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

Rottenwatch: WATCHMEN

Status
Not open for further replies.
Spectral Glider said:
Watched it last night. Not my cup of tea. Had some good parts towards the end, when it finally got there. Movie moves at a snail's pace.
Click to expand...

There's a lot of story to tell. It's not like this was akin to Public Enemies which took 2.5 hours to explain 1 hour of information.
 
Spectral Glider said:
Watched it last night. Not my cup of tea. Had some good parts towards the end, when it finally got there. Movie moves at a snail's pace.
Click to expand...
I don't know how fast the snails move in your neck of the woods but come on. There was a shitload of story crammed into that 3 hours.
 
AgentOtaku said:
One more thing...

I still think Billy Crudup is the star in this and gives the most genuine performance (IE: not acting like a cartoon character), especially during Osterman's origin story ...not Jackie Earl Haley
Click to expand...

Jeffrey Dean Morgan made The Comedian a pretty real character I think.
 
ok here is some red meat for you guys, wmen compared to kubricks lolita

I've been thinking a lot about Watchmen this week, which I think is a good sign, and paying attention to the online response to it. I've seen everything from "This movie is evil and you are evil if you want to see it" to "It puts me into a state of homosexual panic because it shows the penis of one of the characters" to "My favorite panel was not dramatized in the way I imagined and therefore Hollywood is evil and should be destroyed."

The people who hate, hate, hate it seem to fall into three groups: those who feel it isn't enough like the comic, people who feel it's too much like the comic, and those who cannot abide the very idea of people reading comics under any circumstances. It's kind of strange to find, fifty or more years after Wertham, so many critics publicly denouncing comics readers. It's one thing to say "I don't like Watchmen because it's long and boring and violent," all of which are defensible, but it's something else again to say "I don't like Watchmen because it was made to serve the needs of an audience I cannot stand."

The other movie I keep thinking about with regard to Watchmen is, oddly enough, Stanley Kubrick's Lolita. The novel Lolita was, in its time, also considered "unfilmable," and was also regarded as a modern classic. Kubrick, like the makers of Watchmen, faced a great deal of pressure from many different agencies -- people who thought the novel and its audience were evil, people who thought the novel could not be served cinematically, and, of course, people who stood to make money off the final product.

While I think it's too early to say that Zack Snyder is another Stanley Kubrick, the weird thing is, Zack Snyder's movie of Watchmen is substantially more loyal to its source material than is Kubrick's Lolita. Kubrick couldn't do two-thirds of what he wanted to do with Lolita, and who knows what the movie would have been like if he had. But we now have Stanley Kubrick's Lolita, and we have Vladimir Nabokov's Lolita, and somehow the world didn't end and both are still available to experience and both are more or less taken seriously by serious-minded folk. Zack Snyder, through a confluence of unrepeatable phenomena to rival the list that Dr. Manhattan recites to Silk Spectre II, somehow got more freedom to shoot his unfilmable modern classic than Kubrick did in 1962, and at much higher risk to the money folk, and whatever the outcome I think that has to be considered a good thing.

Whatever one thinks of it, Watchmen is a very dense narrative, and a very daring, ambitious piece of moviemaking -- difficult, thorny and not easily digested -- especially when one considers that it's intended to be a mainstream smash and not some funky little boutique project. It is also, for better or worse, more or less the book. The people who, for whatever reason, were bored or outraged or confused (or thrown into a state of homosexual panic), I think, in the months and years to come, will find themselves arguing with their friends and haunted by the movie's arresting images. I think they'll start to see ideas and themes from the movie come up in their daily lives, and they'll come back to it on DVD or whatever home-viewing options the future brings, and maybe they'll be directed back to the book (which is #1 at Amazon this week) and maybe they'll never completely "get" it, but at least it's out there now to be experienced and to become part of our culture and I can't see that as bad.
Click to expand...
http://toddalcott.livejournal.com/263434.html#cutid1
 
birdman said:
Jeffrey Dean Morgan made The Comedian a pretty real character I think.
Click to expand...

Ya know I really wanted to believe that ...but I think his dialog (which is obviously following the GN too closely if not verbatim) is just too disconnected like others have mentioned. He hits the right notes in some parts but others just falls flat ...namely the big ones, like the rape, the vietnemese bar, etc.
Because of the dialog, it sounds like he's just rehearsing a play alot of the time unfortunately.
 
Sooooooo, I finally watched this for this first time today, never read the novel!
Is the reason ever one loves this, because at the end, the " good guys"( well one of them) agrees with the " bad guy"! I did lol when he said 35 minutes ago. It was really good BUT WTF WHY did they kill you know who at the end WTF! That made me not like it a little bit. Also holy shit the actress that played John and what's face girlfriend dammmmnn, shes hot!
 
Finally watched it. Great stab at making an unfilmable film and the added layer of "cleverness" to the changed ending was better on screen than I expected. The real ending would have been ridiculous.

