Watchmen

[Killa Pimp]

Casting does not seem to be going well:

http://www.iwatchstuff.com/2007/07/more_watchmen_casting_news.php

Check the remarks at the bottom of the linked page--- They are hysterical!!!


Snyder has pulled out some magic before, but he is dealing with a classic.
Should be interesting to see how he pulls this off.
But I will reserve my final judgment until after I see it. I have been waiting 20 years for this and don't won't to spoil myself form seeing it by having very unrealistic expectations.

[Sketch Sanchez]

haha, I was actually about to post a new thread. GOod thing I searched.

Anyway...

Whoa I'm totally behind.

I was just browing wiki and saw the page for the film and apparently it has a full cast now? The page has soucres linked to it so apparently they're true.

Anyway, heres the cast:

Cast
Patrick Wilson as Daniel Dreiberg / Nite Owl II: A retired vigilante superhero with technological experience.[3]

Billy Crudup as Dr. Jon Osterman / Doctor Manhattan: A superhero with genuine powers who works for the U.S. government.[3] The role was once pursued by actor Keanu Reeves,[4] but the actor abandoned pursuit due to the studio holding up the project over budget concerns.[3] Crudup provides motion capture for the computer-generated character, and also plays Osterman in flashback as a human.[1]

Jeffrey Dean Morgan as Edward Blake / The Comedian: A vigilante superhero who is commissioned by the U.S. government.[3] Prior to Morgan's casting, producers Lawrence Gordon and Lloyd Levin met with Ron Perlman to discuss portraying the Comedian.[5]

Jackie Earle Haley as Walter Kovacs / Rorschach: A vigilante superhero who continues his vigilante activities after they are outlawed. He has transformed over time from a "soft" costumed hero into a killer who sees the world in black and white.[3]

Malin Åkerman as Laurie Juspeczyk / Silk Spectre II: A retired vigilante superhero.[3] Åkerman described her character as the psychology and the emotion of the film due to being the only woman among the men. The actress worked out and trained to fight for her portrayal of the crimefighter.[6]

Matthew Goode as Adrian Veidt / Ozymandias: A retired vigilante superhero who has since made his identity public.[3] The role of Ozymandias was originally connected to actors Jude Law[4] and Tom Cruise,[7] but they left the project behind due to the studio's delay in handling the budget.[3]

Stephen McHattie as Hollis Mason / Nite Owl: The first vigilante to take up the mantle of Nite Owl.[1]

Carla Gugino as Sally Jupiter / Silk Spectre: A vigilante superhero who retired and became the mother of Laurie Juspeczyk.[8]

Matt Frewer as Edgar Jacobi / Moloch the Mystic: An elderly rehabilitated criminal, who acted as an underworld kingpin and magician when he was younger.[9]


What do you guys think of the cast?

[Cody]

I'm happy with some of them - Wilson, Crudup, Haley particularly, always happy to look at Gugino - the others I don't know the actors well enough to have an opinion about their casting. Matt Frewer is awesome, but I only vaguely remember Moloch from my one reading of the graphic novel.

My paranoid fear was that the ending would be changed, as has been done in previous drafts of the script like the lame one that's online. But Snyder told (http://watchmencomicmovie.com/102407-watchmen-starlog-article.php) Starlog that he's "absolutely keeping the ending", so I have no worries about this movie. With Snyder wanting to stay so faithful that he even wants to make the Black Freighter stuff, I think it's safe.

Some set pics (http://rss.warnerbros.com/watchmen/) went up a few days ago. You can see Rorschach walking down the sidewalk in one of them.

[Lance Lives]

The set pics look good. I don't know anything Snyder has done except Dawn 04 and I wasn't it's biggest fan so I don't know what to think.

[Sketch Sanchez]

He also did 300
ADDED:
Moloch was pretty much Rorschach's first suspect in the death of the comedian, I think.

He's also the one the police use to ambush Rorschach

[Cody]

Moloch was pretty much Rorschach's first suspect in the death of the comedian, I think.

That's what I was thinking, but I'm still blanking on everything else about him. I need to give the book another look through.
ADDED:
The set pics look good. I don't know anything Snyder has done except Dawn 04 and I wasn't it's biggest fan so I don't know what to think.

I'm not fond of Dawn '04 and didn't like 300, either.

I still think there's a good chance Snyder will pull this one off, though.

[Cody]

Legal trouble (http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/content_display/film/news/e3i11eaec8a171fba49be4befec534c5382)

20th Century Fox has initiated a legal battle against Warner Bros. over the rights to develop, produce and distribute a film based on the graphic novel "Watchmen."

On Friday, the studio sued Warners, claiming it holds the exclusive copyrights and contract rights to "Watchmen."

Warners plans to release next year a big-screen version of the popular comic book written by Alan Moore and illustrated by Dave Gibbons. The cast includes Jackie Earle Haley, Billy Crudup, Patrick Wilson, Carla Gugino and Malin Akerman. It is the studio's policy to not comment on pending litigation.

But Fox seeks to enjoin Warners from going forward with the project, saying in the lawsuit that it seeks to "restrain (Warner Bros. Pictures) from taking actions that violate Fox's copyrights and which stand to forever impair Fox's rights to control the distribution and development of this unique work."

Fox claims that between 1986 and 1990, it acquired all movie rights to the 12-issue DC Comics series and screenplays by Charles McKeown and Sam Hamm. In 1991, Fox assigned some rights via a quitclaim to Largo International with the understanding that the studio held exclusive rights to distribute the first motion picture based on "Watchmen," according to the lawsuit.


When Largo dismantled, the rights were transferred to producer Lawrence Gordon. Under a "turnaround agreement" between Fox and Gordon, the producer agreed to pay a buy-out price to Fox if he entered into any agreement with another studio or third party to develop or produce "Watchmen," among other things.

The project apparently bounced around to Universal and Paramount before returning to Warners. Now, Fox claims that neither Gordon nor Warners has paid the buy-out price or advised the studio of any other conditions required under the agreement, including procedures necessary to acquire the rights to "Watchmen" from Fox.

The lawsuit seeks unspecified damages.

[CosmoBubba]

Does Fox really have a case? DC released the Watchmen comics, and Warner Brothers owns DC. So wouldn't Warner own all the movie rights to DC properties?

[Cody]

Pictures of The Comedian, Nite Owl, Ozymandias, Rorschach, and Silk Spectre have been put up on the official site (http://rss.warnerbros.com/watchmen/).


Gerard Butler Talks Black Freighter (http://www.empireonline.com/news/story.asp?NID=22088)

It’s been rumoured for a while now, but Gerard Butler has confirmed to Empire that he will be lending his vocal talents to the animated Tales Of The Black Freighter short that Zack Snyder is planning as a companion piece to Watchmen.

The Scottish actor had been linked with a role in Watchmen for a long time, but when nothing materialised, it seemed likely that he wouldn’t be linking up with his 300 director on next year’s eagerly-awaited blockbuster.

But, when Snyder hatched plans to film the Tales Of The Black Freighter comic-within-a-comic that tells the tale of a castaway’s mental and physical deterioration and damnation as he tries to intercept a ghost freighter headed for his hometown, and include it on the Watchmen DVD, Butler’s name surfaced once more.

And, speaking to Empire just the other day, he told us that he had committed to the project.

“I’m going to do the voice of the captain,” said Butler. “They’re going to do it in the style of a Japanese anime and I’m totally stoked.

“I actually read the script before reading the comic book and I thought it was awesome,” continued the 38 year-old. “Then I read the comic book and it’s great. The little bits that have been added define it so much more. It’s very dark and there’s just something so descriptive and scary. It’s this descent into madness but explained in such a sane way that you totally feel it yourself. By the end, my heart was pumping!”

[CosmoBubba]

http://www.ew.com/ew/article/0,,20191746,00.html

DC Direct is finally releasing Watchmen action figures as a tie-in with the movie. Awesome.

[Dave Dunwoody]

Cool news about the Black Freighter. A lot of that tale bored me to death to be honest, but it ends up essential to the whole thing.

[Lance Lives]

Yeah, I personally felt it was a bit weird to go back and forth between stories, but it ended up cool. I had forgotten about this flick until the other day when my friend mentioned it...I hope it's good.

[CosmoBubba]

If you can't wait until The Dark Knight to see the first trailer, here you are...

http://www.apple.com/trailers/wb/watchmen

[Scarecrow]

A very atmospheric and beautifully composed trailer!


- Scarecrow

[The Dream Master]

Yes, but hearing The Beginning is the End is the Beginning in the trailer, a song composed for Batman & Robin sure brought some bad flashbacks when this played before The Dark Knight. :X

Oh, but this does look awesome. It looks like one of my favorite graphic novels ever will be done right on the big screen.

[TheShowstoppa]

Was it made in the style that Frank Miller used for Sin City? Because if that's not it... I don't like the fact that it looks exactly like Sin City.

[FinalBeyond]

Doesn't look like it to me. Not black and white with flecks of colour, more a general lack of overly saturated colours. I think it fits the mood pretty well.

Still, I'm looking forward to this immensely. Looks like it could well be the best adaptation of a comic book we've seen yet, and from the best comic book as well.

[CanadianFonzie]

Here's a movie that flew passed me, I never knew they were making a Watchmen movie until I saw the previews today during The Dark Knight...though the previews didn't seem to interest me

[The Dream Master]

Was it made in the style that Frank Miller used for Sin City? Because if that's not it... I don't like the fact that it looks exactly like Sin City.

Methinks you are confusing this with The Spirit, Show. :)

[Scarecrow]

Yes, but hearing The Beginning is the End is the Beginning in the trailer, a song composed for Batman & Robin sure brought some bad flashbacks when this played before The Dark Knight. :X

Oh, but this does look awesome. It looks like one of my favorite graphic novels ever will be done right on the big screen.


It's a insane chocie of song and yet... maybe it's a sign. Take a song associated with an abortion of a film and link it to a modern masterpeice? Let's hope do.

- Scarecrow

[The Dream Master]

Yeah, I loved that choice of the song. And, to be technical, that song in that trailer wasn't heard in Batman and Robin, but it was on the soundtrack. The "alternate version" of the song (The End is the Beginning is the End) had a music video though. I'm pretty sure it's on the B&R DVD.

[Killa Pimp]

I thought they would have used "Doomsday Clock" by the Smashing Pumpkins since the covers of the mini series was like a countdown, - Oh Well - Guess it it was too fast a tempo on the song for the slo mo actions of the trailer.


This looks a lot better than what i thought it was going to be- i am going to give it a go when it comes out.

I always though this would do better as a mini series on HBo or Showtime- But I guess you have to please the masses.

[ZPowers]

The preview was ALL WRONG. Do you remember the comic for balls to the wall action? Not to mention the fact that all these actors are far too young and pretty to be playing retired, scarred, sometimes even incontinent characters. No, they're going to turn a gritty graphic novel, praised for its realistic take and separation from the super-hero genre, and turn it into an action movie. That's not Watchmen, though. If thy wanted to do that, make up some new characters.

[The Dream Master]

The age thing stuck out to me as well, but you've got to expect a trailer to be full of action shots. That's just how things are, unfortunately.

[Alex DeLarge]

To be fair, that's trailers. TONS of movies I know have terrible trailers and amazing films. Most of those action scenes were in the book. They just picked the couple that ARE in the film to make it look like something it's not.

[Lance Lives]

I didn't know this trailer was being attached to Dark Knight and it actually wasn't on my Midnight screening so when I saw it Friday night I was completely surprised. Dr. Manhattan looks good so far.

[Joe Strummer]

I really liked the trailer...I'm pumped to see this film! I read the graphic novel not too long ago and it was really good...something different. Ozy doesn't look the part, but the rest are ace!

[The One and Only]

Transcript from the Watchman Panel (http://www.newsarama.com/film/080725-comic-con-watchmen.html) at the Geek Pride Parade.:geek::funky:

[Scarecrow]

Every time I watch that trailer it looks better and better!


- Scarecrow

[Just Jeans]

I know nothing about The Watchmen. Until I saw the trailer before The Dark Knight, I had no clue what it was.

Having said that, this trailer looked epic. And I loved The Beginning is the End is the Beginning. It fit the images perfectly. I'll be there opening day to see this sucker.

Incidentally, I saw an interview with someone at Comic Con on G4 the other day, and they said this film will be rated R, and that they showed some pretty graphic footage at the panel. Sweet.
ADDED:
Question -- is that Robert Downey Jr. in the trailer, using the flame thrower on what appears to be an oriental troop?

The age thing stuck out to me as well....

I don't know anything about the graphic novel so I don't know how the character age should be handled, but the female lead did an interview with the G4 folks at Comic Con, and she said that she spends a portion of the film in prosthetics to make her older (in her late 60s I think she said), so I reckon age plays a part.

[Jack Bauer]

Question -- is that Robert Downey Jr. in the trailer, using the flame thrower on what appears to be an oriental troop?
Nope, that's Jeffrey Dean Morgan who portrays The Comedian. A lot of people have mention that and have been talking about it.

[Just Jeans]

Thanks, Jack. I downloaded the trailer off the Apple website and I kept rewinding it to take a look, and it really does look like Robert Downey Jr.

[Lance Lives]

Jeans, you should give this a read ASAP. It's great.

The other day when I went to see The Dark Knight again, this convo occured directly behind me:

BOY: "Have you heard of this?"
GIRL: "No, what is it?"
BOY: "I don't know but it looks badass"
GIRL: "It say it's the most acclaimed novel of all time, but I've never heard of it *giggle*"

I then proceeded to move.

[The Dream Master]

Good to hear that the age issue will be handled. Also, I thought that was Downey Jr. as well as The Comedian (I'd all but forgotten about the casting for this film by the time I finally saw the teaser).

My only concern here is that the graphic novel is a very non-linear story that goes on quite a bit of tangents. I think this could honestly be more well-served as a trilogy of films; I think Snyder has already said his preferred cut would be over three hours long, and even that would have to sacrifice a few things. Visually, though, this sucker looks stunning.

[Just Jeans]

Good to hear that the age issue will be handled.

I wouldn't be surprised if what we saw in that teaser barely scratched the surface of what this film has in store for us, particularly after reading some comments about the footage screened exclusively at Comic Con, which people were buzzing about.

My only concern here is that the graphic novel is a very non-linear story that goes on quite a bit of tangents.

Pulp Fiction proved that non-linear storytelling can work in cinema, and I think it can work here too.

I think Snyder has already said his preferred cut would be over three hours long...

During his interview on G4, he said the original script for the film was 160 pages, but they were forced to make it a little more lean. Personally, I wouldn't have minded if the film was 2 hours and 40 minutes.

[The Dream Master]

Pulp Fiction proved that non-linear storytelling can work in cinema, and I think it can work here too.

