Bad Movie Logo
"A website to the detriment of good film"
Custom Search
HOMEB-MOVIE REVIEWSREADER REVIEWSFORUMINTERVIEWSUPDATESABOUT
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 16, 2014, 08:11:01 AM
522340 Posts in 39344 Topics by 4869 Members
Latest Member: ilikeithot
Badmovies.org Forum  |  Movies  |  Good Movies  |  Watchmen « previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] 3
Author Topic: Watchmen  (Read 5330 times)
WilliamWeird1313
B-Movie Site Webmaster
Bad Movie Lover
****

Karma: 143
Posts: 865


Bad taste is just an acquired taste!!!


« Reply #15 on: March 10, 2009, 10:32:49 AM »



Quote
If you're a fan of the comic, you will be disappointed. I'm warning you now. I repeat: you WILL be disappointed. There IS stuff that is changed.

Not a knock on you William, but people with that attitude towards comic adaptations irritate me.  I have a friend who is sometimes like that.  I mean, people are p**sy about the changes in the Watchmen film.  But, of course, Watchmen is one of the most literal comic book adaptations EVER.  The only one even close to as literal is Sin City, which is super duper literal.  I might add - I think BOTH of these films were TOO literal.  Both formats have their advantages, and I think things SHOULD be changed between them.  You're just begging for trouble if you don't. 

Watchmen, for example, I think would feel far more disjointed and harder to keep up with if you haven't read the comics.  I'm not sure how it should have been handled, but the movie is so densely packed with origins, back stories, and sidebars I imagine it must be frustrating at times for those who haven't read it first.  The comic has breathing room - a lot of small asides with minor characters, little bits from the news and normal people, etc - for pacing reasons.  The movie is missing all of this, and is also missing a variety of small character moments. 

All that said, I still think it is a good film.  Visually gorgeous, great acting from Jackie Earle Hayley (it's hard to imagine ANYONE being a better Rorscach now). 

Did I not say in my post that the changes are good, and make sense, and belong in the movie?

I think you may have misinterpreted my post. When I say that comic fans will be disappointed because there are changes, I don't mean that fans of the source material SHOULD be disappointed, nor that changes weren't/aren't necessary. I'm very much NOT saying that comic book adaptations should be moment for moment, scene for scene, frame for frame exactly the same. I understand that these are two different mediums, and there must be alterations made when moving a story from one to the other.

The purpose of my "warning" is to let fans of the original comic, many of whom seemed to have been expecting, in the days leading up to the film's release, for the movie to be EXACTLY the same as the comic. My "warning" was intended to let them know that they should NOT expect that, because if they do they will be disappointed. I was trying to point out that we must remember that, as these two mediums are so different, we must be prepared to accept alterations and exclusions. Fact is, if you're a fan of the graphic novel, then chances are you were looking forward to the scene in which Rorschach talks to the prison psychologist about the night he "snapped" and if you were hoping for that scene to be played out in full, you will be disappointed.

That doesn't mean you should disregard or dislike the movie based on how true or untrue it is to the original comic. In fact, what I was trying to say, and what I thought I said quite clearly, was that the movie should be judged on its own merits... as a movie.

That being said, it is in this judgment that you and I are in disagreement. As an adaptation, Watchmen is extremely good and extremely faithful. As a movie, by itself, without the mental baggage associated with familiarity with the source material, I think it is ALSO very, very good. I don't think that Watchmen was "too literal." I also disagree with you in your assertion that Sin City was "too literal." Sin City, I thought, was fantastic, and the story/stories in some ways worked even BETTER in movie form than it/they did in the comics. I'm glad that you liked the film, but I don't think it was "too literal." I thought Snyder perfectly balanced his reverence for the original work and his desire to replicate the feel of that work faithfully... with his need to imprint the film version with his own sense of style. If he was unable to do that, then it would have been a lifeless reproduction, and it would have been redundant. But I think that Snyder managed, quite deftly, to remain creative within structural and thematic confines that another director might have found restrictive and stifling. I, personally, did not find the film disjointed or hard to keep up with, though I might be biased because of my long history with the story. However, I have talked to SEVERAL people who have seen the film without ANY familiarity with the original comics, and only one of those people found it hard to keep up with. This actually, for the record, surprised me. Because I thought that maybe it would be a little hard to keep up with. But the only person I talked to who had that problem was, all due respect to him, kind of (shall we say?) "slow." I do agree that maybe the film is a bit too dense for the average movie-goer who doesn't really know what kind of movie Watchmen is, but not to a degree that it excludes most people. And, in a way, I don't think that even THAT is entirely a criticism. I consider Watchmen a challenging movie, in a time when such few films are few and far between, and I'd like to think that we, as a people, in general relish the chance to be challenged. I do, however, agree that film has pacing problems... as well as a few other minor issues. Like I said in my first post, I do have some criticisms.

