I just saw the Watchmen movie, ask me anything!

[Kelvin Mace]

Incredible, simply incredible. More faithful to the novel than ANY movie ever.

[TK421]

1. I just got back from seeing it, and I want to see it again

it was that awesome :) However, I did get the sense that there were people in that theater who were not familiar with the story and didn't understand some things. I would recommend to anyone they read the novel first...SO much was cut out of this movie, it could have been over five hours long.

[Kelvin Mace]

2. Yeah, we had about a dozen people leave

parents with younger kids who seemed to believe they were here to see "The Superfriends" movie.

What part of "Rated R" escaped your comprehension?

Yes, things were cut from the movie, but the truly critical core was retained. I could quibble about the ending, but not for the reasons most might. I would have preferred that they kept the last conversation between John and Veidt, it put Veidt in his place.

[crimsonblue]

3. I didn't like it.

I thought it was rather boring, too long, and non-linear in such a way that made comprehension difficult. :thumbsdown:

[Kelvin Mace]

4. Did you read the novel?

I have to admit that being a fan of the original made the movie easy.

The novel is non-linear as well, the shunting back and forth in time was in the original.

Not for eveyone, I fear.

[crimsonblue]

5. no I didn't, and that's probably the reason.

It looked amazing, and it wasn't a horrible movie, but definitely not the favorite of mine.

[Kelvin Mace]

6. I would recommend the novel

and a second viewing. It will make more sense. It is a movie that requires concentration if you haven't read the original work. A lot of nuance in the book is translated to the movie, so it is a thinking piece.

What was interesting to me is that the audience was very quiet when the movie was over, none of the usual chatter. It is a dark story that tells a lot of truth about humanity, and paints superheroes realistically, showing us how people would REALLY behave if they were "superheroes" and the dynamic between them, the public and government.

The original "Dune" movie had a similar problem. It is far more majestic and compelling work (especially the longer version) if you read the book.

Personally, the only way the movie could have been better would have been as a mini-series.

[crimsonblue]

7. The movie was almost ruined for me....

There was a guy directly behind us that was laughing hysterically at every grotesque action (especially the meat cleaver and hand saw). What a fucking psycopath!! I thought the guy was going to whip out a gun and start mowing people down in the theatre.

[Kelvin Mace]

8. *sigh*

Yeah, that would ruin it. It is not a movie that you can suffer distractions.

On a side note, and I don't know how old you are or you ever saw the "Wild Wild West" (the TV series, not the abomination with Will Smith), but I was flummoxed by the fact that the actor who played "Big Figure", they villain in prison who tries to murder Rorschach in his cell (the little person), is a dead ringer for the late Michael Dunn, who played Miguelito Loveless, one of the BEST villains in TV history.

[Ava]

15. the actress who played laurie did a pretty horrible job too

you left that out.

[rcrush]

16. Her role wasnt that great.

Laurie Jupiter in the comic is pretty sucky.

[Ava]

17. her role wasn't what i was referring to

her inability to act was

[blogslut]

32. She was awful

Not a good casting choice.

[Bryan]

9. I'm shocked to report that it was pretty swell

As I expected, I'm still not convinced that the film needed to be made, because too much of the force and structural rigor of the book would inevitably be lost to the time constraints of a theatrical film, but I was quite pleased.

The thematic heart of the book is there; it remains a grim, pessimistic story about traumatized people living in a recognizably ugly world, and the questionable choices they make.

[Kelvin Mace]

23. It is an incredible effort

visually stunning. The sequence on Mars is completely faithful to the book, almost frame for frame.

It will (and has) gotten MANY people to read the original, and if nothing else, the movie was worth making.

[WCGreen]

10. Saw it tonight...

It was a really good movie...

[kentauros]

11. How violent is it?

As in, how little regard is there for the rest of the human population?

I know of the comic, having been around comic stores when the original came out, but not having been into any kind of superhero comics back then, I didn't bother to buy it. Yes, I have read the synopsis in various places (wiki, The Houston Press' review of the movie) so I know it will be violent and possibly sickeningly so. Tell me I'm wrong ;)

[rcrush]

13. The comic was very violent.

And its true to the comic so its very violent. I loved the movie cause it was able to tell the same message as the comic.

