• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Rottenwatch: WATCHMEN

Status
Not open for further replies.
VictimOfGrief said:
Never read the graphic novel... never even heard about this until last year...

Went last night....

Was a good movie. Not what I expected in terms of story telling but it was actually kinda cool how they showed the history of all of them converging in the end. Will rent it again on Blu-ray but not one I need to own.

Kudos to Frank though as visually it was great as always.
Click to expand...
Wait... who now?
 
traveler said:
I was wondering about that. Frank, as in Frank Miller? Doesn't he know Gaiman wrote this? :lol
Click to expand...


He means Frank Miller, the director. Not Frank Miller, the comic book guy. Duh.
 
Kastro said:
Ozy
catching bullets was stupid in the movie and book, but it was better executed in the book with Nite Owl asking him if he really could catch bullets and Ozy just responding with an i'm-a-fucking-badass grin from ear to ear. Plus in the book he wasn't even really sure if it would work, he was surprised when it did.
Click to expand...

Yeah, the book did a better job of making the character not entirely sure that he's the smartest man in the world -- capping it off with the
"Everything ends," line and Ozymandias not understanding what Manhattan meant.
I thought that was an effective way of painting the man as a human, rather than a stolid, evil man.
 
Is this movie as mindless and violent as 300? I'm not into mindless brutality and gore, does this movie have excessive stuff like that?
 
g23 said:
Is this movie as mindless and violent as 300? I'm not into mindless brutality and gore, does this movie have excessive stuff like that?
Click to expand...

No, it's a thought provoking noir with a handful of social commentary.
Read the book first, then go see the movie is my suggestion.
 
g23 said:
Is this movie as mindless and violent as 300? I'm not into mindless brutality and gore, does this movie have excessive stuff like that?
Click to expand...
Where 300 was mindlessly violent, Watchmen is mindfully violent.
 
g23 said:
Is this movie as mindless and violent as 300? I'm not into mindless brutality and gore, does this movie have excessive stuff like that?
Click to expand...

Yes. Way more violent than 300.You will weep like a baby watching this.

Oh, whatever you think about the movie you have to admit that it has the best opening credits ever.
 
Rorschach was awesome. I thought he was played to perfection, and all of his scenes had a tension that most of the others lacked.

I'm very happy with how it turned out overall, but I was a little disappointed in the reshuffling of the end sequence, namely
the lack of "I DID IT!" and the last conversation between Ozy and Manhattan. Ozy played it too cool, IMO.
 
DaMan121 said:
Oh, whatever you think about the movie you have to admit that it has the best opening credits ever.
Click to expand...
I loved all the little things in that intro. I would have extended it another minute or so. The classic hero flashback stuff is neat.
 
Just saw this, and I was blown away. I've not read the graphic novel, and I don't think I will, as I don't wish to depreciate the movie.
 
Right, just got back from the film, watched it with my brother, we both thought it was a rather good film, I was rather impressed with how much nuance and grace they managed to capture the whole thing.
 
I picked up the graphic novel a while back when the Watchmen hype started to reach high gear, and I wasn't dissapointed in the least with it -- but I didn't read all of it, either. I stopped a little before the ending, because I knew just from checking about that the ending would be changed. I didn't want that x-factor to be a deciding factor in loving or hating the movie, so I held back.

I saw the movie yesterday (and am going to see it again tonight). Without a doubt, I loved it. It was, in my opinion, an incredible filming of the unfilmable, and -- try as I did -- on my drive home I couldn't think of one thing about the movie I disliked.

I was blown away by Newsweek's review, in which the reviewer complained about Watchmen being soulless because it followed the graphic novel too closely.

...er, what?

Sorry, I just don't understand people, I guess. If it wasn't a recreation of the graphic novel, it'd be hated. Watchmen fans would cry foul, as blame would be placed on Snyder for adding his own influence or what have you. Given that it is extremely close, I thought people would be happy (as I was). I guess that's too much to expect from critics. Only Ebert remains a source of sound reasoning in his review.

