Cool News
Mr. Beaks Hails The Filmable WATCHMEN!
SPOILER ALERT !!
Is it possible to be in awe of Zack Snyder's WATCHMEN and still be unsure as to whether it works as a standalone motion picture? And is there any point in judging the theatrical cut of the film at all when Snyder's preferred version, which runs thirty minutes longer, is set to hit DVD this fall (and, perhaps, theaters this summer)?
After two viewings, I'm still struggling with these questions. Being that this is a 161-minute condensing of a twelve-issue graphic novel loaded with ephemera and exposition (one which, like most of you, I've read numerous times), this is to be expected. But there is one question I'm no longer pondering, and that is whether WATCHMEN can work as a motion picture - because for long stretches of Snyder's theatrical cut, it works rather brilliantly.
Unlike such allegedly "unfilmable" novels as William Burroughs's NAKED LUNCH or Paul Bowles's THE SHELTERING SKY, WATCHMEN doesn't require a top-down restructuring (or, in the case of the Burroughs, a coherent interpretation). Though tricky in that you can never be sure whether Alan Moore is being satiric or sincere, the graphic novel at least comes equipped with a clean narrative. Strip away all the noise, and WATCHMEN is really just a hard-boiled detective yarn, with Rorschach knocking about as a supremely fucked-up Philip Marlowe. So just nail that throughline down (using Dave Gibbons's illustrations as glorified storyboards), and you can start to adorn the narrative with whatever thematic elements it will bear. Easy, right?
Though Snyder and his screenwriters, David Hayter and Alex Tse, haven't exactly turned air into gold here, they've still worked a minor miracle with their adaptation by finding a way to keep the film moving while it briefly sidesteps into backstory and origin vignettes. Aside from the shockingly wanton brutality of, say, Rorschach cleaving open a child murderer's skull (rather than humanely setting him ablaze as he does in the graphic novel), there's not an extraneous moment in the theatrical cut. If there's a detour, it serves a purpose, be it narrative or emotional. It's a wonder of elimination, really. Snyder and company have sacrificed plenty - the one-sided banter between the news vendor and his loyal non-customer, the prison psychiatrist's marriage-splintering fascination with Rorschach, an explanation for Veidt's genetically-engineered pet cat, Bubastis - but they've cleanly, sometimes elegantly explained every main character's motivation/neuroses. This may be WATCHMEN cut to the bone, but it is WATCHMEN, and it works sensationally well. If you've read the comic.
And that's what's most peculiar about Snyder's achievement: his film is aimed almost exclusively at those who've read the graphic novel. Starting with the opening credits sequence (a cleverly modified walkthrough of Hollis Mason's UNDER THE HOOD), he dispenses with backstory at a dizzying clip, and doesn't seem to be worried that the uninitiated might not be able to keep up. Perhaps he thinks it'll be more mindblowing for the newcomers this way. Or maybe it'll just be utterly confusing. Again, that's something I can't answer. I just know that, as a fan, I love that the first knife flung in The Comedian's defense embeds itself in a framed pin-up of Sally Jupiter. Or that the lesbian Silhouette boldly outs herself via the iconic V-J Day kiss. Or that Dr. Manhattan filmed Neil Armstrong's ho-hum first steps on the moon. These scenes reward familiarity, and, I can only assume, confound everyone else*. Regardless, it gets the film off to a rousing start.
It's a welcome elation, too, seeing as how the next twenty minutes or so are a semi-slavish recreation of comic's first chapter. This is also where Snyder hedges his bets on that brilliant introductory montage by having Hollis Mason recount the formation of the Crimebusters for his Nite Owl successor, Dan Dreiberg. It's a clunky scene, but, short of inventing a new opening, unfortunately necessary. Same goes for Rorschach's forced-entry drop-in on Dreiberg and the latter's meeting with Adrien Veidt (a slight diversion from the comic which makes Dreiberg a more active protagonist). Thankfully, there's plenty of eye candy - i.e. Alex McDowell's elaborate production design and Michael Wilkinson's alterna-period costuming - to keep your interest while the plot is being set in motion.
