
The Jon Spaihts-penned script had been developed by producers Reeves and Stephen Hamel. Robinson is also producing.
Source: Variety
HOME
"I'm the Dude. So that's what you call me. You know, that or, uh, His Dudeness, or uh, Duder, or El Duderino if you're not into the whole brevity thing."
The Jon Spaihts-penned script had been developed by producers Reeves and Stephen Hamel. Robinson is also producing.
Source: Variety
Watchmen's opening main title sequence is as nicely rendered as I'd heard, and I didn't have a huge problem listening to Dylan's "The Times They Are A'Changin'" as it happened. I was taken with the portion that lays out Dr. Manhattan's (i.e., Billy Crudup's) history. The Dr. Manhattan full-blue-schlong footage probably will make it more routine for male genitalia to appear in mainstream movies henceforth. (Although I'm not sure that's any kind of major blessing.) And yes, Jackie Earle Haley's Rorschach does deliver in a hard, tight, snarly way.HOME - Discuss in the Forum
And the CG depiction, by the way, of JFK's exploding right-temple head wound in Dallas beats Oliver Stone's all to hell.
But is Watchmen likable? No, it's not. There would have to be something really wrong with you to see this thing and come out on the street beaming and saying, "Yeah... liked it! Woo-hoo!" It's too bitter and cynical and disgusted with human nature to be "liked." I mean, take away Patrick Wilson's Nite Owl/Dan Drieberg character and this is one rancid, bitter, foul-of-temper, heart-of-stone, phlegm-in-your-face, puke-in-the-gutter superhero movie, certainly in a spiritual sense.
Is it endurable in the sense you can get through all 160-odd minutes without looking at your watch three or four times? Or even once or twice? The truth is that I didn't look at my watch once, and I took no bathroom breaks, even though I sort of wanted to.
Is it somehow enjoyable? Yes, somewhat -- but again, you have to go into it prepared. You certainly have to be up on the graphic novel, the characters, their backstories, etc. Because the story is more than a little complex. And then you need to read at least a dozen negative reviews and get ready to hate it with a passion. Which is different from going in determined to hate it, which I definitely wasn't. I went in with my eyes and pores open but at the same time prepared and willing to hate it. You know, open to this. And guess what happened?
I didn't "like" it but I didn't hate it. And here it is an hour later and I still don't hate it. I'm fairly certain I'll never see it again, even on Blu-ray. It's too much of a Gordian Knot, too exhausting, too angry, too obsessive. But at least it's balls-out, no-holds-barred obsessive, which you have to at least respect in this age of corporate branding and capitulation.
Did director Zack Snyder err by trying to replicate the Alan Moore- Dave Gibbons-John Higgins graphic novel a little too precisely and meticulously? Maybe, but at least he went for it big-time. Would Watchmen have been better served as a twelve-part miniseries? Perhaps, but Snyder at least tried like hell to make it work as a feature, and he opened his heart, soul and veins in order to do so.
The cut Snyder turned in, I've read, was messed with by Warner Bros. somewhat, but it doesn't feel as if too much of it was cut down or diluted. Watchmen may or may not be your cup of tea (it's not mine) but at least it was made by a kind of madman who gave as little quarter as possible and didn't muck around. I almost love the fact that Watchmen doesn't try to make you feel "good," and that it just tries to be itself. And give Snyder credit for giving it a fairly kapow look all through. I don't know why I didn't mind all the slow-mo stuff, but I didn't. I kind of feel left out in this respect.
I emerged from the theatre feeling subdued but not seething inside. Watchmen never put a real smile on my face, but neither did it make me sit forward and groan and spread my fingers across my face. Yes, it frequently turned me off and sometimes inspired feelings of deep loathing. It provided almost nothing in the way of whole-hog satisfaction, but at least it left me feeling that I'd seen something different.
I knew going in it wouldn't be the same old good-evil, black-white superhero hash, but I wasn't entirely prepared for how unconcerned it would be as far as trying to charm or half-hold onto a mainstream audience.
I mean, I hated it at times. Jeffrey Dean Morgan's Edward Blake/The Comedian has to be one of the most loathsome and inhumane characters in history, and the Watchmen, who are supposed to be semi-good guys, spend much of the film treating him like some kind of loutish bad-brother figure. I mean, the odor just wafts off the screen from this guy. Yecch.
For all the revolting rage and purist revenge fantasies in this film, which are over-the-top vile (this is a movie that channels misanthropic fury and disdain like it's flowing through a firehouse) and the detestable sadism and the right-reactionary political acts that the Watchmen serve (doing the bidding of Richard Nixon, Dr. Manhattan winning the Vietnam War in a week's time by slaughtering the North Vietnamese and Vietcong like flies, Blake savagely beating up a mob of lefty-hippie protestors), not to mention the random savageries (rape, endless bludgeoning, beating the hell or the life out of adversaries)...this is finally a big-studio flick that doesn't give a holy damn about anyone or anything except those who've been on board to begin with.
And I almost liked it for that. I couldn't finally "like it, not being one of the faithful-faithful, but it has my grudging respect. But that's all it gets.
"I've seen Watchmen," he began. "And speaking as a huge admirer and devotee of the graphic novel, the film is a staggering failure. On the plus side, you've got a pretty literal adaptation of the source material. It is at times a meticulous and gorgeous recreation of Alan Moore's original work. Unfortunately it's an empty, inert, meandering and, yes, boring 2 hours and 45 minutes.
