Ain't It Cool News (
Movie News

Mr. Beaks Sneaks A Peek At Zack Snyder's WATCHMEN: DIRECTOR'S CUT!

Was the theatrical release of WATCHMEN essentially a trailer for the Director's Cut? Judging from the select footage I saw Wednesday morning at Warner Bros. Home Entertainment (which included a peak at the three hours of supplementary material), I think it might've been. "It's almost the reverse of a paperback/hardback version," said Snyder, who was on hand to answer our questions about the WATCHMEN BD and 300: THE COMPLETE EXPERIENCE. "It used to be that the cinematic version was the hardback, and then, when you bought a DVD, it was the paperback version, right? I think that's getting turned on its ear. Now, the deluxe version of the movie is the Blu-ray, and the theatrical version is, in some ways, the paperback. This is a lot more custom. It's a custom experience on a massive level." By now, you know what's coming: on July 21st, Zack Snyder's 188-minute Director's Cut of WATCHMEN will hit Blu-ray and DVD. It is, as Snyder said today, basically what he "wants the movie to look like". And for those of you who are despondent over not getting to see this version of the film in theaters, well, rejoice! If you live in New York City, Los Angeles, Dallas and Minneapolis, that is! Warner Bros. is planning a limited one-weekend rollout of the DC on July 17th. And, yes, "one weekend" means this is a three-day engagement. After that, it's just you and your Philco. That said, it looks like the home experience is going to be pretty damn special. The big selling point with the Blu-ray is the "Director Walk-On", which is a fancy-pants form of commentary that has Snyder standing in front of the screen (and a variety of other screens featuring cast/crew interviews, animatics, etc.) as he explains his stylistic choices. For someone who hasn't goofed around with Blu-ray much, this verges on sensory overload. But I'm cool with a little disorientation so long as the myriad branching features are substantive - which they appear to be. Is this essentially a flashy streamlining of the kinds of featurettes with which we've been inundated since the advent of the DVD? To an extent, yes. But they're so well-produced in this case that I don't mind the "immersive" "Maximum Movie Mode" hard-sell. Also, the opportunity for some kid in the Midwest to fire off questions at Snyder during a live screening (which is scheduled to go down at Comic Con in July) is the kind of thing that makes me wish BD was around when I was fifteen. As for what scenes will be added to the Director's Cut, I can verify that you will get to see the brutal murder of Hollis Mason by a bunch of top-knotted thugs. As with most of the violent scenes in WATCHMEN, Snyder has taken a dozen or so panels from the graphic novel and transformed them into breathtaking cinema. He's also turned the sequence into a half-clever, half-heartbreaking homage to RAGING BULL, with Hollis flashing back to his crime-fighting heyday as the "Intermezzo" from CAVALLERIA RUSTICANA briefly dominates the soundtrack. The music - and his punch-drunk reverie - ends abruptly when the gang's ringleader busts open Hollis's skull with his Nite Owl trophy. This is a brilliantly shot-and-edited sequence. If the rest of the DC is up to this standard, WATCHMEN will officially enter the "Best of '09" conversation. Snyder also fielded questions about his upcoming projects GUARDIANS OF GA'HOOLE and SUCKER PUNCH. Of the former, a PG-rated animated adaptation of the first book in Kathryn Lasky's popular young-adult fantasy series, Snyder would only say that it will be much like the Harry Potter movies in tone (I'm assuming he meant the earlier films, as the later installments have grown increasingly dark). Of SUCKER PUNCH, the fantastic, extremely R-rated tale of a girl busting out of a mental institution, Snyder says it's "Part WIZARD OF OZ, part BRAZIL [and] part ALL THAT JAZZ." Preproduction on that film is set to begin shortly up in Vancouver. WATCHMEN: DIRECTOR'S CUT and 300: THE COMPLETE EXPERIENCE are available for the pre-orderin' right now. Faithfully submitted, Mr. Beaks

Readers Talkback
comments powered by Disqus
    + Expand All
  • June 24, 2009, 9:47 p.m. CST

    worth another look

    by gavdiggity

    okay, I'm in...

  • June 24, 2009, 9:50 p.m. CST

    sounds cool

    by theycallmemrtibbs

  • June 24, 2009, 9:53 p.m. CST


    by darius25

    isn't this the 2nd of the 3 alternative cuts for this movie? Supposedly the next cut runs 3.5 hours long and is the ULTIMATE version. That one's coming out for Christmas 2009 when Avatar is mass raping our eyeballs and blasting all over our faces...

  • June 24, 2009, 9:53 p.m. CST

    I'd like the theatrical version and the DC on DVD

    by sonnyfern

    Just in case I don't feel like wasting half the day on the DC, I could get a quickie version of it then get on with my life.

  • June 24, 2009, 9:54 p.m. CST

    WATCHMEN: DIRECTOR'S CUT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    by Ricky Retardo

    I won't watch it.

  • June 24, 2009, 9:54 p.m. CST

    "sneak a peek" coined on Seinfeld

    by digital8

    When Jerry, George and Kramer were talking about if they snuck a peek at each other's package in the community shower. Kramer said he looked. George said he may have snuck a peek. Jerry said he didn't and that there is certain information he just doesn't need to know.

  • June 24, 2009, 9:55 p.m. CST

    Whoo Hoo!

    by RollingBarrelDotCom

    I enjoyed the theatrical version but admittedly was sitting there thinking what additional goodness I would be getting a few months down the road in DVD form. <p> I will certainly be purchasing it. But will it include the Black Freighter animated story woven into the tale like the GN?

  • June 24, 2009, 9:56 p.m. CST

    Watchmen was awesome!!! Can't wait for DC!

    by kbarber29

  • June 24, 2009, 9:57 p.m. CST

    is it even more gay

    by animas

    zack should just make hard core homo videos since it is obvious that is his desire (and his fans)

  • June 24, 2009, 10 p.m. CST


    by darius25

    cause the last one had more penises than i've ever seen in my entire life... I don't I can stand any more large erections in my face!!

  • June 24, 2009, 10:03 p.m. CST

    Would've worked better as a miniseries...

    by SpeakerForTheDead

    Snyder missed the point of the comic. The flick is visually stunning but he fuggled the message the comic had. Doubtful more scenes will fix that. Nothing to do with the squid, mind you...he just defragged the whole reason Ozzy did what he did, Doc's motivation, etc. Oh's hoping HBO does a 100 Bullets mini.

  • June 24, 2009, 10:04 p.m. CST

    Watchmen Directors Cut: All the blue cock you can swallow

    by Turd Furgeson

    Now that's a title!!!

  • June 24, 2009, 10:05 p.m. CST

    i just wished i liked it

    by mr. smith

    i'm sure i'll watch this too, and be just as frustrated

  • June 24, 2009, 10:11 p.m. CST

    Wow - more horrible than the theatrical version?

    by Professor_Monster

    Zach is a terrible director - truly terrible. He makes music videos with dialogue. Keep your shit Zach. Go do some work for Miley Cyrus - that is the perfect platform for your "talent"

  • June 24, 2009, 10:12 p.m. CST

    Shoulda been like BAND OF BROTHERS

    by MetalMickey

    or 2 separate films like KILL BILL. Packing everything into 2 1/2 hours fucking killed it. Good effort, though.

  • June 24, 2009, 10:13 p.m. CST

    Whatever....the movie was a toss up for me.

    by Nuking the Fridge

    Some of the liberties were too much, but then again the story was too much tell in even a 3 hour version.

  • June 24, 2009, 10:13 p.m. CST

    What does this say about me? You decide

    by T2000

    I never read 300, but loved the movie? I read Watchmen (loved it), but hated the movie?

  • June 24, 2009, 10:14 p.m. CST

    Re: the DVD artwork

    by Vespalad

    Anybody know why the artwork for the DVD releases is so terrible? Almost all the artwork for the theatrical release was bangin. Why couldn't they have picked from the best of that stuff for the DVD?

  • June 24, 2009, 10:14 p.m. CST

    Black Freighter Version

    by mrbeaks

    Due out for Christmas. Don't know if I need that much WATCHMEN, but I'm sure I'll check it out at some point.

  • June 24, 2009, 10:17 p.m. CST


    by thevagraunt

    DAMN IT! I just bought the 300 Bluray for $23 two months ago. I had no idea this was coming out.

  • June 24, 2009, 10:19 p.m. CST

    "Large erections in my face"

    by Nasty In The Pasty

    Manhattan's member was totally flaccid every second it was on-screen.

  • June 24, 2009, 10:24 p.m. CST

    the difference between JJ Abrams and Zack Snyder

    by animas

    Snyder's movies are for repressed homosexuals and JJ's are for openly gay gays.

  • June 24, 2009, 10:25 p.m. CST

    New District 9 Video

    by Trannyformers_Apologist

    Non Humans escape from District 9 <P>

  • June 24, 2009, 10:28 p.m. CST

    will this version also include the bad-ass version of

    by jackknifed_juggernaut

    Ozymandias sorely missed from the theatrical cut?

  • June 24, 2009, 10:29 p.m. CST

    goddamn, District 9 will save this summer for me yet!

    by jackknifed_juggernaut


  • June 24, 2009, 10:33 p.m. CST

    Warners must not have cared about the B.O.

    by The Dum Guy

    If they knew they would triple-dip into releases less than a year after it first screen at theatres.<br><br>Plus the Black Freighter DVD.<br><br>I never saw it, was it any good?

  • June 24, 2009, 10:33 p.m. CST

    Sweet. Bly Ray, prepare to have your face fucked.

    by Heckles

    Watchmen Director's Cut will be mine. Want it. Now.

  • June 24, 2009, 10:38 p.m. CST

    "Director Walk-On" reminds me of

    by Jesiah

    The Simpsons episode where Lisa is watching the postman with Kevin Costner on the screen apologizing for making it, but then she finds out he's really there and asks her to get him some food or drink.

  • June 24, 2009, 10:44 p.m. CST


    by CaptainAxis

    Really looking forward to this. Fuck the closet fags who were transfixed on Dr. Manhattan's dink; it wasn't distracting or gratuitous unless you're a natural-born pecker-checker. Just tell me Mason's flashbacks include Captain Axis.

  • June 24, 2009, 10:46 p.m. CST


    by 3D-Man

    Really, really, really AWESOME.

  • June 24, 2009, 10:51 p.m. CST

    Could be cool...

    by HollywoodPlant

    If it was shorter.

  • June 24, 2009, 10:52 p.m. CST

    Director Walk-On whatever

    by cloudrider`

    all those gimmicky bonus are just that, gimmicks. just concentrate on making a film worth a damn next time. that's all that matters.

  • June 24, 2009, 11:01 p.m. CST

    My next movie is Casablanca meets Citizen Kane meets Star Wars

    by Falafalguy

    God I love Hollywood.

  • June 24, 2009, 11:02 p.m. CST

    beef one:

    by cloudrider`

    all the violence are amped up in this film just for 'cool' and 'daring' effect, but when the violence becomes truly matter at the climax when countless bloody corpses supposed to pile up, the film took the most cliched chickenshit way out - bloodless generic hollywood explosion.

  • June 24, 2009, 11:03 p.m. CST

    How can you have a Director's Cut if you're...

    by m_reporter

    ... not a director to begin with? Snyder needs to make a real movie already.

  • June 24, 2009, 11:04 p.m. CST


    by D.Vader

    Yes, yes, and yes. I'll have some more, thank you.

  • June 24, 2009, 11:05 p.m. CST

    Biggest disappointment ever....

    by robotdevil

    Snyder completely misunderstood the tone and appeal of the material (and that shitbomb of an ending... what the hell was he thinking?). He proved for sure that a great Watchmen film could have been made but that he and Hayter were completely the wrong guys for the job. It's amazing how a film can simultaneously come so close to and yet be so far off the mark. Biggest disappointment ever.

  • June 24, 2009, 11:06 p.m. CST

    beef two:

    by cloudrider`

    the book tries to present a realisitc universe. the film has ozy doing superhuman jumps, heads smash into concrete walls and characters get only minor headaches, nixon gigantic nose. the book feels real, this live action version feels like a cartoon.

  • June 24, 2009, 11:06 p.m. CST


    by RipleyGrady

    this movie was a lukewarm adaptation of the source. They're capitalizing on the fan community to bolster profits for multiple releases of essentially the same product. If anyone has a craving for Watchmen, just read the book. If you want to see it numb and lifeless but with moving pictures, pick up Dr. Manhattan's Deluxe Blue Dick Edition.

  • June 24, 2009, 11:07 p.m. CST

    I liked it. But more violence and longer cut bores me.


    Not interested. Is the theatrical version going to be available?

  • June 24, 2009, 11:07 p.m. CST

    Wait, this DOESN'T include the Black Freighter story?

    by D.Vader

    Well FUCK it then. What's the damn point?

  • June 24, 2009, 11:09 p.m. CST

    needs some squid

    by sokitome

    that is all

  • June 24, 2009, 11:09 p.m. CST

    If you think Snyder had the wrong tone with this film...

    by D.Vader

    Then honestly, I don't know what to say to you. If anything, the tone was spot on.

  • June 24, 2009, 11:10 p.m. CST

    beef three:

    by cloudrider`

    blaming the doc STILL doesnt make sense. doc was made in the US and used by the US, the destruction at the end would be seen by the world as american weapon gone awry. no way the russians would just buy anything the US explain to them. if anything their suspicion would only grow. how would they know the doc leaving earth is not just another ploy by the US? how would they know if and when the doc returns to earth he wont just side the US again? <p> the threat HAS to be from beyond.

  • June 24, 2009, 11:12 p.m. CST

    if i were to watch it again, it'd only be for the opening

    by jackknifed_juggernaut

    titles. Snyder pieced that shit together perfectly.

  • June 24, 2009, 11:18 p.m. CST


    by uberman

    And he ussually doesnt offer an opinion on movies as they arent high on his list of important topics. He did bring up this movie, however-I never even knew he saw it or would bother seeing it. He went with his girlfriend and said it was so friggin horrible that they both left 1/2 way through. That said, I will see the DVD of the Theatrical version when it comes out.

  • June 24, 2009, 11:20 p.m. CST

    waaaah blue dicks!

    by Holodigm

    i love people complaining about the blue cock, saying to read the book instead as if there was no blue cock in the book. uh, there was. ir juar sounds like someone's getting turned on by it but is afraid to admit it.

