First look at characters from the Watchmen movie

[FrogMan]

I thought about posting this in the comics book thread but I guess it's worthy of its own thread. Pics of some of the Watchmen characters have been posted on the official Watchmen production blog.
from: http://rss.warnerbros.com/watchmen/2008/03/one_year_to_go_1.html

http://rss.warnerbros.com/watchmen/ComedianFull-thumb.jpg (http://rss.warnerbros.com/watchmen/ComedianFull1.html)

http://rss.warnerbros.com/watchmen/NIteOwlFull-thumb.jpg (http://rss.warnerbros.com/watchmen/NIteOwlFull1.html)

http://rss.warnerbros.com/watchmen/OzymandiasFull-thumb.jpg (http://rss.warnerbros.com/watchmen/OzymandiasFull1.html)

http://rss.warnerbros.com/watchmen/RorschachFull-thumb.jpg (http://rss.warnerbros.com/watchmen/RorschachFull1.html)

http://rss.warnerbros.com/watchmen/SilkSpectreFull-thumb.jpg (http://rss.warnerbros.com/watchmen/SilkSpectreFull1.html)

You can click them to see bigger pictures...

Watcha all think?

FM

[kurtism]

I think Nite Owl needs to be pudgier.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Watcha all think?

I think I have absolutely no idea WTF you're talking about.

[Calis]

I just can't envision this working at all.

Costumes actually look pretty decent though to me.

[FrogMan]

I think I have absolutely no idea WTF you're talking about.

Then I was probably not talking to you. :p

Watchmen is sort of a classic in comics. Kurtism knew about it...

FM

[JonInMiddleGA]

Then I was probably not talking to you. :p


Then it probably ought to have gone in the comics thread after all :p

Seriously, I'm not anti-comics or anything. I'm not entirely unaware of their modern existence nor of the transition from pulp to graphic novels but this is just completely off my radar.

[Calis]

Then it probably ought to have gone in the comics thread after all :p

Seriously, I'm not anti-comics or anything. I'm not entirely unaware of their modern existence nor of the transition from pulp to graphic novels but this is just completely off my radar.

If you ever hear comic fans argue for comics as "literature" this is the one they usually throw around.

It's from Alan Moore, who wrote V from Vendetta, From Hell, League of Extraordinary Gentlemen among other things.

I was into comics for a very short time when I was stationed in Biloxi simply because there was a great comic store directly off base. I didn't last long in that phase, but this was probably my favorite comic(graphic novel) that I'd read. A really interesting take on things.

[Groundhog]

I've heard *of* the Watchmen, but don't know what the characters look like.

Having said that, pic #2 looks like Batman.

[Crim]

I think they look pretty good. Especially the Comedian. Is that right? The Comedian? Anyhoo, haven't read the Watchmen in a long long time, but I remember it fondly. Excellent story, fleshed out characters, plenty of moral ambiguity. Hope the movie doesn't suxxors ballz.

[JonInMiddleGA]

It's from Alan Moore, who wrote V from Vendetta, From Hell, League of Extraordinary Gentlemen among other things.

See, this kind of illustrates the point I was trying to make (or at least what I was basically thinking about when I commented). V and League I was aware of before they were movies. I'm not going to claim to had much more than passing awareness of their existence but at least I had that. This one, nada.

Maybe that's neither here nor there, but I can't think it's a good sign for the movie, especially considering the relative failure of League at the box office (even if it was a largely revised version of the comics story).

In any event, my intent wasn't to provide some sort of NBA/soccer/hockey/ NASCAR thread sort of drive-by criticism of the subject matter. I was trying to point out something that might be a problem for the movie.

[Raiders Army]

Roschach looks okay, but I can't tell too much of his look from the pic. Doc Manhattan is going to be CGI, correct?

[chesapeake]

Nite Owl could be sufficiently paunchy in the picture -- it is hard to tell. The Comedian's hair looks too Hollywood for me, and Ozymandius looks like a child.

And, speaking as someone who generally does not read comic books or graphic novels, if any sci-fi is considered literature, then Watchmen must be.

[Autumn]

It looks like they're actually spending money on the movie, that's a good sign. The costumes look pretty good. The real question to me though is if they can carry the mood of the comic over, and that's not something money can solve. The fact that NiteOwl looks like that makes me think they might not, since he looks semi-kickass Batman, instead of kind of like a dorky pulp hero. Still, it's worth a try.

I don't think the fact that a lot of people haven't heard of WAtchmen is going to impact the movie much. They're making a movie out of an obscure graphic novel, they're not counting on the fan base to drive it. In the large scheme of things no one had ever heard of V for Vendetta either.

On the other hand, I'm surprised that someone could have known of V for Vendetta and League of Extraordinary Gentlemen and not heard of Watchmen. That's kind of like having heard of George and John but not Paul.

[lordscarlet]

On the other hand, I'm surprised that someone could have known of V for Vendetta and League of Extraordinary Gentlemen and not heard of Watchmen. That's kind of like having heard of George and John but not Paul.

I was surprised by this as well

[Honolulu_Blue]

As far as initial images go, I think these are excellent. I remember when they first showed the X-Men movie stills. I was much more on the fence about that look, which ended up being fine once you saw it on screen, than I am about any of these.

Rorschach and the Comedian are dead on in my opinion. It's hard to get a great feel for Rorschach because the image is dark, but I think they've nailed the look.

