Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

At 3/7/09 06:45 PM, stafffighter wrote: The way I explain it is that the movie doesn't straight up tell us the book but it does tell us the same story as the book. Does that make sense?

Yea.

'While Moore believes that David Hayter's screenplay was "as close as I could imagine anyone getting to Watchmen," he asserted he did not intend to see the film if it were made.'

Well there you have it. The guy who wrote the original comics thinks the screenplay was the closest possible adaptation. I'm fine with the fact that apparently certain elements of Watchmen can only exist in the comics.

How I try to explain it is that we're shown things instead of told them. That different tools for the different medium are used to convay the same things.

At 3/7/09 10:47 AM, DrM wrote:

At 3/7/09 10:03 AM, Sweeper128 wrote:

gently swaying blue penis

*giggles*

At 3/6/09 04:03 AM, PaperBagMask wrote: I also heard it was based on a manga so I think I'll have to get the manga now!

FUCKING RAAAAAGEE

At 3/6/09 04:03 AM, PaperBagMask wrote: I also heard it was based on a manga so I think I'll have to get the manga now!

It might as well have been Japanese in my opinion.

At 3/7/09 06:25 PM, Evark wrote: Here's where I know you're talking out your ass. First of all, the whole Bob Dylan "Times are a' changin'" intro was amazing. Secondly, they actually linked up the LYRICS of "All Along the Watchtower" with the scenic shot all along THE watchtower.

Oh man, I loved that. I practically orgasmed when nite owl and rorschach walked through the arctic blizzard to Jimi singing about two riders approaching as the wind began to howl.

I've got a soft spot for directors appreciating the music they've got.

At 3/7/09 08:24 PM, BananaBreadMuffin wrote:

Oh man, I loved that. I practically orgasmed when nite owl and rorschach walked through the arctic blizzard to Jimi singing about two riders approaching as the wind began to howl.

I've got a soft spot for directors appreciating the music they've got.

Something I noticed in that scene that was really clever was that the survailiance of them coming was shown on that wall of screens between the road warrior and the 1984 Macintosh ad. Road Warrior is self explanatory but the 1984 one was a brillaint spark. Not only are there the obvious implications of 1984 but there's also the fact that it was basically a shot at microsoft, which means a shot to Bill Gates, who's as close to Ozimandius as the real world's seen.
No way they did that by accident.

At 3/7/09 06:41 PM, Evark wrote: Even the PUNS were subtle enough to palette.

I call bullshit on the grounds that puns are never subtle, especially in all-caps.

At 3/6/09 06:37 AM, PaperBagMask wrote:

At 3/6/09 05:38 AM, Lawnbaby wrote: It's based off the graphic novel by Allan Moore and Dave Gibbons

not an effin manga

but they're the same thing right?

Get the fuck out.

At 3/6/09 07:51 AM, REDSPADES wrote: Fuck WATCHMEN the movie, i cant wait for CLOCKCREW!

O I C WUT U DID THAR.

The book.
Awesome, but the ending was weird.
Should read it at comicscans

At 3/6/09 03:42 AM, physco-pickle wrote: I just came back from the midnight showing.
Someone was dressed as Rorschach...

But the movie was awesome.
Only thing is, too much dicks and not enough squid.

lol i went to a midnight showing too, 2 of my friends dressed up as the comedian in his bathrobe when he gets killed and rorshach

At 3/7/09 03:47 AM, MagnumForce wrote:

At 3/6/09 03:42 AM, physco-pickle wrote: Only thing is, too much dicks and not enough squid.

Alright... Ummm... Is this a joke? I mean one dick is too much dicks unless it's a porno, and I don't usually expect squid in any movie.

Maybe it's just me...

Theres supposed to be a squid
...
(Actual scan from Watchmen)

I saw it with my girlfriend. She was soo fucking weirded out by the dogs that Rorschach kills, and the scene where the guy loses his arms while trying to get Rorschach. I still liked the book better, though.

