The Escapist Presents: MovieBob Reviews: Watchmen

[NobleBear]

Bob, I still like you and will continue to listen to/watch your reviews but I have to take you to task on this one.

First, cut the Rorschach voice bullshit. It gets tired quickly especially after being bombarded by the deluge of people lining up to inflict me with it.

Next, I didn't stop by to listen to you masturbate for six minutes. You liked the film. You thought it was important. People delivered their lines well; you want people to see it again. That's, what? thirty seconds?

You know why I like your stuff: the analysis. It seems though I'm only likely to get it from you when you review a movie you hate or consider ridiculous.

Watchmen was, at best, 3/4 of a good movie.

Laurie's actions don't follow naturally from her motives anymore now that she has been changed to be more emotionally well adjusted.

The pacing of the acting sucked. Although I don't blame the actors, rather I blame the editors. Moments with great gravitas are simply swept through so the the importance of things isn't something the audience realizes, it's something they must be told. We are barely given a sense of global tension and aren't given a sense of local tension. Why is society reacting the way they are to the masks? Why are they rioting? In the movie, we don't know.

Is this what I'm to expect from you; that unless a video game is the target of social criticism or a movie sucks that its not worth the time write anything other than filler?

If these aren't things you want to consider in the course of your review then tell me why they should be blown off.

Anyway, that's my two cents.

 

[Mrmandude]

You see that is bull shit i waych the film befor i read the novel and i didn't read the novel because i was confuesd god you must be dumb it is about a murder case of course there will be back stories you problay got confused the moment the plot got away from action and zach snyder did an amazing job the novel is so amazing it is a mirical for him to pull it off watch it againe and pay attenion by the way i aint a fanboy if only got into 1 week ago

 

[Aries_Split]

You see that is bull shit i waych the film befor i read the novel and i didn't read the novel because i was confuesd god you must be dumb it is about a murder case of course there will be back stories you problay got confused the moment the plot got away from action and zach snyder did an amazing job the novel is so amazing it is a mirical for him to pull it off watch it againe and pay attenion by the way i aint a fanboy if only got into 1 week ago

Unless you live in a third world country on the brink of Armageddon then there is no excuse for you not to have proper grammar and spelling.


Or at least something that doesn't look like you slammed your dick on the keyboard fifteen times before banging your head on it.

Seriously, there are MANY people to whom English isn't a first or even second language, and they don't have picture perfect grammar, but they make an effort to make it LEGIBLE.

 

[Elminsters Hat]

You see that is bull shit i waych the film befor i read the novel and i didn't read the novel because i was confuesd god you must be dumb it is about a murder case of course there will be back stories you problay got confused the moment the plot got away from action and zach snyder did an amazing job the novel is so amazing it is a mirical for him to pull it off watch it againe and pay attenion by the way i aint a fanboy if only got into 1 week ago

They're called comma's and periods. They are your friends, use them. It would also help if you would write up a properly argued statement instead of just being an incoherent dick in general.

And you're totally a fanboy.

--------------------------------------------------------

Haven't seen Watchmen yet, but I definitely will give it a try. Not having read the comic I fully expect to be confused though.

 

[SonofSeth]

2009: YEAR OF THE DONG!

 

[The Extremist]

I almost danced a little jig at this video. I thought the world had gone completely crazy for a minute there. The incredibly negative reviews on Metacritic from Wall Street Journal, The Hollywood Reporter, The New York Times, Chicago Tribune, Newsweek, etc. made me wonder if I had even seen the same review as those critics.

... and the most unintentionally hilarious sex scene I have ever seen is what killed the film for me.

From what I saw and (subsequently) read the sex scene was supposed to be hilarious. At the very least it was meant to be ironic.

Meaning the movie is for fans only, since people who have not read the book with leave the theaters highly confused (like my two friends I went to see the movie with)

The only reason people claim it is such a great movie is because of the rich source material and stunning visual effects.

As a counter example I submit myself: I didn't touch The Watchmen book until after I saw the film and I thought it was brilliant. It had some weak scenes or elements in scenes but overall I thought it was an awesome movie.

The soundtrack was a terrible selection of random mismatched periodic songs.

Have to disagree with you there.

When Dr. Manhattan and Laurie are having their confrontation on Mars, her lack of good acting, of expressing the character's emotions appropriately, caused me to think Billy Crudup was doing a piss poor job.

The Mars scenes between Spectre and Dr. Manhatten bothered me as well. I never blamed Billy Crudup but now that you mention it Ackermann's acting in this scene wasn't particularly good. What bothered me more was

Spoiler

the point where Dr Manhattan shows Laurie "things his way" (i.e. life from his perspective) and somehow the hints she picked up throughout her life regarding who her biological father might be are the most relevant images he can project.

