'Watchmen' review

elementsk8xy90 - March 16, 2009 at 3:00 PM

and for everyone who is complaning about seeing a blue penis too many times. grow up. and you can argue whether it is necessary or not but in a way it is because it goes into more depth of Dr.Manhattans character. So if movies such as this are too much for you people to handle than dont see them and than complain about them. also, you try making such a large graphic novel into a movie under 3 hours long and see just how good you can all do it(those of you crying) and thats all i gotta say so goodbye

teemoore722007 - March 16, 2009 at 2:36 PM

Wow, lots of polarizing viewpoints here. I think the movie had some good sequences, including the Comedian's death and anything wi th Rorshach in it, but it did miss the point. All that said, I'm not too sure anyone could pull this movie off in less than 3 hours, but a worthier try would've been to go the "Trainspotting" route and focus on one character as the true lead that you follow (maybe Rorshach, since he journals everything). Another idea I discussed with my wife was for someone like Tarantino to do this and break it up into acts - this would help those who haven't read the book(s) and would allow more time jumping to occur. Didn't hate it, but didn't love it either.

elementsk8xy90 - March 16, 2009 at 2:34 PM

you people are very ignorant, and a waste of time. Id love to see any of you make a better movie and write a better graphic novel than that. you can get as mad as you want but I am never going to check this again, i just registered to tell you people you are ignorant and dont appreciate a good movie/ story.

tomc - March 11, 2009 at 11:38 AM

My girlfriend and I popped in to see this movie without knowing a thing about it before hand. We both LOVE movies and see alot of them. This was the first movie I got up and walked out on. What a waste of money and time. Easily the worst movie I have seen in years...

huntm856 - March 10, 2009 at 7:55 PM

I can understand critics who pan this movie for execution, but most negative reviews I've read, like this one, struck me as having been written by people for whom the ideas the story explores are just too complex to understand. I guess philosophy courses aren't even electives in film school curricula.

GreyTheory - March 9, 2009 at 5:20 PM

I disagree with many of the choices Snyder made (Manhattan telling Laurie who her father was rather than letting her realize it on her own, no final Manhattan/Veidt conversation, Rorschach wimpering - even briefly - before his death) but the movie is not nearly as bas as many seem to want it to be. The movie is really incomplete; forced into a narrow time constraint that left far too many elements on the cutting room floor. Without a full explanation on how Walter Kovacs became Rorschach (especially the Kitty Genovese murder), Jackie Earle Haley is just playing a misogynist with a mask and a Napoleonic complex. Not explaing how Jon Osterman "puts the parts together in the right order" to reassemble himself neglects the origins of his detatchment from humanity. Here's hoping Snyder has no fear in releasing the "Full & Complete Version" on DVD, even if it means a second or third disc in the set.

linder53 - March 9, 2009 at 4:30 PM

One thing I won't forget is that big blue *#@#. I left the theatre screamming, "If I see another blue #@#*, I'll scream." My son thought it was funny. I was about to go to sleep a few times. Violence doesn't turn me on now what they were doing in the owl after rescueing those people, does.

Andrade - March 9, 2009 at 1:29 PM

This is not a film about "super heroes", and it is far from capturing the complexity and humanity (even if it's the sordid side to it) of the graphic novel, which will remain pretty much unfilmable. Good review, by the way.

Murphspot - March 9, 2009 at 3:39 AM

I've never read a movie review that screamed "The ideas in this film were completely over my head" as much as this one. Snyder had "no interest in making sense of a world overcome by evil and the heroism that works to stop it" because that's not what Watchmen is about. That it doesn't fall into Mr. Pais' narrow definition of a standard, good defeats evil superhero movie should not be counted as a failure. The brutality and psychoses are an integral part of looking at what the superhero mindset would actually entail. That the film doesn't presume that the audience needs to have their hand held is a positive, not, as Mr. Pais suggests, negative.

ch0ncheese - March 8, 2009 at 6:39 PM

many of these critics do have points on the films they critic about, but they forget that this is a graphic novel adaptation to film. most of the time these kind of films fail on how the story is truly portrayed in the the actual graphic novel or comic. in my opinion the film compared to the graphic novel was close enough for fans and movie lovers to enjoy. zack snyder may have put some of his visual effects in the film, but it was to pick the film up. people came to see a movie with a well written story but also to see some action partaking in this film. it is a superhero movie.

kinetik - March 8, 2009 at 1:21 PM

Pais - you are a pompous douchebag. It's a movie about super heroes and all you can say is that there wasn't enough character development? I saw the movie last night and though it was a bit long, I was thoroughly entertained on several levels. I look forward to seeing it again. Readers - don't let this guy dissuade you from seeing it.

bela45 - March 8, 2009 at 12:43 PM

My concern is for the parents accompanied by their children that I seen in attendance last night. I will admit I have never read the novel but was aware of the premise of " superheroes " gone bad....Very graphic.. I only hope that word of mouth reviews will get around that this is not about some new commericial movie that the kids will enjoy and will generate "must have" action figure requests at Christmas

Frodo17 - March 8, 2009 at 12:21 PM

Read the Graphic Novel people. Than you'll understand why the movie displayed the nudity, violence and dialogue that it did. If it didn't than it would be a lie using the title of Watchman. Great adaptation.

rave - March 8, 2009 at 8:38 AM

Loved it and I'm old. If you liked Batman, Sin City and 300, you will like this movie. It's a very relevant movie that explores the issues of moralty and mankind's basic human nature. And it's a lot of fun. Reviewers who call this boring and hard to follow are a sad product of this generation that can't handle anything longer or more complex than a 30 second commercial.

o210o - March 8, 2009 at 12:58 AM

this movie was gay if you want to see a mans privates for 2 and a half hours it was great then

shuntashay - March 7, 2009 at 3:32 PM

This movie's heros are more demon than heroic. The Comedian deserved his death, shooting a pregnant woman in cold blood and she was pregnant with his child. The killings, except for the Comedian's and his arch foe, didn't make sense. I give this movie two thumbs down.

