My Watchmen Review (beware spoilers)

[SpursWoman]

That was including the DVD estimates...

Basically it had a 55 million dollar opening weekend based entirely upon hype and then fell off the map. It's expected to take in 16 million this weekend and get it's ass kicked by Race to Witch Mountain

I took my kids to see Witch Mountain on Friday and I liked it better than Watchman.

[whottt]

I think it's silly to say it's unfilmable. Watchmen is no less filmable than any other book. It was a revolutionary comic, but it wasn't the first and only novel to incorporate nontraditional storytelling devices.

Those are the words of Alan Moore...

Overall it translated onto film just fine.

Looks to me like a groundbreaking Hugo Award winning piece of literature that blended fantasy and realism is now going to be remembered as a lackluster action flick about a guy with a glowing johnson...


I'd hardly call that translating just fine...then again, I haven't seen it yet, but the previews didn't really get me enthused to go out and see it.

Some flaws, but very few that were a direct result of the book-to-film transfer. The average moviegoer doesn't leave the theater with any less of an understanding of the basic narrative than someone who reads the book.

If Watchmen loses money, a big reason for that will be its R rating. The filmmakers could have gone the safer route and released a watered down PG13 version to summer blockbuster audiences but I'm glad they didn't.

I expect that after I see the Watchmen the main thing I will take away from it will be that Kelly Leak grew up to be Rorshach...but that's just my early guess.

[dickface]

If Watchmen loses money, a big reason for that will be its R rating.

That, plus the fact that it sucks.

[whottt]

I took my kids to see Witch Mountain on Friday and I liked it better than Watchman.

It looks better than Watchmen in the previews too

[dickface]

Looks to me like a groundbreaking Hugo Award winning piece of literature that blended fantasy and realism is now going to be remembered as a lackluster action flick about a guy with a glowing johnson...

[Cant_Be_Faded]

lol at spurswoman having kids

Spurminator makes a good point, this movie bombing does absolutely nothing to help the cause of more movies of this genre being rated R.

[Spurminator]

Those are the words of Alan Moore...

He's a reclusive and cynical curmudgeon with an overinflated sense of the importance of his work. Of course he thinks it can't be made into a movie.

[SpursWoman]

lol at spurswoman having kids

I've had them for about 13 years now .... ?

[whottt]

Ok Spurminator...you like the movie, I get it. I'm just going by my reaction from the previews and what I know of the backstory from Moore. The fact remains it is on place to be a total bomb.

Add that to that the fact that what cons utes high praise for this film, even from it's vociferous defenders, is stuff like:


"It wasn't a bad film really"
"I've seen worse"
"It was ok"
"It didn't totally suck"
"It was fine"

And the easy conslusion is that this film is the Superhero version of Ishtar...

[whottt]

He's a reclusive and cynical curmudgeon with an overinflated sense of the importance of his work. Of course he thinks it can't be made into a movie.

He's also somewhat of a genius storyteller...

I mean could you write a Hugo award winning comicbook?

[Spurminator]

Ok Spurminator...you like the movie, I get it. I'm just going by my reaction from the previews and what I know of the backstory from Moore.
...
He's also somewhat of a genius storyteller...

I mean could you write a Hugo award winning comicbook?

Whether I liked it or not is irrelevant. What I'm saying is the claim that Watchmen can't be made into a movie is just fanboy snobbery.

Alan Moore has admitted to not being wild about movies in general, so it's no surprise that he'd distance himself from the film versions of his books. Still, Watchmen is a book that is meant to be read front to back, has a beginning and an end, and can be made into a movie without being completely different from the spirit of source material.

It's not like Moore invented some new storytelling technique where you have to read two pages at once starting from the middle in order to fully grasp the idea. It's not like Dr. Manhattan glows in a color previously unseen in the color spectrum, and therefore impossible to translate to screen. Unfilmable my ass.

The fact remains it is on place to be a total bomb. Add that to that the fact that what cons utes high praise for this film, even from it's vociferous defenders, is stuff like:

"It wasn't a bad film really"
"I've seen worse"
"It was ok"
"It didn't totally suck"
"It was fine"

And the easy conslusion is that this film is the Superhero version of Ishtar...

We'll see, I guess. I haven't really paid attention to box office numbers. I hope it's successful because I'd like to see more adult-skewed films of this nature, but if you're right then I guess the masses have spoken: they prefer Fantastic Four. High five!

