slothian Posted March 22, 2009 Report Share Posted March 22, 2009 It's kind of insane that an R-rated film is firmly expected to pass $150m domestically, even if it is a superhero movie. Then again, this is Warner Brothers we're talking about. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackFetch Posted March 22, 2009 Report Share Posted March 22, 2009 It's kind of insane that an R-rated film is firmly expected to pass $150m domestically, even if it is a superhero movie. Then again, this is Warner Brothers we're talking about. Sex in the City did it last year, and 300 did it in 2007. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KnightWing Posted March 22, 2009 Report Share Posted March 22, 2009 Sex in the City did it last year, and 300 did it in 2007. But I don't think that you can necessarily make an R-rated superhero film and have it be marketable. It's too cheesy for mature non-geeks, and too mature for kids. What audience is left is extremely limited. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackFetch Posted March 22, 2009 Report Share Posted March 22, 2009 You can do it, but it takes the right director, the right project, and the right studio to make it happen. It probably won't be tried again for a long time. When the kids of this super hero generation grow up, they will want something more mature. It's like the way Batman went from cheesy to dark. Things shift every once in awhile. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuaveStar Posted March 22, 2009 Report Share Posted March 22, 2009 Sex in the City did it last year, and 300 did it in 2007. Sex and the city had a wide audience who loved the show and watched the movie over and over again. I know people who went to see sex and the city at least twice. I personally saw Watchmen once and am happily waiting for the DVD as I felt it was good, but it wasn't spectacular. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slothian Posted March 22, 2009 Report Share Posted March 22, 2009 Sex in the City did it last year, and 300 did it in 2007. Sex and the city had a wide audience who loved the show and watched the movie over and over again. I know people who went to see sex and the city at least twice. Agreed on that point - Sex & The City mobilised both regular fans of the TV series and the female demographic in general, who aren't catered to as much as young men are (hence the success of the Mamma Mia movie last year). 300 was in NO WAY expected to do as well as it did, hence its low budget. The very fact that it did work (ie/ unlike most all films out there, good word of mouth) is what confused Warner Brothers. Snyder's as much as said that the WB didn't understand how 300 became a hit, but was happy enough to shell out a much larger budget for Watchmen, thinking that it too would be a similar hit as Snyder was a box office alchemist (I greatly paraphrased that last bit). The very idea that 300 and Watchmen are on the same plain, in terms of source material, is ludicrous which is why I stand by my original statement. But yes, this will make a killing in DVD sales. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KnightWing Posted March 22, 2009 Report Share Posted March 22, 2009 When the kids of this super hero generation grow up, they will want something more mature. It's like the way Batman went from cheesy to dark. Things shift every once in awhile. But Watchmen doesn't have the marketing power of Batman, and The Dark Knight was dark without being completely gruesome like Watchmen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuaveStar Posted March 22, 2009 Report Share Posted March 22, 2009 Personally I won't be seeing the watchmen again in the cinema, and will wait till the DVD comes out. I get the feeling that I answer for at least half of the people who saw the movie when i say that in the fact that I liked it, but don't feel the need to sit through it again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackFetch Posted March 22, 2009 Report Share Posted March 22, 2009 When the kids of this super hero generation grow up, they will want something more mature. It's like the way Batman went from cheesy to dark. Things shift every once in awhile. But Watchmen doesn't have the marketing power of Batman, and The Dark Knight was dark without being completely gruesome like Watchmen. Two Face wasn't gruesome? Lets face it, 10 years ago that movie would have been R. That just shows how society changes what it is willing to watch. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuaveStar Posted March 22, 2009 Report Share Posted March 22, 2009 Two Face didn't attempt on screen rape. Ten years ago The dark knight would've got what Batman and Returns got over here a 15 instead of the 12 it got. Note: The comparitive 15 is PG13 so this argument is moot and i'm just saying what the UK rating would have been. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackFetch Posted March 23, 2009 Report Share Posted March 23, 2009 The attempted rape was cringe worthy but we have those in made for tv movies. I was talking about Two-Face having a head on long shot showing his chemical burns. That would have been rated R ten years ago because of how realistic it was. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KnightWing Posted March 23, 2009 Report Share Posted March 23, 2009 The attempted rape was cringe worthy but we have those in made for tv movies. I was talking about Two-Face having a head on long shot showing his chemical burns. That would have been rated R ten years ago because of how realistic it was. That's not the point. Watchmen had bones breaking through skin straight into the camera and hands being sawn off for no apparent reason. TDK didn't even have any notable blood or gore; all of it was implied, not shown in slow-motion on-screen glory. TDK was only violent when needed; Watchmen was sensationalized and seemed to revel in its own inapproriateness. (which was quite the opposite of the novel) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dread Posted March 24, 2009 Report Share Posted March 24, 2009 Interesting interview with director of Under The Hood. Ultimate Version integration seems unlikely Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Posted March 24, 2009 Report Share Posted March 24, 2009 Yeah, I just watched Under the Hood and I don't really see how it works as anything but its own standalone thing. Wasn't bad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Venneh Posted March 29, 2009 Report Share Posted March 29, 2009 Are Under the Hood and Tales of the Black Freighter worth finding and watching somehow? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Posted March 29, 2009 Report Share Posted March 29, 2009 It's all right, but don't spend $20 on it by any means. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Venneh Posted March 30, 2009 Report Share Posted March 30, 2009 So basically get it through illegal means? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Venneh Posted April 5, 2009 Report Share Posted April 5, 2009 Watched Tales and Under the Hood tonight. Tales' story and backgrounds were decent, but the animation of the humans sucked somewhat awful. Can stand on its own, though I'd be interested to see it in the context of the movie and if they included Bernie and Bernie as well. Was pretty short, too. Under the Hood was marginally better. Works well as something that stands on its own, collects a lot of the appendices from teh book into a coherent whole. Spells out a lot of the subtext from teh book, and it's nice to see more of the more minor characters from the movie. Also, about twice as long as Tales, which gets first billing, which makes no sense. Overall, worth a download, maybe a watch on the eventual ultimate edition. Don't spend the money on the separate DVD, though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KnightWing Posted April 5, 2009 Report Share Posted April 5, 2009 ...I'd be interested to see it in the context of the movie and if they included Bernie and Bernie as well. They actually filmed scenes with them, so that's a distinct possibility. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Joker's Groupie Posted April 7, 2009 Report Share Posted April 7, 2009 I watched it opening day with my dad. It was awkward watching the sex scenes with him. I wanted to go get popcorn during the scene but my dad said that we're going to eat after the movie so I had to watch it. The credits were good and I liked the movie ending better than the comic ending. I give it a 4 out of 5. :happy: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackFetch Posted June 25, 2009 Report Share Posted June 25, 2009 Warner Bros. is giving Zack Snyder's director's cut of "Watchmen" a limited theatrical rollout one week before Comic-Con International in San Diego. The cut, which will have an additional 25 minutes of footage including the death of a supporting character, will screen in Los Angeles, New York, Minneapolis and Dallas before the movie is released on Blu-ray and DVD on July 21. The rollout will culminate with a special screening July 25 at Comic-Con that is designed to act as a BD-Live event, a Blu-ray feature that will allow any viewer in North America to watch the movie simultaneously as the audience at Comic-Con, see and hear Snyder comment on the movie, and even ask questions. The screening will then be archived and will be able to be accessed for future viewings. "Comic-Con, it isn't just comic book fanatics, it's cinephiles as well. It'll be cool to discuss what people are thinking," Snyder said at a "Watchmen" press day, held Wednesday at Warner Bros., where the news was unveiled. The day was designed to showcase a bonus Blu-ray feature called Maximum Movie Mode as well as features to be seen in Snyder's Blu-ray release of "300: The Complete Experience." "Warner Bros. is hoping to use the filmmakers of its movies to produce immersive home movie experiences." "We're lucky to have filmmakers at Warners that believe in that," said Warners vp high-def market expansion Kris Brown. The theatrical rerelease is unusual, as the movie is generally considered to be a bit of a boxoffice disappointment, with only $107.5 million grossed domestically. Critics were also divided about the movie, with some saying it was too slavish to the graphic novel's many devotees. Snyder, however, stood by it. "I'm proud of the movie. It does everything I wanted it to," he said. 'Watchmen' director's cut to theaters http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/conten...50f3e4213d94a2c Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Venneh Posted June 25, 2009 Report Share Posted June 25, 2009 I'd be interested to see what the full version's like. Odds that they won't release it out by me, but is worth a shot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Posted June 25, 2009 Report Share Posted June 25, 2009 I'd be interested to see what the full version's like. Odds that they won't release it out by me, but is worth a shot. How far are you from Minneapolis? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KnightWing Posted June 25, 2009 Report Share Posted June 25, 2009 I like this idea. Hopefully it'll put back in a lot of the story information that was necessary for the story's depth. A lot of my friends who hadn't read the book thought the movie was complete garbage because of the way the action and sex overshadowed the actual plot and character depth. They assumed that it was a pornographic, gore-filled action movie with a boring plot. I still have yet to convince them that there's actually a great story hidden behind the sawn-off hands, blue penis, and flashy camera effects. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Missy Posted June 25, 2009 Author Report Share Posted June 25, 2009 This is not the first time I've heard the comparison to porno. Why, because the sex scene was too long and we saw a CG penis? I mean, I just don't get it. 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.