  • June 24, 2009, 11:23 p.m. CST

    Nice to see the heartland get skipped again

    by Knightsong

    You know it seems like nothing exists to anyone that lies west of the mississippi river, east of vegas and north of texas. The midwest is the red headed stepchild of the united states. We don't get shit! No big cons or conventions, a lot of comics and bands don't make it here either. And before some asshole says move, I say fuck you. Not everyone has the means. Spread the love people, your fans exist here too.

  • June 24, 2009, 11:26 p.m. CST

    beef four:

    by cloudrider`

    rorschachs. where's the laugh after he said "human bean juice"? where's the running gag of him breaking dan's door locks? where's the running gag of him going into bar and break fingers? where's the loathing silk spectre has towards him? what happened to him being accused as a pervert by the landlady? <p> oh right... this character is supposed to be badass all the way. no room for humor and sympathy for this guy according to snyder. precisely BECAUSE of these little nuances that he feels more human rather than an action hero, and hence why we feel for him at the end. <p> snyder couldnt even let him be misunderstood by his friends when he chased the midget into the toilet. he has to let the door slide open one more time for us to see what he's doing. the humors and subtleties are completely lost on snyder. please just stick to directing cartoon next time.

  • June 24, 2009, 11:26 p.m. CST

    Knightsong: Here's why it is like that

    by The Dum Guy

  • June 24, 2009, 11:32 p.m. CST

    beef five:

    by cloudrider`

    nuclear armaggedon is impending right? so where's the tension in the film? moore got it right and brought the tension to the street level. you see the panic affecting everyday people and you feel it when reading. the film completely skip past all that and choose instead to show the tension in a war room with a bunch of man in suits. yeah that worked well. i feel no driving tension whatsoever whle watching the film. and how could you take the war room scenes seriously with that huge nixon nogging splashing across the big screen.

  • June 24, 2009, 11:34 p.m. CST

    my biggest problem with watchmen the movie was ozymandias

    by iwasredempted

    i can't put my finger on it but he just didn't come off as compelling in the movie. he was much more of a compelling character in the comic book. everything else i enjoyed. rorschach rocked.

  • June 24, 2009, 11:35 p.m. CST


    by CaptainAxis

    Sounds to me like YOU missed the humor and subtleties of the film. That's pretty funny, actually. Did you need it spelled out for you?<br> <br> I also love the whiners who were disgusted by the violence we did see, yet are disappointed by the lack of visible bloody, mangled corpses in the finale. They also want realism, but they don't want to see the realistic consequences of vigilante violence. They want the same level of "safe" violence we get in the average Batman or Spiderman movie, totally missing the point of Watchmen.

  • June 24, 2009, 11:36 p.m. CST

    The running gag of breaking the door lock...

    by D.Vader

    Just isn't important and probably would take too much time to put in. <p> I dunno, that's what everyone says when I bitch about things changed/cut out from the last 2 Harry Potter films.

  • June 24, 2009, 11:39 p.m. CST

    but i agree with you cloudrider

    by iwasredempted

    i believe snyder has more of an action movie director skill set as opposed to someone like ang lee or scorsese who can make a very nuanced movie. i wonder if ang lee could have made a better watchmen?

  • June 24, 2009, 11:40 p.m. CST

    Blue Guy Special Longer cut.

    by lockesbrokenleg


  • June 24, 2009, 11:45 p.m. CST

    agreed, iwasredempted

    by jackknifed_juggernaut

    totally dropped the ball on Ozzy.

  • June 24, 2009, 11:49 p.m. CST

    director's cut: the circumsized edition

    by iwasredempted

    yeah lockesbrokenleg. let's get this talkback rolling.

  • June 24, 2009, 11:49 p.m. CST

    Snyder's Watchmen

    by CaptainAxis

    did to superhero movies what Moore's Watchmen did to superhero comics in 1986.

  • June 24, 2009, 11:50 p.m. CST

    beef six:

    by cloudrider`

    ozy is now a kungfu figthing gay guy. and the way the actor played him, there's a sense of mysterius menace in every scene he's in. in the book he's supposed to look all decent, an all american quaterback. in the film he showed his card way too early. that and when he received no comeuppance in the book you feel the world's lost all the more. it makes his victory all the more glorious and complete and as a result you detest him even more. <p> in the film, you get this B grade wannabe superhero punching ozy in the face for payback. it desipates his glory, gives us a release for our anger. it's a copout choice, made just to bring more box office dollars in. supposedly the darker the ending the less money a movie makes. this film is far far from being daring, despite what snyder has claimed.

  • June 24, 2009, 11:50 p.m. CST

    30 minute extended Blue Dong scene!!!

    by Series7


  • June 24, 2009, 11:51 p.m. CST

    saw the black freighter.

    by cloudrider`

    exactly like the movie. less is sometimes more.

  • June 24, 2009, 11:57 p.m. CST

    Watchmen sucked!

    by hallmitchell

  • June 24, 2009, 11:58 p.m. CST

    TThe Fieighter thing was really shitty

    by lockesbrokenleg

    So was that Behind the Costume thing. What a waste. Should have given them away for free.

  • June 24, 2009, 11:58 p.m. CST

    Watchmen : First cab off the rank for a bad geek year.

    by hallmitchell

    Had no buzz on the film one week after release. Zack went so down in my eyes after this film. That guy was pushing A list. It will take three awesome films in a row for him to get back on there.

  • June 24, 2009, 11:59 p.m. CST

    Watchmen: Proved Alan Moore right!

    by hallmitchell

    It is unfilmable. Why didn't you believe him?

  • June 25, 2009, midnight CST

    Black Freighter is at my local dvd store.

    by hallmitchell

    No one has hired it.

  • June 25, 2009, 12:01 a.m. CST

    Ya' know, this movie is divisive as fuck...

    by The Dum Guy

    I know alot of people who liked it and some who didn't like it, but I don't know many who loved or hated it.<br><br>I read the comic prior to the film and because of it had to view it as 2nd Gen, and I liked it (not loved), but I had friends see it that didn't like it but ended up reading the comic and loving the comic.<br><br>I dunno, but I have to agree with Kevin Smith in that Snyder essentially set himself up for a downfall, either it would've been too faithfull, or too Hollywood.

  • June 25, 2009, 12:08 a.m. CST

    Loved it

    by CaptainAxis

    Saw it five times, twice with my dad, who is in his late 50s and knew nothing about the comic. He thought it was fantastic and liked the satirical aspects that apparently went over the heads of the typical talkback meatheads. Also saw it with a buddy who didn't know much about the comic and he loved it too.

  • June 25, 2009, 12:10 a.m. CST

    Meh, I have no problem with Ozy's beatdown

    by D.Vader

    The portrayal's of Ozy in book and movie are completely different, and the treatment of story in both mediums is also different. So I have no problem with Ozy taking a beatdown from Nite Owl in the film. In the book, it didn't really feel like Ozy had done something terribly villain-like based on everyone else's reactions. In the book, everyone but Rorshach is like "Gee whiz, this SUCKS. But I guess its okay..." <p> The film did a much better job showing just how pissed everyone was there at the end. Therefore, his beatdown is justified and is good for the audience as a cathartic release. The world is still screwed. All Snyder did was give the audience *one* teeny weeny victory. That's it.

  • June 25, 2009, 12:12 a.m. CST

    i just thought it was ok. i like Snyder but Moore was right

    by BMacSmith

    the comic had no business being a movie, especially decades later. I dont agree with Snyders choices to stick so rigidly to the comic. there has to be changes.

  • June 25, 2009, 12:14 a.m. CST


    by AyatollahSexyBack

    Snyder is quite simply one of my all-time favorite directors. Totally unique and engaging style, quality oozing from every frame. He is masterful and competent. I was enthralled by The Watchmen and this director's cut can't come soon enough.

  • June 25, 2009, 12:15 a.m. CST

    The Theatrical=Hardcover vs DVD=Paperback Conundrum.

    by Amy Chasing

    I can see what Snyder means, but consider this... Films that want to get noticed, make the most money they can, and do it the "traditional" way will be released in cinemas first. I think we're still a long way from films being released on DVD first to achieve the same affect. <P> So I implore directors, get the theatrical release as right as you can please. Don't think that because you can add everything from the cutting-room floor onto the DVD that the theatrical cut is now a "paperback" to the DVD's "hardcover". If anything people buy DVDs because they liked the theatrical release. <P> Perhaps the theatrical release should be called "abridged" if any book terminology should be used, and the DVD "unabridged". But, much like comparing the latter Harry Potter books to the earlier ones, sometimes editing makes stories better.

  • June 25, 2009, 12:15 a.m. CST

    More suck for your buck!

    by Horace Cox

    Christ, that movie was hard enough to sit through once. Methinks I will pass.

  • June 25, 2009, 12:22 a.m. CST

    The which is more stupider edition

    by lockesbrokenleg

    Fuck all these DVDs, the movie still sucked.

  • June 25, 2009, 12:23 a.m. CST


    by cloudrider`

    when i said snyder missed the mark, i provided examples. what subtleties and humors i missed, pray tell? <p> i'm not disgusted by the violence in the film. but those new addition are unnecessary, while the gore and violence in the climax is a MUST to feel the complete visceral impact of what ozy had done. this is the climax we're talking about, the whole movie was leading to this one moment. making it bloodless dissipates the impact. replacing it with a hollywood explosion is just boring.

  • June 25, 2009, 12:27 a.m. CST

    Hardcover vs. Paperback

    by The Dum Guy

    This has alot to do with current Hollywood.<br><br>Think about the last five (fuck it ten) years or so.<br><br>We get lame ass theatre versions versus "non-rated" DVDs that have (usually) both versions. Couple this with the fact that most "shitty" blockbusters get less buck stateside than worldwide, and we wonder why this summer season has little to offer...<br><br>I dunno, but I had this discussion with a friend last night about how Wolverine and T:4 was doing way better over seas, and I realized that 2012 will be the greatest movie ever (since all civilizations will end by 2013).

  • June 25, 2009, 12:28 a.m. CST

    and i love it when...

    by cloudrider`

    people says his dad and circles of friends love it, like that's supposed to mean anything. wolverine did stellar box office, no doubt bayformers will do too. say thanks to your dad and friends for me, will you?

  • June 25, 2009, 12:32 a.m. CST

    cathartic release

    by cloudrider`

    precisely there's no cathartic release provided is why the book ending is so strong and ultimately more satisfying. <p> havent we got enough cathactic releases from all the spielberg films to last us a lifetime?

  • June 25, 2009, 12:34 a.m. CST

    The violence

    by CaptainAxis

    Anybody who thinks Snyder "overdid" the violence needs to go back and examine those scenes in the book. Snyder filled in the blanks, because it's a film not a comic book. The attempted rape scene, the Knot Top brawl with Dan and Laurie, the prison scene - they pushed the envelope in 1986, but this is 2009. Based on his later output, I'm quite sure that Moore would have shown more violence and sex if he thought he could get away with it at the time. The sex scene in the film is positively tame compared to the filth depicted in Moore's Lost Girls series.

  • June 25, 2009, 12:36 a.m. CST

    movie Ozy = Nicolae Carpathia

    by CreamCheeseAlchemist /ndne3q Wooo! 15th time coming up!

  • June 25, 2009, 12:40 a.m. CST

    Wolverine did steller box office?

    by lockesbrokenleg

    That was a dud from the word go. Its it even playing anymore?

  • June 25, 2009, 12:41 a.m. CST

    No cloudrider

    by D.Vader

    In films, no cathartic release often leads into pissed off viewers feeling empty. <p> And while that may be the point, it doesn't leave viewers feeling entertained. Its still a depressing ending. The beatdown really doesn't hurt the film, especially as Ozy just takes it and really isn't hurt by it. <p> But again, its two different mediums. No cathartic release works better in a book than it does in a film.

  • June 25, 2009, 12:43 a.m. CST

    I wish I could care

    by JohnRyder

    I went from a big watchmen fan to someone who cannot give a shit

  • June 25, 2009, 12:45 a.m. CST

    "snyder filled in the blanks"

    by cloudrider`

    exactly. what i said about snyder and subtleties? but you seem to be the perfect audience for his kind of films. good for you. <p> also, when moore did the violence in the book, he was breaking taboos. what snyder did with the film accomplished no such things. we've seen that kind of violence in countless movies before, and potrayed more realistically. concrete smashing headbutts and bones protruding upon arm twisting is cartoonish. that's not realism.

  • June 25, 2009, 12:49 a.m. CST


    by cloudrider`

    "In films, no cathartic release often leads into pissed off viewers feeling empty." <p> which is why i said the change was made to rake more box office cash in. it has nothing to do with making the story better.

  • June 25, 2009, 12:50 a.m. CST

    can i just say that the plot of Watchmen isnt that great to star

    by BMacSmith

    it has amazing characters and mood and depth and whatnot, but the main plot is batshit insane. it screams comic booky, and in the negative campy way. thats why it can never really work as a movie. it can only work in superhero comics.<p> i know i know, flame away at me, but i really really like most of the comic and the movie, but in the last act when it has to wrap up the main plot, it unravels. To be honest i didnt want it to end, i just wanted to follow Rorsach and NightOwl around and see what trouble they got into.

  • June 25, 2009, 12:52 a.m. CST

    *to start with

    by BMacSmith

  • June 25, 2009, 12:55 a.m. CST

    by 6000_little_griglets

    phaedrus007 said = "Snyder completely misunderstood the tone and appeal of the material (and that shitbomb of an ending... what the hell was he thinking?). He proved for sure that a great Watchmen film could have been made but that he and Hayter were completely the wrong guys for the job. It's amazing how a film can simultaneously come so close to and yet be so far off the mark. Biggest disappointment ever." spot on... Snyder turned a rape scene into a hollywood blockbuster fight scene.

  • June 25, 2009, 12:56 a.m. CST

    You're agreeing with me cloudrider

    by D.Vader

    But missing the point. First off, the point IS to make money. There's nothing wrong with that unless by doing so it completely screws up the adaptation. <p> Ozy taking a beatdown does NOT screw up the adaptation. <p> Also, like I said, film is a different medium. Audiences need catharsis of some sort, especially after seeing Rorsach die. The beatdown doesn't change anything. Nite Owl is the closest character to the "Everyman" in the film and the one the audience can relate to most. He should be upset his friend just got killed. Without it, its just a dangling plot thread, just as in the book, where an uncaring Dan thinks Rorschach just died in the snow.

