Watchmen

[StlKj]

The sex scene was key in understanding Nite Owl's character. He's impotent without the costume, at least at first. He is the type of character who says he fights crime because someone has to, but it's really because it makes him feel alive and is arousing.

Dr. Manhattan is naked throughout because it shows how little he concerns himself with the rules of human society, except for when he's forced to do so.

All of these characters reflect the various reasons a human would really put on a costume to fight crime, and what would happen to them if they did. While they are close approximations to a line of characters that DC decided not to use in Watchmen, they are also analogs for Superman, Batman, etc. The purpose was to deconstruct superheroes and bring them down to a level that we all could relate to.

That may actually have been obvious to everyone who saw it--I've just had a few to drink and decided to get all philosophical in case anyone missed the point.

 

[Glafna]

What I meant was that they didn't stay true to the plot in the graphic novel. They changed it into something totally different. The plot didn't tie up right and it royally fucked up Comedian's character. Bloody senseless, the entire movie.

There was this guy who sat next to me in the theater burst into tears at the end of the movie. I cried in the toilet though.

Moe, read the graphic novel. I know you will love it. It so like deep and stuff. Watchmen tackled a lot of issues -- and oh! -- brilliant character development; the mystery of the Comedian made more sense in the book. And the world didn't end like that.

There were reasons why the author wanted NOTHING to do with the film.

 

[StlKj]

So, to clear up what was talked about earlier, Moore was expecting to get the rights to the material when it went out of print. At the time, a comic series of its nature (twelve issues) would have concluded, and aside from a possible reprint of the last issue to make sure demand was met, it would have then gone out of print. Moore would have then taken over the rights.

Because of its popularity, however, DC decided to collect it into a "graphic novel" format. It's popularity continued, so they continued to print it. Because of this, it never reverted back to Moore. He feels he was screwed over because of it, so he wanted nothing to do with the film.

 

[had438]

The sex scene was key in understanding Nite Owl's character. He's impotent without the costume, at least at first. He is the type of character who says he fights crime because someone has to, but it's really because it makes him feel alive and is arousing.

Dr. Manhattan is naked throughout because it shows how little he concerns himself with the rules of human society, except for when he's forced to do so.

All of these characters reflect the various reasons a human would really put on a costume to fight crime, and what would happen to them if they did. While they are close approximations to a line of characters that DC decided not to use in Watchmen, they are also analogs for Superman, Batman, etc. The purpose was to deconstruct superheroes and bring them down to a level that we all could relate to.

That may actually have been obvious to everyone who saw it--I've just had a few to drink and decided to get all philosophical in case anyone missed the point.

That's all well and good, but I don't think Snyder was able to translate that message, the whole aspect of the "deconstructed superhero" seemed somewhat absent to me. The sex scene got the point across, but it was laughable, it seemed like this teenager sensibility of sexiness that just came across as bumbling and amateur, he may as well have just shown at her door with a pizza and asked if she ordered extra pepperoni. I almost hope that Snyder deliberately shot that scene to be comical rather than passionate.

And Dr. Manhattan's nakedness seemed to just be blatantly there, where as in the novel it happened gradually in his flashbacks scenes and you could see that, maybe I wasn't paying attention to the movies.

I'm just saying, I liked the movie despite all that.

 

[StlKj]

That's all well and good, but I don't think Snyder was able to translate that message, the whole aspect of the "deconstructed superhero" seemed somewhat absent to me. The sex scene got the point across, but it was laughable, it seemed like this teenager sensibility of sexiness that just came across as bumbling and amateur, he may as well have just shown at her door with a pizza and asked if she ordered extra pepperoni. I almost hope that Snyder deliberately shot that scene to be comical rather than passionate.

And Dr. Manhattan's nakedness seemed to just be blatantly there, where as in the novel it happened gradually in his flashbacks scenes and you could see that, maybe I wasn't paying attention to the movies.

I'm just saying, I liked the movie despite all that.

With all due respect, I think it was laughable because true, honest sexual energy like that in a film is uncomfortable for people, even those used to watching lots of porn. The thought of two people getting so turned on by putting on a costume and kicking ass or helping others is an uncomfortable one to most people.

 

[had438]

With all due respect, I think it was laughable because true, honest sexual energy like that in a film is uncomfortable for people, even those used to watching lots of porn. The thought of two people getting so turned on by putting on a costume and kicking ass or helping others is an uncomfortable one to most people.

I think there's a fine line b/w being passionate and being desperate, and they omitted the conversation they had afterward, which somewhat explained the scene, exposition can be a bitch, but there's no point in being lazy, I didn't see many bloody omits, and some were added. I can understand too people wanting to fuck with all the adrenaline that comes with the moment, but that was only part of that scene. Feels lacking, and I don't personally like gratuitous thrust either, even if it is Patrick Wilson. Give me a fade out and an afterglow moment any day.

