Upcoming
Youth in Revolt
January 15
January 22
Drool
The Girl on the Train
That Whooshing Feeling
A Watchmen screening happened last night at L.A.'s AMC Century City plex. Attendees included press (including HFPA), studio folk, friends of studio folk and random-off-the-streeters. It was 20 minutes late starting, but a friend of HE attended and his basic verdict is that Tuesday's early-bird review was pretty much on point.
"By far the highlight of the film is the opening credits," he begins. "It perfectly nails the surrealist tone of the graphic novel and does an adequate job of running through some of the back story of the Watchmen. It's so good I'm half-convinced that director Zack Snyder had little to do with this sequence. Because that's where the surrealism ends.
"The rest of Watchmen basically alternates between campy silliness and 2nd-rate comic book melodrama. At some points on the level of live-action Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles. I assume Snyder was trying to hit that sweet spot of surrealism that accompanies the alternate 1985 reality of the graphic novel, but the kindest thing I can call it is a kind of tragedy/campy combo.
Interjected warning: appendage spoiler ten paragraphs hence!
"The violence and action is still 300-rific. Snyder can't seem to help himself - slow-mo for slow-mo's sake and lots of loud whooshing and thudding for every punch and collision. Maybe they should have pulled out the old Adam West Batman on-screen "Wham!" titles? It was that over-the-top, that silly. And let's not forget the blood (deep reds, lotsa squirting) and cracking bones
"There's certainly no sense of tension or release in any of the action sequences. Apparently, that shit is just supposed to look cool.
"Connected to the action is the film's unexplained pseudo-super powers the Watchmen all seem to have. In the graphic novel, it's made very explicit that none of them have super powers (except for Dr. Manhattan). And yet Snyder allows them all to jump really high and punch and kick baddies across the rooms, again with lots of whooshing and thudding. Fists and bodies break through walls like action in a Terminator or Superman film. And it's never explained.
"With the exception of using Bob Dylan during the opening credits, somewhat successfully, the music left me speechless. One bad stick-out is a piece of Hendrix near the final confrontation, which seemed completely misplaced to me. The rest of the music is a smattering of random and very recognizable 80's pop songs randomly pasted over scenes and scene transitions. It continually takes you out of the story. Really bad stuff.
"As Dr.Manhattan, Billy Crudup refuses to mail it in and Jackie Earle Haley's Rorschach is a great presence -- one of the few characters/performances with any weight in the film. But Malin Akerman's Silk Spectre II is cringe-inducing throughout. Her performance (combined with the music) takes you out of the story at every turn. And you're going to love the bad Nixon -- bad make-up and accent (seriously!). It's particularly hilarious coming on the heels of the great Frank Langella's Frost/Nixon performance.
Interjected warning: appendage spoiler five paragraphs hence!
"The film is probably 90% accurate to the graphic novel, and I'm not sure this is a good thing. Fear of the fanboys may have done them in. With no flexibility to explore the characters and scenes, much of the film is a rote viewing experience. No ramping up or down of character development, suspense or action. It's simply 'next', 'next' and 'next' -- like clicking through a viewfinder.
"Look, the graphic novel has some real thought to it and probably the only positive from the rote almost faithful adaptation was that Snyder wasn't able to completely remove some of the larger themes embedded within the crazy (sometimes cool) world of the Watchmen. Having read the graphic novel and its disjointed narrative, I understood this was always going to be a difficult adaptation into a cohesive narrative, one that would plant its antagonist flag early on the horizon and then work its way to that mark, but the filmmakers don't even try here.
"Nor did they embrace the reflexive joy that can spring forth from a disjointed narrative. There's some meat on the bone at the end of the film which lends itself to lingering thought (a classic 'sacrifice the few for the many' dilemma); yet even this is undercut by a weird final scene between the love interests. Are we supposed to be contemplating this classic dilemma or are we expected to feel warm and fuzzy because Akerman and Patrick Wilson's Nite Owl still get to play house?
"There were certainly no cheers at the end. About 80% of the audience rushed out of the theatre the second the credits began; minimal congregating outside. I did come across a group of three 20-something guys, holding their free give-away Watchmen posters, seemingly doing their best to talk themselves into liking the film.