"Oh, and it's horribly acted throughout. Truly. Malin Akerman (i.e., Silk Spectre II) confirms whatever fears you may have initially felt after The Heartbreak Kid and 27 Dresses. Carla Gugino (the other Silk Spectre) just looks silly. Patrick Wilson (Nite Owl II) is his usual blah self. Only Jackie Earle Haley's Rorschach and Billy Crudup's Dr. Manhattan register at all.
"Sadly even the presumed up-and-comer Matthew Goode plays Ozymandias, the world's smartest man, as an arch and slightly bored Bond villain. I had high hopes after being wowed by him in The Lookout, but he's bungled this great opportunity. (It's clear in retrospect the part should have gone to a real star. Say what you will but Tom Cruise would have been perfect.)
"I say all of the above as a person who was very much into the 20 minutes they screened for all of us months ago. Sorry to confirm our worst fears but those scenes in fact remain the best and among the few that work on any level.
"Watchmen is just not much of a movie. It has no narrative pull and no characters to invest in. It uses rotely shoehorned-in action scenes, and has a sheen that doesn't befit the dark material.
"So much for the visionary vistas of Zack Snyder. Oh, what Paul Greengrass could have done!
"And to reduce it all to dollars and sense, I'll be shocked if this one plays to a wide audience after an admittedly huge weekend. Watchmen fans are in for a rude awakening."
CHUD says ,"It will look and feel like a real movie....The footage is stylish - well shot, with rich visuals and dynamic compositions - but it looked more like a modern take on a noir film than anything else. What I saw was moody, sometimes muted. Snyder allows his takes to be long, eschewing a quick cut style that many seem to think would rule the day in this film. The 22 minutes I saw didn't feel like an action film at all (except, of course, for the opening fight scene)"
They also gave a description of what they watched and, if you have read the graphic novel, it will give you a little shiver of excitement.
"The police stare out the broken window of the Comedian's apartment, discussing the crime. 30 stories below a figure holding a sign that reads "The End is Nigh" walks through the puddle of blood that is being sprayed off the sidewalk. The camera zooms away from the building, showing the alternate New York City of the story, filled with zeppelins and a huge Gunga Diner balloon.
Rorschach's narration begins, very faithful to the book. He rappels up the side of the building into the Comedian's apartment. Poking around, he discovers the Comedian's weapons cache and costume. The camera focuses in on a photo of The Minutemen, and then pulls out again, but this time the picture is hanging in Hollis Mason's apartment. We see other photos and newspaper headlines hanging on the wall, and a copy of Beneath the Hood, Mason's memoirs, on the table.
Mason is spinning stories of his days as the Nite Owl to Dan Dreiberg, the second Nite Owl. It's after midnight and Dan gets up to leave; they stop on the porch for a moment as rain falls outside and Hollis asks Dan if he ever misses the good old days. Dan says no, but it seems like he's lying. He leaves Hollis behind, and the camera lingers a moment on the sign for Hollis' auto body shop: Obsolete Models a Speciality. Much of the dialogue in this scene comes straight from the comic.
Dan walks home in the rain, and discovers that his front door has been kicked in. He walks into his brownstone cautiously, only to find Rorschach, mask up, eating cold canned beans at his kitchen table. When Rorschach tells him that the Comedian has been killed (the 'It's human bean juice' joke remains intact), they go down to the basement to talk more.
As Rorschach walks down the subway tunnel beneath Dan's house, Dan asks him whatever happened to the old days. "You quit," Rorschach responds. Dan sits before the display case of costumes and looks at the Comedian's blood-stained smiley face pin.
The film is packed with details. Every frame seems to have something that lends depth to the world or background to the characters; there were elements in the opening scene that I missed the first time around and only caught here. This is definitely a movie that will have a high replay value, both for the uninitiated and the hardcore fan.
All in all it is looking as if this is going to be a very faithful adaption and should hopefully surprise the movie going public who aren't usually into the comic book movies that have been released lately.
Home / Forum / Guestbook
While Wilson acknowledged the presence of a clause in his contract that allowed for sequels, he was quick to add that these types of arrangements are standard fare these days, citing their presence (and even more unlikely use) in Snyder’s previous blockbuster adaptation, “300.”
What do you think of this? Could a Watchmen prequel / sequel work? Where could it go? The computer game is apparantly going to be set before the events in the movie / graphic novel? No doubt Alan Moore will comment on this soon.This horror flick is about a grief counselor assigned to work with a group of plane crash survivors who starts to uncover a horrific mystery when the survivors start to disappear. It stars Anne Hathway (Get Smart, The Princess Diaries) and Patrick Wilson (Watchmen)
Patrick Wilson, who plays Nite Owl in the Watchmen movie has been interviewed by MTV. He mentions that they tried to put in as many things as they could to keep it faithful to the book. Whether it be a photo of an old hero in the background of the Owl Chamber (for those not in the know Alan Moore was going to use more, well known characters for his tale, but there was a problem getting the rights to them all).
Good news is that they won't be altering the ending of the story, which I know many fans had feared.
“Ha!” Wilson laughed. “I have to say, if you know how much Zack believes in it, you wouldn’t believe he would go that far from the graphic novel. I don’t know how those rumors start, but that’d be a stretch!”
Discuss in the forum.