tech.gadgets.video.geekculture.gaming.kittens.
Brief, non-spoilery review of ‘Watchmen’
Like I said, this mini-review shouldn’t have any major spoilers, but if you’re super concerned about spoilers anyway I’d suggest not reading any further. OK, now let’s get on with it. I’m also going to assume you’ve read the book, because if you haven’t this post will make even less sense.
I loved the comic book, so it was very cool to see the pages brought to life (and I’m talking word-for-word, shot-for-shot in most cases). They had to take out the Tales of the Black Freighter unfortunately, but they’re releasing that as a supplemental animated short. The only time the film diverges from the main storyline of the graphic novel is at the very end. Now this is the part where I’m a little worried that crazy fans of the original will try to lynch me… The ending in the movie made a lot more sense in the context of the plot than the ending in the comic. If Zach Snyder was going to change anything in this film, altering the ending as he did was absolutely his smartest move. He made it palatable to movie-going audiences, while also staying true to the spirit of the book.
The casting choices were great, I thought, although I found the Nite Owl II to be a little over-sincere and sappy. That’s exactly how he feels in the book, so I guess it’s just a tad more frustrating to actually watch him be that awkward in person. Everyone else was spot on, especially Rorschach. People were actually cheering for him in the horrific jailhouse scene, which shows both how well-written this character is (and how convincingly he was acted).
The worst (read: most intensely uncomfortable thing I’ve had to sit through in a long time) part of the film was the love scene. The third one. It went on for so long, and was so gratuitous, that people were laughing uncomfortably and squirming in their seats. A couple shots to illustrate the point is one thing, but this went on a good 3 minutes too long. It seemed like an eternity.
So, those are my main points without trying to go into it too much. I loved the film, and I definitely suggest seeing it, especially if you’ve read the original. If you haven’t, the story might be a little harder to follow, but you’ll probably still enjoy the film from a action/visual effects perspective (and for some of the great lines).
If you’ve had a chance to see it, let me know your thoughts in the comments! I’m especially curious to know how the really diehard fans of the book are reacting to the movie.
Image from Saturday Morning Watchmen on Newgrounds.
No related posts.
-
#3 written by Adam 3 years ago
I agree with what you said. I really liked the book but I thought the film was just OK. The music choices really took me out of the film and I think they spent too much time on Nixon. The stakes were in your face, rather than the more subtle cues in the book. I would have liked to see more time spent w/ Rorschach instead.
I would also add that there was too much blue penis. But the source material was treated faithfully and I appreciate that. It wasn’t bad, it just didn’t knock my socks off.
-
#4 written by Brian 3 years ago
I totally agree with you on the love scene. Way over the top.
I disagree with you on the ending. I though it was terrible. Spoiler heavy explanation: Dr. Manhattan was loyal to the USA, to the point of winning the Vietnam war. Why would the Russians just drop all the distrust and help bring about world piece? It doesn’t make any sense politically. They would start out pointing the finger at the US for all the destruction because he was the US’s point man, and if everyone thought that he caused the deaths of 15 million people everyone would hate the US more than they do today.
-
#6 written by Zachary Diaz 3 years ago
One of the first things that was talked about after the group of friends I went with left the theater was that really uncomfortable sex scene. They all mentioned how it was completely unbearable, how awkward they felt, and how out of place it seemed. I felt just as awkward…but I still believe it fit in perfectly. When I thought about it, the movie forced a lot of uncomfortable values of humanity to the forefront of your conscience, and human sexuality is not something Moore or Snyder was/are afraid to deal with.
I /did/ have two friends get up and walk out an hour into the movie and get a refund, which I found extremely surprising. They said they had no idea what was going on, and it was the sex scene that was their tipping point. Other than that, everyone seemed to enjoy it and is now interested in reading the comic book.
-
I have not read the comic book and have no knowledge of the plot, characters, etc.
That said, I can say that I truly enjoyed the film and was able to follow the storyline just fine. I thought the acting, actions scenes, cinematography and awesome 80′s soundtrack were phenomenal.
