Watchmen

7

BenE.Aug 19, 2009

The movie was lacking a better storyline other than old supers that have retired, and was more of a costume party montague,not really having a bio storyline to lead up to the main characters which can be confusing to a newcomer to the The movie was lacking a better storyline other than old supers that have retired, and was more of a costume party montague,not really having a bio storyline to lead up to the main characters which can be confusing to a newcomer to the Watchmen fold. I wanted to see something spectacular that went with all the extreme hype, one thing I can say the fight scenes were on the mark. But when I hear comments from others stating "It can be compared to the Dark Knight" there is no comparison! Heres how you can compare this movie, it is like going from Sin City (which had a great storyline)to a cheaper version like the Spirit(which was all over the place) then trying to pass it off as a great film. Hopefully there will be better writing in the next series for the Watchmen cause America wants to see a little less talk and alot more action, If you bill the movie as a superhero action film, make it so, not a drug out love story or a wheres Waldo approach , thats a good way to lose the audience.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

7

LOmarGMar 30, 2014

Very faithful to the source material, and it works well. I do prefer the cuts without "The Black Freighter"; The Ultimate Cut suffers from those awkward cheap-looking animated insertions and just doesn't flow too well. A strong, serious,Very faithful to the source material, and it works well. I do prefer the cuts without "The Black Freighter"; The Ultimate Cut suffers from those awkward cheap-looking animated insertions and just doesn't flow too well. A strong, serious, and adult superhero chronicle that sets itself apart from others in more ways than one. Zack Snyder really did a respectful job in bringing the graphic novel to life.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

7

MetalMan95Nov 28, 2010

A little ard to follow since i never read the graphic novel. But the action, awesome characters, and visuals helped me keep watching it. I did get somewhat bored towards the end, but that's honestly nit-pickery. I would like to read theA little ard to follow since i never read the graphic novel. But the action, awesome characters, and visuals helped me keep watching it. I did get somewhat bored towards the end, but that's honestly nit-pickery. I would like to read the graphic novel, if i ever get the chance. But good movie.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

7

rotkuAug 7, 2011

Alternative take on superhero movies with plenty of darkness in the characters and good use of the heroes interacting with moments in history. In fact some of their actions would cause you to question if they are even the good guys whichAlternative take on superhero movies with plenty of darkness in the characters and good use of the heroes interacting with moments in history. In fact some of their actions would cause you to question if they are even the good guys which added more of a human element to them. A good sci-fi movie which rises above the usual run of the mill plots.… Expand

7 of 9 users found this helpful72

All this user's reviews

7

moviegrabbagJun 12, 2011

This movie is something special. The acting through out the film is fantastic. Even the small roles were strong. The plot was great and flowed well. I have never read the graphic novel because I usually don't like graphic novels but afterThis movie is something special. The acting through out the film is fantastic. Even the small roles were strong. The plot was great and flowed well. I have never read the graphic novel because I usually don't like graphic novels but after seeing this movie I am going to have to read it. I also loved the visuals and the fact that the movie really dove into what its like to be a superhero after nobody wants you anymore. A great film that takes a dark look at what the world could have been like.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

7

cabritaSep 22, 2011

This movie is a mixed bag. Brilliantly directed in some parts. However boring and poorly acted in others. Overall worth seeing with fantastic visuals.

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

7

Delta_AssaultSep 28, 2011

Thought it was... ok. Definitely not a huge crowd pleaser like The Dark Knight. No real thrills or shocking payoffs. But this is coming from a guy who's read the book about 15 or 20 times, so maybe a newcomer to the story would beg to differ.Thought it was... ok. Definitely not a huge crowd pleaser like The Dark Knight. No real thrills or shocking payoffs. But this is coming from a guy who's read the book about 15 or 20 times, so maybe a newcomer to the story would beg to differ. But uh... just flat in a lot of areas where the book didn't translate well to the screen. What worked on the page was brought to the screen by Zach Snyder as best as anyone could've mustered, but it wasn't really brought to life in a meaningful, emotional way. The violence was fine for the few fight scenes where it was actually present, but that just made them stand out as peculiar, when 90% of the movie is about... talking. Sometimes talking with bad aged makeup.

That rape scene hit me hard. Geez. I knew it was coming, I'd read it plenty of times on the page, but the way it was filmed was just... awful, and you could feel the audience dying inside. Though that was one thing I was surprised about, the audience. I dunno if it was because I went to an 11:50 pm showing or what, but nobody at my screening laughed aloud at Dr. Manhattan's blue dong like so many other reviews have been describing. They were just... pretty much silent throughout. The biggest reaction was when Rorschach spilled the oil on the convict and yelled "I'm not locked up in here with you. You're locked up in here with me." Of course they would, it was a great line.

Yea, that Dr. Manhattan... I gotta say, he ended up falling short of my expectations. Not Crudup's voice, that was fine. But the entire CGI entity just... did not look right to me. Maybe it IS the uncanny valley, but I just thought he looked unreal, inhuman, and somewhat of a failure as a visual effect. Perhaps part of that was because he had no pupils. I just checked and he doesn't have any in the graphic novel either, but... perhaps in this case it would've been better to diverge from the source material.

Like I said before... Snyder did as good a job as anyone could've in bringing this book to the movie screen. And yet... I did miss all the material that was cut out. The stuff with the two Bernies, the Psychiatrist's marital problems, Hollis getting pumpkin'd... there was a feeling of loss throughout watching the film. So I dunno how any person who hasn't read the book will react to the movie.

The ending change? Yea, fine. It works logically. About as well as the original ending I suppose. Though the visceral impact of seeing six full pages of dead corpses in New York was completely missing here. Sorry dude, but showing us a giant blue CGI explosion just doesn't carry the same impact. We needed to feel those millions of dead. I did like the Rorschach pattern in the snow though, that was something new and worked pretty well.

Oh yea, one last thing... good god Zach, what were you thinking with that Hallelujah sex scene? Dude, I like porn and I like superheroes, but that scene... I could not have rolled my eyes any further. It was cringeworthy. And no, it was not as bad as the sex scene in 300, because I was perfectly fine with that sex scene. It was short, perfunctory, and did not have an incredibly odd soundtrack. In this case, less would've been more. The scene in the book was only 2 panels, that was about right. Mostly it was the song though... that Hallelujah song will never be the same to me again.

But I did really like the intro credits with Bob Dylan.

Again, thought it was ok. But no, not the greatest comic book movie ever. It's a mostly faithful retelling of the book in 2 and a half hours that, in my opinion, will completely fly over the heads of the mainstream audience. Let's say 3 and a half stars, and I'm being generous.… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

7

QwertyPJMJun 8, 2014

Firstly, I want to say that as a standalone film, Watchmen is more than adequate. However, as an adaptation of the best graphic novel of all time, it doesn't meet the standards set by it's paper-back sibling.
Watchmen is one of those rareFirstly, I want to say that as a standalone film, Watchmen is more than adequate. However, as an adaptation of the best graphic novel of all time, it doesn't meet the standards set by it's paper-back sibling.
Watchmen is one of those rare anomalies that, despite it's amazing story, characters and setting, could never work as a film. The sharp, juxtaposition of panels and storylines in the comic is something so stylized and unique that it could only succeed in a written medium. As a film, it loses its punch. The pacing doesn't always feel right and, for me, the characters were always more interesting when I read the comics and shaped their voice and movement myself rather than an actor portraying them.
My advice: read the comic, you'll love it. If you're desperate, check out this film. However, I feel that as the comic works so well on its own, the film does nothing to interest me further than what I already loved about the grand universe of Watchmen.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

7

Skullgirlsfan13Jun 14, 2013

Watchmen is the story of vigilante's who stop crime, all the way from the days WW1 to the year of Nixon's election, and now have to deal with someone who is taking out the masked heroes one by one. This based off; more like an exact copy of,Watchmen is the story of vigilante's who stop crime, all the way from the days WW1 to the year of Nixon's election, and now have to deal with someone who is taking out the masked heroes one by one. This based off; more like an exact copy of, the graphic novel by the same name. This film did not do so well at the box office; it still made some money, just not a lot. So there was already a layer of uninterested when this came out. Eventually I got a hold of it on blu-ray; in fact it was my first blu-ray movie I got, and I was generally pleased with it. I really liked the visual style of it, the dark and grimy detail really sells it. It's just like the graphic novel pages were on the screen. Another thing I like to mention is Jackie Earl Haley as Rorscach. This is the best performance in the movie. The way he makes his character act like such a intimidating presents is amazing when thinking about how tall he is; not very. It's almost like Marv from sin city, he's a bad ass, but also a loser in a way. Although with theses great compliments I appear to be giving this film, there're some problems I'd like to address. While Rorshach is great, the other characters don't really leave much of an impression. The guy who played Mr. Manhattan I guess did okay; if he was suppose to sound completely uninterested was his goal, then he's one of the few exceptions. I mean, I just don't find the others that interesting, and the actors don't try to do anything to make them feel real at any point. The running time can be an issue as well, running at around two an a half hours long, it can be a bit dragging when the film is not entirely interesting or captivating throughout. Even if there's not a total appreciation for this film by most, I still like it, and I'm sure there's other who agree with me.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

7

SuperheroMoviesAug 30, 2013

Even though the film overextends its welcome and has a tenacity to assert its political themes as often as possible, its graphic violence, durable characters, and stunning depiction of an unscrupulous alternate Earth more than compensate.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

7

bfoore90Nov 22, 2019

A truly stunning visual comic book spectacle to behold, though the story lacks the meat to ascend into greatness

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

7

TheMetacritiqerJun 3, 2016

I came into it with my expectations too high. I thought there would be a big twist, like Rorschach turning out to be the killer or the whole thing literally being a joke. It's also too long and 2 much backstory. But everything else is pretty good.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

7

moviemayhemApr 28, 2015

n the mid-’80s, writer Alan Moore began to imagine a world in which the superheroes and costumed crime-fighters he’d grown up reading helped shape the Cold War decades that had repeatedly brought humanity to the brink of extinction. It wasn’tn the mid-’80s, writer Alan Moore began to imagine a world in which the superheroes and costumed crime-fighters he’d grown up reading helped shape the Cold War decades that had repeatedly brought humanity to the brink of extinction. It wasn’t a better world. Behind their masks and glowing eyes, the heroes Moore conceived and created with artist Dave Gibbons were hindered, and occasionally crippled, by the same conflicting impulses, childhood traumas, and redirected neuroses that drive everyone else. Moore and Gibbons’ graphic novel Watchmen helped redefine the types of stories superheroes could be used to tell, not just by freighting them with darkness—too many subsequent creators showed how easy that could be—but by weaving their capes and gadgets into a dense, deep narrative: a detective story played out against the apocalypse in a world so thoroughly realized that Charles Dickens would be jealous.

