Watchmen

[blueerica]

Originally Posted by JWBear

Are Bill & I the only ones who loved the movie?

Originally Posted by innerSpaceman

No, I rather enjoyed it.

I have never read the GN, so I liked it just as a movie. Even though all the daming critiques noted above are spot on.


But I'm a sucker for washed up Superheroes stories.

Even though I kinda liked it, I could tell it lost something in spiritual if not literal translation from the graphic novel. Because certainly there couldn't be such fanboy mania over this material if the GN weren't way, way better.

Originally Posted by Bornieo: Fully Loaded

It's flawed but well worth experiancing and based on the above, I think the GN should be read beforehand.

Originally Posted by Pirate Bill

I'll join my voice to the minority here who loved it. And I haven't read the novel...yet. I've been wanting to, but just haven't. I'm definitely picking it up right away.

As much as I like the "Boy Scout" superheroes like Superman, I also love a flawed hero. So I think it was the characters in Watchmen that made for a more enjoyable movie experience. Especially Rorschach. What an awesomely psychotic anti-hero that you just have to love.

I rather enjoyed the film, so, maybe we're less of a minority that was previously though (just, perhaps, not as vocal?). I'm a huge fan of the flawed hero and I didn't hate the music, even if it was a bit... copy-catish.

I have more questions than answers, and I want to read the GN. But, is it too late for me? Are things ruined? I think I'm going to order it, anyway... but figured it's worth asking of those who know the GN.

[blueerica]

I should add: there were a great number of children under, say, 8 at the movie... here in Utah. Theaters were packed. I can't imagine all of them were happy. Did they market the film to a crowd that's expecting X-Men?

[Alex]

It depends. As long and packed with semi-pointless backstory as the movie was there is quite a bit more in the book (and with enough extra that it is no longer semi-pointless). For example, you'll know enough about the people involved to actually care about

Spoiler:

the reveal on SSII parentage.

The ending is different. Better in the movie, in my opinion.

That stupid lion thing won't seem completely out of place (they should have cut it since it was completely without explanation).

A lot more detail on Rorschach, which is good.

All in all, I'd say that if you were intrigued then read the GN. It certainly wouldn't be a burn. But at the same time I was flipping through it last night and it is remarkable how much of it is just a shot for shot storyboard of what was in the movie. So I might suggest waiting a couple months for the movie to fade.

I'm not a big fan of the GN but the movie did make me appreciate it more in that the huge flaws in the movie shined a light on the subtle good things about the novel.

[JWBear]

Originally Posted by blueerica

I rather enjoyed the film, so, maybe we're less of a minority that was previously though (just, perhaps, not as vocal?). I'm a huge fan of the flawed hero and I didn't hate the music, even if it was a bit... copy-catish.

I have more questions than answers, and I want to read the GN. But, is it too late for me? Are things ruined? I think I'm going to order it, anyway... but figured it's worth asking of those who know the GN.

Yes! Read the GN. There is so much depth and layering that the movie could not show. And since they changed one of the main plot points for the movie, you still get to discover the original plot device at the end.

Originally Posted by blueerica

I should add: there were a great number of children under, say, 8 at the movie... here in Utah. Theaters were packed. I can't imagine all of them were happy. Did they market the film to a crowd that's expecting X-Men?

There were small children in the theater when we saw it too. I know a lot of people are going to see it knowing nothing about it beforehand. If they think they are seeing just another Spiderman or X-Men, they are going to be very disappointed, confused, or both.

[Alex]

Oh, and unlike the movie the novel really does feel like it exists in the 1980s. They told you this in the movie but nothing (in my opinion) really sold that beyond some of the music and the desktop computer on Ozy's desk.

I saw it in a reserved-seat theater in the balcony bar. So no children in sight. Very nice. I'm always amazed at what parents will take their children to. I can kind of understand this one if they didn't pay much attention. But my favorite was the four-year-old sitting in front of me during Four Brothers.