"I almost don't want to spoil this for you, but there's a lot of blue penis in this film. Sadly, I'd say this was one of the few surprises and entertaining parts of the entire experience. It's not everyday that a mainstream Hollywood movie flashes blue Johnson!
"Who am I? A regular moviegoer who sees anywhere between 85 to 100 films per year. I'm down with popcorn fare when it at least tries or knows it's silly, but I also do my best to seek out foreign and independent fare. I liked the Bourne series, Dark Knight, first two X-Men. However, I hated 300 (a 2-hour long video game-slash-slow motion campfest). I appreciated the Watchmen graphic novel but was ultimately bored by its jagged and stiff storytelling."
Posted by Jeffrey Wells on February 19, 2009 at 5:22 AM
comment #1
Rich S.
says ...
The various scenes that have been popping up everywhere (odd for a film that's supposedly on lockdown) have been oddly inert. Granted, they've been taken out of context, but the lack of vitality seems to be a consistent theme with these reviews.
I'm still seeing it in IMAX on opening weekend, but it doesn't sound like it's going to make much of a dent outside its core fanbase.
Posted by Rich S.
at February 19, 2009 6:55 AM
comment #2
corey3rd
says ...
Thanks, Mr. Corey -- fixed. -- Jeffrey Wells. Idiot me.
Posted by corey3rd
at February 19, 2009 7:09 AM
comment #3
lesterg
says ...
Cant' say I'm surprised, but I'm certainly disappointed. Too bad.
Posted by lesterg
at February 19, 2009 7:33 AM
comment #4
MDOC
says ...
Pretty negative, from a guy who at least read the book. I get the feeling Watchmen will be easy to crap on for those that want to keep their distance. I can't wait to pass my own judgment. I really want a prerelease box office assessment. What domestic number is the target? 200 million is the obvious target but it's what 300 grossed is it fair? This is tougher material. Would 150 million be considered a disappointment?
It's amazing how much people hate 300, I have noticed people go out of their way to take a shot at 300 when Watchmen and Snyder come up. I liked 300. I thought it was unique and stylized. I loved Snyder's Dawn of the Dead, that movie doesn't get enough credit.
Posted by MDOC
at February 19, 2009 7:33 AM
comment #5
MindlessObamaton
says ...
Greengrass would've nailed this. Just sayin'.
Ironic this dude singles out the credit sequence. The only thing that was any good in DOTD was he pre-credt sequence. The rest of that film was overdone, hammy and stupid.
This guy is McG and Bay rolled up into one.
Posted by MindlessObamaton
at February 19, 2009 7:37 AM
comment #6
lesterg
says ...
"I really want a prerelease box office assessment."
I think it's tracking for an opening in the 70's or 80's right now. Not sure what the studio's expectations are. Considering that the budget was about 120, I'd say anything below 250M would be a disappointment.
Posted by lesterg
at February 19, 2009 7:44 AM
comment #7
MindlessObamaton
says ...
If this review is any indiction, I also wonder about the rewatchability factor. you don't get to 300 mil by people NOT going back for a second, third look. If, indeed, the material has been adapted poorly, then repeated viewings won't happen.
Shoulda beena 12 hour miniseries on HBO.
I have to agree with one hting the poster said, though. I haven't seen the flick, but the fact that the "normal" superheroes appear to have jumping ability and super strength isn't good. if you've read the comic, one of the big points is that outside of Manhattan, no one has superpowers. They are all just normal people, for the most part.
Posted by MindlessObamaton
at February 19, 2009 7:48 AM
comment #8
MDOC
says ...
250? That is a lot of scratch for an R rated March release. I don't think anyone at Warners is seriously expecting 250.
Posted by MDOC
at February 19, 2009 7:49 AM
comment #9
MDOC
says ...
X3, the highest grossing X-Men, came out in the summer and grossed 220. They had a built in fanbase, an established, successful movie franchise, and Wolverine. Watchmen is comic book that essentially only the comic scholars have read with no stars or famous characters. It's amazing we are talking about a potential 200 million grosser.