No doubt, but Watchmen is like that on steroids. It's not just that the story doesn't go in order (the main narrative does), but there are so many flashbacks that are crucial to the story. I'm not going to proclaim that it's "unfilmable" as others have (Terry Gilliam came to that conclusion years ago), but it's going to be quite a task. There's also a comic book plot within the story that parellels the events of the main narrative, so I wonder if that won't be dropped altogether.

[Alex DeLarge]

Snyder said the comic that people read inside Watchmen, "Tales of the Black Frighter" will be filmed as an anime with Gerald "300" Butler voicing the main character and before the release of the film, be put out on DVD along with an animated adaptation of "Under the Hood," the book whose chapters we read at the ends of Issues 1-3. And then on the DVD Extended Cut, Tales be inserted into the film.

[Just Jeans]

I think I'm going to order Watchmen on Amazon.com sometime prior to the film coming out and dedicate a weekend to reading it.

[Alex DeLarge]

A wise choice, Jeans. It brings tears to my eyes ever time I read it. If the film is half as good as the book, this will be the best film of all time, bar none.

I think the hardest aspect of the non-linear stuff to capture will be Issue 4 and how Dr. Manhattan perceives time. "Four seconds..." and all that. It will be pretty hard to capture, I think, but if pulled off, VERY, VERY rewarding.

[Just Jeans]

I'm going to wait until November and get the new hardback (http://www.amazon.com/Watchmen-Alan-Moore/dp/1401219268/ref=ed_oe_h) that DC is publishing. I've gotten to where I prefer hardback collections over trade paperbacks.

[ZPowers]

I'm not sure about this. The actors are... with a couple exceptions... universally a little too young. And they really do look young. And pretty. Almost every actor, except Rorschach, are between 10 and 15 years younger than the characters are supposed to be, which seems a little bit to defeat the point. Doesn't it seem odd to portray pot-bellied, impotent, 15 years retired Nite Owl with a 35 year old pretty boy? I guess reading the graphic novel I never pictured these people as so... pretty? Polished? Pre-planned? (except Manhattan) I dunno. I'm really not liking this casting. I think it implies that they're toning things down a lot. Look at Ozymandias. He's got a lifetime of experience and wisdom and he's a bit tortured by the things has done and will do. This actor looks absolutely wrong. What's wrong with someone looking like John Cusack for Nite Owl? A woman who looks... sort of like a real, attractive, slightly older person for Silk Spectre?

The only person even near their forties are the actors who play Rorschach (which is good), Comedian (which might work, since there's a lot of flashback with this character, who's actually closer to 60 when the story takes place), and Dr. Manhattan (who is actually the only character who really makes sense to be played by someone in their early thirties).

To me, this isn't some minor thing, like "Oh, Rorschach's mask doesn't move around like it does in the comic!", its an important aspect of the story that these people AREN'T at their peak, AREN'T totally perfect and perfect looking, most AREN'T even as fantastical as Batmans or Supermans. They're a lot more real than that.

Next, I don't like the trailer. Watchmen isn't really an ACTION movie, and this was a trailer for a full on action movie. No substance, no grit, no realism, no insight, just... flare. If you want to make an action film, I'm okay with that, but at least have the decency to write an original story, or use source material that lends itself to that genre, instead of absolutely tearing apart a great work of literature for it.

Everything I've seen os far for this movie looks like its all about mass appeal and none of it is actually about Watchmen. I hope I'm wrong, but I already know it's probably not as it could have been.

[Alex DeLarge]

I still think that's just the marketting people and the actual film won't be nearly this action-y. As said, all the action bits are in the graphic novel; it's just a case of them cherry-picking the few scenes that do.

[Just Jeans]

I'm not sure about this. The actors are... with a couple exceptions... universally a little too young. And they really do look young.

They'll be using prosthetics to age (at least one of) the cast. Like I said, I don't know much about Watchmen, but I reckon if one of the leads will be wearing prosthetics to make her look like she's in her sixties, then the rest will, too.

I think it implies that they're toning things down a lot.

According to Blair Butler during G4's Comic Con coverage, the panel for Watchmen showed a lot of footage that wasn't in the teaser, and she said that the film looks just as hard a gritty as she expected it to be.

Next, I don't like the trailer. Watchmen isn't really an ACTION movie, and this was a trailer for a full on action movie. No substance, no grit, no realism, no insight, just... flare.

It's not a trailer, it's a teaser. And the point of a teaser is to be exciting.

[Just Jeans]

I've just found here (http://www.ew.com/ew/article/0,,20213273,00.html) an interesting article about the film. I think the die-hard fans of the graphic novel are quite lucky to have Snyder on board:

Many in Hollywood have tried to get Watchmen on the screen and failed, including directors Terry Gilliam (Brazil), Darren Aronofsky (The Fountain), and, most recently, Bourne Supremacy director Paul Greengrass. In 2005, Greengrass was deep into preproduction on a present-day, war-on-terror-themed adaptation by David Hayter (X-Men), when a regime change at Paramount Pictures led to its demise. Enter Warner Bros., which acquired the rights in late 2005. Snyder was working on 300 for the studio at the time, and he was alarmed when he heard about the deal.

After some soul-searching, his fear of seeing a bad Watchmen movie trumped his fear of trying to make a great one. ''They were going to do it anyway,'' he says. ''And that made me nervous.'' Over many months, and many meetings, Snyder persuaded Warner Bros. to abandon the Greengrass/Hayter script and hew as faithfully as possible to the comic. The key battles: retaining the '80s milieu, keeping Richard Nixon (Moore did consider using an era-appropriate Ronald Reagan, but worried it would alienate American readers), and preserving the villain-doesn't-pay-for-his-crimes climax.

''It was clear that Zack felt an intense obligation to the fans and the book,'' says Warner Bros. Picture Group president Jeff Robinov. ''There was definitely a conversation about the best way to make it contemporary and relevant to today. Zack felt the best way was to go back to the roots of the novel.''

It didn't hurt Snyder's case that by then 300 — another R-rated movie based on a hardcore graphic novel — was making a killing at the box office. ''Little by little, we got the studio on board,'' says Deborah Snyder, the director's producer, chief collaborator, and wife. ''300 really helped. It created a level of trust in Zack's vision.''

Also, Snyder explains casting younger actors (http://www.superherohype.com/news/watchmennews.php?id=6086):

He said they wanted to cast real actors, not get a cast for marketing reasons, much like 300. He said he cast younger actors because there's a lot of flashbacks in the graphic novel and he didn't want to hire two actors for the parts. Instead he got actors in the middle to age them up and down depending on what's happening.

See? Told ya so.

I expect most of the footage from that teaser is from flashbacks.

[The Dream Master]

I've just watched the trailer again for the first time with the ability to pause and examine things closely, and I'd have to say that the news about the actors being aged up is encouraging, with the exception of one thing from the trailer: Ozymandias. There's one shot of him that is definitely not from flashbacks, and the actor looks too young to be playing someone who is 45 years old. This nitpick aside, however, I'm stoked by what I've been reading; I'm especially glad that Snyder insisted on keeping the original ending intact, as, without it, you lose the entire point of Watchmen. I hope he takes it to the extreme and makes the every last page the final scene in the film as well, as it's equally important.

The only real concerns I have is the running time because I fear the final product will be missing a ton of smaller, minor characters (like the news stand owner, Rorschach's pychologist, the New Frontersmen workers, etc.), and the end will suffer dramatically if that happens. The story for this could easily fit into two films, and possibly three, so I'm really concerned by what's going to get dropped here. Still, I'm pumped for it big time. This might be my most anticipated release of 2009.

[Dogmatic Insanity]

To me, this isn't some minor thing, like "Oh, Rorschach's mask doesn't move around like it does in the comic!"

I can't tell if you are using a general complaint, but Rorschach's mask DOES move. You can see it in the trailer, on his close up near the end, and on the official site.

[Just Jeans]

I can't tell if you are using a general complaint, but Rorschach's mask DOES move. You can see it in the trailer, on his close up near the end, and on the official site.

Yeah, I noticed that a couple of nights ago too, when watching the trailer in HD MOV format. The blotching on the mask definitely alters itself.

[ZPowers]

I can't tell if you are using a general complaint, but Rorschach's mask DOES move. You can see it in the trailer, on his close up near the end, and on the official site.

No, I haven't heard about the mask one way or another (the other day I noticed it looked different in different shots, though), it's just something that wouldn't effect anything if they didn't do it, but would draw a lot of complaints for no real good reason.

Although I'm still hesitant about one or two cast members (mostly Ozymandias and Silk Spectre), I reread Watchmen recently and saw the teaser again and I could place almost every shot of action to some part in the book, so I feel better about it now that it doesn't look like they necessarily altered it to make it too action-oriented.

[Monkey]

I've considered buying the Watchmen graphic novel for several years. I've heard nothing but rave reviews, and the plot is intriguing.

The trailer was amazing. This is the only movie I'm looking forward to next year.

I don't want to read the graphic novel and be disappointed by the movie. Either way, I have to experience one before the other... so fuck it. I'm getting the graphic novel next week and reading it. I'm going to watch the movie regardless.

Good times.

[Killa Pimp]

I've considered buying the Watchmen graphic novel for several years. I've heard nothing but rave reviews, and the plot is intriguing.

The trailer was amazing. This is the only movie I'm looking forward to next year.

I don't want to read the graphic novel and be disappointed by the movie. Either way, I have to experience one before the other... so fuck it. I'm getting the graphic novel next week and reading it. I'm going to watch the movie regardless.

Good times.

Go ahead and enjoy it.



I read this back in the late 80's when it came out-
It was bi-monthly so it was 2 years for a payoff-- but it was great and actually came out on time.
it was awesome... i have the 12 issue limited series and the special edition graphic novel-

i read it every couple of years and i am going to start again around Xmas-

You pick up something new every time you read it.
Great story .

[The Dream Master]

I'm amazed by how much I pick up everytime I re-read it. This is certainly one of the most densely layered pieces of fiction I've ever encountered. In fact, I'd say it pretty much demands at least one re-reading.

[Just Jeans]

Here's some stuff I thought interesting. First, a description of the trailer shown at Comic-Con:

The trailer opens with a shot of Rorschach, then cuts to a giant Dr Manhattan blasting apart Vietnamese soldiers. We then see Rorshach searching an apartment. His morphing mask gets a lot of play. We also see the Comedian's armor, a plain-clothes Night Owl collapsing in sorrow. And a flashback of the heroes in better days.Ozymandias's fortress rises from the desert, Night Owl and Silk Spectre kiss in front of a mushroom cloud, Time pieces feature heavily, we see the Owl Jet in flight, and the clip ends with the Comedian falling from a window, the bloodied Smiley falling after him.

And second:

Corgan talks 'Watchmen' music (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/herocomplex/2008/07/corghan-talks-w.html)

One of the most talked about trailers to emerge from last weekend’s Comic-Con convention in San Diego was the teaser for “Watchmen.” Now all over YouTube (and playing nationwide in theaters before blockbusters such as “The Dark Knight”), the trailer features a melancholy, semi-obscure Smashing Pumpkins song titled “The Beginning Is the End Is the Beginning” (not to be confused with the more upbeat “rock” version, “The End Is the Beginning Is the End” that appeared over the closing credits of “Batman & Robin“).

Confused yet?

So are thousands of fans of the storied graphic novel. According to Zack Snyder, who directed “Watchmen” (and “300″), the song will not appear in the film. The director says he chose the song for the mood.

Regardless, the response toward the trailer has been massive online — earning accolades (and a huge iTunes sales spike for the Pumpkins) for how the dark lyrical content and feel of the song meshes with the stunning visuals from the forthcoming film.

We were curious what Smashing Pumpkins frontman Billy Corgan thought of the attention from both old and new fans (many of whom have been unable to identify Corgan’s signature growl in the tune from just watching the trailer) regarding the resurrection of “The Beginning Is the End Is the Beginning.”

According to Corgan, who responded to questions by e-mail, he has already asked if the band can release the song as a video. More thoughts on the song from the Pumpkins ringleader after the jump.

Are you surprised at the reaction online from some young “Watchmen” fans who have never heard “The Beginning Is the End Is the Beginning,” let alone the Smashing Pumpkins?

Honestly, I don’t really keep up on what the world is doing or saying anymore. The word on the street seems to be, from what my friends tell me, that the use of the song in the trailer is intriguing to them and has created some excitement around it.

What has been Smashing Pumpkins fan reaction toward the use of the song in the trailer?

My fans seem to be confused when the outside world appreciates our work, so I can only imagine this terrifies them.

What are your personal thoughts on “Watchmen?”

Before this I’d never heard of the “Watchmen” series, but from what I’ve seen it looks very interesting.

Who approached you to use the song and do you think it’s a good fit?

I just got a call one day asking if I was cool with it, and I was surprised because it’s a version of that song that never seemed to get any notice. Months before the trailer was released I kept hearing from friends in the movie business that they loved how the song worked with the images from the movie. I love the way it’s used in the trailer. I’ve asked the movie people if it’s possible we could release it as a music video. Still waiting on that one. Certainly the massive jump in on-line sales seems to indicate it might be worth it for us and for the movie.

Finally, when can we expect to hear “G.L.O.W.” or any other new SP material?

Just finished recording “G.L.O.W.” in Memphis at the famed Ardent Studios and hope to release it in early September. We feel we have finally turned the corner with these last 2 releases (“American Gothic” and “G.L.O.W.” to come) where it’s starting to feel like our music again, and not theirs, whoever “they” might be. Have plans to start recording a new multi-year, multi-release concept album by the end of this year. It will be very trippy and hopefully unique, and we’ll probably keep putting out singles here.

I love the idea of a music video for The Beginning is the End is the Beginning being released to footage from Watchmen. That song really does fit that trailer perfectly. It's a shame that Snyder isn't planning to use it in the film.

[The Dream Master]

Have plans to start recording a new multi-year, multi-release concept album by the end of this year. It will be very trippy and hopefully unique, and we’ll probably keep putting out singles here.

:drool:

Oh, wait, this is the Watchmen thread. Carry on. :)

[Just Jeans]

Hey, Brett -- any chance you could give me a line on which Smashing Pumpkin albums are the best? I've got both The End is the Beginning is the End and The Beginning is the End is the Beginning. I really like both songs, but I think I prefer the second version (the one used in the Watchmen trailer). Did they do more songs like that?

[The Dream Master]

Those songs came during their transition from what most people call their "traditional" alternative sound (even though their style had varied a ton up to that point) to their more low key style on Adore, which is my favorite album by them. If you're looking for low-key, atmospheric music, it doesn't get much better than that. That said, you really also need Mellon Collie and the Infinite Sadness as well. Also, check out a song called "Eye," a song they did for the Lost Highway soundtrack from the same era.

[Cody]

That trailer is a thing of beauty.

[Just Jeans]

Troof, Cody.

