Click here for an on-camera review with clips from the movie.
Director Zack Snyder’s adaptation of the revered 1986-87 graphic novel “Watchmen,” written by Alan Moore and illustrated by Dave Gibbons, is like the ever-changing mask of its best-drawn character, Rorschach. Paced at many variable speeds, “Watchmen” is the most wildly inconsistent film I’ve seen in recent memory. In fact, the movie is so uneven that it sometimes it feels like parody or a gaudy recreation just minutes after achieving some kind of true cinematic bliss.
If only those blissful scenes were more prevalent in this 163-minute movie—a rare film that feels too long because of its awkward pacing and at the same time too short because it seems like there’s a ton of story missing.
Well, at least we had time for plenty of Snyder’s now-signature melodramatic slow-motion shots.
Let me back up. I did a foolish thing. I read “Watchmen” just this past week, right before seeing the movie. I knew that comparison would be inevitable and that it would cloud my ability to evaluate the film on the film’s merit alone, but I just couldn’t help myself. I hadn’t read it in 10 years and I got excited—kind of like Dan Dreiberg putting on that old Nite Owl suit again.
Wait, let me back up again.
“Watchmen” the 12-issue comic-series-turned-classic-graphic-novel is a literary rumination about many things—the bestial nature of humans, the hunger for power and its consequences, the inevitability of time, the question of destiny, and the psychology of what it might take to make someone put on a silly costume and go out and fight crime. The book asks what motivates one to be a hero and comes up with myriad reasons across the psychological spectrum—very few of them pretty.
“Watchmen” the movie recreates the purple, red, and yellow hues of the book’s alternate-reality 1985 and ramps up its very few action scenes to ridiculous levels while trying to stuff as much of the comic’s dialogue into the mouths of its characters as possible. Unfortunately, this approach doesn’t do the complicated tale any favors. Snyder’s movie is too tidy and reduces these lofty ideas to the kind of typical sentiment that he probably thought would be easier to swallow for an audience of the uninitiated.
It’s too bad, really, because with an opening-credit sequence as inspired as the one he’s concocted, the audience is hooked immediately and probably didn’t need to be talked down to. This bravura scene has its roots in the images of Gibbons’ intricately rendered 1940s costumed adventurers, but ironically, it is one of very few moments that don’t come directly out of the graphic novel. Snyder places us in the “Watchmen” reality by showing the rise and fall of costumed heroes through a series of stunning virtual freeze-frames of actual U.S. history (V-J Day, moon landing, JFK’s assassination) that have been altered by the presence of these costumed freaks. It is all rendered in super slo-mo and set to Bob Dylan’s “The Times They Are A-Changin’.”
In the movie’s 1985, the U.S. and U.S.S.R. are racing towards mutual nuclear destruction and Richard Nixon has repealed term limits to remain in the White House. Paranoia was amplified by the time period in which the book was released, and it’s a bold move by screenwriters Alex Tse and David Hayter to retain that notion today. Since that choice was made then, why wasn’t the choice also made to keep the actor doing the worst Nixon impression I’ve ever seen off the screen altogether? A silhouette and the man’s voice would have sufficed, but instead Snyder yanks his audience right out of that magical opening scene by giving us a poor Nixon caricature with a nose more fake than Michael Jackson’s.
From there, we learn of a possible plot to kill superheroes (I hope “The Incredibles” paid Moore some kind of royalty back in 2004!) from an angry little cuss named Rorschach (Jackie Earle Haley) who narrates in a menacing growl that would make Clint Eastwood jealous. He’s on a mission to warn his fellow outlawed adventurers, including the rich and famous businessman Ozymandias (Matthew Goode), the nebbish Nite Owl (Patrick Wilson), the young and pretty Silk Spectre (Malin Akerman), and her otherworldly boyfriend Dr. Manhattan (Billy Crudup), the only person on the planet with actual superpowers.
The movie poster claims that Snyder is the “visionary” director behind “300,” but the movie itself soon proves that only that he’s a first-rate visual stylist who fetishizes “cool.” What sets Rorschach off is the murder of an amoral government-sponsored “mask” named The Comedian (Jeffrey Dean Morgan). In one of a seemingly infinite number of slo-mo fight scenes with amped up sound effects, he is beaten to a pulp for a good long time before being thrown out the window.
The problem is that by swooping the camera around and dwelling on every painful punch (even one through a tile wall), Snyder is engaging in violence for purely prurient interests. Rather than deconstructing the superhero myth, he is merely glorifying the carnage. This is antithetical to the entire idea of realizing costumed adventurers as actual people, and is especially hard to take when an unexpected alley mugging is an excuse for Snyder to have some bone-snapping fun at his characters’ expense. Rather than showing the consequences of violence, Snyder is fetishizing it like he did in “300.”
Snyder’s efforts to make “Watchmen” a commercial property make sense from a business standpoint (I’m the first to congratulate him for finishing a project that Terry Gilliam, Paul Greengrass, and Darren Aronofsky couldn’t finish.) Upping the action and violence factor certainly helps jar the viewer every now and then during the movie’s long 163 minutes, but doing that also sells out the point of the tale.
That’s not the only element that breaks any sort of psychological realism the film might have built up. Snyder doesn’t know how to handle his actors. One minute they are delivering dialogue that sounds like it was ripped from the pages of a “Star Wars” prequel and the next minute it all feels like a parody; like he’s messing with us on purpose. Bland performances from Akerman and Morgan don’t help, but most of all what is missing from the acting is any sort of consistency (with the exception of Haley and Crudup). There are even some very minor roles that turn out to be essential parts of the movie, and many of those actors seem like they could have been better handled by Ed Wood. (I’m speaking specifically, for example, about the last scene in the movie.)
Snyder may find it hard to handle dialogue or actors with any sort of subtlety, but he sure is great with montages. The other amazing scene in “Watchmen” is Dr. Manhattan’s origin story. The naked man who glows blue is human only in form. He experiences his own past, present, and future. For him, time doesn’t proceed forward sequentially like a movie, but rather all at once. It can be experienced in any order he chooses, like reading a two-page spread of comic book panels. Snyder flashes forward and backward through Manhattan’s life with precision, appropriating two beautiful pieces from Philip Glass’ “Koyaanisqatsi” soundtrack and featuring a calm narration from Crudup. These uniting forces keep the sequence together, giving the audience a taste of how it feels if all moments are the same moment. The God-like being’s remoteness from the world—his disconnect with all things human—become real. It’s a true “movie magic” scene—so much so, in fact, that when it’s time later for a pivotal moment where Manhattan’s mind must change for good, it’s bungled and unconvincing.