  • June 25, 2009, 1:07 a.m. CST

    the ending should fit story.

    by cloudrider`

    it has nothing to do with book medium vs film medium. any story should find its own conclusion. did people complain when no relief was provided at the end of fincher's se7en? that bleak ending couldnt be made more perfect. <p> when you want to adapt a seminal book like watchmen, it has to be more than just about making money. otherwise why bother, just make a movie about robots fighting each other. cant lose money there.

  • June 25, 2009, 1:11 a.m. CST

    Now that the Academy is picking 10 movies...

    by Banzai Rootskibango be nominated for Best Picture, I think this one should recieve a nod. <P> I loved it. It is still the best movie I've seen on the big screen this year. <P> I hadn't read the graphic novel...but I read it cover to cover after I saw the movie...and I still love the movie. <P> You people are a bunch of cunts.

  • June 25, 2009, 1:47 a.m. CST

    Jackie Earle Hailey deserves an Oscar nomination

    by thelordofhell

    He MADE that movie.

  • June 25, 2009, 1:49 a.m. CST

    Enjoy your moobie you fucking tossers

    by Autodidact

    I'll be over here with my copy of Watchmen, the only thing Watchmen that ever needs to exist. You guys have fun at Blockbuster video with your Watchmen clocks and your Watchmen video games and toys. Like Ozymandias' wet dream come to life it is.

  • June 25, 2009, 1:49 a.m. CST

    You can put lipstick on a's still a pig.

    by dasheight

    Nothing he can do can make up for the fact that he CHANGED THE ENDING OF THE COMIC, which was THE POINT of the ENTIRE COMIC. If there was a version with the ACTUAL ENDING OF "WATCHMEN", perhaps I'd be interested. The movie was a bomb theatrically not because people "didn't get it" or that it was "too edgy" - it bombed because it SUCKED. Sure, there were beautiful visual moments here and there - but none of that matters if you REMOVE THE ENDING, ZACK. I won't buy this unless I hear there's a giant space squid in it, and that the ironic ambivalence about the bomb's effect that follows the moral dilemma that was the POINT OF THE ENTIRE THING is included.

  • June 25, 2009, 1:58 a.m. CST

    .. and when I say "copy"

    by Autodidact

    I mean printed copy of the comic book.

  • June 25, 2009, 2:01 a.m. CST

    And on the other hand

    by Autodidact

    People who say "the squid would only work in a comic" about a movie that has a naked blue guy who is basically a god, are the most annoying fucking idiots in the clusterfuck rape of Alan Moore's legacy.

  • June 25, 2009, 2:10 a.m. CST

    God I hate Watchmen whiners.

    by Joker Gordon Levitt

  • June 25, 2009, 2:10 a.m. CST

    God I hate Watchmen sympathizers

    by Joker Gordon Levitt

  • June 25, 2009, 2:10 a.m. CST

    Best movie of the year.

    by Motoko Kusanagi

    Until December of course.

  • June 25, 2009, 2:14 a.m. CST

    I'm glad there's a longer cut of the movie.

    by Joker Gordon Levitt

    I saw all 3 cuts of Alexander, so I'm crazy like that. But the Watchmen Theatrical Cut made me so so so so so ANGRY I wanted to hulk out in the parking lot. <br><br>Here's hoping a longer directors cut + Massive Bong Rips will improve my viewing experience.

  • June 25, 2009, 2:17 a.m. CST

    very estute post, Subtitles

    by Joker Gordon Levitt

    the old "Stay Puft" defense. Clever...

  • June 25, 2009, 2:18 a.m. CST

    God, I am tired of hearing about this movie

    by lockesbrokenleg

    It sucked. Get over it.

  • June 25, 2009, 2:27 a.m. CST

    There were some great moments and scenes

    by zikade zarathos

    but overall the movie sunk under the combined weight of several not-so-good performances, one terrible portrayal of the main bad guy from the writing all the way through to the actor's choices and the overall feeling of watching of "best of" from the book rather than a cohesive retelling of the core story. The best I can say about it is that I didn't hate Snyder after watching it, but I definitely don't need to see any more, and it's NOT going to be in contention for "Best of 09" no matter how shitty this year has been (and it's been pretty shitty).

  • June 25, 2009, 2:44 a.m. CST

    Will this be the good version?

    by reflecto

    The film sucked, fanboys. Get used to it. Zack Snyder can't direct anything other than racked-up bullet time music videos - and even then he's not so great. The film was a rich high schooler's mockery of Watchmen; the denouement was laughably done, with Matthew Goode prancing around as the obviously evil Ozymandias, monologuing.

  • June 25, 2009, 2:45 a.m. CST

    I liked it more than I thought I would.

    by Fortunesfool

    Especially after 300. When Watchmen is just copying the book, it works a treat. It only fails when Snyder forces his 'style' into the material. The superhero 'slow-mo' and violence is childish and goes completely against the characters. It really shows his immaturity as a film-maker/copier of other peoples work.

  • June 25, 2009, 2:51 a.m. CST

    What the hell, I'm not done

    by reflecto

    The only good performances? Jackie Earle Haley and MAYBE Jeffrey Dean Morgan, Patrick Wilson and Billy Crudup. They had little to work with; almost everything of depth was stripped from the characters as Snyder does not how to do character, so he removed any subtleties or quirks, and streamlined the film down to PLOT and "BAD ASS" WIRE FU ACTION. Never as a reader of the comic did I believe Rorschach, Nite Owl or Spectre moved like that - that's purely an invention of the post-Matrix era, and it doesn't fit with Watchmen's brawling heroes. Rorschach in costume rarely came off as Rorschach to me; he mouthed lines, then would POUT and MOVE FORCEFULLY at all times. Rorschach in the comic was a lethargic, laconic, bitter, paranoid presence, given to sudden, dry bursts of violence. Here he's always amped up, moving like a Power Rangr. Didn't work. Then there's all that shit with Nixon. Come on. The Comedian's many facets had no real delineation on film, either, and that was a great character. Silk Spectre was just a hot chick, Ozy was a joke. It was a mess.

  • June 25, 2009, 2:53 a.m. CST

    Wolverine gross so far - 360 mil + worldwide

    by JackRabbitSlim

    Movie may well be shit - never saw it - but calling it a "dud" is rank ignorance.

  • June 25, 2009, 2:55 a.m. CST

    Trek made more than Watchen did in under a month

    by lockesbrokenleg

    Watchmen = dud.

  • June 25, 2009, 3:10 a.m. CST

    Yeah, we all know box office money is what defines quality, righ

    by theplant


  • June 25, 2009, 3:14 a.m. CST

    Parts of it were very good, other parts missed the mark

    by Michael_Bay_Rox

  • June 25, 2009, 3:15 a.m. CST

    please please please

    by richardphilip

    Zack. Directorealy Cut the fucking Hallelueyha music from the sex scene. Its deflated the entire seriousness of the experience for me.

  • June 25, 2009, 3:15 a.m. CST

    Amy Chasing

    by Mr. Zeddemore

    I'm pretty sure that, most times, the studio would refuse to let a film go over three hours at the cinema. Snyder had no choice but to cut a LOT out of this piece, and it showed. (The news vendor man/comic-book kid at the end means more if they appear onscreen earlier.)

  • June 25, 2009, 3:16 a.m. CST

    DC in the UK?

    by masteryoda007

    Is this being released in the UK too?

  • June 25, 2009, 3:22 a.m. CST

    im so there

    by bacci40

    i didnt see the original cut in theaters because i want to see zack's entire vision...if it sux, it sux<p> and fuck all of you reporting grosses....<p> titanic made tons of money, and that movie sux tits

  • June 25, 2009, 3:25 a.m. CST

    Yeah, we all know box office money is what defines quality, righ

    by lockesbrokenleg

    No, this site does apparently.

  • June 25, 2009, 3:25 a.m. CST

    whoever named their kid Jackie Earl should be shot.

    by BMacSmith

  • June 25, 2009, 3:27 a.m. CST


    by Mr. Zeddemore

    No, the geeks here determine quality. Of course. Always.

  • June 25, 2009, 4:11 a.m. CST

    Mr. Zeddemore

    by Amy Chasing

    I understand the reasons why theatrical releases aren't sometimes the director's cut, studios are in the business of making money and a 3+ hour movie by-and-large isn't as marketable, but the danger here is to consider that between theatrical and DVD versions the theatrical one is the lesser one. That it doesn't matter as much. <P> To me, director's cut or not, the way the audience first experiences a film, for which ever medium it was originally intended, is the film. That's the movie warts n all. Anything else coming after is just extras - interesting but not final product.

  • June 25, 2009, 4:13 a.m. CST

    Needs more GIANT PIG

    by GIANT_PIG

    No Squid! <p>GIANT PIG!!!

  • June 25, 2009, 4:14 a.m. CST

    dasheight - "he CHANGED THE ENDING OF THE COMIC"???

    by irishraidersfan

    Snyder did, did he? Ozymandias is still the villain? Check. Lots of innocent people die, making the superpowers realise the errors of their ways? Check. Rorschach dies? Check. Right, so there was no squid? In my opinion, and the opinion of lots of readers of the original graphic novel I've spoken to, the squid was the worst thing about the book. As the film stands, the IMPLICATION (to borrow your use of capitals) is the SAME. As an aside, I love how people diss the sex scene. Jeez, folks, you were meant to hate it! It was an 80s sex scene, for fucks sake!!! All elbows and shitty music, but guess very few people got the joke. As for the violence being overdone? Are you having a laugh?

  • June 25, 2009, 4:16 a.m. CST

    Won't fix the movies problems.

    by V'Shael

    The "heroes" will still be able to punch through solid concrete, and get hurled about without breaking so much as a rib. They'll still be killers. Adrian won't have any moments of self-doubt. And John won't imply to Adrian that his plan ultimately fails.

  • June 25, 2009, 4:34 a.m. CST

    Is Malin Akerman even more naked?

    by sighborg

    Malin wasn't naked enough in the theatrical release. She needs to be much more naked on dvd. How about a bonud dvd. Just Malin naked. I'd buy that.

  • June 25, 2009, 5:18 a.m. CST

    Fuck turdmen

    by Lost Jarv

    The least "daring" or creative movie I've seen in years. All snyder did was vomit the funnybook panel by panel onto the screen. It was lame, ridiculous, psuedo-cool and most unforgivably, dull. <P>An utter pile of shit. <P>What does make me laugh though, is the sole creative decision made by snyder was changing the ending and that's what's got you fuckers up in arms. <P>Fuck the squid- that's frigging ridiculous and not in a good way. <P>PS- I feel that the unfair racism of Hulk not being allowed to free his green unit should end now Doctor Manhatten was able to stride around airing his blue junk.

  • June 25, 2009, 5:20 a.m. CST

    Ps- worst sex scene since the atrocious one in Munich

    by Lost Jarv

    that shit was hackneyed, juvenile and embarrasing. He could quite easily have ditched the pathetic flame spurt (which worked in the comic) and improved the scene immeasurably. Mind you, it still would have been awful.

  • June 25, 2009, 5:25 a.m. CST

    Lost Jarv is correct

    by kwisatzhaderach

  • June 25, 2009, 5:26 a.m. CST


    by kwisatzhaderach

    Watchmen was flat as a pancake. Boring. Badly written, acted and directed. Snooze.

  • June 25, 2009, 5:28 a.m. CST


    by cloudrider`

    that's like saying since snyder's ozy still wears a cape and has egyptian decor in his home, that it's still the same ozy from the book. <p> the ending WAS changed. the point of displaying the monstrosity and countless bloody corpses in gory details in the book is to make us feel the horror in every sense of the word. instead, the reaction we got from snyder's version is 'wow. that's a cool cg explosion'. <p> the impact is much much lessened. done like the book, that ending splashed across the big screen could linger in your mind for a long long time. it'd be talked about just because it's so out of left field, so unpredicted, so shocking. <p> the explosion just bored me, left zero impact, and people just chalked it up as just another cg sequence.

  • June 25, 2009, 5:35 a.m. CST


    by cloudrider`

    ozy's self doubt is too subtle. ozy needs to get pummeled in the face by a screaming nite owl. oh wait...

  • June 25, 2009, 5:58 a.m. CST

    Paperback Hardback Fuckback Boot Scoot Boogiiiiiieeee

    by Stuntcock Mike

  • June 25, 2009, 6:08 a.m. CST

    There's an Uwe Boll movie where I think Tara Reid

    by Amy Chasing

    and Christian Slater have sex to the tune of 7 Seconds Away... <P> Don't really know why I mentioned that but it has to be said you just can't please everyone. I know a guy who will never forgive Peter Jackson for not including the scouring of the Shire in Return Of The King as he feels it changes the entire meaning of the story. I kinda see what he means, but to say the movie is then worthless is a little too harsh to be taken seriously don't ya think?

  • June 25, 2009, 6:17 a.m. CST

    Amy Chasing

    by David Cloverfield

    I'm not smart enough, how does it change the meaning? Not LOTR fan, but I'm curious.

  • June 25, 2009, 6:34 a.m. CST

    No Director's Cut for the UK, WTF??

    by shonin

    Perhaps we'll get it depending on how well it sells in the US? Fuckers.

  • June 25, 2009, 6:37 a.m. CST

    cant wait for july

    by palewook

    late july i get the DC cut of Watchmen and Moon finally opens in my city. <p> going to get the 2 films i most want to see in 2009 out of the way in the same week.

  • June 25, 2009, 6:56 a.m. CST

    Watchmen was stunning

    by RobFromBackEast

    Fucking loved it - best movie of the year for me. The director's cut will be bought as soon as available!

  • June 25, 2009, 7:10 a.m. CST


    by BangoSkank

    "I don't I can stand any more large erections in my face!!" <p> Apparently you've never had an erection before... I'm sure as soon as your balls drop your chances will increase significantly.

  • June 25, 2009, 7:17 a.m. CST


    by AyatollahSexyBack

    is better crafted than the whole of Michael Bay's filmography. Fact.