Also, sadly it made me reappraise my youthful love of the original material. It's not as clever as I thought it was when I was a teenager. In fact, some of it is pretty clunky and sophomoric. I think it's basically dated poorly.
 
neoism said:
Sooooooo, I finally watched this for this first time today, never read the novel!
Is the reason ever one loves this, because at the end, the " good guys"( well one of them) agrees with the " bad guy"! I did lol when he said 35 minutes ago. It was really good BUT WTF WHY did they kill you know who at the end WTF! That made me not like it a little bit. Also holy shit the actress that played John and what's face girlfriend dammmmnn, shes hot!
Click to expand...

Why is there no screening process for GAF?
 
neoism said:
Sooooooo, I finally watched this for this first time today, never read the novel!
Is the reason ever one loves this, because at the end, the " good guys"( well one of them) agrees with the " bad guy"! I did lol when he said 35 minutes ago. It was really good BUT WTF WHY did they kill you know who at the end WTF! That made me not like it a little bit. Also holy shit the actress that played John and what's face girlfriend dammmmnn, shes hot!
Click to expand...

I thought the dialouge before hand explained it pretty well.
 
neoism said:
Sooooooo, I finally watched this for this first time today, never read the novel!
Is the reason ever one loves this, because at the end, the " good guys"( well one of them) agrees with the " bad guy"! I did lol when he said 35 minutes ago. It was really good BUT WTF WHY did they kill you know who at the end WTF! That made me not like it a little bit. Also holy shit the actress that played John and what's face girlfriend dammmmnn, shes hot!
Click to expand...
What? I have no idea what the fuck you just said.
 
neoism said:
Sooooooo, I finally watched this for this first time today, never read the novel!
Is the reason ever one loves this, because at the end, the " good guys"( well one of them) agrees with the " bad guy"! I did lol when he said 35 minutes ago. It was really good BUT WTF WHY did they kill you know who at the end WTF! That made me not like it a little bit. Also holy shit the actress that played John and what's face girlfriend dammmmnn, shes hot!
Click to expand...
No it's more so the fact that the
"good guy" was a mass murdering lunatic and the "bad guy" saved the world. It was the "chaotic neutral" guy who agreed with the "bad guy" once he finally came to the realization that humanity was actually worth saving. "You know who" was killed because he was going to fuck everything up with his whole "Never compromise, even in the face of armageddon" attitude. His moral absolutism was going to make things worse.

This type of moral ambiguity was unheard of for a comic back in the 80s and that's one of the big reasons why it was so popular. It was a breath of fresh air in that regard. The movie adaptation may not be as much so arriving on the heels of TDK, but I still feel it's a breath of fresh air compared to the other comic book flicks out there, TDK notwithstanding.
 
JdFoX187 said:
What? I have no idea what the fuck you just said.
Click to expand...
This is what I wanted to say but I'm stupid, and I was really high when I typed that!
polyh3dron said:
No it's more so the fact that the [spoiler["good guy" was a mass murdering lunatic and the "bad guy" saved the world. It was the "chaotic neutral" guy who agreed with the "bad guy" once he finally came to the realization that humanity was actually worth saving. "You know who" was killed because he was going to fuck everything up with his whole "Never compromise, even in the face of armageddon" attitude. His moral absolutism was going to make things worse.[/spoiler]

This type of moral ambiguity was unheard of for a comic back in the 80s and that's one of the big reasons why it was so popular. It was a breath of fresh air in that regard. The movie adaptation may not be as much so arriving on the heels of TDK, but I still feel it's a breath of fresh air compared to the other comic book flicks out there, TDK notwithstanding.
Click to expand...
STILL, he was fucking awesome! He ended up telling everyone anyway! :/
 
Anything new come up in the media regarding this movie? I want to keep updated on every detail of the fallout regarding this film:lol

-Kye
 
OuterWorldVoice said:
Also, sadly it made me reappraise my youthful love of the original material. It's not as clever as I thought it was when I was a teenager. In fact, some of it is pretty clunky and sophomoric. I think it's basically dated poorly.
Click to expand...


no, it hasn't. Perhaps watching the movie before re-reading the comic made you appreciate a more fast paced and modern take on the story, but that never was Moore's intent. He never wanted to write a "cool" comic book, he wanted to tell a story where every balloon has a meaning, using "dull" storytelling on purpose. I've been reading it at least twice a year since 1990 and it's still the best I've ever read
 
Saw the movie for the first time yesterday, never read the source material and i loved it. Watched with the wife and we both thought it was an awesome movie.

I love Roscharch to death, bu far my favorite character, also Dr. Manhattan was very cool, the rest were pretty meh IMO.
 
What's different in the Director's Cut? Wikipedia doesn't really say anything in particular :( And any news on that ultimate version? I was looking forward to a DC with BF & Under the Hood integrated into the movie just like in the book but that's not gonna happen, is it? :(

This Director's Cut you guys are talking about doesn't have the BF edited into the movie itself right?
 
About a month ago, a coworker of mine told me he just watched the Watchmen. He said it was great, and there should be an "X-Men versus Watchmen" movie next.

I said nothing. NOTHING.
 
How About No said:
About a month ago, a coworker of mine told me he just watched the Watchmen. He said it was great, and there should be an "X-Men versus Watchmen" movie next.

