It makes you NOT want to Watch the Watchmen

It makes you NOT want to Watch the Watchmen

It wasn't good. It copied dialogue and placed it awkwardly without the proper artistic images..

Review Opinion
By CBMcontributor - Mar 07, 2009 02:03 PM EST
Filed Under: Watchmen

Let me first establish that I am a huge fan of the Watchmen series, that I've been following this movie for a long time (since before The Dark Knight was releases), and that I think Zach Snyder is a really amazing director.
Now, in addition, I am a even greater fan of Alan Moore, and in my opinion, this movie was disastrous. I will hold off from saying that it was completely awful, because come on, $150 million dollars not including the legal fees WB paid to keep the movie alive, but it failed to do what the comic book did. My friends tell me that they are two different mediums, and of course that is true, but in my opinion, the movie attempted to represent the comic book and not create the story told in the comic.

Let's get into details, i guess there should be a spoiler alert here.......

This movie truly failed to create the characters that were envisioned by Alan Moore: Drieberg was hardly ever shown to be lamenting over his retirement, his impotence was not shown as a lock of confidence but rather a clumsy response to an extremely horny silk spectre. Rorschach was not the unwavering embodiment of justice, but rather a twisted version of Chris Nolan's Batman, the removal and retrieval of his "face" were painfully empty and melodramatic. Silk Spectre hardly convinced Dr. Manhattan to care for humanity, at no point did their relationship seem significant, and the choice to create a motif where Dr. Manhattan could share "the way he see's the world" was awful. And unfortunately, I'm most sad to say, Dr. Manhattan, was not himself, though people will jump on his voice (which was fine imo), the real problem was that he was connected with humanity, not disillusioned, not emotionally detached, "his subtle facial cues" were noticed by veidt, a very poor portrayal. Even the comedian, certainly my favorite and most human character in the novel, wasn't just right, his blubbering and wet breakdown in front of Molloch, was really really really really poorly done. In fact, if anyone needs proof of how bad the acting was in this movie, just watch Nite Owl when the kill Rorschach near the end.

Beyond the characters, the art was completely lost. Shame on Zach Synder for making the changes that he did. If he was forced by the studio to make all the changes to the story that he did, he should have stopped making this film a long time ago. I'm not talking about the squid, even though it was a terrible alternative, I don't want to dwell on this because I know I and the people who agree are correct, but simply put there is a huge difference between the physical death, the bloody death that was envisioned by Alan Moore, and the complete vaporization of everything... Dr. Manhattan spoke in the movie of visiting the streets of Earth again, with dead bodies all around him, but when did this happen? There weren't any streets after the BS explosion. Truly, Zach Snyder is known for his ability to create a moment, to slow down a few seconds and make it last a minute, so people can truly appreciate the message behind the image, this wasn't accomplished at all in Watchmen. The special effects and god awful karate/fight scenes did not help this movie at all. The beauty of Nite Owl riding on top of Archie after saving the people in the burning building, the majesty of Viedt's utopia in the frozen tundra of the arctic, the final scene where Dr. Manhattan and Viedt speak, where Dr. Manhattan tells Viedt "nothing ends", MARS, and nearly every scene after silk spectre climaxed, were done poorly.

The movie did start well, but only while the amazing characters created by Alan Moore were being developed, once they were given their own license to exist, they crumbled.
Alan Moore was right, Hollywood killed this movie, thankfully us fans of the comic will always have the graphic novel, on monday I will get the perspective of someone who is completely unfamiliar with the comic, certainly that's a review that is valuable too.

And please believe me, I'm not a hater at all, I love all things, but this movie was done very poorly, I was excited to buy the BluRay but I will likely not buy it anymore.

I will say this, Watchmen would have made a better soundtrack.

I'll leave you with the words of Bob Dylan,
Don't criticize what you don't understand.

ALAN MOORE, I APOLOGIZE FOR THE WESTERN WORLD

WATCHMEN CHAPTER I Clip Recreates Two Big Scenes From Alan Moore And Dave Gibbons' Iconic Graphic Novel
Related:

WATCHMEN CHAPTER I Clip Recreates Two Big Scenes From Alan Moore And Dave Gibbons' Iconic Graphic Novel

WATCHMEN CHAPTER I Red-Band Trailer Released Along With Full Cast List And Blu-ray Cover Art
Recommended For You:

WATCHMEN CHAPTER I Red-Band Trailer Released Along With Full Cast List And Blu-ray Cover Art

DISCLAIMER: ComicBookMovie.com is protected under the DMCA (Digital Millenium Copyright Act) and... [MORE]