 

[StlKj]

I think there's a fine line b/w being passionate and being desperate, and they omitted the conversation they had afterward, which somewhat explained the scene, exposition can be a bitch, but there's no point in being lazy, I didn't see many bloody omits, and some were added. I can understand too people wanting to fuck with all the adrenaline that comes with the moment, but that was only part of that scene. Feels lacking, and I don't personally like gratuitous thrust either, even if it is Patrick Wilson. Give me a fade out and an afterglow moment any day.

But a fade out and an after-glow is safe, as it does not challenge people to be uncomfortable.

 

[winterknight]

So, to clear up what was talked about earlier, Moore was expecting to get the rights to the material when it went out of print. At the time, a comic series of its nature (twelve issues) would have concluded, and aside from a possible reprint of the last issue to make sure demand was met, it would have then gone out of print. Moore would have then taken over the rights.

Because of its popularity, however, DC decided to collect it into a "graphic novel" format. It's popularity continued, so they continued to print it. Because of this, it never reverted back to Moore. He feels he was screwed over because of it, so he wanted nothing to do with the film.

Pretty much.

Although if he DID own the rights, the film would never have been made either. He doesn't grant adaptation rights to anything over which he has creative control.

 

[StlKj]

Pretty much.

Although if he DID own the rights, the film would never have been made either. He doesn't grant adaptation rights to anything over which he has creative control.

Very true, Winter. Plus, even if he had creative control, he might have blocked any film efforts for Watchmen. As I pointed out earlier, this was basically his ode to the storytelling power of the comic book. He doesn't believe it should be a movie because of that.

 

[SashaMitchell]

From the perspective of someone not familiar with the comics, I thought it was awful. The opening credits sequence was cool, but otherwise not worth watching and a waste of $10. The story was incomprehensible, the dialogue was silly, the violence was pointless, and most of all the whole movie was just BORING.

 

[had438]

But a fade out and an after-glow is safe, as it does not challenge people to be uncomfortable.

I don't think there is anything challenging about these scenes, its just not very good storytelling, if I want to feel uncomfortable about sex I'll go watch a Catherine Breillat film.

 

[thevofl]

Most people I know who haven't read the GN and saw it loved it or at least in one case liked it. Of the two people I know who have read it, they loved it. Yes they complained about what was in it versus not in it, but they felt that it was still a damn good film.

 

[MisterMajestic]

Havent seen the Flick and never read the Comic...The trailors made me scratch my head..But the Reviews here are pretty Damn good...

I'm a Sci-Fi fan so when Sci-Fi Fans are in agreement then that's a "Thumbs-Up"...I'm gonna check it out this week...

 

[Guy_Gardner]

damn...the movie made only 56 million for its opening weekend..that's not good considering all of the production value and all the advertising....since most movies tend to have a drop off for the second week...

although I had my issues with the movie...I thought it did what it set out to do and adapt the comic for the most part

I just hope that this doesn't affect movie studios wanting to do comic movies...hopefully this might mean a move away from the grim and gritty comic movies...

 

[Raven03]

huh......56 million is a great opening weekend. If it made less than at least 25 million then it would have been a bust.

 

[had438]

56 million ain't bad cosnidering it had a budget of 120 mil, that's almost half it's budget in three days just in the US, it sucks that Fox gets a piece of that though.

 

[YeahWhatever]

huh......56 million is a great opening weekend. If it made less than at least 25 million then it would have been a bust.

Based on the opening weekend box-office, let's hope no one greenlights a sequel.

Anyway, I really loved the movie. Bravo!

 

[Glafna]

56 million ain't bad cosnidering it had a budget of 120 mil, that's almost half it's budget in three days just in the US, it sucks that Fox gets a piece of that though.

It`s their own fault. They were too stupid to realize the opportunity.

 

[NomineDetracto]

just saw it and i have to say that i liked it quite a bit. the opening credits were brilliant.

my biggest complaints is with the soundtrack... a lot of the song choices just didn't work. i understand that they were trying to put us in a certain time with the music, but at some points it seemed really forced and didn't seem to fit. most noticeable in the sex scene.

the casting was pretty much perfect.

i understand that they have to change things up a little and leave things out and blah blah blah and i'm not a big enough fan of the books to nit-pick, the only problem i had with the new ending was that it just felt really melo-dramatic compared to rest of the story/script. maybe that was just me.

i loved the "you're such an asshole", that was great.

 

[YeahWhatever]

^Ah, yes. The credits were pretty cool. Zack Snyder's Dawn of the Dead opening credits were pretty cool too.

I didn't mind the soundtrack too much. But I agree, the casting was pretty inspired.