-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Rottenwatch: WATCHMEN
- Thread starter DevelopmentArrested
- Start date
- Status
Prime crotch
Banned
Did Fox have any recent bit box office hit? They can't even steal one, I almost feel bad for them.Cheebs said:
WB put in 125 mil of the budget, plus all 50 mil of the marketing. Paramount put in 25 mil of the budget. The foreign boxoffice results are looking to be even more terrible than domestic, probably will struggle to make 50 mil overseas so Paramount isn't really ranking in the cash either, although they won't lose money on it like WB is.Evlar said:
No matter how you look at it seeing the collapse of the movie (over 70% in the second weekend is like Horror movie style of drop, bad bad bad) WB has ended up deeeeeeeeeeep in the red on this theatrically. They need the dvd release to save them from the movie being a complete net loss.
You guys sure do bitch a lot. I merely liked the original graphic novel, but I still really enjoyed the movie. So did my girlfriend. She had heard horrible things from the nerds who apparently write reviews for the paper, but was surprised at how much she ended up enjoying the movie.
It wasn't great, but I'd watch it again sooner than I would the Dark Knight. I dunno, maybe I prefer a movie that attempts to tell a mystery rather than 3 hours of build-ups to action set pieces.
It wasn't great, but I'd watch it again sooner than I would the Dark Knight. I dunno, maybe I prefer a movie that attempts to tell a mystery rather than 3 hours of build-ups to action set pieces.
SCULLIBUNDO
Banned
What the fuck? I was under the impression the budget was only $130mil (not including marketing). Where the fuck are people pulling $200mil from?
Seth C said:
Joke post?
The attempt to set up the mystery is what is lost in the movie. The surprise that you are supposed to experience when the mystery is solved is what is missing.
I liked the movie. I just think it failed to set up Ozy up correctly and missed on two mysteries...or revelations. 1. Ror's identity 2. Ozy/Adrian.
I too had always read the budget was 130M. IDK where BOM got their figure from.fistfulofmetal
Banned
Awesome, this means the Blu-ray will be out sooner than I expected.
125 mil. budget from WBScullibundo said:
25 mil. budget paid by Paramount
50 mil. marketing budget paid by WB.
At least thats what the BOM folks said.
Thus 200 million (175 paid by WB) and thus with a movie that will struggle to make 100 million without being able to get foreign gross and having to give a % of domestic gross to Fox WB will make less than half of their investment in theaters. Tada! There you go.
Even if you go with 130 + 50 for marketing that 180 mil...with the fox % WB would only get back half their investment anyway.
Ninja Scooter
Member
Cheebs said:
has the possibility to do decent on DVD but i doubt that will be enough. Yeah Snyder is going to be doing a couple of low budged family comedies before they green light another one like Watchmen for him. Wild Hogs 2!
Prime crotch said:
Plenty of people in this thread who liked the movie understood the plot and cared about the characters without having read the graphic novel. It seems that the biggest fans of the film are the curious people who watched it with no preconceptions based on familiarity with the book.
Was this review of Watchmen posted yet? Somewhat entertaining.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YL8lhTJpYeQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YL8lhTJpYeQ
I started reading the graphic novel today.
First three volumes down so far. The movie is really faithful to the material so far. Some dialogue is switched around a bit, but otherwise it's a real good adaptation. The only thing they really leave out at this point is the pretty detailed insight into the minds of the previous group of heroes.
First three volumes down so far. The movie is really faithful to the material so far. Some dialogue is switched around a bit, but otherwise it's a real good adaptation. The only thing they really leave out at this point is the pretty detailed insight into the minds of the previous group of heroes.
LCfiner said:
I'm taking your advice. I think I'd get a better appreciation of both doing it this way.
On that note, I picked up the book today and have been reading it proper. Mind you I read the story roughly before seeing the movie by spending an afternoon at Borders skimming through it (basically ignoring the Black Freighter and Under the Hood, and getting pretty much 80-90% of the main story.