ComicBookMovie.com, and/or the user who contributed this post, may earn commissions or revenue through clicks or purchases made through any third-party links contained within the content above.

realfirstavenger
realfirstavenger - 3/7/2009, 7:29 PM
this is most likely exactly how i will feel when i finally see the movie
its sad, i was so pumped to see it, was going to go to the midnight showing
now i am really in no rush at all
i beleive it is going to be an entertaining movie, but it is not going to be Watchmen.
why cant people just makes the movies that would work instead of trying to make movies out of every comic series ever made.
blacksword7
blacksword7 - 3/7/2009, 9:53 PM
this comment is not directed toward the guy that wrote the article but i gotta write it somewhere. im pissed at all of these fanboys who give snyder crap for "making too many changes" before they even see the movie, then when they do see it they say "it was too close to the book and needed to take it's own course to get the right message across" you idiots aren't giving the man any goddamn slack!!!!!!!!!! your contradicting all of your original complaints and just coming up with new ones!!!!!!!!!!! you all are just looking for reasons to give the movie crap.
BOOK552
BOOK552 - 3/7/2009, 10:01 PM
blacksword you spoke my mind
MarkCassidy
MarkCassidy - 3/8/2009, 8:03 AM
Anyone going into this movie hoping or thinking that its going to be the comic is going to be sorely disapointed..and they deserve to be! ITS A [frick]ING MOVIE..NOT THE COMIC..COMPRENDE?
thisisvik
thisisvik - 3/8/2009, 9:01 AM
Come on, we are aware that the movie and the comicbook are two different things, two different mediums, but let's be honest, they took lines directly from the comic book, in fact, they boasted while they were making the film how accurate this movie was going to be to the comic book. All that aside, if you are to look at the movie on its own, I'm sure it fails. Scenes were disconnected, and the changes that were made were not just at the ending but throughout the movie, from the beginning where it was actually Dr. Manhattan that was getting annoyed with Rorschach not Silk Spectre, to the very public death of Rorschach. Look at the many choices by Zach Snyder, the subtle and obvious alterations, as a whole they were miscalculated and in the end the movie lost its poetry.

Someone please tell me why/what they liked about this movie..
MarkCassidy
MarkCassidy - 3/8/2009, 9:41 AM
Are you serious? What difference do any of those changes you mentioned make to the heart and soul of the story? Thats all that matters! Snyder said he was going to make a faithful adaptation and he did..he didnt plaster the comic directly to the screen but he kept the guts of what makes Watchmen great. So he added some sex and violence, so what? If you didnt enjoy those things i suggest you take the pole out of your ass and have some fun..unless fanboys have lost the ability to do that.

What did i like about this movie? Whats not to? It was epic, stylish, visually astounding, the performances were spot on (except for Akerman but even she wasnt bad) funny, emotional, deep, thought provoking and despite what any stubborn fanboy says FAITHFUL.
thisisvik
thisisvik - 3/8/2009, 9:57 AM
Man you're just spewing words.
And I'm not a fanboy, [frick] I'm a grown man.
Look I've got the series of graphic novels right here and more Alan Moore works as well. I'm a fan, but not a fanboy. I'm just saying, that as a movie, it was bad. You must be a juvenile because rather than actually say anything and back it up, you just plastered down some words hoping to change opinion through emotion. But trust me that emotion comes from ur love of the comic, not the movie.

Let me show you:
actors spot on?? Drieberg was not at all the impotent Nite Owl, he hardly lamented over quitting and his relationship with Mason, the old Nite Owl, was barely addressed. What did we lose? The fact that Nite Owl still wanted to be a superhero! Are we supposed to believe that he only came back because he got laid???

visually astounding? what was? there was no utopia in a frozen tundra, veidts cat-thing was never explained, it was just thrown in there foolishly, Mars wasn't astounding at all!!

thought provoking?? this is where i win, Dr. Manhattan was a being who viewed all time at once, in fact, the most important aspect of the Watchmen was time. The truth is that many stories show a cause effect streamline process. Watchmen showed up that the world is actually a far more complex, connected entity. Where people are individually doing what brings them joy, but ultimately each individual's actions effect the rest of the world because they were commited at a certain point in time that could never be changed once they had occured. It's this idea that convinces Dr.Manhattan that the world is worth changing. But in the movie, they dumbed it down to his feelings for Silk Spectre and how interesting the biological aspect of fornication was.

I don't intend to respond to you again in this post Rorschach01, you don't seem worth it, is there anyone else?
SuperHeroStuffdotCom
SuperHeroStuffdotCom - 3/8/2009, 12:09 PM
Though I resist the urge to Snark and Flame, I cannot let this drivel go without responding in disagreement.