But once Snyder snaps the film back to life with The Comedian's funeral (mockingly scored to "The Sounds of Silence"), it never bogs down again. Finally unencumbered by solitary locations and perfunctory dialogue, Snyder roars into the murderous history of Edward Blake with a Wagnerian fury. Never more than a monster in the early stages of the comic, Jeffrey Dean Morgan portrays The Comedian as a beast with a glimmer of guilt in his eyes. When he guns down that pregnant Vietnamese villager, his reprimand of Dr. Manhattan carries a tinge of disappointment, a bit of "Why didn't you stop me!?!?" Same goes for his post-riot diatribe to Dreiberg; in Morgan's interpretation, The Comedian seems to be begging someone to yank his leash. Moore can trash the existence of Snyder's film all he wants, but this is one of those instances where film can actually deepen one's connection to the text.
The other key emotional enhancement comes courtesy of Jackie Earle Haley, who claims Rorschach so completely that Dave Gibbons might as well go back and re-draw every frame featuring Walter Kovacs's exposed face (Moore would be cool with that, right?). Rorschach is still the disgusting, canned beans-chomping sociopath he's always been, but there is an added layer of sadness that wasn't perceptible in the Moore/Gibbons conception. Hiding under the feral rage of Haley's Kovacs is a frightened little boy who's holding the entire world responsible for every sin it's ever committed; it's payback for the world's indifference to his mistreatment at the hands of his whore mother and anyone else who thought it'd be fun to take a crack at a funny-looking kid. There's sympathy for Rorschach. To a point. We do feel for the loner when he apologizes to Dreiberg for years of impossible behavior, but we still fear the savage. Still, he's a monster of cruelty's creating, and, thanks to Haley, he's the battered heart of the film.
There has been talk that Snyder's WATCHMEN lacks consequence, that the unthinkable tragedy of the third act means nothing because a) the only fleshed-out characters are head-cases in costumes, and b) the threat of nuclear annihilation isn't as frighteningly present as it was during the Cold War. This is fair. Though Snyder and McDowell have built a tactile, fully-believable world, its non-heroic inhabitants are completely unknown to us; ergo, their vaporization is merely the grand finale to a bitchin' f/x light show. But since the effort has been made to identify the news vendor, the psychiatrist et al. in the moments prior to the blast, I've got to think that they'll get their due in Snyder's cut of the film. So I'll cut him some slack on this charge for now.
The Cold War disconnect is a different matter altogether, and it's one Snyder won't be able to fix short of throwing us all in a time machine. I can still remember the chill I felt in 1986 at the close of Chapter III, when the vendor is stunned into an act of kindness upon learning that the Russians have invaded Afghanistan. That wasn't fantasy; that was fucking real. Anytime one of the superpowers flexed its muscles, everyone's sphincters tightened. And there was such a profound sense of helplessness. I'll never forget a discussion I had with my dad after watching THE DAY AFTER. Scared out of my wits, I asked him where we'd hide in the event of the nuclear war. "The basement," he answered. "Will we be safe there?" "Probably not," he replied. Snyder does a credible job of recalling that hysteria, but it registers as nostalgia in his film, not mortal fear.
Sticking to things Snyder could actually control, I think he made the right choice in opting for a squid-less finale - if only because he cut down on the pre-attack exposition by about three pages. More practically, establishing early that Veidt and Dr. Manhattan are working on a limitless energy project eliminates the need for a late-in-the-game lecture on genetic engineering (which makes Bubastis's presence somewhat puzzling; perhaps that's explained in Snyder's cut); as a film, the story just flows better this way. Also, I like the idea of Utopia breaking out over the very rational fear of a known angry god.
WATCHMEN is far from a perfect film, but it has so much greatness in it that I'm unwilling to issue a definitive judgment until I've seen the director's definitive version. True, some of the flaws will remain (e.g. Malin Ackerman's miscasting, the unconvincing old-age makeup, and the often declamatory dialogue copied straight from the comic), but these are minor infractions when compared to the majesty of the KOYAANISQATSI-scored origin of Dr. Manhattan, Haley's Rorschach, Morgan's Comedian, and those incredible opening credits. This is a stunning achievement. I didn't know if Snyder had an artistic identity of his own after 300, but there is a voice ringing out in his WATCHMEN that doesn't belong to Moore or Gibbons. Hayter and Tse certainly deserve credit for wrangling what was believed to be an unruly text, but the soul of this piece must belong to Snyder.