And you know what? I think I did myself a great disservice doing that. Normally, I pride myself in being able to distance myself from an experience and kind of 'see' it for the first time, even if it may be my tenth viewing. I found it very difficult to see Watchmen that way because the story is so complex (and rushed in 2.5 hours doesn't help). I found it difficult to see as its own entity having partially read the book. And I find it again with the book - having seen the movie, I find it a little difficult to get that out of my mind.
At any rate, the book is amazing. It's obviously been done several times after, but the way the story unfolds is some really good storytelling. The way events and scenes are paralleled and juxtaposing panels between scenes are drawn as if there were a fade between. I can see how this would have been mind blowing at the time. It's like it is written as a movie. Having pre-read it, I find the bits like Under the Hood to be much more fascinating at the moment.
edit: I also notice they play a little more on the world turning against Manhattan. They should've let this concept brew little in the movie, as it would've made the new ending have a bit more weight.
I saw the movie a few hours ago, and here are my impressions (as if random internet guy's opinion matters):
- Some actors were better than I expected (Ozy wasn't bad)
- Some were worse (Miss Jupiter comes to mind)
- The way they dealt with changes from the source material was pretty good. The only problem may have been that things happened pretty fast and it seemed easy to miss what's going on if you haven't read the book.
- Some things were weird
- Overall, a good movie. Would watch again. Will watch again! On BluRay!
- Some actors were better than I expected (Ozy wasn't bad)
- Some were worse (Miss Jupiter comes to mind)
- The way they dealt with changes from the source material was pretty good. The only problem may have been that things happened pretty fast and it seemed easy to miss what's going on if you haven't read the book.
- Some things were weird
The guy whose hands were chopped off died instantly from it, for example. I expected a little more flailing and screaming before death!
just saw it today, having never read the novel, and i really liked it. i didnt go in expecting an action movie like my friends did (mostly because of the hate in this thread) and was pleasantly surprised. the story was very good imo, and kept me interested. i would even say it was more interesting than TDK, i love a mystery. imo:
+solid acting
+solid story
+good action
-a little long
thats pretty much it for me. didnt have any major problems with this movie at all. a tad bit slow in the beginning. malin is so hot..
+solid acting
+solid story
+good action
-a little long
thats pretty much it for me. didnt have any major problems with this movie at all. a tad bit slow in the beginning. malin is so hot..
mrkgoo said:
yea or that, same diff :lol wasnt meant as an insult to watchmen or anything.
and yea the deconstruction of a superhero. a group of heroes who were once adored, now hated by the public and forced into hiding. these heroes then "unite" again for an evil mastermind. obviously its similar to many many other hero movies as well.
AndresON777
shooting blanks
Varna said:
just wait
BorkBork said:
A big shame,the good thing that comes from this is more people will read the GN and then maybe appreciate the film a bit more.
The amount of people who thought that the film was going to be action all the way was sadly hilarious it's a shame that people can't see a film that doesn't have explosions every 5 minutes or they get restless.
Kung Fu Jedi
Member
Ninja Scooter said:
Wild Hogs 2, without Snyder, has sadly already been greenlit and is on the way.
bafflewaffle
Member
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slumdog_Millionaire#Release_and_box_office_performancePrime crotch said:
wb doubt slumdog, so they spilt with fox...
Ninja Scooter
Member
Kung Fu Jedi said:
that blows. I wanted to see Martin Lawrence get decapitated.
Continued impressions of the book:
The pacing is fantastic. There seems to be this very deliberate pacing with the panels. I notice that the layout is very 'plain' - very nice compared to the schizophrenic layouts of so many 'action' comics. It makes the book play out very much like a film (so unfilmable is wrong - I think it was just length of the movie that makes it challenging), with every panel within a sequence nearly presenting a set amount of time passing.
Again the transitions between scenes is very film-like. A fade between scenes that is very natural and sets up the parallels in themes well, especially in the Black Freighter.
