The Watchmen

[Buffalo]

OK so I'm 34 years old and I went out last night to buy a comic book for the first time in more than twenty years (to be honest, the only comic I ever got into was GI-JOE :))). The movie coming out got me reading fanboy sites and whatnot, and I had yet to encounter anyone who didn't think this novel was absolutely brilliant. Let me say they are all correct. Alan Moore, Dave Gibbons, and John Higgins had me for hours last night. Many of you probably knew this twenty years ago.

So what did you all think of the novel (I got to the point where Nite Owl and Silk Spectre decide to bust Rorschach out) and what are your thoughts on the movie that's coming next week? I honestly was ready to stay up all night to finish it.

[DRS]

I have been intrigued by this since I saw the trailers last year, but have not gotten the novel

[Buffalo]

I have been intrigued by this since I saw the trailers last year, but have not gotten the novel
I like to read the source material before I see the movie. You can pick up the Novel, which is really the twelve issue run, for around twenty bucks. It's not just a comic. If you get a chance to hit the book store, flip through it, it is different than any comic I've ever seen. Totally engrossing.

[signcut]

Tremendous novel, I believe that Time rated it as one of the 100 best ever. Like others Moore has done, it is much deeper, much richer, than some simple 'comic book'. It is true literature.

I will see the movie, but I fear that it will suffer greatly from Hollywood's handling it... :confused:

[Darf Tacos]

One differece seems that the movie characters look young. In the book they where close to retirement. The difference may be a plus. We'll see. I can't see comic movies of books I've alrady read. I'll wait for it on tv.

[Hereintheusa]

I first read Watchmen back in the 80s when I was a teenager and to be honest at the time I was to young to really appreciate it but re-reading Watchmen years later and I can now really appreciate the depths both Moore and Gibbons put into the comic.

I was lucky enough to see the movie at an advance screening this morning and I enjoyed it. It is impossible for any movie to do 100% justice to the comic/book but they did a very good adaptation.

There are some major changes to the story but you have to remember the movie has to appeal to a much broader base than any comic ever does.

The opening sequence is superb as are the flashbacks throughout the movie.

However anyone not familar with Watchmen dont expect to see your run of the mill Superhero movie where they are fighting for truth justice and the American way. Alan Moore premise was he wanted to see how superheroes would act if they really existed in our world and really deconstruct the American obsession with superheroes in costumes.

I am sure there will be those who say this is an anti-america movie and try and tie it into with some liberal agenda but if they do they will only be embarrassing themselves and missing the whole point of the story.

There is plenty in the movie to satisfy the fanboys but when I saw it I made a conscious effort not to compare it to the comic.

[angelicmadrigal]

Personally I can't stand comic books or graphic novels.

I also can't stand super heroes.

So you know....it's a total no go here.

[BrittleBullet]

See avatar and sig.
I read the graphic novel several years ago (I'm not a comic fan by any stretch of the imagination) and was blown away by how deep it was. I still read it every couple of months. It certainly deserved to be on Time's list as on the greatest pieces of literature since 1923. I'm so geeked for the movie. I was first a little skeptical about the movie being any decent. The source was said to be unfilmable. Once I saw Zach Snyder attached to the project I was sure it was going to be a failure. 300 didn't suck but it didn't need the attention to storytelling like The Watchmen deserves. I watched some leaked scenes and read the reviews so far and I'm very optimistic now. It looks like this is going to be faithful to Moore's work. Most of the scenes and dialog are taken straight from the graphic novel. Its like music to this fanboys ears.

[BrittleBullet]

Personally I can't stand comic books or graphic novels.

I also can't stand super heroes.

So you know....it's a total no go here.


There's only one superhero in the whole 500+ pages. Everyone else is just a flawed dude who for their own reason puts on a costume. Give The Watchmen a try. You might like it.

[Buffalo]

See avatar and sig.
I read the graphic novel several years ago (I'm not a comic fan by any stretch of the imagination) and was blown away by how deep it was. I still read it every couple of months. It certainly deserved to be on Time's list as on the greatest pieces of literature since 1923. I'm so geeked for the movie. I was first a little skeptical about the movie being any decent. The source was said to be unfilmable. Once I saw Zach Snyder attached to the project I was sure it was going to be a failure. 300 didn't suck but it didn't need the attention to storytelling like The Watchmen deserves. I watched some leaked scenes and read the reviews so far and I'm very optimistic now. It looks like this is going to be faithful to Moore's work. Most of the scenes and dialog are taken straight from the graphic novel. Its like music to this fanboys ears.
I finished it in two sittings cause I couldn't put it down. The movie does look pretty damn good, but I've been fooled before (see 300). I am psyched though, and hope it at least does it justice. I don't know how you film the pieces of the work that provide the depth to the story (the Hollis book, Rorschach stuff, Minutemen background stuff, etc. ) I've already read that the Black Freighter story is being filmed comic style for the DVD, which is good and bad. And I've heard the end is different. Won't spoil, but hopefully Snyder pulls it off. Only negative I've seen so far is the Ozy casting. Matthew Goode may be able to pull of the intellectual side of the character, but he's also the premier athlete of the time, and I just don't see that in Goode. Anyways, I am looking forward to it.

