Watchmen

Post Reply New Topic

I liked the theatrics of Ozy, he contrasted the ever-common appearance of Ror (the "popular" character, even though he's "unpopular" in-universe), by appearing less often and less noticeable. It would have benefited greatly if they included more of his back-story and life, before he became who he admired, but it wasn't needed in my opinion.

Him and Ror are really the central theme; Ror being the undesirable outcast ("sociopath"), with Ozy the desirable bachelor ("the world's smartest man"), and how it appears that Ozy attains his goals due to who and what he is. But in the end, Ror attains his goals too. They both walk on different paths, but they both can shake the foundations of the world, even more than "god" can. I see them as the same character.

Maybe in the comic, but in the film, I think they messed up a bit. I'm not saying Matthew Goode is a crap Ozymandias. But he needed a little more smiling, exterior confidence and interior doubt. And he's also a little too scrawny. But Jackie Earle Haley was almost perfect as Rorschach. He just needed to be a little less overtly malicious and emotional. I always get the feeling that Rorschach is dead inside in the comic (and that's a good thing), and I thought that his treatment of Malcolm Long in the comic, while no less malicious overall, was more subtle and intellectually disturbing than the "Tell me what you see!" in the movie.

One question: What major trailers were beforehand? (If there were trailers in front of your showing)

Star Trek was one, and Wolverine was another.

Quatermass,

Got you. I think they didn't explain his motivations as much as the others, which is a shame considering he is one of the most important characters. Even though in the comic he wasn't shown much, it had a lot of information in his appearances; the movie seemed to lack a lot of this added information. I don't really see the actors when I watch a movie, just the characters; whilst he was rather lithe in physique and minute in intelligent speech, his fighting ability and self-assurance came across well to me.

Ror was well done, though I didn't find his voice as monotonous as it read to me; he sounded emotional with anger, whereas I read him as lacking in emotion with his diatribe, which made the ending so much more astounding in the comic ("Do it!", with real emotion). I agree with you on this; I read him as utterly indifferent to all but his own convictions in the comic, and even then, it was mechanical in motion. It would have been cool to see more of, "The End Is Nigh!".

John was how I read him, and that was far more emotional, fickle and juvenile than what the people in-universe thought he was.

Dunno about fickle and juvenile, but more 'human' (than what he seems, anyway) is what I was looking for. Billy Crudup was a perfect Dr Manhattan, and at times, I actually did forget that I was looking at a CG creation. Now he ranks number two in my top three CG creations. Number one is Gollum/Andy Serkis, and number three is Davy Jones/Bill Nighy.

My favorite is Jar Jar Binks! (who says Aspie's can't be sarcastic?)

star trek, which both impressed with the CG, but some utterly questionable plot choices from what the trailer showed, just like mi3.
knowing, which in parts, looks remotely dark and spooky, but if nicholas cage is going to save mankind, from itself, pass.
adventureland, which seemed fun. reminded me a little of freaks and geeks, but not enough to want to endure it.
and some fox movie special called 12 rounds. where marky mark dodges explosions, and a sociopath. speed + a combo of 80's cop movies, pass.

as for the movie, yes it looked pretty & awesome, the grit was there, especially for 150+ minutes. it just seemed long, but the sex, gore, violence, etc. were very much graphic. as for the story & actors, they really showed all the bright illustrated icons of the various sins of man in so many ways. i.e. greed, lust, avarice, etc. all the good and the bad, etc. but if you've only seen one giant CGI smurf in your life, it's a good CGI rendition of a man. complete with smurftacular underwear which he's just not wearing a whole lot towards the end of the movie.

also, yes, threat of nuclear winter -> plug-in electric cars for everyone. obvious, huh.

Saw it earlier tonight, and loved it. Predictably, my favourite part of it was Rorschach - the guy playing him just nailed the character perfectly. And if there was one character I wanted - nay, needed - them to get right, it was that lovable masked loon.