EDIT: From watching some interviews (yeah, I'm only checking out the hype now) it seems I'm wrong about this. Apparently Dr Manhattan's "power" (though I have yet to encounter it in the books) is to give you a memory. Feels poorly executed if this is what his "letting you see things through his eyes" power is.

Regarding the often-derrided sex scene, I think it's close to the most tragically-honest depiction of "hopeless-dork-gets-to-nail-woman-way-way-way-WAY-the-fuck-out-of-his-league" captured on film in recent memory... which is of course not to say that it's not silly and awkward looking.

Normally the obligatory sex scene would put me off but somehow, despite being graphic, it just seemed to fit. The blue lighting, choice of song, and timing in the context of the rest of the movie just made it seem like it was something that had to be shown, exactly as it was shown.

 

[whaleswiththumbs]

Listening to it right now.

I don't really think much of Watchman anymore, good idea nad story, etc. but i find a problem with the nakedness, yeah i know w/e f**k what your arguments are. If they were gonna do that they could definetly try to warn somebody about the CGI penis, in all of the trailers he wasn't there(Dr. Manhattan) I was alittle ok with how close they got to showing it at first but then it just came out of nowhere, i felt gay everytime it came on screen,i mean i suggested to my parents we go check this out, and bam(!). Please no little fanboy, or defender of the "goodness" of this try to cover that with what a Youtube commentor said to me(Rough Quote atleast):' Dr Manhattan is beyond the human need for close' I have two arguements to that, one involves nudist and i wont get into that, but if he is passed wearing cloths then why did he wear the tux and banana hamock? apparently Moviebob is wrong and you need to read the comic to understand this.

Other than Dr CGI (and the GAY guy who designed his genital area), i liked this movie, i was willing to forgive the sex scenes you know it's a rated R movie, thats gonna happen. My favorite character is probably Rorshac(someone should correct me on that name) i loved the mask probably mnore than his creepy loner style, added to his obserbor(remember Marvel's from the Civil War?) effect, liked the weird parkour abilities and his awesome work in the Jail, but of course you have to respect the whore(Silk, but i will call her as she is) wearing those heels and doing that, batrman ripoff (I never heard his name, if you are already correcting my names here please help again) did not look like he could win a slap contest much lessfight off half a prison of inmates.

It really feels like the guy who made the comic ripoff all his hereos except for the whore, but she may be from Wonder Woman.

 

[pigeon_of_doom]

Frankly, I don't understand why Watchmen is considered "unfilmable," especially when the source material is essentially a storyboard that already cuts a large chunk of the work involved in the project.

You haven't read it though have you? Its more than just a storyboard. Moore made it with the intent of distinguishing comics from other mediums. Some elements of the comic can perhaps at best be mimicked by the film, but it could not be replicated.

I haven't seen the film yet but thats my general stance on most film adaptions.

 

[The Extremist]

Apologies for the double-post but I couldn't let the opportunity slip away to point out how right the antithesis was:

While I also enjoyed the movie and agree with Bob on most points, it has come to my attention exactly why this movie will not be recognized for the masterpiece it is as an adaptation, a super hero movie, and a film in its own right: Dr Manhattan's penis.

...

This kind of shit pisses me right the fuck off, but what it proves to me is that the world at large is not only not ready for a movie like Watchmen. It does not deserve a movie like Watchmen. It may not even deserve the empty explosion fest that are Michael Bay movies. They refuse to grow up and good things are like pearls before swine.

This just in...

... (had it not been for the 4 foot blue IMAX penis) ... Call it an ode to blue penis.

2009: YEAR OF THE DONG!

Seriously, this is what you took away from Watchmen? Out of 160-odd minutes of well crafted film you took away maybe the 5 minutes that containted a blue CGI penis?

 

[Maet]

You haven't read it though have you? Its more than just a storyboard. Moore made it with the intent of distinguishing comics from other mediums. Some elements of the comic can perhaps at best be mimicked by the film, but it could not be replicated.

I haven't seen the film yet but thats my general stance on most film adaptions.

No I haven't read it, but I'm not going to lie and say that I'm not interested since watching the film. I'm definitely going to have a look at it once I have time.

Anything can be filmed, and it's supremely pretentious to think otherwise. Saying Moore's work can't be filmed because he says so is like saying Shakespeare's works can't be filmed because movies didn't exist when he was writing. While you'll probably never get the source author's intended cut, it doesn't change the fact that the director's duty is to "adapt" the material and not replicate it verbatim. If that were the case, would that not outright defeat the purpose of adaptation?

In the end, we have a Watchmen film, and it's a pretty good one at that. I liked the movie, and I feel like reading the original material at one point.

 

[jboking]

I think MovieBob was far to gracious. I liked the watchmen, but even an uneducated film ditz like myself could find numerous problems with it. I would have liked to hear about some of the random ass scenes of over the top violence. I didn't much care for Ozzys performance either.