The plot points are allowed to breath. This is necessary to add weight to the events, and is difficult to portray in a short movie.
My favourite part is how the story is told in a kind of 'flashback' way. It's very 'Lost' in it's execution (or the other way round, lol), where a character is introduced, you learn who they are, but only later learn how they became who they are. Each volume kind of deals with another character - it's a really engaging way to tell a story. It worked for me in Lost, and it works well in the Watchmen book too.
The pacing is fantastic. There seems to be this very deliberate pacing with the panels. I notice that the layout is very 'plain' - very nice compared to the schizophrenic layouts of so many 'action' comics. It makes the book play out very much like a film (so unfilmable is wrong - I think it was just length of the movie that makes it challenging), with every panel within a sequence nearly presenting a set amount of time passing.
Again the transitions between scenes is very film-like. A fade between scenes that is very natural and sets up the parallels in themes well, especially in the Black Freighter.
I also love the little hidden things - like when Rorschach leaves instructions for Moloch to contact him, there's a panel with the "end is Nigh" guy rummaging through the trash in the background. Nice.
The plot points are allowed to breath. This is necessary to add weight to the events, and is difficult to portray in a short movie.
Bits like Manhattan's exile played out well, with the world backlashing against him. The concepts of him being a God amongst men, and how he holds the thread of the cold war together, so that his absence is crucial to the events that take place, are all handled with finesse in the book. It's ironic that the new ending of the movie actually fits the comic better than it does the movie, and with the correct storytelling would work so much better than it did in the film.
Other bits make the whole mystery side of things a lot better too. Rorschach's investigations and trying to come up with why Manhattan and Comedian are targeted include suspects like Laurie, Moloch, the Russians, who all have motive to attack these figures.
Other bits make the whole mystery side of things a lot better too. Rorschach's investigations and trying to come up with why Manhattan and Comedian are targeted include suspects like Laurie, Moloch, the Russians, who all have motive to attack these figures.
My favourite part is how the story is told in a kind of 'flashback' way. It's very 'Lost' in it's execution (or the other way round, lol), where a character is introduced, you learn who they are, but only later learn how they became who they are. Each volume kind of deals with another character - it's a really engaging way to tell a story. It worked for me in Lost, and it works well in the Watchmen book too.
Lol at "Raw Sharks"
The bottom line for me is that the book has an incredibly smooth flow for the narrative. The pacing is excellent, and the revelations that the reader slowly unravels make sense and are very compelling (due in part to the sheer number of them and their subtle and mature designs). It's hard to think of a comic that has a cleaner or better realized build-up and execution.
In contrast, the film feels very disjointed. It's certainly possible for someone who hasn't read the book to understand what's going on in the movie; unfortunately, simply "knowing what's going on" isn't enough to do Watchmen justice. There are so many undertones that are effectively lost in translation -- not to mention how much the overall plot and character developments are crippled. The adaptation is stripped of suspense, mystery, or emotion. In other words, it's bland and lifeless. There's no reason for the viewer to care.
As one example, it's clear from the get-go that the movie has no sense of the deconstruction of the superhero that Moore got across so brilliantly in the book. No one (save the god-like Dr. Manhattan) has powers of any kind. Thus, the crucial focus is on how the characters are and think, not what they can do. The Comedian should not be able to punch through walls. Gratuitous fight scenes should not be added (Dreiberg and Laurie's gauntlet run during the prison riot made me cringe). The fight scenes that are in the book should not be glamorized with slow-motion and trendy "wire-fu" choreography.
Just consider how awkward the apartment rescue scene is in the book, and you'll start to understand how off-the-mark the movie is at portraying these characters. Admittedly, in any other superhero story, inconsistencies like these would seem completely benign. In Watchmen, though, the point is that the "heroes" are just regular people that are caught up in a tidal wave of events they cannot possibly comprehend (or change) until it is too late.
And fuck, outside of Bob Dylan, the choices of music were terrible. Most of the scenes could have done without music at all, much less 99 Luftballons or Hallalujah.
