Who Watches the Watchmen? (New Movie Thread)

[GogglesPizanno]

Spoiler

I'm going to fall into the "Squid would have been silly" camp. Not because the FX couldn't have pulled it off, I think they probably could have done a good job visually with it, but more from the standpoint that it would have come out of nowhere. Cloverfield, Godzilla, Independence Day... all those examples were of films where the central plot point and conceit of the movie was mysterious creatures causing havok. The plot of Watchmen had nothing at all like that... so when you put something like that in a movie (especially one where a lot of the viewers are going int thinking its Batman), you are going to lose a lot of people. The ending they went with kept a similar dramatic theme, made it tie into the plot of film that the audience had just watched, and I think gave some necessary reasoning for why the world wouldn't just call on Dr. Manhattan to fix things.

As was stated before, had this been done as a long form miniseries, then perhaps the squid would have worked as you would have had the freedom to stretch out some of the smaller plot points... but given it was all compressed down to 2 1/2 hours... I think it was decent editorial and creative choice.

[TheMarvell]

Spoiler

You honestly think your average movie goer would find conjuring up a giant alien squid as the finale not absolutely ridiculous?

Spoiler

Godzilla, Cloverfield, Independance Day, Alien, Predator, Starship Troopers, etc etc etc etc etc.
The fact that it wasn't an actual alien in the story, but an SFX conjured up by the sorts used by film companies makes it less of a stretch than the above.
As for the credibility of the hoax; see Wells, Orson, War of the Worlds radio broadcast, or Roswell, Aliens.

Spoiler

That's comparing apples to oranges though. The above mentioned are all fine by the genre standards they fall in, but this a superhero movie that's supposed to be grounded in some sort of reality we can believe, and even relate to, of which a giant alien squid would contradict. I'm not saying it could never work for this film, but your average movie-going public wouldn't buy it.

[Previsionary]

I see a few complaints about the movie being 3 hours long (Titanic length?). Are you all going to skip the extended/director's cut which adds 20-30 more minutes to the run time?

[GogglesPizanno]

I see a few complaints about the movie being 3 hours long (Titanic length?). Are you all going to skip the extended/director's cut which adds 20-30 more minutes to the run time?

I'm not sure. I'll probably watch for the sake of curiosity.
I'm still trying to decide how i totally feel about it.

It reminds a lot of blade runner in that it was technically a very well done movie, but its gonna take me some time to really decide if I "liked" it. And I don't think 20-30 minutes of footage is going to change that... especially if they reinsert the Tales of the Black Freighter portion which i think is an interesting extra, but not something that needs to be included back in the film itself.

[tommyboy]

Spoiler

You honestly think your average movie goer would find conjuring up a giant alien squid as the finale not absolutely ridiculous?

Spoiler

Godzilla, Cloverfield, Independance Day, Alien, Predator, Starship Troopers, etc etc etc etc etc.
The fact that it wasn't an actual alien in the story, but an SFX conjured up by the sorts used by film companies makes it less of a stretch than the above.
As for the credibility of the hoax; see Wells, Orson, War of the Worlds radio broadcast, or Roswell, Aliens.

Spoiler

That's comparing apples to oranges though. The above mentioned are all fine by the genre standards they fall in, but this a superhero movie that's supposed to be grounded in some sort of reality we can believe, and even relate to, of which a giant alien squid would contradict. I'm not saying it could never work for this film, but your average movie-going public wouldn't buy it.

Spoiler

Not to quibble endlessly, but
A)Moore and Gibbons have called Watchmen a work of science fiction rather than a super hero book, and I rather think they know whereof they speak, and
b) would it be un-gallant of me to point out that you spoke of what "your average movie goer" would accept, and I gave examples of films popular with "average movie goers", all of which had more ridiculous content than a fake alien monster(ie real alien monsters).
To now start bringing genre into it seems a bit needless, (and will probably only provoke a long and dull dissertation on my part where I prove that superheroes are firmly a subset of Science fiction).
We must agree to differ on this small, unimportant point. I believe that you are mistaken, but you could be right, and it seems the makers of the film felt similarly to you, and they may well know the audience better than I.