 

[mrverbal]

I'd like to go on a rant about this review, but something else needs a rant first.

get over the dick. You all (probably) have one. They exist. Putting one is a film does not make you gay, nor does seeing one. Penis Happens. There are two basic options in relation to the wang:

1) You noticed it, and shrugged and watched the actual film, and haven't bothered complaining about it

2) You noticed it, and became obsessed because you wanted to taste it. To hide this you whined/joked about it on the internet as if it were of relevance.

Pick one.

Anyway, on the review:

I think you are wildly overstating the films acting, script, story and...well, everything.

The guy who played rorschrach was ok, but not amazing - lets face it, for most of the film he was just voice acting. The guy who played John was pretty good too, although, again, mostly emotionless and voice acting.

Everyone else in the film was sub-par or worse. In some cases this is at least as much the fault of the character/script; the comedian isn't in the film long. But the others were just kind of...dull.

And the plot - please. There are single celled organisms in orbit around rigel 4 who saw that 'twist' coming from 30 minutes into the film.

Now, don't get me wrong. There were some excellently done scenes in this film, and it was cinemaphotographically spectacular. Not just the fight scenes - those were ok, even if all a bit samey - but a number of shots in the film which were obviously intended to clone the framing of sections of the graphic novel. The opening credits were actually excellent (with all the 'history' stuff). I didn't mind the soundtrack at all, and thought that several other scenes were individually very good.

I just didn't care in the slightest about what happened. And it was long. 2 hours and fourty minutes was longer than this film needed to be by a good fourty minutes.

Now...I do understand there is a lot of back story. And, heck, if there was *more* I might have enjoyed the film more. But if you're going to take almost three hours of my life I want to be enthralled, and I don't want pointless slow motion crap (oh look, a minigun!) that would probably look just as good in fast motion and take up less time.

What this film most felt like to me was a piece of self indulgent fanboyism. And I'm sure the self indulgent fanboys loved it to bits. But for other people - even those like me who love a good sf/f or superhero film - you need to make us give a damn about the characters.

Also, I think the nose prosthetic they used for richard nixon deserved its own name in the credits. That thing was massive!

Overall, I'd rate it about 3/5; it's good, but it sure as hell is no masterpiece.

 

[clauwman]

I think MovieBob was far to gracious. I liked the watchmen, but even an uneducated film ditz like myself could find numerous problems with it. I would have liked to hear about some of the random ass scenes of over the top violence. I didn't much care for Ozzys performance either.

Care to explain? Yeah Ozzy's a real dipwad, but I would like to know where these "random ass scenes" were, and how they spoiled the movie.

 

[MovieBob]

Please no little fanboy, or defender of the "goodness" of this try to cover that with what a Youtube commentor said to me(Rough Quote atleast):' Dr Manhattan is beyond the human need for close' I have two arguements to that, one involves nudist and i wont get into that, but if he is passed wearing cloths then why did he wear the tux and banana hamock?

Manhattan's nakedness isn't really "explained" any better (or at all, really) in the book, but in a thematic sense the idea more or less IS that his lack of sexual modesty is a visual representation of his disconnect from humanity. That's why you only see him wearing his (literal) "fig-leaf" of covering in flashbacks from when there were still "public" superheroes (notice that he DOES wear clothes when he's "made" to for the occasion, i.e. the funeral and the TV show.)

Also... yeah, it (the penis) IS supposed to be funny. Occasionally lost (and I mean BY FANS) amid all the grimness is the fact that "Watchmen" in both forms isn't just a deconstruction of comics, it's also a SPOOF. Dr. Manhattan is one of those "energy being"-esque heroes like Silver Surfer or Captain Atom who are usually drawn as nude figures "painted" a certain color but conspicuously lacking genitalia. "Watchmen" being, of course, first and foremost about how awkward, strange and (ultimately) disasterous it would be to have "real" superheroes, has it's "energy being" walking around with his junk out.

In fact, it's definately not one of those "HAVE to know" things, but the "spoof" aspect might be clearer if more people were aware that these are all parodies/reworkings of specific characters, all from a long-defunct publisher called Charlton that DC comics bought and then contracted Moore to re-imagine as a miniseries. They ended up loving his story... except that they were hoping on still being able to USE the Charlton heroes in their main universe of books. So Moore (and Gibbons) reworked them into new characters concieved as satires on the Charlton heroes and the "types" of heroes they represented. Fans of the recent Justice League cartoons, for example, may recognize guys named Captain Atom and The Question who, in "Watchmen," become Dr. Manhattan and Rorschach.

 

[Bagaloo]

Hooray for more MovieBob on the Escapist!
Nice review, can't really comment much else, havn't seen it myself or read any of the Watchmen novels.

 

[NobleBear]

2009: YEAR OF THE GIANT BLUE DONG!

Fixed