It's just goddamn amazing that this movie exists at all.
Faithfully submitted,
Mr. Beaks
*It reminds me of Michael Mann's mesmerizing, detail-laden opening montage for ALI, which, in less than ten minutes, deploys a series of terse visual cues to account for every obstacle and injustice that's driven the boxer to his transformative showdown with Sonny Liston. Even though it's one of the most brilliantly edited sequences of the decade, I'm convinced Mann lost most of his audience this way.
-
+ Expand All
-
Awesome!
-
Great review!
-
Now my big decision is whether I wait for the director's cut or not. Dammit!
-
Brilliant movie indeed.
-
I also haven't seen the movie.....
-
Aw, hamburgers.
-
...but it sure smells good!
-
think i'll take a nap
-
MTV in the old days?
-
...can we please stop talking about how "unfilmable" Watchmen is? If Alan Moore set out to "write the Moby Dick of comics" as he once claimed; and they Fucking filmed Moby Dick several times, and are at it again, then they can film the fucking Watchmen!!! I love the comic- it's wonderful, but at the end of the day- it's still just Men In Tights.
-
no fuckin' wayyyyyy man. Mr. Bay's gonna sue------
-
What's there to like? No performance is great. There is no great action. The owl mobile is okay. It's just a waste of time. A waste of 2hours 40 minutes. A dull, lifeless movie.
And yes I do like the graphic novel.
How about we compare it to the Dark Knight.
Their is NO comparison. The Dark Knight destorys Watchmen hands down in every aspect of performance and direction.
-
...because I think Beaks is a pretentious douchebag. Naw. I'm still pretty sure I'm going to like it. I hope I'm right.
-
montaaaaaaage
-
It looks like a terrific effort - I'm going to this movie to get my socks knocked off...nothing more. I love that Jackie Earle has gotten such terrific roles as of late - the Kruger gig would take him into terrain where he will get pigeonholed as a creepy perv-type, and though he's obviously the best choice for the role, one has to wonder if a romantic lead might be less iconic, but more rewarding acting-wise, in the long run of his career. Nonetheless he is a movie treasure, and it's cool as hell that he's back in such a great way. Go Mooch!
-
Mar 05, 2009 10:52:24 PM CST
It's sad all these bandwagon jumpers thinking this is TDK II
by lockesbrokenleg
It's not douchebags.
-
Pretty much aligns with my thoughts on the film. It's really hard to divorce my attachment to the book with my thoughts on the film... although it is obviously an astonishing film that is quite unlike anything else out there.
For me the biggest flaw was definitely that removing the peripheral characters robbed the climax of the emotional weight it needed. I thought the ending was surprisingly underplayed (muted sound etc)- and I think it actually may have played better as a big, loud, bombastic moment.
That said, Haley and Morgan absolutely rocked! Loved most of the music cues (except the 99 luft balloons and Ride of the Valkyries moments).
Overall... it's just an utterly strange experience to digest the entire Watchmen story in under 3 hours. Can't wait to see it again. -
...the more confused / anxious / titillated / frustrated / curious / nauseous I become. And I friggin' LOVE that. This film will either be a knockout wake-up call a la 'Dark Knight', or a truly enmaddening misfire.
-
Opening credits, Rorshach, Comedian, Manhattan. All brilliant. All in all, it's a wonderfully flawed movie but I reserve judgment until I see THE version of it.
-
Was it unfilmable when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor?! Hell no!!!
-
Bubastis makes no sense without the squid.
-
There are a number of flaws in the film, and after seeing it last night, my friend and I spent a good deal of time identifying misfires and missing moments.
Then, we realised that all of our issues were essentially nitpicks, and that overall it is a remarkable film with the good stuff far outweighing the bad.
I heard one guy coming out (hadn't read the book) saying it was the greatest film he's ever seen.
I expect that it will cause head explosions for people who only can describe films in absolutes (either sucks or rules), because it is an amazing, astonishing, brilliant piece of filmmaking that also happens to be deeply flawed. -
OH THE HUMANITY!!