None of those criticisms, though, are simply "changes have been made, and I don't like that, grrrrr."

Now, if you'll please excuse me, I've gotta go make plans to go n' see the movie again later on tonight. Which will mark my third viewing.

Lol.

Logged

"On a mountain of skulls in a castle of pain, I sat on a throne of blood. What was will be, what is will be no more. Now is the season of evil." - Vigo (former Carpathian warlord and one-time Slayer lyric-writer)
Wortcov
Bad Movie Lover
***

Karma: 27
Posts: 180


the High Inquisitor of bath and wells


« Reply #16 on: March 10, 2009, 03:13:32 PM »

I'm absolutely going to see it, but I will have to wait until June  Bluesad I hate living in Sweden
Logged
Jim H
Frightening Fanatic of Horrible Cinema
****

Karma: 233
Posts: 2908



« Reply #17 on: March 10, 2009, 07:50:44 PM »

Will, I said the "not a knock on you" bit since people on forums frequently misread what I'm saying as an attack on them even when it clearly isn't.  It's more a defensive reflex than anything (kind of like how people stick IMO at the end of tons of things which are quite clearly opinion).  Obviously, that wasn't needed with you.   Cheers
Logged
WingedSerpent
Frightening Fanatic of Horrible Cinema
****

Karma: 153
Posts: 1429


I AM THE BAD PHOTOSHOP EFFECT!


« Reply #18 on: March 10, 2009, 09:04:53 PM »

I read Watchmen but it was a long time between reading it and seeing the movie.  I also saw it with a group of friends who never read it, so we had some different opinions all around.  They all seemed to like it.

I was surprised as to how closely it followed the book (except for the ending-which so many other comic book fans are talking about I really don't see the need to bring it up again).  But deffinatly some great scenes in it.

There were a few unintentional laughs.  Like when Nite Owl and Silk Spectre are making love in the owl plane and the weirdest music choice is played.  It's like a gosepel song.  And yes, eveyone laughed seeing Dr. Manhatten walk around naked.

I liked it-and I feel guilty about that.  Alan Moore hates it when Hollywood makes his works into movies, and for the most part I can see why.  Watchman is considered the work that brings comics into respectable literature.  Alan Moore said he will never see the movie-and I seriouly doubt he liked the idea of the inevitable wave of mechandising that is to come.

I liked his original novel.  I can see where his thought process about it is coming from.  Is it wrong to enjoy another person's take and somebody elses work?  (obvisouly not plagerism, but you get my point)
Logged

At least, that's what Gary Busey told me...

In 1991, when The People's Court ratings started to slip, Judge Wapner reinstated the death penalty-Late Show Fun Fact
Pennywise
Bad Movie Lover
***

Karma: 16
Posts: 386


The clown banned in 51 states!


« Reply #19 on: March 10, 2009, 11:55:21 PM »

When I went to see this in IMAX on Saturday someone actually brought their kid! I didn't really see the kid in the rows in front of me when the movie got sexual, so I suppose they took him out of there.

There was also a guy from a local comic shop who stood up after a voiceover by a DJ from a local country station had told us all to please turn off our cell phones. He stood up before the previews started and said that you could get a free comic from his store if you brought in two ticket stubs from the movie.