One scene that may rub some people the wrong way (mostly because with all the varied tones in the movie, the audience doesn’t know how to take it) is a love scene that starts with the heroes wearing their costumes. It’s filmed with a little Skinemax-style soft focus and is a purposefully funny moment, culminating in a giant flamethrower ejaculation.
Part of the appeal of the book was as much about the method of storytelling as it was the story. Numerous parallel stories commented on the unfolding narrative of the costumed adventurers. Many of those characters will be edited in later for a longer DVD cut, but their omission is not just felt by me as a fan of the graphic novel. Cutting out the characters on the New York street corner removes a great deal of the feeling of doom that should hang over the movie. Instead of experiencing the impending terror through their characters, we get newsreaders and politicians making speeches on TV and the old faithful ticking-clock device, here renamed the Doomsday Clock.
Again, Snyder is a visual stylist. The hollow simplicity of “300” was a tableau for him to show off his affectation for slow-motion violence and highly saturated colors. With “Watchmen,” however, the director is saddled with one hell of a complicated story. And he can’t handle it. It’s as simple as that. He benefits greatly from the source material in the sense that the compelling ideas in his movie are mostly from the graphic novel. And in the movie, they are still compelling (that is, when he’s not watering them down because he thinks “we can’t handle the truth!”).
What makes the “heroes” of “Watchmen” so interesting is that they hold down opposite philosophical ends of the spectrum. The book offers no answers, just a lot of questions. The movie, on the other hand, takes a stab at being an ordinary “nothing is more complicated than the human heart” story. Even in that respect, it doesn’t quite work.
Or at least that’s what I thought after one viewing. I’ll report back after seeing it again this weekend.
Eric is the Editor-in-Chief of Scene-Stealers.com, a Rotten Tomatoes-approved critic, and contributor for The Pitch. He’s former President of the KCFCC, and drummer for The Dead Girls, Ultimate Fakebook, and Truck Stop Love . He is also the 2013 Air Guitar World Champion Mean Melin, ranked 4th best of all-time. Eric goes to 11. Follow him at:
{ 111 comments }
Well, now I want a version with Terry Gilliam directing.
Despite the swiss fist treatment I think your review made more interested in this movie then I was prior to reading it.
ah eric, you summed it up so nicely with your first two paragraphs that i cannot comprehend your need to go see it again. i just watched it a mere hour or so ago and i’m not really sure what i saw. there was nothing but snippets of a movie there. i went into it not knowing much of anything about this movie or book and feel that this gave me the advantage. i’m quite convinced, after seeing your and aaron’s review, that i came away comparably unscathed. i can see that there were fragments for an interesting story so i can only assume that the book is waaaay better (life-changing even) but that film dragged on and on. it was inconsistent and felt simplified which made it confusing. i feel bad for the fans of the book out there. if you do go see it again, i’d be interested to see if you’re thoughts on the whole thing change.
First of all, thank you Eric for the detailed review. I have yet to see the movie, so my comments are based solely on my experience with the graphic novel. I must say that the glorification of violence will most likely not be an issue for me, as I have noticed the novel’s tendency to be very bloody and brutal. While I understand the dislike of this glorification, the source material certainly illustrates ruthless violence that also plays a major role in the life of someone who beats the daylights out of people with righteous justification. For anyone who has ever pounded another, or been pounded personally into the concrete, these moments are as solid as the bone behind the punch; this is the life these vigilantes choose to live, and the graphic novel does illustrate this. Again, I have yet to see the film. I just wanted to bring this particular point into the discussion.
As far as the feeling of the story and the subtleties laced throughout it, well, my personal rule is never to expect “the book”, no matter who is involved in the movie. In doing this, one does not allow the movie to exist apart from the silent and more thoughtful world of literature. Comparing books to movies is an unfair comparison, whether they are comics, horror, sci-fi or drama. They are different mediums, and carrying an expectation of one into the experience of the other gives us a checklist to promote or demote the work based on merits that count mostly for the other medium. The nice thing is that I have yet to be utterly disappointed for years (since I made myself stop with the great expectations). With “Watchmen”, I will use the graphic novel as a guide through the movie, like a map of sorts. Still, I am worried about some of the acting (and direction of the performers); this is not the first review that has mentioned the lack of believability. Thanks again for the review! – Mark
Yale- Me too.
RCM- Awesome. I think any film fan should see this movie and chew on it for sure! I hope my review doesn’t discourage anyone from seeing it, but rather, gives them a new perspective on how to view it.
Nina- There’s nothing more disappointing than a movie that flirts with greatness only intermittently, and that’s what this movie was for me. There were cringeworthy lines from the film (especially at the end)that were added specifically to give the movie a more accessible and typical Hollywood message, and that felt wrong to me. Seeing it again knowing how it will play out will allow me to concentrate more on the movie itself and less on what I thought the movie would be.
mark- The violence in the book existed to show us the brutality of violence and it consequences. The violence in the movie exists to “look cool.” That’s the problem I had with it. You can’t have your cake and eat it too. It’s the same problem I had with “Blood Diamond.” Don’t show me an issue-driven movie where the killing of massive amounts of people is the ultimate horror and then setthat up in an action movie formula to play out for my kicks.
You are right about the different mediums of film and comics (or novels). This is never more true with “Watchmen,” where the panels were symmetrical backwards and forwards for one comic and Moore/Gibbons tell three or four narratives at once.
Eric – You have my full support on this review (down to the swiss fist and seeing it again). You have hit EVERY point and concern i had. I’ll make sure to send my friends this way when they ask what i thought.
Mark – Violence plays a huge part in the telling of the original story, but i felt the violence was for all the wrong reasons in the movie. Also, my debate with the book-to-movie adaptation is the fact that Zack Snyder is boastful of keeping a frame-for-frame representation of the novel. Which in my opinion, doesn’t happen. Just some food for thought before you go. However, i definitely recommend you go see it for yourself.
oh, well eric just basically said that…
I’ve read the book and saw the movie (thanks to Scene Stealers!) and I pretty much agree with this review on the good and bad parts. However, the bad parts weren’t enough to ruin the movie for me and I thought it still turned out above average. There are a lot of directors who would have done a lot worse than Snyder did. There are also those who could have done better, but I feel that there are more of the former.
