Nekofrog Posted March 9, 2009 Share Posted March 9, 2009 You utterly fail at spoiler tag. Thanks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maco70 Posted March 9, 2009 Share Posted March 9, 2009 Maco I disagree, it seemed to me, it followed pretty damn close to the comic. few changes, nothing super huge. Overall Re-read my post... It followed it very close..aside from the things it outright cut and that ending. Anyone notice the name printed on the "device" used at the end? "Project S.Q.U.I.D." Clever maybe? I see the novel as a many layered story. The movie removes several layers... and several of them are the wrong layers. It was "good". I cannot imagine how 2 hours of character development and 45 minutes of fight scenes would be impressive to the casual viewer. The brutally of Rorschach made me love him a lot. In the theater I went, people started clapping for him when[spoilers] He savagely cut up that kidnapper after he fed her to those dogs. [/spoilers] I think the scene in the novel was much more effective. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Vagrance Posted March 9, 2009 Share Posted March 9, 2009 I hate that they destroyed the scene when Rorschach is "born". Turning him from a sociopath into an axe wielding crazy was disappointing. . I actually didn't mind it. They didn't have enough time to fully develop the character so they just kinda amped up the brutal a couple of notches in a shorter time span, although I quite love the story in the comic book as to how he got his mask, and I also wish they didn't make it seem like he hated the psychologist so much (in fact, I kinda wish they fleshed out the psychologist more) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liontamer Posted March 9, 2009 Share Posted March 9, 2009 Good deal, but not great. The comic is the best thing I've ever read, so it was a shame that so many important details had to be glossed over. Regardless, they ended up going pretty faithful with it with the time they had. When Alan Moore said that Watchmen wasn't designed to be a movie, I understand where he is coming from. It's a uniquely comic book style experience. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prophetik music Posted March 9, 2009 Share Posted March 9, 2009 not enough time. i loved the 'some clouds' line, i laughed quite hard at that. edit: this was for vagrance, not lt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Linkjing Donuts Posted March 9, 2009 Share Posted March 9, 2009 boo this movie didn't follow the comic book to the very detail because that's what i wanted and i'm sure everyone will agree fuck you zack for doing your best to keep it at a decent length for casual viewers i want the movie to be 5 hours long do it now or else Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I-n-j-i-n Posted March 9, 2009 Share Posted March 9, 2009 Way, way, way, way, way better than the Dark Knight could hope to be. I'm just disappointed that the non-celeb actors acted like they were non-celebs for the most parts. Lots of little rookie-isms as far as the acting itself went. Also might be a bit overlong for many viewers. I don't mind the movie not being a replica of the comic book. It couldn't have been anyway, and it's basically as good as they could possibly hope to make it. There's even a talk of a sequel and I'm intrigued by that, though the geeks will froth at the mouth over that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Upthorn Posted March 9, 2009 Share Posted March 9, 2009 I saw the movie tonight, and my overall feeling is that it pretty well did the graphic novel justice. Yes, some parts which would have helped to bring the story into a fuller light were cut. However, strictly speaking, they weren't necessary to follow the story. In fact, when I read the graphic novel, I skipped over "Under the Hood" and "Tales of the Black Freighter" segments when I got to them, and then went back and read them after I finished the storyline proper. Perhaps, though, it would have worked better as two 2.5 hour movies instead of one 3 hour film. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaxx Posted March 9, 2009 Share Posted March 9, 2009 Saw it, loved it. Haven't read the book (yet) so I'm coming from a different perspective than most of the contributors of this thread. You could easily say that it was slow going in many parts, it's pace was set up to help you really enjoy the climax, without the needed character development it would be hard to see why the characters made the choices they did and. I thought the ending was awesome, wrapped up everything into a nice bow, even sounds better than the original ending, seems like it possibly gave some characters more depth in the end while maintaining the same moral points that it was getting across in the book. People that didn't like the pacing are usually those impatient types that always need something stimulating them. It's like sex, some people would prefer to climax every few seconds, but the best climax to have is one that is built slowly, taking your time, enjoying the process and then "pop" what a glorious climax, twas the end of the movie, I left satisfied. Unlike woman that have their men always wanting to pop one off real quick. "It's business, It's business time" "business is closed" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheHands Posted March 9, 2009 Share Posted March 9, 2009 Read the book first. They changed a lot, but omitted many things for the sake of time. If they'd done the book word for word, it would've taken 7 hours and been nothing but dated 80's cheese. Some of the changes and adaptations are actually better than the book. I liked the prison scene better in film than in the book. The only complaints I've really heard from people who can stand the time (2 hours, 43 minutes) is that there's a lot of characters, and Dr. Manhattan's penis shows too often. This is not true, unless you're looking for his penis. If you stare at the blue dong, then yes, it'll be there as often as Rorschach (who's in nearly every scene from the intro montage until the prison scene, if you know how to look for him). It's worth seeing. Don't listen to critics who want to pan it, or to fan boys who'll have nothing but praise. Decide for yourself how you like it. Side note for anyone who's read and seen: How did you feel about Scarlet Spectre (both)'s changes in character? Specter I was so much more flat in the film than the book, and Specter II was never a female character worth anything more than being a plot device originally. I kinda don't like the changes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prophetik music Posted March 9, 2009 Share Posted March 9, 2009 i missed that rorschach is in all the scenes. i'll have to go back and look again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Master_Yoshi Posted March 9, 2009 Share Posted March 9, 2009 I liked the characterization in the movie a bit more, since in the book Silk Spectre II was a bit flat. Overall much better. I have figured out what I dislike about the ending though. It's not just a fanboy outrage, but more of a thematic one. In the book with a neutral third party (seemingly) ending the fighting, all the characters made decisions based on what they felt was right. There was that excellent scene at the end of the book where Dr. Manhattan walks around with a smile over everyone, then outside and deals with Rorschach. Overall, the characters made their choices whether things were right, and the audience decided whether they felt the choices were ok. In the movie though, Dr. Manhattan himself is pulled into the resolution, and rather than peacefully leaving for his own reasons he is basically forced into exile to maintain the peace. After that, the characters only have the choice of whether to reveal that Manhattan is innocent against his own wishes. It then falls on the audience to make a judgement call on whether they thought what the characters thought was right. Rorschach's book was probably a bit more powerful in the movie though, since I always thought that in the book it was kind of Hokey that there would only be one alien attack but then nothing else and people would be peaceful anyways. At least with a tangible "god" figure you can expect that peoples' fear would help them figure out what is really important. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arek the Absolute Posted March 9, 2009 Share Posted March 9, 2009 I liked the characterization in the movie a bit more, since in the book Silk Spectre II was a bit flat. Overall much better.I have figured out what I dislike about the ending though. It's not just a fanboy outrage, but more of a thematic one. In the book with a neutral third party (seemingly) ending the fighting, all the characters made decisions based on what they felt was right. There was that excellent scene at the end of the book where Dr. Manhattan walks around with a smile over everyone, then outside and deals with Rorschach. Overall, the characters made their choices whether things were right, and the audience decided whether they felt the choices were ok. In the movie though, Dr. Manhattan himself is pulled into the resolution, and rather than peacefully leaving for his own reasons he is basically forced into exile to maintain the peace. After that, the characters only have the choice of whether to reveal that Manhattan is innocent against his own wishes. It then falls on the audience to make a judgement call on whether they thought what the characters thought was right. Rorschach's book was probably a bit more powerful in the movie though, since I always thought that in the book it was kind of Hokey that there would only be one alien attack but then nothing else and people would be peaceful anyways. At least with a tangible "god" figure you can expect that peoples' fear would help them figure out what is really important. she is still pretty flat in the movie though amirite lolol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avatar of Justice Posted March 9, 2009 Share Posted March 9, 2009 I saw Watchmen and don't intend to ever watch it again. There just doesn't seem to be any point when it follows the graphic novel as closely as it did, unless you like less detail. I wish they'd made it its own thing rather than just providing an inferior version of the graphic novel. I think the only thing I really liked about this movie that wasn't already in the graphic novel was the opening montage. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bleck Posted March 9, 2009 Share Posted March 9, 2009 i missed that rorschach is in all the scenes. i'll have to go back and look again. spoilers: the red haired guy with the sign Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prophetik music Posted March 9, 2009 Share Posted March 9, 2009 i knew THAT, i read the book. i just didn't realize he was in EVERY scene, just most of them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJMetal Posted March 9, 2009 Share Posted March 9, 2009 I saw Watchmen and don't intend to ever watch it again. There just doesn't seem to be any point when it follows the graphic novel as closely as it did, unless you like less detail. I wish they'd made it its own thing rather than just providing an inferior version of the graphic novel. I think the only thing I really liked about this movie that wasn't already in the graphic novel was the opening montage. You are totally not alone. I feel the exact same way. Incidentally, in last week's "Newsweek" there was an article that shared the same sentiment. I mean, it wasn't a bad movie if you ask me, but standing next to the source material it just doesn't compare. Although I must admit, I LOVED the guys who played Rorschach and Nite Owl II. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bleck Posted March 9, 2009 Share Posted March 9, 2009 okay in that case I don't think he means literally in every scene Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weirdboyscott Posted March 9, 2009 Share Posted March 9, 2009 Although I must admit, I LOVED the guys who played Rorschach and Nite Owl II. If you liked Patrick Wilson and Jackie Earle Haley, you should see Little Children, they were both in that one together. But anyway... some people have said they were upset about how they changed how Rorschach killed the child abductor. I remember most of that scene from the comics... except how he killed the guy, so how did it do it again? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OceansAndrew Posted March 9, 2009 Share Posted March 9, 2009 But anyway... some people have said they were upset about how they changed how Rorschach killed the child abductor. I remember most of that scene from the comics... except how he killed the guy, so how did it do it again? handcuffed him to a pipe and firebombed the place- I think he gave him a hacksaw too so he could potentially saw off his arm to escape. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackPanther Posted March 9, 2009 Share Posted March 9, 2009 Kinda confusing at first when I watched it but I understood it fully at the end. This was a movie I could actually watch again and since i enjoyed it that much I should probably try lookin for the comic for this. My favorite part was probably the prison scene when Rorschach threw the hot grease on that guy with the cops detaining him, "I'm not locked in here with you...you're locked in here with me!" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wintermute Posted March 9, 2009 Share Posted March 9, 2009 Saw it, enjoyed it immensely. The changes from the book were alright in my book, will make the story easier to digest. Rorschach was SPOT ON, best casting in the film right there. Looking forward to the director's cut that will include much deleted scenes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prophetik music Posted March 9, 2009 Share Posted March 9, 2009 okay in that case I don't think he means literally in every scene oh, ok. that helps a bit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Native Jovian Posted March 9, 2009 Share Posted March 9, 2009 handcuffed him to a pipe and firebombed the place- I think he gave him a hacksaw too so he could potentially saw off his arm to escape. No, that was Mad Max. Not Road Warrior or Beyond Thunderdome, but the first one (the one that no one ever watches). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Master_Yoshi Posted March 9, 2009 Share Posted March 9, 2009 No, that was Mad Max. Not Road Warrior or Beyond Thunderdome, but the first one (the one that no one ever watches). Actually it was Both. Unless there was sarcasm in there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.