My one downer is exactly the same as yours. The love scene went far too long and really felt unnecessary. In fact, for me all the “relationship” scenes dragged the overall pacing. This coming from a girl who loves romantic comedies.
-
#11 written by Cirdan 3 years ago
Spot on review and great job on making it spoiler free, the film was amazing, it left me with a smile finally a comic to movie transition done right. The film kept the spirit of the comic alive and well and I do agree that changing the end makes more sense to the average movie goer, I loved the music choice as well, it was as if the music was its own character. The music added to the scene or images not just conveyed an emotional response. All in all LETS ALL WATCH THE WATCHMEN!!!
-
#12 written by Richard 3 years ago
I don’t know why the sex seen was so bold, as the novel it was not so detailed, yet some times when you could have done with more it was not there. Maybe the bits they took out would have slowed the story but maybe it was what left the story, slightly holed, but other area’s were more detailed in the film. I feel it is the closest film to mirror the book, but maybe some films have benefited from that more!
-
I didn’t read the comic and found the movie a little difficult to follow. A lot of people that were there didn’t seem to read the comic. I heard a lot of, “That was SOOOOO confusing” while I was walking out.
It was definitely a good movie. I jumped on wikipedia to clarify some points and then it clicked.
I agree. The love scene was waaaaay overboard. You could feel the tension in the room. Funny.
-
I love the comic, I havnt been a fan for too long but i started watching the animated comic when it started coming out. ive been through the animated comic twice and compared to the comic i think the movie did a fantastic job. I felt that the ending was a good change, especialy since I kinda had to force my self to like it in the comic. Rorschach was amazing although maby a little under explained. Jon seemed to me to be a little to… god like in the movie, while in the comic he had the powers of a god but not the personality. when it came to the second silk spectre Im somewhat ashamed to say i loved her character because she was so… hot(this was probaly a good point of the movie for me because im a 15 year old boy and its exactly how i imagianed the comic persona of her). although her being played by who i consider such a horrible actor was a total let down. overall though i loved the movie and thought it was a fun bonus to the comic. also, i cant wait to buy it on blue ray along with the animated comic and the tales of the black freighter.
-
I agree the “Hallelujah” sex scene was a bit long, but it was uncomfortable intentionally. It was supposed to call attention to the absurdity of Dan’s condition, that he has to put on a goofy costume and be Nite Owl to get it up. The whole excursion that he and Laurie take, saving the people from the fire, is a self-serving exercise for them to alleviate their feelings of boredom, powerlessness, and impotence (literally in Dan’s case).
Still, you could say that an intentionally awkward scene is awkward nonetheless.
-
#20 written by Karl 3 years ago
Spoiler Warning: I agree with the love scene, my impression was they figured to add that in since the movie was rated R. It would’ve been better if they made the scene last for a minute then next scene would be Dan telling Laurie his plan to free Rorschach. Adding a lot of bloody scenes was too much like the head slicing, which gave me an impression that the scene came from a Frank Miller pencils than Dave Gibbons. I love the movie regardless.
-
#21 written by Matt Perreault 3 years ago
I fully agree word-for-word with your opinion, Veronica. The non-linear storyline is much more apparent in the movie form, making it hard for non-book-readers to follow. But having recently finished reading it for the first time, it was nice to see the book come to life. They shortened and adjusted it where they had to, and while I appreciated the inclusion of songs that were quoted in the book (i.e. Bob Dylan), sometimes the musical accompaniment seemed completely out-of-place. At least it was good old songs rather than crappy new ones. My criticisms are the standard ones: Big Blue Banana, gratuitous “Hallelujah” scene, etc.
-
Well, I haven’t read the comic book but I knew about the story and I’m not going to talk about the movie in terms of action/visual effects.
Don’t get me wrong, visual were amazing and well acomplished (we saw Snyder’s work on 300), but I think one of the hardest things to get when making a movie based on a comic is to absorb the essence of the characters and the story itself.
