Billy Pilgrim
Stye in my eye
I dug Watchmen all the way through, but I thought your comment was interesting, because that's how I feel about the Dawn of the Dead re-make. I honestly can't remember much about 300 past "This is Spahtah!"
The Watchmen
- Thread starter Sven
- Start date
Billy Pilgrim
Stye in my eye
Haha, that was a good episode. As if 300 wasn't silly enough...
chris f
Veteran
Just watched this film yesterday. Never read the book(s), just saw the previews and thought it looked pretty good. But I was pretty disappointed. I'm going to go on a hunch here and assume that they tried to put the entire history of the story in one movie which is why I thought the movie was unfocused, trying to tell and explain too much, boring at times.
**spoiler alert?**
The only interesting parts of the movie I thought were the story of the Comedian and the character of Rorschach. Also, Rorschach was the only character that seemed to have redeeming qualities that I as a viewer could connect with. The rest of it seemed to just be a soap opera full of compromise and lack of responsibility.
I really liked the opening scene in the Comedian's apartment, but after that I felt like the rest of the movie was spent on explaining the why they were doing everything. It's the movies, Show don't Tell.
**spoiler alert?**
The only interesting parts of the movie I thought were the story of the Comedian and the character of Rorschach. Also, Rorschach was the only character that seemed to have redeeming qualities that I as a viewer could connect with. The rest of it seemed to just be a soap opera full of compromise and lack of responsibility.
I really liked the opening scene in the Comedian's apartment, but after that I felt like the rest of the movie was spent on explaining the why they were doing everything. It's the movies, Show don't Tell.
nouou
Well-known member
I thought this was sick up until the girl who might as well had not been in the film at all, is banging the guy who looks like a kid in a halloween mask while "Hallelujah.... hallelujah.... halleluuuuuujjjjjjjjjaah" plays in the background. After that I didn't like the rest.
Ezekiel667
Well-known member
I have not read the comic, and I understood everything. The one or two questions I did have were quickly explained to me by my friend who had read the comic.
I think if the viewers who haven't read Watchmen beforehand just pay attention, not focus on the lack of action scenes, and listen to the dialogue instead of talking to their friends the whole time, it's pretty simple to understand.
BryantStanton
Well-known member
I had to think over how I felt about this movie since I saw it on opening night quite a bit.
Having never read the novel, I didn't really know what to expect outside of the wikipedia summary I had read for the book. Basically, I felt that, at 3 hours, the movie succeeded and failed in several respects.
As an action movie (which, incidently, I think a good majority of people I knew going to see the film were expecting) it failed, not because the fight scenes weren't awesome, but because they were too few and far between.
As a character study/drama/whatever else you want to call it, it failed slightly in my eyes, mostly because, despite some quite interesting thematic elements, nothing seemed fully developed. It was like they introduced these great ideas, and then got around to developing some of them, but definitely not all of them.
I knew it wasn't going to be an action-fest, and I'm ok with that. I just felt that even the non-action portions were only halfway, or two thirds of the way to being where they wanted to go.
Rorschach was a badass though. The prison scene was awesome.
Also, the introduction was fantastic I thought.
Still a bit on the fence at the this point, but overall I'd probably give the movie a B- or C+.
As an aside, everyone else I went with, and it was a large group, pretty much hated it. I've had a hard time recommending it to people because although I thought it was entertaining enough, I don't want to be at the recieving end of the "Why did you make me waste my money" argument...
Having never read the novel, I didn't really know what to expect outside of the wikipedia summary I had read for the book. Basically, I felt that, at 3 hours, the movie succeeded and failed in several respects.
As an action movie (which, incidently, I think a good majority of people I knew going to see the film were expecting) it failed, not because the fight scenes weren't awesome, but because they were too few and far between.
As a character study/drama/whatever else you want to call it, it failed slightly in my eyes, mostly because, despite some quite interesting thematic elements, nothing seemed fully developed. It was like they introduced these great ideas, and then got around to developing some of them, but definitely not all of them.
I knew it wasn't going to be an action-fest, and I'm ok with that. I just felt that even the non-action portions were only halfway, or two thirds of the way to being where they wanted to go.
Rorschach was a badass though. The prison scene was awesome.
Also, the introduction was fantastic I thought.
Still a bit on the fence at the this point, but overall I'd probably give the movie a B- or C+.
As an aside, everyone else I went with, and it was a large group, pretty much hated it. I've had a hard time recommending it to people because although I thought it was entertaining enough, I don't want to be at the recieving end of the "Why did you make me waste my money" argument...
The biggest problem with the movie was . . .
The story doesn't have the impact it had in the '80s. It's dated.
Sure, there are timeless themes involved. But it's a Cold War story. The ending would have meant something in 1985 that it just doesn't have now.
Now, does that mean I wanted the story changed? No, and the tinkering with it was relatively minor. I like faithful adaptions.
