Watchmen

Sylia · Post by **Sylia** » Tue Mar 17, 2009 7:06 pm

Wow, I can't believe that parents would take little kids to go see something like Watchmen... that's just wrong XD. Like buying Boogiepop or Armitage III for a kid thinking it's a Disney film kind of wrong XD.

I'm kind of surprised how many people saw it who hadn't read the comic before... I think that means their marketing campaign was pretty successful for at least filling seats initially. A friend of mine who has been a huge fan of the comic since it came out went to see it on opening weekend and he came out really happy; apparently it is quite a good adaption overall.

miz ducky · Post by **miz ducky** » Tue Mar 17, 2009 8:21 pm

Sylia wrote:Wow, I can't believe that parents would take little kids to go see something like Watchmen... that's just wrong XD. Like buying Boogiepop or Armitage III for a kid thinking it's a Disney film kind of wrong XD.

Yeah, like having a "Happy Tree Friends" dvd in the kids section of the video store, wrong.

Sylia wrote:I'm kind of surprised how many people saw it who hadn't read the comic before... I think that means their marketing campaign was pretty successful for at least filling seats initially. A friend of mine who has been a huge fan of the comic since it came out went to see it on opening weekend and he came out really happy; apparently it is quite a good adaption overall.

I really don't think that the previews did the movie wrong. As one who has no knowledge of the comics, and watched it on opening night, I went in open minded and curious to see what this was all about. I think the previews made me more curious than anything because they really never said much. Yes you get to see that there are people in costumes and one blue guy who seems to have special powers but really the preview doesn't tell you what to expect at all.

Our theater was full, so I agree that they did a good job of getting people in to see it.

I was surprised to see male frontal nudity in the movie. It is not something that I consider common at all, and I could see the physical reaction that the guys in my row had when it was first shown. All the guys leaned back in their chairs a bit (it made me giggle on the inside). Actually in all honesty, I don't feel that any of the nudity or sex scenes did anything to improve the movie at all. I would have been happier if it was 20 min shorter and never showed anything of the sort.

But I suppose that people who are familiar with the comics might have been unhappy if they were left out, maybe?

Post by **JWR** » Tue Mar 17, 2009 9:30 pm

I can say that in the comic , When Dr. Manhattan 1st appears in public like in the movie he is dressed in a full suit & tie but as the story goes on he appears in less and less as his connection to humanity fades and he loses touch.

A visual metaphor.

aethel · Post by **aethel** » Tue Mar 17, 2009 10:14 pm

Well, having read the graphic novel, I loved the movie. And I thought the major part they changed (trying to be vague to avoid spoilers here, but comic book fans will surely know what I am referring to), was actually better than the way it was in the comic.

I think I must be the only person in the world who scarcely noticed the Manhattan nudity.

Captain Haddock · Post by **Captain Haddock** » Wed Mar 18, 2009 3:00 pm

Manhatten being nude was a neccessity really for the reasons JWR pointed out. I think they did have him covered in one of the releases of the graphic novel, but it's just unnecessary sanitisation in my view. Nudity in my book's fine, we're all nude anyway underneath our clothes so what's the big. Not that I'm a major nudist or anything.

transmet · Post by **transmet** » Wed Mar 18, 2009 11:48 pm

Been an huge Alan Moore and Pat Mills* fan since the 80's, and it seems like I've been waiting for this movie all my life (at least all my adult life)... and I could not have been more disappointed. In fact, I was bored to tears by the time the 3rd act rolled around. Other than Haley's very inspired and spot-on performance, the characters felt flat - the story felt forced - and the "change" to the original story-line made absolutely no sense what-so-ever. This should have been the Network, A Clockwork Orange and Catch-22 of graphic novel films all rolled into one. As it turns out, it is a gross-budget, novelty movie that will fade away quickly to eventually become a 3-hour director's cut dvd release that will initially sell well, and then be thrown into bargain bins around X-mas time. Zack needs to go back to directing music videos/commercials because his movies, while pretty to look at, have no soul.

*See Marshal Law

Startyde · Post by **Startyde** » Thu Mar 19, 2009 2:38 pm

Transmet is hardcore.

I love the Watchmen. I'm a bit of a noob and didn't discover it till the mid 90's, but still hold it near and dear.

I thought the movie did a well enough job of portraying the "gist" of how utterly insane someone has to be to dress up in the name of "justice." It was entertaining, but like a few have said, minor things changed here and there, dialogue recut or swapped around, made no sense.

They never discussed why Rorschachâ€™s face even did that (which was one the defining reasons of his personality), changed the kidnapper death scene, and though I forgive the ending (quite honestly it would be hard to convey without another 2 hours) it eliminates the whole reason for why Comedian even snapped / discovered about it. It ended up making little sense. That and the fact that Ozzy is so underdeveloped, you suspect it's him from the first moment by process of elimination at all. Another is, I'm glad they had Bubastis, but why in the last like 30 minutes? Completely out of nowhere...and is nonsensical because without the true ending, his existing makes no sense whatsoever. And for fuck sake, the whole â€œComedian is your fatherâ€

Penguinton · Post by **Penguinton** » Fri Mar 20, 2009 10:05 pm

Sylia wrote:Wow, I can't believe that parents would take little kids to go see something like Watchmen... that's just wrong XD. Like buying Boogiepop or Armitage III for a kid thinking it's a Disney film kind of wrong XD.

I can see how people who knew absolutely nothing about the series might consider taking a child to see the Watchmen. The Dark Night was only pg13 so they probably thought it was just slightly more violent and hence kid friendly in their warped scary minds. Never really understood how extreme violence is okay for kids but absolutely not sex or nudity...

Plus it seems people who don't read comics think they're automatically for kids. I mean at my local library they put manga like Barefoot Gen and comics like Strangers in Paradise in the children section. You know so when the little five year olds finish their Dr.Seuss book they can read about a kid experiencing the aftermath of an A-bomb on a city or the adventures of a gay ex-prostitute.

Bad liberians bad bad! When I informed the head liberian that you know...those comics really shouldn't be in the children section she just gave me a blank look like I was crazy and said "but they're comic books" like where else would comic books go but there.

Anyways after cracking a few books open to some lovely illustrated artwork the comic section was promptly moved to the teen section.

aernath · Post by **aernath** » Sat Mar 21, 2009 10:26 am

I have to admit, y'all are convincing me I really do need to dig up the novels and read those. The book is always better than the movie, and I know that, but most of the time I don't care enough to dig.
I think this one sounds like it deserves the effort.

Thanks!
Rorschach just fascinates me, and I really want to know more about him, so he'll be the driving force for me.

(And to think I sat blindly through the panel for this at ComicCon, while just trying to get a good seat for the Bleach panel... *snicker*)