Movies and Comics are not the same, trying to compare one thing to another is like trying to make a banana equal to an apple… we must go to a further level, both are fruits… or in the case of movies/comics… both are ways to deliver a message in common, when a comic adaptation is made thinking about the message (not the effects or the “it’s going to be cool if we do this!”), the results are satisfying… that’s why I liked Watchmen.
It’s a good movie, makes you think, to evaluate the characters and their evolution through the story… and in my case (after realizing your comment about people cheering Rorschach) raises the question, why people would love such a sociopath?
The answer: a well conceived character who can reflects humankind irony… -
#23 written by Jason 3 years ago
I agree with Avirtor on the sex scene which I believe was kent to be funny and over the top – the flame thrower anyone? What bothered me the most was some of the more violent scenes, the cleaver to the head scene esp. – which was not in the comic (he burned the house down) and seemed to be changed for no reason.
-
#24 written by Duago 3 years ago
I agree completely with your entire review.
Spoilers:
I don’t think Brain really understood the ending. Dr. Manhattan was believed to be losing his touch with humanity. The reason he helped them win Vietnam was because in some ways he was still John. They state many times how he was slowly starting to care less and less about what happened to people around him. Case in point the pregnant Vietnamese woman. His abandonment of the US was broadcast globally hence the entire nuclear threat with movements in Afghanistan etc. escalating how it did.They were all aware he wasn’t with the US anymore and the fact that cities in the US were destroyed as well would lends credence to the outcome of world peace.
-
#25 written by fatsvernon 3 years ago
They could have cut out about am hour, goi d a loin cloth or spmething for DM to wear, implied the sex scene, and give me a LARGE break with that scooby doo ending. I almost walked out but my $9.00 ticket and $6 candy wouldn’t allow it. Overall very disappointed and almost laughable performances. I liked R though. Massiv fail
-
*Spoiler Alert*
The Ending was far superior in the movie, and here is why…Ozy gave people a real God to worry about. In the end of the film they talk about how the counties of the world know Jon is watching them. Ozy gave humanity a god to fear. They will never let the brink of ultimate war get that close again because they know that before there is ever a chance to determine a winner or a loser…Jon could step in and devastate both sides as punishment.The blue penis is plentiful, but tasteful (would have been nice if they addressed why he didn’t feel the need to where clothes). The sex scene was poignant and campy for a reason, like it was in the book. however there is a odd scene in the middle of that sex scene where they are proped up on Archies seats that is just over the top posturing…it would have been fine to just have them roll around on the floor passionately.
The only thing I found lacking is the description of the “power of Jon” that Ozy was developing and how he got it into every city he destroyed.
-=T=-
-
#27 written by Sergio 3 years ago
So I did read the book but I wouldn’t call myself a die hard fan but I still thought the movie was very true to the source material visually and plot wise. I agree with you that the ending suited the movie going audience (especially the majority of people who did not read the book) and also agree that they were able to show Dr. Manhattan had lost ties with humanity. A part of me did want to see the comic book version of the destruction because I think visually it would have been pretty awesome.
Now as far as the excessive amount of blue dick, pardon my French, it didn’t really bother me because really who cares unless you grew up in a bubble and have never laid eyes on one. I’m not saying women are going to watch it and be like, “YES! I get to look at a blue man’s penis”. It definitely suited the character and his thoughts on wearing clothes at all. What made it bad was the stupid high school boys who loudly commented on it and I wish they would stop having penis envy and let me enjoy the movie.
Finally, the sex scene that yes I agree went on longer than I expected but I think it really went well with Daniel’s impotency issue. The fact that the first time he had trouble because he didn’t feel powerful and whatever. Then they do some heroics he has his confidence back and hence the long intense sex scene. Male bravado and all.
Overall. Great adaptation in my opinion.
-
I’m probably as die-hard a fan of the book as you’ll get – I own about 6 different printings of it, including a couple of signed copies, and I’ve read it 2 or 3 times a years since I first discovered it (about 1991, I think).
However, the film left me completely underwhelmed. I was fascinated by the acting out of scenes from the book, but seriously guys, if you think that they’ve filmed the unfilmable then you’ve seen a different movie to me.
