WATCHMEN

[wertz]

Sean and I and a couple of friends caught Watchmen last night. If it hadn't been the last screening of the day, I would have been very tempted to have turned around, bought a second ticket, and watched it again. In my opinion, it is the best comic-book/graphic novel/pulp fiction/superhero adaptation that has ever reached the screen. Period. It

Comments

[pacotelic]

That was the on;y thing I missed, but I knew that adding t would've added an hour to the movie: all the street corner interactions and their eventual end. The director did a very good job of threading the needle between fauth and detail. His contemprary tacking on of big oil and big auto concerns wasn't even that egregious, as it played like a revenge epic for 2007-2008 American audiences.

[wertz]

And they weren't even that tacked on. In the original, as I recall, one of Veidt's first big money-spinners was some kind of electric car and fuel efficient "airships" - aided by Dr. Manhattan's ability to create lithium or something.

[rowanda380]

really...you liked Dr. Manhattan's performance? I found his delivery so belabored...I was so annoyed just thinking, get the words out and stop talking!!!

[wertz]

I did, yeah. Maybe it had to do with my expectations. I was afraid that there might have been some attempt to make Dr. Manhattan seem other-wordly or something (all of his dialogue in the novel appears in outlined balloons with a blue background, indicating that his voice is somehow alien). I was actually pleased that he sounded kinda low-key, even a bit reedy and felt that gave the character more humanity than a computer-generated character might have had. Plus, in the novel, Manhattan is much more verbose, so I found the screen character relatively terse by comparison. I'm not sure how I would've felt if I'd been coming to the film cold.

It may also help that I generally find Billy Crudup pretty appealing - and I thought his persona came through in the voice work. The god-like buttocks probably didn't hurt, either.  :)

[rowanda380]

lol, those were definitely some crazy buttocks...but yeah, with nothing to compare it too since I haven't read the comics...I am just glad they didn't make him talk any more than they did :0)

[rpeate]

First, let me thank you for this reasoned review. You like the film, but you analyse it rationally, which enables me to take you seriously and to reconsider some of the bad I've heard. That said:

I have heard bad things about it, and what you post here does not assuage my concerns. Two specifics:

1. "The violence anchors the story firmly in the all-too-real world and illuminates the characters, raising questions that should be evident in any costumed vigilante film (there's a big difference between a 'POW!' graphic and a compound fracture tearing through a bad guy's forearm)."

How does what you say here differ from this criticism in the negative New York Times review?

The sex may be laughable, but the violence is another matter. The infliction of pain is rendered in intimate and precise aural and visual detail, from the noise of cracking bones and the gushers of blood and saliva to the splattery deconstruction of entire bodies. But brutality is not merely part of Mr. Snyder’s repertory of effects; it is more like a cause, a

[wertz]

I'm in the midst of errands and so on, but I'll definitely get back to this tonight some time.

[wertz]

Heh - I was way too long-winded. See new post for reply...