-
I totally agree - my experience was more or less identical to yours.
-
Mar 05, 2009 11:08:06 PM CST
The opening credit for this film is the coolest thing I have eve
by slimballs
-
how so?
Not hot enough?
crappy actor? -
It's got "dongs" and "wee wees" and "dingalings"!!!
-
Just to fuck with everyone! Anyway, all they need to do is say that the movie is "a movie studio's fictional adaptation of the REAL characters" that was made a few years before the events of the movie...just like that goofy cartoon in the viral newsreel video. That way they can use the characters and not really fuck with Moore's so-called "vision."
-
...in so far as someone as insanely rich and ever-so-slightly narcissistic would have to have the coolest, most expensive pet on the planet, right?Even without the genetics/squid storyline, this works. It's like Jacko with his chimp, only wa-a-y more stylish.
-
Maybe not so much 'miscast' as inconsistent? Couldn't tell if she was a woman who grew up in the hero life and missed her childhood or if she was spoiled and full of entitlement. Some scenes I felt the former (which earns the character sympathy) and other times it felt similar to Juliette Lewis in 'Strange Days,' no real sadness in those eyes. More like inconvenience and petulance.
-
I love that you put in the 'air into gold' line. I'm not sure if anyone else picked up on it, but, I was there!
Can't wait to see this movie, and I'm really glad for your review. Thanks! -
It's funny, the only people I've seen questioning whether Watchmen works as a film to those unfamiliar to the source material are those that are familiar with the source material themselves. The unfamiliar seem to be coping, and reviewing the film, quite positively in fact. The only ones worrying about "other people" not getting it are the self proclaimed hardcore who already know this stuff inside and out.
-
I just got back from watching the movie. fucking i dont even want to think. im part raging, part like eeh that was kinda cool, and then FUCKING RAGING AGAIN. what movie is next in the anticipation train?? fuck this.
-
When we get the extended cut all the problems will be fixed. Just like Daredevil right?
-
Mar 06, 2009 12:51:32 AM CST
So I always wanted to know exactly what 'Hurm' sounded like
by pissed off and bitter
Everyone I knew had differing opinions on it. Some said it like 'hum', others thought it was an internal dialogue thing or like the clearing of one's throat. I finally saw the motion comic and now I get it. It's more like a grunt. I'm pretty confident this will kick ass.
-
That's how I feel... I'm familiar with the book and am unsure how the uninitiated will take it. The reason is that, as a fan, it is almost impossible to divorce oneself from attachment to the source material while viewing the movie. I tried, but kept finding myself marveling at a frame or line lifted straight from the book, or musing on something removed, or even anticipating upcoming scenes.
That and the fact that the story is so wonderfully fucking strange, that it really is hard to think of it in the same terms as "normal" movies. -
will I like the movie?
-
Credit crunch and all that.
I'm saving for my Star Trek ticket as we speak!
Bloody rip off cinema prices... -
It's a fantastic film and I've seen it twice already. It's also good the major movie chain has internet vouchers you can use to get in for $8. I want to see how my non-Watchmen friends like it over the weekend. And I could watch the opening credits over and over and over. Hurry up DVD.
-
...that I think the movie does also work for those who haven't read the novel/comic.
-
At times the acting was sub-par.
The pacing was odd in the funeral parts, if you didn't read the book it may be hard to follow what was happening.
The fact that he threw in extra little things didn't bother me, it was kinda cool because it stayed true to certain aspects of the characters.
But the fact the Jon left "his" watch in the chamber instead of Janey's was kinda stupid. Did Snyder miss the whole Fatman stepping on her watch, in comparison to the fatman the U.S. dropped on Hiroshima? It was kinda strange to leave such a thing out.
Oh and of course....No squid....But the new ending wasn't terrible, I just feel the squid ending what have had a way better WTF!!! kind of feel to it. Oh well -
Get a life.
-
its worth your time, unless you don't like reading.
-
Dudity = dude nudity. You heard the term here first.
How hard would it have been to um, leave the long duck donger out? Otherwise, ending aside, you nitpickers should feel lucky that a property like this was treated with as much reverence and beauty (minus the Smurf cock) as Watchmen was. -
he thought the beginning was one of the best parts.
