• ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️



    Film & Television

    Welcome Guest


    ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️
  • ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️
    Forum Rules Film Chit-Chat
    Recently Watched Best Documentaries
    ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️
  • Film & TV Moderators: ghostfreak

film: WATCHMEN

rate this film

  • [img]http://i.bluelight.ru/g//543/1star.gif[/img]

    Votes: 4 10.0%
  • [img]http://i.bluelight.ru/g//543/2stars.gif[/img]

    Votes: 2 5.0%
  • [img]http://i.bluelight.ru/g//543/3stars.gif[/img]

    Votes: 8 20.0%
  • [img]http://i.bluelight.ru/g//543/4stars.gif[/img]

    Votes: 12 30.0%
  • [img]http://i.bluelight.ru/g//543/5stars.gif[/img]

    Votes: 14 35.0%

  • Total voters
    40
I can't believe I didn't knock Nixon in my first post, but IndelibleFace, you are exactly right. Nixon didn't even really look like Nixon. I mean, how hard is it to pull Nixon - one of the great caricature of human existence?

Raz you also bring up some great points, man, how relevant is the Watchmen today with their themes of Cold War and nuclear war? perhaps this is why the ending was cleaned up and "modernized" a bit. I think that the Watchmen's relevancy was brought back two-fold in this post-911 world that we live in. but I can see your side of the coin for sure.

I did notice that women were sort of second class citizens in this movie. although the Silk Spectre II is your stereotypical modern strong-type of woman, you definetely see a difference in culture between her and her mom. I think that they were accurately portraying the differences in culture concerning women's rights between the two generations. I mean, Silk Spectre I falls in love with her rapist while Silk Spectre II is in a diss-satisfiying relationship and she does something about it.

I watched it again and I still stand by my critique on the actors, and I still think that when Rorscach went to prison (just like the book) were the best scenes.
 
I really enjoyed this movie. Much more than most big screen adaptations of this type.

I still need to see the first 25 minutes though, as I sat down when it was on. Going to hold off rating until then , I think.
 
the promotion of this film made that inevitable. one could see this debacle coming from a mile away. people are incredibly stupid at times.

Yeah, totally. All the marketing I'm seeing (posters, trailers, the fucking toys) make this seem like a fun kids movie. When it's really a less pleasant version of taxi driver.

Got my tickets for the Imax version next Sunday (wanted to go earlier but all the shows are booked solid unless you want to sit right up close to the screen). Sucks; every last bandwagon jumper will have seen it before I...and my brother keeps emailing me spoilers...
 
OK, I have to be honest, I was completely unaware of the comic but was told by my mate that it was going to be great, so I went along. As someone with no knowledge of the source material, my observations were as follows.

1. Way, way too long! There were many times where nothing happened in the film - where was the editor.

2. The scenes feature music were really poorly done. It was like a set-piece bit of scene setting with no relevance to the film. It was like they were trying to show some context with the real world i.e. what was going on at that particular time, but it just cut from the plot to an often slo-mo shot of some protestors or whatever, with a song from the time played over the top...and then back to the movie. It made the whole thing very disjointed IMO.

3. I have since been told that none of the characters were superheroes, merely dressing as such to 'fight crime' or whatever. Don't have a problem with that, but the fight scene in the alley?!! There were punches and kicks that were super human, slicing through skin and bones with ease. Hmm.

4. Dr Manhattan. I don't understand his character at all. He appears to have become god by way of an accident and he can then appear on Mars, or transport himself around the world. Eh? Also, what's with having his big blue cock hanging out all the time? Just coz you're god, doesn't mean you can wander about with your little fella out.

5. What WAS Nixon's nose about? I was expecting some joke but there wasn't.

6. What was Rorshausch's (spelling?) mask about? There was no explanation in the film and it appeared to have no relevance.

7. The sex scene was pretty poor. It was like a random comedy scene in the middle of a serious film i.e. it felt completely out of place. It was more natural (he couldn't get it up at first) than any Hollywood film - much to it's credit but the orgasm??? Oh dear.

8. The ending was a bit of a let down.

Overall, it was OK. Nothing special. Without any knowledge of the comic, I can't say whether it reflected well on it or not, but as just a film, it was average. One thing though, it should have been about half an hour shorter.

Can anyone enlighten me a bit about the above? Don't mean to have a right go at it, but like I say, it might mean a lot more to people who are familiar with the comic.
 
i'll try...

1- the story is more about the characters than the plot. this is part of what makes the original story so special.

2- every scene shown in that intro has relevence to the story. it's much easier to follow on the page of the books. there's a reason it was deemed "unfilmable" by gilliam

3- by the time of the fights in the film these characters were all seasoned crime fighters, and very well skilled and fit.

4- in the books he mentioned not being interested in clothes anymore (he's above such petty nuisances) and only put something on when doing something which will attract publicity

5- nixon was older in the 80's

6- rorscach's mask is clearly based on the ink blot tests meant to reveal the inner psychology of those who comment on what they see in the shapes. he kinda puts up a mirror to others.

7- this isn't a kid's movie. two adults have that special first fuck after an initial intimacy hiccup. nothing wrong with that imo.

8- the "bad guy"
was right
. to me that is very satisfying as they steered clear of the typical cliched superhero ending.
 
I too felt the results of the fight scenes was a bit extreme for non-super heros. I understand it's not 'realistic' but I was kind of sighing at the extent of the damage in some of the fight scenes.
 
4. Dr Manhattan. I don't understand his character at all. He appears to have become god by way of an accident and he can then appear on Mars, or transport himself around the world. Eh? Also, what's with having his big blue cock hanging out all the time? Just coz you're god, doesn't mean you can wander about with your little fella out.

Jon is one of the most complex characters in the book I can see how hard it must be to translate him to the big screen and not confuse the audience or get into too much needless backstory (note I haven't gotten around to seeing the movie yet so I can't comment)

We never learn whether his powers lead him to a different understanding of the world as he says or if his former submissive nature when he was human is effecting his decisions (I think Moore hints at the latter more but it's pretty ambiguous)
 
3- by the time of the fights in the film these characters were all seasoned crime fighters, and very well skilled and fit.

5- nixon was older in the 80's

6- rorscach's mask is clearly based on the ink blot tests meant to reveal the inner psychology of those who comment on what they see in the shapes. he kinda puts up a mirror to others.

7- this isn't a kid's movie. two adults have that special first fuck after an initial intimacy hiccup. nothing wrong with that imo.

8- the "bad guy"
was right
. to me that is very satisfying as they steered clear of the typical cliched superhero ending.

Thanks for the reply Impacto. Just wondering a bit more on your answers if I may...

3- I can accept they were seasoned crime fighters, but they did appear to me to be extraordinarily strong (particularly that alley scene). Was this just artisitc licence from the director packing a bit more 'action' into the film, or is the book the same? And if so, is the writer pushing us to think of super hero powers in the same way that Manhattan in Vietnam for example, appears to single-handedly win the war, thus hinting at super powers?

5- Again, is this the same in the book, or had the make-ip department gone crazy? It really was a quite incredible nose!

6- This is another one where I was confused about 'super hero' status. I got the link with the psychology tests but what I meant was, is it special (apart from the fabric I mean) in that the ink runs around creating patterns. I understood the relevance of the situations with it, but not how it occurred. I mean, I may have missed something somewhere but it just seemed to be a magic bandage that had no real explanation as to why/how it existed and how he was able to use it. Most of the other characters I could accept as normal people, with non-super hero powers, dressing as caped crusaders, but his mask appeared to me as something that I just couldn't explain in any 'normal' way.

7- Don't have a problem with the sex scene in itself, just the way that overall, the film had a dark tone, but for the sex scene it was almost as if Benny ill had made an appearance! Then it was back to the darkness again. Just felt a bit lumpen in the context of the film, but as sex scenes go, I accept it as being pretty genuine.

8- Yep, I can accept that it steered away from a cliched ending, but why couldn't the all-powerful one, figure things out before then? Or did he and thus create the ending he wanted??

Oh, just thought of one more, what was that thing on Mars? I didn't understand that bit at all.

The more I think about it, the more confused I get! :\
 
I'll try and field a couple.

3-I'd say there was a bit of artistic licence taken with the characters strength in the film version. What are you getting at with the second part? Manhattan definitely had what could be described as super powers, everyone else is just supposed to be extremely strong/skilled at fighthing.

5-It's a nose... presumably one the art and makeup teams felt was suitable.

6-His mask wasn't well explained in the film but:

wiki said:
After leaving school, Kovacs took a job as an unskilled tailor. The prospect of handling women's clothing caused him discomfort, and he later commented that the job was "bearable but unpleasant". A few weeks before her murder in front of an apartment, Kitty Genovese ordered a dress from him, made of a fabric created by Doctor Manhattan that used two pressure and heat-sensitive liquids suspended between a layer of latex to create black-on-white shifting color patterns, "always changing, never mixing into grey". When the dress was completed, Genovese was unsatisfied with the design, and she refused to pay for it. Kovacs took it home for himself, fascinated with the fabric. Upon reading of Kitty's murder in the newspaper, he became disgusted with the amount of crime in New York City and, creating a mask from her dress, became the vigilante Rorschach.

7-There were a good few moments of comic relief in the film, as was intended, this was one of them.

8-
NSFW:
In both the book and film it's explained that Veidt was producing tachyon waves (or something hah) that clouded Manhattan's vision of the future. Even when learned of the plan he came to accept that Veidt's actions were for the best. The deaths he caused prevented the deaths of millions more. The "bad guy" in the film wasn't really bad at all, that was the point.


The Mars thing? Manhattan wanted to go somewhere without life and mars is the closest planet?
 
Cheers Evad, I'm getting a bit closer to understanding! By the 'Mars thing', I meant the 'machine' that was there. Again, I may have missed something but I didn't understand what it was.
 
tbh i don't know what it is. all i could tell is he made a glass machine from the sand. could be a timepiece since he was taught watchmaking when he was a kid.

but then again, the drive and motive for a character of such complexity is meant to be beyond the audiences complete understanding. had it been too understandable, they would have failed with the character.
 
^ i think ur right about the mars thing...i remember it being a giant clock or something
 
people really don't get it? wtf. i didn't even read the comic and it was all 100% straight forward as could be.
 
Same here. I like the movie and everything. I thought it was a very interesting film. None of these characters needed an origin story, with the exception of Dr. Manhattan, which was provided a bit.

Sometimes, you just have to let certain things go and say to yourself, "It's only a movie."
 
Top