[Ava]

14. It's pretty violent

not sickeningly so.. but it is pretty violent

[kentauros]

18. Okay, I guess what I should have asked is:

How high is the body count?

I like some violent movies (The Professional is a favorite, even with the graphic killings) but if huge numbers of "civilians" (or even "enemy" soldiers) are being killed as part of the plot, it tends to turn me off to the rest of the "message".

[rcrush]

19. You want me to spoil the end?

Its pretty high.

[kentauros]

20. Then I'll probably wait until it's out on torrent

;)

I really am bothered by high numbers of dead. Plenty will say "it's only a movie" yet how can you be entertained by not suspending disbelief? Apocalyptic scenarios just bother me. At least whenever 2012 comes out, it will be so bad, that 7 billion dead and rotting while the heroes "survive" will be so laughable as to be pointless to ever suspend disbelief ;)

[Kelvin Mace]

26. Well, the ultimate body count

is not in the billions, low tens of millions.

I do, however, believe this is a movie worth buying a ticket too, and visually it is stunning, so it is worth seeing on a big screen.

[Ava]

21. don't most people going to see the movie already know the end?

:shrug: even those who haven't read the book

[kentauros]

22. Not really.

Never read the series (didn't really appeal to me) and the synopses I've seen only mention an apocalypse, but not for the whole world.

[Kelvin Mace]

27. Not really

if you didn't read the book, you are pretty much clueless.

[Kelvin Mace]

25. Actual people dying graphically on screen

the body count is a fraction of a Bond film. In terms of people dying en toto, pretty damned high.

But again, so was the novel.

[Kelvin Mace]

24. Depends on how you view violence in context

it is pretty realistic in its depiction of violence, and very much like like real life in the casualness of violence.

The story is dark, but it make people THINK, and provokes discussion. It is nuanced, and not B&W like most comics were (and the rightwing way of thinking still is).

It is one of the few movies worth paying to see.

[kentauros]

29. Like I said, I like The Professional.

Even though he's a "cleaner" he's still a character I'd like to know, despite the violence he does as well as the rest that's done in the movie. I can get past the relatively minor amount of violence Gary Oldman's character (and his agents) do, since at least his agents aren't so "casual" about it. And with the special effects getting better and better at depicting a reality we could never visually see, it gets that much more bothersome when it's violent or ultra-violent.

I understand it's a plot that makes people think. Yet so did 2001 and Contact with relatively little violent content and still managing to be dark in places (HAL killing the scientists and one astronaut; the bombing of the first Machine with no regard to the technicians or what might happen with it already running.) Massive amounts of death and destruction aren't necessary to make people think, even for whatever the message is with this movie.

Perhaps there are times when a graphic novel should remain just that ;)

[Ava]

12. I thought it was entirely too long

I expected to love it.. instead I just left with a "meh" feeling about it. Maybe my expectations were just too high.

[Kelvin Mace]

28. It could easily have been a five hour movie

if they had been rigidly faithful to the book.

I didn't see it as long, but anything shorter would not have done justice to the book. I can quibble about some of the edits, but ultimately, it was a faithful adaptation that captured the spirit of teh book, so I won't complain.

Seldom does Hollywood get it right. This was one of the few times.

[Iggo]

30. It's a graphic novel, right?

And is the novel a quick read?

'Cause I'd like to see a movie that colorful and action-packed in the theater, know'm say'n?

[Kelvin Mace]

31. No, it is a long read

which is why the movie is complex. Well worth the effort though.

[LittleClarkie]

34. It is a long read but it is a graphic novel correct?

I read the graphic novel, but is there an actual novel this was based on?

[Kelvin Mace]

35. Yes, it is a graphic novel

I said "novel" for short.

The ending of the movie is slightly different from the novel, but it works and is a lot more realistic on film that the comic's ending would have been.

[NewJeffCT]

36. Nope

the 1986 graphic novel series was the "novel"

[LittleClarkie]

33. I am so psyched to see that thing. The graphic novel was so cool.

I was hoping they'd done a good job. COOL!