  • June 25, 2009, 7:24 a.m. CST


    by ZombieHeathLedger

    I think it's finally time to acknowledge the mistake it was to remove the squid in hindsight. I mean, with Snyder's new ending the results were that WATCHMEN was panned by half of the critics, not to the lengths of TRANSFORMERS 2, but WATCHMEN was not well received universally by all critics, let's admit it got at least "mixed reviews" and this was with the supposedly new, improved for cinematic purposes ending. But was it, "inna final analysis" the right choice? The word of mouth by non-geeks was that WATCHMEN was "ponderous" to say the least. We can all admit that it underperformed at the box office. There are even those in the Oscar TB speculating that at even with ten Oscar nominees, WATCHMEN shouldn't be included. <br> <br> So what could've been different? Can we now examine what could've resulted if they'd went with the tried and time tested, crazy awesome squid ending of the comic? Why? Let's look at the benefits. First of all, it couldn't have done any worse than what they went with instead. Plus, all the people who loved CLOVERFIELD would've paid to go see WATCHMEN repeatedly just for the new monster, the giant squid, and that would've meant higher grosses just right there. Fans of the comic who were outraged by the squid's omission would've been happier and gone to more viewings as well, again generating mo' money. As for we geeks, we would STILL be talking about the WATCHMEN squid we saw onscreen today in talkbacks, but may I point out, no one, NO ONE, ever talks about the generic big, blue, meh, "Heroes" explosion ending. No one. The same results Snyder's new ending achieved could've been achieved by the squid ending AND it would've received all of the above mentioned additional benefits which Snyder's ending did NOT deliver on, plus, it may have been so much more $uccessful with said added benefits we could've been sitting here discussing the awesome upcoming WATCHMEN sequel/prequel which isn't ever, ever, ever gonna happen now.

  • June 25, 2009, 7:26 a.m. CST


    by Volfan8404

    Watchmen sucked. That's what happens when you give live actors the EXACT same outfits as the ones from the book. They look retarded. Everyone bashes Bay all the time but when it comes down to it, the majority of movie goers will go to and ENJOY Transformers. Watchmen is for sniveling little snot nosed terds that can't get open their eyes enough to see that you have to take some creative liberties with the characters to make them translate onto the big screen. At the end of the day the boxoffice receipts will tell the tale. Transformers and Bay 1, Watchmen and Snyder (and snivelling little snot nosed fanboys) 0.

  • June 25, 2009, 7:31 a.m. CST


    by AyatollahSexyBack

    even if it is retarded.

  • June 25, 2009, 7:31 a.m. CST

    WATCHMEN. Bad movie. Hrm

    by Prof_Ender

    Very boring. Actors flat. Rorshach was good. Sex scene was terrible. Hrm.

  • June 25, 2009, 7:39 a.m. CST

    and THAT is why...

    by biggles2_22

    ...I didn't see it at the theater. Just wait until the DC comes out and you'll get the TRUE vision of the director.

  • June 25, 2009, 7:40 a.m. CST


    by Buzz Maverik

    Take this option away from these guys! Here it is, bunkie. You ain't Stanley Kubrick. You get to make one movie, what goes in theaters, I don't care if the STU-DEE-OH interfere with yer genius or not, there it is, that's it, make a good one anyway.<p>To be fair to Snyder, even as a life long comic fan who bought WATCHMEN issue by issue in the mid 80s (when being a comic fan was even geekier than it is now), the property was probably never all the cinematic. Deconstruction just doesn't work unless what's being deconstruction already dominates the medium. There's lots of superhero movies, but not enough to decontstruct them in movies. Satire, yes (BLAZING SADDLES was a great satire but still a traditional western at heart)but not deconstruction.

  • June 25, 2009, 7:42 a.m. CST

    Shithouse flick based on an overrated funnybook

    by Droid

    By "Directors Cut" do you mean this is an Alan Moore and Dave Gibbons version? Because Snyder "directed" fuck all. He just recreated the images from the funnybook in film form. <p>It's as big a waste of everyones time as the Van Sant/Psycho debacle.

  • June 25, 2009, 7:43 a.m. CST


    by Volfan8404

    Watchmen was a tremendous flop. It had an ok opening weekend and then it tanked. Transformers will make more in two weeks then Watchmen did in it's entire run. Why? BECAUSE IT FUN! I haven't talked to one single living, breathing person that hasn't LOVED the new Transformers. I can't wait to see it. The ONLY redeeming quality about Watchmen was Rorshach. That's it, nothing else.

  • June 25, 2009, 7:51 a.m. CST


    by AyatollahSexyBack

    I'm sorry you didn't like The Watchmen, but not nearly as sorry that you're going to love Bayformers 2.

  • June 25, 2009, 7:56 a.m. CST

    Watchmen was fucking awesome, fatties can eat dick.

    by dr sauch

    We NEED a version with the black freighter cut throughout.

  • June 25, 2009, 8:01 a.m. CST

    Finally Figured Something Out

    by cymbalta4thedevil

    The reason you guys are so obsessed with Dr. Manhattan's penis?<br /><br />It's because you're all so fat you haven't seen your own since the Clinton Administration.

  • June 25, 2009, 8:09 a.m. CST


    by Volfan8404

    That was awesome. I will, like I said earlier, give it up for Rorshach. He was AWESOME! Other than that, it sucked ass.

  • June 25, 2009, 8:11 a.m. CST


    by Touche_Douche

    Hey Guys, does this obsession with talking about how "gay" movies are and penises help you deal with your latent homosexual fantasies? If it does, i'm happy that you have an outlet besides beating down a fag. I hear hate crimes carry a harsh sentence these days.

  • June 25, 2009, 8:13 a.m. CST

    Irony of the squid...

    by Kevin Holsinger united humanity and ended the Cold War, but divided Watchmen fans on whether it needed to be included in the movie (I like both endings, btw).

  • June 25, 2009, 8:15 a.m. CST

    Director Walk-On = retarded gimmick

    by Rupee88

    reminds me of cnn "hologram". What's the fucking point?

  • June 25, 2009, 8:15 a.m. CST


    by Stereotypical Evil Archer

    Just wondering.

  • June 25, 2009, 8:17 a.m. CST

    Harry Potter - dark?

    by The Penultimate Gunslinger

    I'm fed up with people saying these movies have got "dark". I'm a fan, but they're about as dark as the Milky Bar Kid's pubes. I remember when the second film came out when I was still at school and the press were saying how this one would be darker and more terrifying for kids. And they've said the same fucking thing every time a new one comes out. On an unrelated note, Watchmen was ok. It was much better on a second viewing, but I'm not sure how the Director's Cut will be any better - since its biggest weakness was the fact it was much too long.

  • June 25, 2009, 8:26 a.m. CST

    It's like when there was an extended cut of King Kong...

    by The Penultimate Gunslinger

    ... I just don't get the desire to make these over-long movies even longer. As Hitchcock said: "The length of a film should be directly related to the endurance of the human bladder". Sometimes less is more. Every movie has to drag on and on these days, even mindless bullshit like Transformers which can't even justify it with the need to show a complicated plot.

  • June 25, 2009, 8:31 a.m. CST

    Watchmen theatrical = amazing.

    by knowthyself

    Directors cut = unbelievable. Black Freighter Cut this fall = Masterpiece.

  • June 25, 2009, 8:34 a.m. CST

    ooh an extra hour of lifeless eye candy!

    by FleshMachine


  • June 25, 2009, 8:36 a.m. CST


    by kolchak

    was not memorable by any stretch of the imagination.

  • June 25, 2009, 8:36 a.m. CST

    Um, Knightsong? Isn't Minneapolis in the Midwest?

    by John Maddening

    I'm surprised it's Minneapolis instead of Chicago and Dallas instead of Austin. I'll be there that weekend!

  • June 25, 2009, 8:38 a.m. CST

    I liked Watchmen.

    by Nice Marmot

    Would have liked the squid, but didn't get it. I thought the same message was pretty much there. HOWEVER, w/out the squid, there is no point whatsoever to having a version w/ the animated Black Freighter woven in.

  • June 25, 2009, 8:39 a.m. CST

    Oh look it's the haters...

    by knowthyself

    You guys are still funny even months later. If the string of dissapointments this summer season don't make you run back to Watchmen begging for forgiveness for being too critical than you are hopeless. Snyder has made the only memorable film this year so far and it wasn't a remake or a sequel. It was daring, original, and uncompromising.

  • June 25, 2009, 8:41 a.m. CST

    Black Freighter is about Veidt.

    by knowthyself

    Not some allusion to the squid. It makes perfect sense as long as Ozymandias is in the story. Snyder did a great job on that as well btw. As chilling to watch as it was to read.

  • June 25, 2009, 8:44 a.m. CST

    Frankly I'm relieved...

    by Dr Strangeface

    ...that the ridiculous comedy 'squid' from the book doesn't make an appearance. How the fuck could anyone take that thing seriously? I missed out on the theatrical release, which I sorely regret, but as a fan of the book (apart from the 'not-at-all-convincing-alien-squid-thing') I'm gagging for the Blu Ray version. Bring it on Zack! Loved 300 also. Yeah, you heard me right.

  • June 25, 2009, 9:01 a.m. CST

    AGREED Knobules—

    by blakindigo

    —that comment is funny as FUCK!!<br><br>Depressing that it's entirely accurate…

  • June 25, 2009, 9:04 a.m. CST

    WATCHMEN is still the best film of 2009 so far

    by SpyGuy

    Of course, when your competition is X-MEN ORIGINS: WOLVERINE, STAR TREK, TERMINATOR: SALVATION and TRANSFORMERS: REVENGE OF THE FALLEN, that's not very hard. Still, WATCHMEN was a great film and anyone still whining about the Squid, please go see TRANSFORMERS: ROTF. That's obviously your level of movie.

  • June 25, 2009, 9:09 a.m. CST


    by Six Demon Bag

    i agree...people who dont like Watchmen are the reason why Tranformers 2 exist. <P>trick question--which is the better film--STAR TREK or WATCHMEN...i was blown away by both...probaly have to say Watchmen though..

  • June 25, 2009, 9:10 a.m. CST

    Why bother?

    by The StarWolf

    Hiring a director, that is. No point at all, if you're then going to twist his arm to where he has to put out what he wanted to see on screen on DVD months later. Or, why should we pay to see movies in the cinema if the studio will try to fool people into then paying again later for the 'real' version on disc?

  • June 25, 2009, 9:13 a.m. CST

    The Black Freighter Version

    by Jor-El23

    I assume this director's cut coming out in a few weeks includes scenes at the newsstand, so the black freighter version expands on those scenes by including chunks of the animated movie?

  • June 25, 2009, 9:13 a.m. CST

    I finally got a Rorschach action figure...

    by StatelyWayneManor

    ...that was the only thing that made that borefest tolerable. Its like a superhero movie on Prozac.

  • June 25, 2009, 9:19 a.m. CST

    people complaining about the DC

    by Six Demon Bag

    we ALL knew he was doing this...snyder has been explicit as to say what wasnt in the film (including the damned squid) and that the black frieghter and other scenes WOULD BE ADDED on video..with the theatrical cut, this was the longest film that the studio would support to make a profit i guess. <P>BTW this isnt like seeing "the extremem unrated edition" with 2 seconds of shock footage..this is more along the lines of lord of the rings where it actually will expand on the story and universe. stop whining.

  • June 25, 2009, 9:29 a.m. CST

    "sneak a peek" was not coined on Seinfeld.

    by Chadley BeBay

    that is all.

  • June 25, 2009, 9:30 a.m. CST

    Jor-El23—I might be wrong but, I think the ultimate

    by blakindigo

    edition will have the ENTIRE 'Black Freighter' story intercut with the directors cut. So, that would make the film about as long as 'The Fellowship of the Ring' extended edition.

  • June 25, 2009, 9:36 a.m. CST

    Any chance of a re-edited ending?

    by photoboy

    I know the squid is not possible but something that shifts the tone away from Ozy being portrayed as a villain would be nice.

  • June 25, 2009, 9:42 a.m. CST

    WATCHMEN is still the best film of 2009 so far (and by far)

    by lavatory love machine

    saw it 3 times on theaters and I've been waiting the DC with the same anticipation that I did for the return of the king EE, but Zack: I want to see the real Roschard origin story (the rape he saw from his window and nobody helped) and not the story of how he went nuts

  • June 25, 2009, 9:49 a.m. CST

    Watchmen is STILL the best film I've seen in 2009

    by Powers Boothe

    I actually liked it more after a second viewing.

  • June 25, 2009, 9:50 a.m. CST

    lavatory love machine

    by Powers Boothe

    Too funny that we put up such similar posts, minutes after one another!

  • June 25, 2009, 9:54 a.m. CST

    I saw it 3 times and I liked it more with each viewing

    by lavatory love machine

  • June 25, 2009, 10 a.m. CST

    "...still the best film of 2009..."

    by cutest_of_borg That would be Trek, kind sir. Your moniker is the greatest, btw.

  • June 25, 2009, 10:02 a.m. CST

    I agree, I think it works much better a second time

    by blakindigo

    and I enjoyed it the first time. I had some issues, some moments of head scratching, but I think if you've lived with the comic for a long time, it takes a minute to stop comparing it to the graphic novel/trade paperback and appreciate it on it's own terms.<br><br>I think the extended edition will play like a mini–series anyway; I don't know many people that watched "Lord of the Rings: Fellowship of the Ring" director's cut in one sitting (I did, but I'm a huge fan of that adaptation).

  • June 25, 2009, 10:04 a.m. CST


    by AyatollahSexyBack

    Hard to way which I liked better, because I liked them both differently. <P> New Trek was just a thrill ride with a very likable ensemble. And it earned my respect with some very poignant moments, which elevates it for me. <P> The Watchmen, though, blew me away completely. I'd never read the graphic novel. I was enthralled by it. It was beautiful to behold, and I was riveted with how the story was unfolding. I don't understand why Zack Snyder catches so much shit. That just baffles me. He is truly a master of the craft in every detail, from dialogue, acting, and of course the gorgeous visuals. <P> I would say I 'enjoyed' New Trek more, but I regard Watchmen with a far higher degree of respect.

  • June 25, 2009, 10:06 a.m. CST

    Star Trek is great except...

    by knowthyself

    It has nothing to say. I'd give Watchmen the edge for having more substance.

