comment #1

Nick says ...

I appreciate the cynicism that Jeff has for the Watchmen movie. Since so much of the internet is going bonkers over it, it's hard to find other opinions.

I also think that anyone who is a fan of the comic should be prepared for a epic letdown from this movie. Zack Snyder is a giant hack who does not have the right skills to make a character piece like Watchmen.

Furthermore, reading this guy's review, I just don't think he gets it. The way he describes the scenes in the move and how they match up with the comic, just don't seem like he has really "read" it. Calling Rorschach a "delightful anti hero" just seems like he's missed the point of the character completely. And therefore, his review should be called into question.

Ack. I wish Fox had shut this up in a vault forever.

comment #2

Monument says ...

That's a review? It's basically a description piece with a tacked on "ehh, it's pretty good!' ending paragraph. Sorry, Jeff's anonymous sources offered up better reviews than that.

comment #3

Rich S. says ...

For all the crap Jeffrey takes for not posting spoiler warnings, he rarely goes as far as this guy. I guess the guy just assumed everyone had read the comic, because he reveals many of the plot twists in the story.

I still say that AICN's silence is deafening. They've posted one positive "review" from a guy whose pen name was one of the characters from the movie. In the old days, AICN would have been taking the lead on stuff like this. But they must like their goody bags too much to poke the WB bear.

comment #4

actionman says ...

So Nick, I take it you've seen the film?

comment #5

CitizenKanedforChewingGum says ...

Rich,

AICN is not the same site it was 5 years ago, when even then it wasn't the site it was 5 years before that.

Drew's gone, Harry's lazy; everyone has pretty much sold their soul. Trust me, if they wanted to run positive reviews of Watchmen, they could (hell, they could just make them up at this point). Many days go by with no new posts (the average is probably around 1 or 2). It's really just laziness, at this point.

You say their silence on Watchmen is deafening? I say that site has been Helen Keller-esque since the turn of the century.

comment #6

monettx says ...

Wil Wheaton over on his blog got to see the film as part of MTV Spoilers and is going ga ga over it.

http://wilwheaton.typepad.com/

He is, of course, an admitted big geek and huge graphic novel Watchmen fan. Perhaps that segment might actually like the film? Seems like the reviews from the "regular" folks have not been positive. Myself, I am also a huge geek, but I must be missing the Watchmen gene as I was somewhat let down by the graphic novel. I just didn't get the hoopla over it. At this point I am having a tough time gauging what my possible reaction to the film is going to be based on the reviews I have seen.

comment #7

Rich S. says ...

CKCG,

You're right, of course. I generally read the site for TV tidbits from Hercules and, until recently, Quint's Movie of the Day. Nothing Harry says interests me at all.

What I meant was that AICN has been so meticulous in posting every Watchmen viral tidbit that WB has released, now that industry screenings have actually occurred, I'm stunned they haven't posted some review of some type. I don't expect anything other than slavish adulation, but I expected something. Maybe Harry wants to be the first to express his everlasting love for the film and the lockdown is giving him an excuse.

I guess the dustup over Drew/Moriarty's negative review of Superman Returns marked an irreversible turning point. Set access trumps all, I guess.

comment #8

TheCahuengaKid says ...

Saw WATCHMEN last night.
Fans will love it - newbies probably will get involved and come away really liking it. Word of mouth among the movie going public should be enthusiastic - it is a bona fide "event" movie.
But with a running time of 2:45 and a hard "R" rating, I'm not sure this will make any money for Warner/Fox...

comment #9

The Playlist says ...

@Nick. Totally agree. There's no dissent allowed in the Watchmen discussions and hitflix and chud ppl just descend upon Wells and Poland anytime they dare post anything slightly negative. It's a troublesome approach.

comment #10

Nick says ...

-actionman

In all honesty I have not. I've formed my half assed opinion by the clips, the reviews, and suffering through 300.

In that one clip where the Comedian jumps down in ridiculous slow mo and they're playing Boogie Man, just looks terrible. The focus of that scene, in the comic, is to show the anger that the people have for the masks. In the clip all we get is that slow mo is cool and that Zack Snyder likes KC and the Sunshine Band.

At least that's what I get watching it out of context.

comment #11

bibliotechnician says ...

-Nick

Do you watch other graphic novel/comic book movies? Do you like the genre? Iron Man? Spider-Man 2? TDK?

