Review: Watchmen

Yup. What he said. Can't wait for this one to come out. Perfect film for Blu-ray - throw in the 3 hour diector's cut and I'm literally coming in my pants right now.

Tales of the Black Freighter is worth seeking out too. More a fun distraction than a proper supplementary story (never really liked it in the book tbh) but the animation is cool.

Kinda breaks my heart that this 'flopped', although it wasn't a huge failure by any means. A lot of people have said it's low box-office takings mean that studios won't risk big bucks on making films like this again, but to them I say - how many other books are there like Watchmen ARE there?

Finally saw this. Finished 20mins ago and loved it. Absolutely loved it. Dark, cynical, miserable, nihilistic superhero movie. What The Dark Knight could've been if they had the balls to go all out with an 18 cert. Surprised at how nasty it was, idealogically and graphically - The Comedian made me hate him then like him then loathe him all in the space of about 10mins.
Rorschach was the most interesting character, as others have said, by far. Loved it when he was demasked and in prison - a total loony with zero fear of anything.
Makes me want to read the comic now to see what was missed out, but one of my favourites I've seen this year so far.
If Jackie Earl Hayley was Batman, I wouldn't snigger into my popcorn when Bats does his growly voice - as it is, Bale is just a lisping bloke with a cough. I got genuine sociopathic menace & fury from Rorschach, could have watched a 3hr movie just about him.
5 Star.
Fuck Transformers etc, this is what a Summer Blockbuster should be with intelligence & giving the audience the benefit of figuring stuff out for themselves.

i have not read the GN and still enjoyed this film a lot. I've always wanted batman and other comic book type "super heroes" to actually use powers on people on the big screen and I finally got it. while this movie may or may not have followed the book i don't know nor care. as a stand alone movie i thought it was great.

Rorschach was by far the most interesting character and the best acted. If he had the screen time as ledger did in batman, i would proably put them on par with each other.

expectations were probably to high for this movie for most out there due to fandom and the fact it's been talked about since the 90's.

Fairly good really. It's certainly got a depth and message beyond any comic I've seen and the characters are interesting, very well written and adequately fleshed out. However, something about this film is not right. The structure, particularly in the first half is too rigid. I've not read the source material but I'm guessing it's episodic and that doesn't work here. You start with Rorschach pursuing a mystery and then don't see him again for what seems like a ridiculous amount of time. To be honest it ruins the pacing as well for while the other characters are fleshed out, it's the mystery that should be driving the story. There is no kind of tension or build. Not much happens, Manhattan says the world is about to end and you're left thinking "Oh right, this'll be ending soon then". The source material is great but this film is on a par with sticking tracing paper over the Mona Lisa. It's a pale imitation of what it's supposed to be.

I read there's a clip cut from the credits with The Comedian raising the flag on Iwo Jima by himself.

Oh, I also love how the anti piracy brigade say that "It's the experience of cinema that counts"

Generally, I find the experience to be varying degrees of dirty surroundings (unless it's a new cinema) tacky floors, people getting in your way, braying laughs and charvas talking on mobile phones.

The only movie I haven't had one of the above with, although there was a huge pack of chavs at the back was the aforementioned "Pan's Labyrinth". Go figure. I was ready to demand my cash back as I had waited months so see it. They must have enjoyed it because there wasn't a peep out of them until it finished.

I like to pause my movie if I need a piss as well.

If it's something I *really* want to see, I'll pay at the cinema.

Extras scenes are the prison psychiatrist and how R's story takes his marriage to breaking point, and the news stand guy and the customer. Black Freighter obv, which mirrors what happens in the main thread, and I'm not sure if they'll have Under The Hood as chapter ends.

I will be buying the extended DVD. There's a number of movies I've seen downloaded and then bought or seen at the cineam. "Let the right one in" for example, "Pan's Labyrinth" i saw at the cinema, downloaded a copy, then bought the DVD. Same with 300.

Something like "Far Cry", which exists only because the director says he's only in it for the money, well, he can suck my big blue wang.

How close is purple to blue?