I'm not really sure what people's problems are with the violence; there's very little of it. The movie is not overly violent -- and it fits in tone with the graphic novel, in my opinion.

Rorshach and Dr. Manhattan were both played beautifully and respectfully by their respective actors. I couldn't have hoped for their portrayels to be any closer to the source material. Watchmen may be hated now for whatever godawful reasons, but in a few years -- just like the graphic novel -- I imagine most will look back on it as something of a cult classic. Someone said it's the Blade Runner of Graphic Novel-to-film adaptation; I'm forced to agree because I can't ignore the amazing amount of talent and focus that fuels this absolutely thrilling and true adaptation of Watchmen. It is almost frame for frame because that is the only way to make the unfilmable filmable, and I applaud the move, as well as await with great excitement a blu-ray release with even more content that will bring it (hopefully) that much closer to the graphic novel's depth.
 
A couple more hours until I witness the rise and fall of AMERICAN GOD! :D
My brother is already watching it and I can't imagine what he'll be going through! I hope he jizzes in his pants by the time he's outta the theater! :lol
 
Link Man said:
Just saw this, and I was blown away. I've not read the graphic novel, and I don't think I will, as I don't wish to depreciate the movie.
Click to expand...

WorstFuckingAttorney.gif
 
quadriplegicjon said:
i havent seen the movie yet, but.. how so?
Click to expand...

in the original book, i don't believe night owl or silk specter ii would of brutalized people in the way the did in the movie. it's hard to empathize with those two as the true heroes whenever they themselves were so excessively violent. rorschach was way too calculated and cool to have flipped and murdered someone like he was in a slasher film. the way he offed the murderer in the book was perfect to his character.
 
Spoo said:
I picked up the graphic novel a while back when the Watchmen hype started to reach high gear, and I wasn't dissapointed in the least with it -- but I didn't read all of it, either. I stopped a little before the ending, because I knew just from checking about that the ending would be changed. I didn't want that x-factor to be a deciding factor in loving or hating the movie, so I held back.

I saw the movie yesterday (and am going to see it again tonight). Without a doubt, I loved it. It was, in my opinion, an incredible filming of the unfilmable, and -- try as I did -- on my drive home I couldn't think of one thing about the movie I disliked.

I was blown away by Newsweek's review, in which the reviewer complained about Watchmen being soulless because it followed the graphic novel too closely.

...er, what?

Sorry, I just don't understand people, I guess. If it wasn't a recreation of the graphic novel, it'd be hated. Watchmen fans would cry foul, as blame would be placed on Snyder for adding his own influence or what have you. Given that it is extremely close, I thought people would be happy (as I was). I guess that's too much to expect from critics. Only Ebert remains a source of sound reasoning in his review.
Click to expand...

Uhm, The Shining is not faithful to the source material and it's a masterpiece that will be remembered forever (more than the book).
The problem for a lot of critics is that Watchmen (like Sin City, 300, The Spirit) is a bad movie because it forget to be a movie. Movie's time are different than comics' time, and we are talking about different medium. The narrative is different, especially in Watchmen where Moore has experimented with the language of comics like Kubrick has done with the movies. The fact is that Snyder is nowhere a good director, sure, I recognize his passion for the comic, but it's not sufficient to make a good movie. All he knows is making 'coolness' with overused slow-motion and some MTV music clip, the kind of things you can see anywhere on Youtube.

Dear Link Man, sorry to say that but you are part of the problem.
 
Did anyone else have kids in their theather? When I was leaving, I saw 4 kids(like around 8 or so) and they seemed to really enjoy it. I'm surprised someone brought their children to this. It's so violent.
 