  • June 25, 2009, 10:08 a.m. CST

    I hope they spend more time on destroying the cities

    by mitortilla

    to me that was delivered weakly, it didn't seem harsh. Those scenes needed Roland Emmerich style destruction sequences to make it seem important. People dying screaming on the streets, children left orphans the white house being destroyed, just put a white house in new york. It just seemed to pass to quickly and unimportantly.

  • June 25, 2009, 10:08 a.m. CST

    I hope they spend more time on destroying the cities

    by mitortilla

    to me that was delivered weakly, it didn't seem harsh. Those scenes needed Roland Emmerich style destruction sequences to make it seem important. People dying screaming on the streets, children left orphans the white house being destroyed, just put a white house in new york. It just seemed to pass too quickly and unimportantly.

  • June 25, 2009, 10:09 a.m. CST

    Sorry for posting double

    by mitortilla

    why doesn't this website have a delete or edit comments button, are we in the 90s?

  • June 25, 2009, 10:10 a.m. CST

    This was one of the worst films I

    by MrJJonz

    have ever seen in the cinema. I just can't decide whether it is better as bad or worse than the latest Terminator train wreck.

  • June 25, 2009, 10:10 a.m. CST

    Uh, Photoboy...

    by thewoodpecker

    Ozy as the villian is whole point of the comic! From what fucking planet are you? Did you even read the book? Anyway, I would like a re-editied ending, but the changes they made were so drastic I doubt a more faithful ending is even possible.

  • June 25, 2009, 10:11 a.m. CST


    by Phimseto

    <P> I'll wait for the complete cut, thanks. I'm disappointed to not be getting Watchmen in a couple of weeks, but it's the black freighter edit that I have been waiting for. <P> As for Star Trek, I enjoyed the film when I saw it, but it has been diminishing as I've thought about it. <P> Sir, we've come back in time. We can rescue Romulus from its terrible fate! <P> NOOOOOO!!!! We'll wait here for Spock! <P> But...we don't even know if he's here. Why don't we wait a little while and if he doesn't show up, we'll go save Romulus? <P> NOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!! We'll wait for as long as we need to! <P> Well...I don't know...can we go hang out somewhere? You know? Get some drinks...some R&R? Maybe see Romulus, our home, once again? <P> NOOOOOOOOO!!!!! We will wait in the middle of nowhere FOR AS LONG AS IT TAKES! <P> Umm...ok.

  • June 25, 2009, 10:14 a.m. CST


    by The Dark Shite

    Digital8...<p> "Sneak a peek" was coined on seinfeld??????? Are you sure?<p> Maybe it was the first time you'd heard it (if so, maybe you should get out a bit more), but it's one of the oldest English terms still in use today. <p> As for Watchmen, have they already released a DVD of the theatrical cut? I didn't care for it that much, so I wasn't paying attention. <p> If they haven't, will it be included with the Director's cut? I mean, what if someone out there liked the theatrical version?

  • June 25, 2009, 10:16 a.m. CST

    ASB--was that to me?

    by Six Demon Bag

    cause you cant post to yourself like youre talking in the 3rd person..cerebus boy.<P>watch part 2 of reunion tonight..

  • June 25, 2009, 10:17 a.m. CST

    David Cloverfield

    by Amy Chasing

    I think it's because by not having the scouring of the Shire, the Shire ends up not being affected by the War of the Ring at all. The hobbits come home and everything is exactly as they left it, which is what they were fighting for. If the scouring had happened then they would have come home to a ruined Shire, showing that in war everything is changed and that what they're fighting for is lost anyway. It also matches the book's plot point that by destroying the One Ring the magic the Elves wielded with the Three Rings was diminished to the point that their world in Middle-Earth was lost, hence why their age was at an end and they were moving to the West. <P> Perhaps my friend's point was that Tolkien meant to say that in war everything is affected even if it's not directly involved, while in the movie this message was lost. It's a good point I think, but I still the movies are incredible cinematic achievements, so I can't dismiss them like he can. Watchmen also has some good cinema in it. I wonder why people feel the need to say it's completely crap when there is enough actual complete crap out there.

  • June 25, 2009, 10:24 a.m. CST

    Watchmen: it's parts were better than its whole

    by Kief_Ledger

    some scenes worked really well (opening credits, Dr. Manhattan flashbacks) others didn't (sex scene, ending) Maybe it's just because I'm a huge fan of the book, but any time Snyder deviated from the novel the movie fell flat for me. Anyone else feel that way?

  • June 25, 2009, 10:32 a.m. CST

    SDB - HAHA

    by AyatollahSexyBack

    I think the simultaneous appearances of Fred and Orcus in the Bayformers TB are affecting me.

  • June 25, 2009, 10:39 a.m. CST

    squid ending is gay


    there I said it. Snyders ending makes more sense, i mean why would russia not attack america because some squid attacked new york, they dont attack because of manhattan. Synders ending takes manhattan away from america and makes him a adversary the whole world now needs to come together and face. Just because you read the comic a bizillion times doesnt mean its the BEST watchmen it can be. Some stories can be improved. For me watchmen is the best film I have ever seen.

  • June 25, 2009, 10:43 a.m. CST

    Watchmen = Superhero Deconstruction

    by CaptainAxis

    Snyder uses all the conventions of superhero films (hyperreal fight sequences, fetishistic costumes, action setpieces, etc.) and twists them around, just as Moore did with the conventions of superhero comics when he wrote Watchmen. I just think you haters wanted a "cool" movie about "cool" superheroes, but Snyder showed how ridiculous superheroes would be if they were real, just like Moore did. Sorry if it went over your heads.

  • June 25, 2009, 10:47 a.m. CST


    by JAMF

    i cant believe you resurrected the age old 'you just dont get it' excuse. it was a piece of shit. i like the comics and the animated version waaay more than snyder's turd.

  • June 25, 2009, 10:53 a.m. CST

    The Squid

    by CaptainAxis

    I can't believe you fuckers are still all autistic over the squid ending. IT WAS FUCKING RETARDED. I tried explaining it to some friends who hadn't read the book after we saw the movie and the glazed-over "WTF?" look in their eyes was priceless. It boggles my mind that you basement-dwelling troglodytes STILL think it should have been in the film. NO, it was FUCKING STUPID and actually works against the argument that Moore's Watchmen was more realistic. Be honest about it.

  • June 25, 2009, 11:01 a.m. CST

    CaptainAxis, you clan claim it was deconstruction

    by reflecto

    But what played onscreen was Snyder just doing shit because he thought it looked cool, regardless of whether it fit the material. The movie is an embarrassment. I realize you're not all ready to admit that today, or perhaps even in six months. But perhaps in nine, you'll begin to start coming to terms with this. And I'll be here.

  • June 25, 2009, 11:05 a.m. CST


    by CaptainAxis

    I hate the "you don't get it" argument too, but in this case it's true. Snyder himself explained it in an interview and it totally makes sense. Watchmen is a meta-commentary on superhero movies and how silly they can be. Even the beloved Dark Knight was unrealistic, because none of the violence has any consequences. People are shot, stabbed, and dropped off balconies without a drop of blood spilled. Bruce Wayne's "romance" with Rachel has all the passion of kissing your grandmother on the cheek. Watchmen takes us where other superhero films are afraid to go for fear of alienating the PG-13 audience.<br> <br> I don't care if you didn't like it, that's your opinion, but it was not a piece of shit. You just wanted a standard superhero movie using the Watchmen story.

  • June 25, 2009, 11:12 a.m. CST


    by CaptainAxis

    I'm so glad you have the ability to know what Snyder was really thinking. I actually have some evidence to back up my claims, but somehow you just KNOW that Snyder made all his decisions based solely on aesthetics. One example that I think is brilliant is how he used the "suiting up" scene we usually get in superhero flicks, where we get closeups of the hero strapping on his suit. Instead, Snyder used it when the heroes were taking off their costumes, i.e. Silk Spectre I before the rape scene, and Dan and Laurie in the Owlship.

  • June 25, 2009, 11:12 a.m. CST

    Watchmens only problem was having to follow TDK.

    by knowthyself

    Anything would have been dissapointing if it had to follow TDK.

  • June 25, 2009, 11:14 a.m. CST

    captainaxis- Right on brutha'.

    by knowthyself

    I agree 100%. You can also alot of research and thought went into the music choices in the film. Most of them were lifted directly from out of the comic. Playing "all along the watchtower" at the beginning of the "two riders were approaching" chapter was inspired.

  • June 25, 2009, 11:20 a.m. CST

    Another brilliant Watchmen moment...

    by knowthyself

    There are almost too many to mention. Instead of having Manhattan tell Veidt that some things never change he makes it more subtle as Laurie and Jon condemn him to being alone as they leave in the owl ship. The look they give him is priceless and he is indeed alone. Snyder takes a blunt moments and makes it more subtle. Thats definetly one thing Moores comment wasn't and that was subtle. Why did they expect Snyder to be if Moore wasn't?

  • June 25, 2009, 11:24 a.m. CST

    Maybe it was too close to the book?

    by HollywoodPlant

    I felt it didn't work because old Zacky was trying to keep it too close to the book, and I'm sorry, but when something is adapted to the big screen, it has to flow on its new medium. Plus, reading it and taking it all in for its time was great, but people who didn't know the book figured out the bad guy in 2 seconds. Have to say, the opening credits did kick ass though. But the very end where catchup drops on the guys t-shit was FUCKING dumb. It could not of dropped in that angle.

  • June 25, 2009, 11:25 a.m. CST

    The book's ending

    by CaptainAxis

    How about the absolutely dumbshit idea that Dan and Laurie would stick around Karnak AND HAVE SEX afterward? It's almost funny how some talkbackers will overlook all of the flaws and unrealistic crap in the book, but nitpick the film to death.

  • June 25, 2009, 11:29 a.m. CST

    Who watches the Watchmen?

    by Snookeroo

    Apparently, not as many people as WB thought.

  • June 25, 2009, 11:31 a.m. CST


    by TedKordLives

    Exactly. You're funny. <P> Everyone else-You don't get to dictate how I feel about a movie. It seems like most of you missed the point, anyway. So eff off. July 21st cannot get here soon enough.

  • June 25, 2009, 11:33 a.m. CST


    by HollywoodPlant

    I agree with you 100% That, and having the movie at a shorter length might of made it more of perfect 10. People who do not know the comic could of been blown away by it. Might of come out of no where. Might of been the reason people would tell their friends to go see it instead of telling them they walked out half way through. This movie had such a huge drop off. Barley passed the 100 mil mark.

  • June 25, 2009, 11:35 a.m. CST


    by CaptainAxis

    The ketchup drop on the guy's t-shirt was in the book - see the last two panels. You can blame that one on Moore and Gibbons.<br> <br> Superficially, Watchmen is a noirish murder mystery, but it doesn't matter if we know Ozy is the bad guy. Ozy is a twist on the usual supervillain who wants to take over the world for his own selfish purposes; the surprise is that he isn't really a villain, his purpose is to actually save the world, and unlike most villains, he doesn't want any of the credit.

  • June 25, 2009, 11:36 a.m. CST


    by Koyaanisqatsi

    mitortilla hit it on the head. The impact the ending of the book has is not directly related IN ANY WAY to the squid itself. The impact is from the six fucking pages of corpses and carnage before we even get to any characters or dialogue. The movie ending worked but would have been sublime had they just showed spectre and manhattan walking around a bit and looking at dead bodies and gore. Hopefully they'll put some of that in the DC.

  • June 25, 2009, 11:37 a.m. CST


    by Koyaanisqatsi

    The squid is not important, the destruction is important. Anybody who can't see that is fooling themselves by thinking they understand what's going on.

  • June 25, 2009, 11:43 a.m. CST


    by CaptainAxis

    I loved TDK, but it was still a superhero movie filled with massive plotholes and unrealistic decisions. Yeah, like nobody on either boat would have pushed the button. How did Joker survive the truck being flipped over? Batman and Rachel falling 50 stories, crashing on top of a car, AND THEN MAKING GOOGLY EYES AT EACH OTHER?! "Let's not do that again" - what the fuck is that bullshit? Plenty of gun and knife play, but nobody ever bleeds. Don't even get me started on the ultra-silly "Gordon is dead, oh no he isn't" plot device that made no sense. Honestly, watch TDK as critically as you obviously watched Watchmen.

  • June 25, 2009, 11:44 a.m. CST

    no point in arguing...

    by Six Demon Bag

    we live in a world where WATCHMEN makes barely 100 million in its entire run. Transformers 2 will make that in 3 days...masses are fools. i think ROTF will have a bigger dropoff by the way..and which we be remember 2 years from now? 5 years from now? 10?

  • June 25, 2009, 11:48 a.m. CST

    Snyder should make his own zombie trilogy.

    by mitortilla

    Call it baby zombies or something.

  • June 25, 2009, 11:48 a.m. CST

    Sounds great, but I won't pay for it right now

    by Immortal_Fish

    There's bound to be a half dozen cuts of this movie available for purchase. So tired of being bled dry. This particular cut sounds like a cool approach, but I'll bide my time until enough of them have been released so I can have my choice.

  • June 25, 2009, 11:49 a.m. CST

    Difference between TDK and Watchmen

    by CaptainAxis

    TDK is more physically realistic, i.e. everything looks real and takes place in a real city, but psychologically they still act like comic book characters. Watchmen is more visually over-the-top (as was the book, unless you believe in flying cars and big blue demigods) but psychologically, the characters are real and react like real people.

  • June 25, 2009, 11:51 a.m. CST

    Zack, you moron, get your fucking book terminology right

    by Jack D. Ripper

    The hardcover and the paperback versions of a book have NO DIFFERENCE in quality or length, it is simply a matter of PACKAGING. A hardcover book does NOT have more material, supplemental or otherwise, than its paperback counterpart. What you MEANT was the difference between an 'abridged' and 'unabridged' version of a book, because an abridged version contains less material. You are so fucking stupid, Zack. Thank Christ you've expended all your cred on this movie and people can now stop pretending to take you seriously.