-
Your review totaly summed up how I felt after seeing the movie. We all know that the book is almost always going to be better than the movie...does that mean that the movie does not work and that we can't enjoy it?
Everybody seems to be nitpicking, and that's ok, but when I read reviews that complain that Snyder stayed to close to the graphic novel, like that's a bad thing, I have to say "hurm?" Isn't that what everybody has been concerned about for the past year leading up to the movie..that it wouldn't be faithful to the source material?
I watched this with a friend who had never read the book, and he loved it. Like most of you, I've read the book at least once or twice a year for the last 20 years. There were things that I wish had been done differently, but I still really enjoyed the movie and applaud the cast and crew for what they pulled off. A movie doesn't have to be perfect to be enjoyable, which is good, considering there are so few perfect movies out there. -
I do feel that it's still incomplete, and that the extended cuts might be alot better, and may even give the GN even more justice. But my rating is a very high 8.5/10. It's damn good, it's too short, it's brilliantly acted, it's gorgeous, and I love that it wasn't dumb down for stupid people. I was afraid that Zack Snyder would make it too accessible for newbies, and not give me any kind of respect. But apparently, I was wrong. It's done intelligently, it is intellectually satisfying, it has depth, and it is very dense. It asks alot from viewers, and it definitely asks a whole lot more from people who have never read the GN, but it still works.
I do feel that Zack might of empathized a bit much on the sex and violence. But even then, it served it's purpose. Because when the sex scene becomes erotic, and erousing, it's still pretty disturbing. Because you just realized that Laurie and Dan are getting turned on by hurting people, and saving people at the same time. Crazy stuff. -
He's a lovely bloke, very down to earth and friendly. It's only when you get him onto the movie adaptations that he's, understandably, pissed off. But even then, it comes across much more bilious in print than when you hear him saying things quite matter-of-factly. His books have been turned into some awful films in the past, but his main beef over Watchmen seems to be with the studio and their very nasty treatment of him, than with Snyder. Mind you, he doesn't think anyone should make a film of Watchmen because, to quote from the interview: "It's a completely pointless idea, because Watchmen, at least in my mind, wasn't about a bunch of slightly dark superheroes in a slightly dark version of our modern world. It was about the storytelling techniques, and the way that me and Dave were altering the range of what it was possible to do in comics; this new way that we'd stumbled upon of telling a comic book story.". You can read snippets from the 15-page interview at www.mustardweb.org/alanmoore (remove any spaces that appear in the URL).
-
Mathew Goode was the only miscast, and he still did a great job. He truly nailed Ozymandias in my opinion.
-
i dont think moore is angry with any of the creators...its the suits and i think he has issue with the amount of money it takes to translate what is on the page to the screen and moore is right...his book is much more about what a comic could do, then the story itself...which is why both he and dave were very dissapointed, when instead of creators coming out with new and innovative ways to tell stories, the comic world decided to go dark
-
Measured and honest. Not like that stupid hick Massawyrm. That guy can be so on point, but sometimes he just channels the power of a dozen retards. LIke his No Country For Old Men review, where he decried the lack of a climactic shootout.
-
Now, that is "unfilmable".
-
Someone tell me
-
Your review would bring sanity to these proceedings. Love, TopHat.
-
I saw it last night at a 12:30 screening. I enjoyed it over all, but the movie moved at such a rapid clip, in order to cover all of the necessary material, that there was very little time for scenes to breathe. This was especially problematic in the third act, when Veidt's plan goes into effect. The entire event was dealt with in what seemed like 5 minutes - for a brutal and graphic movie, the scenes of destruction were suprisingly "clean" - a few landscape shots of destruction, a few computer screens showing the same, and a handful of people vaporized. The movie did not allow the audience to dwell on the horror of what Veidt had done, nor was their much debate about whether he was right or wrong to do so. It just didn't capture the enormity or gravity of the situation, in my opinion. Also, on a less serious note, Bubastis looked fake as hell. That was some terrible CGI.
-
They really blew a couple of reveals that should've meant a lot more than they were allowed too. For all of the posturing, the movie just doesn't have a lot of gravity.