I said nothing. NOTHING.
Click to expand...

How About No
Junior Member
(Today, 11:18 AM)
Reply | Quote
 
Arjen said:
Saw the Directors cut to, no idea why they don't release this in Europe, it felt so much better.
Click to expand...

It's never coming to Europe? Guess I have to order the region 1 version from Amazon then. :/
 
Just finished Watchmen on Blu-Ray (director's cut)

I knew nothing of the source material going into it, so keep that in mind for those who read my comments.

Aside from being a bit uneven in pacing, I enjoyed the movie more then most 3 hour movies.
The first 20 mins was very disjointed, which made it hard to get into the movie. I think this is where not knowing much of the source material, effected many peoples opinions. But, after sticking with it, it held my interest as I started to see the back stories.

Biggest complaint:
The love story in the movie was uninspired, and I honestly did not care about it at all.
Which would have also allowed them (they still could have even with the love story) to easily end with the pan out in Antarctica.

I loved the atmosphere in the movie, the lighting was fantastic. Plus some very creative shots in the movie too, especially the shot in the prison with the swinging door.

All in all, a nice evening spent watching a movie :)
 
So the ultimate cut on Blu Ray comes out tomorrow...anyone get this early? What's included? Sorry for bumbing thread but I didn't wanna make a new thread either.
 
I watched the director's cut over the weekend for the first time, and I just want to say that
Hollis Mason's death scene
was way better than I thought it'd be. I was very surprised by how good that was.
 
ravien56 said:
So the ultimate cut on Blu Ray comes out tomorrow...anyone get this early? What's included? Sorry for bumbing thread but I didn't wanna make a new thread either.
Click to expand...


I'd like to hear about this as well. I totally forgot about this.
 
Picked up the Ultimate Cut thanks to some well-combined gift cards. Black Freighter or no, the best additions are the little scenes they had to put back in to make the cuts to/from Black Freighter segments flow better. The banter between the newsstand guy and the kid is great stuff.

Is there some site that shows the bitrates of BluRay discs? I don't have the wherewithall to swap discs for hours, but it seems to me the yellow in the opening titles was a little more yellow in the DC... could be my mind playing tricks.

BTW, the box the set comes in is great... except for how it attracts fingerprints and oils. You better have clean hands every time you touch the box, or you're going to be a sad panda.
 
Glad somebody bumped this, I actually picked up the Ultimate Cut for $30.99 from Amazon over the holidays, and enjoyed the film much, MUCH more than I did in theaters. Some really great extras in this set, too. All of the stuff they put back in really added to the tapestry of the film, and I'm kind of wishing they'd kept some of it for the theatrical release... namely, the Bernard/Bernard stuff and especially the death of Hollis Mason.

They should have cut that ridiculous sex scene to fit Hollis Mason in. :(
 
I loved this movie. I tried to buy the director's cut this weekend, but it was actually sold out at my local best buy.

how are the dvd/blueray sales going by the way?
 
Would it be safe to import the Ultimate Cut from the US to EU for use on a ps3? Amazon.co.uk doesn't say anything about it being locked but play.com does. Are there no other upcoming cuts*? Haven't been able to watch the movie again my cinema visit because of the silly versions released over here :( Don't want to buy anything less than stellar.

* I wanted the extended version with BOTH Black Freighter & Under The Hood :'( I don't give a shit if the movie is 4+ hours long!
 
I watched the extended director's cut of this again recently and still love many bits of it. The way it is shot is fabulous, and it captures a bizarre comic book mood better than almost any live action comic book film to date.

My only real problems with the film remain that Ozzy was miscast, tragically. Whatever Synder was going for, the experiment failed. A man like the book's Ozzy would have come across much better in live action.

And the book's ending, with the actual conversation between Ozzy and Jon, was the perfect end-cap. Changing it in the movie is nonsensical. I see no advantage in the way the ending plays out for the film.

However, I did like some of Snyder's different interpretation of characters that made them stronger than in the book. By the end of the film, Dan and Laurie were much stronger, more respectable people than in the book.

I love the result of Dan actually seeing Jon murder Rorschach to keep Ozzy's secret safe. In the book, Dan is a broken, defeated man who is made to look the fool by Ozzy. In the movie, Dan rages and is clearly held hostage by the fact that he knows Jon will use his power to keep the secret - Dan and Laurie are not philosophically defeated as in the book, but rather, forced along at gunpoint. Dan gets to tell Ozzy that he has, in the pursuit of peace, warped mankind into an unnatural shape. This is a major point, since the book implies a rather nihilistic view that only Ozzy's manipulation could unite mankind. In the movie Dan's objection counters this by suggesting that this state of affairs is not a healthy evolution of society.

The implication is that Ozzy's world peace is poisoned, and in the long run, doomed. While the book suggests this with the reveal of Rorschach's journal at the end, the movie is stronger for allowing Dan to rebel against Ozzy's dismissal of direct and honest attempts to improve the world, which is what the idealistic and "naive" costumed adventuring of Dan represent.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Rottenwatch: The Bride!
37
922
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