At 3/6/09 04:03 AM, PaperBagMask wrote: I saw it on a school trip, I thought it was pretty good.
I also heard it was based on a manga so I think I'll have to get the manga now!

its not manga, manga is japanese. watchmen is a comic book novel, aka graphic novel.

and why would a school let you see this?

to me this movie sucked.

(read on)

and by sucked i dont mean the quality of the film or anything was horrible, i mean it sucked the breath out of me cause IT WAS SO AWESOME!!!.

i loved the book. first read it years ago. this movie was very true and loyal to the book. some minor differences besides having no squid thing, which i can live with. no dark freighter, but because it got its own dvd, im happy.

loved the music. the song at the credits, riot squad song wht ever its called, was ok, like the origonal better.

Found the opening credits online.

http://www.ropeofsilicon.com/article/the -watchmen-opening-credits-are-online

This seems to be the one thing that every single person that watched the movie can agree on.

I loved this movie!!!!!!!!!!!! First of all, all the characters were very well developed and complex, there wasn't a one-sided character anywhere. The comedian, was he bad, was he good? He's supposed to be one of the 'good guys' but do good guys attempt to rape and shoot women pregnant with their kids? But is he a victim of his environment or is he genuinely evil? He has seen the worst of things and that does have to have some effect.

Sally Jupiter, who was a secondary character, wasn't one-sided either, she had her own stuff going down.

Rorschach was my most interesting character, he had such a complex history and was totally psycho because of his life story. His mom was a whore and he walked in on her once! Getting bullied about it, "Do you think your mom would suck my dick for a dollar?". He bit of a guys cheek hannibal-style.

The characters were so well developed!

The violence was gory, but violence IS gory. A lot of movies sensationalize it to be this necessary and not painful thing, but it is. He was gory to make a statement. The fight scenes were awesome, makes me want to be in peak physical condition, but Silk Spectre II had a power all in her own - walking in those shoes!!

The story line was interesting, we went with another couple, and one of them is very literal. He didn't like the plot because the blue guy couldn't happen. Which was fair, you have to have a creative mind to not question all the stuff that was happening.

The sex scene was pretty explicit, I even whispered this to Jordy in the middle of it. Most movies have steady swaying and only top halves showing. This one was very explicit, complete with pumping and realistic positions and everything. I guess for a large part of their demographic, film is the closest they will get to sex for a few years. I didn't mind all the blue penis, I just wondered why they kept him in a semi-erect state the whole time, he was never completely flaccid (yea, I noticed).

Movie had few highlights, basically stole Christian Bale and added smurf porn.
Long and boring.

I had a lot of love-hate feelings about the movie. I liked that it was more faithful to it's source material than I ever would have thought, but at the same time it was faithful to a fault at times. Have you ever read a book and imagined how it would appear as a movie if nearly every scene was put to film exactly as it was being played in your mind? That's pretty much what Zack Snyder and David Hayter did with Watchmen and while it's interesting to see that finally happen I do like a little adaptation. Even going beyond the plot there are things that read a lot more naturally then they play out on the screen. A lot of Dan and Laurie's dialogue just felt unnatural and it took me out of the film. Slightly altering a lot of the lines would have made a big difference. It made the personal moments outside of the action and spectacle less effective than they should have been.

Speaking of Dan and Laurie, I thought their acting jobs were a little weak. Maybe it was because everyone else was playing such strong characters while they were the two who had to play a lot of their scenes straight. Maybe it seemed poorly played by comparison, but I think it's just that playing a normal guy is way harder than playing an over-the-top hero and they just didn't have the chops to pull it off. In any case I felt like Rorschach, Dr, Manhattan and the Comedian were done the best, Ozymandias was a little weak too, but he had the least screen time so it didn't strike me as much.