Greengrass wanted to move Watchmen out of the 80's didn't he? I'm glad we got a faithful translation.
Posted by MDOC
at February 19, 2009 7:54 AM
comment #10
lesterg
says ...
I don't think anyone at Warners is seriously expecting 250.
I agree it's unlikely, but 120M pre-marketing cost (and a payout to another studio) means they've got to aim high.
Posted by lesterg
at February 19, 2009 7:56 AM
comment #11
Rich S.
says ...
I wouldn't be too hard on Snyder. First of all, he actually got the damn thing made. Second, he was handcuffed from the get-go by the fans' expectations and the need to make a carbon-copy of the comic. That he's not the most skillful of directors doesn't make him a hack. It just makes him mediocre.
I also wonder whether he wasn't hamstrung to a certain extent by the desire to make this a "multi-media experience." Online comics, viral marketing, etc. may play well with the AICN crowd, but ultimately doesn't that distract the director from actually, you know, making the film?
Sadly, we can probably expect more of the same with every future genre release.
Posted by Rich S.
at February 19, 2009 7:57 AM
comment #12
lesterg
says ...
"It's amazing we are talking about a potential 200 million grosser. "
WB is in this to make a profit. A 200 million gross is no where near break-even, much less black.
Posted by lesterg
at February 19, 2009 7:59 AM
comment #13
scooterzz
says ...
as i posted in your 'not invested' thread two days ago, the openng scenes and title sequence are worth the price of admission alone....
Posted by scooterzz
at February 19, 2009 8:00 AM
comment #14
VictorLazlo
says ...
The minute I realized this would be another green screen fest I was worried. Imagine how much more verismilitude (sp?) this would've had if it had been shot by Robert RIchardson in the style of JFK, NIXON or THE RIGHT STUFF. The Vietnam scenes look terrible. No sense of history. Imagine if he had aped APOCALYPSE NOW's village attack scene and just added the giant Dr. Manhattan.
Why is the sky always dramaticly cloudy and stormlike in these green screen-fests? Why can't we ever get a plain old blue sky. Just because you can, doesn't mean you should.
Why is Dr. Manhattan a CGI? The same effect can be acheived with a real actor. He doesn't do anything but walk around and point at things. It looks stupid.
None of this matters because I'm still plunking down 5 bucks for a matinee.
Posted by VictorLazlo
at February 19, 2009 8:07 AM
comment #15
VictorLazlo
says ...
Also, 300 was crap but DAWN OF THE DEAD was one of best action movies to come out in the past 5 or 6 years.
Posted by VictorLazlo
at February 19, 2009 8:10 AM
comment #16
MindlessObamaton
says ...
MDOC: Faithful? Is there a giant squid from outer space at hte end of the film? didn't think so.
Posted by MindlessObamaton
at February 19, 2009 8:15 AM
comment #17
Ethan
says ...
Nice to know that you're going to be completely fair towards this movie Jeff.
Posted by Ethan
at February 19, 2009 8:36 AM
comment #18
Jeffrey Wells
says ...
Wells to Ethan: Fair? How would that work exactly? I've made all kinds of overtures to Warner Bros. about getting back with them & working with them & observing proper boundaries, but they won't even respond so I have nothing to lose. They're corporate mummies -- humorless drones with a garrison-state mentality. The two people who sent along the two early reviews are reputable, fair-minded types -- all I've done, it seems to me, is pass along the reality of what this film is. What's unfair about that? What would "fair" be in your mind? Saying absolutely nothing until opening day? Suppressing the word on the street? Letting contemptible shills like Matt Selman define the advance word?
http://nerdworld.blogs.time.com/2009/02/16/my-own-private-watchmen/
Posted by Jeffrey Wells
at February 19, 2009 9:19 AM
comment #19
DeafBrownTrashPunk
says ...
Ugh. This is confirming my worst fears for the movie.
I'm still seeing the movie....
Posted by DeafBrownTrashPunk
at February 19, 2009 9:37 AM
comment #20
Ethan
says ...
Yeah, Jeff, ever since that Time review you seem to be hating on this movie big time. You seem to be the only person on the web posting pans while everything I've heard has been extremely positive. Not saying that I totally doubt your sources. But it does seem a little fishy.