  • June 25, 2009, 11:55 a.m. CST

    Reeeeeally hope this comes out in the UK.

    by Mr Nicholas

  • June 25, 2009, 11:59 a.m. CST

    Jack D Ripper--calm the fuck down

    by Six Demon Bag

    listen to some ENO and chill dude.<P><P>i see what you are trying to say but really, does it need to be said? Snyder "meant" that first a book comes out in hardback and people are happy about it who want to read it right away...then the paperback comes out and that is usually people who dont want to pay a lot for a book and might want to read it. he sais this was the opposite of that. meaning--the theatrical version is something people wanted to see right away. the "hardcover" version is for the fans who want it all. <P>somethimes you have to read between the lines.

  • June 25, 2009, noon CST

    regardless of how many cuts this film has...

    by Six Demon Bag

    that is still less than how many cuts WOLVERINE had. <P>and they will all be good.

  • June 25, 2009, 12:07 p.m. CST


    by HollywoodPlant

    Tshirt bit - They could of just filmed it different. And your right about Ozy. I guess what I meant to say is Zack didn't get it across to us. Or the general public who knows nothing of Watchmen. Also, the big problem for me was I never felt that there people outside the Watchmen themselves. I never felt a sense of danger for anyone. Now all movies have flaws. We only forgive the ones to the movies we want to love. and Six Demon Bag, I guess I am a fool. I will be seeing TF2 and I hope I like more than I did the 1st:) Good day sir!

  • June 25, 2009, 12:11 p.m. CST

    "no one you will ever meet hates Nolan's Batman more than I do"

    by CaptainAxis

    Yet earlier you said: "If you had said TDK is to superhero movies as Moore's WATCHMEN was to comic books, you'd've said something that was true." So you hated Moore's Watchmen? The rest of your post doesn't make much more sense either. TDK, on the surface, wasn't about a guy in a costume saving the day from some vague threat? Really? And yes, realistic superheroes ARE a joke. That's kind of the point.<br> <br> Before we go any further, do you even know what the term "deconstruction" means? I would enjoy an actual discussion on this topic.

  • June 25, 2009, 12:21 p.m. CST

    You can't polish a turd...

    by Aftermath1349

    Sorry but the Watchmen film was fucking terrible. Zack couldn't have picked a worst cast. The worst was the guy who played Dan. What the fuck was with his goofy ass expressions? I've read Watchmen probably 10 times in the last 6-7 years and not once did he ever come across as the pathetic goofball. Just a pathetic man who used to be a great hero.

  • June 25, 2009, 12:21 p.m. CST

    rest in peace farrah

    by Stalkeye

    the sex symbol of the seventies. you shall be remembered angel.

  • June 25, 2009, 12:22 p.m. CST


    by CaptainAxis

    Zack didn't get what across to us? I don't know man, "the general public who knows nothing of Watchmen" I saw it with understood it perfectly. Maybe you just need smarter friends? ;)

  • June 25, 2009, 12:23 p.m. CST

    If you didn't like the film, move on.

    by TheLastCleric

    Of course, any of you incredibly myopic children can't move on because your bloated egos won't allow you to. Instead, you actually feel the need to insist that our positive opinions of the film are WRONG, which is of course juvenile and ridiculous. Snyder's Watchmen adaptation was just that: an adaptation. He included most of the novel but made some tweaks along the way, as all directors do. Peter Jackson made far more liberal changes to the LOTR franchise and other directors have abandoned their respective source materials all together. Snyder made what I and many others consider an incredibly accurate cinematic version of a dense, complicated narrative that is a fine companion piece to the novel. There is no way he could have pleased everyone (especially when so many Alan Moore sycophants claim the novel is un-filmable, which is basically a bizarre little paradox unto itself since they still insist on seeing and critiquing the film) but what was delivered was hardly some puerile bastardization of the original work. I keep reading all of these self-indulgent posts claiming that Snyder “missed the point of the novel” when in reality the prominent thematic of Watchmen, which is the abuse of power and the deception of the population by its leaders, has been clearly retained. It’s almost as if some of you think the Watchmen is so complex and difficult to grasp that only brilliant humans can fully appreciate its scope and subtext, which isn’t true. The themes of Watchmen weren’t even new in 1986 but rather what was fresh and even a bit revolutionary was the vessel that Moore used to get his point across. Personally, I think Snyder’s film was courageous, relevant, and visually amazing and I resent the notion that those of us who enjoyed the film are a bunch of illiterate assholes who don’t appreciate the novel. I love the novel and frankly, it’s my appreciation of the novel that made me enjoy Snyder’s film so much because I was stunned at how much he managed to get into a theatrical print. If you didn’t like the film I can respect that but don’t come in here and act like your passion or understanding of the novel is greater than ours because that’s nonsense.

  • June 25, 2009, 12:39 p.m. CST


    by HollywoodPlant

    I don't feel Snyder nailed what you said. That "Watchmen is a noirish murder mystery, but it doesn't matter if we know Ozy is the bad guy. Ozy is a twist on the usual supervillain who wants to take over the world for his own selfish purposes; the surprise is that he isn't really a villain, his purpose is to actually save the world, and unlike most villains, he doesn't want any of the credit." Snyder should of had you write what Watchmen meant to us. I know you understood it. I feel a lot of people did. It just wasn't amazing to some. Not enough anyway to get people coming back or to spread good buzz. But who the fuck cares that the masses didn't dig it. You liked it and thats what matters. You got something out of it, and I'm not tying to take anything away from that. and no, I will never get smarter friends. I'm the smartest (and thats not saying much) and I like it that way.

  • June 25, 2009, 12:52 p.m. CST


    by CaptainAxis

    "Now, you tell me where Zack Snyder challenged any of the traditional superhero movie tropes. Tropes, in this case, being the visual characteristics of any other superhero movie."<br> <br> There's the problem, I'm not just talking about visuals. He challenged the traditional superhero movie tropes relating to violence and sex; where all superhero films shy away, Watchmen does not. The Joker can fire his machine gun at dozens of cars and stabs a pencil through a dude's face, but there's no blood, or Superman can toss normal humans around without accidentally snapping bones.<br> <br> The sex in Iron Man is permissible because it's played for laughs and by the end of the movie, Tony Stark has seen the error of his ways. Bruce Banner can't even have sex in The Incredible Hulk without turning into a raging monster, and look at how chaste everybody is in the Spiderman and X-Men movies. No matter how "realistic" superhero films and comics try to make their worlds, it rings hollow when these perfect physical specimens running around in leather, latex, spandex, and molded rubber never have sex or address it in any meaningful way. Batman Returns is really the only superhero film that touched on the sexual fetishism of the costumes with the erotically-charged scenes between Batman and Catwoman, but it was within the confines of a PG-13 movie and only scratched the surface.<br> <br> Watchmen's sex scenes are meant to make you talk about these issues and wonder why you're so squeamish about explicit sex in a superhero film. I like that the awkward non-costumed Dan/Laurie scene on the couch was shot more realistically, while the costumed sex scene in the Owlship was total porno - the glossy sheen, the camera shots, Dan's thrusting, Laurie's oh-face. It's fantasy come to life, just like the hyperreal fight scenes debated in other threads. How could Watchmen have commented on the sex and violence in other superhero movies if it showed barely more than those other movies?

  • June 25, 2009, 12:54 p.m. CST

    Agree with you, TheLastCleric

    by 3D-Man

    Every word.

  • June 25, 2009, 12:59 p.m. CST


    by CaptainAxis

    Thanks for the civility. We can agree to disagree. Unfortunately, others need to make themselves feel better by belittling anyone who did like the movie. I have no beef with you, sir.

  • June 25, 2009, 1:07 p.m. CST

    Beaks - "Raging Bull"

    by DennisMM

    "He's also turned the sequence into a half-clever, half-heartbreaking homage to RAGING BULL, with Hollis flashing back to his crime-fighting heyday as the "Intermezzo" from CAVALLERIA RUSTICANA briefly dominates the soundtrack." <P> You have read the comic, right? Moore has flashes to Mason's past within the murder scene. But I'm sure the film version is just as gratuitously gory and graphic as the rest of the movie.

  • June 25, 2009, 1:09 p.m. CST

    half clever half heart breaking homage

    by Samuel Fulmer

    Wasn't that the problem with this film. It had so many homages to other films in it, that it was impossible to take it seriously.

  • June 25, 2009, 1:13 p.m. CST

    "Watchmen" was a good movie

    by DennisMM

    but not particularly good. It was lukewarn, so-so. Some competent performances, solid visuals but the direction was flat whenever people weren't kicking the crap out of one another. 6/10 for me, 7/10 as a comic book movie. Neither horrible nor great, which is a shame. A truly awful attempt at a masterpiece would have been better than the flatness Snyder brought to the project.

  • June 25, 2009, 1:14 p.m. CST


    by HollywoodPlant

    When I have time this weekend, I'm going to check it out again. Haven't seen it since the theatre. Personally, I don't feel it was the worst film. Visually amazing. Again, the opening was awesome. It had some grit. Its the comic to life (though, I wish some things were treated better) Possibly one of the better marketed films too. I want to see Snyder do something just off a fresh script though. 300 and Watchmen are pretty specific in their source, imagery wise. Love to see him do something new.

  • June 25, 2009, 1:14 p.m. CST


    by DennisMM

    Well said in your last post with the beer metaphor.

  • June 25, 2009, 1:21 p.m. CST

    Sex scenes

    by DennisMM

    "Watchmen"'s sex scenes would be ludicrous in any picture. They walk the edge of soft-core, simulated porn seen in Skinemax Friday late night "erotic thrillers." They do not seem real, nor did they engage my interest on any level other than my sense of the absurd. Moore brought a complete sense of realism - clumsy fumbling, rising desire cooled by anxiety, final triumph over nerves - to the sex. Snyder's thrusting and grinding was, like his violence, gratuitous and broke the tone of the film.

  • June 25, 2009, 1:21 p.m. CST

    Oh my... movie was too long as it is!

    by Potch

    Maybe it just SEEMED long because I was so bored. I went into this never having read the comic, but being told by my comic guy that it was "The greatest graphic novel of all time." The trailers looked amazing... I was really incredibly excited... then COMPLETELY let down. I just kept wishing the movie would end. There were parts that were good, and visually, it was quite stunning. But it just came up flat for me. Sorry to those of you that liked it. I'm not putting you down... it just wasn't my cup of tea. No DC for me!

  • June 25, 2009, 1:23 p.m. CST

    OH and the blue penis....

    by Potch

    I'm a GIRL and I thought it was unnecessary! I'm not against nudity in a movie if it's there for a purpose, but this was like... Hello look at my big blue penis flopping around for no reason....

  • June 25, 2009, 1:24 p.m. CST


    by DennisMM

    You might as well see the Tom Jane Punisher and say, "No Marvel for me!" Neither film was very good and neither represents its publisher well.

  • June 25, 2009, 1:26 p.m. CST


    by TheLastCleric

    I see your point regarding the paranoia of the cold war but I would actually argue that capturing that tone is nearly impossible this day and age because frankly, you had to have lived through it (and that constant, looming threat of nuclear devastation) to fully understand the era. Snyder made this film more than 20 years after the original novel was written so his approach comes off, at least to me, as a much more historical film tonally with a slightly more sterile approach because we as a society are no longer entrenched in that reality. My point is that while you are correct that he didn’t capture the paranoia of the age, it may very well be that he didn’t glean that as a prevalent theme of the novel in the same way you obviously did. I think the cold war era atmosphere is an important part of Watchmen but I certainly don’t think it was the primary thematic. I think it is logistically impossible for any film to capture all the nuances and subtle layers of any complex written work, especially one that has been deconstructed and analyzed as much as Watchmen. I sincerely think the best any director could do is read the book, decide what the story is really about, and capture that essence as best as humanly possible. That is why not everyone will be happy with Snyder’s film but personally, when I first read the book, I took away from it very similar things that Snyder obviously also got from his reading. That said, I do think Snyder nailed the cynical tone of the “real” superhero very well, especially with that brilliant credit intro that showed them larger-than-life and then also showed their subsequent mortality and failures. As to Dr. Manhattan, I agree about him being both a product of romanticism and philosophy but I’ll raise you one even better: I think Manhattan essentially represents Alan Moore: apathetic and generally disconnected from the pettiness of the human condition.

  • June 25, 2009, 1:28 p.m. CST

    It's a bad film- forget the funnybook for a minute

    by Lost Jarv

    and look at the actual film. <P>The pacing's fucked- to begin with. It's hackneyed shit (The music is especially guilty of this), the ending is absolutely incomprehensible (the squid would have been worse) and exposition filled garbage. The acting, especially goode- but with the exception of haley, was dreadfully wooden. <P>It was just garbage fetishism. <P>Now, if you compare it to the overrated funnybook, it gets even worse, because it isn't an adaptation (with the exception of the end), all it is, is just moore's work literally vomited across the screen with nary a thought for how it would work in a different medium. <P>Sadly, it is one of the better films of 2009, but look at the competition. It's like winning gold in the special olympics. <P>TO be absolutely fair, if you are either a massive fan of the comic, or totally ignorant of the comic then I'd imagine it's quite good. If you're like me and read it once, but it didn't really do anything for you, then the film is indefensibly boring.

  • June 25, 2009, 1:28 p.m. CST


    by DennisMM

    Alan Moore is a very passionate man. Just read some interviews where he talks about more than comics.

  • June 25, 2009, 1:31 p.m. CST

    Lost Jarv

    by DennisMM

    Most massive fans of the comic think it's mediocre to abhorrent, actually. Like me. Read it 20 times over 20 years, wrote about it, discussed it, gave copies to friends. And, as I expected, was utterly disappointed. Though, if "Watchmen" the comic hadn't existed, the movie would have seemed a good deal more interesting.

  • June 25, 2009, 1:35 p.m. CST

    You said so, so you must be right

    by CaptainAxis

    Can't argue with that logic! We can agree to disagree, but I fail to see how he made the sex and violence "cool" at all. He merely exposed the irony of the bloodless violence and sexless romance in most every superhero movie by using the same conventions to make his point. Call it whatever you want, but he couldn't make the same point if he filmed the fight scenes in "shaky-cam" or some other more realistic way. Same with the sex scene.

  • June 25, 2009, 1:37 p.m. CST

    Everyone's right

    by Lost Jarv

    it's certainly fucking cynical. And the 9 different versions to totally wallet-rape a ridiculously credulous and obsessive fanbase prove it.