I just think someone going into it cold might not connect. I think that's been shown to be true.
The story doesn't have the impact it had in the '80s. It's dated.
Sure, there are timeless themes involved. But it's a Cold War story. The ending would have meant something in 1985 that it just doesn't have now.
Now, does that mean I wanted the story changed? No, and the tinkering with it was relatively minor. I like faithful adaptions.
I just think someone going into it cold might not connect. I think that's been shown to be true.
Batutta
Major Contributor
True, but this is an alternate history movie, and it would have seemed more potent and relevant to people in the 80's because it was revising history that just occurred. Since we're at a distance now it doesn't have the same emotional wallop. I don't think that's the biggest problem, because as you said if the film satisfied on other more basic levels it wouldn't have mattered, but it's another factor for me of why the film doesn't work.
But they weren't released in 2009. I'm just saying, the outcome of the Cold War was not at all apparent in the 80s; the idea of rapprochement and lasting peace seemed far-fetched, yet it was the hopeful outcome of the day. It would have been more satisfying then.
I'm betting not many people aged 25 or younger connected much with it. (And I know not one of them is going to appreciate how crazy it is to see a movie where Lee Iacocca takes one between the eyes.
)In all, though, much better movie, and much better adaption, than V for Vendetta.
I'm not getting the logic; this seems to suggest that Saving Private Ryan should have diminished impact because after all we all know how WWII turned out...
...regarding the scene with Iacocca, etc - yeah, that was a strange choice, to insert material that wasn't in the original story and which was not an improvement in terms of telling the story.
Maybe ol' Zack had a bad experience with his Chrysler.
...regarding the scene with Iacocca, etc - yeah, that was a strange choice, to insert material that wasn't in the original story and which was not an improvement in terms of telling the story.
Maybe ol' Zack had a bad experience with his Chrysler.
Last edited:
Batutta
Major Contributor
Wow. You know the filmmakers are worried when the screenwriter writes an open letter to a website pleading for people to go see the film--
http://www.aintitcool.com/node/40409
I think his plea comes off as desperate and futile. In it, he states the film was made by fans and for fans, and I think this is exactly the problem. Sorry, but fanboys only make up a small portion of the moviegoing audience. Most people don't care about the source material. Most people don't even go to websites like AICN. Most people can't even name three Hollywood actors. They just go see a film because it either has an interesting premise, a star they like, or heard it was good from a friend. If you make a film primarily for a small fanboy audience you shouldn't be surprised when your gross doesn't meet expectations.
http://www.aintitcool.com/node/40409
I think his plea comes off as desperate and futile. In it, he states the film was made by fans and for fans, and I think this is exactly the problem. Sorry, but fanboys only make up a small portion of the moviegoing audience. Most people don't care about the source material. Most people don't even go to websites like AICN. Most people can't even name three Hollywood actors. They just go see a film because it either has an interesting premise, a star they like, or heard it was good from a friend. If you make a film primarily for a small fanboy audience you shouldn't be surprised when your gross doesn't meet expectations.
Well, no, because the resolution of that story wasn't the outcome of the war.
MattinSTL
Sound Modulator
Saw Watchmen last night... in my honest opinion, it sucked. Generously, I'd give it 1 of 4 stars.
Very dissatisfied with this. There were some cool scenes and concepts, but overall very very weak.
Poor story with virtually no arc... and big LOGIC errors... conceptual logic errors... and some childish action sequences mixed in with some good action sequences. I was particularly disturbed by character development used to define the character, and then a total abandonment of the persona that I finally got used to. Simply put, there were a lot of "he'd never do that" moments.
There were a lot of FX sequences that served no purpose other then eye-candy... Dr. Manhattan flies around Mars in a Digital Juice JUMPBACK... and on that subject, if you have a thing for blue genitalia then you are going to LOVE this character.
The main villain was like Michael McDonald from Mad TV... no really.
Very dissatisfied with this. There were some cool scenes and concepts, but overall very very weak.
Poor story with virtually no arc... and big LOGIC errors... conceptual logic errors... and some childish action sequences mixed in with some good action sequences. I was particularly disturbed by character development used to define the character, and then a total abandonment of the persona that I finally got used to. Simply put, there were a lot of "he'd never do that" moments.
There were a lot of FX sequences that served no purpose other then eye-candy... Dr. Manhattan flies around Mars in a Digital Juice JUMPBACK... and on that subject, if you have a thing for blue genitalia then you are going to LOVE this character.
The main villain was like Michael McDonald from Mad TV... no really.
Batutta
Major Contributor
He gave new meaning to the term blue balls...Personally, the nudity didn't really bother me, but I don't understand the purpose of it. It's just going to be a distraction for most of the audience so why include it? I'd rather have people focused on the scene and not looking at the swinging blue d*ick.