The same elements that make Watchmen a great book made a Watchmen film a difficult prospect. (Moore, on principle, removed himself and his name from the project, which probably didn’t help.) It’s remarkable that any Watchmen movie made it to the screen, after the years of false starts and litigation. And the one we got—directed by Zack Snyder, most recently responsible for the ably made, philosophically dubious Frank Miller adaptation 300—deserves credit for staying true to the characters, plot (up to a point), and look of the original material while still generating his own kind of energy. Sometimes that energy feels misapplied and overcranked, as the roar of the action drowns out the film’s human voices, but Snyder’s Watchmen keeps moving so assuredly, it’s nearly impossible not to get swept along.

Keeping Moore’s alternate-universe ’80s New York setting, Watchmen opens with the murder of The Comedian (Jeffrey Dean Morgan), a long-serving crime-fighter with a late-career sideline in covert ops. (The film keeps Moore’s dark joke that electing Nixon to multiple terms is one of his world’s problems.) A masked vigilante named Rorschach (Jackie Earle Haley)—the only one who didn’t hang up his disguise when the government outlawed civilian crime-fighters in the mid-’70s—launches an investigation and uncovers a much larger conspiracy, one seemingly tied to mounting nuclear tensions between the U.S. and the U.S.S.R., as well as a bunch of Rorschach’s old colleagues. These include the Silk Spectre (Malin Akerman), who inherited the title from her mother (Carla Gugino); Nite Owl (Patrick Wilson) a bookish, wealthy master of machines; Ozymandias (Matthew Goode), who’s since turned his remarkable intellect to acquiring wealth and power; and Dr. Manhattan (Billy Crudup), a lab-accident-created glowing godlike being whose connection to humanity remains an open question.

There’s sometimes too much Dr. Manhattan in Snyder’s Watchmen, which often feels like a feat of engineering first, an artistic expression second. But his source material keeps him grounded, as does solid work from Crudup, Wilson, and especially Haley, whose performance evokes pity, fear, sympathy, and revulsion as he goes about his single-minded pursuit of justice without compromise. Others bring less. Given a central role, the lightweight Akerman serves as an Andie MacDowell-in-Four-Weddings-And-A-Funeral-level distraction, and Snyder isn’t always well-served by his tendency to start at 11 and try to turn up the volume, particularly in a bunch of over-the-top, bone-cracking action scenes. The time spent developing watchmen-fu would have been better invested in not blowing one of the book’s big Mars setpieces, or figuring out a better alternate ending than the one dropped in the original’s place.

And yet in the end, the film’s ambitious drive to create a dread-soaked alternate America and people it with flawed, recognizable heroes carries it along. Snyder uses grand gestures to create a sense of world-imperiling doom rooted in another era, but equally at home in this one. But he also remains willing to slow down to capture the gravity of a funeral, or dwell on a moment between old partners patching up a friendship as doomsday approaches. Moore’s touch emphasizes how messed-up and needy comic-book people would have to be to do what they do. Missteps and all, Snyder’s film gets that right, and this as well: When we look up in the sky, we don’t see a bird or a plane, but a mirror.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

7

Cinemassacre94Mar 20, 2016

In the mid-’80s, writer Alan Moore began to imagine a world in which the superheroes and costumed crime-fighters he’d grown up reading helped shape the Cold War decades that had repeatedly brought humanity to the brink of extinction. ItIn the mid-’80s, writer Alan Moore began to imagine a world in which the superheroes and costumed crime-fighters he’d grown up reading helped shape the Cold War decades that had repeatedly brought humanity to the brink of extinction. It wasn’t a better world. Behind their masks and glowing eyes, the heroes Moore conceived and created with artist Dave Gibbons were hindered, and occasionally crippled, by the same conflicting impulses, childhood traumas, and redirected neuroses that drive everyone else. Moore and Gibbons’ graphic novel Watchmen helped redefine the types of stories superheroes could be used to tell, not just by freighting them with darkness—too many subsequent creators showed how easy that could be—but by weaving their capes and gadgets into a dense, deep narrative: a detective story played out against the apocalypse in a world so thoroughly realized that Charles Dickens would be jealous.

The same elements that make Watchmen a great book made a Watchmen film a difficult prospect. (Moore, on principle, removed himself and his name from the project, which probably didn’t help.) It’s remarkable that any Watchmen movie made it to the screen, after the years of false starts and litigation. And the one we got—directed by Zack Snyder, most recently responsible for the ably made, philosophically dubious Frank Miller adaptation 300—deserves credit for staying true to the characters, plot (up to a point), and look of the original material while still generating his own kind of energy. Sometimes that energy feels misapplied and overcranked, as the roar of the action drowns out the film’s human voices, but Snyder’s Watchmen keeps moving so assuredly, it’s nearly impossible not to get swept along.

Keeping Moore’s alternate-universe ’80s New York setting, Watchmen opens with the murder of The Comedian (Jeffrey Dean Morgan), a long-serving crime-fighter with a late-career sideline in covert ops. (The film keeps Moore’s dark joke that electing Nixon to multiple terms is one of his world’s problems.) A masked vigilante named Rorschach (Jackie Earle Haley)—the only one who didn’t hang up his disguise when the government outlawed civilian crime-fighters in the mid-’70s—launches an investigation and uncovers a much larger conspiracy, one seemingly tied to mounting nuclear tensions between the U.S. and the U.S.S.R., as well as a bunch of Rorschach’s old colleagues. These include the Silk Spectre (Malin Akerman), who inherited the title from her mother (Carla Gugino); Nite Owl (Patrick Wilson) a bookish, wealthy master of machines; Ozymandias (Matthew Goode), who’s since turned his remarkable intellect to acquiring wealth and power; and Dr. Manhattan (Billy Crudup), a lab-accident-created glowing godlike being whose connection to humanity remains an open question.

There’s sometimes too much Dr. Manhattan in Snyder’s Watchmen, which often feels like a feat of engineering first, an artistic expression second. But his source material keeps him grounded, as does solid work from Crudup, Wilson, and especially Haley, whose performance evokes pity, fear, sympathy, and revulsion as he goes about his single-minded pursuit of justice without compromise. Others bring less. Given a central role, the lightweight Akerman serves as an Andie MacDowell-in-Four-Weddings-And-A-Funeral-level distraction, and Snyder isn’t always well-served by his tendency to start at 11 and try to turn up the volume, particularly in a bunch of over-the-top, bone-cracking action scenes. The time spent developing watchmen-fu would have been better invested in not blowing one of the book’s big Mars setpieces, or figuring out a better alternate ending than the one dropped in the original’s place.

And yet in the end, the film’s ambitious drive to create a dread-soaked alternate America and people it with flawed, recognizable heroes carries it along. Snyder uses grand gestures to create a sense of world-imperiling doom rooted in another era, but equally at home in this one. But he also remains willing to slow down to capture the gravity of a funeral, or dwell on a moment between old partners patching up a friendship as doomsday approaches. Moore’s touch emphasizes how messed-up and needy comic-book people would have to be to do what they do. Missteps and all, Snyder’s film gets that right, and this as well: When we look up in the sky, we don’t see a bird or a plane, but a mirror.… Expand

2 of 4 users found this helpful22

All this user's reviews

7

AaronWasserman1Mar 27, 2016

Zack Snyder is a genius when it comes to taking images of a comic book and putting them up on the screen. A stunning visual spectacle of a comic book that was deemed impossible to put on screen.

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

7

Chempion1Sep 2, 2022

Ну скажу честно, что не являюсь прям поклонником комиксных фильмов, но после всех этих "Человеков пауков" и "Мстителей" случайно наткнулся на фильм "Хранители" и решил посмотреть.
Да, именно после первых "Мстителей", я увидел этот фильмНу скажу честно, что не являюсь прям поклонником комиксных фильмов, но после всех этих "Человеков пауков" и "Мстителей" случайно наткнулся на фильм "Хранители" и решил посмотреть.
Да, именно после первых "Мстителей", я увидел этот фильм только году в 2013м и это была "Максимальная версия" хронометражем аж под три часа. Фильм мне показался невероятно затянутым. Но прошло время и я пересмотрел его, а фильмец то ничего!
Герои очень хорошо прописаны им даже сопереживаешь, чего очень трудно добиться в одной серии даже с таким хронометражем.
В фильме глубокий смысл прогнившего общества и отношения к людям как к мусору. Кто то не выдерживает своей супер силы и сходит с ума, а кто то превращается просто в циничного зверя. Хотя показывается альтернативная реальность, но всё же всем понятно, что это сегодняшние США.
Лично для меня интрига главного злодея оставалась интригой почти до самого конца.
Ещё меня напряг какой то не здоровый акцент режиссера на огромной синей ялде Доктора Манхэттена! Зачем? Хотя такой фильм сейчас вряд ли мог выйти в США.
Короче, если вам надоели детские фильмы-комиксы про "Мстителей", то советую "Хранителей", эдакую смесь "Бэтмена" и "Города грехов". Не надо ожидать от фильма серьёзного подхода к вещам и отсутствия дебильных костюмов, но зато в отличие от вышеперечисленных комиксов в этом есть какой то серьёзный подтекст. Каждый увидит то, что захочет увидеть.
На сколько я осведомлён, этот фильм даже сейчас мало кто смотрел. Так, что кто не видел, есть повод познакомиться.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

7

Onlyclassicvg1Jan 28, 2021

Watchmen is set in an alternate 1985 America in which costumed superheroes are part of the fabric of everyday society. When one of his former colleagues is murdered, the outlawed but no less determined masked vigilante Rorschach sets out toWatchmen is set in an alternate 1985 America in which costumed superheroes are part of the fabric of everyday society. When one of his former colleagues is murdered, the outlawed but no less determined masked vigilante Rorschach sets out to uncover a plot to kill and discredit all past and present superheroes. As he reconnects with hi… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

7

noob328Dec 8, 2020

this film is really good and faithful to the source material but the fanbase is really toxic. they would scream at anyone who dares to criticize this film

3 of 4 users found this helpful31

All this user's reviews

6

ChadMar 6, 2009

Interesting to look at, hard to care about. For those who say you need to read the comic to enjoy the movie... then why watch the movie at all?

0 of 0 users found this helpful

6

AndyMar 6, 2009

I enjoyed the beginning montage scene. And all the noire stuff with Roscharck was great. The third act was pretty weak. Considering the budget, it could have looked a bit better.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

6

RowdyR.Mar 7, 2009

Entertaining if you don't think about it too much and just go with it. I have never read the "graphic novel" (apparently a fancy word for a comic book) so keep that in mind. There is fun to be had here. The Comedian is a well realized Entertaining if you don't think about it too much and just go with it. I have never read the "graphic novel" (apparently a fancy word for a comic book) so keep that in mind. There is fun to be had here. The Comedian is a well realized character, as is that Owl dude and Rorschach (?), even though the Owl dude is just a poor man's batman in reality. The main bad guy is a little boring and fey. The Blue Guy and his Wife are pretty much boring and you never really care about them. The script is convoluted and did not make a lot of sense to me. Some parts of the movie are just flat dumb....why does Blue Dude have that circle on his forehead? Instead of just leaving it unexplained (like this is the only thing in this movie that needs an explaination) there is a scene where he uses his finger to draw it on his forehead...oh! ok, now I understand! The overall look of this movie was so-so....nothing really innovative here, and some of the effects I thought were pretty bad (like the whole blue man effect) and really nothing innovative here (300 was better). The make-up was REALLY BAD (I saw it in Imax)...lots of really apparent goofy wigs and latex noses and wrinkles. The use of "popular music" was poorly executed. At times they try to use the music to frame the time events are happening (like using "99 ballons" for a scene from the 80's) but then the suddenly also start using music from the 60's and so this was in-congruent and they were not very innovative in their music selection (took too many obvious choices..e.g. Sound of Silence during a funeral scene). If you don't try to make sense of the script you will be ok. Some of it seems really campy...imagine a world where Richard Nixon is Still President! Although this might have seemed creepy back in the 80's, now it just seems dopey if you are trying to frame a "disturbing alternate view of the world" (and considering what we have all just gone through with Dubya, it almost seems like a comforting notion). Most of the actors are well cast and do good jobs. I guess it is an "adult comic book movie" because there are boobs and people have sex. But I am immensely confused about the whole premise of the Watchmen. So, they started out as cops who started dressing up (so they are normal guys) but in this movie they start doing Superhuman things (running up walls, punching through them, etc.) so that to me does not make any sense. Anyways, like I say, don't think about it too much, go with it, and you will have fun, but don't believe the hype about what a sophisticated take on superheroes this is.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

6

TitaniumD.Mar 7, 2009

Overall okay, but too direct of an adaptation of the graphic novel to the big screen. Its pacing was often schizophrenic and the music choices, while funny, didn't quite work right. Overall they stuck too close to the graphic novel. Overall okay, but too direct of an adaptation of the graphic novel to the big screen. Its pacing was often schizophrenic and the music choices, while funny, didn't quite work right. Overall they stuck too close to the graphic novel. Some of the dialogue, directly taken from the graphic novel, sounded stilted and somehow wrong. Rorsarch and Doctor Manhattan's speech patterns both showed this; while they sounded good sometimes, at other times they sounded awful. Overall, an okay movie, but unexceptional due to the directness of the adaptation.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

6

THATMOVIEGUYMar 16, 2009

B- for effort. However, if you guys want to see an actual 10 out of 10, stunning visual representation of the Watchmen comic... Get the Watchmen 6 hour Animated Comic. It's a totally new medium of art that going overlooked, and one of B- for effort. However, if you guys want to see an actual 10 out of 10, stunning visual representation of the Watchmen comic... Get the Watchmen 6 hour Animated Comic. It's a totally new medium of art that going overlooked, and one of the greatest films you could watch right now! Why? Because it's a frame for frame (not recreation with "decent" actors and an action/horror director) COMIC with GREAT VOICE ACTING and subtle not over the top animation of the actual comic, WATCHMEN. Go see it, after you leave this "alright" film, please. And if you like it, tell more people!… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

6

MichaelM.Mar 6, 2009

Not having read the graphic novel this was an enjoyable fantasy if a little long & ponderous in parts

0 of 0 users found this helpful

6

AnnE.Mar 6, 2009

The movie lost one of the key points of the comic: these "superheroes" aren't super at all--they are normal human beings (with the exception of Dr. Manhattan). Even Ozymandias, as intelligent as he is, is still just a normal human The movie lost one of the key points of the comic: these "superheroes" aren't super at all--they are normal human beings (with the exception of Dr. Manhattan). Even Ozymandias, as intelligent as he is, is still just a normal human being. But the film is full of gore and violence that normal humans shouldn't really be capable of. Many of the fight scenes were a bit ridiculous because of this. They shouldn't be able to fight THAT well, or inflict THAT much damage. Also, the complexity of the ending was almost completely lost. I knew before hand that the main part of Ozymandias's plan had been altered in the movie, though I knew not how. But after watching it, I don't quite understand WHY that part was changed. The constant change in time was also severely simplified towards the end, as well, which made the entire ending lose a lot of its richness. All that being said, the movie is not bad. I enjoyed it, and I'll probably watch the Director's Cut with the scenes from the pirate comic and Under the Hood woven in. But unfortunately, it's not quite as good as it could have been, or should have been.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

6

TimN.Mar 7, 2009

VERY underwhelming compared to the book.

On its own, it's solid. But compared to the book...ech. Nearly all of the themes and messages were either diluted or totally wiped out, too many important scenes cut out, too rushed (I'dVERY underwhelming compared to the book.

On its own, it's solid. But compared to the book...ech. Nearly all of the themes and messages were either diluted or totally wiped out, too many important scenes cut out, too rushed (I'd probably be somewhat confused midway without reading the book beforehand), parts of the narrative changed for no reason , too much emphasis on slo-mo Hollywood action which WASN'T the book's emphasis, too much gratuitous gore and sex compared to the book (its isolated moments of emphasis in the book made it stand out when it needed to), etc.

Of course, I shouldn't be surprised. The amount of content in the book is way too much for 2h40m (still pretty lengthy for contemporary films), and its narrative structure is much too complex to translate to the screen...it's true, though: Watchmen is unfilmable, both in the amount of content to show and the way in which the narrative is constructed. Unless you make it 6 hours long, you will NOT end up with Watchmen. Actually, scratch that--you'll never equal the original, no matter what.

Oh well. Snyder made a good effort.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

6

BorisA.Mar 8, 2009

In the first hour it's ok,but then comes out the all splatter-action soul...clearly it's not like the graphic novel...the dialogues are not as fascinating as the graphic novel and the characters are not good like in the graphic In the first hour it's ok,but then comes out the all splatter-action soul...clearly it's not like the graphic novel...the dialogues are not as fascinating as the graphic novel and the characters are not good like in the graphic novel... The story in the movie it's also modified..and..not in a good way...it's an enjoyable movie..but it's a 6..considering what WATCHMEN really is...… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

6

DarenM.Mar 8, 2009

Great action movie, great characters, good sci-fi and any fan of "comic book" movies would like this. However, viewer beware. I would have rated this a 9 if not for the over use of frontal male nudity and excessive (or gratuitous as people Great action movie, great characters, good sci-fi and any fan of "comic book" movies would like this. However, viewer beware. I would have rated this a 9 if not for the over use of frontal male nudity and excessive (or gratuitous as people say) sexual scenes. This is where I think a movie pushes beyond my perceived definition of the R rating and I wasn… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

6

DPiddyMar 8, 2009

Seemed too long and yet still crammed with a lot of uninteresting moments... Like everyone is just going through the motions and not taking time to focus at key moments that would motivate the audience to care about any of the characters. Seemed too long and yet still crammed with a lot of uninteresting moments... Like everyone is just going through the motions and not taking time to focus at key moments that would motivate the audience to care about any of the characters. The visuals are the saving grace, obviously.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

6

ChrisG.Mar 9, 2009

I have never read the book, although I had heard a little bit about it, that said here is my review. Good plot, interesting characters, but a bit to dark for my tastes. The story is very deep, and it is not your typical superhero move. If I have never read the book, although I had heard a little bit about it, that said here is my review. Good plot, interesting characters, but a bit to dark for my tastes. The story is very deep, and it is not your typical superhero move. If you go into it thinking its going to be another iron man or spiderman, you will be shocked. You really have to pay attention to follow the plot, this is not for light viewing. Think of this as a cross between batman begins and sin city. Superheros in a dark, brutal world filled with uncertainty. Downside, the movie moves slowly at times, the movie may be a bit to much like the book to really do well with audiences. If you are uncertain about if you want to see this, I suggest you wait for it to be a rental, then watch it a couple of times, if you can. You will get much more out of it.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

6

KhrisApr 4, 2009

The film on the overall looks good and tries to bring a big sense of morality. Even if the film is strongly based on the Comics, I felt like teased about super heroes, but it was more about ''we've been super The film on the overall looks good and tries to bring a big sense of morality. Even if the film is strongly based on the Comics, I felt like teased about super heroes, but it was more about ''we've been super heroes'' and the film didn't show off enough content and poorly brought on screen some romance. I felt the story being oky, but not well developped enough to bring a quality that equal the visual. It must have been a great movie for the fans, thought, but to bring morality and society critisms in that way isn't enough appealing to me... just like a bad super hero parody trying to say something. Just not my style.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

6

IainWJul 3, 2009

Watchmen was a masterpeice of writing, for the people who believe comic books are childish, they ought to read the graphic novel and seriously re-consider their view, however as Alan Moore has stated, this is not a film, it is a comic book Watchmen was a masterpeice of writing, for the people who believe comic books are childish, they ought to read the graphic novel and seriously re-consider their view, however as Alan Moore has stated, this is not a film, it is a comic book and while this was a well put together, detailed film, even the simple change of how new york is attacked at the end of the film is proof that comic books fans will never get the true adaptation films that we hope for.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

6

ShawnBMar 15, 2009

Decent, but not able to live up to its source material. Can't say it was a failure as a film but it was a bit of a disappointment to someone who had read the original story.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

6

JudyTMar 6, 2009

Interesting but lacks characters to connect with. Like Dr. Manhattan we're cut off and distant bogged down in the corporate, controlled story and timid ending.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

6

TonyMACMar 6, 2009

Decent adaptation but lacks depth. It all looks good enough but at no point do we really care what's happening. I mean there's supposed to be a feeling of impending doom throughout the story but where is it? Alan Moore was right Decent adaptation but lacks depth. It all looks good enough but at no point do we really care what's happening. I mean there's supposed to be a feeling of impending doom throughout the story but where is it? Alan Moore was right (once again!)… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

6

KentG.Mar 6, 2009

The filmmakers did a decent job of actually adapting the movie from the comic book. However, they really missed the boat by explicitly showing too many things that were merely hinted at in the books. Overall, it made for a really flat adaptation.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

6

DeafHeavenMar 7, 2009

This may be the first time I've gone to see a movie where I was first intimately familiar with the book. Does the movie succeed? Sort of. The director did treat the source material with all due respect. All the key notes are there. This may be the first time I've gone to see a movie where I was first intimately familiar with the book. Does the movie succeed? Sort of. The director did treat the source material with all due respect. All the key notes are there. It's the adagio, the espressivo, the intermezzo that are missing. Some here say there was too much exposition. I have to disagree... there was too little. I look forward to seeing the super extended director's cut which will probably push it to a 7 or 8 on my scale. I give the excellently done motion capture comic a 9 (would have been a 10 had they had a female actor do the female voices).… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

6

SevanMar 8, 2009

The movie itself was great, but the changes from the book were terrible. Pinning the blame on Dr. Manhattan? And even making him the cheesy one ("I think I finally believe in miracles")? Seriously. And way too many sex scenes. Even the book The movie itself was great, but the changes from the book were terrible. Pinning the blame on Dr. Manhattan? And even making him the cheesy one ("I think I finally believe in miracles")? Seriously. And way too many sex scenes. Even the book didn't have THAT much sex.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

6

C.Lo.Mar 9, 2009

The Watchmen, though enjoyable, was, to be quite honest, too long and drawn out. As some have already stated, if you've read the graphic novel and really enjoyed it, then you will probably love this movie. It is almost a perfect The Watchmen, though enjoyable, was, to be quite honest, too long and drawn out. As some have already stated, if you've read the graphic novel and really enjoyed it, then you will probably love this movie. It is almost a perfect adaptation of the graphic novel, which I found to be pretty good, though I purposefully did not read to the end so the movie would surprise me. To be frank, the first 3/4 of the movie are quite awesome, and the last 1/4 of the movie is a complete disappointment. Not to mention, Dr. Manhattan (the blue guy) is completely naked the whole movie and is exposed, which blinded me through parts of the movie (if he was having sex, it woulda been intriguing, but no, he was just hanging out. That's really enjoyable). There were many slow scenes unless Rorschach was involved, and my girlfriend even fell asleep twice during the movie. I did enjoy the story (not including the ending), the opening is amazing, Rorschach is a beast, and then... Matthew Goode's acting was terrible. Just plain awful. There are many more things to be said, but the movie was, on the whole, a let down (and i saw it at IMAX), Enjoyable, somewhat worth seeing, but if you're expecting THE next movie, wait for G.I. Joe or Transformers 2 (or Wolverine or Terminator..)… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful

6

JayH.Jul 19, 2009

The best thing about the film are the visuals and special effects, the biggest flaw - bad miscasting. Malin Akerman doesn't come close to having the range needed for the role. Great action sequences, awesome score but way way overlong.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

6

AlexMJul 26, 2009

When I saw this movie in theaters for the first time, I absolutely loved it; however, the extravagant experience that movie theaters dish out can often make any movie seem amazing. Having seen the movie a second time, I began to dislike it When I saw this movie in theaters for the first time, I absolutely loved it; however, the extravagant experience that movie theaters dish out can often make any movie seem amazing. Having seen the movie a second time, I began to dislike it more and more. The movie starts out interesting, but after the first hour, it begins to drag on, and on, and on, for a whopping two hours and forty-five minutes, and soon the audience's attention to the apparent doomsday clock is transferred to the watches on their wrists. Also, the plot has numerous inconsistencies, such as the lack of depth of all of the heroes and the pointless subplots associated with the over-exaggerated ongoing conflict between the U.S. and U.S.S.R. I believe that only the apostles of the graphic novel will remain faithful to its unconventional film adaption. Although the movie has numerous holes to trip in, there is amiable land to run on as well. The action scenes satisfy the hungry, and the small humorous moments capture the moviegoer's attention, even if just for a moment. The distinct type of hero portrayed in the film (tough-fisted, clever, and strong).… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

6

MattFOct 18, 2009

This 300 like superhero film is an awesome form of entertainment, though, it is not a great movie because of its weird soundtrack and its distraught and unaccomplished plot, untill a 5 minute scene at the end where if you blink you wont get This 300 like superhero film is an awesome form of entertainment, though, it is not a great movie because of its weird soundtrack and its distraught and unaccomplished plot, untill a 5 minute scene at the end where if you blink you wont get the whole movie or where 30 minutes of the movie has anything to do with the plot. It has a great daily dose of action, sex, and gore, so it deserves a good solid 6.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

6

GerryGMar 14, 2009

Parts of it were great, others good, some disturbing, some silly, and some scenes were quite graphic (nudity, sex, attempted rape, bloody violence). Surprisingly little language, though, considering the other elements. It was uneven, but Parts of it were great, others good, some disturbing, some silly, and some scenes were quite graphic (nudity, sex, attempted rape, bloody violence). Surprisingly little language, though, considering the other elements. It was uneven, but never boring or poorly acted. If you have a religious or conservative leaning, you probably would do best to avoid this. Not for kids.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

6

SteveMar 15, 2009

Was It Worth Watching? We should give Watchmen its props for the most faithful adaptation of a comic book to the screen. This is a good thing. Alan Moore

0 of 0 users found this helpful

6

SandorBJul 21, 2009

The problem with this movie is that it does what everyone wants when it comes to adaptation and only proves that movies that are in tune with their novel counterparts will be slow and poorly paced when translated to the big screen. Almost The problem with this movie is that it does what everyone wants when it comes to adaptation and only proves that movies that are in tune with their novel counterparts will be slow and poorly paced when translated to the big screen. Almost every other film based on another medium has disappointed readers yet those movies are often very entertaining. Aside from that the film was shot beautifully and acted well it just fell short because of its pacing. Had the story fit into the standard 2 hour formula (something I consider to be impossible) it would have probably been better received. I find myself both loving and hating this film at the same time. If you really don't have the patience to read the actual source I would suggest watching the first episode of the motion comics and seeing if it intrigues you enough to continue on.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

6

ThomasPJul 27, 2009

This is by all means a good, but not great film. I never read the comic, but i still understood the movie, its long, some of it seems unnecessary, say the half dozen or so sex scenes. In any case its fun to watch, but the characters could This is by all means a good, but not great film. I never read the comic, but i still understood the movie, its long, some of it seems unnecessary, say the half dozen or so sex scenes. In any case its fun to watch, but the characters could have been developed more, given more of a personality. Still its a solid rent movie.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

6

ryancarroll88Aug 27, 2010

There were a lot of things the movie did right, and plotwise, it stayed faithful to the original medium. However, there were enough missteps/inconsistencies and an unfulfilling style that it comes off as a purely enjoyable film, rather than aThere were a lot of things the movie did right, and plotwise, it stayed faithful to the original medium. However, there were enough missteps/inconsistencies and an unfulfilling style that it comes off as a purely enjoyable film, rather than a great, memorable one. Also, those watching the movie who haven't read the graphic novel will find little to cling on to, and might find the ending bemusing, but not anywhere near as impacting as what's presented in the book. The whole soundtrack also just needed an overhaul (If you're gonna feature "Hallelujah" in a movie, at least let it be Jeff Buckley's version!) Anyway, I need to get some sleep...… Expand

0 of 4 users found this helpful04

All this user's reviews

6

tonyGreenJan 16, 2020

Mostly enjoyable but bonkers. An unusual superhero story with an intricate plot (many flashbacks and diversions). The practical sets and effects are great, the CGI elements less than great. Very violent and gory which gets a bit tiresome.Mostly enjoyable but bonkers. An unusual superhero story with an intricate plot (many flashbacks and diversions). The practical sets and effects are great, the CGI elements less than great. Very violent and gory which gets a bit tiresome. Wonderfully ambiguous characters and a clever alternative history world. Slick and a bit dumb, but pretty enjoyable.… Expand

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

All this user's reviews

6

txrangersfan72Sep 19, 2010

Watchmen was a socially-relevant, very gritty graphic novel from the late 80s written by one of the most original comic book writers of the time (or any time), Alan Moore.

Many of Alan's books have been made into movies. From Hell. V forWatchmen was a socially-relevant, very gritty graphic novel from the late 80s written by one of the most original comic book writers of the time (or any time), Alan Moore.

Many of Alan's books have been made into movies. From Hell. V for Vendetta. The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen. And he refuses to put his name on any of them because he thinks movies are pointless drivel.

So, for over 20 years, people have been trying to prove Alan wrong and find a way to put his "masterpiece," Watchmen, into film form. And no one had the balls, or technology, to accomplish it.

Until now.

First off, Zack Snyder has done the PERFECT translation of Watchmen into film. There is no way it could have ever been done better. Ever. By anyone.

However, that still doesn't mean the book translates to film well. It doesn't. At all.

Zack is very aware of how much it is possible to forever ruin Watchmen by making it into a cheesy movie, so he sticks to the source material almost verbatim. This makes for an interesting viewing experience, if you've read the book. It's like the book is being read to you.

However, it's like the book is being read to you.

It doesn't have a movie flow. It has a book flow. The film struggles to emotionally connect you with any character, except for Rorschach, who is the highlight of the film. PERFECT casting. And being so distant from the era of the cold war, even though we are seeing hints of it again, it's incredibly difficult to feel what the book made readers feel in the 80s when the cold war was so prevalent.

From the perspective of being faithful to the book, Zack should be commended and, in that respect, the film is perfect, even if they replaced the giant squid with nuclear explosions. It's a 5 star film.

However, from a film-watcher's perspective, it was too long (and, yes, I realize it had to be), it was too dated (and, yes, I realize it had to be), it was too boring and it did not flow well at all, though I think it picked up in the last half hour.

If you were a fan of the book, you HAVE to see it. If you have no idea about the book, do not waste your 3 hours and $15.

Side note: I was a huge comic book reader in the 1980s. What made Watchmen important was that, at the time, in the era of Ronald Reagan and the Cold War, what was weird was that comic book writers would not tackle the subject of nuclear war. It was almost like a silent rule that even though super heroes are supposed to save us from everything, we all know writing that a super hero could stop nuclear war is just dumb and unrealistic (even though the concept of super heroes themselves is dumb and unrealistic). It was very strange. Since no one could figure out a way to have a hero stop EVERY nuclear missile before hitting their targets, they just avoided the subject.

So when Alan Moore decided to tackle the subject head-on, he did it in a very unique way, and probably the only way it would have made sense. In Watchmen, the heroes manipulated mankind from destroying themselves. THAT is the way they saved them. They brought them together by making a common enemy from which they could unite. The heroes didn't have to "stop all the bombs." They simply had to manipulate the leaders from ever wanting to release the bombs.

It was genius.

Alan's disgust of the government, status quo, etc., and his story's descent into chaos are themes in many of Alan's stories. V for Vendetta is another great example (and much better done film). He is a master storyteller though, and superb character developer. Rorschach, in particular, comes across to me as Alan himself, which is why I think the character appeals to the reader so much. Uncompromising and blunt, like Alan himself.… Expand

0 of 7 users found this helpful07

All this user's reviews

6

TheQuietGamerMar 6, 2011

This movie wasn't a great movie, the plot is pretty boring but picks up when the action finally shows up, all the characters but Rorschach are unlikable and lame, this is incredibly overhyped, and get boring at times, but you may be willingThis movie wasn't a great movie, the plot is pretty boring but picks up when the action finally shows up, all the characters but Rorschach are unlikable and lame, this is incredibly overhyped, and get boring at times, but you may be willing to give this a chance just don't expect greatness.… Expand

1 of 3 users found this helpful12

All this user's reviews

6

davenbettridgeSep 8, 2011

Unlike most movies which seem to be held back by film studios, Watchmen and its director Zack Snyder would have benifited by studios saying NO and holding back the excessive nonsense that weighs down this movie. Too much of Watchmen'sUnlike most movies which seem to be held back by film studios, Watchmen and its director Zack Snyder would have benifited by studios saying NO and holding back the excessive nonsense that weighs down this movie. Too much of Watchmen's violence is unnecessary and far too excessive. Violence can be very effective but too much will screw up its impact and this movie suffers as a result. I did enjoy some of the films back story and the characters Rorschach and Doctor Manhattan were interesting, but for everything this movie did right it did something wrong. Some of the actors are good some are miscast, the screen play is messy at times and there is also a ridiculously clumsy laughable sex scene. It's a pitty as Watchmen does have some depth and could have been much better.â… Expand

0 of 3 users found this helpful03

All this user's reviews

6

TyranianApr 13, 2019

Visually fantastic, certainly Snyder at his best in that department, but the film feels bloated and in need of better editing.

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

6

Bruce722Nov 29, 2012

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. This was a very disappointing book-to-film portrayal. Not only do they include the only stupid element from the book (Jon's ability to see into the future which I fully expected them to keep) but they also changed some things for the worst. For one, unlike in the book where there is some foreshadowing but the twist is still somewhat of a surprise, this movie gives away the identity of the villain pretty much from the beginning. Also, they give the characters superhuman abilities for some reason that, other than one minor glitch in the end of the book, never actually existed. Rorschach can't leap 10 feet into the air at will, Adrian Veidt isn't a superhero, etc. This not only made a dark and realistic world silly but it also made the closing sequence of the film incredibly retarded. And speaking of Veidt, this was by far the worst casting of all of the characters. In the book, Adrian Veidt appeared to be a "larger than life" person, not just in terms of his celebrity and persona but also in terms of his physical appearance. The dude was a big, strong, and intimidating person but Matthew Goode looks like a dorky little twerp. Malin Akerman also wasn't a great selection but she at least pulled of the role of Laurie Jupiter decent enough. The rest of the casting was fantastic and they nailed the style of the book spot on. The soundtrack was also really good. Honestly, other than the Adrian character in general, they really stayed very true to the book. It's just that this story is so reliant, not on action and effects but rather on the development of the characters and the world itself. And while they developed the world really nicely, I think they failed to develop Dr. Manhattan enough and his back story is really one of the key turns in the book. Overall I think they gave it a solid effort but it just doesn't have the same impact. I think people who read the book will at least find this movie intriguing and somewhat enjoyable but I think people who never read the book will find the movie mediocre at best.… Expand

2 of 4 users found this helpful22

All this user's reviews

6

JamesCannonJan 3, 2013

I can see why fans of the novel enjoyed this..and I didnt entirely hate it, but it just didnt have that great stirring narrative feel that the graphic novel had. Of course not having a gaint squid kill millions in N.Y with its telekinesisI can see why fans of the novel enjoyed this..and I didnt entirely hate it, but it just didnt have that great stirring narrative feel that the graphic novel had. Of course not having a gaint squid kill millions in N.Y with its telekinesis powers was a little of downer but the film actually pulls off some of the scenes from the book rather nicely. The casting isnt all the terrible either, esp. Rorschach, Nite Owl, and even the Comedian. I didnt mind all the violence either, it was violent book, but for some reason it had a shiny cartoony feel to it, much like he did with 300...kind of glossy blood violence. It also just didnt appear as smart as the book did either, many of lines of dialogue that came right from the book, came across clunky and also Ozymandius is given villain status immediately..his character was the one I just felt they completely missed the ball park on...but hell he didnt pretty decent job with a challenging movie.… Expand

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

All this user's reviews

6

Swishalicious29Apr 1, 2016

Watchmen is a decent super-hero film, but is nowhere near as good at the graphic-novel. A lot of exposition is removed, but that isn't what bothers me. The problem is that a lot of bloated action scenes were added, where none were present inWatchmen is a decent super-hero film, but is nowhere near as good at the graphic-novel. A lot of exposition is removed, but that isn't what bothers me. The problem is that a lot of bloated action scenes were added, where none were present in the novel and this hurt the characters. By creating super-hero's, Snyder completely missed the point of the comic that these are regular humans with complicated lives.

The characters don't have the same distinct personalities and traits that are in the comic. Rorschach and Nite Owl are great, but Ackerman as Silk Spectre is pretty dreadful. She doesn't have the same conflicted personality that was in the comic and speaks in a monotone that becomes tedious throughout the movie. And while I respect the reverence for the comic, it definitely wouldn't have hurt to stray from it a little at times.

Some iconic scenes are done well, (prison scene in particular) and I loved the use of a rock soundtrack. Watchmen is decent enough, but its points get lost through the long run-time. Worth a watch for fans of the comic, but I can't recommend it much more than that.… Expand

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

All this user's reviews

6

rustyjudasSep 23, 2013

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Who watches Watchmen?

Watchmen is a movie based on the graphic novel written by Alan Moore and is set in an alternate reality in 1985 New York City. It attempts to deconstruct the myth of the superhero genre.

I've read the graphic novel which is multi-layered and relies on flashbacks to propel the main narrative. So I was eager when news of a film adaptation was announced. However the director behind the project is Zac Snyder whose previous efforts I didn't like.

So with that in mind I knew it wouldn't be like Christopher Nolan's take on the Dark Knight but more like an highly excitable fan boy who had got their wish to direct this movie. To be fair Zac has done well with the source material and stayed faithful however his technique of highly stylized violence and the slowing and speeding up of images can get a bit tiring and is more in style to Sin City then how I personally imagined Watchmen to be like.

I envisaged Watchmen to be realistic in it's portrayal of it's characters and in the novel you assume the only character with genuine superpowers is Dr Manhattan yet in the movie every fight scene is hyper real with characters exhibiting superhuman strength which is confusing to say the least. This is a minor quibble.

The film is long and still manages to omit exposition necessary for the plot and requires inferences which is difficult if you haven't read the source material. For example Hollis Mason is introduced and it is never explained that there are two Nite Owls. Why introduce the character when he is necessary in the comic as he is killed in the novel and is part of Dan's desire to return to the world of superheroes but this doesn't happen in the movie. It's unnecessary.

Minor criticism's first. The only error in casting for me Is Ozymandias's character. He is supposed to be an Olympian style Adonis like figure who is the smartest man in the world but comes across as a bitter public school boy who lost on University Challenge.

The one other omission from the novel which I can't go into as it would reveal too much is the absence of a tentacled foe. I can see why this is omitted but in the comic the secrecy of this operation is more because of what it involves.

Overall I enjoyed the movie. Yes it is flawed and overlong. Some of the dialogue is clunky and Subtlety is definitely out of the window but it remains faithful to the novel and I would like to see the longer cut which would iron over any plot holes.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

Kai82May 14, 2022

Except for the ending it is one of the most fateful graphic novels adaptations in movies. Sadly the ending angered many fans and it would be a masterpiece without it. To be fair you can argue that the ending does the same as the source but inExcept for the ending it is one of the most fateful graphic novels adaptations in movies. Sadly the ending angered many fans and it would be a masterpiece without it. To be fair you can argue that the ending does the same as the source but in a different way. I will give a summary with a spoiler warning at the end of the review. Lets start at the Beginning: Watchman is a graphic novel by Alan Moore and Dave Gibbons. It has fan and critical acclaim and is a frequent contender for best comics of all time rarely if ever missing the top 5. It is set in an alternative world in 1985 that resembles our own but also is quite different. Nixon is still President in 1985, the Vietnam war was won thanks to Dr. Manhattan but the Cold War is still there maybe even more serious. Masked Superheroes existed but except Dr. Manhattan they have no superpowers. Those were outlawed a few years before the events of the movie by a nation wide police strike. Story: After a set up that shows a bit of the history of this world a man named Edward Blake died under strange circumstances. The vigilante hero Rorschach discovers that there was more behind Blake and this leads to even more questions. Meanwhile the tensions between thee USA and Russia reach new heights and it seems a war that can end humanity is on the horizon. I stop here to avoid spoilers and have already been a bit vague. The story is excellent and entertains form start to nearly finish. The ending is the elephant in the room. While being not a mayor change in what is happening the how is ruining the movie for many. While I have not read the novel before the movie I see why. See below if you like but beware of spoilers. The visuals, effects and dedication to the source are amazing. Like I said you hardly find a better adaptation. The actors do an amazing job. I praise the whole cast and there are a lot of great moments. In this regard it is an amazing adaptation too. I think I said all necessary things I can without spoilers. Overall this is a great movie / adaptation with an ending that angered many fans. Because of this it is hated. I give a 6/10 because of the ending (Otherwise a 10/10). Spoiler warning: In the graphic novel Ozymandias let scientist design / fabricate an alien that appears in New York and kills millions with a psychic wave before it died. As planned this stopped the looming world war as mankind banned together to defend themselves against this unknown outside thread. Not a perfect plan but it safes humanity or at least gives time to solve the problems that lead to this nuclear standoff. Now to the movie: With Dr. Manhattan as seemingly 7 framed bad guy I think mankind would surrender immediately instead of mobilizing the military as they cant kill him. Even a full disintegration is a small inconvenience for him and he has god like abilities that outclass everything mankind have. As perspective: Neither the Avengers nor Justice League would be able to stop him in a serious fight.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

DenisManuOct 12, 2014

Not that good of a graphic novel adaptation indeed.But a marvelous movie filled with great moments.With great performances and good looking visuals,this movie is entertaining and has a truly unexpected take on superheroes.

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

All this user's reviews

6

aadityamudharApr 17, 2016

It's crazy how this movie turned out average for me. The graphic novel is great, thought-provoking, and artistic. The movie adaptation, however, feels like a wax replica of the novel. With the actors/actresses looking uninspired and dull.

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

All this user's reviews

6

EpicLadySpongeApr 4, 2016

Users defending Zack Snyder's films make me look bad in front of public. Seriously, stop defending any film Zack Snyder has made because you know you're not a true moviegoer if you do this all day. Watchmen just keeps trying, but fails at the end.

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

All this user's reviews

6

TheArchetypesSep 9, 2016

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. This was a very disappointing book-to-film portrayal. Not only do they include the only stupid element from the book (Jon's ability to see into the future which I fully expected them to keep) but they also changed some things for the worst. For one, unlike in the book where there is some foreshadowing but the twist is still somewhat of a surprise, this movie gives away the identity of the villain pretty much from the beginning. Also, they give the characters superhuman abilities for some reason that, other than one minor glitch in the end of the book, never actually existed. Rorschach can't leap 10 feet into the air at will, Adrian Veidt isn't a superhero, etc. This not only made a dark and realistic world silly but it also made the closing sequence of the film incredibly retarded. And speaking of Veidt, this was by far the worst casting of all of the characters. In the book, Adrian Veidt appeared to be a "larger than life" person, not just in terms of his celebrity and persona but also in terms of his physical appearance. The dude was a big, strong, and intimidating person but Matthew Goode looks like a dorky little twerp. Malin Akerman also wasn't a great selection but she at least pulled of the role of Laurie Jupiter decent enough. The rest of the casting was fantastic and they nailed the style of the book spot on. The soundtrack was also really good. Honestly, other than the Adrian character in general, they really stayed very true to the book. It's just that this story is so reliant, not on action and effects but rather on the development of the characters and the world itself. And while they developed the world really nicely, I think they failed to develop Dr. Manhattan enough and his back story is really one of the key turns in the book. Overall I think they gave it a solid effort but it just doesn't have the same impact. I think people who read the book will at least find this movie intriguing and somewhat enjoyable but I think people who never read the book will find the movie mediocre at best.… Expand

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

All this user's reviews

6

Jaredc324May 9, 2019

Shame such visual extravagance and stylistic fervor goes partly to waste from such an overly dense, stretched out, and lazy execution. Watchmen has moments and stretches of intrigue and awe, but the splendor dies and gets reborn again andShame such visual extravagance and stylistic fervor goes partly to waste from such an overly dense, stretched out, and lazy execution. Watchmen has moments and stretches of intrigue and awe, but the splendor dies and gets reborn again and again throughout the movie. It's never consistent, and especially with the character motivations. i just felt there wasn't a single character i could resonate or relate to. They're just posers with backstories that are more interesting than the characters themselves. Watchmen isn't a total collapse. It's actually a masterpiece in the eyes of many, and to me for what it withholds. It just doesn't know how to shape it's glory within the time frame it strives for.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

6

Cristofer21Aug 2, 2018

Good soundtrack,good visual effects and good sound but a very boring story and at times confused and incoherent, this movie only keeps the fan of the comics interested but the vast majority of the movie theater put them to sleep.

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

5

TylerD.Mar 7, 2009

It did not suck.... I kept waiting for some bad ass scene but it never came.... Overall it was one of the most disappointing movies I have ever seen... Watchmen had the perfect recipe for a classic and it was way too long, movies that long It did not suck.... I kept waiting for some bad ass scene but it never came.... Overall it was one of the most disappointing movies I have ever seen... Watchmen had the perfect recipe for a classic and it was way too long, movies that long need to have great action to keep their desired audience watching.. Total bummer, this is the flop of the year, all that bark and no bite...… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

5

GVBMar 10, 2009

I saw this movie at the midnight showing at the local theater. At around 3 in the morning, I walked out of the theater and thought, "It was.. OK." This is to all the people who say that "if you read the comic, you'll love the movie." I I saw this movie at the midnight showing at the local theater. At around 3 in the morning, I walked out of the theater and thought, "It was.. OK." This is to all the people who say that "if you read the comic, you'll love the movie." I say that it's almost the complete opposite. Fans of Alan Moore's masterpiece will be disappointed by the changes and by some of the casting. Speaking for myself, I really came into the theater with high hopes. I had read the comic only twice (a small number compared to the many other Watchmen fanatics), and had been psyched ever since the trailer first came out. Needless to say, I left the movie criticizing the film, even though I would never call it "bad." It just seems like the people who haven't read the comic are going to see it to gain respect points from people, or are going expecting another movie like Batman. This is not Batman; this is Watchmen, where superheroes don't exist. Real people exist, a concept that was left out of the movie adaption. Everyone's running around and doing all these superhuman things, the point gets lost that these are just ordinary people that don masks to fight crime for their own reasons. Another thing to the people that praise the soundtrack: What movie were you watching?? The soundtrack, by itself, is probably fine for any hipster's iPod. But the music in the film just felt disjointed and unnecessary (excluding Dylan's "The Times They Are a-Changin' "). I mean, "99 Luftballons"? That was laughable. And playing "Hallelujah" during one of the most awkward parts of the movie pulled a giggle out of the whole audience. I know that these were the songs quoted in the novel.. but numerous times, people have brought up what works in a comic doesn't always work in a movie. The soundtrack was one of those things. Please stop calling Snyder "visionary." He's made three movies, calm down. Looks like he traded story for heavy-handed punches and ludicrous fighting scenes, via slow-mo. This could've been a really good movie; the only thing that I count as a plus is that, hopefully, the film will get people to read the original comic. I won't say it's a bad movie, but it sure wasn't good.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

5

MitchellO.Mar 6, 2009

Can't tell you how much I loved the graphic novel. I can see the Director's love for the source material. I can see the shots, the reference, the mood. The only thing I don't get is any real connection to the characters and Can't tell you how much I loved the graphic novel. I can see the Director's love for the source material. I can see the shots, the reference, the mood. The only thing I don't get is any real connection to the characters and their stories. Their dialogue comes across as made-up and wooden. Maybe my hopes were just too high going in.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

5

DanLApr 4, 2009

Zach should have stuck with Frank Miller. There's no chance of butchering any of the nuances of Frank's work because there are none. Alan Moore is a completely different beast. The Watchmen graphic novel is famous because of Zach should have stuck with Frank Miller. There's no chance of butchering any of the nuances of Frank's work because there are none. Alan Moore is a completely different beast. The Watchmen graphic novel is famous because of it's depth and rightly so, but there is just too much to translate to the big screen in one movie. The Watchmen is a big story, it would of worked better on HBO as a TV series, adapted by Milch of course. One movie, even nearly 3 hours long, was never going to fit everything in. And what a long 3 hours it was! The cinema release should not have tried to be a copy of the book, there is just too much backstory to be told, save that for the extended DVD version. Peter Jackson had the same problem with the LORT trilogy, which has even more backstory than Watchmen. Instead of bloating the entire movie with continual flashbacks, he just put the important historical stuff at the beginning as a monologue spoken by Galadriel, it was all over in about ten minutes. The Watchmen movie had too much exposition, and not enough narrative. The main plot was interesting, but was always interrupted by the character flashbacks. I don't think this was good for the continuity of the film because it just drew out the conclusion longer and longer.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

5

NidheeshMMay 23, 2009

Great book by Alan Moore, bad movie by Zack Snyder....the movie looks as if it was made for people who have read the book...for the average cinema goer....the movie fails to be seductive in it that it does not captivate ones Great book by Alan Moore, bad movie by Zack Snyder....the movie looks as if it was made for people who have read the book...for the average cinema goer....the movie fails to be seductive in it that it does not captivate ones imagination...add to that the really sloppy editing and after the while...it gets boring..The Silk Scepter was awful and the comedian too glorified than in the book....the saving grace was the character of Rosarch...as was in the case of 300..Zack Snyder leaves his audience very detached.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

5

ChristopherA.Jan 19, 2010

Watchmen was overall an okay movie. I liked the action and the romance in it. The best part was how they played out Walter Kovacs (aka Rorschach). However, I did not like the pace of the movie, it could have been shorter. Plus I don't Watchmen was overall an okay movie. I liked the action and the romance in it. The best part was how they played out Walter Kovacs (aka Rorschach). However, I did not like the pace of the movie, it could have been shorter. Plus I don't like there being bloodshed caused by torture and mutilating (which happened in the jail riot scene). I only accept it if it was in battle, like 300. Plus, this comic book film was inferior to that of most of the other comic films. They include the Spider-Man, Batman (except Batman and Robin), and the X-Men films. However, of all the comic movies I've seen, it was better than Batman and Robin, the Fantastic Four films, Elektra, and Catwoman (which I haven't seen, although I looked at its reception).… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

5

OCMar 14, 2009

A plodding film that sets out to fill some very large boots but ends up falling head over heels. Having not read the graphic novel I entered the cinema with little expectation; to walk away almost three hours later wondering what all the A plodding film that sets out to fill some very large boots but ends up falling head over heels. Having not read the graphic novel I entered the cinema with little expectation; to walk away almost three hours later wondering what all the fuss is about is a sad testament to the lack of resonance this film has. Unfortunately even the set pieces don't stand up to much scrutiny. Worthy performances from the central actors but not enough to rescue this B-movie adaptation.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

5

MonkeyManMar 15, 2009

Doesn't live up to its hype. A movie without a real plot, mostly boring and made for teenagers.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

5

RonLMar 16, 2009

1. The acting sucked. 2. The soundtrack was annoying. 3. The ending didn

0 of 0 users found this helpful

5

NickS.Mar 8, 2009

Great visuals but a big disappointment. All efforts were made to stay true to the book. Most people came out of the cinema feeling indifferent. I personally felt like I wasted 3 hours of my life, the movie wasn't bad, I just didn't Great visuals but a big disappointment. All efforts were made to stay true to the book. Most people came out of the cinema feeling indifferent. I personally felt like I wasted 3 hours of my life, the movie wasn't bad, I just didn't care. At first I thought the book was not as good as I first thought, then I realised I just didn't care either way. i couldn't recommend it to someone who hasn't read watchmen because its very hard to follow and I can't recommend it to someone who has read Watchmen because there's just no point. Great visuals though but still indifferent to the experience.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

5

JonR.Jul 22, 2009

All I have to say is, read the book. The movie could never achieve the amount of emotion and depth the book had. I have to say they really tried, but it just didn't translate well. So if u want to read the best graphic novel ever, All I have to say is, read the book. The movie could never achieve the amount of emotion and depth the book had. I have to say they really tried, but it just didn't translate well. So if u want to read the best graphic novel ever, definitely pay 20 bucks for the book instead of the DVD. You won't regret it.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

5

AndréLMar 15, 2009

I give it 5 for changing so much stuff from the original story, like rorschach pass and a LOT of stuff that don´t make sense to change, shit, if i could beat zack snyder it would be great, simply destroyed the reputation of the history I give it 5 for changing so much stuff from the original story, like rorschach pass and a LOT of stuff that don´t make sense to change, shit, if i could beat zack snyder it would be great, simply destroyed the reputation of the history for those who doesn´t know.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

5

TrajanMar 15, 2009

the plot was far too disjointed to make a good movie. the sex and graphic violence didn't add to the story. it was very difficult to care about any of the characters. i could never figure out if any of the characters aside from dr. m. the plot was far too disjointed to make a good movie. the sex and graphic violence didn't add to the story. it was very difficult to care about any of the characters. i could never figure out if any of the characters aside from dr. m. had special powers (aside from the ability to take a lot of damage). overall, it was simply nothing special.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

5

JosephAMar 23, 2009

Just not that good. If I hadn't been familiar with the story I don't think I would've enjoyed it at all.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

5

nutterjrNov 16, 2010

As camp as the George Clooney's Batman films (or even Roger Moore's Bond films) and not even close to the class of "The Dark Knight." It is a great production indeed, but it is never as good as its opening credit sequence.

1 of 8 users found this helpful17

All this user's reviews

5

mariotoadrabbitJul 6, 2014

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. With more darker, thrilling, and violet then the novel, watchmen brings the intense mystery violet film that frightens the audiences under 12 or 13 with graphic violences,bad sex love scenes and others. I don't need to hurt Zack synder's feelings for this movie but he does directed others films that are good such as legend of the guardians, sucker punch, 300, and man of steel. So I would generally recommend that this is a good movie but has bad stuff in it based on the graphic novel. So there's one thing I am confused about this movie. One thing am confused is that the plot generally mixed up from character to character. Each from past it the present of the story. So I would this is that the movie maybe frighten people with intense violence and darker past of the story. So that's that things I would say about this movie.… Expand

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

All this user's reviews

5

ZaratusaJan 8, 2018

This movie started out really cool with outsanding potential: good introduction and top-notch music playlist. Rorschach got some philosophical lines and that really gave you a feeling of immersion in the world. But half-way, it just comes upThis movie started out really cool with outsanding potential: good introduction and top-notch music playlist. Rorschach got some philosophical lines and that really gave you a feeling of immersion in the world. But half-way, it just comes up short. It turns itself from an intriguing puzzle-solving super-hero movie to some cheap boring cliché crap. It was just so... vague. Underwhelmed me.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

5

wevertonaguiiarAug 9, 2019

Esse claramente é um filme do Zack Snyder. E isso não é bom. O filme não tem emoção nenhuma.

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

5

ErikTheCriticOct 14, 2018

This is one of those films where you either love it or you hate it. Interestingly enough, I am somewhere down the middle.

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

5

jonslowJan 11, 2019

ตัวหนังยาวเกินไป น่าจะทำได้ดีกว่านี้ ตัวหนังยาวเกินไป น่าจะทำได้ดีกว่านี้

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

5

DarkwingSchmuckJul 27, 2023

While it isn't his worst film, never has Zack Snyder's penchant for perfectly adapting a source material aesthetically while completely missing its point thematically been so apparent than with his adaptation of Alan Moore's classic Watchmen.While it isn't his worst film, never has Zack Snyder's penchant for perfectly adapting a source material aesthetically while completely missing its point thematically been so apparent than with his adaptation of Alan Moore's classic Watchmen. Snyder clearly idolizes these characters, whom Moore wrote intentionally as selfish, arrogant, cynical, hypocritical, cowardly, and downright terrible people.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

4

KarlD.Mar 9, 2009

I give the benefit of the doubt to those who read the graphic novel. I haven't, and so I really was looking forward to see this on the big screen because it seemed interesting. The movie is a total bore, pointless, overlong, and no I give the benefit of the doubt to those who read the graphic novel. I haven't, and so I really was looking forward to see this on the big screen because it seemed interesting. The movie is a total bore, pointless, overlong, and no action whatsoever except for 2-3 fights which we have seen already in dozens of films. There were times when scenes were so boring and long that I was falling asleep. Maybe for those who read the graphic novel this was an amazing movie, perhaps if I read it in the first place and discovered that Watchmen is this load of crap I wouldn't have seen the movie. The only thing interesting in the whole film was the character Rorschach since I love anti-heroes in movies, and of coarse the visual effects. I can't believe the good ratings I'm seeing from users for such a pointless and boring film.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

4

KPJul 2, 2009

I love superheroes. But this movie was a disappointment. I found it long winded and meandering. The graphic novel was great. But as movies go, I'd rather watch almost any comic book based movie than this one. (except maybe Ghost Rider I love superheroes. But this movie was a disappointment. I found it long winded and meandering. The graphic novel was great. But as movies go, I'd rather watch almost any comic book based movie than this one. (except maybe Ghost Rider lol) It just missed the mark it almost every way. And I hated hearing Hendrix in the soundtrack...I love Jimi, but what horrible placement.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

4

KominoMar 12, 2009

An interesting idea but ultimately a movie that is way too long and with a story that, while could have been gripping, is left stretched and devoid of punch. The fans of the original seem to love it, so only really can be recommended to them.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

4

RichiLCMar 6, 2009

I've read the comic book like fifty times (so I'm a huge fan) and after seen this movie, i understand why Moore thought that this was unmakeable. It could be the best possible adaptation to de comic, but still, the same fidelity I've read the comic book like fifty times (so I'm a huge fan) and after seen this movie, i understand why Moore thought that this was unmakeable. It could be the best possible adaptation to de comic, but still, the same fidelity that the movie has, makes an inconsistent and looong film, and it lacks the emotional and philosophic charge of the comic. Watchmen works great as a comic book, but not well as a movie.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

4

JosephTMay 8, 2009

I don't know why I stayed to finish this, even as several people got up and left during the movie. I think it was because I hoped it wouldn't get worse. Now, I see what they were trying for - I really do, and I give them marks for I don't know why I stayed to finish this, even as several people got up and left during the movie. I think it was because I hoped it wouldn't get worse. Now, I see what they were trying for - I really do, and I give them marks for that. My failure to enjoy it wasn't because of a short attention span - I'm a very patient person. Otherwise, it was a tasteless experience that somehow offended me and everybody in that room. The previews sold us on a summer action movie, what happened instead was families went to see this thinking it was standard Rated "R" action fair, only to be proven very wrong. I felt bad for those parents who could do nothing as scenes that should have been rated "X" made their appearances in front of their kids.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

4

KenithG.Mar 14, 2009

The only thing decent about this movie was the visual quality.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

4

EricOMar 24, 2009

Honestly I was disappointed. I knew going into it to expect typical Zach Snyder garbage. I did not ever expect to have to waste 10 or so minutes covering a sex scene that was 1 page maybe 2 in a novel that is about 500 pages long. He chose Honestly I was disappointed. I knew going into it to expect typical Zach Snyder garbage. I did not ever expect to have to waste 10 or so minutes covering a sex scene that was 1 page maybe 2 in a novel that is about 500 pages long. He chose to stick so closely to the comic at parts and then totally make up an entire scene at another. Instead of using oldies which I like should have scored the whole movie. The comic is infinitely better. It has the whole story. It has the story within the story. The format totally ruined the Watchmen experience. I feel like those that only know the movie have been robbed of one of the best pieces of all time. Its not the worst movie ever but it is very far from the best.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

4

j30Nov 27, 2011

It's crazy how this movie turned out average for me. The graphic novel is great, thought-provoking, and artistic. The movie adaptation, however, feels like a wax replica of the novel. With the actors/actresses looking uninspired and dull.

3 of 11 users found this helpful38

All this user's reviews

4

TylerDsCreationJul 2, 2013

The graphic novel, Watchmen by Alan Moore is one of my favorite books and one of the best graphic novels ever written, if not the best. It is a groundbreaking piece of literature gold that deserves to be worshiped. Yes, I just recently readThe graphic novel, Watchmen by Alan Moore is one of my favorite books and one of the best graphic novels ever written, if not the best. It is a groundbreaking piece of literature gold that deserves to be worshiped. Yes, I just recently read the book and I missed this in theaters. But I know now how all those poor soles walking into the theater one night with their personal Watchmen copy in hand just awaiting this monumental adaptation to flash before their eyes feel. It does not feel very good.
I'm going to level with you, Watchmen wasn't awful. It was actually a pretty decently filmed movie. That meaning it looked great. Zack Snyder really has a talent for visual thrills because this looked beautiful. It had that Dark Knight look to it, but it had that polished and gleaming flare to it also. Snyder has style, and if only he can get a good script to go with it and he could be legendary.
Watchmen also had something else that blew me away. It has the best opening titles I have ever seen. They play out after the first scene and they aren't your normal opening credits just showing the people behind it. They do show that, but behind a series of slow-mo scenes where it's telling you all about the world your about to delve into. It shows the whole back story with the song The Times They Are A-Changin' playing. That is the one time in this movie that I will say the song actually fits the scene, but it did.
Now time to talk about all of the faults. I thought the music choices were bad. The choices for the soundtrack were very interesting choices. The songs they chose for each scene did not fit well with what was happening on screen and as a result, it took away from the impact. This was a problem, but it wasn't the biggest problem I had with this movie. The biggest problem I had was the excessive and graphic gore throughout. It's this CG blood that flies everywhere when people are shot or hurt and it constantly comes splattering everywhere like it's Gears of War. It's comedic at certain moments and it really detracts from the scene. It doesn't even look good and that really bothered me.
In the end, Watchmen has the same problem that another adaptation had, The Great Gatsby. It is maybe a bit too faithful to the source material. I watch this movie knowing exactly whats going to happen, exactly what I will see, and even exactly what people say.They literally have line by line quotes straight from the book said in this movie, and some of the story board was taken directly from the graphic novel comic strip boxes. There's no new spin on it and it ends up just feeling like you copied off another person's school project and didn't put any real effort to call it your own.
Watchmen may be ambitious, but it sure isn't the best adaptation that the classic book could have had. That's another of the biggest problem with this movie, it has so much potential, but is squandered by the soundtrack, excessive gore, and a vision a bit too close to the source material. I really feel pity for those poor people at that midnight showing in 2009.… Expand

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

All this user's reviews

4

gracjanskiJan 2, 2021

The story is being told a bit weird, I asked myself, what is the core of the movie? Maybe the many slow motion scenes took my attention too often away from the main story. And in addition the movie was too long.

On the other side, most ofThe story is being told a bit weird, I asked myself, what is the core of the movie? Maybe the many slow motion scenes took my attention too often away from the main story. And in addition the movie was too long.

On the other side, most of the action scenes were brutal and great. Also the characters were not good or bad, just between it, so more interesting, but somehow I find some of the superheroes ridiculous.… Expand

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

All this user's reviews

4

ypomoniJul 5, 2013

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. The plot was good, but the way it was developed left me disappointed. The characters were not well-defined. In fact, on many occasions they were either boring or indifferent to me. A lot of the film consisted of scenes that did not add to the central plot.
Miss Jupiter's encounter with the Comedian. She was almost raped by him, and then it's revealed she went and had sex with him. I am assuming this is put in to reflect the distorted mentality of today's society? Or was it just to make Silk Spec cry?
I still cant understand the attraction between Silk Spectre II and Dr. Manhattan, both of which appeared several times naked the first to hold the male audience's interest (I assume) and the second only made the audience giggle and laugh, detracting from the film.
Jackie Earle Haley's portrayal of a sociopathic anti-hero was definitely the highlight of the movie. Again, these "heroes" appeared more interested in the fight than actually helping mankind (JDM's Comedian a bright example of this). This notion is revoked in the end, when even a distant Dr Manhattan is "moved" by the devious actions of Ozymandias, all in the name of mankind. Well, that settles it then. Forget democracy, bring in the world's smartest men to lead us, otherwise we are just savages that ultimately will kill each other to extinction. But if we are indeed savages, mankind and heroes alike, what's the point in saving us in the first place? So there was a message trying to be sent, but it got lost (at least, on me) somewhere along the way...… Expand

2 of 4 users found this helpful22

All this user's reviews

4

MovieMasterEddyApr 6, 2016

The only character in “Watchmen” who possesses actual superpowers — resulting from an accident at a top-secret government research lab in the late 1950s — is Dr. Manhattan, a blue, bald, naked dude with blank eyes and the voice of BillyThe only character in “Watchmen” who possesses actual superpowers — resulting from an accident at a top-secret government research lab in the late 1950s — is Dr. Manhattan, a blue, bald, naked dude with blank eyes and the voice of Billy Crudup. Dr. Manhattan’s existence is busy and fairly melancholy, but I do envy him his ability to perceive every moment of past and future time as a part of a continuous present.

If I had that power, the 2 hours 40 minutes of Zack Snyder’s grim and grisly excursion into comic-book mythology might not have felt quite so interminable. (“It will never end,” says Dr. Manhattan. “Nothing ever ends.” No indeed.) Also, an enhanced temporal perspective would make it possible to watch “Watchmen” not in 2009 but back in 1985, when the story takes place, and when the movie might have made at least a little more sense.

The original graphic novel, by Alan Moore and Dave Gibbons, was published by DC in 1986 and ’87, first serially and then in a single volume, and it quickly gained a following in discriminating geek circles. The book was very much a product of its moment, both in the history of comics — which were scouting new horizons of complexity and thematic ambition — and in the wider world that “Watchmen” mirrored.

Mr. Moore and Mr. Gibbons confected a dour alternative chronology of cold-war America, defined by victory in Vietnam, an endless Nixon presidency, nuclear brinkmanship and pervasive social rot. At the same time, they offered a self-conscious critique of the national preoccupation with muscled, masked crime-fighters. Their heroes — the paranoid Rorschach, the shy Nite Owl II, the coldly post-human Dr. Manhattan and various other colleagues and rivals — were violent, ambivalent, treacherous and vain, even though they also seemed to be uniquely capable of saving the world from ultimate catastrophe.

Somewhat remarkably, Mr. Snyder’s film freezes its frame of reference in the 1980s, preserving the dank, downcast, revanchist spirit of the original and adding a few period-specific grace notes of its own, including time-capsule references to Lee Iacocca and “The McLaughlin Group.” There is also a nod of homage in the direction of “Apocalypse Now” and a soundtrack heavy with the baby-boomer anthems that still echoed in the ears of Reagan-era adolescents.

Indeed, the ideal viewer — or reviewer, as the case may be — of the “Watchmen” movie would probably be a mid-’80s college sophomore with a smattering of Nietzsche, an extensive record collection and a comic-book nerd for a roommate. The film’s carefully preserved themes of apocalypse and decay might have proved powerfully unsettling to that anxious undergraduate sitting in his dorm room, listening to “99 Luftballons” and waiting for the world to end or the Berlin Wall to come down.

He would also no doubt have been stirred by the costumes of the female superheroes — Carla Gugino and Malin Akerman, both gamely giving solid performances — who sensibly accessorize their shoulder-padded spandex leotards with garter belts and high-heeled boots. And the dense involution of the narrative might have seemed exhilarating rather than exhausting.

I’m not sure that this hypothetical young man — not to be confused with the middle-aged, 21st-century moviegoer he most likely grew into, whose old copy of “Watchmen” lies in a box somewhere alongside a dog-eared Penguin Classics edition of “Thus Spake Zarathustra” — would necessarily say that Mr. Snyder’s “Watchmen” is a good movie. I wouldn’t, though it is certainly better than the same director’s “300.” But it’s possible to imagine that our imaginary student would at least have found some food for thought in Mr. Snyder’s grandiose, meticulously art-directed vision of blood, cruelty and metaphysical dread. As it is, the film is more curiosity than provocation, an artifact of a faded world brought to zombie half-life by the cinematic technology of the present.

The title sequence — in which Mr. Moore’s name, at his insistence, does not appear, leaving Mr. Gibbons listed, somewhat absurdly, as a solitary “co-creator” of the graphic novel — seems to acknowledge the project’s anachronistic, nostalgic orientation. As Bob Dylan sings “The Times They Are A-Changin’,” familiar images from the past are altered in ways both subtle and outrageous. Tableaus evoking Andy Warhol, the Zapruder film, Studio 54 and Weegee-style crime scenes commingle with snapshots from the lives of several generations of costumed crusaders. There is a witty pop sensibility evident in these pictures that gets the movie off to a promising start, even though such breeziness works to undermine the ambient gloom of the source material.

Perhaps there is some pleasure to be found in regressing into this belligerent, adolescent state of mind. But maybe it’s better to grow up.… Expand

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

All this user's reviews

3

daemonmooreMar 10, 2009

I ranked it a three for the fight scenes, and that's it - what a waist of movie. Also, this movie is not for the non-comic book audience at all. This movie makes me wanna cuss...

0 of 0 users found this helpful

3

franklJul 9, 2009

This movie has the graphics to score big as that part is very well done. The dialogues are also pretty good, but do get long and boring after a while. I'll admit I did not know Watchmen before, but it probably will not get many poeple This movie has the graphics to score big as that part is very well done. The dialogues are also pretty good, but do get long and boring after a while. I'll admit I did not know Watchmen before, but it probably will not get many poeple interested in learning more. Again, it wreally starts to get boring after a while, you start to wonder where the movie is heading, or what did you actually learn after 2 hours watching the movie. Also, Dr. Manhattan is very well done, but most of his parts could have been summarized instead of long useless dialogues. Overall graphically this movie is splendid but it ends there. Way too long to get to the point, many dialogues that could have been shortened up, this can leave you wondering why u spent 3 hours watching it. Just my opinion.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful

3

JustinSMar 10, 2009

The first half hour of the movie is amazing, it rivals the Dark Knight but then the movie meanders through a familiar road: a dramatic Hollywood soap opera. The movie tries to fit in too many things without describing others. The movie The first half hour of the movie is amazing, it rivals the Dark Knight but then the movie meanders through a familiar road: a dramatic Hollywood soap opera. The movie tries to fit in too many things without describing others. The movie should have been two maybe even three parts. Oh and the acting is horrid (except the comedien and masked guy). Many of the scenes were laugable...pple kept shaking their heads in the theater.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

3

PhilipDuncanMar 6, 2009

A story that doesn't draw you in. Watchmen is flashy and has it's enjoyable fight scenes, but outside of that the plot moves at a stagnant pace.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

Watchmen

User Reviews