Only if you share it. Personally if you tried to share your blue wang with me, copyright laws would be the least of your worries.

I think it was that fat nerd who works for Steam who said they don't treat videogame pirates as criminals, more like under-served customers. That's probably the best any industry susceptible to piracy can hope for, seeing as "pirates" will find a way around any attempts to block access to content.

A hypothetical question:
In 10 years a machine is invented that can display your thoughts on a screen. You have a photographic memory and are able to transmit exactly what you've seen at the cinema onto the screen - you are, in effect, a walking camcorder. Could you be fined for that? The way piracy works at the moment is essentially the same: data is shared between mediums/formats.

Am I breaking copyright laws when I close my eyes and imagine that blue wang? I mean if. IF.

I think that made some sort of point.

I consider myself an average film viewer, with average tastes. A lot of films that come out I wouldn't pay to see at the cinema, or on DVD - they appear on cable after about a year, and that's fine.

BUT.

Surely there's more chance of someone like me going out and buying the DVD (or merchandise, can't wait for my Dr. Manhattan anatomically-correct figurine to arrive) if I've seen it elsewhere?

If someone would just download the film anyway, what's the point of chasing them when they could potentially be a customer in other ways?

Gimme a break, I'm a parent. I can't get the time even if I didn't hate my local cinema.
Last time I went there was for "The Golden Compass" and ended up demanding my £ back from the manager who refused to deal with shouty, phone waving chimps at the front.

I'll watch this and if I like it, buy the DVD.

And I thought the £8.10 for my local were expensive. There have been loads of films recently that I've wanted to see at the cinema, Watchmen included, but who is going to spend £80+ over 2 months when you can watch them via a few clicks of your mouse? I'll go and see Let The Right One In when it's released because I feel cheap for watching it online and it's a film that deserves my money.

That's cheap round my neck of the woods. Really. Adult ticket in our local Cineworld is something like £12. Pretty disgusting when you factor in popcorn etc. But that's why I pay monthly and buy my sweets from the shop down the road. *cracks knuckles* Oh yeah.

I paid £5.30 each to go see it at the cinema - they owe me. Tickets for the later showing were £6.80. That's obscene.

But yes, one of the few recent films I'd consider buying on DVD.

I hope the director's cut actually has supplemental material, and not just extended scenes. Because the scenes I saw were extended enough already. I'd like some more of Rorschach's diary I think. Might be interested to see the Black Freighter stuff weaved into the main feature, if that's being planned.

Anyone actually planning to buy it? Or are we all downloaders?

Loved it. Some things didn't work, but that was because it was basically trimmed for a general release. Roll on the directors cut with all the elements intact.

Also, yeah was way too long because the scenes were dragged out, and a flashback every 2 minutes. Seemed like the Garth Marenghi technique if padding an episode by using slow motion.

Saw this last night. It was good - definitey a par above your X-Men and Push movies. Never read the comic but comics aren't films so that point is null. Nice to see an interesting moral dilemma for once, and to be treated like an adult when watching my cartoon violence. Were the Nite Owl and thingy characters blatantly Lois and Clark-ish, or is there some reference/history I'm missing there? They do genuinely interesting things, like joke about people getting killed, and getting aroused by the excitement - I imagine it's the same mentality an ambulance driver, or soldier adopts after seeing so much violence. Except the arousal bit. They were just stone cold freaks.

Also, is it wrong to expect a big, blue, glowing bellend when you scroll to the bottom of this page? This blue shaft of a website will never be the same again.

As someone who hasn't read the comic- i think you definately need to if you want to enjoy this film properly!
Was way too long and the blue guys shlong was just too distracting!
The guy who played Rorschach was fab though!! He was what made the film in my eyes

How are the Americans getting along with blue atomic cock? I cant imagine it's going down well over there.

I've never read it, no. Just assumed that because the movie was all oil and gristle, it was taking a few filmic licences.

Reviews for Watchmen have been divisive to say the least. I've seen the full spectrum - ones to fives. I know die hard fans who loved it and some who despised it, and non-fans who felt the same ways. It's a total Marmite movie and not everyone's gonna like it. But hey, at least it's not boring.