The movie itself was excellent. The credit sequence at the beginning was perfect to explain how the coming of science heroes changed the course of American history and subsequently world history as well. I don't know if a general audience could understand how a change in events in the past could lead to an alternate history. I was pleased as punch to see this in a theatrical movie though, and the Bob Dylan song accentuated it perfectly.

Alan Moore doesn't have his name on this film either-again. He talked about only putting his name on something expanding upon something he's written in an interview I read in Wizard Magazine once. I think that at this point he should take a page from Stephen King and compromise, it could only help to get people interested in his work that don't usually read comics. Only Dave Gibbons name comes up as the co-author of the graphic novel in the credits.

I was impressed with everyone's performances in this film. It was much more believable for that. I kept noticing how Nite Owl II (Patrick Wilson) looked alot like Bruce Campbell (without the greying hair and wrinkles-it's the chin really). I didn't expect Matt Frewer (Trashcan Man from the miniseries The Stand) as Moloch. It's always neat to see a character actor in a big movie like this.

I don't think the audience was prepared for Rorschach's psychoanalysis and imprisonment, "You people don't understand. I'm not locked in here with you, you're locked in here with ME!" That was the darkest Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer-type sequence I've ever seen in a superhero movie. Jackie Earle Haley is perfect as that disturbed vigilante. And Jeffrey Dean Morgan (who looks a lot like Robert Downey, Jr. in the flashbacks and a lot like Javier Bardem when he's older) does an excellent job as cynical and selfish Comedian. His comment about the American Dream is perfect.

It's pretty violent and gory, but infinitely more mature than most superhero movies. I wish it had come out in December so it could have been nominated for an Oscar, but then again the Academy Awards seem to be severely out of touch with what people actually like, so it probably wouldn't have been nominated anyway.

I've also read the book and wasn't really expecting them to stick to the source material so closely. I just wanted a good story and got an excellent one. You probably won't see another superhero movie this mature again. Catch it in the theater while you can.
Logged
trekgeezer
Frightening Fanatic of Horrible Cinema
****

Karma: 0
Posts: 4968


We're all just victims of circumstance


« Reply #20 on: March 11, 2009, 07:57:41 AM »

Only Dave Gibbons name comes up as the co-author of the graphic novel in the credits.



Alan Moore turns his royalties from the movies over to the artist, in this case Gibbons.
Logged




And you thought Trek isn't cool.
inframan
Bad Movie Lover
***

Karma: 19
Posts: 226



« Reply #21 on: March 11, 2009, 03:37:55 PM »

Only Dave Gibbons name comes up as the co-author of the graphic novel in the credits.



Alan Moore turns his royalties from the movies over to the artist, in this case Gibbons.

Yeah I noticed that in the credits. I was also wanting to see more of Rorsach in prison with the psychiatrist, esp the story of how he got his "face".  I think they changed the way he takes care of the murderer because Saw or one of those torute porn movies did the same thing, even though watchmen was written years earlier. I think too much story was cut out at the expense of extended Kung Fu battles, but I guess that's what a big blockbuster movie needs. I think he had the best line in the movie, great audience reaction to that one Smile

Overall I really liked it, I could get all obsessive about the changes but it is what it is and its a good flick, probably see it again.
Logged
AnubisVonMojo
B-Movie Site Webmaster
Frightening Fanatic of Horrible Cinema
****

Karma: 240
Posts: 1779


Jesus H. Chelios!


WWW
« Reply #22 on: March 11, 2009, 07:36:40 PM »

I think they changed the way he takes care of the murderer because Saw or one of those torute porn movies did the same thing, even though watchmen was written years earlier.