[bredon7777]

Spoiler

You honestly think your average movie goer would find conjuring up a giant alien squid as the finale not absolutely ridiculous?

I've seen no evidence either way.  In the absence of evidence that proves they wouldn't accept it, my tendency is to believe that they wouldn't have a problem with it, yes.

[bredon7777]

I see a few complaints about the movie being 3 hours long (Titanic length?). Are you all going to skip the extended/director's cut which adds 20-30 more minutes to the run time?

Not sure if I'll see the extended cut in the theater or wait for the DVD which adds 'Tales from the Black Freighter' back in and pushes the running time to 4 hours+.

[lgmss]

Tales from the Black Freighter might be a short on the dvd, because it would be kind of hard to add it in, without adding in more of the side characters. Tales from the Black Freighter could even be it's own movie, but it would lose a lot of it's style, since it is a big part of Watchmen.

[bredon7777]

OK, spoiler free review first:

When it works, it's brilliant; when it doesn't work it's only slightly off, and it works far, far more often than it doesn't. It is very, very good, both as a movie and an adaptation of the source material; some poor directorial/adaptation choices keep it out of the range of being great, though.

Ultimately, I wanted to love it and I couldn't. But I liked it very, very much, and for the most part, that's good enough.

Now on to the meat;

Minor Quibbles
______________

Spoiler

The old age/Nixon makeup was dreadful.  Seriously, you paid money to license that Apple commericial for about 15 seconds, and on makeup you skimp?
Rorschach refers to his mask at least twice.  Only jarring if you've read the novel, but still - sloppy.
As is Roy Chess working for Pyramid delivers directly - Adrian wouldn't be that dumb.  And there was no reason to change that scene in the bar- if it was for time I can think of several gratuitous gore shots that could've been cut in it's place.
Too much gore - you have more than enough violence and nudity to give you "street cred", some of the gore shots were just plain unnecessary.
I actually don't have a problem with making SS not smoke- it eliminates a couple of my favorite lines of dialog, but it's a subplot that can otherwise be cut without harming the movie- as long as you eliminate the scene where she triggers Archie's flamethrower.  The woman is not an idiot, and is not going to push a button clearly marked with flames for no good reason.
Matthew Goode's accent wandered all over the place.  Sometimes he had it, sometimes he didn't.
Too much exposition in places: the death of the Big Figure and Laurie's revelation about The Comedian being the most blatant examples.  Trust your audience to get it, Snyder; don't ruin it for us by shoving it right in our faces.
As mentioned before, Nite Owl's cheesy "NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!" completely undercut one of the most dramatic and powerful scenes in the movie.

That's it for now. Next, the two MAJOR problems I had with the movie and everything I really liked about it.

[TheMarvell]

Spoiler

Godzilla, Cloverfield, Independance Day, Alien, Predator, Starship Troopers, etc etc etc etc etc.
The fact that it wasn't an actual alien in the story, but an SFX conjured up by the sorts used by film companies makes it less of a stretch than the above.
As for the credibility of the hoax; see Wells, Orson, War of the Worlds radio broadcast, or Roswell, Aliens.

Spoiler

Not to quibble endlessly, but
A)Moore and Gibbons have called Watchmen a work of science fiction rather than a super hero book, and I rather think they know whereof they speak, and
b) would it be un-gallant of me to point out that you spoke of what "your average movie goer" would accept, and I gave examples of films popular with "average movie goers", all of which had more ridiculous content than a fake alien monster(ie real alien monsters).
To now start bringing genre into it seems a bit needless, (and will probably only provoke a long and dull dissertation on my part where I prove that superheroes are firmly a subset of Science fiction).
We must agree to differ on this small, unimportant point. I believe that you are mistaken, but you could be right, and it seems the makers of the film felt similarly to you, and they may well know the audience better than I.