Kikujiro said:
Uhm, The Shining is not faithful to the source material and it's a masterpiece that will be remembered forever (more than the book).
The problem for a lot of critics is that Watchmen (like Sin City, 300, The Spirit) is a bad movie because it forget to be a movie. Movie's time are different than comics' time, and we are talking about different medium. The narrative is different, especially in Watchmen where Moore has experimented with the language of comics like Kubrick has done with the movies. The fact is that Snyder is nowhere a good director, sure, I recognize his passion for the comic, but it's not sufficient to make a good movie. All he knows is making 'coolness' with overused slow-motion and some MTV music clip, the kind of things you can see anywhere on Youtube.

Dear Link Man, sorry to say that but you are part of the problem.
Click to expand...

I hope english isn't your first language.
 
Kikujiro said:
Uhm, The Shining is not faithful to the source material and it's a masterpiece that will be remembered forever (more than the book).
The problem for a lot of critics is that Watchmen (like Sin City, 300, The Spirit) is a bad movie because it forget to be a movie. Movie's time are different than comics' time, and we are talking about different medium. The narrative is different, especially in Watchmen where Moore has experimented with the language of comics like Kubrick has done with the movies. The fact is that Snyder is nowhere a good director, sure, I recognize his passion for the comic, but it's not sufficient to make a good movie. All he knows is making 'coolness' with overused slow-motion and some MTV music clip, the kind of things you can see anywhere on Youtube.
Click to expand...

Well, I'll gladly give you The Shining -- then again, there was some star power there, and I didn't read the book it was based on. Kubrick, of course, one of the greats, and if he were alive today and was behind bringing Watchmen to the screen, I'd be, er, interested to say the least! Perhaps, though, because I didn't read the book, I wouldn't be one to comment on this -- I honestly think if Watchmen wildly strayed from its source material, most fans would have a bone to pick (and it'd probably be warranted, who knows?)

But I have to disagree with you on the second bolded point, but I'm probably only disagreeing out of ignorance. I really don't know what you mean when you say this, because -- throughout the entire film -- I was absolutely enthralled. Which, honestly, is amazing, because I knew what was going to happen. There was something about the beauty of the film in motion (which I do attribute somewhat to Snyder's panache for "cool" stuff), and a story I loved. Even with some holes (holes which I don't think hurt the movie, but are holes nonetheless), every scene in the movie was breathtaking, well-filmed, well-acted, and still maintained the graphic novel's charm, dry wit, social commentary, and existential-what-have-you. But did it forget it was a movie? I don't know. It was good enough though, that at times, I certainly forgot it was.

Sorry you didn't like it :\
 
was anyone else confused by the portrayal of rorshach's mask in the film? I was always under the belief that the mask changed form based on his facial expressions, not that it was some kind of living, sentient being..

there was a logic to his choosing of the mask in the book, whereas in the movie it seemed supernatural.
 
Link Man said:
Just saw this, and I was blown away. I've not read the graphic novel, and I don't think I will, as I don't wish to depreciate the movie.
Click to expand...

hahahahahahaha
 
andymcc said:
in the original book, i don't believe night owl or silk specter ii would of brutalized people in the way the did in the movie. it's hard to empathize with those two as the true heroes whenever they themselves were so excessively violent. rorschach was way too calculated and cool to have flipped and murdered someone like he was in a slasher film. the way he offed the murderer in the book was perfect to his character.
Click to expand...



MEH What the hell do you want? a street fight is a street fight. You either bloody the guy up or get bloodied up.
...and for Rorschach
going crazy at the murder made sense, the one thing that pushed him over the edge that he could never come back from. Not necessarily better or worse, just like the ending, but made complete sense to the characters & fit perfectly
!
 
FTWer said:
MEH What the hell do you want? a street fight is a street fight. You either bloody the guy up or get bloodied up.
...and for Rorschach
going crazy at the murder made sense, the one thing that pushed him over the edge that he could never come back from. Not necessarily better or worse, just like the ending, but made complete sense to the characters & fit perfectly
!
Click to expand...

oh i understand it's a street fight. it was a like a street fight on the set of 300 though. :lol


as for rorschach...
i guess that my qualm is, in the book, that rorschach, even going over the edge, still retained enough composure to tactfully off the guy. again, this is just a general disagreement of the portrayal of the character, and, disregarding the book, the film made you empathize with rorschach's decision, but... just a matter of preference, still.