  • June 25, 2009, 1:40 p.m. CST


    by Lost Jarv

    Fair enough. I was bored by it because it was too close to the comic, so assumed that if you were a huge fan then that level of translation would appeal.

  • June 25, 2009, 1:41 p.m. CST


    by Kid Z


  • June 25, 2009, 1:46 p.m. CST


    by CaptainAxis

    "If at any point in the film, the characters were presented to look as foolish as they often do in the comic, I'd concede you, at least, that. But they don't."<br> <br> You can't be serious. I don't even think you watched the film. Dan comes off as a huge loser who only gains confidence when he puts on the suit, and even then he's still pretty dorky. Dr. M, for all his godlike powers, is the same "puppet on a string" he is in the book; my buddy even noted that afterward, asking why Manhattan seemingly had no will of his own. I'm guessing you saw the film once and spent most of it rolling your eyes because you'd already decided to hate it.<br> <br> "Snyder isn't making his sex scene more explicit to make the characters look awkward. He's extending it in order to sell a fart joke."<br> <br> Wow, what? A fart joke? If you're referring to Archie's flamethrower bit... it was in the book and had NOTHING to do with farts. If you're truly that dense, I think we're done with this discussion. You gave me a good laugh, though.

  • June 25, 2009, 1:54 p.m. CST

    The McLaughlin Group

    by CaptainAxis

    Show began airing in 1982, ten years before Clinton. I have always associated it with the '80s. Reagan even talked about in 1985, so yeah it was fairly accurate to the era. Stop embarrassing yourself.

  • June 25, 2009, 1:56 p.m. CST

    "it was in the book and had NOTHING to do with farts!"

    by Lost Jarv

    absolutely true. <P>HOwever, it should never have been in the film. It was the cherry on top of the embarrassment pie of that scene. <P>It was effective in the book, I'll admit, but juvenile and asinine if you've just sat through an eternity of poorly simulated sex to a cliched soundtrack.

  • June 25, 2009, 1:57 p.m. CST


    by CaptainAxis

    What are you, 16? I'll take a bottle of 40 Creek over that piss any day, thanks.

  • June 25, 2009, 2 p.m. CST

    I was amazed that Rorshach was hurled against a stone pillar.

    by cookylamoo

    And then gets up like he was thrown on a judo mat. So much for gritty realism.

  • June 25, 2009, 2 p.m. CST


    by HoboCode

    If you're going to challenge Snyder's intelligence you should at least proofread.

  • June 25, 2009, 2:01 p.m. CST

    Ok I never read the graphic novel

    by rogueleader66

    Yet I found the movie to be highly entertaining. It confused me a bit at first with all the jumping back and forth between the past and the present, but it didn't take me long to figure it out. <P>I admire the fact that Snyder wanted to stay as true as possible to the novel because not too many comic adaptions do that. Changes did and always will have to be made when you adapt comics to the big screen. From what my buddy (who saw the film with me) told me, the changes they made were well done and even though he liked the original squid ending better, he thought the new ending serviced the film fine. I will definitely see the directors cut, I am interested to see if it makes the movie better or worse.

  • June 25, 2009, 2:02 p.m. CST


    by Six Demon Bag

    had it not been in the film, nerds and geeks alike wouldve cried murder most foul. snyder cant win...he did a hell of a job all things considering. even the ending worked for the condensed film..

  • June 25, 2009, 2:04 p.m. CST

    When people asked me to describe the movie

    by rogueleader66

    I told them it was a drama about superheroes, because when you tell people a superhero movie, they expect flare, action, colorful bad guys. Watchmen was a drama, a character study about people who happened to be superheroes, and a well done one at that.

  • June 25, 2009, 2:05 p.m. CST

    Hey SDB how's it going bro?

    by rogueleader66

    Whats happening?

  • June 25, 2009, 2:05 p.m. CST


    by Six Demon Bag

    yeah the film was great, but you should jump on the book. awesome, that goes without saying.<P>i remember when i was young i thought Dark Knight Returns was the best (comic) book id read until my friend dropped watchmen in front of me..the film was very faithful to the look, the tone, everything. it was like a live action comic book.

  • June 25, 2009, 2:07 p.m. CST


    by Six Demon Bag

    yeah July 21 cant get here soon enough..watchmen AND GI JOE cartoon out on the same day...whats my inner child to do?

  • June 25, 2009, 2:17 p.m. CST

    I'll rent it

    by DennisMM

    Normally this is the sort of thing I'd pick up in a heartbeat, even though I didn't like the movie much. I want to see the extended cut and I want to check out the extras. But if the "Black Freighter" version is truly coming for Christmas, I'll wait. Unless that's only on Blu-Ray, which seems like the sort of screw-the-consumer move they might pull.

  • June 25, 2009, 2:20 p.m. CST


    by rogueleader66

    Yea my buddy has the graphic novel, when I finish reading the SW book I am reading now I will have to get i from him. But who knows how long til I finish the book I am reading now. No matter how good a book is, I can take a year and a day to finish it LOL.

  • June 25, 2009, 2:34 p.m. CST


    by Six Demon Bag

    which SW book?

  • June 25, 2009, 2:38 p.m. CST

    Subtitles_Off - you are one ARROGANT fuck...

    by irishraidersfan

    To tell people they have "flawed logic"? About a piece of cinema? When, for the love of Christ, has logic EVER applied to cinema? The whole point is that it's ultimately a trick! You talk about "tone" like it's something measurable, and my 'favourite'? (The quotes are for an implied sarcastic tone, not irony as I'm sure you'd misinterpret it) "Only a fucktard would think 3 more hours of shit would improve it." In YOUR opinion, for fucks sake!

  • June 25, 2009, 2:40 p.m. CST


    by rogueleader66

    Path Of Destruction, the story of Darth Bane and the establishment of the "rule of two" for the Sith. Just started it, good so far, Bane is a great character.

  • June 25, 2009, 2:42 p.m. CST


    by DennisMM

    Does that mean, for example, that "Star Trek V: The Final Frontier" is a good movie? I worked with someone who, when all of its awfulness was discussed, said, "It's good to ME!" Some things are beyond opinion.

  • June 25, 2009, 2:45 p.m. CST


    by rogueleader66

    Some people just don't get that all entertainment, not just film, is subjective. What is great to one of us may suck to someone else. But that is the beauty of entertainment, if we all liked the same things, there would be no variety in entertainment. <P>Don't let people on here get to you, the one's who think that their opinion is the definitive one are the ones who probably live at home and have nothing better to do but to feel superior in the eyes of total's kinda sad when you think about it, the need to feel superior among people you have never met and probably never will.

  • June 25, 2009, 2:53 p.m. CST

    i'll skip it.

    by wookie1972

    If I want to see Watchmen on DVD, I've got the Motion Comic, which works just fine. Bottom line, it should have been a miniseries, and Snyder should have been let nowhere near the material. Snyder likes to rationalize his choices with "I meant it to be deconstructionist and ironic," but he failed. The point of the violence is not that it's too over-the-top, it's that he revels in it. He doesn't want us to recoil at Dan and Laurie beating the Knot-Tops, he wants us to cheer. (THAT'S why it's a copout to show the bomb's impact abstractly. I mean, the Day After showed the consequences of an atom bomb more than that, for pete's sake)

  • June 25, 2009, 2:56 p.m. CST

    The main problem was the structure

    by wookie1972

    The comic was designed flawlessly, to capitalize on the episodic nature of a monthly series. By retaining some of the aspects of the episodic nature (having the multiple narration in particular) but not totally, it just seemed awkward.

  • June 25, 2009, 3 p.m. CST

    Snyder's main strength seems to be

    by MrJJonz

    getting completely hammy performances from the actors.

  • June 25, 2009, 3 p.m. CST

    ATTN: Watchmen detractors

    by Gwai Lo

    Your opinions are wrong

  • June 25, 2009, 3 p.m. CST


    by rogueleader66

    I was making a generalization but if you feel I was referring directly to you, then read my post a bit closer. I don't know you, I have never been involved in a conversation with you so how could I possibly be referring to you? <P>First off, I said "dont let PEOPLE on here get to you" I never mentioned your name did I? I was generalizing. I also said "are the ones who PROBABLY live at home" Never said anyone in particular lied at home. So why take it as a reference to you when I never mentioned you?

  • June 25, 2009, 3:01 p.m. CST

    The problem wasn't the structure at all.

    by Evangelion217

    The problem was that the film was too short, and that's why it had some pacing issues. Some scenes just didn't connect together too well. And the film was still brilliantly done.

  • June 25, 2009, 3:04 p.m. CST

    i loved watchmen, but weakest parts were

    by smudgewhat

    casting of Ozy, and lack of the coda conversation between Manhattan and Ozy. otherwise any 'flaws' are really the same 'flaws' as the source material, which i consider minimal. poor hollis. they showed him getting the statue in the face in the preview as i recall. it looked sadly brutal.

  • June 25, 2009, 3:04 p.m. CST

    I don't normally feel the need

    by rogueleader66

    To explain myself to someone I don't know, but there is enough conflict in these TB's so I sure don't need to start anymore. Especially over something that was a generalization.

  • June 25, 2009, 3:07 p.m. CST

    also, i thought patrick wilson was great as nite owl

    by smudgewhat

    c'mon, weren't you charmed too? and jackie earl too - fantastic performance. especially in the psychiatrist's office.

  • June 25, 2009, 3:12 p.m. CST

    Evangelion, I must disagree

    by DennisMM

    One of the biggest problems was the cast. Crudup, while talented, was miscast and his voice struck me as inappropriate, especially as the comic indicates Jon has an odd voice that makes him seem even less human than he looks. Goode underplays far too much and doesn't look anything like Veidt should, and his light German accent and implied backstory seemed gratuitous and silly. Wilson is pretty good, playing against type. It's a solid performance but nothing more. Haley, if one excuses his completely wrong voice treatment, does a fine job as Rorschach. Morgan, though way over the top at some points, puts on a good show as Blake. But Akerman might as well have been literally phoning in her role for all the emotion she brought to Laurie. Lots of the secondary actors are no more than competent and sometimes dreadful, like Gugino, and Robert Wisden as Nixon. <P> Without decent performances, one cannot make a film that's much good.

  • June 25, 2009, 3:19 p.m. CST


    by DennisMM

    You may be a tad harsh there. However, I must admit that when I hear Snyder giggle in glee, I feel a bit sick.

  • June 25, 2009, 3:20 p.m. CST

    Who watched their watch watching Watchmen?

    by StatelyWayneManor

    Playing a dirge during Doc Manhattan's origin & Leonard Cohen during the sex scene is no way to keep an audience awake.

  • June 25, 2009, 3:22 p.m. CST


    by HoboCode

    I think you have me confused with someone that a.) even remotely liked Watchmen, and b.) doesn't agree that Zack Snyder is a hack and a meathead. But if you want to take pride in looking like a moron yourself while bashing somone else's intelligence, you go right ahead.

  • June 25, 2009, 3:30 p.m. CST

    Seriously people

    by Volfan8404

    I think I made feelings quite clear earlier but the fact is people look for different things when they go to a movie. Me? I just want to be entertained and have a good time. I thought Watchmen was a great cure for insomnia, with the exception of Rorshach. I can see why a true fan of this movie would love it, or hate it. I can definitely see why someone with no prior knowledge would go see it and say "WTF? Over?". Of course if this movie wasn't so polarizing, this TB wouldn't be so much fun!

  • June 25, 2009, 3:32 p.m. CST


    by HoboCode

    Because I want talkbackers here who hate Snyder and Watchmen to be taken seriously.

  • June 25, 2009, 3:33 p.m. CST


    by Volfan8404

    Where the fuck did you go to school? Corky's Academy for the Retarded Arts? Learn some grammar, dumbass. That Stately Wayne Manor Post was pretty pathetic. Hurry up and type your response before mommy comes in to change you.

  • June 25, 2009, 3:35 p.m. CST

    i guess i'm an immature perv

    by Bouncy X

    because during the sex scene, i could care less how appropriate or cheesy it was or wasn't, i was just enjoying watching a hot girl doing soft core porn for 5mins.

  • June 25, 2009, 3:36 p.m. CST

    Wow. Insults

    by DennisMM

    That's original. AsimovLives's grammar and sometimes spelling can be dire, but there's no need to call the man names.

  • June 25, 2009, 3:40 p.m. CST

    Bouncy X

    by DennisMM

    There lies the difference. I didn't find Akerman hot at all. She was like a mannequin.

  • June 25, 2009, 3:42 p.m. CST

    If you don't get Watchmen...

    by 35MinutesAgo

    ... you're dumb.

  • June 25, 2009, 3:42 p.m. CST


    by Volfan8404

    You're right. I was just trying to funny and overstepped the bounds a little. Sorry Asimov! I feel horrible, maybe I should go drink a beer and try to recover.

  • June 25, 2009, 3:47 p.m. CST

    Once again

    by rogueleader66

    We have different opinions on something and it has to turn into a festival of juvinille insults. <P>When will anyone learn that we all have different opinions and while we may agree with the opinions of others, we should, at the very least, respect the fact that we are individuals with opinions of our own. No one opinion is better or more correct than a another, and those who think that they have the definitive opinion and all other's opinions are shit are just sad people with the need to feel superior. The need to insult someone just because they like something you don't is childish and stupid, period.

  • June 25, 2009, 3:49 p.m. CST


    by rogueleader66

    In my previous post I meant to say "while we may NOT agree with the opinions as others" damn TB, we really need a real forum here or at least a fucking edit button LOL.

  • June 25, 2009, 3:50 p.m. CST

    Group Hug!

    by DennisMM

    ((((((TBers))))) <P> Kidding. But it's nice to see unanimity of niceness.

  • June 25, 2009, 4 p.m. CST

    Rorschach moved "like a Power Ranger"

    by Autodidact

    That is an incredibly apt description of one of the huge problems with the movie.

  • June 25, 2009, 4 p.m. CST

    The real problem with the film

    by DennisMM

    is that it was a superhero movie. The comic was psychological fiction about people who happened to be former costumed crime fighters. The movie was about superheroes caught in psychological crisis. Big difference.

  • June 25, 2009, 4:06 p.m. CST


    by DennisMM

    Perfect. And Veidt like a Power Ranger with a battery jammed up his fundament.