Several problems that stood out to me:
1) The fight scenes and violence, which I feel exactly the same about. I went with a friend who hadn’t read the book. After the movie, he was disappointed that the movie didn’t explore the powers of all the characters; only Dr. Manhattan. (Yes, I set him straight. But I shouldn’t have had to.)
2) I felt that some of the music was really poorly chosen. I like All Along the Watchtower as much as anyone, but in Watchmen it feels out of place. That was the case with several song choices.
3) The parts left out, abbreviated, or otherwise changed. Some scenes felt rushed. There were also some things left out that I wished had been there, but I don’t think there was anything that was just inexcusable. I’d have preferred it if Snyder had cut down the fight scenes and the sex scene in favor of other things, though.
4) The ending was different and weaker than the book’s, but managed to mostly keep the same type of feel to me.
I was also very disappointed. This is a very good review Eric, but it sounds to me like you already realize that this simply didn’t work as a movie, so why still the swiss fist? I mean dear god, that third act was literally exposition, it might as well have been filming pages in a dictionary! I needed a bag of ice after the beating over the head this movie put me through. Once again, awesome review.
“I find film in its modern form to be quite bullying. It spoon-feeds us, which has the effect of watering down our collective cultural imagination. It is as if we are freshly hatched birds looking up with our mouths open waiting for Hollywood to feed us more regurgitated worms. The ‘Watchmen’ film sounds like more regurgitated worms. I for one am sick of worms. Can’t we get something else? Perhaps some takeout? Even Chinese worms would be a nice change.” Alan Moore, Los Angeles Times interview, Sep. 18, 2008
Well, Mr. Moore just defined this film’s largest problem and he hasn’t even seen the damn movie (nor will he). Still, overall I think I’m in the same boat as you Eric, there is a lot to love, but there is also some major fail here. To be fair, I was pretty much loving the thing right up to when Manhattan’s back story ended, after that the whole thing was pretty much downhill with a few flashes of excellence minced into an otherwise nausea inducing final act.
This film was bound for failure from the beginning because fans of the book refuse to except it as it’s own medium, and those who haven’t read the book will never understand what the big deal was in the first place. This movie was certainly not without flaws (the over-the-top violence and slow motion action sequences being two of them), but as far as obtaining the look and feel of the graphic novel, I feel like it was on point. I applaud Zack Snyder for finally being able to bring it to screen and doing so rather fearlessly.
So, have you made the trek for viewing #2 yet?
I saw Watchmen on Friday and hated it. I’ve never read the graphic novel, but I found the movie too slow and with lots of ideas and ideologies that don’t really connect.
I was surprised to see that someone agrees with some of my point of views:
“when it’s time later for a pivotal moment where Manhattan’s mind must change for good, it’s bungled and unconvincing.”
– I totally agree. His epiphany about “miracles” is totally random. I found that scene ridiculous.
“Rather than deconstructing the superhero myth, he is merely glorifying the carnage.”
– This also bothered me. Not that I don’t like violence in movies, but it goes against the characters. Too bad!
“It’s filmed with a little Skinemax-style soft focus and is a purposefully funny moment, culminating in a giant flamethrower ejaculation.”
– Yeah… Was this supposed to be funny? And the use of the song Hallelujah was just not original. Who does Snyder think he is? Quentin Tarantino?
Well, I hope people stop making “serious” movies that are actually ridiculous.
I quite agree with poster #3. Maybe I should read the book, because the movie has some interesting ideas that, if developed, could make a great story.
I watched the movie without having ever picked up the graphic novel and ended up hating the movie. However, your review does make me want to go and read it.
OK. I’ve now seen it a second time. I stand by everything that I wrote in the review above after one viewing. But I will say this: Watching again, it was way easier to separate the book from the movie and enjoy the things that Snyder got right. He did tackle an extraordinarily huge and difficult project and, in order to get as much right as he did, I can see how he also had to buckle to some commercial considerations. I don’t appreciate many of them, but there they are. The acting didn’t bug me as much the second time, although Ackerman and Morgan did nothing to really inhabit their characters. In Ackerman’s case, this affects the entire film because her character is the lynchpin for so much of the third act. Morgan simply did nothing with a role that could have been iconic like Rorschach’s. That said, I am starting to come to terms with this version of “Watchmen” as its own work of art. I have a certain amount of trepidation regarding the extended cut with the “Black Freighter” stuff on DVD, but I will certainly watch that as well. Even though parts of the film don’t work at all, the ideas put forth in the movie (all coming from the book of course) are still interesting, and can inspire a lot of intelligent discussion about moral certitude and political responsibility. In fact, on the way home from the movie, my friends and I argued relentlessly about what each character represented. On that level alone, putting it in the same category with mindless slop like “Fantastic Four” and “Daredevil” is just wrong. It’s way better than that and any serious film fan should see it because, like it or hate it, it will provoke discussion.
Nothing should be compared to Fantastic Four. That movie is the worst!
But… really? There’s going to be an extended cut? Well, it’s already overlong as it is!
Okay i’ve seen the film and read the book 3 times, and in my opiion the film gets (using scene stealers reviewing method) a “minor rock fist up”, while a agree with some of Eric’s criticisms of the film, i felt that i enjoyed it alot more than i thought i would and thought J.D Morgans performance was rather good, although i do agree that Ackerman wasn’t the best, overall i think the pros outweigh the cons in the film and i preffered the films climax to the book, u guys know what i’m talking about. So a minor rock fist up is what the film deserves.
Even though the Nietzschean themes and deep pathology are present in the movie, they are far more contrived in the film version, making discussion of the philosophical complexities less seamless, but the fact they can still be vocalized is proof of the filmmaker’s commitment to be loyal to the ideas of Watchmen. In his four star review, Roger Ebert wrote, “here is “Watchmen,” another bold exercise in the liberation of the superhero movie.” By “liberation,” I assume he managed understand the key idea of Watchmen, the deconstruction of the superhero myth (or even the hero myth), even without reading the book. He was comparing it favorably to the Dark Knight, which flirted with similar themes. I think that it is clear that Snyder had a lot of love for the source material and as such tried hard to keep its main ideas alive, and for me, it worked on screen for about half of the film. But I think it definitely has a place among a few super ambitious comic book movies that worked hard to break the stereotype of the genre. That’s what Watchmen did as a graphical novel, that’s why we loved it.
