Watchmen...

[fajrdrako]

I saw the movie Watchmen this afternoon.

Loved it. Very, very clever. Very violent; I watched parts of it with my eyes closed.

At the end, I was saying: "Where's the squid? I want the squid! I was cheated of the squid!" but I didn't really mean it. I thought the changes to the plot and the ending were good.

Best things:

1. Jackie Earle Haley as Rorschach. Wonderful acting. Jeffrey Dean Morgan was also excellent as The Comedian.
   
2. The special effects on Dr. Manhattan.
   
3. The semiotics: transferring the cinematically-inspired comic book pages to a real movie form without losing the references and artistic effects.
   
4. The alternate history aspect.
   
5. I've always had my doubts about Watchmen: it'ss an artistic and conceptual masterpiece of the comic book form, and when it came out I was raving and anlyzing it along with everyone else. But I found the story depressing. Anti-Romantic, and I am, above all else, a Romantic.
   
   To my surprise, I liked the story aspect of the movie better than the comic. I wonder what I'll think when I read it again. I've read bits and pieces in the last year, but I haven't read the whole thing as a narrative since it first came out in the `980s.
   
   This time, I was rooting for Veidt.

Comments

[dameruth.livejournal.com]

Guilty fangirl confession: I think the Watchmen comic is truly a work of genius and shows what the medium can do in intelligent hands, and I love it . . . but I have yet to read it in its entirety. It's just too freaking depressing. I've skimmed most of the last half of it and read the ending, but never done it all as a straight shot. I mean, I got where it was going, I totally grokked the idea . . . but I just didn't want to have to slog through the grimy particulars.

Still wanna see the movie, though! :D And Ozzy *does* have a point, I have to admit . . .

[topgeargirl2.livejournal.com]

I really want to see it.

Hopefully soon, though never read the graphic novel.

[kaimu-art.livejournal.com]

I just saw it tonight, and it was absolutely amazing. I haven't read the comic yet but the people I saw it with all agreed that it was a very good adaptation of it.

re: #1, the casting was phenomenal, I thought they did a good job with Patrick Wilson as Dan as well.

3. The semiotics: transferring the cinematically-inspired comic book pages to a real movie form without losing the references and artistic effects.
It really was a visually stunning movie as well!

[walkingowl.livejournal.com]

Re: the semiotics. Ah. This is also why you will love The Spirit.

I didn't manage to see Watchmen; on Friday, all shows were sold out up to the 10:45 PM one, and I just didn't want to rub elbows with that many people! I'll catch it at a 1:00 matinee in the coming few days, I'm sure.

(I still think that a lot of the hype, and a good portion of the huge crowds, is focused primarily on there being a fifty-foot-tall naked blue guy in the movie. What do you think? hee)

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

I can relate to all of that! It is a work of genius, but oh my... First time I read it, issue by issue as it came out, I had no idea how it was going. And I felt let down by the ending, and I thought Veidt was doing the wrong thing. Now, the ending strikes me as being as brilliant as the rest of it and I think Veidt was doing the right thing. What does this say about me, or the times? I don't know.

The movie is so full of detail, a lot of it all at once, it'll take repeat viewings to take it all in. Maybe I'll learn to cope better with the goriness.

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

I'll be interested to hear what you think of it. It might be a plus, to see the movie before reading the comic, not knowing what to expect. It is very faithful to the original in parellel technique.

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

I just saw it tonight, and it was absolutely amazing.

It was.

I haven't read the comic yet but the people I saw it with all agreed that it was a very good adaptation of it.

Which was amazing, because they changed few key things, but all the changes were for the better.

I thought they did a good job with Patrick Wilson as Dan as well.

Absolutely.

It's a visually stunning comic book (in an aesthetically cerebral sort of way) and incredibly, the movie captured that perfectly.

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

This is also why you will love The Spirit.

Good! Who'd have thought they could, or would, capture that sort of thing on screen? Previous comic book movies (except 300) didn't try.

I still think that a lot of the hype, and a good portion of the huge crowds, is focused primarily on there being a fifty-foot-tall naked blue guy in the movie. What do you think? hee

I haven't heard a lot about that in the 'hype' but it's ... not a detriment. [g] Dr. Manhattan is beautifully done, and we were halfway through the movie when I caught on and thought, "That's Billy Crudup!" The one actor I should have recognized, I didn't.

[raissad.livejournal.com]

I loved the film. I love the logic of Manhattan, and the fact that he and Laurie are commentary on the god/mortal relationships in mythology. The sequences on Mars were my favorite.

Confession time. As much as I appreciate Moore, I'm not a purist. I actually prefer the structural and thematic economy of the Watchmen movie's altered ending to the source material. Plus, I actually enjoyed the League of Extraordinary Gentlemen film in it's own right, as I have some issues with Moore's specific narrative choices there, too. I don't plan to read V, as the film was enough.

[silverwhistle.livejournal.com]

I want to see this!

