Wednesday, March 11, 2009

A Few Brief Thoughts Followed By An Earnest Solicitation of Reader Opinion

It made me happy to see an Alan Moore work faithfully translated to another medium. Sure, a few things had to be switched around, but all in all, I'd say they did a good job. Besides, what's Jason Todd doing at the Fortress of Solitude anyway?

Oh, my bad... did you think I was talking about 'Watchmen'? I was actually talking about the 'For the Man Who Has Everything' episode of JLU... but I guess Watchmen is more topical at the moment...

I'll provide a few quick notes on the film, and then, Second Printers, I urge you to chime in with your thoughts... no self-respecting geek who is not actively serving in Iraq or Afghanistan has any excuse for not having seen 'Watchmen', so I won't bother with a SPOILER ALERT...

1. Rorschach = Awesome. Jackie Earle Haley was good in 'Little Children' and great in 'Watchmen'. Plus, he didn't have to chop his junk off this time.

2. If you'd asked me a week ago if I was mature enough to stare at an incandescent blue penis for 3 hours without giggling, I would have said 'of course!' I would've been wrong.

3. I didn't know super-hero sex could be that... awkward...

4. If Zach Snyder could direct interpersonal action as well as he directs fights, he'd win every film-making award in the biz. This, however, is not the case.

Anywho, by now lots of us have made up our mind about the movie... I want to know YOUR thoughts, Second Printers. Tell me your praises, grunts, gripes, and groans about 'Watchmen'... because for me, it was all about the blue dong.


ticknart said...

I thought the movie was okay.

If I had seen it after the first time I read the comic I would have been blown away because it came out exactly how I read it that first time.

Today, I read it much differently and I thought some of the important themes were too surfacey or cut out entirely.

Still, when I see it again I'll be able to enjoy it more for what it is.

Bill said...

I thought it was good with the potential to be GREAT, but missed that mark. It needed more incredible movie making prowess applied to it, as Snyder did with the opening sequence, which was fantastic. It also needed more about Veidt and more Rorshach. For a 3 hour movie, all I can say is it needed more.

My other problem was the lack of tension. Yes, I've read the book a few times, but that is no excuse for a total lack of "on-the-edge-of-my-seat" moments. Even when you are watching a good movie for the fourth time, it will still grab you and create that feeling of suspense. Watchmen didn't seem to do that.

Sleestak said...

I had the feeling anyone not familiar with the comic book series would have walked away going 'huh'?

I didn't hate the film but walked out thinking it could have been better. Oddly, the part I most noticed as being incongruous was the decision to break Rorschach out of jail was voiced by Dan and not Laurie.

Oh, and every time Ozy appeared on screen I kept thinking how much he reminded me of Don Knotts in The Ghost and Mr. Chicken.