…which kinda goes back to what I was saying about people that loved the movie (like Robert Butler of the KC Star, who called it the greatest superhero movie ever) and never read the book. The reason they enjoyed it was because of the themes, however simplified, that are inherent in the book.
read books: http://wvs.topleftpixel.com/09/03/09/
I have agree with the reviewer here. While this isn’t some piece of hollywood junk it does have some merits to it. I did like some of the touches Synder did, like the scoring for the Laurie and Dan scene, that part were she tries on the nightvision goggles. But some of the touches did bother me alittle. The Viedt mock assignation scene was very puzzling for someone who is trying to stick close to the source material. That was one of my favorite scenes in the graphic novel and I thought it would be bloody amazing with Synder but it was kind of dumb and akward. And then he took poetic license with the Rosarach kidnapper scene which I guess is fair game. But I think the violence was more for shock value than anything. I really think this is as good as it gets for an adaptation from Hollywood. Was hoping for a different movie…yes….was I happy that this was made…yes.
Monique- That picture is hilarious.
I have not seen the film yet, but from what I’ve heard, it sounds like the Watchmen could have been improved by two things I can truthfully say without having seen the film:
1)A different director
2)the movie should be cut into separate films (if one can find a good stopping point).
Okay, I saw it this weekend.
I never have read the novel. I thought as a film the pacing just did not work. All the music during some of scene’s was, well some of it was trying to hard to be a John Woo film and other times it just did not work. Was the film boring? No. Did it want to make me read the book? Yes I am going to. It is better than a lot of garbage out there, but something within the film just does not work well.
I will say this though..this was the first movie in a long time I went to where people actually walked out and left half way through. It must have been a very bizarre experience for someone who did not read the book. Sure watchmen is not for everyone of course but I mean come on atleast make it alittle watchable for someone else. I do agree with the poster that I think they could have benefited from two seperate movies, with the pirate comic included in both. Sort of like a kill bill type approach. I think that this could have worked rather well because it is a story where you need to take a break anyway. But we will never know.
I think people walked out cause there is an overpowering amount of dick in this movie too. Synder is not to subtle when comes to this area. Its really not shown as much in the graphic novel..and there are strategic placed objects infront of it in the graphic novel..here just dangling in all its glory…i couldnt believe the amount cgi work that was put into that penis…i thought i accidently walked into a gay porno at one point..im not kidding..it was uncomfortable watching with other men in the theatre. A couple women just walked out and left..they couldnt take it anymore…
If your sole reason for not liking this movie is because there was a naked guy in it then you probably have some deep seeded issues with dicks, not the film.
Dr. Manhattan’s penis (which was in the book just as much as it is in the film) keeps making people uncomfortable. I don’t really understand why. Malin Akerman’s boobs are in the film a lot just like EVERY other movie she’s in and that doesn’t bother anyone. Long live male frontal nudity!!
Okay, I’m not gonna make a big deal about the penis. It was in the movie way more than it was in the book. The book goes out of its way to cover it up in many panels, but the movie made few efforts to do similar things. Big deal. If that’s your primary complaint about the movie, then I think you’re overlooking at least a dozen other much more important things.
Let’s grow up, folks. It’s a penis. If you’re old enough to see a rated R movie, there’s a pretty chance you’ve seen one before.
I agree with poster 28, I find it interesting that when male nudity enters the picture, suddenly it is jarring and offensive. I think it is a good move to help break traditional gender definitions, and, concerning this story in particular, it fits perfectly with the character. Manhattan’s humanity is a distant, weak thread. Why should he care about society’s mores? I sure as hell wouldn’t. Additionally, nudity is a taboo that persists for the dame reason curse words (or any words) do: we all agree to the meaning of it all. F*** this, or f*** you is offensive because we agree that it is offensive. The same applies to nudity, and Manhattan has moved beyond our perceptions and definitions.
As for the nudity, I agree w/ the previous posters it shows us Dr. Manhattan who is moving further and further from humanity. They go into more depth in the book about his nudity, his powers, him in general which were removed from the movie (that symbol on his forehead, etc.). I applaud what Mr. Snyder did w/ this graphic novel. People will gripe about any movie made from a, “holy grail” of any genre or medium. Alan Moore removed his name from this work but judging from the response here he has gained at least a bit more recognition for creating a Masterwork like “The Watchmen” and created a larger fan base, because it’s going to be hard for people to not love reading the watchmen even if they say, “This isn’t what happened in the movie!”
I just wanted to say please make more movies with as many time stops ass possible. Or would you rather watch transformers and not see anything during the action scenes. I much prefer movies like watchman and 300. Just wanted to comment on that one aspect.
I respect the movie i m not totally in love with it…but it does have alot of balls..figuratively speaking..it took a ton of risks that major studies would never have dreamed of touching and I thought captured most of the graphic novels appeal…i guess I just wished it was more accepted on a mass level like the way the dark knight was..I just felt the story was to compacted and was hard for people who didnt read the book to real give a crap on what was happening on screen…but I love the music and subtle stuff..its all good stuff for this geek..but i was just hoping for a tad bit more i guess..just me..
why are people such babies about this film when they find out someone doesnt particulary like something about it.
I dont care if im multi posting..ive seen this movie twice and Im so torn if i actually like or despise it…im losing sleep..there are so many things wrong about this “adaptation” but they did some beatiful things…I may have to see it again…i dont know….im at a loss for words..it was so anti republican and changes were so off the wall…i cant believe true fans of the graphic novel arent at odds as I am…and that they can accept this as the greatest thing ever witnessed…it puzzles me to know end…do they just like Watchmen cause its “cool”…I cant begin to describe the battle waging in my head.
yea ive graphic novel but dont you think he over did it with one too many penis shots…dont you think becomes a parody of itself eventually and the joke wears thin…everything about this movie is over done…im finished with it.