Whoever the author is of this “review,” you’re simply spewing words for the sake of gaining recognition in the virtual world. Needless to say, that the people who run ComicBookMovie.com had to put a DISCLAIMER at the bottom of your pedantic post in order to distance themselves from your ridiculous conclusions.

You: “This movie truly failed to create the characters that were envisioned by Alan Moore: Drieberg was hardly ever shown to be lamenting over his retirement, his impotence was not shown as a lock of confidence but rather a clumsy response to an extremely horny silk spectre.”

Me: Pssst… use spellcheck! You misspelled “lack of confidence.” Is this your opening criticism? Nite Owl didn’t NOT get a hard-on correctly? My god man, why not focus on something catastrophically more important to the theme of the movie, such as.. “there was no pool table in Sally Jupiter’s rape scene!” I suggest starting off your “reviews” with theme/structure/plot and uncalled for/unacceptable deviations from the comic book.. not motivations behind malfunctioning erections.

You: “Rorschach was not the unwavering embodiment of justice, but rather a twisted version of Chris Nolan's Batman, the removal and retrieval of his "face" were painfully empty and melodramatic.”

Me: Wow… Chris Nolan’s Batman… that provides volumes of critique and analysis regarding the failings of Rorschach and how flat he really was. I presume that’s why every single audience across the country burst into applause and laughter when the imprisoned Rorschach yells, in the cafeteria, “You DON’T GET IT! I'M not locked up in here with YOU, YOU'RE locked up in here with ME!” I guess you also must have had a potty break as Rorschach repeatedly planted the meat cleaver into the child murderer’s head. You must have also gone for popcorn during the last words that Rorschach spoke right before Manhatten murdered him. Jackie Earle Haley did s PERFECT Rorschach. When we see Walter Kovacs in prison… Haley was Kovacs.

You...again: “Silk Spectre hardly convinced Dr. Manhattan to care for humanity, at no point did their relationship seem significant.”

Me: What movie did you go see?? My god, no wonder why your name is left off of this “review.” Did you not even listen to the words that came out of Manhatten’s mouth? Were you so steeped in your hatred for this movie that you couldn’t fathom the depth of what he was saying? He literally brought a tear to my eye with his words.

You: “the real problem was that [Manhatten] was connected with humanity, not disillusioned, not emotionally detached, "his subtle facial cues" were noticed by veidt, a very poor portrayal.

Me: … Yeah, whatever.

You: “Even the comedian… wasn't just right, his blubbering and wet breakdown in front of Molloch, was really really really really poorly done.”

Me: … I’m sorry, but your points are so pedestrian that I can’t even afford to spend more time commenting on them. … but I will because I don’t like you. You refer to one insignificant scene, among many in your useless arsenal of examples, as substantiated proof that the movie failed. Who cares that the comedian didn’t cry just perfect or Nite Owl didn’t NOT get a hard-on just perfectly the way you have liked to see it. Where is your substance man?

You: “In fact, if anyone needs proof of how bad the acting was in this movie, just watch Nite Owl when the kill Rorschach near the end. “

Me: … wow, that “really really really really” convinced me. However, I will admit that Spectre’s performance, though visually appealing, was flat, but who friggin’ cares?!

You: ”Beyond the characters, the art was completely lost.”

Me: … I’m presuming that the terms of agreement for this site would not permit me to call you an idiot, so I won’t. (examples please)

You: “ Shame on Zach Synder for making the changes that he did.”

Me: Your pedestrian examples lack any substance what so ever worthy of a response.

You: “The special effects and god awful karate/fight scenes did not help this movie at all.”

Me: It was Ju Jitsu not karate. And it ROCKED! The fight between Blake and Veidt were ultraviolently spectacular.

You: “The beauty of Nite Owl riding on top of Archie after saving the people in the burning building, the majesty of…”

Me: Shut up.

You: “scene where Dr. Manhattan and Viedt speak, where Dr. Manhattan tells..”

Me: Quit talking!

You: “Alan Moore was right, Hollywood killed this movie, thankfully us fans of the comic will always have the graphic novel, on monday I will …”

Me: UGGGGH!!

Well that’s an hour of my time I won’t get back. This movie was a fantastic adaptation from the comic book. Snyder painfully, and lovingly, adhered to the theme that Moore and Gibbons created 20 years ago.

It succeeded in it’s adaptation and interpretation just as Peter Jackson’s translation of LOTR succeeded. The commitment and attention to detail and strict adherence to the plot and imagery in the comic is unlike no other comic-to-film ever seen, except for what we saw in Robert Rodriguez’s Sin City.