Then there's the directing. My main issue was that the film wanted to be cool more than it should have. It's a lot like a film that tries really hard to be artistic, as a result you become hyper-aware while you're watching it that it's trying to be artistic. No one really knows what makes a film cool and no film is ever going to be cool to everyone, but when someone is actively taking steps to make their film appear cool it's usually counter-productive. Plus, and this is a special message to Zack Snyder, you don't have to slow the action down every fucking time someone gets hit hard in an action scene. We get it, it was a really hard hit.

In any case it was a good film, probably the best adaptation of Watchmen we could ever realistically hope to have. It's just that, at two hours and forty minutes it lends itself to over analysis through virtue of having so much of itself to analyze,

Also, if it's of any worth to anyone, I got douched with a second row corner seat. I don't know the psychology of seating and viewing angles, but I'm sure there was at least a few things I missed or perceived a little differently because I was caught in the trenches.

At 3/8/09 10:51 AM, TropicalParadise wrote: I guess for a large part of their demographic, film is the closest they will get to sex for a few years.

Could you come off a little more condesending here, please?

me I just think its OK but not great, a few of my friends were just lost.(they hated it)

with regards to the giant blue death wang - someone, somewhere, has to try and explain that his last 2 years of employment have all been about animating that thing. I bet his mumma is so proud of them :-)

At 3/6/09 03:42 AM, physco-pickle wrote: too much dicks and not enough squid.

well, now all of NG will see it for sure

At 3/8/09 12:14 AM, Ninjuku wrote: (Actual scan from Watchmen)

Ah, the infamous close up of Silk Spectre's vagina.

At 3/8/09 11:36 AM, stafffighter wrote:

At 3/8/09 10:51 AM, TropicalParadise wrote: I guess for a large part of their demographic, film is the closest they will get to sex for a few years.

Could you come off a little more condesending here, please?

If you like...

At 3/8/09 12:55 PM, SevenSeize wrote:

I guess for a large part of their demographic, film is the closest they will get to sex for a few years.

I read comics regularly. I had sex 3 times after watching this movie.

I didn't mean anything like ALL NERDS WILL NEVER HAVE SEX. Because that would include me, right? I just meant that there will be a large amount of young boys who would like to see this movie. This large amount of young boys is a large part of their demographic. I made the assumption that a large amount of young boys are not yet sexually active. You're not a young boy! No need to get defensive, I just meant that a realistic portrayal of sex is not a bad thing when it comes to a certain set that is still curious as to how it works.

Strongg forever!
United together!
They're the best of frriieeenddss!!

I really want to watch it :)

I found the movie to be excellent; I went with a bunch of friends, about half of which hadn't read Watchmen, and they all agreed with me. I even didn't mind the changed ending that much: even though it wasn't as great as the original, it accomplished the same thing. Also, I thought that Rorschach's performance was absolutely amazing.

And I loved the use of music, such as Bob Dylan's "The Times They are A-Changing" in the beginning and Jimi Hendrix' cover of "All Along the Watchtower" near the end, but especially the use of Philip Glass music for Dr. Manhattan's trip to Mars and origin story flashback.

My only complaints:
The slow-motion stuff felt too overused--even in the very beginning with the Comedian's death, it felt overdone (then again, it was by the same guys who did 300)
The acting for Silk Spectre II felt a little weak to me.
And it felt to me as if the film established Veidt/Ozymandias as the villain too soon. When I read the comic book, I didn't have the impression that he was a bad guy until everything started to lead up to him; in the movie, I could tell right away (not because I had already read the book, but because there was something villainous in his tone of voice).

But overall, I thought it was great.

At 3/8/09 01:14 PM, TropicalParadise wrote: I just meant that there will be a large amount of young boys who would like to see this movie. This large amount of young boys is a large part of their demographic.

I disagree. Watchmen is 22 years old now. The film is 18 rated, as such, the main demographic is probably male 18-25, with a secondary demographic of a bit older, of people who bought the original comics when they came out.

:\