Spoiler

Like Goggles pointed out, the movies you give as examples all focused on those things. The squid was never the focus of Watchmen (which is one of the reasons why Snyder changed it). Including it would have only further removed the audience from what was happening. At least in how the film is set up. Including Bubastis with no explanation or point whatsoever was bad enough. But I digress. I totally agree though that superheroes are a blend of fantasy and science fiction. But I really think including the squid would have completely thrown off the movie, especially for those expecting it to be more like Batman. And lord knows a giant squid wouldn't work in a Batman flick.

Enough of the squid though. I'm curious about the director's cut dvd, but only if it actually adds character development. If there was one thing I was truly disappointed in with this movie, it's that there was hardly any character development after almost 3 hours.

[The Hitman]

Tales from the Black Freighter might be a short on the dvd, because it would be kind of hard to add it in, without adding in more of the side characters. Tales from the Black Freighter could even be it's own movie, but it would lose a lot of it's style, since it is a big part of Watchmen.

Tales of the Black Freighter is being released on March 24th as an animated feature- length movie. Kinda like Get Smart: Out of Control with Harold and Lloyd.

... What? It's my job to know these things.

And on the topic of the movie, I liked it. Went to the midnight show, got home at 4:00 am, but it was worth it. Like the book, it's gonna take multiple viewings, probably not until DVD, for me to really like it, but it was pretty good first time around.

Am am I the only person who thought...

Spoiler

Rorchach looked like the very ugly son of Chuck Norris and Clint Eastwood?

[captmorgan72]

I was shocked to see so many parents bringing there kids to see this. I just saw this tonight and had a family sitting in front of me. There was a dad and his maybe 8 year old son and maybe 13 year old daughter.

Spoiler

When the sex scenes started I noticed the teenage girl's mouth was hanging open and she was clearly seeing something she never had before. I looked at the boy and he looked very confused. Then the graphic violence was shown and the kids just stared. When Rorschach started splitting that guy's head with the cleaver the boy just said wow. I don't know but it just seemed wrong. Then when I left the theater I saw a huge crowd heading into the same theater I just came out of with a boat load of kids in tow.

I personally really liked the movie and want to see it again, but man, parents, leave the kids at home.

[Ajax]

Spoiler

You honestly think your average movie goer would find conjuring up a giant alien squid as the finale not absolutely ridiculous?

I've seen no evidence either way.  In the absence of evidence that proves they wouldn't accept it, my tendency is to believe that they wouldn't have a problem with it, yes.

Spoiler

It wouldn't have worked because there was no set up for the squid nor could they have done a set up given time constraints and what not. The movie was almost three hours and still felt rushed, imagine if they added the side story to explain the squid. So as far as the context of the movie goes, the changes they made, made sense and ultimately filled the same function. Why gripe? Last I checked the squid didn't have any special meaning behind it that would make people sit up and cheer at it's literary significance.

[bredon7777]

Spoiler

You honestly think your average movie goer would find conjuring up a giant alien squid as the finale not absolutely ridiculous?

I've seen no evidence either way.  In the absence of evidence that proves they wouldn't accept it, my tendency is to believe that they wouldn't have a problem with it, yes.

Spoiler

It wouldn't have worked because there was no set up for the squid nor could they have done a set up given time constraints and what not. The movie was almost three hours and still felt rushed, imagine if they added the side story to explain the squid. So as far as the context of the movie goes, the changes they made, made sense and ultimately filled the same function. Why gripe? Last I checked the squid didn't have any special meaning behind it that would make people sit up and cheer at it's literary significance.

It's a personal hot-button for me.  If you want to put your own take on something, write your own characters and direct that; or license the characters and write something original.  If you are adapting something that has already been written you have one job and one job only: to be as faithful to the source material as possible without damaging the story.

Spoiler

No one has made a convincing case that doing the original ending would've damaged the story. Instead everyone is just being offhand and dismissive, going "Oh, the squid would never have worked" as if it is a self-evident fact that should be obvious to everyone.

Guess what?  It's not.  I've seen no evidence the squid would not have worked, and until someone presents that case, backed up with facts, in my opinion, they will always have done a disservice to the story by changing the ending like they did.