Concerning the things that are wrong about the adaptation, I noticed the changes from the comic, but kept them separate from from the viewing of the movie. I think part of our collective problems arise from the need for perfection in a translation from literature to the screen. I truly enjoyed the comic as a work of literature to love, and to learn from as an art (both visual and written); however, when I went to see the movie I repeated in my mind like a mantra, “this will not be perfect”. Thus, although I saw flaws throughout the film, I am able to allow the things that went right to exist as well. We should acknowledge that this is a small group of people (with Snyder at the helm) who are trying to pull this off; and, for all the things that went awry for “we the readers”, I must admit that I have not seen a movie in a long time that so closely followed some scenes word for word and panel for panel (concerning comics) as this one. Now, I have not seen every movie, so if someone knows a good one, please let us know, because I would like to read then watch another comic/graphic novel adaptation for comparison. Sorry this is long winded y’all. I have school tomorrow, more later – Mark
James-
In regard to one your posts (#36), if people didn’t like the movie that’s totally okay. To be distracted or pulled out of the film because you see Dr. Manhattan’s dick is something else altogether. Maybe I’m desensitized to violence and nudity due to my age and the time I grew up in (I’m 26 and female by the way), but I hardly noticed it all. It didn’t even occur to me until I heard several people mention how distracting his penis was after seeing the film this weekend. People can rip on the movie all they want, I just don’t think the nudity or graphic violence should be a huge factor in why someone doesn’t like the film because it is in the book. I finished reading the book less than 8 hours before seeing the film so it was very fresh in my mind.
i actually thought it was pretty decent all together… i grew up loving the book, and it was definitely a big turning point for me as a comics geek, but i made it a point to go into this movie without expectations… it’s been at least 5 years since i last read through Watchmen, so it was easier to put it out of my head. and really, reading reviews (yours included, Eric) that weren’t so hot on the movie helped me to really lower my expectations going in… and I think as a direct result, I rather loved the movie!
obviously it isn’t as nuanced or fully fleshed out as the source material. obviously Snyder made conceits that made it more commercial, more eye-candy, more palatable to the post-Matrix crowd. obviously the underlying theme of amorality and megalomania isn’t nearly as well addressed…
but it is a fun, dark action movie that still manages to ask some difficult ethical questions and really leaves you thinking at the end… albeit with the worst aging make-up/prosthetics i’ve seen on film.
my popcorn bag was empty at the end, i never felt bored, and goddammit, Haley KILLED the role of Rorschach… anytime he was onscreen, I was afraid to blink lest I miss a single snarl…
incidentally Eric, I think the reason so many people relate to Rorschach is because he (strangely enough) becomes the moral center of the story… he is the only one that never wavers in his beliefs or ethics… maniacal as they may be. everyone else is either a pussy or aloof…
Ben- You are right. He is a consistent character with a backstory that makes him more sympathetic than one might expect, especially from someone who hacks someone’s head with a meat cleaver. It’s funny how expectations can affect our opinions of movies. People don’t think about how much that plays into it, but I think it’s huge…like Dr M’s penis! (ba-dum!)
I think Dana hit it on the head. Can we drop all the discussion about the detached doctor’s member? It’s so trivial.
Maybe this is all part of the film makers plan…but there comes a point of overkill and if you want this movie to succeed on a grand level which is what I think the producers want to happen then you cant take certain risks its just not plausible..the makers of this film want both worlds..they want to make it for the fans but they want it accecessible…I think they totally missed the mark on both,,,they created a film thats both alienates fans of the novel and puzzles movie goers…fight with me on this…im mean how low do i have to put my expecations to enjoy something…and not only that i think alan moore would abosuletly dispise this verison and not even close to liking it…he had quote about hollywood beating over the head with ideas and thats exactly what this movie does..i would be so pissed off about this movie if they didnt pick fight with the republican party but they imagine to throw that hollywood trick in to…face it this is no win situation.
yeah the glowing blue dick didn’t bother me…
i just found it strange that there didn’t seem to be a scrotum/testicular situation. is Dr. M all twig, no berries? there were berries in the comic, but then again, the comic didn’t spraypaint and repurpose Mark Wahlberg’s dick prop from Boogie Nights.
hahaha..i love all the dick criticisms..ebert loved this movie it must have not bothered him in the least.
another homoerotic thriller by Zach Synder.
i cant believe they convinced the studie to have 10 minutes of dick footage but they didnt want a killer squid….no thats to risky!…nobody would understand! Nobody understands the movie the way it is..what the fuck would a squid make the difference.
An interesting “letter to the fans” from screenwriter David Hayter:
http://www.hardcorenerdity.com/profiles/blog/show?id=2239098%3ABlogPost%3A40658
yea i read it they are begging you to go see this.
he doesnt even know if the movie is good or if it isnt
I would be perfectly happy not seeing this movie again…cause i know if i do im just going to get pissed off.
I have read the book and loved it and have recently seen the movie. Here are quick points of what I liked and didn’t. first what I didn’t like…
– the casting for Ozymandias. poor. I did not believe him in the role and I hated his accent even more. at times he was alright, but too often he took me out of the moment. especially with the way he delivered some of the dialogue like he literally just memorized it.
– the dialogue was at times ‘too’ slavish to the book. this was the wrong approach. people simply do not talk like that. it made certain scenes less believable.
– the fighting. for example when Comedian and Ozy are fighting they go into a tactical punch/block sort of thing which just looked SO fake. other parts were good. throwing him around, the big punch through the wall, I can believe that. the fighting needed to feel more real, it looked choreographed. Most of the other fight scenes had this feel as well.
– the music. not all of it. I liked Boogeyman with Comedian and I liked Luftballoons when Laurie met Dan on the date. but other moments, again combined with some of the slo-mo (the entire funeral scene) just made me cringe.
– the ending. over the top. did all those cities need to get wiped off the face of the earth to get the point across? excessive just like the gore.
– the gore. over the top. unecessary. some of it was appropriate, most of it wasn’t.
– Manhatten’s penis. I’m not a homophobe, and I understand he was becoming less and less connected to things like that, but why continue to show it. it was distracting and killed scenes at times. show him once or twice to get the message across and then shoot from the waste up for god’s sakes. look how many people are talking about it, it’s ridiculous that people are coming out of the theatres talking about it. a couple shots and you don’t have that problem Snyder. big mistake.
