WATCHMEN Movie Discussion (SPOILERS allowed)!

[Scar]

Ebert is overrated though

I usually end up siding with Ebert, but not always... For example I didn't find any redeeming qualities in Hancock; where he thought the characters at least contained depth, I found them to have all the depth of an alley puddle after a abbreviated Spring shower. He liked Mummy: Tomb of the Dragon Emperor because it was "just plain, dumb fun"... which is precisely why I found it loathsome, pointless, pandering unto itself without any real story to tell. Now on those two instances I at least agreed with his appraisal of the Mummy movie but found that as my reason to dislike it, having already accepted that the first sequel was just plain, dumb fun and there wasn't a reason to create a third which was divorced from the ongoing narrative thread from the first two movies; Hancock was a different story. I do want to hear what he thinks, as he is by far my favorite critic today (the late Joel Siegel was my go-to guy who usually shared my appraisal of most any film). The Chicago Sun Times will be my place to look, though I like looking to EW with Lisa Schwarzbaum and Owen Glieberman whose consistent harshness and analytical flair leave me optimistic about any movie that garners at least a B-, meaning that it was likely entertaining though with some shortcomings.

 

[barbelith]

Ebert is overrated though

I don't think so. He's one of the few intellectuals we have left, and he's able to approach a movie on its terms, which is rare. He's a real critic, especially in his essays.

 

[BadMoon]

All I know is I don't give a squirt what the critics say. All I care about is what I think. I can't wait to watch it!

 

[karamazov80]

If not for Ebert, we might never know Oprah. And that would be a tragedy.

 

[Ra88]

Just watched the 11th chapter of the Motion Comic...And it was absolutely ^^^^ing perfect. The buildup, the EXCELLENT music, the ending...Chills, dudes, chills.

 

[darthviper107]

I don't think so. He's one of the few intellectuals we have left, and he's able to approach a movie on its terms, which is rare. He's a real critic, especially in his essays.

He's not bad, but people act like his opinion is infallible and that's simply not true, he's well-respected but he's not as great as people think he is.

 

[Lembas Eater]

I'm not sure whats going on, it doesn't seem like they've upped the release date but there are midnite shows all over the area.

A 3-hour midnight show might be a little hard but theres no way I'm missing this. I've been in a bad habit of not posting a lot (outside of LOTR, even there) but I've been following this thread and the movie and I cannot wait.
I have been a Watchmen reader for years and right now I'm in a strange sort of disbelief, that it can't be as good as these reviews say. Last time I felt that, it was when everyone was saying how good THE DARK KNIGHT was going to be and they turned out to be right.

I'm crossing my fingers, reminding myself that an inevitable directors cut should fix a lot the things that people seem to find faults in.

And I have come to accept the fact that there is (sighing the Deep Sigh) no squid in this movie.

 

[barbelith]

He's not bad, but people act like his opinion is infallible and that's simply not true, he's well-respected but he's not as great as people think he is.

He's actually better than people usually think he is. And he's usually right when he slates an aspect of a film. You have to remember civilians and academics aren't looking at the same things. For 99% of people, the only thing that matters is, "Did I have a good time?" That's more or less irrelevant for proper criticism. Popular films can be garbage and box office disasters can be masterpieces.

 

[plasmid303]

Attn: MIKE and other NoCal folks:

https://www.comic-con.org/wc/wc09_prog_watchmen.shtml

Can't make it to the screening, but I'll definitely be at that panel!

 

[darthviper107]

Rottentomatoes now has reviews, so far it's good:
https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/watchmen/

 

[Scar]

All I know is I don't give a squirt what the critics say. All I care about is what I think. I can't wait to watch it!

Same way i feel. I'm taking in what everyone's saying, but in the end all anyone will care about is his or her own individual experience with the movie, and I'm hoping mine will be a good one. God, I still remember sitting through The Phantom Menace with an overweight guy who insisting on devouring every ice cube in his soda individually, and laughing raucously at Boss Nass throughout the entire thing... if that guy made it a point to go around to each and every cinema where the movie was showing, then I understand the reaction people have had to it.

You have to remember civilians and academics aren't looking at the same things. For 99% of people, the only thing that matters is, "Did I have a good time?" That's more or less irrelevant for proper criticism. Popular films can be garbage and box office disasters can be masterpieces.

And with that, our entire past debate seems moot. Wonderful, wonderful.