Did it work, as an ending, in context? Sure.  Could they have screwed it up worse?  Hell, yes.  Would the original ending have been far superior?  In my opinion, absolutely.  And I don't buy for a second the "no time for a setup"- it would've taken an extra 2 minutes  in Adrian's monologue, tops (and if they're that concerned with time, I could easily find 120 cuttable seconds before that point).

[AncientSpirit]

Saw it today and loved it.    While it did seem a little long, it didn't seem as long as it actually was.

What I loved most about this film was the exact same thing I loved most about the graphic novel.   It was unique compared to everything else out there.   Whenever I go to a Batman/Spider-Man/Superman/Iron Man/Incredibles/X-Men/Super X Girlfriend/Fantastic Four/Hancock movie, I know I'm in for a mega super battle in the last reel.  Not knocking them; I enjoy the hell out of them.   But this was a thinking persons movie in the same way the graphic novel was a thinking person's "comic." 

My wife, daughter and son-in-law went with me and none of them had heard of the Watchmen before this.   My wife was certain that Manhattan was going to reverse time and undo everything like Christopher Reeve did in Superman. 

This remains entirely its own mix:  murder mystery and morality tale ... superhero and science fiction ... pulp fiction and philosophy.

[Ajax]

Spoiler

There was an entire subplot invovled with the squid, the missing scientist and what not. Plus several other things that lead to it not being something that just came out of left field. Even in your version with Adrian just going "oh and btw while you were all running around figuring this out I made a giant squid which will destroy several cities". The audience would just go "huh? Where did that come from?" If you want proof, then how bout Blake Snyder's "Save the Cat" book, which does a intro into the business of screenwriting. In it he makes the point that, in a movie the audience will only accept so many things, if you cross that line, you end up alienating or losing the audience. You can't set certain conditions up and then suddenly break the rules by going the complete opposite direction. Alan Moore had 300+ pages of comic, Snyder was lucky to get 2hrs and 40mins. Most studios try and limit screen time cause they know the longer a movie the less likely it is to be a big money maker. If you want proof look at the story behind Quiet Man and how every screenwriter will tell you that each genre has a sort of built in industry standard running time. was the movie perfect? No. Does it stand up to the original novel? no. I still agree with Gilliam, the Watchmen would best be served as a miniseries on a premium cable station like HBO/Showtime. There is just too much story/subtleties and what not that would be lost trying to fit it into a feature length format. Which ended up being the case, since in my opinion the movie basically told the story while ignoring most of the depth the comic had. Like reading a synopsis on wiki. Oh well, it was at least visually spot on.

[Figure Fan]

Saw it twice. I liked it the first time. Loved it the second time, mostly because I didn't have anxiety and unrealistically high hopes.

Spoiler

The opening fight and credits were absolutely amazing. Dr. Manhattan's CGI was breathtaking. The dream sequence and the scenes on Mars went over surprisingly well, and they more or less nailed the 'thermo-dynamic miracle' dialogue (One of my favorite parts from the book). A CGI character has never had me so transfixed, not to mention my eyes welling up with tears. The music throughout the film was great, and most of it was taken right from the book.

I liked the new ending better than the one in the book. Yeah, shocking. I think it works better, especially considering that Veidt attacked multiple cities around the world. Would I have liked to have seen the other cities being destroyed? Yeah, as I think it would have sold the ending a bit more. It still worked, regardless. I wish we could have gotten more Veidt, just because Goode portrayed him so well. Just the way his face was after his various lines in Karnak had me really impressed.

I liked that Dan and Adrian had a history, and that it culminated the way it did. I liked that Dan actually got to react to Rorschach's death. These were things that I felt the book could have benefited from.

So, I liked it, and while I felt that there were a few parts that might be been a bit better if they would have actually stuck to the book (The longer Laurie/Sally talk at the end, Jon walking across the water, etc.), they are mostly small and don't serve to change the story much at all.

I'm certainly looking forward to the director's cut. The extra time will definitely tie up/improve upon various parts.

[Jakew]

Did anyone else find some of the dialogue a bit weird? Like "Your hands, my PLEASURE"? What was the point of the that change?