[i am SAW]

New Posters,

1 (http://www.impawards.com/2009/watchmen_ver6.html) 2 (http://www.impawards.com/2009/watchmen_ver7.html) 3 (http://www.impawards.com/2009/watchmen_ver5.html) 4 (http://www.impawards.com/2009/watchmen_ver4.html) 5 (http://www.impawards.com/2009/watchmen_ver3.html) 6 (http://www.impawards.com/2009/watchmen_ver2.html) 7 (http://www.impawards.com/2009/watchmen.html)

[The Dream Master]

Those are pretty much exactly the same as the ads for the original graphic novel. Doep.

[Lance Lives]

"Check out the blue butt on that"
"Yeah, he must work out..."

I'm getting kind of excited about this flick, I was a little against it, but I hope it does it justice. I've been re-reading the novel this week.

[Just Jeans]

You know, the further I read into Watchmen (I'm just starting Chapter VI or VII, I forget which) the more I wonder why some fans have reacted so negatively against the film trailer. Practically everything in the trailer has occurred through these first six chapters (although there is some stuff that seems to be extended -- like Silk Spectre actually going into the burning building).

As far as the cast is concerned, the only actor who looks prettier than he probably should in the film is the guy playing Veidt. Otherwise, I think the rest of the cast look good.

[Darth Sinister]

There will always be those who complain because the series is on such a high pedestal, that anything less than perfection is unacceptable. They also complain because they fear that it won't live up to their hype and that too many people will be confused by the story, after seeing a trailer which paints a different picture from the finished product.

[Alex DeLarge]

You know, the further I read into Watchmen (I'm just starting Chapter VI or VII, I forget which) the more I wonder why some fans have reacted so negatively against the film trailer. Practically everything in the trailer has occurred through these first six chapters (although there is some stuff that seems to be extended -- like Silk Spectre actually going into the burning building).

As far as the cast is concerned, the only actor who looks prettier than he probably should in the film is the guy playing Veidt. Otherwise, I think the rest of the cast look good.

Exactly! The other day, I went by shot-by-shot and every single scene in the trailer is in the book except, mysteriously, the one of Nite Owl on the ground outside presumably Karnak, screaming.

[Just Jeans]

I wouldn't say it's shot-for-shot -- Snyder certainly doesn't seem to follow the panels as closely as he did in 300 -- but the basic idea of each scene is completely intact. The shot of Silk Spectre falling through the ceiling into a burning corridor appears to be an embellishment of the moment in the book where she goes into the burning building to force someone to leave, but it's not that much different from what's in the book.

There are a couple of things with Doctor Manhattan that I've not seen in the book yet -- the bit where Jon's screaming skeleton falls against the wall and explodes into energy, which knocks the janitor off his feet, isn't in the book (but there is a scene quite a bit like it where a chef sees Jon's skeleton in the kitchen.) Also, the shot of the duplicates combining isn't in the book. We see Jon split into three bodies prior to Laurie walking out on him, but we never see them converge.

Out of interest -- is the shot of Jon and Laurie in that crystal temple at the end of the trailer supposed to be set on the surface of Mars?

mysteriously, the one of Nite Owl on the ground outside presumably Karnak, screaming.

Snyder said that while the ending is in tact, the final set-piece in the film has been altered. Could be that shot is from the altered set-piece?

Bit of random here -- I've just noticed a detail in the film that I don't think is in the book: the can of hairspray that Rorschach uses to set the police officer on fire has Veidt's name stenciled on it.

[Dogmatic Insanity]

Out of interest -- is the shot of Jon and Laurie in that crystal temple at the end of the trailer supposed to be set on the surface of Mars?


Yep.

Spoilers for those that haven't finished the novel... Another little detail that's different is the fact that in the shot of the Comedian on the fron of the Owlship, he's not wearing his leather "gimp" mask that he wore after getting his face scarred up. I know he's scarred in the film, I guess they just dropped that aspect.

The other day, I went by shot-by-shot and every single scene in the trailer is in the book except, mysteriously, the one of Nite Owl on the ground outside presumably Karnak, screaming.

Ending spoilage! Definately do NOT highlight this unless you've read the book. I'm very seriously.

Isn't that outside of Veidt's Antarctic fortress when Manhattan vaporizes Rorschach?

[jayTL]

Yep.

Spoilers for those that haven't finished the novel... Another little detail that's different is the fact that in the shot of the Comedian on the fron of the Owlship, he's not wearing his leather "gimp" mask that he wore after getting his face scarred up. I know he's scarred in the film, I guess they just dropped that aspect.



Ending spoilage! Definately do NOT highlight this unless you've read the book. I'm very seriously.

Isn't that outside of Veidt's Antarctic fortress when Manhattan vaporizes Rorschach?

But I dont think Night Owl was there for that...maybe extended scene?

[Cody]

Kevin Smith (http://blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendID=63831867&blogID=424468543)

I saw "Watchmen." It's fucking astounding. The Non-Disclosure Agreement I signed prevents me from saying much, but I can spout the following with complete joygasmic enthusiasm: Snyder and Co. have pulled it off.

Remember that feeling of watching "Sin City" on the big screen and being blown away by what a faithful translation of the source material it was, in terms of both content and visuals? Triple that, and you'll come close to watching "Watchmen." Even Alan Moore might be surprised at how close the movie is to the book. March can't come soon enough.

[Just Jeans]

Given how hardcore Smith is on comic books, that blurb is a good sign.

Anyhoo, I've more or less finished Chapter VIII. The beating to death of Hollis Mason is perhaps the most disturbing thing I've read in a work of fiction in a long time. I can't put my finger on why it disturbed me so deeply, but I had to put the book down and walk away.

[Just Jeans]

Sort of unexpected news, at least to me.

Judge refuses to drop 20th Century Fox lawsuit. (http://movies.ign.com/articles/899/899767p1.html)

August 18, 2008 - 20th Century Fox sued Warner Bros. in February over the latter's right to make and distribute the Watchmen movie, which had a long development history in Hollywood including a spell at Fox. On Friday, a federal judge reportedly refused to dismiss Fox's suit as requested in a motion filed by Warners. What does this mean exactly for the highly anticipated film adaptation of the Alan Moore-Dave Gibbons graphic novel, which is one of Warners' biggest 2009 releases?

As a Fox source for Deadline Hollywood Daily explained, "In essence, the Judge appears to conclude that Fox retained distribution rights in Watchmen through the 1991 Largo quit claim, and he concludes that, under the 1994 turnaround, producer Larry Gordon acquired an option to acquire Fox's remaining interest in Watchmen that was never exercised, thereby leaving Fox with its rights under the 1994 agreement."

While the judge's determination could change as the suit proceeds, he is basically siding with Fox's position right now. Does this mean Fox could actually derail Warners' plans for Watchmen? Or is it all just about finding the right price to settle on?

[Jack Bauer]

Damn you Tom Rothman and 20th Century Fox!!!!!

You know what would happen if 20th Century Fox was in charge of Watchmen? It'll be PG-13. I've never seen a major studio release that was a hard R from Fox as of late, excusing AVP:R I think.

[El Rooto]

What about Hitman?

[The Dream Master]

I honestly don't think that this will affect the film at all; I think WB and Fox will eventually settle out of court, and Watchmen will be out when it's supposed to be. This was actually in the news way back at the beginning of production, so it would seem to me that WB wasn't afraid of any repercussions back then.

[Jack Bauer]

What about Hitman?
That was still cut down, and wasn't even approved by Gans.

[The One and Only]

Other than AVP:R, Fox also released The Hills Have Eyes II, which was a very hard "R". Then there was last week's Mirrors which you can add to the list.

[Sean [The Wildcard]]

I think things will be settled out in the long run, and WATCHMEN will be released when it's scheduled to be.

Because Damn... I wanna see this in IMAX after seeing the Teaser in IMAX in front of TDK.

:D

[Monkey]

I just finished the book.

It's hard to describe. Very complex, so many things going at once (side-stories, sub-plots). The sheer amount of twists and surprises... you really need to pay attention. Thought about getting this for my nephew, but decided against it as most of its meaning will fly right past him at this stage of his young life.

I find Rohrschach's statement to Moloch quite ironic... "Sorry about mess. Can't make omelette without breaking (a) few eggs."

Didn't expect such a heavy read. The story deserves a movie; it begs to be told to a much wider audience. Had it not been for the trailer, I might have gone another 20 years without reading Watchmen.

Good times.

[FinalBeyond]

Just saw the trailer in IMAX before Dark Knight. Wasn't expecting it at all, blown away. I was sort of shaking in my seat, and by the end of it, seeing the scenes on Mars... I'd have to say it's the closest I've come to a religious experience. :p

Also, Monkey, that's perhaps the best thing that this film can do. Watchmen truly deserves to be read, and even if the movie stinks (which I highly doubt), at least more people will give it the attention it deserves.

[Monkey]

...Also, Monkey, that's perhaps the best thing that this film can do. Watchmen truly deserves to be read, and even if the movie stinks (which I highly doubt), at least more people will give it the attention it deserves.
Exactly.

I'd rather see Watchmen made into a mini-series on television... if only the networks could somehow elevate the production quality of your typical mini-series and make them more profitable. There's enough content to fill 10-12 hours of good storytelling (not bloated with filler).

...but glad to get what we're getting. Movie looks spectacular. You don't see that on TV, and the IMAX experience has no substitute.

Finally, the graphic novel is cheap (comparitively speaking). Full-color, 360+ pages for 20 bucks.

[Jack Bauer]

One of the purists will know this, but why is Rorschach such an angry person? Is he suppose to represent the obsess or something? Given how I never read the book though I have seen pages of it and know of Moore's work I am leaning towards Rorschach being the "face" of the 1980s.

[Uncle Hugo]

One of the purists will know this, but why is Rorschach such an angry person? Is he suppose to represent the obsess or something? Given how I never read the book though I have seen pages of it and know of Moore's work I am leaning towards Rorschach being the "face" of the 1980s.

Rorschach is an extreme personality due to his upbringing, his mother was a teenage whore who beat him and abused him, this instills a violent hatred for criminals, and he starts his tenure as Rorschach after the murder of Kitty Genovese, whom he thought he met once. But the real turning point in his Rorschach persona was a tragic case involving a six year old girl.

Alan Moore says Rorschach is an extremely right-wing person who sees the world in black and white, there is good, and there is evil, and evil must be violently punished.

[Jack Bauer]

Thanks Hugo.

[Nick Michalak]

The trailer has me extremely fascinated with this film. I never read the graphic novel, but I've done general research on "Watchmen." It has me very intrigued. Makes my creativity run rampant with such a beautiful piece of inspiration. I'll certainly be keeping my eyes on this film. The whole lawsuit bullshit with FOX sucks, but hey, FOX sucks anyway. They botch up all of their comic franchises (which were Marvel properties), and now, want to cash in on Warners & DC's potential success. Obviously, as I'm sure someone's probably noted, they could've filed this suit before the start of production, but instead, they want to cash an easy paycheck. They'll get a percentage of the profits if this thing follows through.

-NJM

[Cody]

Studio War Involving ‘Watchmen’ Heats Up (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/30/movies/30watc.html?_r=2&oref=slogin&oref=slogin)

The legal brawl over “Watchmen” is about to get rougher.

Lawyers for Warner Brothers, which has already shot a movie of this graphic novel about the seamier side of superhero life, and lawyers for 20th Century Fox, which claims it owns the rights to the material, laid plans for a frenzied fight in a joint report submitted to the federal court here on Friday.

Fox has said it will seek an injunction blocking Warner’s planned release of the film next March. Warner has argued that Fox should not be allowed to stop the movie, after standing by while Warner and its partners on the film, Paramount Pictures and Legendary Pictures, spent more than $100 million on the production, directed by Zack Snyder (“300”).

In a summary of its position in Friday’s report, Warner said Fox “sat silently” as one of the producers of “Watchmen,” Lawrence Gordon, took the project “to studio after studio with Fox’s express knowledge.”

Fox, which filed a lawsuit in February, has claimed in its own filings that Mr. Gordon did not keep the studio apprised of his plans, as required by a 1994 agreement. That deal granted Mr. Gordon rights to “Watchmen” in “turnaround” — an industry term for arrangements under which producers can move a project from one studio to another under certain conditions.

In Warner’s version of events, Mr. Gordon, who is not named as a defendant in the Fox suit, actually offered the project to Fox in 2005, shortly before bringing it to Warner after years of trying to make the movie with Paramount. “Fox simply rejected it,” Warner said in the Friday filing.

On Friday Warner said Fox had gone so far as to grant it rights to the title “Watchmen,” which Fox had earlier registered with the Motion Picture Association of America.

Fox, moreover, was paid $320,000 by one of Mr. Gordon’s companies for rights to “Watchmen” as early as 1991, Warner lawyers said in the report. Fox has said that agreement was superseded by a later deal, under which Mr. Gordon was supposed to deliver a much larger buyout price that has never been paid.

The report also outlined conflicting requests for a trial date: as early as next June, if Fox has its way, or April, if Warner prevails.

Friday’s filing makes it clear that not only Mr. Gordon, but also Paramount, Legendary and even Universal Pictures can expect to be drawn into the fray. Universal had tried to make a version of the film in 2001, before Paramount took over. And though Paramount dropped its plans for the movie, it became involved as a partner when Warner teamed up with the director Mr. Snyder in the wake of the box office success of “300.”

[Just Jeans]

Jesus, this is turning into a real legal cluster fuck.

[MaC]

I had read somewhere that Watchmen wasn't really polling well. But that was before the teaser and the comic-con stuff. I'm curious to see how this plays out, after TDK's over-performance this year I can't imagine them wanting to give up any money to make next year look even worse by comparison. They have Harry Potter since they pushed it back, but I'm not sure what else.

This isn't something I'm particularly interested in seeing, and it's already got more people reading the Watchmen, which is a fantastic thing and more then enough for me. So now I'm just interested in watching how this all plays out.

[The One and Only]

And with this lawsuit, FOX pisses away that last iota of fan cred it had.

[Just Jeans]

Just finished the book. Excellent read, I can't wait to see the film.

You know, the book draws a difficult moral line. On the one hand, Veidt strikes me as a complete and utter nut case. But on the other hand, he scheme did unify the world and prevent nuclear holocaust.

I can't bring myself to agree with what he did, but neither can I deny that the crazy son of a bitch pulled it off. It leaves one feeling very morally ambiguous. And I don't know how to feel about the fact that Rorschach's journal has the potential to undo the unification of nations. After everything that's been sacrificed to bring about peace, do you really want to risk it?

Isn't that outside of Veidt's Antarctic fortress when Manhattan vaporizes Rorschach?

It might go down like that in the film, but in the book Dan and Laurie are making love inside Karnak when Jon kills Rorschach. The story gives no indication as to whether or not Dan is ever made aware of what happens to Rorschach.