Lets start from scratch:
When Moore said it was unfilmable, he didn’t mean the nuts and bolts story – that’s obvious. However, the true beauty of Watchmen is the stuff you only notice on the 3rd or 4th reading… The way different chapters overlap in time so you can see characters in the background. The detailing in the artwork that endlessly references the same visual motifs. The background characters who infest the intersection the story revolves around.All of this stuff is expunged to make what is, essentially, a straightforward story with a few flashbacks. And not for nothing, but that isn’t the reason Watchmen (no ‘The’, note, for an important reason) is so revered. It’s more than just a ‘grown-up’ super-hero story.
The techniques that Moore and Gibbons employed to tell that story are STILL worth paying attention to, as I don’t think the super-hero genre has yet produced anything as literary as they did 20 years ago, and I don’t even think its Moore’s best work by a long-shot. Gibbons, on the other hand, has never bettered this.
Oh, and ‘The’ Watchmen? I think anyone who has read the book should be able to realise that the title doesn’t solely refer to the costumed adventurers in the story – it refers to ALL forms of authority, both elected (like the President) and self-appointed (like The Comedian). To re-appropriate it as the name for a super-team is to completely miss one of the main themes of Moore’s original work – that ALL authority’s integrity should be scrutinised and suspected.
To assume that the comic was JUST about the central story is to do it a disservice, and to assume that acting out scenes of it means it can be translated to screen seems a little naive.
The movie is a moving, audible tribute to the book. But only about, oh, 50-60% of it. There’s none of the original texture, none of the amazing attention to detail regarding space and time (surprising, given Gibbons heavy involvement), and there’s a shit-load of extraneous sex and violence seemingly amped-up to lend the picture the appearance of being a grown-up film.Which, going by the rather shallow appreciation of the book Snyder seems to have, it isn’t.
Sorry for the rant Veronica!
-
Oh, and the ending? Well, since they didn’t feel it was worth developing background characters, there was no sense of personal tragedy when New York was destroyed.
In the book a great deal of time is spent with the people who inhabit the intersection at the newspaper stand, but in the film the location seemed completely arbitrary.
Almost as if Snyder thought that having it look like the book would convince people he had a clue what he was doing…
-
I really like your review Veronica – I think it was a good version of the book – Aaron’s criticisms above seem to miss the inevitable choices that come from reducing a very large story into one film – he makes a point about the “central story” – and doesn’t notice that he has admitted himself that that is the central story.
- it’s bound to be what the film focuses on.
I was fascinated by how much dialogue was exactly the same as the book – and how so many shots mirrored the page.
- the major plot points were there – with the few exceptions you’ve mentioned.
I personally think it would have been mental to include the Black Freighter stuff – despite liking its part in the book.
The casting was really good and the feel of the film was right I thought.
It was enormously violent – but the book is too – it might not seem so bad on the page, but that’s just the nature of film – it’s more shocking in front of you like that….
As for the sex scene….I don’t know, me and the mates I went with didn’t mention it – it felt like an important part of Dan’s arc…..and didn’t seem “that” long….
Dan I thought by the way was the most interesting character – thought that when I read it too.
Really liked the film though – even if it couldn’t include “everything”.
- one other thing – the only major distraction that I thought was a mistake was the make up for Nixon – it was distracting because it looked like make-up – surely these days they can do much better jobs than that…..
Thanks for the review….found the link on twitter.