I liked it, but I just can't love it even though I wish I could. The book is just so much better. -
Fair and balanced all around. Nice one, sir. Here's to hoping the director's cut improves on the theatrical version.
-
makes me more excited to see the flick and addresses most of my fanboy concerns.
-
Is it me or does this girl even have a nose? And the Betty Page styling only emphasizes her distinct lack of an facially based olfactory organ. She's not hideous obviously and I've only seen her in a few scenes in that shitty Ben Stiller movie (so can't speak of her acting ability, etc) but from the first time I saw Ackerman cast I was thinking back to Wings (I believe it was) and the mechanic (Thoma H Church) dating the "big face girl" not a fat girl at all but a girl with a big round face (or was it Seinfield? Didn't watch Jerry so don't remember for sure). It's kinda creepy...like Shannon Dougherty...she's got a picasso face. Look again if you don't believe me...one eye is visibly higher than the other and its not cause he head is tilted...its mutant CROOKED! But Ackerman reminds me of those cupie doll pictures of rounded face cherubs with nary a nose in site. She's like living anime without the crazy giant boobs or giant freaky saucer eyes. Is it me or should they have cast Gugino as SS2 and then maybe go with someone a else for the first SS? Carla can act AND is scrumdeliumptious!Ackerman seems like she'd never need a napkin to eat...just lay back and any food she spilled would just circle around her face until it eventually went into her mouth or that teeny tiny quasi-peanut thing she calls a nose. Shallow? Of course! Lies? Meh...opinion I guess.
-
I agree that the movie is an incredible accomplishment. quibbles: i thought Malin Ackerman was spot on as Laurie, looking more like the drawings than any other character and coming across as a likeable girl lost in amongst crazy people. And way less whiney than she was in the book. wub.
I was more put off by Ozy's casting. And the endings reference to printing Rorshach's journal seems to point out the fact that this is better as a book. And the outer limits tv reference seems unnecessary without the fake monster. hmm. but. wow. WOW! what a movie. -
Fair fucks, Beaks.
-
It's going to be interesting to see how well this film does overall. I see that the review consensus has dropped to low 60s percent as more mainstream reviewers chime in. The point is that the majority of the public are never going to read the comic. Like any film, it has to work on its own without prerequisites. I hope to see it in the week ahead -- and I've never read the comic, so I'm curious how well the film will work for me...
-
each shot has been already been frames for you? (other than the extra shit in the book that is)
-
I saw watchmen last night in imax and must say that this review rings loud and true to exactly how I felt about the movie, I can't wait to see it again and am even MORE excited by the tantilizing director's cut!!!
-
I dont really buy "the idea of Utopia breaking out over the very rational fear of a known angry god." Of course, I never felt humans would really band together in the graphic novel either, so I cant fault the movie for having the same problem the book had.
-
Every book I have ever read before seeing the movie ended up in me hating the movie. If I see the movie first then read the book I usually like both (assuming the movie is good).
Luckly I havent read Watchmen yet as a purposfully waited till I saw the movie, well at least I waited a year after heard they were making this.
-
Roll over and play dead!
-
Pretty much sums it all up.
The old-age makeup still stinks. I mean, better make-up exists, doesn't it? -
Beaks was spot on with his review. From here on out, Zack Snyder has my respect and total confidence in him as a genius and ( I know the die hard Watchmen fans who wanted every single moment to mirror the comic and nothing excised) "faithful to the material sort of director" we all wish could do all our comic adaptations! Congratulations, Sir.
You did us proud... -
I read the graphic novel years ago, and thought it was great, but I haven't reread it since, so I came to the movie relatively fresh. I thought the film worked brilliantly without me remembering all that much about the comic. On that basis, I don't think people who haven't read it should have a problem.
-
What kind of gay fanboys are you that like this film? First you get all excited like giggling schoolgirls over the movie "300" which features big, sweaty, muscular men half naked wearing speedos, and now you fanboys get all excited over a movie that features full frontal male nudity!!!!!! YOU'RE SO FREAKING GAY!!! If you're gay then just come out and admit it! Seriously, how can any straight guy watch this stuff. At least "Street Fighter" had that hot ass Kristen Kruenyk or whatever the hell her name is.