Let's give credit where credit is due: that exact method of torture-revenge was seen in Mad Max, which came out years before Watchmen. Wink

And I agree with you on the change made to that scene in the movie. The original was much more effective and I was a little miffed that the entire end to the scene was changed to fill some kind of Eli Roth brutality shock moment. Not unlike how Nite Owl's impotence was treated as a joke rather than as a sign of the hero's "fall from power" after giving up his life as a hero. Thumbdown
Logged


"Don't make me stain my last clean shirt with the back of your head." - Shatter Dead
"A grizzly bear with a chainsaw. Now THERE's a killing machine!" - The Simpsons
"I've always wanted to make love to an angry welder." - Jaws: the Revenge
Rev. Powell
Global Moderator
B-Movie Kraken
****

Karma: 1712
Posts: 13821


Click on that globe for 366 Weird Movies


WWW
« Reply #23 on: March 11, 2009, 08:42:30 PM »

Has anyone posted this yet?

Small | Large
Logged

"The best parts are watching Sly go through the full range of emotions: deadpan, deadpan with raised eyebrow, deadpan with quivering lip. There's also a great sequence where Sly drives his VW Beetle down the interstate for about 20 minutes, staring dramatically through the windshield.."-Joe Bob on A MAN CALLED RAMBO
akiratubo
Frightening Fanatic of Horrible Cinema
****

Karma: 406
Posts: 3279



« Reply #24 on: March 11, 2009, 11:00:11 PM »

Saw it today.  It was ... pretty good.  It's worth seeing.

I didn't like the actress who played Silk Spectre II (Malin Ackerman?) but I liked the character.  I loved Dan Drieberg (aka Nite Owl).  He seemed the most human of all of them.  Funny thing, though, whenever he was in costume, his acting talent just went to s**t.  Maybe that's what the director was telling him to do.  His scenes with Laurie Jupiter were probably my favorite parts of the movie.  (Yeah, I enjoyed the romantic subplot more than anything else.  Sue me.)  I'm not too sure what I thought of Rorschach.  There was a time when I would have loved him but now that I'm a little older, I can see that's he's not much more than a dangerous sociopath.  I didn't care at all for Dr. MonotonousManhattan.  He was just boring.  Veidt ... well, I dunno.  Part of me wants to hate him, part of me thinks I would have been on his side.

As for The Comedian, he was easily my favorite.  He seemed more human than any of them except Dan.  I think he had the best character arc.  Hell, I wish the movie had been about him.

The slow-mo seriously got on my nerves a few times.  The long stretch in which Dr. Manhattan kept droning on and on about his origin and such was excruciating.  (It's a good time to take a bathroom break.)

Taken as a whole, it's the best "comic book" movie I've seen in a long time, though I won't be watching it again any time soon.
« Last Edit: March 12, 2009, 01:06:48 AM by akiratubo » Logged

Kneel before Dr. Hell, the ruler of this world!
Ash
Frightening Fanatic of Horrible Cinema
****

Karma: 0
Posts: 6608


13 Year Badmovies.org Veteran


« Reply #25 on: March 12, 2009, 01:35:48 AM »


I had never even heard of the Watchmen graphic novel until about a year ago.
I haven't read it and don't know much about it.  I did briefly flip through one recently at a local Barnes & Noble but other than that, I don't know much about the story.

What I do know is that it's set in an alternate universe or something and that only Dr. Manhattan actually has powers.

I'm thinking of going to see this in the next day or two.  Probably at a matinee showing.
Any advice for someone like me who knows almost nothing about the comic?

 
Logged
D-Man
Bad Movie Lover
***

Karma: 26
Posts: 343


Only my head is tiny...


« Reply #26 on: March 12, 2009, 08:10:06 AM »

I saw this movie the day it came out, and I loved it.  This is also someone who read the comic, and wasn't disturbed at all by the changes. 

The advice I'd give to someone like you, Ash, is to first realize that it's a long movie.  It didn't feel long to me, but I heard a lot of grumbling from more casual moviegoers.  Also, don't go in expecting action every minute, like many other comic book movie fans were probably expecting...although the action sequences it does have balances things out nicely, I think.

When I think about it, though, Watchmen actually had more action in it than Iron Man (Though I liked that one too.)
Logged
inframan
Bad Movie Lover
***

Karma: 19
Posts: 226



« Reply #27 on: March 12, 2009, 09:53:20 AM »

I think they changed the way he takes care of the murderer because Saw or one of those torute porn movies did the same thing, even though watchmen was written years earlier.