I thought 300 was the best of them all, bar none. It truly captured the visceral feeling of reading a comic. It was not, and was never supposed to be, an historical epic, but rather a thoughtful, well choreographed, hyperbolic, ass kicking ballet. What else do we want or expect for a comic book movie? Profundity?

comment #12

drturing says ...

I have above this desk I sit at a framed original page from one of Alan Moore's comics.

The few clips I've been able to see of Watchmen have utterly convinced me that Snyder tried his damndest, but utterly failed. He just doesn't get the tone of it; he said himself it's operatic. It's not. It's superheroes with the provincial realism of British soap operas. It's supposed to be the Sopranos of superheroes. What I see is a ridiculous over the top conflagaration where people who supposedly don't have superpowers jump into burning buildings through rooftops and dodge fireballs in slow motion. Utterly, utterly missing the point.

comment #13

drturing says ...

By that I mean to see, that I think a lot of fans of the book are not going to be impressed.

comment #14

crazyeight says ...

What I relish most is the elitist crap.

Have an opinion that agrees with Wells and his preconceived notions? Great, fine, perfect-- welcome to the club, here's your drink. You're not a movie reviewer? You're not a journalist? No problem, you're a friend-- a "kindred spirit," (fellow traveler?).

Have an opinion that disagrees with Wells and his preconceived notions? Why, there's something wrong with this chap-- he's a shill, an industry twit, some sort of lower being who must not know what he's talking about. Doesn't this man Ragu-Sauce-ah know who Wells is? He wrote for PEOPLE MAGAZINE, that's who!

Perhaps the greatest thing about the internet is how it democratizes us all-- we ALL look like assholes here, because it doesn't matter who you are back in the real world-- journalism degree, "street cred," friends of the rich & powerful, interesting resume, etc.

What's even better is that people waste this much air over a *movie*.

comment #15

BurmaShave says ...

Well if Wesley Crusher liked it, I'm sold...

comment #16

actionman says ...

"I thought 300 was the best of them all, bar none. It truly captured the visceral feeling of reading a comic. It was not, and was never supposed to be, an historical epic, but rather a thoughtful, well choreographed, hyperbolic, ass kicking ballet. What else do we want or expect for a comic book movie? Profundity?"

In complete agreement, bibliotechnician.

comment #17

The Playlist says ...

@Burma. LOL

comment #18

Nick says ...

-biblio

I love comic books. I try to love comic book movies, but I usually end up being disappointed. I think Iron Man, Spidey 2 and TDK are all good examples of the comic book adaptation. But even these perfectly good movies have big problems as far as their adaptations.

And I always hear that: "fanboys always complain. it's a movie not a comic. blah blah blah." There's certain elements that have made these characters endure in pop culture and when the filmmakers change them, usually out of creative ego or studio interference, it does a disservice to the creators and fans who love these characters.

300 just did not do it for me. I suppose that it's a bad example to use, since the comic is pretty one note to begin with. The adaptation was faithful to the material stylistically but, for me, had absolutely no emotion.

I would expect certain comic book adaptations to contain the elements which define these characters. And, in the case of Watchmen, the story has a lot of sobering, profound things to say, which look like they were replaced by slow motion and plastic costumes.

-drturing.
I agree with you 100%. Operatic is not how I would describe Watchmen. A friend of mine is just reading the book now, and he's astonished by the low key-ness of it all. A distinct lack of any serious superheroing.

comment #19

drturing says ...

What I expect from a comic book movie based on Watchmen is profundity. I'm guessing you haven't read it.

comment #20

Rich S. says ...

"What I expect from a comic book movie based on Watchmen is profundity. I'm guessing you haven't read it."

Therein lies my problem. I have read it, multiple times.

I am a huge comic book fan. But I recognize that super hero comics, by their very nature, are rather vapid pre-adolescent empowerment fantasies. Nothing wrong with that. You could argue that Tarzan and Robin Hood were super heroes before they were super heroes.

I think Alan Moore recognizes that, too, which is why he's spent most of his career showing how absurd comic book super heroes would be if they existed in the real world. But I don't think there's anything overly profound about that, at least outside the context of comics themselves.

These stories are entertaining, nothing more. They can be more or less "realistic," I guess. But if you want to seek profound answers to life's truths, in my opinion you have to look elsewhere.