Nite Owl does look a lot like Batman, but he's supposed to. His character was very much modeled after a Batman in a real world setting. The outfit is more hightech than pulp, but I don't think the pulp look would work well on screen.

I've read Watchmen probably around 15 times over the last 16, 17 years. I love it. Each time I read it I find something new, see something I missed before, or appreciate it in a different way. That said, I am not a fan boy. I understand that comics are very different medium than film and some things that work in comics simply do not translate well into film. There is no way that a 2 hour movie is going to be able to be anywhere near as deep, complex, and intricate as the comic series. It'd be impossible. That said, so long as they hit the right themes, do well by the characters, and don't charge the basic feel and messages of the series, I think this movie has a chance.

A few have raised the Nite Owl not looking pudgy enough. While that point my seem minor, I agree that it's a pretty significant part of the character. Dan needs to come across as a slightly over weight, balding, over-the-hill hero. I think that's a really compelling aspect of the character and his decision to get back into the game. If he's too young and fit, that will be slightly more than an annoyance.

I am pretty optimistic about it. I really like Zach Snyder. I loved his Dawn of The Dead remake thought 300 was fantastic. He has a great eye and fabulous director.

That said, I have some concerns. While I loved the Dawn of the dead re-make, he did strip the film of any of its symbolism and social commentary. Where Romero's film was a great zombie yarn with a ton of this stuff, Snyder's was just a bad-ass zombie movie full of action, zombies dying, all that good stuff. 300 looked amazing. The action scenes were incredible, it was also a perfect film adaptation of Frank Miller's work. Perfect. That said, the source material for 300 (much like Sin City) really isn't all that deep. It's a story about 300 bad ass dudes kicking ass. Not a ton of layers or complexity to it at all. Therefore, while Snyder certainly has the technical aptitude and directing chops to make this film look amazing, he still hasn't shown the ability to make a weighty, complex movie like Watchmen needs to be.

That being said, I've read a ton of interviews with Snyder about Watchmen and he really seems to "get it." He comes across as someone who knows what the comics are about and how important it is to keep the essence of them in tact. Based on the screen shots above, as well as some I've seen of some of the sets, so far so good.

As far as I am concerned, I think this movie really could sink or swim based on Jackie Earl Haley's performance as Rorschach. He's always been the most compelling character as far as I was concerned and could be the hardest to pull off well on screen.

They are spending a lot of money on this. Actually, the success of 300 did a lot for Watchmen. It really gave Zach Snyder a proven smash hit and all of the authority/budget that goes with it.

[Honolulu_Blue]

See, this kind of illustrates the point I was trying to make (or at least what I was basically thinking about when I commented). V and League I was aware of before they were movies. I'm not going to claim to had much more than passing awareness of their existence but at least I had that. This one, nada.

Maybe that's neither here nor there, but I can't think it's a good sign for the movie, especially considering the relative failure of League at the box office (even if it was a largely revised version of the comics story).

I think the real question is "When were you aware of V and League before they were movies"?

I didn't even know about League until after it slated to be made into a movie. I remember first reading about it on some movie website and then doing some research when I found out about it being based on an Alan Moore comic. In fact, now that I think of it, I think that bit of research was really what spawned my comics resurgance over the last 5 years.

Watchmen doesn't open for another year. It will be heavily marketed. Though it will be interested to see how that's pulled off. It's not the easiest story to package.

While Watchmen is by no means Batman, Superman, Spider Man, or even the X-Men, it's still not that obscure. It won a Hugo Award and was named in Time Magazine's 2005 list of of "the 100 best English-language novels from 1923 to the present."

I think it will be interesting to see how the movie does at the box office. Not that I care, so long as it's good, but it will be interesting. I could see possibly see Watchmen netting a box office result similar to that of, say, Sin City.

I wouldn't put too much stock into the box office result for League. It was a horrible movie and the geek community had long turned on it before it ever came out.

[Honolulu_Blue]

While this story from the New York Times has a lot of extraneous information on DVD sales, it has a lot of very interesting stuff about "Watchmen."

The current cut is three hours? A 4 hour extended DVD? A separate "Tales of the Black Freighter" DVD?

So. Very. Awesome.

Warner Tries a New Tactic to Revive Its DVD Sales </NYT_HEADLINE><NYT_BYLINE version="1.0" type=" ">
By BROOKS BARNES (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/b/brooks_barnes/index.html?inline=nyt-per)

</NYT_BYLINE><NYT_TEXT>LOS ANGELES — Retail’s love affair with the DVD is on the rocks and Warner Brothers (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/business/companies/warner_bros_entertainment_inc/index.html?inline=nyt-org) Entertainment would like to patch things up.
Faced with a decline in DVD sales, Warner Brothers, part of Time Warner (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/business/companies/time_warner_inc/index.html?inline=nyt-org), is planning an unusual effort around its upcoming adaptation of the popular graphic novel “Watchmen.” Directed by Zack Snyder (http://movies.nytimes.com/person/367818/Zack-Snyder?inline=nyt-per) and set for a March 2009 release, the big-budget movie tells the story of a group of retired superheroes who are tied to a conspiracy that could change history.

The twist is that Mr. Snyder, known for turning the Spartan comic book series “300” into a global hit movie, is also directing a separate-but-related picture that Warner plans to distribute exclusively on DVD.