– Manhatten’s voice. why can’t he show more emotion? he shows emotion when he yells for them to leave him alone, and then it’s the flat monotone throughout. which is fine, but for the discussion with Laurie on Mars about the miracle of human life the scene really falls flat because of his delivery.
– the fight scene in the alley with Laurie and Dan. that should have felt more like a surprise, instead they went in the alley, seen/felt the thugs coming and just kind of starting kicking ass. very bizarre.
– Ozy’s lair. didn’t feel real.
liked…
– many of the set pieces. Manhatten’s story, the jail break, all the Owl ship moments. Most of the scenes from Mars. the beginning credit’s. the dream Dan has is fantastically shot.
– the sex scene. what is everyone so up in arms about? it was hot!! the costumes were fetishized in the book and so they were in the movie. they had sex in the book, and so in the movie. what sucked was the music (again) and Laurie’s unecessary pressing of the flame button at the end of it.
– Rorsarch. pretty much all of it with him.
– the cast in general was all up to the task. Even Akerman was fine. She looked the part, yah she was the weakest of the group (a few lines were not delivered properly, more Snyder’s fault for not seeing that in his edit) but on the whole she was ok. critics are too hard on here I think.
– the ‘superhero’ moments. like when they are in the owl ship and saving the people from the burning building. I loved when Laurie falls through the floor and slowly stands. It’s what she was born to do. Same with Dreiberg as night Owl. Putting the costumes back on and kicking but was thrilling. Comedian as well when he jumps off the Owl ship and it creates a wave. This is no ordinary man, he is extra-ordinay. Excellent touches by Snyder who gets that aspect to their superhero side.
– I was impressed with the way he condensed the story. So much of the back story is needed to fully appreciate the characters and the ending. But he did an admirable job of it, even though it left for a bit of an empty feeling in the end.
The weird thing is, I have to see it again immediately. I liked a lot of this movie, in fact the part I did I was so impressed with that this is why I am so hard on him for the rest. It is like so many other critics have said that it’s a piece of flawed brilliance. with tweaking and fixing it could have been so much more.
Thanks Eric! Best review of “Watchmen” I have read so far. Expresses my own thoughts after watching the movie quite accurately.
The more times you watch this the more things you will pick out that you hate…why did they keep refering to themselves as the Watchmen…where was captain Metropolis…Why did the ending feel so cheesy…i almosted wanted to cry when this was over..one because jackie earle haely performance gets basically wasted and the ending had no impact on me what so ever…i can go on for days why I cant stand this movie..but im done..if i see this again im going to be severly dissapointed in myself.
This movie tries so hard to be bad ass its misses the whole picture. The slick cheographed fight scenes, the endless slow mo, the tired music, They copied apolyacse now for the music in vietnam, the the only things that were orginal in this movie were showing somebody different dying from cancer (wally weaver) instead of his father dying from opening the letter… interesting addition there…we get more backstory on wally weaver then we do anyone else..i think he is in the movie more then Veidt actually is.
and could they make a more dorky wally weaver.
the super dorked wally weaver…i felt bad for the actor playing him
I one point I thought Wally Weaver was behind of all of this.
Did I mention that I hate this movie.
This is saving me weeks of therapy.
Keep in mind people that this movie cost 125 million dollars to make
25 million of it must went into creating Dr.Manhattans oversized gentialla…No wonder this econmony is the way it is..people cant even find jobs and there spending 25 million to create a wilt chamberlian penis for our hero Dr.Manhattan so a bunch of fans can marvel at his God like ablities…this movie is the sign Apocalypse.
This movie has a giant penis and still cant bring in female viewers….Nothing kills a scene more then the slow drifting down of the camera…
I want to be the fly on the wall who came up with these ideas…Were ..were gonna make Dr.Manhattan’s penis really huge…yea yea…that would make sense…we want the audence to really feel the awesome power of Dr.Manhattan..yes yes…THINK BIG…think Watchmen super hung..yes yes..marvelous…I love that idea you are real thinker Mr.Synder…I like that about you! Yea push the envelope…yea push the evelope…bigger penis equals bigger box office! And will show it alot..like in really important scenes of dialog..and will mix it with great action scenes…Yes Mr.Synder..Im getting excited just thinking about it! The people will come in droves to see this massive penis on the big screen…and then we will put in IMAX!..The IMAX EXPERIENCE..!…Genius..people will think of you as a genius Mr.Synder.
But we have respect the source material!…Yes of course we cant disrespect the source material…So we will show up close and personal..like really in your face!…Yes I like that…Like do you like this cock in your face kind of shots…yes Mr.Synder that wouldnt take away from source material at all…I like that idea…and we will have it dangle and flop back forth when he runs….Good idea…I like the realism you are capturing Mr.Synder…You are really have a true grip on this story…Yes well im a true visonary..it says it on my contract..yes a visonary of epic poropotions!
Actually James, definitely seek therapy.
I dont therapy need I can just come in here and rip on this terrible movie..it actually much more fun then trying to convince yourself that is good.
I apologize for using this as a platform of hate…but I cant wait to get work done this weekend instead watching this 2 and half hour long cock fest..enjoy your movie!
Im not fimilar with the watchmen but did Dr.Manhattans penis cause that terrible explosion that happened at the end…and whos that black kid in glasses hugging that old man they were in a lovers embrace of some sort…such shame they had to die
That black kid you are talking about is actually the reader of a great pirate comic named Tales of The Black Frieghter and the older man is the owner of the news stand. Somehow Synder managed to even make them homoerotic together…Placing them cheek to cheek instead of having the older man sheild the young black kid with his body..its another one of Synder’s brilliant tricks as a director to homosize everything in this movie thus shattering your love of the classic graphic novel.
I noticed that that the bad guy..Mr.Veidt i think his name was…Had a huge cod piece for his costume..in this alternate reality did everyone have huge cocks?
Thats a good question…while the huge cod piece is not seen in the graphic novel it is assumed that Adrian does have a huge cock and is gay..but Mr.Synder likes to make things gayer then what they already are..thus adding rock nipples to his suit..and casting an effimate actor to fill the roll…It can be assumed that Mr.Synder likes all things gay in his movies, thus shattering your love of the classic tale.