BigMofo - March 6, 2009 at 3:58 PM

This reviewer is a moron, I doubt he never gave the film a real chance and had this hit piece written before he went to see it. You can tell from the first 3 sentences (including a spoiler) that he has disdain for this genre and probably gave "Broke Back Mountain" and "Milk" is highest marks....You need to get off your high, elitist perch ass-wipe.

Alex9545 - March 6, 2009 at 11:12 AM

I don't know why you're so negative on this movie. I found it fantastic, and was impressed from start to finish, beginning with the quasi still shots and ending with desolation row. Did you read the novel? That little thing made of paper that the movie was based on? The movie followed very closely with the storyline, down to dialogue and imaging. Watchmen was a gruesome comic! and it serves a lot to be analyzed. I thought each actor perfectly suited his or her part: Rorschach-enough said; Dan, awkward and nerdy and a great guy at heart; Dr. Manhattan, becoming detached from humanity but not without a conscience; Adrian, with his indelible confidence in every situation; Laurie, with her many frustrations, relating to sex and family history; and the Comedian, a complete jerk, but not without reason. Even the bit parts were good, like Hooded Justice. From start to finish, I was absolutely enthralled. It might help to know your subject matter before you review.

roadburn - March 6, 2009 at 5:48 AM

This review is 3 sentences long, far too long to sustain my interest.

please - March 5, 2009 at 9:07 PM

there's no way any novel can be summed up or captured in a 90 minute glory flick from some hollywood spank. we all suck for thinking that this movie will ever return what the original novel have us. CGI is neat and there's alot of snot inbetween the frames but this is not WATCHMEN - as good as it may be, there isn't going to be enough if you've read WATCHMEN. another over paid entertainer sucking our blood...ask what you can do for your country not how much we should pay for your movie

Odin - March 5, 2009 at 5:17 PM

I have read a few more unfavorable reviews of "Watchmen" now, but I believe these critics have a lot better understanding of the comic series and the film than Pais was able to express in his review. I believe Bob Mondello's review "In 'Watchmen,' A Long Look At Life In Spandex" (found on NPR's website) and Christy Lemire's review "'Watchmen' faithful but flawed" (The Associated Press • March 5, 2009) were written much better. I never said this movie was "above sucking," but I think having mostly lousy movies out in theaters now is no excuse to settle for lousy critic reviews.

Odin - March 4, 2009 at 7:55 PM

Seeing as how I have not yet seen the movie (and I admitted as much), my comment on the review was based mainly on the following line:"Equally cold and sappy, "Watchmen" has been executed rather than crafted, and again suggests Snyder has no interest in making sense of a world overcome by evil and the heroism that works to stop it." When you state that the movie should have been about heroes working to stop evil- then I believe you have either completely missed the point of Watchmen, or have written a poorly worded review.

SexualHarassmntPanda - March 4, 2009 at 5:23 PM

Why do the MMX reviewers hate movies so much? Sexual Harassment Panda saw this movie and thought it was pretty good. A technical achievement given how complex the graphic novel was, and Snyder was able to keep most of the general thematics intact. Not a perfect movie but definitely not worth 2.5 stars.

Indydude32 - March 4, 2009 at 3:10 PM

Has anyone noticed how every movie reviewed by the metromix staff never gets a good rating? I'm not even saying a great one, just an adequate or good rating. If you pay strict attention to how they look at every movie then none would be worth watching. I know there's not a lot of "great" films being released in current times, but sometimes you just want to be entertained for a few hours and not feel like you were ripped off. If I'm going to a movie, I want to leave feeling like it was worth it. I don't always sit there and analyze what happened. It's Hollywood, they always play by the rules of life.

MMX_Geoff - March 4, 2009 at 1:49 PM

garfw8 and Odin, reserve your skepticism until you see the movie. I can understand why the criticism would be confusing based only on the book, but it holds up as a criticism against the movie. The movie is generally faithful with plot points, characters, dialogue, etc. But it really misses the spirit of the book and a lot of the nuances. In the movie, Zack Snyder does indulge the violence, as if he's saying "look! isn't this cool!" in a way the book never does. The job of adapting such a great piece of material was going to be tough for anyone, but once you see the movie you might end up agreeing that the task was way over Snyder's head.

Odin - March 3, 2009 at 4:20 PM

I agree with garfw8. While I have not seen the film yet, the Graphic novel is not about the heroism that stands up against evil in the world at all! This whole film questions the entire idea of a superhero, where Batman doesn't save the day and Spider-Man doesn't get the girl running to him mindlessly in an overdone wedding dress. This comic series finally let out the dark side of heroes and ran with it. I hope the film captures the spirit of the comic, which is the type of genius that is in good company with madness.

garfw8 - March 3, 2009 at 10:21 AM

"(Ruthless actions by The Comedian and Rorschach are indulged instead of analyzed.) " This comment demonstrates a tendency among some (less gifted) movie reviewers to expect &/or demand that whatever movie they are viewing should wrap up every dilemma posed & place it, resolved & uncontroversial, in their laps. The Watchmen story is ABOUT those ruthless actions. It is ABOUT what defines a 'hero'. The ENTIRE STORY provides the analysis this reviewer says he seeks. Apparently he needs that spelled out for him/her - most fans of the story, thankfully, do not.