But kids would have been really traumatized if

Spoiler:

The images of post-explosion New York had been used in the movie. Stacks of mangled bodies everywhere.

[Pirate Bill]

Any parent that is taking a child to an R-rated movie without first previewing the movie is a stupid parent and deserves a swift kick in the head. If you can't do the kicking yourself then send the offenders my way and I'll kick them for you.

Back to Rorschach...

Here's how much I knew going into the movie: "The dude wears a lame mask with ink blots on the face? Ugh...I'm probably going to hate this guy."

Leaving the movie: "Dude, Rorschach rocks! Best. Hero. Ever!"

He got all the best lines. And even though the "bat growl" bugged me in Batman, it worked with Rorschach. And with his beautifully written dialog I could listen to him all day.

[Moonliner]

Originally Posted by Pirate Bill

Any parent that is taking a child to an R-rated movie without first previewing the movie is a stupid parent and deserves a swift kick in the head.

I have a really funny story about that and a movie called "Pulp Fiction"

[innerSpaceman]

I imagine the creepy moving inkblots on the mask was one of the movie's major advantages over the comic. It was really cool-looking, and impossible to achieve on flat-panels.

But speaking of flat ... the movie just had a certain flat dullness that I feel couldn't have been the same tone as the GN. And it's not like me reading it now could reproduce the same effect it gave fanboys 20 years ago. So even though I'll likely check it out, I'm not expecting a revelation.


So I guess I'll have to take it on faith that it was great, but that filming it practically verbatem (sans the ending and the other comic story weaved thru) does not provide the same thrill.

To me, it was a very interesting exercise ... and I liked it well enough. But it did not soar. And I was expecting better.

Sheesh, the way fan peeps creamed their pants over the trailer led me to expect fantasticness.

On the other end of the spectrum, I know people completely unfamiliar with the material who are indeed expecting X-Men.

[Bornieo: Fully Loaded]

Originally Posted by innerSpaceman

I
Sheesh, the way fan peeps creamed their pants over the trailer led me to expect fantasticness.
.

Well, we know how the trailers for films really expresess exactly what the film will be. heheh. I think most of us Fan Peeps were more excited to see the visuals come to life than anything. I think AintItCoolNews.com's review more than explaines that idea.

http://www.aintitcoolnews.com/node/40225

love that when I first discovered WATCHMEN, I had to wait between issues. That it was a part of that Sophmore High School Experience. That I got my driver’s license and had to drive 2 hours round trip to get the next issue, and that only my friends in my high school read those issues and shared that experience with me. That it wasn’t a single session. That it wasn’t a trade paperback experience, but something that I waited and wondered where it was all going. That I got aggravated that it wasn’t necessarily telling me the story I could have possibly conceived or made up at that age. That my friends and I sat around talking about it. Condemning & Condoning Ozymandias. That it introduced me to Alexander The Great.

I love that as I’ve run this site… I’ve been able to revisit the material continually and discover not only little things about that story that my brain wasn’t picking up on at the initial readings and even subsequent readings. And I love that in the future I will revisit that book, that material and discover ever more. There is a reason TIME MAGAZINE put it as one of the 100 greatest works. It is deeply textured and nuanced in a way that very few comic books have ever been.

[Alex]

Originally Posted by Moonliner

If:

Readers like it and Non-readers don't = Read the book first

If Readers don't and Non-readers do = Don't read it first

If Readers and Non-readers don't = Not an issue, I'll just skip it.

If Readers and non-readers like it = Read the book first so I can get some of the inside jokes.

Saw this matrix from upthread. I've been watching a few discussion threads at various places and must say I'm not seeing a solid trend.

One thing I find interesting is the huge spread at Rotten Tomatoes between the cream of the crop critics and everybody else. The "cream of the crop" is at 43% and everybody else was 70% favorable. I don't know that I've seen such a large split in quite a while.