Posted by Ethan
at February 19, 2009 9:43 AM
comment #21
Chase Kahn
says ...
Ugh. I knew it -- I've seen past the slick and sexy TV spots, trailers, hype, etc. I know it's the opinion of one person, but it matches my exact fears. Snyder had to '300' it up.
Posted by Chase Kahn
at February 19, 2009 10:11 AM
comment #22
Scott Mendelson
says ...
Random question... last night's screening was at Century City, the 'all-media' screening will be at the Grove on 3/3/09... are they screening this for critics in any IMAX theaters? And, if not, why not? Just an oddity.
Posted by Scott Mendelson
at February 19, 2009 10:17 AM
comment #23
The Winchester
says ...
Zack Snyder gets an eternal pass in my book for the opening ten minutes of Dawn of the Dead alone. I can't wait to see Watchmen, but I think it's being over-hyped to hell, and the more I see and read, the less I want to see the movie. Gilliam would've done a better job than Snyder or Greengrass, and yes it should've been a 12 hour HBO miniseries. But this is what we get, and I'm still amazed that it exists.
But more than the release of the film, I can't wait for Harry Knowles' hyperbole-laden spooge of a misspelled review for the movie. Because he "grew up on Watchmen".
Posted by The Winchester
at February 19, 2009 10:21 AM
comment #24
econeywaaa
says ...
Say what you will about Snyder's lack of auteur credit, he has undertaken a thankless task and put a lot of passion into it. I have always been a fan of the book and I while I disagree with Moore that it was unfilmable, I think that a BBC-HBO mini series would have done more justice to the source than trying to cram it all into 3 hrs. That being said I'm still going into it with an open mind.
Posted by econeywaaa
at February 19, 2009 10:36 AM
comment #25
LYT
says ...
Batman doesn't have superpowers either, yet early on in the Dark Knight he bends the barrel of a gun, and does many other things no actual human can do. As does James Bond. I think you have to give the non-super Watchmen characters the same leeway any standard-issue movie action hero has -- we can assume Nite Owl's costume is tricked out like Bale's Batsuit, for example, or that Ozy genuinely is a genetic anomaly in his intelligence and fitness levels.
I too am nervous. But Dr. M and Rorschach were the best characters in the book, and it sounds like that's reflected here.
Posted by LYT
at February 19, 2009 11:07 AM
comment #26
Jumpman
says ...
LYT,
Batman uses a device to bend the barrel of the gun in the beginning. It's clearly shown in close up.
Posted by Jumpman
at February 19, 2009 11:17 AM
comment #27
chicagodad
says ...
Actually, as someone who really does want this movie to succeed, and loves the original material, and is a comic book nerd, I appreciate the posts here.
To be honest, I was already going in expecting a lot of the film to be crap. But I'll still have fun with a lot of it.
Posted by chicagodad
at February 19, 2009 11:37 AM
comment #28
Colin
says ...
This is the same man championing Michael Shannon as the second coming of Jesus Christ. Wells is a comicbook-phobe slowly coming to the realisation that he and other elitist film critics are the dodo bird of this generation.
Posted by Colin
at February 19, 2009 11:53 AM
comment #29
Deathtongue_Groupie
says ...
Jeff - fair would be waiting until your usual circle of critic friends could send you word (like you do with most other films you haven't been able to see). Fair would be choosing as your "street guy" someone who actually like 300, because Warners based much of their confidence of Snyder on the BO of that film. So it would seem far more intellectually honest to find someone who dug on it to assess how they might feel about this.
But I actually never expected fairness. Any long time HE reader knows these films are not your cup of tea and the only value you comments would have is only in the case of a rave. You said as much yourself. But lacking a rave, we will need to get feedback elsewhere.
Posted by Deathtongue_Groupie
at February 19, 2009 12:22 PM
comment #30
Limping Lucy
says ...
The hostility Mr. Wells seems to be showing to this film is downright bizarre. He seems to derive glee from posting these negative opinions of his pals. You cannot kill this movie, Mr. Wells, and if it does indeed suck your word will be redundant.