-
The movie was so bad, that alot of people (non fanboys) actually walked out! And this was in Burbank. Hahahaaha! Now that was funny.
-
Isn't that why we needed to invade Iraq? Isn't a suitcase nuke in the hands of a jihadist a more terrifying proposition than an actual government playing brinksmanship?
I get that the level of constant fear isn't as palpable but it seems to me a whole generation of people have tuned out thinking about anything that hasn't or won't happen in their own lifetimes. Like all cool art this story has heaps of relevance - maybe more for the more mature among us but whatever. The fact that it appears to be polarizing tells me it is what it's supposed to be. Scads of people will only be able to talk about blue penis, Comedien's assault of Jupiter and rendezvous in the owl ship. Too bad. -
like you 'The Day After' freaked me the hell out as a kid. And I used to have these, I dunno, daymares where I would drift off in class not really sleeping but half-fantasing half-dreaming that an alarm would go off and we'd all have to run to someplace with a fallout shelter sign on it and once we got there how would I find my mom? Nuclear war was my #1 fear for most of my life. Now it's Octomoms. Anywho, that was a really good review. Although, I really don't understand why people need a violet cat explained to them when a gigantic nekkid blue guy had been walking around for two hours.
-
yes her line readings were wooden, but i always saw Laurie as a flake anyway, as detached from society as Dr Manhatttan so she WOULD be socially awkward and talking to people would be kinda 'new' to her...just my take
-
Saw it last night and was dumbfounded. I have never walked out of a theater and not known what to think! I wasnt till I got home and my wife asked me how it was that I could even start to figure out the answer to that question.
It was simply amazing, just a hair less than Dark Knight. And the only reason for that is that it seemed rushed, after the director's cut comes out and gives us a half hour more I am sure that it will work even more. -
I didn't read the comics so was completely lost. The violence was way way over the top to the point of distracting, how many times can you show a guys arm breakin before it becomes 'fun'? OK-I GET IT ENOUGH ALREADY.
I did like Rorshewhatshisname but otherwise, this must be some kinda geek masturbation movie.. -
Fantastic movie! Snyder did a great job of bringing the novel to life. This story was syrupy thick with human drama and realistic characterizations. Dr. Manhattan did look a little stiff (not down there) but the lip-synch did not appear to me to be off. The sex scenes and fight scenes were very graphic, very realistic and very appropriate to developing the characters and stories. The violence was very graphic (blood, burning flesh, severed limbs) it deserves its "R" rating. Please, do not bring kids (I saw some there) as the sex scenes were very graphic. I read the book, my wife did not, we both were able to enjoy, understand, and relate to the story. The ending made more sense to me than the one in the book, it seemed more realistic in the story line. They did eliminate Vice President Ford and some other characters and elements that I thought would be important, But as the movie is at three hours I guess something has to be cut. I can't wait to see what Snyder puts in the Director's cut! Must see multiple times!
Readers Talkback
User Login
Top Talkbacks
- Kurtzman And Boborci Producing An Adaptation Of Anne Rice's Lestat Novel TALE OF THE BODY THIEF?? -- 233 total posts 233 posts
- Happy Birthday John Williams! -- 229 total posts 166 posts
- Are These Space Nazis Fighting Sarah Palin?? Behold The Unbridaled Dementia Of This New IRON SKY Trailer!! -- 103 total posts 103 posts
- THE BOURNE LEGACY trailer is a bit Saul Bassy -- 102 total posts 102 posts
- The JETSONS Movie Gets New Writers!! -- 96 total posts 96 posts
- HOUSE 2004-2012 -- 94 total posts 91 posts
- Significantly different 1 minute JOHN CARTER spot! -- 138 total posts 86 posts
- Mike Fleming confirms AICN scoop on Sly & Arnold teaming up in THE TOMB!!! -- 75 total posts 75 posts
- Jason Statham's In HEAT!! Brian De Palma And William Goldman Helped Put Him There... -- 59 total posts 59 posts
- DOUGLAS TRUMBULL is going to destroy our minds and reveal awesome beyond our mortal imaginations! -- 59 total posts 59 posts