Whether it's your first Bonnaroo or you’re a music festival veteran, we welcome you to Inforoo.
Here you'll find info about artists, rumors, camping tips, and the infamous Roo Clues. Have a look around then create an account and join in the fun. See you at Bonnaroo!!
For the most part, I think the movie was really good. But there are three things about the ending that really bother me.
*SPOILER ALERT*
1. Dan & Laurie storm out of Ozy's layer in righteous anger at the end of the movie instead of making desperate end of the world love. Further, the movie's ending implies they've settled back into society as superheroes instead of being incognito and on the run from the authorities.
2. Ozy and Dr. Manhattan final conversation is cut, and Laurie is given Manhattan's final line in a totally different context that strips this particular line of its intended meaning.
3. The film implies Sally's affection for the Comedian is soley based on his fathering of Laurie when in fact the comic is pretty clear that she is in love with him.
Honestly, the best way I can describe how the messed up the ending is the throwaway Reagan joke at the end with the line about him being a cowboy. In the comic, it's Robert Redford and so the cowboy thing actually makes sense. Anyway...overall, a good movie, but those last 15 minutes really bothered me.
Last Edit: Mar 6, 2009 4:21:29 GMT -5 by dudezer47 - Back to Top
Post by noeysasquatch on Mar 6, 2009 10:21:11 GMT -5
I wish I noticed this topic after coming from the midnight showing! I though the movie was really well done. The action and fight scenes were great and were more intense than fights in other movies of this genre. I think it was a good adaptation of the graphic novel to a film. They made the plot just as deep and interesting as the novel, using a lot of background of the past of the watchmen. The characters of the movie fit well to the characters in the graphic novel, especially Rorschach and the Comedian.
I knew that there would be some plot deviation but it didnt have much an affect on the movie until the end because it is completely different from the novel.
I am going on Sunday, I heard the end was pretty messed up from the comic, I guess I will see. Sometimes his material gets treated pretty good, Like V. Sometimes though you get a League of Extraordinary Gentleman, which was a crap sandwich.
I am going on Sunday, I heard the end was pretty messed up from the comic, I guess I will see. Sometimes his material gets treated pretty good, Like V. Sometimes though you get a League of Extraordinary Gentleman, which was a crap sandwich.
The end is messed up, but it's still really good. And the people I went with who hadn't read the comic loved it. It's just they simplify a few things at the end that sort of change the overall mood of the piece dramatically.
The city as a character doesn't come into play as much as it does in the comic, but I get the feeling when they reinsert The Black Freighter in the 200 minute cut, we're going to get a lot more of the newstand and psychiatrist subplots.
i saw it last night and was very disappointed. i give it a 6 out of 10. way too much slow motion but coming from the "300" guy i kinda expected it. the ending was screwed up in all the ways Dudezer mentioned which bothered me. little to no backstory on Veidt. apart from Jackie Earle Haley and Jeffrey Dean Morgan i thought most of the acting was very stale. the "hallelujah" sex scene came off way too rushed and silly. and many of the very strong, emotional scenes from the graphic novel just werent effective at all (to me at least) in the film: * SPOILERS* like when the comedian shoots the vietnames woman in the bar. or when rorshach as a kid sees his mom fucking that random guy... and the climax.. when veidt unleashes his bomb on the city... just didnt effect me emotionally at all. idk... *END SPOILERS*
i feel like a little whiney fanboy... but i told myself last night im not going to see it again until the directors cut with the black freighter edited in comes out in july.
i saw it last night and was very disappointed. i give it a 6 out of 10. way too much slow motion but coming from the "300" guy i kinda expected it. the ending was screwed up in all the ways Dudezer mentioned which bothered me. little to no backstory on Veidt. apart from Jackie Earle Haley and Jeffrey Dean Morgan i thought most of the acting was very stale. the "hallelujah" sex scene came off way too rushed and silly. and many of the very strong, emotional scenes from the graphic novel just werent effective at all (to me at least) in the film: * SPOILERS* like when the comedian shoots the vietnames woman in the bar. or when rorshach as a kid sees his mom quacking that random guy... and the climax.. when veidt unleashes his bomb on the city... just didnt effect me emotionally at all. idk... *END SPOILERS*
i feel like a little whiney fanboy... but i told myself last night im not going to see it again until the directors cut with the black freighter edited in comes out in july.
I think those are all valid criticisms. The acting and movie-ness of it didn't bother me because for me, it was just a movie version.
I don't think it compares favorably to The Dark Knight, but I do think if you compare it to something similar in theme and inspiration like Southland Tales, it comes out looking more successful. I just think ultimately they made a few choices in how to tell the story that simplified things in a negative way.
That said, most of the problems I had with the movie went generally unnoticed by people who hadn't read the series. To them, Watchmen the movie will be to superhero movies what Watchmen the comic was to comic book readers. I think this movie will end up having a Fight Club-esque following.
Last Edit: Mar 6, 2009 17:58:55 GMT -5 by dudezer47 - Back to Top
the use of music was great until the end credits where i almost threw up in my mouth lol.
my roommates that didnt read the graphic novel loved the movie. but my two other friends that read it along with me were very disappointed. but like i said... the directors cut will hopefully make me a little happier. *possible SPOILER**but yeah pretty much my favorite quote from the novel is Dr. Manhatten's "In the End? Nothing ends, Adrian. Nothing EVER ends." which is not even said but assumed by Laurie. that kinda upset me.
Post by StreetBum87 on Mar 7, 2009 22:11:36 GMT -5
alright guys, i've had the will power to not read the spoilers, but you should really rephrase the title simply so people know what they are getting into. just my .02.