[Darth Sinister]

You also have to factor in what Jon says to Adrian about whether or not he did right. Jon indicates that it might not last as long as he thinks it will. Whether Rorschach's journal is ever published or people believe it, sooner or later mankind will go to war again.

[CosmoBubba]

You know, the book draws a difficult moral line. On the one hand, Veidt strikes me as a complete and utter nut case. But on the other hand, he scheme did unify the world and prevent nuclear holocaust.

I can't bring myself to agree with what he did, but neither can I deny that the crazy son of a bitch pulled it off. It leaves one feeling very morally ambiguous. And I don't know how to feel about the fact that Rorschach's journal has the potential to undo the unification of nations. After everything that's been sacrificed to bring about peace, do you really want to risk it?

What strikes me as oddly humorous about it is the dichotomy of Rorschach's disgust with Veidt's idea, in spite of him viewing Harry Truman as a role model. Rorschach says at one point that he respects Truman because he ended World War 2 and brought about peace, even if he had to green-light the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings to do it. Even if Veidt was a thundering loony with delusions of grandeur, he was essentially dropping one huge, frightfully ugly bomb on New York City so we could avoid World War 3 and achieve peace between America and Russia.

[Just Jeans]

Rorschach was a walking talking contradiction. At the beginning of the book, his journal indicates that he would stand and watch the world choke on its own filth, but in the end he takes a bizarre moral high ground in regard to Veidt's plan. It's hard to figure out just where the hell he's coming from.

[Cody]

Alan Moore still says "Fuck that (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/herocomplex/2008/09/alan-moore-on-w.html)"

For the record, Alan Moore has not softened his view on Hollywood nor its plan to bring his classic graphic novel "Watchmen" to the screen next March.

"I find film in its modern form to be quite bullying," Moore told me during an hour-long phone call from his home in England. "It spoon-feeds us, which has the effect of watering down our collective cultural imagination. It is as if we are freshly hatched birds looking up with our mouths open waiting for Hollywood to feed us more regurgitated worms. The 'Watchmen' film sounds like more regurgitated worms. I for one am sick of worms. Can't we get something else? Perhaps some takeout? Even Chinese worms would be a nice change."

Moore has no intention of seeing the film and, in fact, he hints that he has put a magical curse on the entire endeavor.

"Will the film even be coming out? There are these legal problems now, which I find wonderfully ironic. Perhaps it's been cursed from afar, from England. And I can tell you that I will also be spitting venom all over it for months to come."

Moore said all that with more mischievous glee than true malice, but I know it will still pain "Watchmen" director Zack Snyder when he reads it. The director of "300" absolutely adores the work of Moore and has been laboring intensely to bring "Watchmen" to the screen with faithful sophistication. But I don't think there's any way to win Moore over, he simply detests Hollywood. Moore said he has never watched any of the film adaptations of his comics creations (which have included "V for Vendetta," "From Hell," "Constantine" and "The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen") and that he believes "Watchmen" is "inherently unfilmable."

[Uncle Hugo]

You tell them Moore! :bang:

[Cody]

AICN's Moriarty got to see 30 minutes of the movie and talks about it here (http://www.aintitcool.com/node/38594).

I also spent a good chunk of time chatting with Snyder, and more than anything, he seems pleased. The film’s running 2 hours and 43 minutes right now without closing credits, and he doesn’t feel like he’s really had to sacrifice anything to get it to that length. At most, a director’s extended cut might add 20 minutes or so to that time, and the BLACK FREIGHTER material might add in another half-hour at most. The theatrical version might not be the last cut of WATCHMEN we see, but it’s certainly not a compromised edit in any way.

[Spook]

Apparently, a test screening was held in Portland, OR. AICN has links to read some spoilers posted by some users who saw the film. Read at your own risk:

http://www.aintitcool.com/node/38801

Honestly, I think the film looks stellar. Judging by what these guys had to say about the movie, it sounds like it will be amazing! Also, I'm glad that it looks like it will be rated R. Very excited for this film, and 2009 can't get here soon enough! This, along with Friday the 13th, are my two most anticipated movies for '09.

[Just Jeans]

I dunno if I should read the spoilers or not. I've read the graphic novel, but I don't know how close they are in content. What's the general vibe? And how long was the test screening cut of the film?

[Spook]

From what I read, it seemed that the film was around 2 1/2 hours long. I don't really know about the vibe. It wasn't too detailed. I just read about the ending, and that it is (let me paraphrase what the user said) "one of the best superhero movies ever." It sounds like its all kinds of awesome!

[CosmoBubba]

For those of you who are interested, here's the Watchmen footage that aired on Spike TV's Scream Awards...

VAXKtEjaYcI

[Spook]

Flick is looking good, methinks. Hope it turns out well.

BTW, CosmoBubba, love your sig. Twin Peaks is probably the best show I've ever seen. I was actually watching some earlier via the Definitive Gold Box Edition.

[CosmoBubba]

Flick is looking good, methinks. Hope it turns out well.

BTW, CosmoBubba, love your sig. Twin Peaks is probably the best show I've ever seen. I was actually watching some earlier via the Definitive Gold Box Edition.

You know, I've only watched one episode of Twin Peaks in my life. I just happened to stumble upon the line and thought it was funny. :p

And as for the spoilers from the test screening, I'm really hoping that the "frame Dr. Manhattan for nuking cities" ending was a fake ending in order to get people talking. Sometimes changing a book's ending for the movie can turn out fine, like Fight Club. But changing Watchmen's ending? Fuck that bombing shit, I want to see that giant mutant Lovecraftian squid.

[Uncle Hugo]

It looks pretty fuckin good. I can't wait until it comes out.

[Spook]

You know, I've only watched one episode of Twin Peaks in my life. I just happened to stumble upon the line and thought it was funny. :p


Shame. You should watch more.

Yeah, I really do hope that the ending is a fake. I don't like that Dr. Manhattan gets framed for the nukes. I mean, they gotta have the squid. I always felt that having the squid killing all those people was important to the story. I've read that apparently there are, like, 3 different endings, so I hope that is true. Then again, there is no official source for that piece of information, so who knows.

[Just Jeans]

I just went and watched the footage on the telly. This film looks EPIC.

[Sean [The Wildcard]]

The WATCHMEN footage from the Scream Awards last night was AMAZING.

[Just Jeans]

The Scream Awards trailer is up for download in HD:

HD 480P (http://pdl.warnerbros.com/wbmovies/watchmen/video/WatchmenScreamALT_480.mov) (35.2Mb)
HD 720P (http://pdl.warnerbros.com/wbmovies/watchmen/video/WatchmenScreamALT_720.mov) (80.7Mb)
HD 1080P (http://pdl.warnerbros.com/wbmovies/watchmen/video/WatchmenScreamALT_1080.mov) (134Mb)

Fuckin' saved. :eek:

[El Rooto]

The MPAA sez:

Rated R for strong graphic violence, sexuality, nudity and language.

[CharlieBrummel]

http://chud.com/articles/articles/16947/1/THE-STORY-OF-SALLY-JUPITER/Page1.html

[Jigsaw]

I have yet to read the comic, but the movie looks amazing. I'll be sure to read a copy of the comic ASAP, in time for the film.

[Darth Sinister]

Finding the trade will not be difficult. Wal-Mart has been selling it in their book section.

[Sean [The Wildcard]]

BRAND NEW TRAILER NOW ONLINE. (http://movies.yahoo.com/feature/watchmen.html?showVideo=1)

[Just Jeans]

Here they are in various degrees of quality.

HD 480P (http://playlist.yahoo.com/makeplaylist.dll?sid=75031206&sdm=web&pt=rd) (50.4Mb)
HD 720P (http://playlist.yahoo.com/makeplaylist.dll?sid=75031207&sdm=web&pt=rd) (131Mb)
HD 1080P (http://playlist.yahoo.com/makeplaylist.dll?sid=75031208&sdm=web&pt=rd) (184Mb)

Downloading now. Will comment back when done.

[Uncle Hugo]

My face just melted it was so awesome!!

[Just Jeans]

Have they changed the name of The Minutemen to The Watchmen in the film? At one point in the trailer someone says "Watchmen are over", but I don't recall the term Watchmen actually being used in the dialog of the book.

[Cody]

Have they changed the name of The Minutemen to The Watchmen in the film?

I believe so.

[FinalBeyond]

Ok then. So there's Sally standing in costume, smiling, next to the Comedian. So I assume this has to be the attempted formation of the 'Crimebusters'. At which point Captain Metropolis would have been there, even if they were standing all happy go lucky together for the big group shot rather than infighting and disagreeing. Have they dumped the fairly accurate script that's been lauded about, and just gone back to the Sam Hamm draft where they go and fight terrorists in the Statue of Liberty?

[CosmoBubba]

Though one could argue that perhaps they replaced the word "Minutemen" with "Watchmen" just for the trailer so the uninitiated wouldn't get confused.

[Just Jeans]

Have they dumped the fairly accurate script that's been lauded about, and just gone back to the Sam Hamm draft where they go and fight terrorists in the Statue of Liberty?

Nope, same script. And those who've seen it have talked really good about how accurate it is, despite some changes.
ADDED:
This is a bit of a random observation, but you can tell work has been done on even the scenes that were in the original trailer that ran before The Dark Knight. I've seen that trailer enough over the months to notice right away that some things have been tweaked.

For example, when the Owl Ship comes up out of the river, the scene looks noticeably different. In the original trailer there's less water exploding around the ship and the lighting is more neutral (whereas in the new trailer, it's blue).

Original Trailer:
http://i376.photobucket.com/albums/oo201/JeansieWho/F13thForum/OwlShip01.gif

New Trailer:
http://i376.photobucket.com/albums/oo201/JeansieWho/F13thForum/OwlShip02.gif

Like I said, a random observation. But it makes me wonder what else might be different in the finished film.

[Nick Michalak]

The new trailer doesn't do much for me. Sure, the opening bits are good, and it's nice to see the plot somewhat covered. Though, it doesn't have as much of an epic feeling to it. Plus, the voice over is not to my liking. If people don't like Christian Bale's gravelly Bat-voice, this is no better. The audio levels are too high. Granted, I'm very green when it comes to Watchmen, but the quality of the voice sounds more accustomed to a soft, whispery style. Furthermore, the ambiance of it sounds flat. Sounds like ADR to me.

-NJM

[Just Jeans]

Though, it doesn't have as much of an epic feeling to it.

It isn't really a very epic book. It's actually a very intimate, character-driven story.

After reading the book, I decided the initial teaser was somewhat misleading, because while most everything in that teaser does occur in the book, it's really not all that action heavy.

Plus, the voice over is not to my liking. If people don't like Christian Bale's gravelly Bat-voice, this is no better.

I really dislike Bale's gravelly Batman voice, but I love Jackie Earle Haley's Rorschach voice. That's almost exactly how I imagined him sounding in the book.

And from a character standpoint, it's the polar opposite of what Bale's Bruce Wayne is trying to accomplish. Wayne gets gravelly to try and hide his identity, whereas Walter Kovacs is Rorschach; when the police strip him of his mask, he screams hysterically "Give me back my face!"

The only character that sounds way different from what I expected is Dr. Manhattan. He's much more soft spoken in the trailer than how I imagined him in my head. I thought he'd have a more baritone voice.

Also, Veidt appears to have a really bizarre accent that I can't quite place.
ADDED:
At which point Captain Metropolis would have been there...

I did some digging, Final, and found a picture here (http://img58.imageshack.us/img58/5286/mmpicom0.jpg) that has Captain Metropolis in it. Whether he plays any sort of major role in the film remains unclear -- I think it's unlikely, coz he only gets a couple of mentions in the book -- but they obviously didn't drop him from the back story. There may have even been scenes filmed that feature him, but were cut during the required editing for time.

It's also possible that Captain Metropolis is the one taking the photo of the rest of Crimebusters in the trailer.

[Jack Bauer]

Comedian looks like a damn pimp in that pic for some reason.

[Just Jeans]

I love how beautifully retro those 1940s costumes are.

[Cody]

MinuteWatchBusters (http://chud.com/articles/articles/17048/1/ZACK-SNYDER-EXPLAINS-WHO-THESE-quotWATCHMENquot-ARE/Page1.html)

In the graphic novel Watchmen there are two superhero teams. Neither is called The Watchmen. One, from the 1940s, is called The Minutemen. A second, still-born team from the 60s, is called The Crimebusters. I'd have to go back to the book and do a real analysis, but I don't think the word Watchmen (unless it's in the job title 'night watchman') is spoken by any character in the original. It is spray-painted on walls, though - during the 70s, when the public has turned on the masked vigilantes, 'Who Watches the Watchmen' (the English translation of 'Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?', a quote by the Roman poet Juvenal).

So with that history lesson in mind, some fans of the comic were perplexed when, at two different points in the latest trailer for the movie version, it sounded like people were referring to 'Watchmen' as a group. The dialogue bits in question sound weird, almost like they're clipped or laid in over real dialogue.

Also, I knew that Zack Snyder had wrestled with whether or not to call The Minutemen The Minutemen, but as of the screening of twenty minutes of footage in LA last month, the team bore their original name. Seeking answers, I went right to the man himself. Here's what he had to say:

"The original [team] we called the Minutemen, as per the graphic novel. We never exactly say whether or not in the more modern version we call them the Watchmen/Crimebusters. We loosely called them Watchmen as more of a the symbolic name, more than anything else."

Hrmm, as Rorschach might say. It sounds from that statement like 'Watchmen' isn't really being used in the film, or at least not being used in a big way. At this point, liking so much of what I've seen of Snyder's work on this film - and how generally uncompromising it is - I'm okay with a minor deviation like this (despite feeling that the deviation is actually major in a thematic way) simply because you have to make a concession or two towards the uninitiated audience.

[Cody]

The 3 minutes of footage shown at Comic-Con are now available on iTunes (http://itunes.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewMovie?id=296582410&s=143441)

[Boiler Room Brawler]

I am still amazed at how much the sales of the GN have picked up over the past several months.

It's a good thing though...

[Cody]

Judge Says Fox Owns Rights to a Warner Movie (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/25/business/media/25fox.html?_r=3)

In a surprise ruling, a federal judge in Los Angeles said he intended to grant 20th Century Fox’s claim that it owns a copyright interest in the “Watchmen,” a movie shot by Warner Brothers and Legendary Pictures and set for release in March.

The decision was disclosed in a five-page written order issued on Wednesday. Gary A. Feess, a judge in the United States District Court for Central California, said he would provide a more detailed order soon.

Fox has been seeking to prevent Warner from releasing the film. The superhero adventure, based on the “Watchmen” graphic novel, is being directed by Zack Snyder (who also directed “300”) and has shaped up as one of most eagerly anticipated releases for next year.

A Warner spokesman, Scott Rowe, declined to comment on the ruling and the studio’s plans.