[whottt]

If it makes you feel any better...Alan Moore is probably more pissed off about the R rating than anyone else is...that's the other part of the reason he hasn't willingly written a comic for DC in 20 years.

[whottt]

<<<<<<*makes mental note that Spurminator will defend the concept of any literary work being transferable to film with an intensity that makes Zionist Jews defense of Israel look like blatant indifference*

Everyone has their passion I spose...and now at last Spurm's has been revealed :waiveswhiteflag

[Spurminator]

Pfft, this is nothing. If you really want to get me worked up let's talk about merging traffic.

[whottt]

I forgot about that one

[CuckingFunt]

I thought it was true when CBF was railing against The Dark Knight and I think it's true here: sharing your expert opinion on a film you haven't yet seen is just silly. However, wasting energy on a response to that opinion is equally silly, so... have at it.

Ultimately, however, I don't think that either of your arguments carry much weight. It's impossible to use losing money as evidence that a film is bad because, by that same logic, you'd have to use making money as evidence that Meet The Spartans is good. And Alan Moore's comments are largely irrelevant because he has already made his biases against film adaptations quite clear. He through hissy fits about From and V for Vendetta being adapted, and those were both good films, too.

[whottt]

On the contrary my dear Funt, in this case if the film turns out to be a flop it can only be because it was bad. It's not like it was poorly promoted or people hadn't heard of it. It won't even be because it wasn't true to the orginal story, because most of the people seeing it haven't read the original.

If it has a huge opening weekend and suffers a 70% decline in revenue by the following weeked, it can only be because it was poorly received and wasn't striking a resonant chord with anyone.

It doesn't get to pull the artsy fartsy card...a 55 million dollar opening weekend precludes it from that excuse.

It just appears it's not that good of a film. I will however withold ultimate judgement until actually seeing it.

[CuckingFunt]

If it has a huge opening weekend and suffers a 70% decline in revenue by the following weeked, it can only be because it was poorly received and wasn't striking a resonant chord with anyone.

That still wouldn't necessarily mean it's bad.

[Cant_Be_Faded]

I've had them for about 13 years now .... ?

exactly

LOL

[Mark in Austin]

Saw it on Friday - my quick take:

Own and love the novel. Overall was satisfied with the movie. I expect the longer cut that comes out later to be better. I view this as facing a similar challenge as Kingdom of Heaven several years ago. To hit a certain run time, they cut out all the character development. I thought the theatrical version was dog - came in at about 120 minutes. Once Riddly Scott was able to release the 184 minute director's cut that brought back all the character development and emotional resonance, it is one of my top 5 favorite movies of all time.

I suspect Watchment will be similar. Some films just need to be long to tell their story the right way - in fact some films actually feel shorter when they add running time because the story draws you in and keeps you absorbed better. I never really fully connected emotionally with the characters in the current cut except for Rorshach and to a certain extent The Comedian and Dr Manhattan. The execution was excellent though; and I'm happy to withhold judgement until I see the movie at its true fighting weight.

[Spurtacus]

Never read the graphic novel so I went into the film knowing very little.

Overall, I rated it a 7/10. I liked the alternate history/timeline. Characters were well developed. Plot was solid as well. Some of the dialogue went over my heads but that may be because I saw a 3 hour movie at 11pm beginning time. Not too thrilled with seeing blue dong on screen so much.

[mFFL03]

That, plus the fact that it sucks.

ditto.

[MannyIsGod]

Wanted to bump this since I saw it on DVD this weekend. I enjoyed it far more the 2nd time around, and I think its because I understood more about the characters this time. Maybe I just didn't pay attention enough the first time or something, but the 2nd time was better.

Still not the greatest movie ever, but very good and visually stunning. I also think the opening credit sequence is quite good - fwiw.

Those of you that haven't watched it should pick it up and give it a couple of tries.

[JoeChalupa]

I'm going to Red Box this.

[Cane]

Saw it a couple of days ago.

8/10 - Never read the book but I'm a movie buff.

The style was awesome but if you don't like long narrative flashbacks then this movie isn't for you. Nixon also looked like and wasn't much better than those Nixon masks imo but this seems intentional.

Also didn't enjoy the ending especially how Dr. Manhattan handled it but the very last few seconds made it somewhat okay.