"Alan, relax - we know you weren't happy with Snyder as director. Like us, you probably saw what he did with Frank Miller's 300 – buckets of style, precious little substance."

Have you read 300? There's actually *more* substance to the movie than the book.

Book then movie is the way to do it. I think you could probably knock a star off if you have no idea what's going on. Not really a very admirable trait for a movie to require prior reading to understand it, but it's pretty unavoidable in this case I think.

Never read the comic, slightly interested in the film.
But I don't want to see blue superhero cock, no matter dark and edgy it is

Aye, I was hammered. What do you expect? It's a Friday (not that that matters)

Ali, that's the reason I am eagerly awaiting this movie. The book will remain the book. This movie isn't going to damage that, but I will judge the movie on it's own merits.

In a perfect world, we would have a version totally faithful with nothing cut, but in a perfect world we would get an HBO Preacher series, with an episode an issue, but that ain't going to happen :(

Ha, Pands. You drunken hobo, you.

I'm always of the opinion 'It's just a movie'. Just as a shitty remake doesn't affect the brilliance of the original, a shitty comic-book adaptation doesn't delete the original from existence. In this case, as I said, I think it's going to have people seeking out the book to make more sense of it and to extend the universe a little bit more. In that respect at least, it compliments the book nicely.

But fuck it, life's too short. It's just a movie. One day, someone somewhere will greenlight a Jaws remake. That's just the way it is.

Oh Christ he's drunk.

DP (waHEY!)

Oh, and Lost Girls is slash fiction. There is no getting away from it. Nice drawings of Wendy and Alice getting it are no different from Riker and Picard doing each other up the wrong 'un IMHO. ;D

Oh, and Lost Girls is slash fiction. There is no getting away from it. Nice drawings of Wendy and Alice getting it are no different from Riker and Picard doing each other up the wrong 'un IMHO. ;D

The case with Moore is that a lot of his recent output is taking someone elses characters and adapting it. "I increasingly fear that nothing good can come of almost any adaptation,"

But he essentially does adaptations with Lost Girls, League Of Extraordinary Gentlemen (Swamp Thing wasn't his creation but he changed direction massively with it.)

So what is the difference with him taking someone elses material and doing something new, and someone else taking *his* material and doing something new, and in a different medium?

Fair enough. And of course, despite everything I said, I'll be the first in line to see this.

Well then you're damned if you do and you damned if you don't. This was never intended to be a work of great originality, it's a faithful and reverent homage to a classic piece of fiction and nothing else. It's not a work of art, but it sure looks like one.

And it's not really meant to be a counter-argument to Moore's criticisms. It's just a bit of fun. I didn't actually send a letter to him :)

While I appreciate this article as a review of Snyder's film, I don't think that it really works as a counter-argument to Moore's criticisms. If you were to examine his interviews more thoroughly, you'd realize that he isn't bemoaning the choice of the director -- he even admits not having seen 300 -- he opposes adaptations in general (of course, he sold the rights to his comics, but that's a different story entirely). Also, Moore's complaints are directed at comic books as well, and not just Hollywood, so your remark about how he believes Hollywood hinders the progress of comic books isn't valid.

And while most Moore adaptations have been awful, I don't think absolute faithfulness is the ultimate virtue either. I can't really judge the movie until I've seen it by myself, but I can say that a near-carbon copy of a work of art is not a work of art in itself. It's ironic how everyone celebrates the movie's faithfulness to the source material, when a large part of the comic's appeal was about how different it was.

The idea of this movie, with The Black Freighter, Under The Hood and the two Bernie's replaced makes me almost sexually excited.

To all the naysayers. This movie isn't going to be perfect. I fulyy understand that. What it isn't is the first Sam Hamm version (http://www.scifiscripts.com/scripts/wtchmn.txt) or disrespectful of the source ala The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen.

I'll watch, I'll think it's not as good as the GN, but fuck it, it could have been sooooo much worse.