Let's give credit where credit is due: that exact method of torture-revenge was seen in Mad Max, which came out years before Watchmen. Wink

And I agree with you on the change made to that scene in the movie. The original was much more effective and I was a little miffed that the entire end to the scene was changed to fill some kind of Eli Roth brutality shock moment. Not unlike how Nite Owl's impotence was treated as a joke rather than as a sign of the hero's "fall from power" after giving up his life as a hero. Thumbdown

I think Mad Max, or maybe Road Warrior, was playing on one of the many TV screens at the end of the movie, also one of the TV's said something like "operation SQUID".
Logged
akiratubo
Frightening Fanatic of Horrible Cinema
****

Karma: 406
Posts: 3279



« Reply #28 on: March 12, 2009, 01:06:32 PM »

I think Mad Max, or maybe Road Warrior, was playing on one of the many TV screens at the end of the movie

The Road Warrior was playing, the bit where The Humungus shoots the radiator out of the big rig.  I think Mad Max was also playing on one of the other screens.
Logged

Kneel before Dr. Hell, the ruler of this world!
AnubisVonMojo
B-Movie Site Webmaster
Frightening Fanatic of Horrible Cinema
****

Karma: 240
Posts: 1779


Jesus H. Chelios!


WWW
« Reply #29 on: March 12, 2009, 08:56:04 PM »

I think they changed the way he takes care of the murderer because Saw or one of those torute porn movies did the same thing, even though watchmen was written years earlier.

Let's give credit where credit is due: that exact method of torture-revenge was seen in Mad Max, which came out years before Watchmen. Wink

And I agree with you on the change made to that scene in the movie. The original was much more effective and I was a little miffed that the entire end to the scene was changed to fill some kind of Eli Roth brutality shock moment. Not unlike how Nite Owl's impotence was treated as a joke rather than as a sign of the hero's "fall from power" after giving up his life as a hero. Thumbdown

I think Mad Max, or maybe Road Warrior, was playing on one of the many TV screens at the end of the movie, also one of the TV's said something like "operation SQUID".

Yeah, I missed the Squid reference during my viewing but my mom-in-law told me about it afterwards. No doubt a *wink*wink* for fans of the comic. Wink
Logged


"Don't make me stain my last clean shirt with the back of your head." - Shatter Dead
"A grizzly bear with a chainsaw. Now THERE's a killing machine!" - The Simpsons
"I've always wanted to make love to an angry welder." - Jaws: the Revenge
Pages: 1 [2] 3
Badmovies.org Forum  |  Movies  |  Good Movies  |  Watchmen « previous next »
    Jump to:  


    RSS Feed Subscribe Subscribe by RSS
    Email Subscribe Subscribe by Email


    Popular Articles
    How To Find A Bad Movie

    The Champions of Justice

    Plan 9 from Outer Space

    Manos, The Hands of Fate

    Podcast: Todd the Convenience Store Clerk

    Faster, Pussycat! Kill! Kill!

    Dragonball: The Magic Begins

    Cool As Ice

    The Educational Archives: Driver's Ed

    Godzilla vs. Monster Zero

    Do you have a zombie plan?

    FROM THE BADMOVIES.ORG ARCHIVES
    ImageThe Giant Claw - Slime drop

    Earth is visited by a GIANT ANTIMATTER SPACE BUZZARD! Gawk at the amazingly bad bird puppet, or chuckle over the silly dialog. This is one of the greatest b-movies ever made.

    Lesson Learned:
    • Osmosis: os·mo·sis (oz-mo'sis, os-) n., 1. When a bird eats something.

    Subscribe to Badmovies.org and get updates by email:

    HOME B-Movie Reviews Reader Reviews Forum Interviews TV Shows Advertising Information Sideshows Links Contact

    Badmovies.org is owned and operated by Andrew Borntreger. All original content is © 1998 - 2014 by its respective author(s). Image, video, and audio files are used in accordance with the Fair Use Law, and are property of the film copyright holders. You may freely link to any page (.html or .php) on this website, but reproduction in any other form must be authorized by the copyright holder.