Gareth
-
Other than the obvious (music, campy sex scene), I only had two real gripes with what the movie left out:
Rorschach and the shrink:
This may seem kind of minor, but when Rorschach first meets the doctor in the movie, I wish they would have kept the line “…Think you understand pain.” I’m not sure why, but the way the movie handled it didn’t sit well with me. I know, I’m splitting hairs, but the real issue was the part of the ending.Jon and Veidt: **SPOILER ALERT**
In the movie, Veidt never has even a glimmer of uncertainty in anything he does THE WHOLE TIME. He’s nearly 1-dimensional as a character. I preferred the conversation he has with Jon in the end of the comic when he asks Jon “I did the right thing, didn’t I?” That brief moment of doubt made him something other than a cardboard cutout, but I didn’t get that feeling from the movie. -
#36 written by John F 3 years ago
Just got back a few hours ago from the movie. Like Veronica said it was cool to see how Snyder brought the pages to life and the style of the movie. Also I enjoyed the music choices used in the movie. Casting choices were pretty dead on and i felt like i knew Night Owl II and Rorschach, just like i did when i read the comic. As for the story i though they did a pretty good job, although i missed some background characters that was in the comic, that made the comic. The theater i was in had the same uncomfortably feeling when the sex scene show up, most people giggled. Other then that i think the people in theater enjoyed it. As for the ending, i not trilled with it but i can see where the change makes sense for general movie going audience.
Overall. a fine adaptation and a good movie.
-
#37 written by arigold 3 years ago
Right on, Veronica!
Whenever I see things like this overly gratuitous sex scene, I always envision a director pitching this, and being completely disassociated with their audience, like portrayed Barton fink.
Check out Kevin Smith’s story about being hired to write for Hollywood for a Superman movie; http://tinyurl.com/kswrit -
I agree with the “halleluja” love scene kinda. It did go on a bit long and it being an “uncomfortable” scene didn’t bother me, however the music made it seem a bit goofy which yes, they’re in super hero costumes, but it’s serious to them, so that was a bit off for me.
The excess violence I think wasn’t necessary. Not to say it should have none, but I doubt Night Owl would fight that way for every fight so it made him seem like a different guy in the fight scenes to me tho the rest of when he was on screen was spot on.
As for the ending, which I won’t spoil for anyone else reading, the movie one did make sense after I think about it tho it felt rushed slightly, but I like the book’s more lol. Tho I think the “bad guy” should have acted more sincere when they were on screen because it gives too much away I think than their personality in the book.
I did enjoy the movie tho and some scenes, Rorschach’s scenes and the Doc’s origins scenes, I loved those. I think I am gonna read the book again when I get it back from my cousin.
-
Spot on review. I absolutely agree that the ending change was necessary. I saw it with my wife last night, which was interesting because she had never read the story and I wanted to see if someone could follow the movie without having read it, which she did. I came away feeling that Snyder got it right, that a movie version of Watchmen should be this, but that film is not (and can never be) the best way to consume this material. Moore and Gibbons did so many things things in the comic that can simply not be done in any other medium. I always tell someone who’s reading the comic that the first thing they’ll do when they finish it is read it again. It lends itself to that like no other book, comic or otherwise, that I’ve encountered. Back at the movie, I felt the sex scene between Dan and Laurie was not overdone and needed to be included. I find it interesting how uncomfortable people have become at viewing sex scenes (or even a flaccid blue penis) in theaters. I think it’s possible that the ubiquity of internet porn has trained people to view sex scenes and nudity as something that needs to be experienced alone. Kind of funny really, since communally was for so long the only way people were able to experience sex scenes on film, even non-explicit ones. Makes me wonder if a film like Basic Instinct or Last Tango in Paris could even be releasable today. There’s also the obvious paradox that a flaccid blue penis is considered yucky but repeated cleaver to head and arms chopped off with angle grinder barely register a mention. Makes you wonder about even more about the films commentary on human nature.
-
I still don’t get why framing Dr. Manhattan instead of the Aliens is a better ending. I mean, the basis of the peace is that the Soviet Union and the USA are united against a common foe. So, what hope do they have fighting an invulnerable godlike being?
Ditto on the uncomfortable sex scenes. (Not necessarily because they didn’t fit but because of having to listen to all the dumb reactions in the movie theater.) Other than that, I was happy to see how faithfully adapted it was. For me, just watching the pretty visuals was enough to make the movie.
