How does texags feel about it?

i approve

one of my favorite movies from 2009.

The first time I saw Watchman in the theaters, I didn't know ANYTHING about the plot....it just looked like a different movie to watch and try out.

Man....I loved it. I remember walking out of the theater not being able to shutup about it. I watched it with my wife, and she loved it too.

Fortunately, I'm not familiar with the graphic novel....I heard a lot of people who were familiar with the book saying they didn't care for the movie....So I got to appreciate the film story for what it was, not having to compare it to the book.

An amazing film!

I watched the movie first and then read the comics. I really liked both. I can definitely see why the comic fans would be disappointed with the movie, though. The movie is essentially a copy of the comic book with one major change, much abbreviation and is as "comic-booky" as it can be. If you enjoyed the movie, you'll really like the comic. I definitely recommend it. There's a reason why watchmen fans were critical of the movie - it tries to do justice to a masterpiece when it is impossible to do so.

Jokershady, I felt the same way walking out of watchmen. Going into it, I'd seen the trailer, but didn't know anything about the movie / graphic novel other than that it was supposed to be dark. I loved the movie though. I thought it was great.

Entertaining and stylistic bullsh*t

Strange with poor acting

Since you didn't indicate, I'm going to assume you're referring to the book.


It is one of the best novels of the last 50 years. Really smart read, check it out.

Didn't know anything about Watchmen before the movie. Just thought it was ok.

eh

Read the book before the movie. Mixed reaction. Thought the production and visuals were all well done, but I think some plot elements just didn't work together, especially if you didn't know the full story from the book. It was also odd in that there were no real emotional highs. Kind of flat. OK, but not great.

Visually accurate. Still doomed from the start. It's just an impossible book/story to film. Good effort, though.

Liked it.

Comic book is really good and the movie is probably as good as you can do.

I understand why the movie had the big plot change, the comic book ending was definitely a WTF moment.

quote:

---

I understand why the movie had the big plot change, the comic book ending was definitely a WTF moment.

---

woah really??? i thought the endings were pretty much the same....

i haven't read the novel, but i did skim through it one day in a book store, and it looked like the endings were somewhat similar.

^ it was essentially the same idea, but instead of using bombs they used fake aliens that came out of no where. It kind of worked considering that it was a comic book, but at the same time Watchmen is supposed to be a tad more realistic than most comics. I definitely think that Snyder was justified in changing it up for the big screen.

Trying to avoid getting into spoilers here, but I think the purpose of the big thing at the end was just more obvious in the book than it was in the movie.

*SPOILERS*













So how did that work into the plot? Was the character's ending the same in the book as the movie?

Meaning, does Rorschach still get killed by Dr. Manhattan when he said he'd reveal the truth about how everything was destroyed? Does Adrian still betray the Watchmen and cause all the destruction in order to bring peace on Earth? Is the blame still placed on Dr. Manhattan?















*END SPOILERS*

Joker: yes, yes, and no

*SPOILERS*









Pretty much "yes" to all your questions Joker. I just didn't see it as strongly in the movie as I did in the book. That may be a personal perspective thing. In the book, I thought it was more obvious that Adrian had created the alien invasion threat in order to unite the people of the world and end the cold war, and that's why Manhattan felt it justified to overlook the underhandedness of Adrian and destroy Rorschach for the greater goal. The alien invasion angle was fitting in the context of the times the book was written, given that Reagan had spoken to the UN about how nations might unite if faced by an otherworldly threat.

The movie shortcutted that a little with the Tachyon/Manhattan threat. I probably need to watch the movie again to refresh my memory on that, though.

[This message has been edited by Aggro (edited 2/12/2011 3:24p).]

Great movie

Giant blue dong.

I thought the movie did all right. As far as actors/acting - Night Owl, Dr Manhattan, Rorschach, and The Comedian were exactly how I figured they'd be. Silk Spectre II wasn't great but wasn't terrible. I think Ozymandias as a whole was terrible.

I didn't mind the ending being altered. To be completely honest, the thing that was changed from the book that pissed me off the most was the scene with the young girl's kidnapper. The scene in the book was much better to me than what they changed it to.

^ Ozymandias definitely didn't resemble his comic book counterpart. Their interpretation didn't bother me all that much though.

In my opinion, Ozymandias wasn't as well done in the comic book either (still good, but not on the level with the others), but eh.




The one thing I missed from the comic book


spoiler



was the side story about the scientists and artists who were used to create the alien. That seemingly "what's the point of this" coming into the plot was great.

^Yeah, ozymandias was underdeveloped in the novel. The plot necessitated it, but he really wasn't explored until the very end. Laurie (though she was done much better in the comic) and Dan were way overshadowed by manhattan, rorschach, and the comedian (though once again, there was a reason for it).

I actually liked the ending in the movie better than the book. I thought it made more sense to have the world unite against Dr. Manhattan than a fake alien attack.

Awesome movie!

Pretty sweet movie.

quote:

---

In my opinion, Ozymandias wasn't as well done in the comic book either (still good, but not on the level with the others), but eh.

---

Ozymandias' character was pretty well developed in the memos and supplemental documents in the novel. It doesn't really integrate into the plot, but it allows you to better understand his motivations. That just really didn't translate well at all on the screen.

As far as the acting, I thought Jackie Earle Haley (Rorschach), Jeffrey Dean Morgan (The Comedian), and Stephen McHattie (Hollis Mason) were exceptional in their roles.

^ i thought manhattan was pretty close as well.

Yeah I agree. I guess I just kinda forget about him because the character itself is someone that you can't really identify with. Billy Crudip is usually pretty likable in his other roles, so he did a pretty good job with Manhattan.