At an earlier hearing, the judge said he believed that issues in the case could be settled only at a trial, which was scheduled for late January. On Wednesday, however, Judge Feess said he had reconsidered and concluded that Fox should prevail on crucial issues.

“Fox owns a copyright interest consisting of, at the very least, the right to distribute the ‘Watchmen’ motion picture,” the ruling said.

Fox acquired rights to the “Watchmen” graphic novel in the late 1980s for the producer Lawrence Gordon, but eventually dropped its own plan to make a movie from its story, about the underside of life for superbeings.

Mr. Gordon later pursued the project with Universal Pictures, and then with Paramount Pictures, before shooting it with Warner and Legendary under an arrangement that allows Paramount to distribute the film abroad.

In ruling on Wednesday, Judge Feess advised both Fox and Warner to look toward a settlement or an appeal.

“The parties may wish to turn their efforts from preparing for trial to negotiating a resolution of this dispute or positioning the case for review,” he said.

[The Dream Master]

I can't say I saw that one coming. Should be interesting to see how this plays out.

[Nick Michalak]

Probably the best course of action would be to cut Fox in on the profits. Might not be Warner's favored choice, but they don't want Fox stalling the film's release. If they're stuck with this ruling, ultimately, then there's little point in dragging this conflict out further. Slap their logo at he beginning next to the Warners, Legendary, and DC ones, and call it a day.

-NJM

[Cody]

Japanese trailer... for now...

3WNETpX2Jd0

[Just Jeans]

Was that the Comedian on the Grassy Knoll? :eek:

[Jack Bauer]

That he was Jeans. The Comedian was everywhere Jeans... Everywhere.

[Just Jeans]

Well that just upgrades him from Douche Bag to Serious Douche Bag.

[Jack Bauer]

Actually Jeans he would be a Serious Douche Bag with 00 status and License to Kill.

[Uncle Hugo]

The Comedian hardly gives a shit about anything, just an amoral merc who'll ally himself with any political faction that'll grant him the greatest license.

Ozymandias on the other hand....

[Darth Sinister]

According to what's suggested in the comics, the Comedian was in Dallas the day Kennedy was killed. All this does is show it.

[The Dream Master]

Settlement Reached? (http://www.comingsoon.net/news/movienews.php?id=51926)

A scheduled Tuesday court conference between Fox and Warner Bros. attorneys has been cancelled, fueling talk that a settlement in the contentious Watchmen case is imminent.

Fox sued Warners last February, saying the studio infringed on its rights to make the comic book adaptation. In December, when federal judge Gary A. Feess ruled that Fox has distribution rights to the film, Warners faced the prospect of having the film's March 6 release blocked.

Settlement talks between the two sides became serious over the weekend and continued to heat up yesterday.

A settlement could cost Warners tens of millions of dollars as Fox is reportedly asking for upfront fees as well as a percentage of the back-end.

[Just Jeans]

A settlement could cost Warners tens of millions of dollars as Fox is reportedly asking for upfront fees as well as a percentage of the back-end.

It sounds like FOX wants to have their cake and eat it too.

[The Dream Master]

Well, if I understand the situation correctly, WB is lucky that Fox is even willing to settle at all because someone at the WB legal department screwed up royally by allowing this to even go into production.

[Just Jeans]

I'm betting it's because FOX knows if they get into a lengthy legal battle, momentum will die and the movie is liable to make significantly less than it would if it lands when it's supposed to.

[The Dream Master]

Yeah, they are being smart by settling, no doubt because if they wanted to get 100% of the profits, it'd require a lengthy delay (as you said), or they'd have to go and make their own production, which would take even longer. I'm willing to bet that whatever cut Fox gets will actually result in them making more of a profit than they would in either of those cases, considering they didn't have to pay a dime to get this thing produced.

[Nick Michalak]

Warners is probably mainly pushing for a settle soon in case they want to place a Watchmen SuperBowl ad. Granted, they could still do it regardless, but if they're forced to change the release date, it throws the entire marketing campaign and its momentum off.

ADDED:
Matter Supposedly Resolved. (http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/content_display/news/e3i2079648bd224e2c8075db99d3217979a)

-NJM

[Cody]

Some settlement details (http://www.deadlinehollywooddaily.com/finallyfox-warner-paramount-reach-watchmen-settlement/)

I'm hearing that in tonight's settlement, Fox will not be an active distributor of the pic, but will receive up to 8 1/2% gross participation in the pic, and a piece of everything going forward including a sequel or spinoff, and a cash payment upfront including recoupment of its development costs and attorney fees, and god-only-knows what else. Because neither Fox nor Warner Bros would comment on the terms. But Legendary Pictures already owns a chunk of Watchmen. So cutting Fox in now as another partner really plays havoc with Warner Bros' economics on the movie. Studios hate when that happens.

and the press statement

Warner Bros. and Twentieth Century Fox have resolved their dispute regarding the rights to the upcoming motion picture Watchmen in a confidential settlement. Warner Bros acknowledges that Fox acted in good faith in bringing its claims, which were asserted prior to the start of principal photography. Fox acknowledges that Warner Bros. acted in good faith in defending against those claims Warner Bros. and Fox, like all Watchmen fans, look forward with great anticipation to this film's March 6 release in theatres.

[Cody]

Celebrating 10 years of Dr. Manhattan.

nd5cInmK6LQ

[Sean [The Wildcard]]

Wow, that was great. Thanks for posting, Cody!

[Cody]

The Keene Act & You

n5WsciSNVS0

[jasonlives13]

Watchmen is going to be class

[jayTL]

I wonder why my local Imax hasn't posted showtimes yet...While many other (Non-imax) theaters have. :-( I WANT TICKETS!

[nottidelterrore]

This looks like it'll be pretty good.

I remember when I emailed Jackie Earle Haley a few years back about an interview for his role in Maniac Cop 3. No response. This movie is probably why. That & I doubt he'd want to do an interview about something like Maniac Cop 3 when he's working on this movie, which'll be pretty damn good. Haha.

[Spook]

Man, I just finished reading the graphic novel again, just to refresh for the movie. This thing looks absolutely fucking amazing! I'm not even bummed about the changes they did, and I am also very happy about the 2 1/2 hour running time. Looking forward to seeing this many times!

[Lance Lives]

I had no idea the release date was so soon until I saw the trailer in front of Friday the 13th. I started re-reading the graphic novel today in anticipation of it...I'm getting decently excited.

[Apocalypto]

This looks like it'll be pretty good.

I remember when I emailed Jackie Earle Haley a few years back about an interview for his role in Maniac Cop 3. No response. This movie is probably why. That & I doubt he'd want to do an interview about something like Maniac Cop 3 when he's working on this movie, which'll be pretty damn good. Haha.

Who was he in Maniac Cop 3 again?

[nottidelterrore]

He played Frank Jessup, the junkie from the pharmacy.

[CosmoBubba]

sCpl3MLVwUc

[Just Jeans]

I've spotted two media reviews for the film. Neither inspires confidence.

The Hollywood Reporter's Risky Biz Blog has mixed feelings (http://www.riskybusinessblog.com/2009/02/first-watchmen-review.html):

We caught "Watchmen" tonight at the first wide-scale media screening in the U.S., thanks to some admirable help from the Warners publicity department, and while our take is more generous than Kirk Honeycutt's quickly but elegantly composed THR review (he calls it, rather candidly, "nonsense," and predicts "a flop") we can't say we always disagree.

The Zack Snyder-directed story of a gang of superheroes who broke up for reasons as much professional and personal -- in what seems like the tenth superhero movie this year, they were not appreciated by the people they were supposed to rescue, though this time, with some true heinousness on their records, it's justified -- begins with some enjoyably complicated emotional relationships. But they soon give way to the conventions of superhero outlandishness. Nuclear holocaust, evil-corporate plots, world domination -- numerous crises that make the current U.S. economic mess seem like a minor inconvenience are trotted out here, usually with deadly seriousness.

Brooding, dark and far too sincere for its own good (note extended voiceovers about heroism and loneliness, not to mention a whole counterfactual element in which the U.S. wins Vietnam and Richard Nixon is elected to five terms), what could have been a moral fable in superhero clothes (ie, the Dark Knight) is instead a sloppy stew of vigilante justice, techno-musings and pop social philosophy.

And therein lays the problem. The political elements, noble as they may be in a big-budget Hollywood picture, simply don't connect often enough. "V for Vendetta," another nihilism-inflected Alan Moore adaptation that we happen to like a lot more, took the author's 80's-era paranoia and gently (and sometimes not so gently) updated it for Bush-era America. This one spends stretches avoiding that paranoia,but then lurches right into Nixon, Kissinger and Soviet containment in a way that seems not only anachronistic but out of sync with the rest of the movie.

That said, there were scenes that startled -- or bludgeoned -- with violent and colorful spectacle. Watchmen also deserves props for plunging us into a world without insulting us with exposition or traditional linear explanations; even at the beginning, you're shown characters after several decades of friendship and betrayals and are asked to piece together how they got here.

Finally, the opening montage - a Forrest Gump-like integration of the band of superheroes with iconic American moments (all done with a kind of high-gloss and over Dylan's "Times They are A-Changin'"), may be the best pre-credit sequence we've ever seen in a superhero movie.

These are a few of things that made a fan we happened to catch the screening with walk away impressed. And it saved the movie -- at least at times -- from descending into camp. Next week will tell how much these elements rescue the film for ticket buyers.

Bottom Line: Ouch. (http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/film-reviews/film-review-watchmen-1003945726.story) (SPOILER HEAVY)

It's not easy being a comic book hero these days. The poor boys have taken their lumps in "Hancock," "The Dark Knight" and even "Iron Man." Self-doubt, angst and inadequacies plague them. And now comes "Watchmen." Its costumed superheroes, operating in an alternative 1985, are seriously screwed up -- and so is their movie. If anyone were able to make a nine-figure movie, something like "Watchmen" would have been the opening-night film at the Sundance Film Festival.

As stimulating as it was to see the superhero movie enter the realm of crime fiction in "The Dark Knight," "Watchmen" enters into a realm that is both nihilistic and campy. The two make odd companions. The film, directed by Zack Snyder ("300"), will test the limits of superhero movie fans. If you're not already invested in these characters because of the original graphic novel by Alan Moore and Dave Gibbons, nothing this movie does is likely to change that predicament.

That's bad news for Warner Bros. and Paramount, which hold domestic and international rights, respectively. Opening weekends everywhere will reflect the huge anticipation of this much-touted, news-making movie. After that, the boxoffice slide could be drastic.

Snyder and writers David Hayter and Alex Tse never find a reason for those unfamiliar with the graphic novel to care about any of this nonsense. And it is nonsense. When one superhero has to take a Zen break, he does so on Mars. Of course he does.

The film opens with a brutal killing, then moves on to a credit-roll newsreel of sorts that takes us though the Cold War years, landing us in 1985 when Nixon is in his third term, tipping us that we're in an alternate 1985 America, where our superheroes have taken care of Woodward and Bernstein and other forces have evidently taken care of the U.S. Constitution.

The opening murder happens to a character called the Comedian (Jeffrey Dean Morgan), who was once a member of a now-banished team of superheroes called the Masks. Fellow ex-Mask Rorschach (Jackie Earle Haley) -- his mask one of perpetually shifting inkblots -- takes exception to his old colleague's death. He believes the entire society of ex-crime-fighters is being targeted even as the Doomsday Clock -- which charts tensions between the U.S. and the Soviet Union that could lead to nuclear war -- nears midnight.

His investigation and renewed contacts with former buddies fills us in on the complicated histories and problematic psychiatric makeups of these colleagues.

It's all very complicated but not impenetrable. We pick up the relationships quickly enough, but soon realize these back stories owe more to soap operas than to superhero comics.

The thing is, these aren't so much superheroes as ordinary human beings with, let us say, comic-book martial arts prowess. The one exception is Billy Crudup's Jon Osterman, aka Dr. Manhattan, who in true comic book fashion was caught in a laboratory accident that turned him into a scientific freak -- a naked, glowing giant, looking a little bit like the Oscar statuette only with actual genitals -- who has amazing God-like powers.

These powers are being harnessed by an ex-Mask, Matthew Goode's menacing though slightly effeminate industrialist Adrian Veidt.

When Dr. Manhattan's frustrated girlfriend, yet another former Mask, Malin Akerman's Laurie Jupiter, can't get any satisfaction from Dr. M, she turns to the former Nite Owl II, Dan Dreiberg, who seems too much of a good guy to be an actual superhero, but he does miss those midnight prowls.

The point is that these superheroes, before Nixon banned them, were more vigilantes than real heroes, so the question the movie poses is, ah-hah, who is watching these Watchmen? They don't seem too much different from the villains.

Which also means we don't empathize with any of these creatures. And what's with the silly Halloween getups? Did anyone ever buy those Hollywood Boulevard costumes?

The violence is not as bad as early rumors would have one believe. It's still comic book stuff, only with lots of bloody effects and makeup. The real disappointment is that the film does not transport an audience to another world, as "300" did. Nor does the third-rate Chandler-esque narration by Rorschach help.

There is something a little lackadaisical here. The set pieces are surprisingly flat and the characters have little resonance. Fight scenes don't hold a candle to Asian action. Even the digital effects are ho-hum. Armageddon never looked so cheesy.

The film seems to take pride in its darkness, but this is just another failed special effect. Cinematographer Larry Fong and production designer Alex McDowell blend real and digital sets with earthen tones and secondary colors that give a sense of the past. But the stories are too absurd and acting too uneven to convince anyone. The appearances of a waxworks Nixon, Kissinger and other 1980s personalities will only bring hoots from less charitable audiences.

Looks like we have the first real flop of 2009.

[jasonlives13]

Actually these reviewers don't like them because the watchmen is different and lets be honest its not a well known name like batman for example, for someone watching characters they know nothing about, there bound to not really like since they don't know who any of them are

[CosmoBubba]

Actually these reviewers don't like them because the watchmen is different and lets be honest its not a well known name like batman for example, for someone watching characters they know nothing about, there bound to not really like since they don't know who any of them are

Yeah, no kidding. Most of the people I know who haven't read the book have heard it's a superhero movie and asked me if Batman and Superman were in it.

[jasonlives13]

Yeah, no kidding. Most of the people I know who haven't read the book have heard it's a superhero movie and asked me if Batman and Superman were in it.

That says it all right there :shifty:, I got my friend into comics and graphic novels last june and I told him to buy the watchmen to start off and he read it twice and he loves it, but I said watch in the month or 2 before the movie comes out, there'll be loads of peeps buying the book and stuff, and its happend

[Lance Lives]

Yeah, I was a bit shocked to see the book at Wal-Mart, but I guess I shouldn't have been...it's to be expected really. Not only that, the tie in books I saw at the book store in the mall the other day were ridiculous, there at least 4 different ones. I was excited to see Moore's Swamp Thing run in a collected volume though and I hope to get that soon.