[Buffalo]

There's only one superhero in the whole 500+ pages. Everyone else is just a flawed dude who for their own reason puts on a costume. Give The Watchmen a try. You might like it.
Definitely far more than a superhero story. I've never gotten into comics or GNs before either (at least since very young), but this is totally different.

[angelicmadrigal]

There's only one superhero in the whole 500+ pages. Everyone else is just a flawed dude who for their own reason puts on a costume. Give The Watchmen a try. You might like it.

Oh, and I also don't like vigilantes and stuff like that. I tolerate batman.....I say tolerate. And one superhero is one superhero too many.

[Gaby77]

I'm so stoked about this, it's not even funny! I'm just trying to not get my expectations up too high for the movie. I don't want to be disappointed. But from everything I've seen so far, I don't think I will.

[BrittleBullet]

I finished it in two sittings cause I couldn't put it down. The movie does look pretty damn good, but I've been fooled before (see 300). I am psyched though, and hope it at least does it justice. I don't know how you film the pieces of the work that provide the depth to the story (the Hollis book, Rorschach stuff, Minutemen background stuff, etc. ) I've already read that the Black Freighter story is being filmed comic style for the DVD, which is good and bad. And I've heard the end is different. Won't spoil, but hopefully Snyder pulls it off. Only negative I've seen so far is the Ozy casting. Matthew Goode may be able to pull of the intellectual side of the character, but he's also the premier athlete of the time, and I just don't see that in Goode. Anyways, I am looking forward to it.

The guy who they casted for Ozy put me off a bit, but if the movie as a whole is good, I think I'll be able to forgive it. :mrgreen:

[BrittleBullet]

I just got back from watching the movie. It stayed very true to the comic. Some portions of the movie didn't pack the emotion that the printed version can hit you with but that was to be expected. The only way I could see it made into a perfect translation was to make into a ten part, one hour long piece HBO miniseries, but this was still quite good. As a fan of the graphic novel it give it 4/5 stars. The ending is changed and I didn't think it worked as good as it does in the graphic novel. I didn't find it as complex as the original ending. As a movie fan I give it 3.5/5 stars. Its really tough to give the movie an unbiased review because I love the original work so much but I'll give it a shot. The movie dragged at a few points. If I wasn't a fan of the graphic novel I wouldn't be able to grasp why the original source material is so revered. It seemed to be focused more on Silk Specter and Nite Owl. I thought the part were they advanced the plot was boring. Veidt came off as cartoonish super villian. The real stars of the movie were Rorschach and Dr. Manhattan. This wasn't as accesable as The Dark Knight or other comic book hero movies so I highly doubt this will make anywhere close to the money those movies made, but I do think some people will stick it out and might be able to appreciate it. We shall see.

[Buffalo]

Thanks for the review. I plan on going Saturday. Compared to a lot of the films out today, I'm sure I won't be too dissappointed if your assessment is right. I'll post one after I see it.

[BrittleBullet]

Thanks for the review. I plan on going Saturday. Compared to a lot of the films out today, I'm sure I won't be too dissappointed if your assessment is right. I'll post one after I see it.

I eagerly await your review along with anyone else who'll catch the movie soon.

[sgtmac_46]

Oh, and I also don't like vigilantes and stuff like that. I tolerate batman.....I say tolerate. And one superhero is one superhero too many. Considering 'Watchmen' is really nothing less than a complete de-construction of the entire Superhero mythology, it's not really a 'Superhero' or 'Vigilante' story in remotely the traditional sense......it's more about the ridiculousness of comic book heroes, and the ultimately dangerous results of that power.

'Who watches the Watchmen?'

[angelicmadrigal]

Considering 'Watchmen' is really nothing less than a complete de-construction of the entire Superhero mythology, it's not really a 'Superhero' or 'Vigilante' story in remotely the traditional sense......it's more about the ridiculousness of comic book heroes, and the ultimately dangerous results of that power.

'Who watches the Watchmen?'

