guy next to me literally groaned aloud and covered his eyes. I just remember thinking, "C'mon man, aside from the blue light this is nothing you don't see every day." People here are weird though, they manage to get insulted/'disgusted' by the littlest things.

User avatar
bigglesworth
I feel like Biggles should have a title
Posts: 7461
Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2007 9:29 pm UTC
Location: Airstrip One

Re: I am joyous. (Watchmen.)

Postby bigglesworth » Thu Mar 05, 2009 6:29 pm UTC

mstrzerg wrote:People here are weird though, they manage to get insulted/'disgusted' by the littlest things.


TWSS.
Generation Y. I don't remember the First Gulf War, but do remember floppy disks.

annals
Posts: 330
Joined: Fri Mar 21, 2008 11:24 pm UTC

Re: I am joyous. (Watchmen.)

Postby annals » Thu Mar 05, 2009 7:49 pm UTC

It wasn't that little.
Everyone looked 10 years too young and a little too sexy.
Yes. Definitely. Though the Comedian and Rorschach were okay.

User avatar
Various Varieties
Posts: 505
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2008 7:24 pm UTC

Re: I am joyous. (Watchmen.)

Postby Various Varieties » Thu Mar 05, 2009 7:54 pm UTC

Ubik wrote:I got a funny thought. We'll know that Randall has seen the movie when we get a comic titled "Rorschach's Twitter."

@Nite_Owl: Hurm.

User avatar
bigglesworth
I feel like Biggles should have a title
Posts: 7461
Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2007 9:29 pm UTC
Location: Airstrip One

Re: I am joyous. (Watchmen.)

Postby bigglesworth » Thu Mar 05, 2009 7:59 pm UTC

In addition, I only got today why the name Night Owl is amusing.

Spoiler:
Night Hawk was used as the title for one of the positions in the KKK.
Generation Y. I don't remember the First Gulf War, but do remember floppy disks.


Return to “Movies and TV Shows”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests