KnightWing Posted March 7, 2009 Report Share Posted March 7, 2009 I liked Bubastis. That cat/wolf/tiger/whatever was one of my favorite parts of the comic, and I don't really care if he wasn't explained to the viewers; they probably thought he was cool too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stavros Posted March 7, 2009 Report Share Posted March 7, 2009 I also though it was interesting that they made it really obvious that Ozymandias was gay. Subtle clues were laid with the stereotyped gay dancers behind him in one of the early scenes, and then later on his PC there is a file marked "boys". Its cool that they basically confirmed it but left it as a detail. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Mxyzptlk Posted March 7, 2009 Report Share Posted March 7, 2009 Not a huge fan. I actually didn't mind the way they changed the ending to Dr. Manhattan being made to look responsible, but it lost all the moral ambiguity about it. The dialogue was lacking and Ozymandias was terrible. He was made to look like a sneering condescending jerk, the villain of the story. The book was far better about making him an actual character instead of the shameful caricature the movie made him. Also, the overdone violence was awful. Violence for the sake of violence. Every little thing causing a massive slo-mo blood spurt was stupid and undermined the violence in the book that actually meant something. Violence for the sake of violence goes against the point of the story. It also made the movie super unbelievable, especially all the stupid karate fights. Gah. But Dr. Manhattan and Rorschach were pretty great, so I have nothing to complain about there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KnightWing Posted March 7, 2009 Report Share Posted March 7, 2009 I also though it was interesting that they made it really obvious that Ozymandias was gay. Subtle clues were laid with the stereotyped gay dancers behind him in one of the early scenes, and then later on his PC there is a file marked "boys". Its cool that they basically confirmed it but left it as a detail. I totally missed that. The dancers made me wonder for a moment, but I dismissed it as "well, being the smartest man in the world, he's just having them there for everybody else." That sounds really stupid in hindsight. Yeah, it's nice to see detail like that. Man, now I have to scrounge up $10 and go see it again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Venneh Posted March 7, 2009 Report Share Posted March 7, 2009 The dialogue was lacking and Ozymandias was terrible. He was made to look like a sneering condescending jerk, the villain of the story. The book was far better about making him an actual character instead of the shameful caricature the movie made him. Also, the overdone violence was awful. Violence for the sake of violence. Every little thing causing a massive slo-mo blood spurt was stupid and undermined the violence in the book that actually meant something. Violence for the sake of violence goes against the point of the story. It also made the movie super unbelievable, especially all the stupid karate fights. Gah. W/r/t Ozy being so blatantly the villain: I think they had to alter some aspects of the original plot to make it a bit more clear to the layman or the person who went into this not knowing the source material as to what was eventually going to happen. Unfortunately, this was at the cost of the subtletly of the original plot. And as for the dialogue - a lot of it was from the book, but they switched it around to, again, lay groundwork for things to come, and made later scenes, in my opinion, lose their impact. As for the violence - I think that that, stylistically, is part of who Snyder is as a director. And in most cases, I didn't mind it or see any particular differences in what was in the original book, except for a few scenes. For the most part, Snyder was spelling out things that were implied in the book. I also though it was interesting that they made it really obvious that Ozymandias was gay. Subtle clues were laid with the stereotyped gay dancers behind him in one of the early scenes, and then later on his PC there is a file marked "boys". Its cool that they basically confirmed it but left it as a detail. I didn't notice that, actually. But Ozy's always struck me as at least bi or pansexual, personally. Bubastis. Totally surplus to requirements here unless they explain a bit more in the extended cut. I'm betting that she at least appears a bit more with Ozy in the extended cut. But, hey, I always wanted a huge cat like her, so I didn't mind seeing her at the end. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stavros Posted March 7, 2009 Report Share Posted March 7, 2009 I also though it was interesting that they made it really obvious that Ozymandias was gay. Subtle clues were laid with the stereotyped gay dancers behind him in one of the early scenes, and then later on his PC there is a file marked "boys". Its cool that they basically confirmed it but left it as a detail. I didn't notice that, actually. But Ozy's always struck me as at least bi or pansexual, personally. His hero was Alexander the Great after all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuaveStar Posted March 7, 2009 Report Share Posted March 7, 2009 And at his age and no wedding ring....oohhh (Holds cup of tea close) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elnino14 Posted March 7, 2009 Report Share Posted March 7, 2009 I watched the movie last night and I rather enjoyed it for what it was. I didn't have a problem with the graphic violence, I already knew that Zack Snyder was capable of directing great action sequences. All the ones here were great. What I was more worried about was whether Zack Snyder could handle the depth of the book. I thought he did a commendable job, but I can't help but think if a more experienced director could have done a better job. After the movie, I totally felt that there was something missing in the translation. I'm still not quite sure what it is, but I think it's the heart of the film, instead of making an adaptation, Snyder decided to put the book on screen. I went with one person who never read the book, not yet anyway, and he said as a film the pacing doesn't quite work, while a comic can spend lots of length going off into flashbacks, because comics tend to build slowly, but as a person who never read the book, he felt that movie was just wandering around before being snapped back to the main plot. Of course Rorschach was perfect, the Comedian and Dr. Manhattan were rather good. Nite Owl II was good at times, sloppy during others. Ozy, Silk Spectre, and Sally Jupiter were all terrible. I really think that the opening was too obvious in terms of it being Ozy. My buddy actually said something pretty interesting, he said even though he thought it was Ozy the first time he saw him, he didn't think Ozy was capable of that type of fighting and that he was just the smartest man. I asked him what about all the references to him being able to "catch a bullet," he said, "I thought they were all joking and being sarcastic." So although, it's made rather obvious, and the actor really did a terrible job downplaying him...there was still some doubt, at least until the fake assassination attempt. Also I wasn't a huge fan of the changes to the ending, I've accepted it more now, but still not a huge fan. Maybe some of you guys here could explain it better, but it was a frame up to make it seem like Dr. Manhattan attacked different countries in the world, wouldn't the Soviet Unions just think that America sent Dr. Manhattan to attack them. And even if the attack was just on New York, why would the Soviets care? America has been threatening them with Dr. Manhattan since he arrived, wouldn't they have just been like good riddance. That's why the squid works, because it's an external threat, disconnected from any particular country, thus all the countries have to unite. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Venneh Posted March 7, 2009 Report Share Posted March 7, 2009 As I understood it, it attacked not only America and Russia, but a bunch of other large cities all throughout the globe, so it seems like Manhattan's turned on the world? And thus, with him turning on everyone else, they have to unite against him to save themselves? I'm not entirely clear myself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dread Posted March 8, 2009 Report Share Posted March 8, 2009 Let me preface what I'm about to say with the fact that I think Watchmen (the comic) is one of the greatest examnples of what this medium is capable of. But I thought the ending of the movie was wayyyyy better. They took something that was there and used it in a way that it makes me wonder why Alan Moore didn't do that. I loved it. My thoughts on Monday's Dread Media. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George W. Posted March 8, 2009 Report Share Posted March 8, 2009 Linkara rants, Spoony raves. Oh, and my parents liked it. Just in case that mattered to someone other than me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koete Posted March 8, 2009 Report Share Posted March 8, 2009 Well that was a damn good movie. Not as good as the book, but still damn good. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koete Posted March 8, 2009 Report Share Posted March 8, 2009 Watch the opening credits again...and again...and again... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Posted March 8, 2009 Report Share Posted March 8, 2009 GLEE! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stavros Posted March 8, 2009 Report Share Posted March 8, 2009 Probably the best opening credit sequence of any film I've seen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koete Posted March 8, 2009 Report Share Posted March 8, 2009 Probably the best opening credit sequence of any film I've seen. Without question, hands down. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NightAngle04 Posted March 8, 2009 Report Share Posted March 8, 2009 I agree with Linkara, but its probably the best on screen adaptation we are going to get. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Molly Posted March 8, 2009 Report Share Posted March 8, 2009 I honestly think he's bitching for the sake of bitching. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koete Posted March 8, 2009 Report Share Posted March 8, 2009 Something that there's surprisingly little of on the net considering it's the film adaptation of Watchmen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Venneh Posted March 8, 2009 Report Share Posted March 8, 2009 Watch the opening credits again...and again...and again... ! So much love for this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuaveStar Posted March 8, 2009 Report Share Posted March 8, 2009 Not really movie news, but no point making a new thread for this: I was in my local comic shop and they had variant Comedian figures, why variant, he doesn't have the domino mask. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chops Posted March 8, 2009 Report Share Posted March 8, 2009 I want to see this movie so badly, it fucking sucks I have to wait for winter to see it. Unless some cool person finds it online, burns it to a dvd, and ships a copy to Iraq... :whistle: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Posted March 8, 2009 Report Share Posted March 8, 2009 Just watched it again, and picked up on a few Easter eggs hidden throughout. I like that Adrian's project is codenamed "S.Q.U.I.D.". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuaveStar Posted March 8, 2009 Report Share Posted March 8, 2009 This is the variant figure I was talking about. Posting link as pic is quite big. Original figure to compare it to. I have the original comedian figure and personally prefer it, so I'm not getting it. Anyone else have thoughts on this? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aaron Robinson Posted March 9, 2009 Report Share Posted March 9, 2009 I honestly think he's bitching for the sake of bitching. I’m glad I’m not the only one who was thinking that. Some of his points were perfectly valid, but when you’re holding up the comic and shouting “They changed it from this” you’re kind of missing the point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.