[auriaephiala.livejournal.com]

Thanks for the review. I don't think I'm up to depressing AND violent right now.

(I just returned _The Company_ by K.J. Parker to the library today -- I had kept it out overdue to try to finish it. It's well written and very believable, but I just couldn't finish it knowing it was going to turn out very, very badly. And, besides, he needed better character names -- I could never keep them straight. Maybe another time.)

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

I love the logic of Manhattan, and the fact that he and Laurie are commentary on the god/mortal relationships in mythology.

I loved that, too. And I loved it that the 'nuclear accident' that is so much a staple of the old superhero comics - Bruce Banner being a classic case - made him something not quite human any more. You can't have that level of perception, and be ordinary.

Yes, I agree about the ending. I guess I'm not a purist, either.

I read and liked V but ... it didn't make a huge impression. My favourite of Moore's work by far is the material he did for DC, especially Swamp Thing and Superman. I loved his version of John Constantine - much more than that of most writers who followed him on the character. And I don't usually like Superman much, but I loved him when Moore wrote him.

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

Not every book is a winner. Unfortunately.

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

It's a very interesting, intricately crafted version of the comic. I was impressed.

[walkingowl.livejournal.com]

Yeah, mainstream press was all hung up on the fact that blue man is naked. Big deal.

(I saw Billy Crudup on Jon Stewart's show two days before the movie opened. He was asked about the nudity issue, and replied sheepishly that he showed up for work every day wearing pseudo-pajamas for the motion-capture thing. And then he added that "about that much of me is Dr. Manhattan," holding up thumb and forefinger about three inches apart. Cute.)

I was astonished to hear Dr. Manhattan's voice: a light tenor. Totally not stereotype!

Also not stereotype: the Comedian isn't unidimensional. That utterly shocked me. It was brilliantly done.

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

No wonder I don't read mainstream press.

Did you see Stage Beauty? That's always what I remember Billy Crudup for. He's changed.

The Comedian isn't unidimensional at all. He's quite amazing. With the possible exception of Daniel and Laurie, no one in the story is unidimensional or uniformly good or bad.

So much about it is amazing. Very impressive - not just the technical achievement, which is remarkable, or the fidelity to the comic, but the level of thinking behind it.

[silverwhistle.livejournal.com]

I saw this tonight. WOW!
I thought the violence was a bit excessive – some of it could have been implied without being shown in such detail. It detracted from the philosophical content a bit.

But I found the story depressing. Anti-Romantic, and I am, above all else, a Romantic.

It shows the danger of Romanticism: the Carlyle cult of the 'Great Man', of Nietzsche.

I was sorry Silhouette was killed off so early: she was gorgeous!

[walkingowl.livejournal.com]

(Ooo! Ozymandias!!)

Haven't seen Stage Beauty. Someday?

Billy Crudup reminded me intensely of Sean Maher. Taller. But so similar.

I've been re-reading the graphic novel, up to issue four now... and I love how much more depth the movie gave Laurie. In the books, she was at best a reluctant superhero; in the movie, she's totally into it! The alley fight scene tied it all together for me, for those two: right then we found out that Dan and Laurie were really just hiding in plain sight by wearing civilian clothes, oh yeah. They really belonged in those suits, and they were playing normal because the law said they had to, no other reason. "Hey, let's break Rorschach out of prison," just tossed off like "Wanna go get coffee?" It was so cool!

The other thing the movie did was straighten out the continuity. The scenes with Moloch all got stretched out, and it played better onscreen that way, I thought. Any change done for the movie was done with respect for the original material, I could tell. Even dropping out the giant squid was a good thing, speaking from that perspective. Gad, when we found out Veidt was behind it all... and was reigning in Antarctica... and was really, really, really scary and nobody was gonna outthink or outfight him...! Oh, yeah, that was it.

I keep thinking back to Frank Miller sitting next to Zack Snyder in one of the add-ons with the 300 DVD -- Frank says to him, "How you gonna do Watchmen?" just like that, out of nowhere, and Zack looks totally blind-sided and then just says, "Ummmm... very carefully?"

The Spirit is coming out on DVD on April 14.

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

WOW!

Amazing, isn't it?

It detracted from the philosophical content a bit.

Yeah. I would have been happier if I hadn't had to close my eyes every now and again.

It shows the danger of Romanticism

Yup, absolutely.

I thought Silhouette was wonderful - I'd love to see a movie about her.

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

(Ooo! Ozymandias!!)

Loved him. Too bad he wasn't in more of the movie. He was more or less what Smallville's Lex Luthor should have become.

Haven't seen Stage Beauty. Someday?

I loved it on first viewing. On second viewing, I still liked it, but wasn't left with a desire to see it again. Crudup is excellent in it. Loved the theme - the story - about the transition to men play women on stage, to women playing women.

I love how much more depth the movie gave Laurie.

I loved that too. She was much more of a 'real character' with a place in the action.

The other thing the movie did was straighten out the continuity.