I cannot stop thinking about this movie and how accurate and dead on target it was in honoring the works of Moore. Everything about this movie was taken STRAIGHT from the comic. Even though the scene with the newspaper stand and the kid reading the Black Freighter comic had no more than a couple seconds on screen, you will notice that Snyder duplicated virtually everything from the comic, down to the patch on the kid’s left knee and the green sweater worn by the street vendor with the left-over-right lapel. http://www.superherostuff.com/superhero-movies/images/watchmen-newsstand.html (Notice who is in the foreground of the movie pic.)

This is truly a movie that can only be fully appreciated by those who have read, and reread, the work that Moore and Gibbons gave birth to so many years ago. Each time you read Watchmen, you learn a little more about the story that you hadn’t known before. I cannot WAIT to see this movie again and to buy the extended version dvd with the extra hour and a half.

I loved this movie.

Shadyaj
Shadyaj - 3/8/2009, 12:37 PM
well I must say, zack snyder, if you want a great idea to be tragically portrayed in the worst possible way, he's your man.

now, i know a lot of people are going to complain, especially about me not using caps. i don't care about caps so don't bother.

secondly if you liked the movie and or the terrible director, try a post about why you liked it rather then say i'm wrong about zacky snacks, i'm just giving my opinion.

onto why this miserable man made a miserable movie.

first the name of the movie is watchmen, the same name as the graphic novel(not comic...graphic novel) If your going to use the name watchmen and the supremely screw up the characters and the story, just stop. it's like making a movie about jack the ripper, except he's a jolly ol chap and he doesn't kill. don't use the name if your not gonna represent the idea.

secondly this is the third movie of snyders that has sucked(that i have seen. still not convinced to see anymore). Dawn of the dead, oh boy. then we get 300, (does he create his own stories or does he just ruin everyone elses?) and lastly watchmen

point and case why does silk spectre's only reason in the movie seemed to be getting plowed for about 2 minutes? I know the novel had it, but they showed a lot less. theres no need to see little miss nipple suite doin the nasty for that long. especially since she went from an independent women(graphic novel) to a whining bitch (movie)

and the ending. its not that he changed it, its what he changed it to. here....
country a and country r are at each others throat, about to nuke each other, except country a has a mystic blue man that could obliterate country r in a matter of moments, so when mr blue balls destroys cities in country a, the one he was "on sides with" i'm betting country r would have taken that and nuked the shit out of country a. instead you end up with this completely ridiculous crap.

as you can see i didn't like the movie. abhor would be a better word. i'm not some fanboy or actual fan of the graphic novel. i enjoyed the characters the story and the whole point at the end. so i went to see the movie. and was taken back at how anyone would want the zack attack to direct a movie. )i say zack attack because he attacked and raped watchmen, i hope there aren't any other good ideas tfor him to rape in the near future)
SuperHeroStuffdotCom
SuperHeroStuffdotCom - 3/8/2009, 1:14 PM
Your lack of punctuation, poor grammar and the consistently lazy use of letters in place of actual words reveals that you are obviously still in high school as you display your cell phone text messaging abilities in abundance. It's obvious that you will have nothing more than ... an opinion, albeit lacking in thought and form, steeped in ignorance as you mundanely meander through life.

Where do you think the graphic novel came from? ... The comic book. Watchmen was a 12 issue, limited series comic book.

The movie has already brought in $55 million dollars and the weekend isn't even over yet. 300, also made by Snyder, brought in over $210 Million in domestic movie sales.

No director, or actor, bats a thousand ever time. What determines their success is the pile of greenbacks they can bring in. Your "opinion" can't even hold a candle to what Snyder has accomplished in these two movies.
Shadyaj
Shadyaj - 3/8/2009, 1:31 PM
Well, thank you so much. You are the first idiot of the day! congratulations!

My grammar and punctuation was just a wonderful device to show just how idiotic idiots can be! I gave an opinion, that had nothing to do with money or what a movie brings in, and said as a foreword to not bother trying to insult me with my lack of caps and such, and to just give your own opinion rather that complain. I didn't complain about anyones opinion. Yet here you, saying I am in high-school( I'm not by the way) and saying that I did not give an opinion with thought, yet what opinion have you given? Oh yes, that a movies good if it brings in money, and that you didn't like my opinion so you try to insult me? Well, well, well, why don't you sit for awhile, maybe

You can see now why you are the idiot right?

Making money on a movie does not mean that it is good, if you think like that, well then maybe you should try not thinking.

As for snyder(lower case s) accomplishing something in those two movies, thats almost as ridiculous as the bible. He's made poor movies, poor representations, and down right bad work. It's your opinion, of course, that he's good, so I won't argue with you on that, anymore at least.