Post by jumpinjamesbrown on Mar 7, 2009 22:36:19 GMT -5
i thought it was good not great i do agree with sassy that the soundtrack made me enjoy the movie more the ending was kinda strange but enjoyed watching it and hope that the way they treated this to be directed towards adults they will do that with more of the movies that come out
Saw it today on the IMAX and it was pretty solid. I enjoyed it alot. I never read the novel so I came into it fresh. I thought it was a bit slow in the middle and a bit confusing not really knowing all the connections. All in all though it was very entertaining.
Post by steveternal on Mar 8, 2009 16:59:32 GMT -5
***Spoilers Herein***
Having read the book, but also having seen the trailers and ads, I went into the theater expecting the true essence of the book--philosophical, ethical, epistemological issues; dark, unrelenting character studies; multi-faceted storytelling devices--to be marginalized in favor of another flashy superhero film. By the time the opening scene and credits had finished I was already won over. And neither of which were even from the book; Snyder had just clearly captured that essence of the book, and had made something for the fanboys. Most changes to the story, even the ending, didn't really bother me. Honestly, my only major complaint would be the use of very graphic violence. It was in those moments that Snyder's love of B-movie gore and titillation seemed to get the better of him, and he compromised subtlety for sensationalism. The same could be said for the obvious sex scene, but I didn't feel quite so strongly about that. Liked the musical choices; it's nice to hear a soundtrack that ranges from Dylan to Luna to Philip Glass to Leonard Cohen to Mozart to Hendrix to a punk version of Dylan to a Muzak version of Tears for Fears, and uses them appropriately. Most of the performances I thought were competent, but Jackie Earl Haley as Rorschach really stole the spotlight. Superb. Some of the make-up and CG didn't work so well. I don't see why Dr. Manhattan had to be all CG, because it struck me as classic Uncanny Valley stuff. With a $110M budget, couldn't they have done a bit better? Yet as I said, I don't see why he couldn't have just been a CG-enhanced human actor. Bleh. One of the films greatest strengths was cutting down a towering, deftly intricate story into something that didn't feel cropped or rushed or compressed. The Harry Potter folks could really learn a thing or two.
Post by Fishing Maniac on Mar 8, 2009 21:32:47 GMT -5
I saw it today. I know nothing of the comic. It kept my attention for 2 hours and 45 minutes. That's good. The ending sucked. Again I know nothing of the comic. It sucked on it's own. The special effects were great and that's normally my #1 complaint. Rorschach is the coolest.
I thought I was going to be disappointed by the end after all I had heard. I didn't think it really detracted from it though. That being said I can not see how it would have been any more complicated to keep the original ending. So not bad but unnecessary, Other than that I thought it was really good, like FM said it kept my attention for almost three hours and most movies these days can not do that. I was actually praying for Zodiac to be over 1 hour before it ended.
Before I go any further, I didn't read everyone's reactions to the movie before posting this. I don't know what the general climate to it is, and I'm sure that there's someone who said something similar to what I'm about to say. Please don't be too bothered by the repition. Oh yeah, there's probably going to be many a spoiler, so be warned. Here I go...
Possible Spoiler Alert!
AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH. The movie is destruction of art. It is similar to someone penciling in a moustache on the Mona Lisa, writing "v DICK v" above David's genitals or adding a cheesy synth to Freebird's kickass solo. The book is perfect and part of it's perfection is the fact that it's a graphic novel. It dissects the superhero by mimication and alteration of similar slides in real comics (some of the poses that Night Owl were in are similar to something you could see in Batman comics), it has multiple interwoven plots, many minor characters, extra readings in between the chapters (which actually give a lot to the story and characters), and the most mind-boggling, kickass, explosive, "holy s%&t! What the F@$k just happened!? I have to read this ending fifty more times to comprehend it. I'll do that after I put the book down and catch my breath," ending ever.
The movie? From what I've heard, the ending is changed into one that doesn't make too much sense (why would a guy that spent his entire life at the service of the US military suddenly turn against it? Plus the main reason the ending in the book worked is because the threat was one that could not be understood or pointed at. Although the Dr. Manhatten is a pretty complicated guy, he's known around the world. A [if you read the novel you know what the real ending is] is something that the world needs to unite in case another attack by it. Also, a movie is too short and straightforward in plot to include all of the beautiful intricacies that the book contained.
Plus there's a few small things that the movie doesn't include. One: Kovacs/Rorshac is supposed to be one ugly dude, in the movie he looks pretty normal to me. Two: The book doesn't stress very much action. Of course it has its scenes, but those scenes serve a purpose. Every friggen panel in the book serves a purpose. I'm sure in the movie there's some over the top, "look how sweet I am" action scenes which are just unnecessary. Three: The genius behind the book, Alan Moore, wanted nothing to do with the movie. I think that shows a sign of bad things to come.
Zack Snyder is a clever bastard. He realizes that Comic Movies are hot in the box office now. He realizes that by making a comic movie he'll make a killing. Plus they're pretty easy to make. 300 was pretty much strip for strip the Frank Miller comic, but it just looked cool. I mean, it was a sweet testosterone infused movie, but Watchmen is just too complicated for that. It's a movie that shouldn't have been ever made.
Post by steveternal on Mar 10, 2009 6:55:53 GMT -5
^^^SPOILER!!!!!!! The film glossed over the fact that Veidt/Ozymandias has a keen interest in bio-engineering. Bubastis was his genetically engineered lynx.