FTWer said:
oh BTW anyone find it funny that a movie set in 1980's sure had a lot of music montages from the 70's? :lol
Click to expand...

i guess it was because of the varied generations of characters in the movie... regardless, the music typically stuck out like a sore thumb. (i'm sure everyone has bitched enough about the especially awful ending theme.)
 
ALright....I was JUST informed that now my wife's sister and one of their friends is going with us as well. So it's me and 3 chicks that have no clue whats in store for them.

Anything I should tell them? I'm kinda pissed at my wife for doing this...
 
SwitchBladeKneegrow said:
ALright....I was JUST informed that now my wife's sister and one of their friends is going with us as well. So it's me and 3 chicks that have no clue whats in store for them.

Anything I should tell them? I'm kinda pissed at my wife for doing this...
Click to expand...

Tell them to shut the fuck up and not talk in the movie. Also that there is a naked man and to prepare themselves now so that they don't go into wild bouts of hysteria like children.
 
So it's me and 3 chicks that have no clue whats in store for them.
Click to expand...

In the words of Sam Becket: Oh Boy! The story is about humanity, but its a sausage fest, and they might be bothered by the obvious misogyny.
 
Scullibundo said:
Tell them to shut the fuck up and not talk in the movie. Also that there is a naked man and to prepare themselves now so that they don't go into wild bouts of hysteria like children.
Click to expand...

My theater was pretty good. When the dick showed up one dude said, "WHAT?"
 
ten5ive9ine said:
Scullibundo, you're welcome to like this film, but can you get off Synder's dick for a minute.
Click to expand...

I've mentioned the flaws with the film, but the flaws other people perceive are ridiculous. Apparently liking the film and not sharing the same retarded sentiments as the majority of people who see this movie = Snyder fanboy. The amount of people I've seen complain about penis as one of the main flaws is retarded. The character is naked, get over it.
 
SwitchBladeKneegrow said:
ALright....I was JUST informed that now my wife's sister and one of their friends is going with us as well. So it's me and 3 chicks that have no clue whats in store for them.

Anything I should tell them? I'm kinda pissed at my wife for doing this...
Click to expand...

Expect a lot of violence against women
a brutal rape scene & a pregnant chick killed.
 
Kastro said:
was anyone else confused by the portrayal of rorshach's mask in the film? I was always under the belief that the mask changed form based on his facial expressions, not that it was some kind of living, sentient being..

there was a logic to his choosing of the mask in the book, whereas in the movie it seemed supernatural.
Click to expand...
You were mistaken. In the book the mask(s) are made from a Manhattan-age material that had been used to make a designer dress. When the woman who had ordered the dress decided she didn't want it after all Rorschach helped himself too it, experimented with it, and ended up with the inkblot mask. In my recollection there is no indication that the material responded to human emotion as a dress or as a mask. That would sort of defeat the purpose- the theory behind the Rorschach inkblot test is allowing the human mind to create patterns out of random shapes, and the nature of those patterns informs the clinician about the state of the viewers' mind. Rorschach's mask is the face of senselessness- any meaning is provided by the people looking at him. His own feelings are completely obscured.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Rottenwatch: The Bride!
37
924
CGNoire replied
Megalopolis | Rottenwatch
2 3 4 5
235
17K
Chuck Berry replied
Watchmen: Chapter 1 (Animated comic adaptation)
5
1K
Heimdall_Xtreme replied
Watchmen Chapter 1 & 2 Teaser.
34
4K
DeafTourette replied
Section 31 Rottenwatch: Kurtzman makes a worse Star Trek movie than Into Darkness, Nemesis, and Final Frontier combined
2
94
8K
Darkmakaimura replied
Top Bottom