  • June 25, 2009, 4:10 p.m. CST

    Rorschach's voice was all wrong, anyway

    by DennisMM

    He speaks in a near-monotone, flat and dead. He's not a Batman growler.

  • June 25, 2009, 4:11 p.m. CST


    by rogueleader66

    Listen dude, you and I don't always agree and like I have said before, it's all good, our opinions are part of what makes us individuals. I do have to say that it annoys me when people pick on your grammar and/or spelling. For one, english is obviously not your first language and IMO you do just fine with it. Secondly, there are plenty of retards on here whose first language probably is English and they have as much grammatical skill as a 5 year old.<P>So basically what I am saying is people need to stop this childish need to criticize someone for "butchering" the English language when people are doing their best to communicate with us even though it is not their first language. Jeez isn't there enough childish banter on these TB's already? We sure don't need more.

  • June 25, 2009, 4:12 p.m. CST


    by DennisMM

    Let's all be nice again, now.

  • June 25, 2009, 4:17 p.m. CST

    Well now

    by rogueleader66

    I don't know about being nice, heated discussions are always fun, but the childish insults over stupid shit is what I hate.

  • June 25, 2009, 4:19 p.m. CST

    Watchmen movie = parody of comic

    by 6000_little_griglets

    Snyder choked. Need to approach an adaptation with insight, intelligence and a unique vision in order to create something stand alone that works. (ie Kubrick's The Shining, Scott's Bladerunner etc)

  • June 25, 2009, 4:38 p.m. CST


    by rogueleader66

    True I was reacting about a post aimed at you, but I still was not talking about you, I was generalizing, plain and simple. If you take it as an an indirect attack on you, that's really not my problem. There were no dots to connect, as I said, I don't know you, and have never been engaged in conversation with you so to attack you would be silly. Take it as you will, my intentions were made clear, what you do beyond that is not my concern. Peace.

  • June 25, 2009, 4:39 p.m. CST


    by rogueleader66

    Since we are talking about Snyder, I am assuming you did not like 300? I am curious to know what about that movie you did not like if that's the case.

  • June 25, 2009, 4:54 p.m. CST

    if the book is so realistic...

    by CaptainAxis

    Explain how the costumed heroes survived long enough to make a career out of it. I don't care what kind of training they had or fancy suits they wore, how could one regular person take down gangs of criminals at a time? This is why I let Snyder slide with his depictions of the heroes being something more than normal; otherwise, you're left wondering how these schlubs weren't killed in the line of duty. I know I wondered that while reading the comic. On a related note, how did Ozy catch a bullet with his bare hands? I'd love to see the explanation for that one from the nitpickers.<br> <br> Oh yeah, Subtitles, did you figure out what the "fart joke" really was yet? I imagine you reading the book so many times over the years and thinking that Archie's flamethrower represented a fart. Thanks for the laugh.

  • June 25, 2009, 5:10 p.m. CST


    by rogueleader66

    Ok dude, now I hate to say this LOL...but try to explain to me what you didn't like about 300. Nothing detailed, just a general idea of what you hated about it.

  • June 25, 2009, 5:12 p.m. CST


    by DennisMM

    There's bending reality and breaking it. Allowing someone to have Bruce Lee level skills and a genius mind is one thing. Allowing a middle-aged fat man to fight like Jackie Chan while another middle-aged man jumps six feet straight up in the air, and another runs up walls, was too much for me to accept. <P> I think it's made clear that the characters consider themselves damned lucky not to have been seriously injured or killed during their adventures. Let's not forget, also, that Dollar Bill was shot, The Silhouette was brutally murdered and The Comedian was nearly stabbed to death.

  • June 25, 2009, 5:26 p.m. CST

    "Bruce Lee level skills and a genius mind"

    by CaptainAxis

    Which one of those allowed Ozy to catch a bullet with his bare hands?<br> <br> Ozy did not jump six feet in the air. His flying leap afterward definitely looked silly upon first viewing, but after seeing the movie again it really wasn't that ridiculous. I like to think that if Ozy can create Bubastis, he can probably alter his own genetic makeup enough to give him an extra edge.

  • June 25, 2009, 5:31 p.m. CST

    Okay, if he's done so ...

    by DennisMM

    why can't he catch a bullet?

  • June 25, 2009, 5:42 p.m. CST

    Just saying, because ...

    by DennisMM

    for me, the bullet-catching was like the existence of Dr. Manhattan. It walked the line of disbelief, but I accepted it. The abilities seen in the film (and I apologize if my estimate of the straight jump was off - it has been a while since I saw the movie) were, to me, gratuitous. Almost all of the physical stuff, whether action oriented or sexual, was gratuitous. Having said that for the third or fourth time, I'll stop with it.

  • June 25, 2009, 5:47 p.m. CST

    I didn't say he couldn't

    by CaptainAxis

    I was just wondering how the nitpickers justify one ridiculous aspect and not another. It's funny to me that these people suspended disbelief for Osterman having his "intrinsic field" removed and re-forming his physical body, and Ozy catching a bullet with his bare hands, but Ozy jumps a bit higher than the world record for vertical leap in the film and everybody freaks out about how unrealistic it is. That's funny to me.<br> <br> Anyway, I love the book and the movie, so enough negativity from me. You can't please everybody, and there are plenty of people who loved the film, so I'll try not to lose any sleep over a bunch of disgruntled talkbackers who hate everything anyway.

  • June 25, 2009, 8:35 p.m. CST

    the mood, the spirit and the themes.

    by knowthyself

    Snyder nailed all three.

  • June 25, 2009, 10:54 p.m. CST

    Yay, a Watchmen talkback

    by Mockingbuddha

    so I can say, "Giant squid." (ø‹›≈≈

  • June 26, 2009, 2:37 a.m. CST


    by Lost Jarv

    OK, then, so you argue that nerds would have whinged that it wasn't in? <P>Fine I can deal with it being in, if there hadn't been the excrutiating shagging first. <P>Or alternatively show the shagging and not the juvenile and asinine flame spurt. <P>One or the other, not both. <P>That's what I mean about a translation as opposed to an adaptation.

  • June 26, 2009, 2:54 a.m. CST

    Lazy lazy soundtrack

    by Bass Ackwards

    Share a lot of complaints that have already been mentioned. Just thought i'd toss in how boring and superficial the soundtrack was, much like the film as a whole.

  • June 26, 2009, 3:30 a.m. CST

    Let me guess this fucker has a lot of SLO MO FIGHT

    by lockesbrokenleg

    scenes? I skipped it in theaters cause I knew a 3 hour DVD was gonna come out. Why bother wasting 8 bucks for a chopped up version

  • June 26, 2009, 5:39 a.m. CST

    One or Two, yeah

    by Lost Jarv

    hehehehe. <P>Skip the DVD as well. I would.

  • June 26, 2009, 6:32 a.m. CST

    Movie vs. Comic

    by fatjesuschrysler

    I've read the comic, and I liked it. Saw the movie, and I liked it. I've certainly liked other comic book stories more. Why this slavish devotion to the Watchmen? Is it really that grounbreaking? Squid aside, I thought the movie was exactly what everyone wanted.

  • June 26, 2009, 6:51 a.m. CST

    No thanks.

    by adiehardfanwithalethalweapon

    I wasted my money the first time around.

  • June 26, 2009, 7:10 a.m. CST

    Another take

    by The StarWolf

    Squiddly - Agreed. The original ending was, for me, the second weakest point in the book (the whole useless Black Freighter sub story being the worst). That the smartest man in the world couldn't see the glaring flaws in his plan made no sense to me. The movie version worked far better.

  • June 26, 2009, 7:29 a.m. CST



    Film being re-edited. Co-director also removed from film.

  • June 26, 2009, 10:38 a.m. CST

    Loved the Book. Loved the Movie.

    by cymbalta4thedevil

    If he hadn't amped up the violence and made the sex more gratuitous, you would have had a movie where people in ridiculous costumes where standing around. Talking. For 3 Hours.<br /><br />And the amped up violence is OBVIOUSLY a satirical commentary on the ludicrously superhuman feats normal human beings are capable of in EVERY movie these days.<br /><br /> Forget superhero movies. James Bond and Jason Bourne are doing leaps and rope swings that would break a normal person's ankles or rip their arms from their sockets. You geeks don't object to that. Things that were over the top satirical silliness in McG's Charlie's Angels movies have become standard operating procedure in films we're supposed to take seriously.<br /><br />Snyder knows that and satirizes it. When Malin Akerman comes crashing through the floor, lands like a gymnast, tresses flowing in a burning building, looking hot and cool and ignoring the pieces of wood hitting her on the head- You don't get that that's supposed to be FUNNY? And that sex scene was so obviously a parody of every bad glossy arty self important sex scene from an 80's movie. Who fucks to Leonard Cohen? Any director who can get an audience aroused and amused simultaneously is a talented man IMHO.

  • June 26, 2009, 10:42 a.m. CST

    Snyder definetly creates "super hero mode" for the characters.

    by knowthyself

    They they are stopping bad guys they become heroes and that includes the over the top fighting. I love how he makes a distinct difference between their normal boring lives and the "suped up action feel" they get when they have to save the day. That little smirk laurie and jon give eachother at the prison fight is priceless.

  • June 26, 2009, 2:16 p.m. CST

    asimov--i hate to be the one to say it..

    by Six Demon Bag

    but it was pretty faithful to the book. yes, its totally inaccurate but makes a fairly entertaining story. i think you have a problem with the story more than anything. <P>i believe snyder has stated that he uses the slo-mo to emphasize the coolness of the scene (or panel of book). if you want to get technical, all comic books are really still frames to show the action. basically snyder was slowing it down.<P><P>and who really knows waht happened way back when anyway, history is written by the winners and passed on as legend. which is what they were doing in the film--a soldier was telling the legend of king leonidas to incite his men to stand up and fight harder than theyve ever fought before. <P>if yu take it from this point of view, does it really matter if its true or not..<P>i take more offense to Patch Adams, based on true events, than 300.

  • June 26, 2009, 2:17 p.m. CST

    BTW, thanks asimov..its good to talk about film again

    by Six Demon Bag

    after MJs death

  • June 26, 2009, 3:24 p.m. CST

    300 isn't meant to be acurate

    by Bouncy X

    the movie isn't a film adaption of the true story of that fight, its a film adaption of the comic about that story. whatever historical inacuries exist, its the comic's fault and not the movie. the movie is just following its source material.

  • June 26, 2009, 3:27 p.m. CST


    by rogueleader66

    Asimov, if that is your idea of a short post I don't want to see a long one!!! LOL. Anyways ty for your insights. Always interesting to see your point of view on things.

  • June 26, 2009, 4:32 p.m. CST

    Great Movie with an unforgettable intro

    by Stalkeye

    Never cared for Dylian's music, but "times are a changing" worked perfect for the opening scenes.Another fucking Snyder Masterpiece.

  • June 26, 2009, 10:56 p.m. CST

    The one essential part

    by carraway

    The one essential part of the book that was not in the movie was Rorshach's nihlist monologue about how Rorshach consumed his identity. Given that they changed that part I hope Snyder finds a way to fit in Rorshach's "...and God wasn't there." monologue. It was pure poetry that could easily be translated to film. The movie as is rates about a 7 just by adding that one part (effectivly)could easily make this film a 10.

  • June 27, 2009, 1:10 a.m. CST

    Asimov—hats off to you sir

    by blakindigo

    The absolute best critique of '300' I've read. Ever. 1000 internets to you…

  • June 27, 2009, 11:29 a.m. CST

    Asimov Lives

    by cymbalta4thedevil

    What are your sources for information on the real historical background of 300? You've obviously done way more research than Frank Miller did. :^)

  • June 27, 2009, 9:09 p.m. CST


    by CaptainAxis

    Curious, how many times have you watched Watchmen? There's a lot more subtlety and depth than you (and others) give Snyder credit for, stuff that I didn't even notice upon my first viewing. You're entitled to your opinion, but calling Snyder a hack is factually incorrect. Your critique of 300 is unintentionally funny. Are you saying that filmmakers shouldn't be allowed to use historical events as the basis of fictional works? 300 is a mythologized version of the event, and overanalyzing it as you've done is pretentious and a bit dull. I could see your point if Snyder and Miller claimed to be telling the definitive true story, but it was evident from the first trailer what 300 was all about. If I wanted a history lesson, I'd go to the library. I do hope you're not one of the talkbackers looking forward to Inglorious Basterds though, because that doesn't look historically accurate at all.

  • June 27, 2009, 9:14 p.m. CST


    by smackfu

    If you saw an onscreen penis and remember it as an erection in your face, I think your mind might be filling in some blanks that you'd rather it didn't.

  • June 27, 2009, 9:27 p.m. CST

    the entire notion of genetically engineering a giant squid

    by smackfu

    a giant *psychic* squid that mentally kills everyone around when it dies, transporting into a major city and then exploding it as a means of faking a threat to the world was such a ridiculous, ridiculous idea. It completely took me out of the comic when it happened and I'm pretty sure I uttered 'wtf' outloud. Really guys, you think THAT belongs in the realm of realism? Like if tomorrow, you were watching C-Span and the politicians were discussing the pros and cons of spending 500 billion dollars of genetically engineering a giant telepathic squid as a defense weapon, which they would deploy by teleporting it into a city and then exploding it, you'd be like 'well yeah, that sounds like a reasonable idea. I'll put my taxpayer dollars behind that, it sounds totally plausible and not the slightest bit completely insane and random'.

  • June 28, 2009, 4:09 p.m. CST

    Go watch Big Robots hitting Each Other II instead.

    by Sal_Bando

    You'll be glad you did. I about fell asleep in the last half of Watchmen.

  • June 28, 2009, 5:50 p.m. CST


    by Baryonyx

    You say that they are just fit dudes in the comic, and not super-powered-types (apart from Doc Manhattan.) That's true to a certain extent, but a bullet is still caught in the hand in the comic - and they do beat up thugs far easier than most 'normal' dudes can. AND there are psychic people existing in the world of the Watchmen comic (they're part of that stupid alien-squid plan.)

  • July 11, 2009, 6:10 a.m. CST

    all the 300 blame should be on Miller's shoulders

    by theplant

    Not Snyder who did a top nocht job. Frank Miller is the main culprit. I mean he wrote Robocop 2 & 3. He killed a major american icon by making a mockery out of it.