Posted by Limping Lucy
at February 19, 2009 1:10 PM
comment #31
MDOC
says ...
Lucy there is nothing bizarre about Wells. Of course Wells will be down on Watchmen, it's a big budget popcorn flick aimed at the masses. He has to talk about it, but it's failure would be more interesting than it's success to discuss. Wells doesn't like popcorn movies, superheroes, or people. The guy hates on Peter Jackson. All the anti-establishment aging hipsters have to take a swipe. Stick it to the man, Jeff!
Posted by MDOC
at February 19, 2009 1:21 PM
comment #32
CitizenKanedforChewingGum
says ...
Say what you will about Snyder, but his movies have been pretty successful thus far at doing what they're meant to do: provide solid, no-frills escapist entertainment fare.
300 and DotD aren't going to change the world, I think Snyder knows this so he just tries to stay as close to the source material (and this includes fighting for an R rating for his first three films; really no small feat in this day and age) as possible for the genre fans.
The Bay/McG comparison is way off base, IMO. They have both made movies that meander on meaningless side plots (I swear to God there was literally an atrocious half hour "let's pretend Will and Martin are gay" sitcom written into the Bad Boys 2 script) and feature really dumb, hollow scenes that slow their films to a literal standstill (animal crackers, anyone).
Snyder so far has been lean and mean with his editing: he knows the strengths of his pics relies mainly on pace and effects, and, at least in this respect, he's been smart enough to get out of his own way with his adaptations.
Now having said all that, the 2 1/2 hour running time does actually worry me a bit -- I don't think it plays to Snyder's strengths, and it does lend some serious credence to those who have said since the get-go that this would be better filmed -- if at all -- as a mini-series.
Gonna be there opening night for IMAX, regardless...it's just that kind of event for me.
Posted by CitizenKanedforChewingGum
at February 19, 2009 1:38 PM
comment #33
Joel
says ...
Yeah, I have to side with Ethan here. All reviews other than from your "friends", Jeffy, have been pretty damn positive and these seem to have been unearthed out of some bitter hatred of fandom. As someone who is not a fanboy here and is just an objective reader who thinks Watchmen looks fun. . . this here looks like the byproduct of Jeffery Wells' self-martyrdom (flashes of Armond White).
Posted by Joel
at February 19, 2009 1:56 PM
comment #34
Limping Lucy
says ...
As Wells has admitted he wants to personally set the "advanced word" on this movie.
Megalomania indeed!
Posted by Limping Lucy
at February 19, 2009 1:59 PM
comment #35
Alex
says ...
MindlessObamaton: The dazzling Kyle Cooper did the opening/closing credits for Dawn, so I wouldn't give Snyder much credit for that.
Did Cooper do Watchmen?
Posted by Alex
at February 19, 2009 3:24 PM
comment #36
D.Z.
says ...
"I assume Snyder was trying to hit that sweet spot of surrealism that accompanies the alternate 1985 reality of the graphic novel, but the kindest thing I can call it is a kind of tragedy/campy combo."
So then I guess it's as bad as V for Vendetta?
"Snyder can't seem to help himself - slow-mo for slow-mo's sake and lots of loud whooshing and thudding for every punch and collision."
That trick worked in 300, because you have more epic fights. But Watchmen isn't about the fights.
"Connected to the action is the film's unexplained pseudo-super powers the Watchmen all seem to have. In the graphic novel, it's made very explicit that none of them have super powers (except for Dr. Manhattan). And yet Snyder allows them all to jump really high and punch and kick baddies across the rooms, again with lots of whooshing and thudding. Fists and bodies break through walls like action in a Terminator or Superman film. And it's never explained."
Looks like Alan Moore's been vindicated.
"With the exception of using Bob Dylan during the opening credits, somewhat successfully, the music left me speechless. One bad stick-out is a piece of Hendrix near the final confrontation, which seemed completely misplaced to me. The rest of the music is a smattering of random and very recognizable 80's pop songs randomly pasted over scenes and scene transitions. It continually takes you out of the story. Really bad stuff."