Spoiler

And when Big Figure comments that he wants to smell Rorsharch "cooking" ... that comment only worked in context of the comic, where the henchmen was cutting through the lock with an oxy-torch to get at Rorscharch, and inadvertedly "cooking" his dead friend's body. In the film is was (to graphic effect) a power saw ... thus Big Figure's comment is totally non-sensical.

There were other annoying little changes/mistakes as well ... it's suprising considering the script had been polished by so many people.

Also, I may have missed this, but where did Laurie pick up the

Spoiler

gun she shot Ozy with? Someone on another board mentioned she got it from a prison guard but, if so, I must have missed it?

[Talavar]

I'm a fan of the comic, and quite enjoyed the movie - it wasn't perfect, but it was way better than it could have been, and has some moments that are truly great.

My wife, who's never read the comic, enjoyed it as well, maybe moreso. 

The film isn't to superhero movies what the graphic novel was to superhero comics, but it's still a major accomplishment.

[TheMarvell]

There was one thing that happened both in the book and in the movie that I never understood or maybe missed the explanation somewhere, but

Spoiler

how could Ozy catch that bullet? Was it his costume? Or did he use some of that genetic engineering on himself?

[tommyboy]

There was one thing that happened both in the book and in the movie that I never understood or maybe missed the explanation somewhere, but

Spoiler

how could Ozy catch that bullet? Was it his costume? Or did he use some of that genetic engineering on himself?

Spoiler

I think the idea was that Oz was in the peak of human condition. His mind, speed, strength and reflexes allowed him to calculate the speed of the bullet, and to move his hand fast enough to absorb the kinetic energy whilst slowing it down. Supposedly some martial artists and magicians can do a similar "trick" in real life. Bear in mind he easily beat the snot out of the Comedian, and did the same to both Rorschach and Nite Owl when both were attacking him at once.

[Tomato]

Not to get too far off topic with this, but I haven't seen this movie yet, and I was just wondering...

Spoiler

Is the part where Rorscharch kills the dogs in the movie? I don't much care about human mutilation and all that, but I have a real weakness for animals, dogs in particular.

Either way I'm still planning to see it (I'm going with my dad this next week during my spring break), but I might go to the bathroom or some such when/if that scene is playing.

[TheMarvell]

There was one thing that happened both in the book and in the movie that I never understood or maybe missed the explanation somewhere, but

Spoiler

how could Ozy catch that bullet? Was it his costume? Or did he use some of that genetic engineering on himself?

Spoiler

I think the idea was that Oz was in the peak of human condition. His mind, speed, strength and reflexes allowed him to calculate the speed of the bullet, and to move his hand fast enough to absorb the kinetic energy whilst slowing it down. Supposedly some martial artists and magicians can do a similar "trick" in real life. Bear in mind he easily beat the snot out of the Comedian, and did the same to both Rorschach and Nite Owl when both were attacking him at once.

Spoiler

I know that he was in tip-top shape, and was supposed to resemble basically an Olympic athlete in superhero form, but being able to catch a bullet? He's not Superman. This part bothered me in both the book and the movie and I just thought it had something to do with genetic engineering, or possibly his costume or something. I can buy him beating the crap out of Comedian, Nite Owl, and Rorschach because he was younger and in much better shape than them. But I find it hard to swallow that he can catch a bullet because he's at "the peak of the human condition." Is that really the only explanation?

Not to get too far off topic with this, but I haven't seen this movie yet, and I was just wondering...

Spoiler

Is the part where Rorscharch kills the dogs in the movie? I don't much care about human mutilation and all that, but I have a real weakness for animals, dogs in particular.

Either way I'm still planning to see it (I'm going with my dad this next week during my spring break), but I might go to the bathroom or some such when/if that scene is playing.

Yes, this part is in the film, but you don't see him do it directly, just shortly afterwards, if you catch my drift.

[thanoson]

Just got back form taking my GF to the show. She loved it. I felt it was very true to the spirit of the book. The ending DID NOT HURT the film and it still came off strong in the end. I liked it.

BTW, Danny Bonaduce did a great job as Rorsharc. 