-
#41 written by Jon 3 years ago
Coming from someone who read the comic only a few months ago I really enjoyed the movie. Snyder was very true to the comic in many respects, using many of the lines verbatim as well as several of the most iconic images (the best imitated from page to film was Comedian crashing through the window at the beginning). Rorschach was amazingly brought to life by Jackie Earl Haley, from his look to his mannerisms to the voice he used. I thoroughly enjoyed every moment he was on screen, in mask or out. As a matter of fact, I thought that hearing the actor beg Dr. Manhattan to kill him at the end was far more enlightening for some reason than the same sequence in the comic.
As for the controversial love scene, I didn’t mind it that much (I am a guy after all). However, the one thing that I thought lacked in that scene was the explicit comment by Nite Owl that it was wearing the costume and feeling like he was powerful again allowed him to ‘perform’ where he was unable to a while earlier in the evening. I felt that (in the comic anway) that the character stating that in black and white was a great way to contrast Nite Owl’s feelings of inadequacy in his everyday life and his feelings of power and ability to make a difference when in costume. The inclusion of that simple exchange might have taken the edge off a rather gratuitous sequence.
-
#43 written by Telephonus 3 years ago
-
Veronica and others: a bit prudish are we?
If people in the audience were “laughing uncomfortably and squirming in their seats” while watching the Hallelujah sex scene, then, from the filmmaker’s perspective, mission accomplished. As you’ve read in previous comments, comedic irony was the point of the scene. It wasn’t meant to get you horny.
As Glenn mentioned a couple posts above, why does the sex bother you and not the violence? (I personally enjoy both).
-
#46 written by Veronica 3 years ago
Chachi, don’t insult my intelligence. I’m aware that the scene is supposed to prove a point, but that doesn’t mean people have to enjoy it.
I don’t like gratuitous sex OR violence in films. Just not my thing. Was I expecting it in this film? Of course. It’s a lot easier for me to read it and see it in comic form that real people.
I’m glad you enjoyed both aspects, that’s obviously what’s intended. However, it doesn’t mean everyone has to feel the same as you do.
-
The movie really impressed me, but still felt hollow. It felt like an exercise in filming comic panels, and not like a narrative. That said, I’ll still see it again.
*Spoiler*
I’m a big fan of the comic, and of course liked the original ending better. The first time I read the book, I thought the giant creature was cool, but kind of silly. The second time, I picked up all the foreshadowing when you can see the design of the creature, and all the work that goes into it before the final reveal. When it happens, it strengthens the “joke” aspect that runs through the book. It’s the ultimate joke. However, I don’t think there is too much funny about nuclear bombs…just sayin.
Overall, I liked the movie, but didn’t like the ending change, or the exclusion of the more human moments from the book (like the intersection and everyone in it, Rorschach’s doctor’s story, and Hollis Mason’s murder.)
-
#49 written by Jeff 3 years ago
I had just finished the book the night before I saw the movie, so the drastic switcheroo on the ending left me a little disillusioned. Overall,though, I thought it was superbly cast. It’s nice to see Jackie Earl Haley working again, and he did an EXCELLENT job. As did the rest of the cast. I’m not sure why they cast Carson Kressley as Veidt though…
Sex scene was awkward (ANOTHER use of “Hallelujah”? Really?) but it didn’t bother me. What did bother me was adding in violence where there wasn’t any in the book. Rorschach killing the child rapist like THAT? Wrong. Dan and Laurie in that ridiculously choreographed prison fight scene? Um, no. Little capitulations to the Hollywood machine like that bothered me more than anything else.
-
I thought the love scene wasn’t that bad. I went with my friend and we sat through it better than most who were either giggling, squirming, or thinking it was really hot (some guy yelled it out). The music choice really made it another scene for both of us. I thought it was fine. But you should have said your response to Chachi in your blog post in the first place. Then it would make sense about you feeling it was gratuitous. Also, a lot of people tend to laugh at all the penis/butt shots in the movie. That kind of bothered me more than anything about the movie (and it wasn’t even the movie’s fault). Every time Dr. Manhattan was saying something real deep, there would be snickers and giggles. *sigh* Anyway, great review.
-
- Comment Feed for this Post
The Watchmen movie turned me into an insane person.
More reaction when I calm down.