The real point was that you couldn't give an opinion without trying to be insulting( and you failed by the way)

oh and Allen Moore calles it a graphic novel by the way.


Think on that, or rather, don't, it'll work out better for you.
MarkCassidy
MarkCassidy - 3/8/2009, 2:06 PM
thisisvik you can be 90 years old and still be a fanboy! And you may not like that given moniker but since you are stubborn, pedantic and closed minded in the extreme im afraid theres not much separating you. And yeah im juvenile but you "win " right? Talk about the pot and the kettle. Not one of your strange little points are true! Not one! Ill give an example..you say the movie was not visually astounding because it left out ONE scene from the book? So all of that other wonderful stuff that is in there is tainted by that is it? You clearly have one eye..and thats not being used properly. Now i realize people have different opinions and theres no accounting for taste but seriously..if that is really what you thought about the performances and the movie in general you really dont have any! I would love to hear which movies you do consider to be good??
Hyson
Hyson - 3/8/2009, 6:01 PM
Why do all the bad reviews get most of the comments? And they're mostly you kissing the reviewer's ass or chastising them endlessly and anyone who agrees with them. Maybe, I should have given it a lower rating for some more comments on mine.... ;)
DaFetus
DaFetus - 3/8/2009, 7:40 PM
OMG, this is the most faithful adaptation of an Alan Moore book ever. Need I remind you From Hell, The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen, and even V for Vendetta which changed almost the whole story (but was a good film) was not as faithful as this movie. Give Snyder a break. I think he did a very good job making the Watchmen into a film. Probably better and truer to the story than anyone else would have. As far as the movie being like the comic, more so than any other comic film I have seen (except maybe Sin City).
thisisvik
thisisvik - 3/8/2009, 10:26 PM
man oh man, SuperHeroStuffdotCom, you're a fool
And I don't mean that really as an insult, but I just didn't expect that I would have to draw it out. I can understand though why you liked the movie, because just like you couldn't see the message behind my review/critique, you probably did not understand the message derived from either the graphic novel or the movie.

I'm surprised that you can claim attention to detail when other than certain visual cues, the movie was truly far from the graphic novel. For instance, actually, i've already posted enough of an argument throughout this site, it will be my opinion that this movie was terrible, and interestingly many people who didn't know the story at all, seeing this movie with completely fresh eyes, were baffled. They were not entertained, they did not enjoy waiting in line and sitting for that long to be bored.
I truly do love the Watchmen series, and Alan Moore's work in general (i.e. The Killing Joke), but this movie was not a representation of the graphic novel, it was more like a reconstruction of the panels. Do you understand what I mean? or was that over your head, jk, I'm not about to act belligerent, the logic behind my reasons for not liking this movie are completely valid, and in fact I've derived much joy from this experience.

All I really want to say is that, anyone who really believes Alan Moore was wrong to take his name off the credits of this travesty, please speak up, I'd like to see the numbers..
thisisvik
thisisvik - 3/8/2009, 10:30 PM
p.s. I was the one who wrote this review and I accidentally misquoted perhaps that's why you felt the express yourself SuperHeroStuffdotCom

Let me correct myself;
Don't criticize what you CAN'T understand

(i guess i did get a little belligerent)
TheLarTheorem
TheLarTheorem - 3/11/2009, 6:05 PM
Well, I'm going in having realised what Hollywood has done to Alan Moore related material before. I can't see this movie being worse than pieces of shit like 'League', 'V', and 'From Hell'. And when is Dave Gibbons gonna get credit for having worked on the story AND creating the designs and iconic images contained in the Watchmen book?
ComicFan101
ComicFan101 - 3/12/2009, 5:55 PM
Mabey someone can tell me...is the movie worth the price of the ticket. I mean I love the graphic novel (and it is a graphic novel). I just want to know if it's worth it.
Shadyaj
Shadyaj - 3/13/2009, 1:58 PM
no rent it from your library when it comes out
Shadyaj
Shadyaj - 3/13/2009, 8:48 PM
rather see it if you want, and decide for yourself...just come back and post what you thought though
Shadyaj
Shadyaj - 3/13/2009, 8:48 PM
rather see it if you want, and decide for yourself...just come back and post what you thought though
Shadyaj
Shadyaj - 3/13/2009, 8:48 PM
rather see it if you want, and decide for yourself...just come back and post what you thought though
Shadyaj
Shadyaj - 3/13/2009, 8:48 PM
rather see it if you want, and decide for yourself...just come back and post what you thought though
Shadyaj
Shadyaj - 3/18/2009, 8:29 PM
sorry about the posts my computer got all funny with the post button
View Recorder