The second film, tentatively called “Tales of the Black Freighter,” follows a side “Watchmen” storyline about a shipwreck and will arrive in stores five days after the main movie rolls out in theaters. The DVD will also include a documentary-style film called “Under the Hood” that will delve into the characters’ backstories.

Warner, the No. 1 distributor of DVDs, bills the effort as a way to renew retail excitement for little silver discs now that the once-booming market has matured.

After years of blistering growth, domestic DVD sales fell 3.2 percent last year to $15.9 billion, according to Adams Media Research, the first annual drop in the medium’s history. While it is still a blockbuster business, any decline is cause for concern because DVD sales can account for as much as 70 percent of revenue for a new film. Results for the first quarter this year were mixed, with overall sales flat but notable softness for some new releases like Warner’s box office hit “I Am Legend.”

As a result — and as consumer adoption of the next-generation Blu-ray discs lags — some important retail partners like Wal-Mart Stores (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/business/companies/wal_mart_stores_inc/index.html?inline=nyt-org) have been starting to rethink how much shelf space they devote to the category. Also up for discussion is to what degree retailers market new releases in circulars and with in-store promotions.

“There is a fear that if the DVD category declines over time that any well-run retailer is going to re-evaluate its commitment,” said Ron Sanders, the president of Warner Home Video. “We are offering retailers a meaningful opportunity to be involved with the theatrical event, to have a product that will generate foot traffic and sales.”

If that sounds like spin, to some degree it is. The movie studio would not be drafting one of its top filmmakers and sinking millions into “Tales of the Black Freighter” if it did not see a direct benefit for itself.

The immediate goal is for the parallel release to help start a potential new movie franchise. As television advertising becomes less effective because of declining TV viewership, movie studios need to reach a mass audience somehow, and having what amounts to ads sitting on store shelves is seen as a crucial antidote.

The effort is also a way for Warner to get more DVD bang for not many more bucks. The “Watchmen” film, Mr. Synder said, will probably generate at least three DVDs: “Tales of the Black Freighter,” followed about four months later by release of “Watchmen” itself, and then an “ultimate” edition in which the two are edited together into one megamovie.
“The überfans of this property are going to go crazy for that,” Mr. Snyder said.

Warner has another reason to make nice with retailers. The studio, under added scrutiny from Wall Street now that its corporate parent plans to spin off Time Warner Cable (http://www.nytimes.com/mem/MWredirect.html?MW=http://custom.marketwatch.com/custom/nyt-com/html-companyprofile.asp&symb=TWC), has annoyed chains by leading a movement in Hollywood to simultaneously release titles on DVD and on video-on-demand services.

Retailers worry that DVD sales will suffer from the lack of exclusivity, but Warner — which enjoys 60 percent profit margins for video on demand, compared to half that for physical DVD sales — says there is no cannibalization. Warner said this month that it would distribute many new releases simultaneously to DVD and on-demand services.

Warner downplayed any friction from the growth of video on demand. “Our retail partners haven’t seen a dramatic impact one way or another on their business, so they’re allowing us to work on it,” said Mr. Sanders.
Retailers seem to be taking a wait-and-see approach to Warner’s olive branch. Wal-Mart, the nation’s biggest DVD retailer, with as much as 40 percent of sales, declined to comment. Target (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/business/companies/target_corporation/index.html?inline=nyt-org), which has historically accounted for about 15 percent of DVD sales, said, “We’re always looking for opportunities to generate excitement in our entertainment business.”
Tom Adams, the founder of Adams Media Research, predicted that retailers would embrace the “Tales of the Black Freighter” strategy. “They have every reason to try it,” he said. “It’s a fresh idea and it’s something that will be of value to movie fans.”

Warner knows releasing a related film on DVD at the same time it is trying to motivate people to buy tickets to “Watchmen” is not without risk. Consumers could become confused about which is which. And if they are disappointed in the quality of “Tales of the Black Freighter,” the plan might hurt sales of the “Watchmen” DVD.

“We feel a great responsibility to do this well for exactly these reasons,” said Diane Nelson, president of Warner Premiere, the division responsible for direct-to-DVD projects. “The movies that we do under this parallel content strategy have to be viable in their own right.” Although Ms. Nelson declined to reveal the budget for “Tales of the Black Freighter,” she said it was 30 percent to 50 percent higher than a typical direct-to-DVD effort.

Still, some concessions were made because of the budget, Mr. Snyder said. The original plan was to tell the “Black Freighter” story in a visual style similar to the mock-historical “300.” But an early budget was approaching $20 million and the studio balked, he said. Instead, the feature will be animated.

Mr. Snyder said he was eager to head a direct-to-DVD project, in part because it would allow him to use more material from the “Watchmen” graphic novel.

“I thought the ‘Black Freighter’ story would never see the light of day,” he said. “The main picture is nearing three hours long and I know I have a fight on my hands just with that.”

In addition, the studio plans a dozen 22- to 26-minute Webisodes to help make the complex story easier for the uninitiated to digest. Called “The Watchmen Motion Comic,” it will be a panel-by-panel slide show of the graphic novel narrated by an actor.

Although no decisions have been made, Mr. Snyder, who is overseeing the digital component but leaving the details to others, said the Webisodes would probably be combined for later release on — you guessed it — DVD.

[Calis]

Sounds like there is going to be a trailer for this one before The Dark Knight.

It's been popping up around the internet, but they're getting taken down about as fast as they go up. The general consensus is that it's an awesome trailer and is giving people hope that it'll be a good treatment.

I'm going to hold out and hope that it plays before Dark Knight for me tonight.

[lordscarlet]

It's an awesome trailer. I'm still sowrried, though.

[Autumn]

I was really hoping to see it today, but they didn't play it before Dark Knight for us. Although they only played two previews, so who knows what's up with that.

[FrogMan]

trailer's up on apple.com:
http://www.apple.com/trailers/wb/watchmen/

FM

[lordscarlet]

They played it before Dark Knight for us and it's also on watchmenmovie.com

[Toddzilla]

I'd only incidentally heard about The Watchmen over the years, but the trailer before TDK blew me away. I love it when someone makes a move that has long been labeled as "impossible to make a movie of". I'll be seeing it for sure.

[JetsIn06]

Looks ridiculously awesome, to me. Saw the trailer before TDK today.

[Calis]

Saw it before TDK night as well and it was awesome. I'm very excited now, whereas I was pretty leery before.

One of the better trailers I've seen for a movie. The music was perfect for the mood. Very nice job.

Odd thing though, at the the theatre I was at for a midnight showing of The Dark Knight, they went crazy after every preview, clapping and hooting, but when this one came up it was almost silent after. No clapping and just a few murmurs. I don't think people had any idea what to make of it. I assumed this was a pretty comic savvy crowd, but maybe I overestimated how widespread knowledge of The Watchmen is. It was also a younger crowd so maybe that was it as well.

[Chief Rum]

Trailer looked cool, and I am in the JiMG camp with respect to hearing about this. Looks like fun.

All that said, most ridiculous statement in this thread is Honolulu Blue's "I am not a fanboy." :D

Sheesh, HB, look at the length of your three posts, and above and beyond the "I have read this 15 times since I was 16" bit.

[Honolulu_Blue]

Trailer looked cool, and I am in the JiMG camp with respect to hearing about this. Looks like fun.

All that said, most ridiculous statement in this thread is Honolulu Blue's "I am not a fanboy." :D

Sheesh, HB, look at the length of your three posts, and above and beyond the "I have read this 15 times since I was 16" bit.

Heh!

Well, I guess I am trying to say that I am not a "fanboy" in the pegorative sense. I am not going to get my panties all in a wad if they don't include every scene, or someone's costume is a bit different, or any other little nitpicks that typically throw "fanboys" into a frenzy.

I am very open to the idea that this is a movie adaptation of a comic book and some things that work in comics simply don't or may not translate on screen.

The story and characters are obviously near and dear to me, but, so long as they are preserved and the right feel and themes come across, I am fine with alterations.

I watched the trailer three times today. It looks awesome. Empire online did a screen shot to comic panel comparison of a few and it was damn near perfect.

So far, everything I have read and seen has been very positive.

[Honolulu_Blue]

For anyone who has iTunes they are putting out semi-animated episodes of each issue of the Watchmen. They animate the comic panels and there is voice acting, music, sounds, etc. The voice acting ranges from ok to poor, but it's pretty good.

You can download the first issue on iTunes. They are free.

Anyone who hasn't read the comic, it /is/ the comic, so it's a great way to "read" it for free.

[JetsIn06]

For anyone who has iTunes they are putting out semi-animated episodes of each issue of the Watchmen. They animate the comic panels and there is voice acting, music, sounds, etc. The voice acting ranges from ok to poor, but it's pretty good.

You can download the first issue on iTunes. They are free.

Anyone who hasn't read the comic, it /is/ the comic, so it's a great way to "read" it for free.

Awesome, thanks for letting us know. Downloading now.

[Travis]

For anyone who has iTunes they are putting out semi-animated episodes of each issue of the Watchmen. They animate the comic panels and there is voice acting, music, sounds, etc. The voice acting ranges from ok to poor, but it's pretty good.

You can download the first issue on iTunes. They are free.

Anyone who hasn't read the comic, it /is/ the comic, so it's a great way to "read" it for free.

Sorry for what is likely a stupid question, but what are they calling it/what area is it listed in? Not sure how much difference there is between the American and Canadian iTunes stores, but I haven't been able to find it so far.

[Honolulu_Blue]

Sorry for what is likely a stupid question, but what are they calling it/what area is it listed in? Not sure how much difference there is between the American and Canadian iTunes stores, but I haven't been able to find it so far.

It's called "Watchmen" motion comics. In the US it's under the following:

TV Shows > Sci Fi & Fantasy > Watchmen > Watchmen Motion Comic.

[Travis]

It's called "Watchmen" motion comics. In the US it's under the following:

TV Shows > Sci Fi & Fantasy > Watchmen > Watchmen Motion Comic.

Heh, not only can you not sort by genre in the Canadian store, it looks like the Watchmen comic isn't available there (no content from Warner either), so looks like I'll have to sign an account up for the American store tonight if possible. What a pain in the ass. Thanks for the direction though as I found easily enough in the American store.

[Sgran]

In honor of “Tales of the Black Freighter” I'm exhuming this gas-bloated thread and fastening it to the bottom of my raft.
Actually, I am reading the whole Watchmen series right now for the first time. I'm about two-thirds done (minor spoiler alert!! --they just broke Rorscharch out of jail).
To be honest, it's a good read but i'm not that impressed yet. I hear there's a great twist coming so I'll finish it for sure, but at the moment I have to believe that Time Magazine's editors had only read 99 books between them.

[chesapeake]

I enjoyed it the first time through, and enjoyed it twice as much the second time.

I think it also helps to keep in mind the context of world events and the comics genre when it was written. Dark, realistic graphic novels are the standard today. They were not before this was written. It is truly a groundbreaking accomplishment.

[Honolulu_Blue]

I agree. It gets better with multiple readings. It's very dense and confusing. That said, it's not for everyone. I have a few friends who hate it, some who are indifferent about it, and some who love it.

Like all "art" (films, books, tv, music, etc.) it's mostly subjective.

[Honolulu_Blue]

Wow. I can't believe it's almost been a year since someone (me) last posted about this film.

It's less than a month away now. Has anyone been following all of the viral video marketing stuff that they've been putting out? I don't have links (since I'm at work), but I think you can find them all here:

THE NEW FRONTIERSMAN (http://www.thenewfrontiersman.net/)

The two I have seen were a 1970's news cast about Dr. Manhattan and a government educational video about the "Keane Act." They're both fantastic. I also listend to a fake radio newscast about the Keane Act riots.

They also released a flash-based (I think) web video game. It's one of those side-scrolling brawlers (like Double Dragon). It's made by Veidt Enterprises and you can be either the original Nite Owl or Silk Specter. It's super simple, but the feel is great.

There's also been a trailer for the "Tales of the Black Freighter" DVD that's coming out March 24. Along with the DVD will be a fake documentary called "Behind The Mask" based on Hollis Mason's (the first Nite Owl) book detailing the Minute Men.

Over all, based on everything I have, all the viral videos, the stuff on the web, the images, the trailers, if this movie fails it wont be due to lack of effort or because Snyder et al doesn "get" the material. It really looks like they have poured every once of their being into this movie and have worked incredibly hard to bring Alan Moore's world to life.

There's just so much packed into the 12 issues that some things have to be cut and some things will have to be changed. It's all a matter of making those tough calls, but still preserving the essence of the story and characters.

I think everything they're doing outside of the film, the DVD, the videos, the web-stuff, etc. really go a long way in establishing the world and giving it the granularity it so richly deserves.

While I obviously would like the movie to be successful, I really don't care all that much. I mean, there aren't going to be any sequels. Nor should there ever be. As far was whether it is "good" or not will be wildly subjective, I think.

I have no idea what people who haven't read the comics or aren't familiar with the story will think about it. That will be really interesting.

As for those who have read it or are "fanboys" or "fan girls", I think different things in the book are important to different people. Some people will go off the rails because "x" thing was changed or "x" thing was cut out, while others wont mind.

There's a pretty gushing "reveiw" of the film here:

My Own Private Watchmen :: Nerd World - TIME.com (http://nerdworld.blogs.time.com/2009/02/16/my-own-private-watchmen/)

I can't wait.

[QuikSand]

Wow. I can't believe it's almost been a year since someone (me) last posted about this film.

Uh, me neither?

[Honolulu_Blue]

Huh.

For some reason I decided to read 9-3-08 in the European fashion, thinking it was March 9. I guess that's because March 9 is my brother's birthday and I am working on about 8 hours of sleep the last two nights.

So, not a year, but 5 months. That's almost a year. Almost. Not really. At all.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Meanwhile I saw the TV ad version of the trailer for the first time last night & thought it looked like a jumbled mess that did little to entice a potential viewer who isn't familiar with the material. A lot of quick cuts & glimpses of scenes that I'm sure were scintillating teases for people chomping at the bit but just annoyingly confusing if you don't know anything about it.

So bad in fact that until I noticed you had bumped this thread I didn't even connect that ad with what movie this actually was (and I'd say I'm at least more aware of it's existence & pedigree than the average moviegoer).

[spleen1015]

If I bought this, is it what the movie is based on?

hxxp://www.amazon.com/Watchmen-Alan-Moore/dp/0930289234/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1234886946&sr=8-1

[wade moore]

If I bought this, is it what the movie is based on?

hxxp://www.amazon.com/Watchmen-Alan-Moore/dp/0930289234/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1234886946&sr=8-1

Yup, that's it!

[path12]

Started to read this about a year and a half ago, ended up putting it aside for some reason and started it again last week and am about 10 chapters in now. Looking forward to the movie.

[Autumn]

Yeah, I haven't been impressed with the trailer. If I was going on that alone I'd say they hadn't nailed the movie. The viral extras and The Black Freighter, as well as what I've heard from Dave Gibbons about the movie makes me think maybe they did get it right, but let the studio get their hands in the trailer.

[DeToxRox]

I've never read a comic book ever, but after relentless urging I finally relented and got the Graphic Novel.

Amazing. Totally amazing. I just finished it. Read all day.

[Tasan]

If I bought this, is it what the movie is based on?

hxxp://www.amazon.com/Watchmen-Alan-Moore/dp/0930289234/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1234886946&sr=8-1

That would be it. I had heard of it before the movie stuff started coming out, but never read it. I got it from our library about a month ago and LOVED it. The movie looks like a real good adaptation of it from what I've seen so far, except one thing that I've heard about it so far. I won't go spoiling it though.

[DeToxRox]

Just got tickets for midnight opening night at an IMAX.

Can't wait.

[Lathum]

Should I even bother trying to go see this opening weekend?

[Honolulu_Blue]

Should I even bother trying to go see this opening weekend?

If you want to. I don't anticipate huge crowds. I reckon if you went to a Saturday or Sunday matinee, you'd be fine.

The more I think about it, the more likely I think that this film will not be a huge commercial success. I think it will have a strong opening weekend due to the built in fanbase, but I am not sure how much staying power it has beyond that.

As has always been the problem with this film, I just don't know why that many people would want to go see a 3 hour long movie based on comic book characters who they have never heard of.

I have been checking out the early reviews. Those familiar with the source material have been generally positive, while those that aren't have been quite negative. That's not too surprising since most folks who haven't read it are not all that familiar with comics. That familiarity with comics really helps understand and appreciate the story.

[Lathum]

it's 3 hours?

ugh.

I hate going to any movie over 2 hours, it makes me feel like a whole day on the weekend is gone.

[DeToxRox]

Just got back .. Personally I loved it, but I am not sure people will like it if they haven't read the graphic novel because I read it two weeks ago, and I am still confused. There is just way too much going on at times. Only a few things are slightly different (some deaths basically) but beyond that its true to the story minus the ending, which makes sense. If they used the original ending a lot of people would be even more confused.

Basically if you liked the book + 300's action sequences, you'll love the movie.

If you liked 300, you probably like the movie.

If you didn't like 300 and didn't read the book, I might wait for DVD.

A lot of people applauded at the end. Like 300 people in the theater, so I assume it went over well. There is just SO much to it, it's hard to grasp it all at once.

[fantom1979]

They have been advertising the heck out of this movie this week, so I would expect at least a good opening weekend. I never saw the comic and didn't really think 300 was awesome, so I might hold off on this one until some of my friends see it.

[ISiddiqui]

Never read the book (actually just got it yesterday from Amazon), but just saw the movie. Very, very well done! I was skeptical about the length, but it didn't seem that long at all and they needed all that time to tell the story full, with the flashbacks and what not to build up the world.

[SackAttack]

Just got back .. Personally I loved it, but I am not sure people will like it if they haven't read the graphic novel because I read it two weeks ago, and I am still confused. There is just way too much going on at times. Only a few things are slightly different (some deaths basically) but beyond that its true to the story minus the ending, which makes sense. If they used the original ending a lot of people would be even more confused.

Basically if you liked the book + 300's action sequences, you'll love the movie.

If you liked 300, you probably like the movie.

If you didn't like 300 and didn't read the book, I might wait for DVD.

A lot of people applauded at the end. Like 300 people in the theater, so I assume it went over well. There is just SO much to it, it's hard to grasp it all at once.

I enjoyed it, but there were definitely some dropped hooks. "Here's stuff the book had that set up this way, and we included it to be true to the book...but here's the direction we went instead."

Nothing that really detracts from the movie, but enough to make you wonder what the 'uncut' version is like.

[ISiddiqui]

DeTox... that's a strange review. Like I said, I didn't read the graphic novel, but I followed it fairly easily.

And I despised 300. One of the worst movies I've ever seen. Not even comparable.

[Peregrine]

Saw the movie yesterday, definitely liked it a lot. They have a ton on their plate to try to film the movie at all, but I think they came out with a very good result.

[Travis]

Loved the movie, absolutely can't wait to see the extended version (assuming that'll be on the disc releases).

[cubboyroy1826]

The movie i thought was very good and i agree that if they come out with an extended version it will be even better.

[Chief Rum]

It has been 36 hours or so since I saw this, and I am still not certain how to grade it. Probably the hardest one for me to pin down in a long time.

I know I liked a lot of it. I know I didn't feel as strong an emotional connection to it as I think was intended. I know I enjoyed the amazing effect and the action sequences. I know the plot and pacing was abit of a mess at times, and I know that was because of being true to the novel. And I know I am still thinking about it and its message and meaning now.

So what does that mean? Hell if I know.

[ISiddiqui]

If you are still thinking on its message and meaning after 36 hours, I think that's a mark of a good story.

[Pyser]

uh, this movie wouldnt have been any different if night owl and that chick werent even in it at all, basically.

[ISiddiqui]

Yeah, but they are how we see this world. We can't really identify with Rorshack or Dr. Manhatten or Ozzymandius. And the Silk Specter woman convinced Dr. Manhatten to come back (then again, I guess him coming back doesn't change anything... except getting Rorshack killed... but I think Ozzy could have done that anyway).

[Honolulu_Blue]

Yeah, but they are how we see this world. We can't really identify with Rorshack or Dr. Manhatten or Ozzymandius. And the Silk Specter woman convinced Dr. Manhatten to come back (then again, I guess him coming back doesn't change anything... except getting Rorshack killed... but I think Ozzy could have done that anyway).

Dan and Laurie are the human element to the story. They are definitely more passengers than drivers, but they are critical nonetheless.

I wont be able to see this until next weekend.

[Calis]

Just got a chance to see this.

Not really sure what I think yet either. I enjoyed it to an extent, and think Snyder once again stuck to the source material pretty well, and I think the changes he made make sense for the film. I can't really fault that.

It seemed off though. I guess it's one of those cases were a direct translation just doesn't work. I can't put a finger on it, but something just didn't click. I still enjoyed seeing it put to film and am not sure what needed to be done differently. I think a little more of Rorschach would have helped, fleshing out his character a bit more. I think the over the top action sequences that we knew Snyder would use detract from the movie a bit. The gruesome violence while "cool" to see sort of blurred what should be a pretty solid line between how Dan/Laurie operate and how Rorschach does.

The girl that played Laurie while quite attractive was absolutely terrible.

Sounds overly negative but I did like it overall. I'm not the hugest fan of the original comic either. I enjoyed it and it was the first non-traditional superhero comic I read so it has a certain appeal, but I had issues with it as well.

[Surtt]

Just went to see this last night.

First off, I think they would have been "truer" to the original by setting it in the present (or near future); Bush in his 5th term, Dr. Manhattan wins in Iraq, We are having a cold war with China over oil... The comic was written in 85 about 85, but that was a long time ago now and a lot of the audience did not lived through the cold war or Watergate. It felt more nostalgic then shocking.

Second, I am confused about changing the the ending. Why go through the effort of reproducing the comic (sometimes frame for frame) and then shit the bed by changing the whole ending? If you are going to do that, just make a movie "based" on The Watchmen (which I think would have been a better movie)

Also, I thought the sound track wasn't very well done. Sounds of Silence in for a funeral in 85? Playing a 60s song for an 80s scene? The sound track didn't add much to the movie, where as the Smashing Pumpkins song on the trailer really set the tone.

Finally, going back to the new ending, why change it? The comic was very nihilistic; even our new god (Dr. Manhattan) could not save use from our destructive urges. But the movie tried to humanize Dr. Manhattan and turn him into some sort of Christ figure. (sacrificing his reputation, if not himself, to save the world). I guess every directer thinks he can improve the original with just a few minor, to them, changes. (see LOTR)


Anyway, I liked the movie, it is well worth going to see.
Yet a day later I am ponder the changed ending more the anything else, I don't think that is what they wanted.
Maybe the "Director's Cut" will fill in the gaps.

[lordscarlet]

Finally, going back to the new ending, why change it? The comic was very nihilistic; even our new god (Dr. Manhattan) could not save use from our destructive urges. But the movie tried to humanize Dr. Manhattan and turn him into some sort of Christ figure. (sacrificing his reputation, if not himself, to save the world). I guess every directer thinks he can improve the original with just a few minor, to them, changes. (see LOTR)


Anyway, I liked the movie, it is well worth going to see.
Yet a day later I am ponder the changed ending more the anything else, I don't think that is what they wanted.
Maybe the "Director's Cut" will fill in the gaps.

I think the cheesiness of a giant squid monster thing would have been off-putting to people that did not read the comic. And probably pretty stupid looking to those that did as well.

[Honolulu_Blue]

Spoiler

I agree with that. Getting rid of the squid also cuts out the minor plotline about all the missing artists and such. That said, they still could have preserved the ending by having a faux alien invasion that resulted in the deaths of a few million through some means other than the squid. I am not that bothered with the changed ending, but I think the original ending was a bit darker, since it showed that man's destructive urges could only be re-directed, not changed.

[Surtt]

I don't care too much about the giant squid (yeah it was cheesy)

But they did not just change the details, they made a major plot change.
And then claimed they didn't....


The book explicitly states:
god/super man/Dr. Manhattan is real and he is American
god did not do this to use, we did it to ourselves.
god does not care about us


In the movie:
Dr. Manhattan's still cares deeply for us, but only Veidt can see it.
He is even willing to leave the galaxy so we can have a better future.


Not just the framing Dr. Manhattan, having Silk Spectre & Nite Owl go bake to being super heroes instead of having to go into hiding, The shot of Veidt standing alone and dejected instead of happily going off to meditate, the book ended very darkly.


It would be like remaking Casablanca and having Ilsa and Rick run off together.
Changing the ending changes the whole movie.

YMMV

[Honolulu_Blue]

This decline in box office and the "middling" opening is really not at all surprising. I never really saw how it was going to be a huge commercial success.

It's long.

It's rated R.

It's confusing.

It's about a bunch of superheroes no one has ever heard about.

It has no star power. (I had never heard of any of the actors who played Ozymandias, Silke Spectre, or the Comedian. I had to look Nite Owl up on IMDB and only then did I realize he was in "Hard Candy". I only really know Billy Cudrup as the guy who did a voice in "Princess Mononoke" and from some independent film about drug addiction, the name of which I don't remember. I remember Jackie Earl Haley from his "Bad News Bears" and "Breaking Away" days and from his hillarious appearance as Chris Elliot's cousin, Donald, in one episode of "Get A Life". I think my brother and I are probably the only two people in America who watched that episode. That was in 1991.)

It's beloved by a rabid core that would freak out at almost any change, modification or deletion, but were dealing with a story that's impossible to film and totally inacessible to anyone unfamiliar with the work without some changes/deletions. That led to divisive reviews. Most of those unfamiliar with the comics hated it and those who were familiar with the work were split.

Given all of that $55 million for an opening weekend and $18 million on the second weekend and it looking to break $100 million domestically isn't that bad. I guess it's all a matter of expectations.

At the end of the day, with DVD sales and all, I think the film will manage to scrape back its production costs. It's certainly not what Warner Bros was expecting, but I think they didn't have a realistic view of its box office potential. Allen Moore's work, even when done well, like "Watchmen" and "V For Vendetta", just isn't all that accessible.

I think people's perception of the popularity of the graphic novel got all skewed as well. Yes, many people love it. Yes, many people think it's the best graphic novel ever. But it doesn't have anywhere near the popularity of almost any mainstream Marvel or DC title.

Think about it this way. Let's say someone makes a new film based on "The Great Gatsby" or "The Grapes of Wrath", widely considered to be two of the best modern novels (well, according to my 30 second internet search. THANK YOU WIKIPEDIA). The movies are near perfect adaptations, but there are no famous actors in either film. Then you have the "DaVinci Code" starring Tom Hanks, Gandalf, Amelie, and others. Which of these films is going to make more money?

I would have liked to have seen the film do better commercially, simply because there are a lot of other great, non-mainstream, mature (not in a porny type of way) comics out there.

The success of "Watchmen" would have gone a long way to helping them get the proper treatment they deserve in film. I would have also liked to see it do well because, obviously, people like Hayter and others who really loved the material and did their best feel that it's commercial success would have been some sort of affirmation or vindication or something.

I finally saw it over the weekend in iMax glory. While there are a few things I would have tweaked and few things that didn't quite work, overall I thought it was great. I can't really imagine there being a better film adaptation of the comics. In particular, Rorshach, Dr. Manhattan, the Comedian, and Nite Owl were spot on perfect.

Strutt, as for some of your comments, I agree with some, but I think you need to re-read the comics, since almost all of the "changes" you claim were made in the film's ending, were almost entirely taken from the comics.



The book explicitly states:
god/super man/Dr. Manhattan is real and he is American
god did not do this to use, we did it to ourselves.
god does not care about us

In the movie:
Dr. Manhattan's still cares deeply for us, but only Veidt can see it.
He is even willing to leave the galaxy so we can have a better future.

-- This is incorrect. There's no place in the movie where it's implied that Dr. Manhattan "cares deeply for us." In both sources, Veidt learns that he's becoming detached, but still has some ties, and the whole cancer thing is designed to break those ties.

Also, in both the comic and movie, his reason for returning to earth is exactly the same. Sure, there's definitely a more christlike act of giving himself up for humanity in the movie, but that's only one way to see it. He leaves the earth in the comic because he understands the revealing Veidt's plan will only lead to more death - he returned because of the miracle of life - same with the movie.

Not just the framing Dr. Manhattan, having Silk Spectre & Nite Owl go bake to being super heroes instead of having to go into hiding, The shot of Veidt standing alone and dejected instead of happily going off to meditate, the book ended very darkly.

-- I didn't remember this until just re-reading the comics over the weekend. Yes, Dan and Laurie go into hiding, but they also go back to being super heroes. Read their last line, it's definitely implied that they plan on going back to being heroes. Laurie just wants a new outfit and possibly a gun.

-- I am not sure your point about Veidt. That said, I feel that's the one sequence Snyder really should have kept: The final interaction between Dr. Manhattan and Veidt, the whole, "nothing ever ends" discussion. That was pitch perfect in the comic and would have come out nicely.

It would be like remaking Casablanca and having Ilsa and Rick run off together.
Changing the ending changes the whole movie.

-- Upon a closer reading, I think the ending of the movie, for the most part, is much more in line with the ending of the comic than you think.

[Surtt]

-- This is incorrect. There's no place in the movie where it's implied that Dr. Manhattan "cares deeply for us." In both sources, Veidt learns that he's becoming detached, but still has some ties, and the whole cancer thing is designed to break those ties.

When they brake into Veidt's office and read his file on Dr. Manhattan, it specifically stated he still cared but only Veidt could read his emotions, at least I thought it did. When the DVD comes out I will need to double check.

-- I am not sure your point about Veidt. That said, I feel that's the one sequence Snyder really should have kept: The final interaction between Dr. Manhattan and Veidt, the whole, "nothing ever ends" discussion. That was pitch perfect in the comic and would have come out nicely.

That defiantly would have helped.

The point I was trying to make about Veidt:
In the book, he got off scott free. He pulled off his plan, didn't get caught, didn't even feel bad about killing millions of people. Just another day at the office, until the Dr. Manhattan -"nothing ever ends" discussion

In the movie, they showed that parting shot of him standing alone. in the rubble. At least giving the impression that his world had crumbled and something bad had happen to him.
While technically it was not very different, it was definitely a shift in mood.




-- Upon a closer reading, I think the ending of the movie, for the most part, is much more in line with the ending of the comic than you think.

Yeah, I need to re-read the comic.
(I probably missed and/or forgot a lot of this)

My main complaint is they changed the "look and feel" of the ending.
The book ended very bleak and Nilistic, whereas the movie had more of up beat ending.
If you end the book depressed, but leave the theater happy, you can't say it was very good adaptation. (doesn't mean it was a bad movie, though)
I guess it all depends on how you interpreted the book.
As always YMMV

[Honolulu_Blue]

I wonder if they end up doing a cut of the movie, as has been speculated, that includes the "Tales of The Black Freighter" 'comic', if they change a bit of the ending.

There's really no reason at all to have the comic in there without Veidt's single line about the dream he had where he was swimming towards a ship. That line, and that line alone, really, is what ties the pirate comic to the rest of the story.