As to the Rotten Tomatoes review... wow. Really? 91%? I mean I was optimistic, but their early reviews, I'll admit, are more positive than I was expecting. I'm sure they'll balance out as more filter in, but these do make it seem promising.

 

[The Mike]

Attn: MIKE and other NoCal folks:

https://www.comic-con.org/wc/wc09_prog_watchmen.shtml

My wife is pushing now for us to go right after work on Friday and try and make WonderCon by 5 PM to enter. I'll have to see what I can arrange because damn it I want to watch it. I wonder if I can swing the panel on Saturday...that is going to be a tough one to get into.

Check this out:

Feb 24 2009 6:18 PM EST

'Watchmen' Director Reveals Key Differences Between Graphic Novel, FilmZack Snyder walks us through adjustments he made to bring 'unfilmable' comic to the big screen.
By Larry Carroll

BEVERLY HILLS, California —

Imagine filming "Harry Potter," but having no time for the Sorting Hat. Putting "The Giving Tree" on celluloid, but having to change the ending.

Those are the types of quandaries director Zack Snyder navigated while adapting "Watchmen," the beloved graphic novel deemed "unfilmable" by many — including Alan Moore, its creator.



Impressively, the "300" filmmaker has crammed an endless amount of sacred information into the fiercely faithful movie that hits theaters March 6. At our recent "Spoilers" taping, Snyder discussed the ending that he had to tweak for the sake of length. Below, he discusses nine other spoiler-heavy (you've been warned!) additions/subtractions that bridged the gap between the splash page and the screen:

Nite Owl Watches Rorschach Become a Blot
Following their confrontation with Ozymandias, Rorschach is blown to bits by Manhattan. In the novel, Nite Owl misses the kill because he's with Silk Spectre. In the film, Dan Dreiberg watches helplessly as his old partner is killed. "I just felt that I needed a moment at the end," Snyder explained. "That relationship between Rorschach and Nite Owl is a sweet relationship that we establish in the movie. We get a glimpse of what their partnership was like. ... I thought it was nice [for Dan] to see Rorschach die, and also it motivates him to come back in [to confront Adrian] and be mad. You think, for a second, maybe, 'Whoa, this is going to be a superhero movie!' But he has no chance against Adrian."

Let It Snow! Let It Snow!
In the novel, young Laurie has a touching flashback in which she drops a snow globe. And although the scene isn't in "Watchmen," Snyder revealed that the globe is. "In that title sequence, when you peek past the doorway ... you can see little Laurie walking down the hallway to her mother and her stepfather fighting at the end of the hall," Snyder said. "On top of the TV, we built a snow globe that's got the snow, and we actually shook it [before cameras rolled] so fans could see it."

A Short Stroll to Ozymandias' Crib
In the novel, Nite Owl and Rorschach crash their ship in Antarctica, then ride Segway-like hovercrafts over several freezing miles to Adrian Veidt's lair. In the movie, they walk a few hundred feet. "It's because I like that shot where you can see the Owl Ship, and you can pull back and see Karnak in the foreground," Snyder said of the first time we see Ozymandias' enormous fortress of solitude. "I wanted to have geography, for the audience to understand the distances. And also, when they approach Karnak, you can [now] see it as you approach. [Otherwise], it would be difficult for them to fly so far away. It would be some bad flying by the end."

A Hairy Interview?
A bona fide superhero celebrity, Dr. Manhattan goes on a news talk show during a key "Watchmen" moment. In Moore's novel, the interviewer is a generic talking head. In the movie — is that Ted Koppel? "It is Ted Koppel," Snyder confirmed. "I do that a lot in the movie. I try to drill down on pop culture and make you have a reference to your own world."

Kill the Media
Following the revelations during his interview, a frenzied Dr. Manhattan is surrounded by reporters screaming questions. In the novel, he makes them all vanish and reappear outside. In the movie, he makes himself vanish and reappear on Mars. "In the director's cut, he beams them all out," Zack said. "That was just a little time-saving device to move us along in the [story] of Manhattan." But wait, it gets cooler: "In the director's cut, you don't know what he did with those people," Snyder grinned wickedly, implying that Manhattan may have killed the reporters. "You don't see them in the parking lot. We don't PG-13 them; you just don't know where they went."

