|
|
Post by Werewolf on Mar 25, 2009 13:44:08 GMT -5
So has anyone else seen this yet and did you think it lived upto the hype?
Personally i didn't think so. I've never read the original so i only have the film to go off, but it seemed a disapointment to me, i'd been expecting so much..... I saw no reason to feel sorry for the comedian, frankly i'm surprised he lived as long as he did and the ending left me feeling reallt flat. However it had a large amount of very realistic looking violence and some good laughs. It just didn't seem to be the masterpiece i was hoping for.
|
|
|
|
Post by Marcus on Mar 25, 2009 17:18:01 GMT -5
I've not seen it yet. Won't be until it's released on DVD. Thanks for the heads up though. When I watch it I'll keep my expectations low so I'll enjoy the film rather then be disapointed by it.
|
|
|
|
Post by ArcLight on Mar 26, 2009 1:29:35 GMT -5
Seems to definitely be for serious comic fans - especially comic fans from the mid-80s. I thought it was very good tho it's the type of movie that I'm not sure "enjoy" would be the right word for if that makes sense.
|
|
|
|
Post by Werewolf on Apr 1, 2009 15:52:40 GMT -5
Yeah. I think it made me feel the same way as Sin City did. I would say i enjoyed that movie but it wasn't a bad movie either. It's very hard to explain....
|
|
|
|
Post by Marcus on Jul 29, 2009 3:52:35 GMT -5
I watched this a couple of days ago now. I've now got mixed feelings about the film.
First off I found it dragged a lot, and think it needed a faster pace for the kind of film it was.
The effects and action scenes were enjoyable and, the violence worked well without being excessive.
The costumes looked geeky enough to work well in the setting. The make up they used on the president looked a bit too fake.
Rorschach was definately the best thing in the film, and frankly I'd have enjoyed it more if it'd concentrated on him, rather than spreading the story between the different characters the way it did.
I agree the comedian was not someone to be sorry for.
Don't remember anything funny in it. Just changing from dry to action and back as the story progressed.
|
|
|
|
Post by darkwolfavenged on Jul 29, 2009 11:46:40 GMT -5
I loved Watchmen. It's a remarkably faithful and stylish adaptation of the graphic novel. The extended directors cut on bluray is even better.
But I can see perfectly why this wasn't wildly popular and a big commercial hit. It is a strange, dark and violent film that is quite complex and has little real action that delves in to the worst aspects of humanity and how we behave towards each other as seen through the eyes of Alan Moore. And in his world costumed heroes can be the worst of all ala The Comedian.
|
|
|
|
Post by Werewolf on Jul 29, 2009 12:48:17 GMT -5
My brother has just bought the dvd so was able to watch it again.... It's seemed exceptionally dark yet seemed more enjoyable the 2nd time around. I still found the ending hard, one of my favourite characters was Rorschach. I must read the graphic novel.
|
|
|
|
Post by dedwyre on Jul 30, 2009 15:02:13 GMT -5
I liked it, but I would have drastically shortened the sex scenes and given Dr. Manhattan some pants. Seeing him naked is so distracting. It wasn't so bad in the graphic novel because it's not as realistic, but on the big screen, it's all you can see. I would have liked it better if I'd seen it alone. I was squirming in my seat thinking about what my friends were thinking.
It was very true to the book except for the ending, which was mostly faithful but added a couple things. (If Zach Snyder was willing to change the ending, why couldn't he add pants?)
I don't think you're supposed to feel sorry for the Comedian.
Alan Moore hated it, but I don't know if he ever actually saw it. After <i>League of Extraordinary Gentlemen</i> and <i>V for Vendetta</i> deviated so far from his books, I think he gave up on supporting any film based on his work, which is a shame since this one followed the original story so well. Has anyone else noticed how he's never credited in any of the films based on his books? Dave Gibbons didn't have a problem with it, though.
|
|
|
|
Post by Werewolf on Jul 30, 2009 15:56:54 GMT -5
You know i never noticed Dr Manhatten's private parts the first time i saw the film...
|
|
|
|
Post by ArcLight on Jul 30, 2009 23:43:31 GMT -5
I don't think Alan Moore has ever approved of (or admitted to seeing) any adaption of his work. He even has his name taken off the credits and refuses any money from them as best I remember.
|
|
|
|
Post by Marcus on Jul 31, 2009 6:01:43 GMT -5
So I'm guessing it was the publisher that sold the film rights rather than Alan Moore himself if he's so against movie adaptations of his stories.
Never read the comic so couldn't comment on how accurately it followed it. Though I still think the pacing was too slow for the film, even if it was matching the comic.
Manhatten's private parts never bothered me. Didn't find them distracting or uncomfortable, just basically noticed he was walking about nude, thought "yeah, that fits the character" and then paid it no more notice.
|
|
|
|
Post by dedwyre on Aug 7, 2009 13:33:56 GMT -5
You know i never noticed Dr Manhatten's private parts the first time i saw the film... Manhatten's private parts never bothered me. Didn't find them distracting or uncomfortable, just basically noticed he was walking about nude, thought "yeah, that fits the character" and then paid it no more notice. Well, you two are European, and I'm North American, so that explains that, more or less. I suppose that, if I see it again without the group that I was with, it probably won't bother me as much. |
|