[stumpy]

Spoiler

Regarding the bullet catch, it didn't really bother me, and bad physics usually does. It's just not that far outside the realm of things we are already buying into, if we are believing that Veidt can take a 200+ pound guy and throw him across a room. If we knew that the bullet was a high velocity rifle round, then I would have more of an issue with it because those travel way, way faster than handgun slugs. But, on this case, it was a handgun and we don't even know that it was a high load cartridge. In addition, Veidt wasn't seeing and catching random bullets out of the air; Laurie had taken very deliberate aim with him watching, so he know where the bullet was going to go. Obviously, real humans can't do this, but Veidt was the supposed to be the fastest person on the planet which is enough for me to let it slide.

Frankly, I am far more annoyed by movie scenes where a character is shot and the bullet's impact tosses him backwards (often lifting him off the ground) and into walls, over desks, through windows, etc. Utter nonsense for many reasons, not the least of which being that the bullet adds no more (and somewhat less, in reality) momentum to the target than it does to the shooter. Anyone who has fired a gun knows that, even with decent-sized rifle and shotgun shells, the most that one has to do is take a step back to keep one's feet. There is no chance of being blown back through the air.

[Jakew]

There was one thing that happened both in the book and in the movie that I never understood or maybe missed the explanation somewhere, but

Spoiler

how could Ozy catch that bullet? Was it his costume? Or did he use some of that genetic engineering on himself?

Spoiler

I think the idea was that Oz was in the peak of human condition. His mind, speed, strength and reflexes allowed him to calculate the speed of the bullet, and to move his hand fast enough to absorb the kinetic energy whilst slowing it down. Supposedly some martial artists and magicians can do a similar "trick" in real life. Bear in mind he easily beat the snot out of the Comedian, and did the same to both Rorschach and Nite Owl when both were attacking him at once.

Spoiler

I know that he was in tip-top shape, and was supposed to resemble basically an Olympic athlete in superhero form, but being able to catch a bullet? He's not Superman. This part bothered me in both the book and the movie and I just thought it had something to do with genetic engineering, or possibly his costume or something. I can buy him beating the crap out of Comedian, Nite Owl, and Rorschach because he was younger and in much better shape than them. But I find it hard to swallow that he can catch a bullet because he's at "the peak of the human condition." Is that really the only explanation?

Well, the guy also has "super intelligence"... essentially Watchmen has two genuine "superhuman" characters: Dr Manhattan and Ozymandias. Ozy's power just isn't as flashy as Dr Manhattan's.

I might add, the "bullet catch" is far less shocking in the film, as ALL the heroes are portayed as uber-ninjas, with Veidt seemingly slightly more uber than the rest of them.

[Podmark]

Saw it on Saturday. Overall I really liked it.

Spoiler

For the most part it was pretty spot on, and did a good job of recreating the story.
Fights scenes were all longer but I'm good with that, but some of them did go on too long. I also didn't like the extra gore in the alley fight, too much and that scene didn't need that.
I'd have preferred the original ending but I'm ok with the one they used.

[Panther_Gunn]

BTW, Danny Bonaduce did a great job as Rorsharc. 

While he might have been a good casting choice if he hadn't bulked up (Rorshac was supposed to be scrawny & wiry), I think the actual actor, Jackie Earle Haley (aka Kelly Leak from the original Bad News Bears) did an excellent job, and Danny was probably the only other one that could have beaten him for intense psycho takes. 

[BWPS]

I'm mad they didn't cast carrot top

Though he is too tall.

[captmorgan72]

There was one thing that happened both in the book and in the movie that I never understood or maybe missed the explanation somewhere, but

Spoiler

how could Ozy catch that bullet? Was it his costume? Or did he use some of that genetic engineering on himself?

Spoiler

If you notice when Ozy looks down at his hand the bullet is sort of lodged in his glove and he pulls it out. This tells me that his costume is bullet proof. Also notice that he looked like he was doing some mental calculations when Laurie was aiming the gun at him. Seems to me that he calculated the trajectory of the bullet and used his superior reflexes to "catch" the bullet.