Janey's Got a Wig
In Alan Moore's graphic novel, Dr. Manhattan's interview goes off track as reporters reveal that he might be giving his loved ones cancer. In the movie, his former lover Janey Slater actually shows up at the TV studio and dramatically takes off her wig, revealing that she's dying. "I just needed and wanted that to be tied back to Janey emotionally and felt that the reporters weren't enough," Zack said of the addition. "There's an interview with her [in the graphic novel], and she reveals a lot of the stuff that she reveals in that speech to him. We took it from that moment; I took all of those ideas and had her confront Manhattan with them instead."

Shrinkage!
In Moore's novel, Rorschach's intense meetings with Cosby-like shrink Dr. Malcolm Long send the good doctor down his own dark, downward spiral. In Snyder's film, the subplot is nonexistent. "That's very indulgent. We didn't quite go that far, but I would have loved to," he said of Dr. Malcolm's scenes at home.

Drinks Are on the Comedian
In the novel, a tense flashback has Laurie confronting Edward Blake and throwing a drink in his face. In the movie, the scene doesn't exist. "Yeah, I didn't put that scene in. I felt that I could only have one Comedian/Laurie flashback," Snyder explained. "So I stayed with the one outside the Watchmen headquarters."

Screeching to a Halt
In both the novel and film, Archie is the vehicle of choice for breaking Rorschach out of prison, but the movie version doesn't give us the ear-piercing Screechers that disable the guards and convicts. "The Owl Ship does have Screechers; you don't hear them," Snyder said. "But in the director's cut, when they are escaping from prison, there's a scene when they are up on the rooftop and Dan says, 'I had to turn the Screechers off, so we're going to be drawing fire soon!' So there's a little reference."

 

[Ra88]

Interesting changes, and they sound like they'll work, though hopefully the Dr. Long bits in the prison are still there. Those are vital for the audience to understand what broke Rorschach. There's no mention of Dan meeting Veidt instead of Rorschach though, so there might be other changes as well...The one I fear is that they have taken out Captain Metropolis and have Veidt organize that meeting.

 

[Kabukiman]

"So I stayed with the one outside the Watchmen headquarters."

I know I need to get over it, but it still really bugs me that there will be an assembled group of adventurers called "Watchmen"

 

[SpawnFan]

Hmm pretty cool that he tells us what we will be seeing in the Director's Cut.

 

[IrishJedi]

I know I need to get over it, but it still really bugs me that there will be an assembled group of adventurers called "Watchmen"

It's really not that overt, though. Plus it actually makes sense within the context of the story as presented on film.

 

[IrishJedi]

Interesting changes, and they sound like they'll work, though hopefully the Dr. Long bits in the prison are still there. Those are vital for the audience to understand what broke Rorschach. There's no mention of Dan meeting Veidt instead of Rorschach though, so there might be other changes as well...The one I fear is that they have taken out Captain Metropolis and have Veidt organize that meeting.

Long's part is extremely short in the Theatrical Cut, but Rorschach's "origin" flashback (with the Blair Roche murder) is pretty much intact and extremely effective.

Ozymandias indeed organizes the meeting in place of Captain Metropolis. That will tick many purists off, but I actually understood that decision on 2 fronts:

1) For most of the audience, it wouldn't make sense because CM (who's just briefly in the Minutemen flashbacks) would basically disappear from the story after that altogether. People would be thinking, "Who the hell is this guy??"

2) The tension between Blake and the rest (particularly Veidt) becomes much more palpable because of this scene. After the revelation at the end, people will think back to this scene and the opening fight/murder (and lines like "It was just a matter of time, I suppose" and "It's all a joke") and it will make perfect sense. Film does not allow for as much nuanced subtlety as the book.

It works.

 

[barbelith]

But wait, it gets cooler: "In the director's cut, you don't know what he did with those people," Snyder grinned wickedly, implying that Manhattan may have killed the reporters.

It's so "cool" when you don't get it.

 

[Scar]

Shrinkage!
In Moore's novel, Rorschach's intense meetings with Cosby-like shrink Dr. Malcolm Long send the good doctor down his own dark, downward spiral. In Snyder's film, the subplot is nonexistent. "That's very indulgent. We didn't quite go that far, but I would have loved to," he said of Dr. Malcolm's scenes at home.

Not liking that. At all.

 

[Lembas Eater]

They lied to me. There is no midight show till next week. Kind of obvious and that makes a lot more sense but I'm obviously disappointed. I guess it was some weird glitch in the Yahoo Movies schedule and who knows, the theater worker that confirmed the showing may have been looking at the same website for all I know.