I liked the guys playing the Comedian and Dr Manhattan, too (although I could have done without the knuckle-dragging idiots in the row behind me tittering like five year-olds every time they saw Dr M's CGI manhood - I mean, for Zod's sake, if they're still finding the mere sight of penises funny, they clearly need to do some serious growing up), but I also found Ozymandias to be at the bottom of the heap, character-wise. The actor playing him seemed far too willowy to pull off being a superhero.

I may have to go back and read the graphic novel again this weekend, just to get a double dose (and give me a refresher for the next time I go and see it ).

For a "god", he didn't know much, and he was very easily swayed from one opinion to another at the whim of a mere human (Silk). To him, his diatribe about the Martian surface should have been his conclusion, as a speck of dust is just as unique as a single person on a galactic scale. Hence, fickle in the changing of his views. And yeah, he was human, and if they were implying that he would turn into god himself, he'll probably make them in his former image, which he still knows and experiences.

I'm still cool with Ozy (I still wish they included more, like the interview, and also the doubt that you mentioned about whether he was doing the right thing or not). When he was beating down everybody, that was the highlight for me (as he speaks throughout it).

The Ozymandias of the comic was great. The one in the movie seemed to have none of the sorrow of the original.

That was definitely great, and I really loved the amount of detail they put into the background and such. Especially when they're in the restaurant, the lady in the background saying "Why did I just order a four-legged chicken?" (in the graphic novel there's a lady accepting a four-legged chicken from a waiter).

As for the endings from the movie and the graphic novel, I liked both about equally, and was a bit relieved since I had heard that they had changed the ending to Dr. Manhattan actually being the one that does it.

Trailers: Star Trek, Wolverine, Public Enemies (Michael Mann's next film), and the new Terminator Salvations.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YDDHHrt6l4w[/youtube]

I thought that was funny, albeit cringe-inducing.

Watch this funny vid I found about Watchmen: http://my.spill.com/video/watchmen-trouble-on-the-set

Last edited by JimmyNeurtonRules on 08 Mar 2009, 4:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Spoilers.

Watchmen was good. Took the movie to get me into Silk Spectre and Nite Owl. Kovacs was 100% spot on!

Could've used more Hiroshima lovers and symmetrical symmetry symbolism. The loss of a lot of the symbolism really couldn't've been helped, unfortunately.

The ending change was unnecessary and foolish. What is going to keep humanity from realizing the Dr Manhattan isn't checking up on them? (the squid gave people nightmares, remember) Where is the desire to explore space?

As for Ozymandias's sorrow, I saw it in the scene in which they buried the Comedian. But they totally down played his ubermensch role, and altered the entire dynamic between him and Dr Manhattan. They also cut out Dr Manhattan's final speech to Ozymandias, which was a powerful scene in my opinion.

The only good thing I can think about the ending change was that I can now tell my friends to read the comic book, because it has a different, better ending.

One word: [b]Hallelujah![b]

Overall grade: A

---

One note, there was some talking in the theatre during this part and I wasn't sure exactly what was going on : When Ozymandias was explaining his scheme, what was the explanation behind the gas introduced into the vents at Dr Manhattan's interview, just to get everyone's nerves up? In the movie version are we to believe Dr Manhattan killed the audience or just teleported them away?

---

There was a man dressed as Rorschach outside the theatre (very good costume - I think I found my Halloween outfit) who was taking pictures with people. When I got there, there was a gaggle of maybe a dozen adolescent girls (all dressed in pastels and GIGGLING for god's sake) taking their picture with him. He had his arms around a few of them, even. I know they went into the theatre, but unfortunately I sat so that I couldn't see how long it took them to leave (though I did notice several people leaving during "Hallelujah" - funny, they didn't think to take their children out during the excessive violence, but a bit of sex made them go amok).

Also, the girl sitting next to me (16-17 ish, black, dressed nice, with a male friend, assuming on a date) shouted out during some of the scenes of violence and laughed right along with me during Hallelujah. It actually added to the experience.