I was willing to give the movie the benefit of the doubt, but after seeing it, the hardline stance of Watchmen being "unfilmable" seems a much more logical position to hold.
In contrast, the film feels very disjointed. It's certainly possible for someone who hasn't read the book to understand what's going on in the movie; unfortunately, simply "knowing what's going on" isn't enough to do Watchmen justice. There are so many undertones that are effectively lost in translation -- not to mention how much the overall plot and character developments are crippled. The adaptation is stripped of suspense, mystery, or emotion. In other words, it's bland and lifeless. There's no reason for the viewer to care.
As one example, it's clear from the get-go that the movie has no sense of the deconstruction of the superhero that Moore got across so brilliantly in the book. No one (save the god-like Dr. Manhattan) has powers of any kind. Thus, the crucial focus is on how the characters are and think, not what they can do. The Comedian should not be able to punch through walls. Gratuitous fight scenes should not be added (Dreiberg and Laurie's gauntlet run during the prison riot made me cringe). The fight scenes that are in the book should not be glamorized with slow-motion and trendy "wire-fu" choreography.
Just consider how awkward the apartment rescue scene is in the book, and you'll start to understand how off-the-mark the movie is at portraying these characters. Admittedly, in any other superhero story, inconsistencies like these would seem completely benign. In Watchmen, though, the point is that the "heroes" are just regular people that are caught up in a tidal wave of events they cannot possibly comprehend (or change) until it is too late.
And fuck, outside of Bob Dylan, the choices of music were terrible. Most of the scenes could have done without music at all, much less 99 Luftballons or Hallalujah.
I was willing to give the movie the benefit of the doubt, but after seeing it, the hardline stance of Watchmen being "unfilmable" seems a much more logical position to hold.
Ignatz Mouse
Banned
shintoki said:
Unless I read wrong, they only have to split profits, not grosses. Meaning Fox gets fuck-all if it doesn't make back its budget.
SiegfriedFM
Member
I just watched the movie after rereading the book for the fourth time or so. And I loved it. There's obviously things that need to be cut for length and to avoid going into the entire squid thing, which I still think makes a more waterproof plan. But getting a HD remake of sorts of the entire book is pretty damn awesome, unless you're some Rorschach-level "no compromises" type of fan.
Ether_Snake
å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®
So:
"You mutated humanity!" = "You didn't make a 100% faithful adaptation!"
"I sacrificed millions so that billions could survive." = "Hardcore fans will be made to cry so that everyone else can see Watchmen."
"You mutated humanity!" = "You didn't make a 100% faithful adaptation!"
"I sacrificed millions so that billions could survive." = "Hardcore fans will be made to cry so that everyone else can see Watchmen."
So let me tell you my review
*DISCLAIMERS*
1. I have not read the graphic novel
2. I'm not very picky with my movies. I have a wide range of stuff I like. I also like all types of movies.
3. This is completely unbiased. I saw one trailer, and went to see the movie
Negatives
I did not like this movie. It was increcibly long, and not in a good way. There are some movies that are long, such as the Lord of the Rings, but you don't notice it. This movie, I noticed the length.
The pacing of the plot is horrible. I felt that in a movie format, if it focused on the character of Rorshack and the main plot, it would have been a much better movie, and also cut down on the length. Personally, I for one did not like watching 20 minutes of the main plot, and then going off on a side plot for 40 minutes that resulted in no point really. By the time the end of the movie comes around, I almost got the feeling of "So what happened back at the beginning now?"
The acting of a few characters was pretty bad, along with some of the script. "When I lick your finger it's like licking a battery" comes to mind. I did not like the girl superhero (I can't recall her name, but the one that used skimpy outfits and I guess was going for sex appeal). The sex scenes were pretty awful, especially the one with the "Hallelujah" song playing in the background. The romance between night owl and the same girl superhero was just....bad.
The music in weird places was another off putting aspect. Things like that Hallelujah song.