Top ten things I did rather then watch this gay movie:1.Help an eldery woman find her keys.2. Got some work done so I can have a free weekend. 3. Had a cafe Mocha 4.Talk to my brother who struggling through the ecomony..hopefully gave him so words of encouragement.5.went to listen to another addict share his story 6.Saved money as to hope getting my own place one day. 7.Talked to my parents told them i loved them. 8. realized life is to short 9.wrote an email to my professors. 10.Made my bed…..
Im not fimilar with the watchmen either..as I was watching this movie I couldnt help but vomit my jujubees in my mouth…this movie is truly breathtaking with it large appratus swinging about..I had to call someone immediately after seeing this movie and tell them I wanted to read the book…Upon looking in the book I found that everything was smaller then I expected..The large appratuses were significantly tinier and less impressive. I threw the book in the trash and dismissed it as utter garbage.
God I hope they keep making movies like this….
Im dying to know what Alan Moore thought of this movie…now that his great book is synomous with an oversized gaint blue dick…Please God above let Alan Moore come out of seclusion and release a statement..who knows maybe he loves it too…i highly doubt that though…Who was the fucking editor of this movie…they oboviously should be fired…im starting believe this is all some sort of grand prank and they going to release the real verison soon..and it will be edited down so we dont have as much close ups of dick…maybe they will cut back in the dvd verison..i doubt it..i cant believe this happening…what a catstrophe…
Are you all serious? Most of posts 50 through 75 have been about peoples junk?! Are all the men such homophobes that this has become 1/3 of the discussion? I notice no one has an issue with the tits. How come the discussion has not veered into one of the virtues of the source comics? Why they are better, what Moore did that was so wonderful, perhaps his other works; even his other works that have been made into movies would be better than this. This is one of the worst discussion threads I have seen in a while. If you dislike the cock so much, why so you keep focusing on it? What is the attraction? If anyone is wanting serious discussions about the film, I recommend that you google something up; this one would lead an atheist to prayer.
Im a casual movie goer and I just like to know what some of the themes are regarding this comic…and how was that blue guy able to make that big thing come up out of the ground and did his penis have anything do with it?
Thats a good question Tim…Alan Moore’s classic tale touches on alot interesting concepts such do the ends justify the means, is utilitarianism a good idea, what would the world be like if people actually dressed up as super heroes…but to answer your question Dr.Manhattan is given God Like ability so he can form matter out of the ground…he also possesses a huge penis in the movie which can be seen in various stages of the movie…Some may speculate that his penis did infact cause that huge object to form but we will have to wait for the DVD..which I hear has much more penis shots..and I have already ordered my copy on blu-ray.
Im a to newbie watchmen..the movie looked amazing but I was alittle confused at the part of the blue guys girlfriend..did his penis give her cancer?
Thats another excellent question..the simple answer is no..She is actually part of the conspiracing group known as Pyrmaid..who is contracted by Mr.Veidt..the one with the huge cod piece and hard nipples for custome..but watching the movie I can see how you can make the assumption that his penis did cause the cancer in Janey Slater..as far as Wally Weaver its unclear what killed him it looked like a sudden heart attack realizing his good friend has a humongous God Like penis sending eminent shock waves through his body..Wally Weaver is assumed in the book to die of natural causes…in fact he gets a bigger role in this movie elavating his character into more then a bit character..he looks like a cross between mister fester and paul from the wonder years.
I cant decide which is better this or buck rogers?
In all seriousness it should be commended that Synder took on such a risky project
I was wondering…i noticed the guy they called the comedian had a big cod piece too…was he as well endowed as the other super hero…the blue guy..and if he so is that why he was killed by the other super hero…the one with the big cod piece and the hard nipple..i was alittle cloudy on that..any clarifaction would help.
Haha, at least it is almost humorous now. Anyways, have a good life.
Thats the Comedian you are referring too..probably the most reckless and revered character of Watchmen..some believe he actually deserved his fate..He was actually killed because he knew too much of Mr.Veidt plans…the one with huge cod piece and hard nipple suit..Mr.Veidt thought that he would eventually crack and spill the story..which he is already seen doing to the character Moloch..he refers to the “island with artists,and writers”..and is babbling incoherently..but the scene doesnt make sense in the movie and yes I did notice that he had huge cod piece were he kept his costume..we are also given a nice slo motion view of his cod piece in the flashback scene were he makes a stand against people who are trying to uprise against Viligantes…you may have actully mistaken it for a disco party given the Boogeyman soundtrack..which was my favorite in the movie..I cant get the song out of my freakin head!
I love comic book movies..this one was absolutely gorgeous…but I was wondering..why did the older Sally Jupiter slap the nerdy batmans ass at the end…where they planning a threesome….Isnt that the mother of the daughter’s boyfriend?
Yes you are right actually….Synder thought it would be a good idea make a Sally a complete aging whore..like the words the Rorscarch used. This is actually popular misconception that she became whore once she was assulted by the comedian..due to time contraints the movie couldnt really go into the physche of Sally Jupitr..so instead our lasting image of her is slapping Nite Owl II ass as she walks to get another drink…We have to assume that she is an alcholic as well..also she comes across as a complete bitch…but the book shows a more tender side to her character.
Great movie…saw it twice!….But im new to Watchmen….what happened to that character Hollis Mason…the one that wrote that book..Under the Hood?
Ah yes a pivotal scene in the rising climax to the tales arch..We actually dont get to see this important and heart wrenching scene…He gets killed by someone weilding a trophy of himself so we miss this scene..probably due to Synders love of showing enmourous cock but I could be wrong..he may have thought it just didnt fit with the tone of the movie..which I find incredible cause he no problems killing everything else…we do have to give Synder credit for crompressing as much into the graphic novel as he did
Come to think of it that wally weaver did look alot like a cross between Uncle Fester and Paul from the wonder years..especially dying of cancer..one of the most hilarious scenes in the movie
God damnit where can I find an intellectual discussion on this great masterpiece!
Im a huge fan of the graphic novel..i wear all the t-shirts and have smiley face pin on my bookbag..im only 15 years would it be good idea to watch this movie..with lets say my mom an Christian Right wing fanatic
you know, the more time has past the more I liked it actually. I came in with too many preconceived notions of what I wanted to see and that tainted it a big for me. The parts that were good were damn good and the parts that were bad were not great but not enough to ruin the experience. I also want to reserved final judgement until I see Snyder’s 4 hour final cut. The feeling of the movie suffered a bit because he just couldn’t include all he wanted too.
oh I forgot, blue penis.