I just got done re-reading Watchmen a few minutes ago and have to admit that I'm both excited and nervous about the movie. I hope it pulls it off but I don't really see how it can match the intimacy of the novel.

[CosmoBubba]

Those must be some awesome Wal-Marts, because all the ones I've been to lately haven't had the Watchmen book. Then again, they couldn't fit any on the shelves for the millions of Twilight books they have stocked.

[The Dream Master]

Snyder Rules out Watchmen Sequel (http://www.imdb.com/news/ns0000002/#ni0697893)

Snyder Rules Out Watchmen Sequel
3 March 2009 11:10 PM, PST


Watchmen director Zack Snyder is adamant he will never direct a sequel to the new film - no matter how much money he is offered.

The moviemaker is pleased with his interpretation of the cult comic book, but insists the film would not work as a major movie franchise.

He says, "There's no way I would be involved in a sequel or prequel.

"Will they make one? I have no idea how you would. The work is the work. This movie is about ideas. Anything else you would do, if you did a sequel to it, misses the point entirely of what Watchmen is. To continue is to either rehash the same idea again or you're going to try to fix the characters, which goes against everything the book stands for, or you could pick up new characters. To me, philosophically, it just doesn't make sense."

But the film's star, Billy Crudup, admits the decision about a sequel lies with Hollywood bosses - because he has already signed a contract to make a Watchmen follow-up.

He adds, "Contractually, we are obligated. I will do it. I just don't know what it is we would do."

Have to say I agree with Snyder on this one.

[Natman]

Snyder pleases me yet again.

In the mouth.

[Apocalypto]

If this movie is as big as it looks to be (midnight shows were sold out in my area over a week in advance), I'll be shocked if there is no follow up.

[The Dream Master]

There likely will be a follow-up, but Snyder is saying that he won't be doing it. Then again, I've heard that from someone else before when it comes to sequels. :X

[Just Jeans]

Well, he hasn't done sequels to Dawn of the Dead or 300, either. He seems to be a "do the film and move on" sort of director.

But in this case more so than the others, I can see why he wouldn't want to be involved. He respects and loves the source material so much -- and in spite of Moore's rather nasty commentary on Snyder's ability as a director -- that it's easy to understand why he would distance himself from a sequel.

[The Dream Master]

Yeah, and I totally agree with his idea that Watchmen is more of an idea than it is a bunch of characters. I just can't see the same cast of characters being put into another scenario because that just isn't Watchmen.

[CosmoBubba]

1n3VSw1XBOo

[andrew8798]

Ebert's review is up:

http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090304/REVIEWS/903049997

[jasonlives13]

1n3VSw1XBOo

LMAO that video's class, I love how he used the line from the novel about someone being a homosexual and then he uses it on wolverine :D

[Just Jeans]

Really sort of surprised by just how complimentary Ebert was toward the film.

[The Dark Vampire]

Going to get my tickets today I can't make the 1st showing (it won't finish until about 11pm and where the cinema is there have been 2-3 very violent attacks on ppl in the past few weeks with all the victims ending up in ICU so I'm not taking the risk plus I'll have to miss WWE to see it )

I'll make the Saturday afternoon showing

[Boiler Room Brawler]

Really sort of surprised by just how complimentary Ebert was toward the film.
I think that people tend to automatically associate him with giving their favorite movies bad reviews.

C'mon, a guy who like Dawn of the Dead (original) and Evil Dead 2 can't be all bad, right?

[i am SAW]

i might be in the minority, but this looks fucking stupid. the only character who looks semi-cool is the guy with the white and black face. the rest look dumb. one looks like a retarded Batman and the big blue naked CGI guy is ridiculous. the guy flying out the window in slow motion, that was cool.... when i first seen it in Wanted.

[The Dream Master]

Despite what the adversiting is leading to you believe, Watchmen isn't all about "omg dat wuz badass!!!" and "such and such looks awesome!". I think people that have no clue what it's really about are going to be very surprised tomorrow.

[Boiler Room Brawler]

In fact, the very misinterpretation of Watchmen as being teh kewlz has been the bane of Alan Moore.

[Just Jeans]

Yeah, the marketing for this film is really misleading. The book (and the film) is about the emotional state of the heroes and the tense state of the world. There's very little action (although what there is seems to have been realized beautifully by Snyder), and it's entirely character driven.

[CosmoBubba]

I think the advertising is supposed to be misleading on purpose. Get a whole bunch of people to say "omg that looks awesome!" and go see it, then Zack Snyder comes in and is all "Psyche! Now you're stuck watching a sociopolitical murder mystery!"

[The Dream Master]

Well, it certainly is misleading because they want the average movie-goer to think it's an action packed superhero film because that sells better than a "sociopolitical murder mystery." :p

Whether or not this pisses off a lot of people remains to be seen I guess. It's going to open huge (no doubt because of the marketing), but i'll be interesting to see what the word of mouth does to it.

[COREYG34]

i wanna see this, i just got the arcade game, and it is pretty fun

[Cody]

I think it will turn out to be a "love it or hate it" movie among the average viewer, based on what people have extrapolated from the marketing. It's already visible among reviewers that some will be put off by the bait & switch, one review I saw complained that "They ruined what could've been the start of a series!"

[The Dream Master]

My only complaint about it so far is the fact that I have to work tomorrow; otherwise, you bet your ass I'd be there tonight at midnight.

Any of you lucky fucks seeing it tonight?

[The Dark Vampire]

Only slight problem I have it how long it's on for but that's to do with the fact i don't like to be away from the house for to long in case I'm needed and I don't like been around ppl for that amount of time

[Nick Michalak]

From Dark Horizons:
"Watchmen" Set For Big Opening Night
By Garth Franklin
Wednesday March 4th 2009 11:07PM

The Zack Snyder-helmed adaptation of "Watchmen" will play in an impressive 1,600 locations starting at midnight Thursday reports Reuters.

To give you an idea, that's more than double the 656 midnight shows that helped Snyder's ancient Greece actioner "300" fetch $28 million in only the first day of its $71 million opening weekend in March 2007.

To date that first-day haul for "300" was the second-highest ever for an R-rated pic, after the $42.5 million that Warners registered with 2003's "The Matrix Reloaded."

Where "Watchmen" will sit is anyone's guess right now - anticipation is certainly there though with Imax's Web site crashing four times this week because of traffic surges by "Watchmen" fans looking for ticket information.

Fandango added on Wednesday that "Watchmen" purchases represented 90% of its advance ticket sales for this weekend, though admittedly there are no other wide openers this week.

Reviews continue to be surprisingly divisive. Rotten Tomatoes has the film at a quite mixed 64% approval rating and a quite low 6.1/10 average score with 74 reviews counted.

Garth Franklin Review of "Watchmen." (http://www.darkhorizons.com/reviews/888/Watchmen/)

-NJM

[ZPowers]

Actually these reviewers don't like them because the watchmen is different and lets be honest its not a well known name like batman for example, for someone watching characters they know nothing about, there bound to not really like since they don't know who any of them are

Double edged sword here. People who HAVE read the graphic novel almost without exception love the thing. So they're going to expect a strong, faithful adaptation, and omitting their favorite parts (and there are so many good parts, I don't care if it's three hours, some will be missing). With the Dark Knight, at least it was an original story so we couldn't have the same level of worries. As a fan of the novel, I am kind of hesitant to see this movie, and won't go to a midnight showing. Also, I think Snyder is an all-style-no-substance movie which is the exact opposite of what the Graphic novel is to me (a gritty, realistic, unstylized story full of meaning and layers), and also think 300 was one of the biggest pieces of shit ever, so... I'm especially uncomfortable here.

[Just Jeans]

Also, I think Snyder is an all-style-no-substance movie which is the exact opposite of what the Graphic novel is to me (a gritty, realistic, unstylized story full of meaning and layers)...

For what it's worth, one of the reviews I posted complained about the film's lack of a stylized graphic novel look. They seemed to be expecting a 300 redux in the visuals department. So it seems like Snyder is going to play things a little more subtle this time around (apart from the action and big special FX stuff, I expect it to look closer to Dawn of the Dead visually).

[CosmoBubba]

I caught the midnight showing last night, and I thought that Zack Snyder made the best Watchmen movie he possibly could have. Granted, there's things that had to be condensed, cut down, or otherwise altered to make Watchmen work as a movie, but to me, they pulled it off well enough.

[Natman]

IMO, there is nothing else this could have been. This is, in my mind, the only Watchmen movie that could ever exist.

The characters felt like they walked off the page, very little was lost in translation, for this film alone, Zack Snyder may be the most dedicated director in terms of adapting the source material that I have ever seen.

I thought it was bloody brilliant.

[WOLF]

I knew zero about Watchmen before I saw the film...except what I saw in the trailers.

I liked it more than I thought I would. It didn't feel like 2 hrs 40 min. But the last 15-20 minutes were the weakest for me. The movie seemed to end with a whimper. I'm sure it's true to the source, but it just didn't do it for me.
ADDED:
Also...I was pretty surprised the theater was half full for the 7pm showing. Granted...there is an IMAX screen showing it...but those were like at 6 and 9.

[Apocalypto]

i might be in the minority, but this looks fucking stupid. the only character who looks semi-cool is the guy with the white and black face. the rest look dumb. one looks like a retarded Batman and the big blue naked CGI guy is ridiculous. the guy flying out the window in slow motion, that was cool.... when i first seen it in Wanted.

I think they did it many years ago in the graphic novel prior to the existence of Wanted.

[The Dream Master]

I agree with the sentiments above in saying that this is pretty much the best version of Watchmen I could ever imagine making it to the big screen. It was so fucking good; one thing that really caught me off guard was the use of music, particularly the Bob Dylan tunes that are a nice homage to the title of the original issues. I also think the opening credit sequence is one of the best I've seen in years. Great, great film all the way around.

[TheShowstoppa]

I just got back from seeing this.. It was good, but not great. I thought it ran a little long and there were some issues that could have been resolved without using 3 hours of my life.

I probably should have read the graphic novel before going to see this. I'm going to probably watch it again just to see what it was like after I've gotten the "I don't know what to expect" aspect out, but aside from that, I am not too keen on it on my first initial viewing. Great CG, great battle scenes, but way too much blue man cock.

Good story, though. I liked the premise.

[The Dream Master]

Yeah, I think the perception of those who are familiar with the graphic novel vs. those that aren't are going to be wildly different because the film's narrative is so damn sprawling and all over the place, yet coherent enough in the end. Reading the graphic novel is the same sort of experience, and it's actually even more bewildering (particularly Dr. Manhattan's back story and the "Tales of the Black Freighter" stuff that didn't make it into the theatrical cut). I think this is what people (including myself) mean when they say that this is the best adaptation one could hope for when it comes to this material because it really did manage to capture the essence, and that includes the unique narrative structure.

[TheShowstoppa]

YDDHHrt6l4w

Thought you might get a kick out of this since it's whoa different than the actual movie. :)

I'm actually liking what the movie had to offer. It had a lot of good elements, I just wasn't impressed upon first initial view. Keep in mind, those I love upon first viewing I tend to love in the long run.

[ZPowers]

i might be in the minority, but this looks fucking stupid. the only character who looks semi-cool is the guy with the white and black face. the rest look dumb. one looks like a retarded Batman and the big blue naked CGI guy is ridiculous. the guy flying out the window in slow motion, that was cool.... when i first seen it in Wanted.

The point of Watchmen isn't "cool". That's why I think (haven't seen it yet) Snyder is a terrible choice for a director. This is a story that is about substance. For fuck's sake, in the original story Nite Owl had a potbelly. Action scenes were the vast minority. It's a story with a point and that makes you think (especially about personal definitions of morality), not a story that looks nice and you forget about the next day.

[TheShowstoppa]

Hate to say it, but a movie based on a comic book that a lot of people might not know about definitely wouldn't have worked well without action scenes, period. The purists can beg for what they want, but when it comes down to it, they're marketing a product to not only the comic fans, but the masses in general. Dumbing this down with very few action sequences would not have benefited this movie. I would have likely shot myself in the face had there not been as many fight scenes as there were.

[The Dark Vampire]

Just off to see it now

[WOLF]

I hear quite a few people on the way out saying how disappointed they were. It sounded like they were expecting Xmen. I think the general audience reaction will be very mixed.

I think what bothered me about the ending is that the main characters had no impact on the ending. Throw out their whole story and it still would have ended the same. They figured out what was going on but that's it.

[The Dark Vampire]

back from it and thought it was great my brother hated it but I told him he would before even bought the tickets as i knew he wouldn't understand it.

only thing I though was slightly bad/distracting was I wish Dr Manhattan would put some damn shorts on or something

I haven't read the comic yet but I think it will pick it up this week if I have the cash to spare

[Just Jeans]

Dr. Manhattan flies commando in the graphic novel, too.

Dumbing this down with very few action sequences would not have benefited this movie.

I think this is the first time I've ever seen "fewer action scenes" and "dumb down" in the same sentence. :X

[Apocalypto]

The point of Watchmen isn't "cool". That's why I think (haven't seen it yet) Snyder is a terrible choice for a director. This is a story that is about substance. For fuck's sake, in the original story Nite Owl had a potbelly. Action scenes were the vast minority. It's a story with a point and that makes you think (especially about personal definitions of morality), not a story that looks nice and you forget about the next day.

That's pretty much what I took from it, actually. I didn't care for Dawn, liked 300, and this was definitely better than that because it was more cerebral and thought provoking. I wouldn't blame Snyder for 300 not being especially deep, since the source material was no deeper than his film.

This movie uses action pretty sparingly, it's a character drama with alot of morality play and some bad-assery mixed in, not a bad-ass action flick with a little bit of thought provoking material mixed in.

[andrew8798]

Saw it today I liked it

[Rick]

I thought it was really good.
Some friends of mine loved the graphic novel but i never bothered to read it.
I only decided to find out what the graphic was all about after seeing the trailer a few times. Thank you wikipedia.
It's not your typical superhero action flick, but I don't think it suffers. The story and character make up for it.
It actually had more action then i was expecting.
It entertained me and they guy's I know who loved the graphic novel as well.
I can see a lot of people who aren't familiar with the graphic novel going in expecting something a lot different, but I think if the audience gives it a chance it can satisfy a lot of them on another level.

[Apocalypto]

I can't get his battle out of my head now...

http://c1.ac-images.myspacecdn.com/images02/32/l_7fce697e013840c6830e1d0ad621cb2c.jpg

vs.

http://c2.ac-images.myspacecdn.com/images02/60/l_efdde59e282c4622959ceba936c658e9.jpg

:)

[Just Jeans]

A friend of mine went to see this tonight. He was totally unaware of the graphic novel. He said the film wrong-footed him a little bit -- the marketing tried to sell him something other than what was in the package, he said -- but ultimately he liked it, which is a pretty high complement. It's hard to please this guy.