I've heard the quote, many many many times. And honestly I've had the premise explained to me by more people than I care to count. When you look at certain characters in particular you still see elements of the things I don't like about the whole genre in general. Even though it may be a deconstruction/non traditional presentation it still has a good number of the same elements of traditional Superhero/Vigilante stories, and that's just something I dont' care to see.

My bf will have to see it first, he'll let me know if there's anything in it I'd like, or that will make it tolerable for me to sit through.

[BOBPENN]

Well, it sacrificed millions based on a lie, to achieve a false sense of security, you can compare it to socialism, or national socialism, and it will not work. A dangerous film, in dangerous times.

[uncledoom]

Well, it sacrificed millions based on a lie, to achieve a false sense of security, you can compare it to socialism, or national socialism, and it will not work. A dangerous film, in dangerous times.

Huh??

[Hereintheusa]

Well, it sacrificed millions based on a lie, to achieve a false sense of security, you can compare it to socialism, or national socialism, and it will not work. A dangerous film, in dangerous times.

For ****s sake this movie has notthing to do with socialism.

BTW to the previous poster who said it looks at the ridicolness of superheroes, you are missing the point. Alan Moore wanted to write a story which put costumed crime fighters in the real world and look at how they would really act and interact with the rest of society.

At the time DC had just purchased the Charlton stable of superheroes and the series was supposed to use them. But we ended up with the likes of Dr Manhattan (Capt Atom) and Niteowl (blue beetle)

[Pudge]

I just saw the movie tonight, and I thought it was good- not great, but good. I don't mind movies that have a deeper philisophical plot to them

As for the moral dilemma posed by the end of the film, I'll not spoil it, but I see it as a choosing of the lesser of evils, not as an advancement of socialism.

The portrayal of Richard Nixon was downright cartoonish.

Overall, could have used either a little more action or a faster plot.

[ArmyMAJretired]

I just saw the movie tonight, and I thought it was good- not great, but good. I don't mind movies that have a deeper philisophical plot to them

As for the moral dilemma posed by the end of the film, I'll not spoil it, but I see it as a choosing of the lesser of evils, not as an advancement of socialism.

The portrayal of Richard Nixon was downright cartoonish.

Overall, could have used either a little more action or a faster plot.

My 17 year old son, a HS senior and a good kid wanted to see it, so I went with him. I liked the movie. Abit long with too many plot twists and hard to follow, but actionpacked.

My only objection was there is too much sex, nudity and vulgarity for my 13 year old son to see it on DVD.

[Pudge]

My 17 year old son, a HS senior and a good kid wanted to see it, so I went with him. I liked the movie. Abit long with too many plot twists and hard to follow, but actionpacked.

My only objection was there is too much sex, nudity and vulgarity for my 13 year old son to see it on DVD.

The graphic violence didn't stand out more than the very brief nude/sex scenes?

I mean, all I saw was a nipple and a glowing blue penis for what, a fraction of a second, but the violence and gore was much more prevalent.

[-American-]

I definitely want to see the movie, I've never read the novel though. Here I am a comic book geek and I've never read Watchmen.

Buffalo you might also be interested in "Kingdom Come." It's one of the great graphic novles everyone should read. The familar DC heroes are in it.

[BrittleBullet]

The graphic violence didn't stand out more than the very brief nude/sex scenes?

I mean, all I saw was a nipple and a glowing blue penis for what, a fraction of a second, but the violence and gore was much more prevalent.

I actually wasn't a fan of either simply because it was unnecessary. The graphic novel has both sex and extreme violence, but didn't go to the same lengths for shock value. The part that got me was when someone's arm was snapped back and the bone was coming out of the skin. Snyder added in a lot more violence. If I remember the first scene (the fight) in the movie correctly there was very little extreme graphic violence and those first couple of minutes to me were the best. Setting it to "Unforgettable" was brilliant. I had no prob with Dr. Manhattan's glowing blue junk being shown. I really didn't pay as much attention to it as some people seemed to have. Its actually very relevant to the his character. The sex scene on the other hand was useless.

[BasicGreatGuy]

I just got done watching the movie. In my opinion, the hype exceeded the reality of the movie itself. Not really surprising. That is what movie promotion is about. The movie was noticeably long, at just under 3 hrs. It was long due to the poor script, in my opinion. It was disjointed, and made it hard for me to want to stay interested in it.

I give the movie a C- If it weren't for the special effects, I would have rated it a D. Wait for the dollar DVD, or watch it online ;)

[Tanthiel]

I haven't seen the movie yet, but the ending in the book was as much a commentary on how ideas change over time as much as anything else. In the psych profile of Rorschach in chapter 6, there's an essay written by the young Walter Kovacs (Rorschach) where he expresses his admiration for President Truman for dropping the atom bomb on Japan and saving millions of lives.