Positives
Rorshack. Dude completely nailed it. Any scene involving him had me thoroughly interested in the movie again. I completely snapped back to attention when his stuff came up again after the romance scenes for instance.
Special effects and fighting scenes were very well done.
And honestly? That's really all the positives that I can remember from the movie. Everything else was just so forgettable to me. I know this was a very faithful adaptation of the book, but it just didn't work in a movie format for me.
Two last pet peeves
If you aren't going to explain the genetic engineering experiments, why put the tiger with antlers even in the movie? When that showed up I was like...huh?...and didn't realize what it was about until I came home and read about it
The boob to penis ratio (this is more of a joke but still). I mean seriously. One or two shots of Dr. Manhattan to give the audience the idea, fine. But as many as they did? Put some freakin pants on Jon. He was wearing them in Vietnam, so it was done at points.
*DISCLAIMERS*
1. I have not read the graphic novel
2. I'm not very picky with my movies. I have a wide range of stuff I like. I also like all types of movies.
3. This is completely unbiased. I saw one trailer, and went to see the movie
Negatives
I did not like this movie. It was increcibly long, and not in a good way. There are some movies that are long, such as the Lord of the Rings, but you don't notice it. This movie, I noticed the length.
The pacing of the plot is horrible. I felt that in a movie format, if it focused on the character of Rorshack and the main plot, it would have been a much better movie, and also cut down on the length. Personally, I for one did not like watching 20 minutes of the main plot, and then going off on a side plot for 40 minutes that resulted in no point really. By the time the end of the movie comes around, I almost got the feeling of "So what happened back at the beginning now?"
The acting of a few characters was pretty bad, along with some of the script. "When I lick your finger it's like licking a battery" comes to mind. I did not like the girl superhero (I can't recall her name, but the one that used skimpy outfits and I guess was going for sex appeal). The sex scenes were pretty awful, especially the one with the "Hallelujah" song playing in the background. The romance between night owl and the same girl superhero was just....bad.
The music in weird places was another off putting aspect. Things like that Hallelujah song.
Positives
Rorshack. Dude completely nailed it. Any scene involving him had me thoroughly interested in the movie again. I completely snapped back to attention when his stuff came up again after the romance scenes for instance.
Special effects and fighting scenes were very well done.
And honestly? That's really all the positives that I can remember from the movie. Everything else was just so forgettable to me. I know this was a very faithful adaptation of the book, but it just didn't work in a movie format for me.
Two last pet peeves
If you aren't going to explain the genetic engineering experiments, why put the tiger with antlers even in the movie? When that showed up I was like...huh?...and didn't realize what it was about until I came home and read about it
The boob to penis ratio (this is more of a joke but still). I mean seriously. One or two shots of Dr. Manhattan to give the audience the idea, fine. But as many as they did? Put some freakin pants on Jon. He was wearing them in Vietnam, so it was done at points.
Ether_Snake
å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®
Roschach was a great character and you can really have had a movie only about him. He didn't fit at all in the story, and really didn't deserve to be wasted in such a movie. The scenes with him were great. It's really a shame. A movie about such a vigilante would have been great.
I also liked Dr. Manhattan, and again he too feels like he was throw in a story he didn't really belong in. A story could have been written about such a character and his impact on the world, without the need for him to be in this story.
Basically I think that the author of the Watchmen probably had all these little stories/super heroes he wanted to write about, but couldn't settle on one, so he put them all in the same story and tried to tie it up together. A lot like Quentin Tarantino, except QT does it right.
I also liked Dr. Manhattan, and again he too feels like he was throw in a story he didn't really belong in. A story could have been written about such a character and his impact on the world, without the need for him to be in this story.
Basically I think that the author of the Watchmen probably had all these little stories/super heroes he wanted to write about, but couldn't settle on one, so he put them all in the same story and tried to tie it up together. A lot like Quentin Tarantino, except QT does it right.
BigJonsson
Member
Geeze, I didn't realize its only made that much money
- Status