That made it all make more sense. I missed the pirates, though.

Even dropping out the giant squid was a good thing, speaking from that perspective.

I agree. With a faint reluctance - the absurdity of the squid was a point in itself.

Zack looks totally blind-sided and then just says, "Ummmm... very carefully?"

LOL. Great answer.

[walkingowl.livejournal.com]

Agreed that Ozymandias should have been in more of the movie. Still, watching it the second time makes his every part more terrifying. For instance, when he murders the hit-man (which, delightfully, I caught him doing the first time I saw it: wait, he's saying that he wants the guy to tell who hired him, but why's he holding his hand over his mouth at the same time? ack, yeah, he's forcing him to eat the poison pill!!) and lets Lee Iacoca get killed. That entire scene was highly nasty. I also loved Annie Liebovitz shooting him (caught her the first time, too! gad, I love pop cultural references to itself!) while his airships floated by outside, brr. One thing: the credits list Andy Warhol, Trumone Capote, and then Naken Man At Warhol Party. I still have not seen this fellow. Just too taken with staring at the faux Warhol of Mothman!

Stage Beauty sounds interesting. I will see it someday. Thanks.

Yes, the framing bits with the news vendor and the kid were gone, alas. All of that with intense amounts of literary allusion and significance. Which didn't fit in a movie-type telling of the same story. But, you of course saw: the two characters were in it till the end, grabbing each other in shock as the city disintegrated around them. I thought that was an incredibly touching tribute to the comic book itself.

Another fascinating thing was how everyone's costumes were changed. That was a surprise! But it worked.

Did you notice how many of the tableaux vivantes (sorry if I spelled that wrong) had the same framed newspaper headlines on the background wall? And the same Minuteman photo? And that Vargas-like portrait of (not Bettie Page) -- not only The Comedian had that on the wall, which was delightful. Such little touches! All intentional. Ai, this movie was so good.

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

when he murders the hit-man

I really liked that.

Just too taken with staring at the faux Warhol of Mothman!

I'd like to study a screencap of that moment. I could, too, I have the technology. Just need to find the time to set it up.

Yes, I liked the use of walls, headlines, graffiti, all of that.... so much in the spirit of the book.

[walkingowl.livejournal.com]

I liked the use of walls, headlines, graffiti, all of that.... so much in the spirit of the book.

Reminding me of something that is sad. The dialogue is verbatim from the comic in almost every instance; the storyline is pretty much verbatim, too. And all of this is the creation of a writer who is getting nothing from his work, in movie form. Bothers me. I wonder if DC would take steps to make that right if the story of how they semi-lied to Alan Moore got wide enough press?

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

The dialogue is verbatim from the comic in almost every instance; the storyline is pretty much verbatim, too. And all of this is the creation of a writer who is getting nothing from his work, in movie form. Bothers me.

Politically speaking, I'm not sure how much this is Warner's rapacious lawyers and how much it is Alan Moore's eccentric choice. I've heard somewhat different versions of the story. Is it the Joe Shuster problem all over again, or is Moore making the wrong demands? I don't know. I don't know what profit or royalties Dave Gibbons is getting, either. I actually think it's more of a shame that he isn't getting the credit, rather than that he isn't getting the money. But that's just my anti-mercenary perspective, and that part was Moore's own choice.

[walkingowl.livejournal.com]

Different versions of the story, hm? I shouldn't be surprised.

I was, actually, referring to credit, not money. And -- ok, thanks for clarifying my confusion over not having seen Dave Gibbons's name in the credits. He chose not to get credit? But yes to payment? To each their own!

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

Sorry, I was unclear. Dave McGibbon was in the credits of The Watchmen, and in the pre-publicity - I saw him interviewed about it on SPACE. But Alan Moore wanted nothing to do with it, took no money, and was not mentioned in the publicity or the credits of The Watchmen, by his own choice.

[walkingowl.livejournal.com]

Oops, no, that was my misunderstanding. Twice I've seen it now, and neither time have I noticed Dave Gibbons in the credits. Where does he show up? I knew, of course, about the Alam Moore boycotting... he does make an appearance in the MAD magazine version, and he's lookin' good. Actually, he looks even more like Ken Gale than usual. I found the magazine today by sheer luck, and will read it happily. Probably try to copy the story into an Apaplexy zine! hee

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

Twice I've seen it now, and neither time have I noticed Dave Gibbons in the credits.

At the beginning, I think. The credit is 'co-created by Dave Gibbons' with no hint as to who he co-created the story with.

he looks even more like Ken Gale than usual

LOL - kind of terrifying for poor Ken.

[walkingowl.livejournal.com]

Yeah, reminding me of the lyric by Bob Dylan: "They got him on conspiracy; they were never sure who with!"

Don't you think Alan Moore and Ken Gale look alike? I do!

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

I can see a resemblance between Alan Moore and Ken Gale, but last I saw Ken, he looked much more... civilized.