In the end when Veidt does exactly the same thing, he condemns him and sets off to expose the truth, despite that the truth being known will cost more lives than the destruction of New York. The sacrifice in the end isn't a "false sense of security", it defuses the conflicts.

And Nixon is supposed to come off as a cartoon, at the point the comic is set at, Nixon has been in office for 23 years, the Constitution has been changed for himself, he's had Woodward and Bernstein killed, etc.

Hoping to get out and see the movie on Wednesday, hoping the new ending doesn't change the tone too much.

[snagswolf]

Saw the movie today and I enjoyed it a lot. A little on the long side, but kept me engrossed.

I didn't see much politicizing, and what there was was pretty even on both sides.

It's definitely not a kids movie, with violence, language, and nudity. The standout performance was from Jackie Earle Haley, who played Rorschach.

The movie did a great job of mixing in flashbacks to fill in the backstories of the Watchmen, although they never did examine the history of one of the main characters, Night Owl II.

And they never did explain the cat.

I'll have to read the book.

[BillyBobUSA]

I liked the movie up to the ending, which was contrived, shallow and twisted.

There is no justification for killing millions to avert the mere risk of the death of billions, period. And the post-holocaust nervana was also pure BS that was in striking contrast, to my perception, with the rest of the gritty realism of the social degeneracy portrayed.

Lefties always seem enamored with these 'we gotta kill some to save the rest of us' line of thought. This ending was just another construction of the life boat ethics just with better graphics and more bovine scatology.

Worked really well for Stalin, Marat and Mao, didnt it?

Anyway, at that point I was so disgusted I almost laughed when a certain masked man was blown up by his good buddy in order to save the world from humanity.

There *is* a lesson to all this, but it isnt the one the writers thought most will take from it, I suspect.

[JeffR]

I was mostly bored during the movie.

[BrittleBullet]

Saw the movie today and I enjoyed it a lot. A little on the long side, but kept me engrossed.

I didn't see much politicizing, and what there was was pretty even on both sides.

It's definitely not a kids movie, with violence, language, and nudity. The standout performance was from Jackie Earle Haley, who played Rorschach.

The movie did a great job of mixing in flashbacks to fill in the backstories of the Watchmen, although they never did examine the history of one of the main characters, Night Owl II.

And they never did explain the cat.

I'll have to read the book.

Nite Owl II has very little backstory even in the graphic novel, so the movie didn't have anything to skip over.

The cat is Bubastis, Veidt's genetically modified pet lynx. It was of his early accomplishments in the way of genetic modification. It actually ties into the ending of the original but didn't have any use in the movie besides making the audience say ***.

[BrittleBullet]

I liked the movie up to the ending, which was contrived, shallow and twisted.

There is no justification for killing millions to avert the mere risk of the death of billions, period. And the post-holocaust nervana was also pure BS that was in striking contrast, to my perception, with the rest of the gritty realism of the social degeneracy portrayed.

Lefties always seem enamored with these 'we gotta kill some to save the rest of us' line of thought. This ending was just another construction of the life boat ethics just with better graphics and more bovine scatology.

Worked really well for Stalin, Marat and Mao, didnt it?

Anyway, at that point I was so disgusted I almost laughed when a certain masked man was blown up by his good buddy in order to save the world from humanity.

There *is* a lesson to all this, but it isnt the one the writers thought most will take from it, I suspect.

That was the point, kinda.
And they were never friends.

[Rorus Raz]

The movie didn't condone what happened at the end. It's a moral quandary of sorts. And yes, the countries would probably unite in the face of a common enemy blowing their major cities to rubble. How long such unity would last is another matter.

[ISYairio]

I saw it at the local midnight showing on a whim. I liked it. Not great, but whatever.

Interesting Watchmen site: A Watchmen Guide (http://web.me.com/rlevatter/V_is_the_Veidt%3A_A_Watchmen_Guide/Watchmen_Guide_Welcome.html).

[RogerDodger]

I was underwhelmed.

I suppose it would have been helpful to be familiar with the source material, but I was not.

OK, but nothing special.

[newyorkjetsfan]

I finally saw Watchmen over the weekend, and it was a good movie. There were some boring moments in the film, especially the ones featuring Dr. Manhattan.

There were some good moments in the movie, especially the fight scenes. I loved the performance by Jackie Earle Haley as Walter Kovacs/Rorschach. He was really a badass.

I think the film could have been better, especially the ending. I think the film was a little bit too long. But, I like the movie, and it's worthy of a matinee fare.

On a scale of one to ten, I give this film a seven.