[FinalBeyond]

I think what bothered me about the ending is that the main characters had no impact on the ending. Throw out their whole story and it still would have ended the same. They figured out what was going on but that's it.

That's the whole point! They're caught up in something beyond their own abilities. Ozymandias put it perfectly, there's no need for their childish heroics. The superheroes think they can make a difference, but he's shown that they're outdated. It takes viewing the bigger picture to really change the world.

I saw this yesterday, and I really do love it. It's definitely got myriad flaws, and some of my favourite lines and scenes have been excised. But that's always going to happen. They're not going to be able to squeeze Watchmen into a film without losing some things. I'm just so thankful we got this, and not the Sam Hamm Watchmen.

The sequence on Mars was amazing, particularly with Philip Glass playing. It really feels... right. The opening sequence was also fantastic, showing the differences superheroes have made to society in a subtle way. Again, the soundtrack worked wonders here. With the exception of MCR's butchering of Joy Division, the soundtrack is absolutely flawless. I went out and got the CD afterwards.

Every actor seems flawless, and Haley in particular seems like he's stepped from the pages of the comic. I can't read the book now without his voice in my head. Same with Doctor Manhattan, even though I always thought of his voice and mannerisms as different before the movie. His interpretation seems to fit amazingly.

The new ending also works well, in that it allows the disappearance of Max Shea, the island and so on, to be excised, while keeping the theme of a larger-than-life threat that unites everyone. And it works so well with Manhattan's self imposed exile, that's made him suspicious. Thematically, it's just as clever a plot on Ozymandias's part.

[The Dream Master]

Yeah, I think this was well-cast as well; I'd say that Goode was a bit mis-cast upon my first viewing because something just seemed off about his interpretation of Ozymandias, and I still think he just looked too damn young (Ozymandias should be around 45 at the end of the film). And I think it goes without saying that Malin Akerman is fucking stunning, but I'm glad she was more than just eye candy; she played the part of Laurie very well. The best-realized character (besides Rorscach) was Dan Dreiberg--I really enjoyed his character and thought he provided a good empathetic center for the film (because, let's face it, there's not many places to look for empathy in Watchmen, and he's about as close as you can get).

[Alex DeLarge]

I realized something. Society has been conditioned to think films are the be-all-end-all medium. Everything must become films. People read comics and books and think what they would be like as a film. But whoever does the reverse? Who watches a film and thinks, "Man, this would make an amazing novelization" It's not just about Watchmen; it's about everything now. Watchmen just made me realize this (even though Alan Moore has been saying it all along).

I just don't think adaptations are needed now. Not in today's society. Back in the 1970s, people had no access to the 1963 televised episode, "The Daleks" and so the book "Doctor Who in an Exciting Adventure with the Daleks..." was the only means. Books may not be avaliable and so they'd make films. But now... we live in such an "everything is readily avaliable" society. Watchmen, even BEFORE the movie promotion, was avaliable at every single bookstore I've ever visited. So, while the movie might "reach a wider audience," it only proves that audience *choose* not to read, because it's not wider in an "availability" sense; it's wider in a "what we will actually experience" sense. The fans who want to see Dr. Manhattan on screen or what-not, I have sympathy for. I just can't relate. Not anymore. It'd be like if they produced a novelization of the Rocky Horror Picture Show. I'd probably read it, but do we need it? I would be intrigued, like I was with a Watchmen film, but I wouldn't freak out over it, like some people do with Watchmen, thinking, "Oh my god, we finally get to see Dr. Manhattan's origin on the big screen!" I wouldn't think that anymore than I'd think, "Oh my god, we finally get to read Frank-n-Furter make fun of Janet on the printed page!"

And yes, I know Rocky Horror was itself an adaptation. But it's theater so it is, as I said, a means of availability. Before that, there would not be permanent and ever-lasting documentation of Tim Curry as Frank-n-Furter. It takes something fleeting and passing and makes it final. (And remember, these were the days before Tennant/Hamlet-style DVD of plays:p).

I'm not 100% against adaptations. There are reasons to make them. I'll go through a couple and point out the reasons I think they’re acceptable. Jaws is a boring book. Jaws is also an exciting movie. They took a "kind of all right" source material and made it extraordinary. So Reason 1) Improve on the original. I don't think ANYONE (Snyder included) would argue the film is an improvement on the original. Okay, so moving on... Human Nature, a 1990s Doctor Who book made into a 2007 Doctor Who episode. The difference here is Human Nature/The Family of Blood does not standalone. It is in the middle of a series. With a story like Human Nature, it changes the entire context of the series. Have that Doctor do those scenes completely changes how we view the Tenth Doctor. It makes him simultaneously more relatable and more alien. And that's not even counting plot threads which is introduced in Human Nature and later reappears in a future episode. But the point is it makes the episode around them stronger. And makes the universe (and I don't just mean the universe of DW from 1963 onwards, which already had Human Nature, I mean the mythology of the Tenth Doctor and Martha) stronger. Watchmen stands alone. It's not the third film in an original series of 5. It doesn't make an existing series stronger. So scratch Reason 2). Watchmen isn't a better product than the comic and it doesn't help an existing mythos. So... what's the point?

That leaves the two other alternatives I discussed earlier. One is for new people. And as I said, it's their choice not to read the comic; it shouldn't be truncated and smushed in order to introduce others to Watchmen. If you watched and thought, "That was awesome!" and then went out and read the comic, that's great and I'm glad you get to enjoy Watchmen. But I don't think they should spend however many millions just to advertise the comic to people! Plenty of cheaper ways to do that. And the other is existing fans. And as I said, I have a lot of sympathty for you, I do. If you get a kick out of seeing Dr. Manhattan on the big screen, good for you. I'm completely and honestly happy for you and other fans. But to paraphrase Jon: "The world's best Watchmen movie adaptation means no more to me than does its best Watchmen haiku adaptation."

[jah jah jason]

This movie was painful to watch. I have to admit, I knew nothing about it going in. The advertisement had me curious and I was wanting to enjoy this. I WANTED to fall asleep, leave, or gouge my eyes out. The most fascinating thing was the blue man's peen. Finally penis instead of boobs! Luckily, I paid mantinee prices.

[WOLF]

I did understand the point of the ending (it pretty much explains it on one of the posters). I just don't like when stories end that way. Just a personal preference.


I do have some questions for those who know the comic book.

So Ozy is the smartest guy in the world. Dr Manhattan is the most powerful man. I know they said he can't be everywhere at once. But I sat there wondering if this is the best plan he could have come up with. I've seen/read stories that probably copied off of this. Some of them involved the US faking attacks from a foreign power to start a war on their own terms. But using an American (Dr Manhattan) as the bad guy didn't seem to let the U.S. off the hook. Yeah, he blew up American cities too. But the US was the fucktards who trusted him. Also, one of the main point was that heroes had out lived their time in a new dangerous world (hello No Country For Old Men). But Ozy was hanging out in his base with his costume on. Was it for old time's sake?

I do think this movie is going to have a helluva time making it's money back. It cost 50 million just to market it. And then Fox got a part of the action..

[The Dream Master]

The ending from the book is different from the film; in the book, Ozymandias actually conjures up a giant squid that he engineered to destory half of New York. Everyone percieves the squid to be alien in origin, which unites humankind against that larger threat, so I guess that doesn't really clear up the issues you had with the film. I kind of thought the same thing about the film at first, but then they threw in that line that everyone would fall in line as long as they thought Dr. Manhattan was watching over them.

As for Ozy still wearing the suit, that makes perfect sense given his penchant for idolizing pharaohs and other ancient kings, who would no doubt be adorned in elaborate costumes and such. It sort of also reveals his hubris and (along with his name) foreshadows the fact that everything he accomplished will one day be undone (whether Rorshach's journal is published or not).

[WOLF]

Thanks Dream Master. The movie was pretty dense to sort through everything in one sitting (especially without reading the comic).

I missed the line about "watching over everyone". And I guess the suit makes sense now. I think the movie can be enjoyed without the comic, but it seems you need to read it to really get everything out of it.

[Just Jeans]

That was perhaps one of the most accurate comic-to-film adaptations we'll ever see. Some things were changed, obviously, but I'd say about 95% of everything on the screen was lifted right from the panels of the book. If you dislike the film, then Watchmen probably isn't your cup of tea in general (or you're Alan Moore, and you just won't like it regardless).

I was quite pleased with how it turned out. I'm not sure I appreciate the notion of shifting the blame onto John and ditching the faux-alien invasion, particularly because it managed to eradicate at least one scene I really liked in the comic: the moment in which Veidt appeals to John to justify what he's done before John leaves Earth forever. That scene allows us to see Veidt question his actions, it shows his humanity, and while they tried to simulate that with the "I make my self feel every death" bit in the film, I don't think it worked as well.

The direction was top notch. I think Snyder was the perfect person to direct this film. He managed to deliver a stylish, beautiful film without sacrificing the pathos that makes the book special. [And while I'm on the subject of direction, I have to say that, in my opinion, Snyder knows how to shoot a sex scene without making it feel cheap or trashy. That takes some skill.]

The film had a perfect soundtrack. I want to buy both CDs that were released for the film. Awesome song placement, and a really moving score by Tyler Bates.

The casting was perfect. I wasn't entirely sure about the guy cast to play Veidt when I first saw him in trailers, but he wasn't as miscast as I thought. Not perfect, but not completely out of place. Jackie Earle Haley was perfect as Rorschach. His final confrontation with John was particularly moving, which is something I wasn't expecting.

I can't wait to see this again. I've heard rumors that an extended cut of the film featuring all the Tales of the Black Freighter stuff will be released on Blu-ray, so that should be really awesome.

With the exception of MCR's butchering of Joy Division, the soundtrack is absolutely flawless. I went out and got the CD afterwards.

I tried to do that, but there wasn't a single Watchmen CD -- soundtrack or score -- at Best Buy. I was like :cry:.

[The Dark Vampire]

I have heard the DVD is rumoured to be about 4 hours long.

[Just Jeans]

Forgot to mention it in my initial post, but something else that I missed seeing in the film was the subplot involving the interaction between the young black man and the old white newspaper salesman, and the lesbian couple. None of that was strictly important to the plot of the film, but I think the moment where the young black man and the old white newspaper salesman embrace before evaporating loses a little bit of "oomph" due to the lack of their subplot.

I suspect that the murder of Hollis Mason will end up on the extended DVD, and I hope the subplot mentioned above does, too.

[FinalBeyond]

Given that the extended edition is going to have the Black Freighter stuff interweaved, it's extremely likely we'll get more stuff relating to the Bernies. Especially since they look so perfectly cast, it'd seem a shame not to have more of them.

Also, given that the Hollis Mason stuff has been filmed, and is referenced on the score CD (there's a track named "Who Murdered Hollis Mason?"), that also seems a likely bet.

[Just Jeans]

When Rorschach takes Dan along to break thumbs in the bar, isn't there meant to be a scene where Dan realizes Hollis has been murdered? I seem to recall that from the book, and I even recall feeling as though there was an establishing shot for that scene still in the film.

[FinalBeyond]

Yeah, it is placed there, and I got the exact same feeling. You can see him turning around towards the knot-top in the bad, only for it to cut back to Rorschach.

Also, looking at the Japanese trailer, thanks to Alex, he pointed out that it has scenes from Hollis' murder itself.

[Apocalypto]

I have heard the DVD is rumoured to be about 4 hours long.

I heard fourty minutes longer, which would put it around 3 hours 25 minutes.

[Just Jeans]

When Snyder decided not to include Tales from the Black Freighter in the film, the running time was already edging on 3 hours in length. If the whole of Tales from the Black Freighter is inserted into the film, that's at least 30 minutes on its own. Maybe longer. And then there's the scenes in which Tales from the Black Freighter belongs, the murder of Hollis Mason, Dan's realization of Hollis' murder, and possibly the lesbian couple.

I wonder if we'll get Rorschach's psychiatrist's deteriorating home life, too?

[CosmoBubba]

I actually heard there'd be two extended cuts. The first one would have all the deleted scenes edited back in, which would be three and a half hours long. The other one is that extended cut with Tales from the Black Freighter added as well, which would push the running time to four hours and ten minutes.

[Sean [The Wildcard]]

Do people who only become aware of a comic book/book because they went to go see the movie adaptation annoy you? Especially if the movie wasn't true to the source material and the nerd instincts in you want to help them to understand that the movie was a poor representation of the comic book/book but you know you shouldn't because you'll look like a total wanker...?

[Just Jeans]

;314696']Do people who only become aware of a comic book/book because they went to go see the movie adaptation annoy you?

Not in the slightest.

[TheShowstoppa]

Sean, I have to say that I like it when people get into reading comics because they saw a movie. That's particularly why the comics continue to sell like they do. I think it's helpful, but if it gets people to open their eyes to other comics, then so be it. Let them discover the classics and everything the way they were and the way they are in the movies. You might have to help educate them a little bit (trust me, informing people over and over again that Bebop and Rocksteady are NOT TMNT canon gets really tiresome), but it is somewhat satisfying in the end.

[CosmoBubba]

(trust me, informing people over and over again that Bebop and Rocksteady are NOT TMNT canon gets really tiresome)

Non-comic or not, Bebob and Rocksteady are fucking awesome and all the arguing against them is never going to make me change my mind about that. :p

[TheShowstoppa]

Non-comic or not, Bebob and Rocksteady are fucking awesome and all the arguing against them is never going to make me change my mind about that. :p
:banghead:

*TheShowstoppa kicks CosmoBubba hard in the nuts!*:ballshot:

;) No, seriously, it's frustrating at times, but I find it more comforting that they're going to look up the source material after seeing the awesome that is the movie adaptions of those comics. It's amazingly refreshing at times. :don:

[CosmoBubba]

:banghead:

*TheShowstoppa kicks CosmoBubba hard in the nuts!*:ballshot:

;) No, seriously, it's frustrating at times, but I find it more comforting that they're going to look up the source material after seeing the awesome that is the movie adaptions of those comics. It's amazingly refreshing at times. :don:

Dude. That hurt. My poor balls. :misery:

[Just Jeans]

(trust me, informing people over and over again that Bebop and Rocksteady are NOT TMNT canon gets really tiresome)

More's the pity, coz they are awesome. :shy:

[Darth Sinister]

No, I'm not annoyed. Especially pretaining to comics. If they can get more people to read them and not feel insecure about it, more power to you. People have a preconcieved notion about comics and it has only be within the last decade, that those notions are finally starting to erode away.

[Dave Dunwoody]

Loved it. Snyder took everything from the comic that could be translated to film and did it superbly. I wasn't 100% crazy about the change to Veidt's master plan in which he framed Dr. Manhattan, but I do think it worked better for the movie version.