You may want to talk with your mom before bring her to see this..This movie has some adult themes that might not be suitable for children your age..but I bet you got that cool shirt at hot topic along with all the other merchandise thats targeted for teenagers who are about 15..and who will be exposed to this movie anyway..cause there parents wont say no to them and let them do whatever want…so go with your mom and have a wonderful time at the movies..get lots of popcorn!
Johnny you dont have say blue penis after you are done with your comment..this an intellectual discussion about this great movie we want to keep it dignified as much as possible so please refrain from any comments..such as..blue penis…or look Dr.Manhattans big blue shclong, or anything about cod pieces…so please can we keep this as dignified as the movie was! Thank you…Now back to your post about the 4 hour long DVD…there will come a time when you will have decision to make if you want to buy the 4 hour long dvd of this masterpiece of a movie..put your manhood aside and buy the dvd…dont let them bring you down Johnny!
This movie is starting to grow on me like Dr.Manhattans penis
This movie is starting to grow on me like Dr.Manhattans penis
I cant believe they altered dr.manhattans penis in this movie!…To make it larger then it is…im going to personally write to Zach Synder and tell him to get his measurements right!…Its was about Three inch flacid penis in the book if memory serves me right! Here its a whopping 6inches soft!
God…what is wrong with these people..when are they going drop the blue penis!…its a freakin blue penis big deal!…Havent you ever seen a blue penis before! Hahaha blue penis!…Start talking about important things like costume design!…And set design…and what the ending was about!…and the cod pieces they used!…God I never seen such glorious cod pieces in my life!…talk about what matters people!..not about the silly talk about the blue penis!…
Can we talk about silk spectres in that suit…wow..
Im starting to believe that this movie actually blew some peoples mind so much that they cannot comprehend what they actually saw.
I had the same feeling of watching this movie as I did when watched Flash Gordon..the exact same response
Im sorry Johnny that was wrong of me
Well, I saw the movie last night (I live in Sweden so it premiered a week later than in the U.S). I am a big fan of comic books, but I have regrettably never read Watchmen. I was however somewhat familiar to the premises of the story. I must agree that to someone who hasn’t read the graphic novel or know the story, this movie lacks a lot in the plot department. And don’t get me started on the blue penis (and yes yes, I know Dr. Manhattan is just as naked in the graphic novel. But that doesn’t mean I want it shoved in my face for 2 hours!)… and Silk Spectre’s boobs… or lack of clothing period. Just a sidenote, who thinks going out and fighting crime in an outfit that pretty much shows half of your vagina is a good idea? Yes, superheroines often are clad in skimpy outfits but Silk Spectre II takes it to a whole new level…
Well back to the movie. People leaving the theaters in the middle of this movie seems to be a common thing. I myself saw many who left and I can understand why. Snyder has unfortunately failed to bring us an adaptation that draws us in, especially for those who are unfamiliar to the Watchmen story. Someone wrote that they went and saw it with a friend and afterwards had to explain that all the other superheroes except for Dr. Manhattan don’t have any superpowers, I can understand why his friend was a bit confused over the whole thing. I knew from the beginning that they didn’t have any superpowers, but after seeing the film I was a bit confused over it myself for a moment. I have a hard time deciding whether or not I like or dislike the movie, even though it’s been 12 hours since I saw it…
issy you bring up alot of the issues that people with actual intelligence have with this movie…it didnt make any sense and there was too much penis in it are valid points…I m at the point were I cant decide if I absolutely hate it or it hate marginally enough to one day rent it on dvd when im really bored..i dont know why the whole penis thing didnt bother me in the graphic novel..but it sure as hell bothered me here!..it was an absolute scene stealer.
I wish they would have cast will ferrell to play the part of Dr.Manhattan..that would have added a little comic side to this movie.
I think they had really good knng fu training somewhere in their lives….i was amazed on roscrachs kung fu ablility…which he doesnt have any in the graphic novel…and his ability to leap buildings in a single bound..I cant get over how some people in the mainstream (kevin smith) are calling this faithful to the source material..i think thats insult to the source material..if anything this is a cranked up mtv verison for nerds…its time for us to forget this ever happened and go on with our lives as normal..
I only added that blue penis comment as a joke at the end. to make fun of the fact it’s being talked about to this extent, which is ridiculous. it’s distracting, but critics are really over doing it.
glenn, Silk Spectre II in that suit for me is pretty much the hottest thing I have ever seen in a girl superhero. wow, whomever designed that, thank you. it’s my wall paper right now. damn he’s sexy in that, and the sex scene was hot as hell too.
you know, I watched a Zack Snyder interview and guess what was his first and favourite comic book? Heavy Metal. that should help explain a lot of Zack’s sexual tendencies in 300 and Watchmen. he had a subscription.
I know! It looked like her vagina couldnt breathe..i was little worried about her..but then bam she comes out looking so hot…who cares that she cant act her way out of a paper bag..she deserves to be in movies just based on her looks..foxy! Not mention her hot cougar mom in this movie..between the two of them I couldnt decide which one I wanted to masturbate too when I got home…instead I took a shower and tried to get Dr.Manhattans penis out of my mind…Oh the Humanity!
How did you know I used to read heavy metal…have you been going through my mail…God was it with these people would they leave me alone with all this fucking penis shit…ive had up to here! I only put the fucking penis in movie as a joke..something people would laugh at..but instead it backfired and now everyone thinks im fucking liberace or something…what do you want from me the character has a penis!…I couldnt not shoot the penis..its an important part of the story…it shows Dr.Manhattans break with humanity..I tried to juxatupose his penis with different shots of Malin Ackermans camel toe with the penis to balance things out!…I wanted to keep both men and women enjoying this movie..please leave me out of your discussions!..i have to go shoot another movie..
its okay to like this movie tom…its just hard for the general public to get on board with it…the ones that havent read the novel..i mean can you put yourself in their shoes and imagine what they are witnessing…some people walked out of this movie halfway through..it must have been a total mind warp.
this thing is an unfortunate flop
Comments on this entry are closed.