I know it's become a cliche argument by now, but one of the things that makes anime so appealing to Hollywood films is that directors don't always use music in scenes, because they're too afraid of "quiet".
Obamaton: "Shoulda beena 12 hour miniseries"
That's actually what Gilliam said.
MDOC: If they weren't expecting $250 m, they wouldn't have tried to screw over FOX out of its money. And how the hell is it a popcorn movie or aimed at the masses, when it's the most anti-comic book story of them all?
Deathtongue: Why would someone who liked 300 like Watchmen, when they're two totally different concepts?
Posted by D.Z.
at February 19, 2009 3:58 PM
comment #37
D.Z.
says ...
*so appealing, in comparison to,*...*just because*
Posted by D.Z.
at February 19, 2009 3:59 PM
comment #38
MartinBlank
says ...
The true goal here would have been to make a movie that is to superhero movies what the graphic novel was to superhero comics.
Somehow this isn't feeling like that kind of movie.
Snyder's good at eye candy. You know the set design has been sweated down to the smallest, most ridiculous detail. The big question mark is whether he gets this material on a level other that its being, like, awesomely cool.
Posted by MartinBlank
at February 19, 2009 5:47 PM
comment #39
AtticusRex
says ...
I gotta ask... What is with all the hating on 300? Are these same haters down on Sin City as well? I know different directors... but approached the same way... making as close to a true rendition of the source material as possible.
Usually people complain when a director makes his own version of gospel, now when a director makes as faithful as possible of the gospel he/she is spat upon.
300 was great for what it was. It wasn't taking on Gladiator or Troy. It was it's own animal. I loved the fact of how it and Sin City were made. It's the only way to keep costs in line and create new environments.
Does this mean Zack's The Watchmen will suck? Dunno haven't seen it... But I am going to give it a chance.
Posted by AtticusRex
at February 19, 2009 6:21 PM
comment #40
shermy
says ...
I predict it will not be "gritty/realistic/dark/serious" enough, and will ultimately be lumped into the "flawed/misfire/garbage/waitforthedirectorscutondvd" bin by fanboys at large.
Posted by shermy
at February 19, 2009 6:38 PM
comment #41
frankbooth
says ...
Has everybody seen these? They don't bode well as far as I'm concerned:
http://www.slashfilm.com/2009/02/17/four-new-watchmen-clips/
The makeup and wigs looks cheesy, the slo-mo predictably overdone and the acting as flat as a skating rink in Wichita. I've gone from extremely low expectations to tentative hope to almost-enthusiasm to borderline apathy.
This could be another Dune, an intermittently fascinating, messy work of genius that makes absolutely no sense to anyone unfamiliar with the source material -- minus the genius part.
Should look pretty on a really big screen, though.
Posted by frankbooth
at February 19, 2009 10:23 PM
comment #42
dobbsy
says ...
In the words of a very seasoned and smart filmgoer whose taste I trust:
"OK so there is much wrong with Watchmen but I have to say the opening
sequence, with Bob Dylan playing over it, in fact maybe the first 20
minutes - are fantastic!"
Posted by dobbsy
at February 19, 2009 11:14 PM
comment #43
Big Black
says ...
People keep commenting that it's 'amazing' and 'incredible' that this film was made at all, and I don't understand what they are talking about. An adaptation has been discussed for years, and it's one of the most recognizable, widely heralded works of comic fiction in history, and in case no one's noticed, we're in the middle of a huge glut of shit film adaptations of comic books. Seems more like inertia or gravity to me than some miracle or great act of will.
I also keep seeing people say that the comic is just a big storyboard. That's fucking idiotic, man. You might as well say a novel is just a big screenplay, yeesh.
Posted by Big Black
at February 20, 2009 11:11 AM
comment #44
free games
says ...
It's amazing how much people hate 300
Posted by free games
at October 26, 2009 12:41 PM
comment #45
canadian cialis
says ...
that nice post
Posted by canadian cialis
at January 3, 2010 3:36 AM
comment #46
observer
says ...
sci fi movies always the best..Astaga.com Portal Lifestyle On The Net:Let's Think Out Of The Box
Posted by observer
at January 11, 2010 11:20 PM
Post a comment