Rorschach is definitely the most badass Watchman, but I'm always surprised that people like him so much. What a sick, sad man he was. Just plain dangerous.

On the other hand, he was the only character who never compromised his values.

And that's the brilliance of WATCHMEN.

[Just Jeans]

Rorschach is one of those characters people tend to like in spite of the fact that he's not a very pleasant human being. Or maybe it's because he's a monster that we like him. The fact that we get to see inside his head, to see the circumstances that make him the man he is when the story begins, helps build empathy for him.

Rorschach -- unlike the Comedian -- is the sort of character we identify as a hero despite his dark nature. He's got the right idea, his execution is just... unbalanced. His sense of justice is black and white, there is no gray area, and it makes Rorschach a fascinating character to observe.

I think my favorite thing about Rorschach is his self deluded nature. He's actually convinced himself that he's one of the only members of the Crimebusters who hasn't become emotionally damaged over time. :eek:

[Psychoticninja]

Well, watched it yesterday with a large group of friends in the local theatre. None of us read the comic or had any idea what the movie was about. And only 2 out of 10 of us liked the movie. To me it was a good movie, not EXCELLENT or great, but just good. It was hard at times for me during the movie because i was constantly trying to figure out, 'WTF does all of this have to do with the movie??" because so many different things were happening (the A bomb going to drop, there's a superhero killer, the back story of the Comedian, Dr. Manhattan giving people cancer!)i couldn't piece them together until the very end and i think that's where it lost all the rest of my friends. Some of them were sleeping, the others stopped following the movie and only perked up for the action sequences and of course the 'night shag' scene. At one point i was trying to figure out which one of the subplots was actually the MAIN plot of the show because it was jumping so much :doh:

But, when i finally pieced everything together at the end and i really thought about it, i liked it. I 100% understand that it was a movie made from a comic and those who read the comic would appreciate it more, so the most i could advise people when going to watch this is that its a hit or a miss with you, i don't think there's a grey area. Either you like what you saw or you would hate it. All in all.... its interesting.... it really does make me want to read the comic though.

One thing that i was VERY lost about was the whole Dr. Manhattan going to Mars and creating some kind of spaceship? Then the girl hit it and destroyed it...? I had no idea what was going on there except that she convinced him to come back to earth to stop the war.

[CosmoBubba]

I think my favorite thing about Rorschach is his self deluded nature. He's actually convinced himself that he's one of the only members of the Crimebusters who hasn't become emotionally damaged over time. :eek:

I believe I've mentioned it in the past, but I always thought it was funny that Rorshach once said he respected Harry Truman for dropping nukes on Japan because it ended the war, yet wanted to kick the everloving shit out of Ozymandias for doing pretty much the same thing. Just further evidence that Rorschach is totally loopy.

[The Taff]

Saw it opening night, thought I had commented already.

Fucking outstanding. That's all that needs to be said.

[ZPowers]

This wasn't quite as bad as I thought, but I'm not singing it's praises either. Was it the graphic novel? No, not by a long shot, but it was never going to be. Is it the Dark Knight? Again, no, not by a long shot. But it... did serve its purpose. For a movie adaptation of something like Watchmen, it was pretty well done. I thought Rorschach, the Comedian, and Dr. Manhattan were all done pretty much right, and Nite Owl was pretty good, but MAN, the girl who played Silk Spectre II could not act! And also, I didn't like the changes to Ozymandias's character. No emotion, no charisma, no empathy. They turned him into Blofeld for all intents and purposes. They cut his moments of exhiliaration, the charm he oozed in the comic (he was beloved by the public), and most importantly the supreme doubt he had. Ozymandias was REALLY trying to do something good, but this guy was just... evil. Why Dr. Manhattan's last conversation was with Silk Specter instead of Ozymandias I just do not get. And looked about 12 years old. Also wish they had emphasized Drieberg's impotence/fetish a bit more. And the My Chemical Romance cover of Bob Dylan's Desolation Row, my favorite Dylan song, made my ears bleed. That reminds me, the soundtrack, though mostly good songs, was a little too obvious. Sound of Silence at a funeral? Everybody Wants to Rule the World when Ozymandias shows up? Come on.

The most indicative change was the emphasis on over the top violence and slow motion (arguably the MCR Desolation Row indicates the same thing). The spirit and emotion of the comic was often replaced with a slicker, but less deep feel. I expected that from the second Snyder signed on.

That said, they did really get a some scenes right, especially involving Dr. Manhattan, Rorschach and the Comedian. I thought the opening montage worked well, too. Still, I doubt I'll ever bother watching this again, and this viewing was just insatiable curiosity. I'll stick to the book.

[Nick Michalak]

I finally saw this last night. Rorschach is definitely the most interesting character. If you melded Batman & The Punisher, you'd get a close resemblence of this guy. By the fact that he's both terribly traumatized by the horrors of life, and has an unwavering commitment to justice. Granted, the film doesn't give us as deep of an insight into his psyche as I'm sure the graphic novel does, but he would be worth further exploration.

Okay, I know the film was long, and it felt long because there were scenes which seemed to go on forever, but my problem with it is that there doesn't seem to be enough happening. I didn't get a dreadful sense that the world was heading towards ultimate destruction, or that story elements were converging towards a climax. Nor did Ozymandias sell me on his master plan. I think it comes from what you said ZPowers - he had no charisma, no emotion. He was just dead cold flat. He seemed more like a twisted nutjob than someone doing this out of a desperate compassion for humanity (which is what I've gathered is the graphic novel's version). I do hope that DVD injects a great deal more depth to the overall story, and the little details that were cut out for the theatrical release. There was a lot of good in this film, but again, it was Rorschach who kept me intrigued throughout. He couldn't stand the world as it was, but also could never accept the world that was created at the film's end. I also enjoyed the Comedian because he had no allusions towards people or the world. He was a reflection of society.

I'll also have to say that the ladies who portrayed both the first and second Silk Spectre were painfully HOT!!! Maybe too much so.

-NJM

[Just Jeans]

Everybody Wants to Rule the World when Ozymandias shows up?.

I thought that was a really clever piece of foreshadowing, particularly since it was a simplified elevator music version of the song, lacking lyrics and gusto. Anyone who doesn't know the song in the first place isn't going to recognize it.

[The One and Only]

Hi, I'm A Marvel & I'm a DC:Part 2 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FlqCaqmrto4&feature=dir)
ADDED:
ADDED:
What everyone's talking about after viewing the WATCHMEN

http://www.fohguild.org/forums/attachments/screenshots/103610d1237188968-funny-strange-random-pics-watchmen.png

[Sketch Sanchez]

I feel like I'm the only person in the world who thought every actor is the movie did a terrible job.

[CosmoBubba]

Some guy shot himself during a screening of Watchmen the other day. (http://www.kmtr.com/news/local/story/Man-shoots-himself-during-Watchmen-movie/H0qmxSQyCkim5hh80WuOSA.cspx) I'd heard of people attacking each other during movies, but never suicides.

[Killa Pimp]

The fan boys will cry out, the movie is good, and go see it"

...and the average moviegoer will whisper..."NO!"

:p


I thought it was a good companion piece to the graphic novel.
Can't wait for the full special edition DVD or blue ray.

[ZPowers]

The fan boys will cry out, the movie is good, and go see it"


Well, some will say it's good. Even then, 99.9% will probably admit the graphic novel's superior. I would say "it's a solid C+, but if you haven't read the novel, it's not worth blowing the surprises seeing this first. If you have read the novel, it's okay for a matinee some lazy afternoon."

The average moviegoer not seeing it bit was more or less right, though.

[Rick]

I'd say fanboys will always side with the graphic novel though.
I'm reading the graphic now and from waht I can tell, aside from the ending, it's very close. There was a bunch of stuff left out, but the film could never have had time to fit absolutely everything in.
It's unfortunate when a great novel, graphic or not, has to choose one scene or the other to make a movie flow properly and keep it within a reasonable time frame.
A director and producer also have to make sure that what comes out onscreen is going to work too. Could you imagine if we got to the point that Manhattan and Silk Spectre return from mars to find the destruction, then go to Ozymandis' fortress and discover the cause was the same as it was in the novel? How would thay even have fit that explanation in? Would they just have Ozzy say "oh, by the way this is what happened"? That would come off as pretty lame and really out of left field.
I know the movie changed the ending, but what was unfortunately left out of the film allowed them to create a new ending that worked just as well, IMO, even if it got to the point by taking a different route.

[ZPowers]

I'm aware of the limitations of putting this on film. There were suggestions about making this an HBO miniseries or something of that nature: that could have had some better potential. Even in what they decided to lose and keep, and the presentation of the material, I think the film was still just adequate at best.

[Rick]

The time they could have taken with a mini-series would have made for a more direct and awsome adaptation. I don't think i'd ever heard that a mini-series was considered, although before the film I only ever had limited exposure or interest in the material.

[jasonlives13]

The graphic novel is better, though if I hadn't read it, I don't know if I would of been interested in seeing the watchmen if I hadn't of read the novel

[Rick]

I'd never been interested in reading the graphic novel, though a couple friends raved about it a few years ago.
I wasn't terribly interested in seeing the movie either.
One of my friends who loved the comic called to see if I wanted to see it so I went. I left thinking the movie was incredible, which made me go out and get the graphic, which is just as incredible.

[andrew8798]

Warner Home Video has revealed the artwork and specs for the "Watchmen: Ultimate Cut" coming to Blu-ray and DVD on November 3. The "Ultimate Cut" weaves "Tales of the Black Freighter" into the "Watchmen: Director's Cut." The following are included on both the Blu-ray and DVD (the "Watchmen: The Complete Motion Comics" is on two discs instead of one for the DVD set):

Disc 1:
• Watchmen: The Ultimate Cut Film
• Audio Commentary with Zack Snyder and Dave Gibbons
Disc 2: Over 3 Hours of Special Features
• The Phenomenon: The Comic that Changed Comics
• Real Super Heroes, Real Vigilantes
• Mechanics: Technologies of a Fantastic World
• Watchmen: Video Journals
• My Chemical Romance Desolation Row
• Under The Hood
• Story Within A Story: The Books of Watchmen
Disc 3: Digital Copy of the Theatrical Version
Disc 4: Watchmen: The Complete Motion Comics
BD-Live

http://i41.photobucket.com/albums/e264/andrew8798/watchmenultimate3.jpg

[Alex DeLarge]

Having recently rewatched the Director's Cut...

I really, honestly think this is a terrible film. Forget how accurate/inaccurate of an adaptation it is, Zack Snyder (as he also showed with DOTD; never seen 300) is a horrible filmmaker who has no idea about pacing or what's tonally right for what situations and every moment reeks of adolescent, "Oooh! A slow-motion finger getting shot off would be cooooool!"

[Just Jeans]

Thought the theatrical film was excellent. The Director's Cut is over long. The Ultimate Cut is gong to be a nightmare to try and sit through (hip pain and all that). I might have to break it up into episodes.

[Alex DeLarge]

I just think it's inappropriate. Everything's shot the same, all the action sequences employ an overuse of slow-motion and gore in all the wrong places (I'm not against gore, Watchmen is quite bloody, after all, but at all the right moments; we DID NOT need to see Dan snap a guy's arm so that the bone broke out of it or a close-up of a Knot Top bloodily spitting up teeth), it feels like a 14-year old's wet dream.

If I may go and compare it to the comic for a moment, not to say that it's bad that he altered it from the original (he could've changed it, I just don't like what he changed it to if that makes any sense), but just to show how it's handled tonally:

COMIC: Veidt and his assistant have a casual conversation about life and death and what death meant to the Egyptians and if--"Oh, God, he has a gun-" BAM! A shot! She falls back, Veidt responds, grabs the item hits him. Oh, God... What just happened?! It's quick, brutal and to the point, perfectly fitting in with Watchmen's "realistic" universe.

FILM: After that whole "right out of every boardroom movie, no, YOU listen to me!" scene with Veidt and the businessmen (who I'll give the benefit of the doubt to Snyder, assuming he created them to tell Veidt's backstory), the elevator door opens. The guy stands there, looking all bad-ass. And here we go, cue the SLO-MO! The dramatic music builds...! He takes out a gun...! BAM, a hole in the secretary's leg...! BAM, close-up of fingers getting blown off...! BAM, BAM, BAM, one by one, each of the businessmen get shot...! But Veidt's ready...! He grabs the item... and he hits him with it! It's not a quick, violent incident; it's the crescendo to a symphony.

Do you see what I mean? That sort of stylized stuff has its place, but not in the harsh and cold world of Watchmen. The irony is he took Watchmen and made it MORE "comic book-y."

[Just Jeans]

I get where you're coming from, but personally, I'm not bothered by any of that. The only thing about the film that bothers me on a significant level is the run time, and that's only because of my health. Otherwise, I thought it was a perfectly suitable adaptation -- slow motion and all -- and felt that pretty much everything worked.

Do I think it's perfect? Of course not. But then nothing is.

[Alex DeLarge]

I'm just not a Zack Snyder fan. Everything he does has this immature quality to it (again, I haven't seen 300 but no comment on it has made me hopeful), who has only a peripheral idea of any deeper content and is obsessed with making scenes Torchwood S1-style "adult" (hence why you get entire scenes of Watchmen adapted from the comic with the word "fuck" added between each sentence).

[AshLoomis]

I have to say I agree with Alex here. I think most people are just happy that they got a more-or-less faithful (at least on the surface) adaptation by someone who obviously loves the material. I mean, this could have been another League of Extraordinary Gentlemen or another From Hell. But we got a movie with most of the important scenes and which in terms of the visuals looked about as much like the comic book as possible. And for most people, that's enough. Most people aren't going to look at it and say "okay, Veidt wins and he kept the odd colouring and it's not rated PG. But so what? What does this have to offer simply as a film?" Because when you look at it that way, the flaws really come out.

I didn't really like anything about the movie. I thought the guys who played Doctor Manhatten and Rorschach were good. The the opening credits were nice too, but that was about it. It was even worse than I expected it to be. It wasn't that it was a bad adaptation, it was just a bad movie. The music was out of place most of the time (especially during that ridiculous sex scene, it had the whole theatre laughing,) the camera angles and direction were boring at best and stupid at worst. Most of the fight scenes were dumb, especially the ending where they fight Veidt. It was basically "blah, blah, blah" *gets beat up.* Blah, blah, blah, *gets beat up,* repeat. It was handled much better in the book with Rorschach constantly attempting to disarm Veidt while he explains his plan to Daniel. As for the scenes that weren't fighting, Snyder just put the cameras in front of the actors and filmed them as they talked. None of the magnificent staging, "camera" pans, or visual metaphors of the graphic novel were present in the film. Snyder was just interested in the action, he was content to use boring TV style direction for the rest of the film.

Aside from Doctor Manhatten and Rorschach, the acting ranged from so-so (like the Comedian or Dan) to outright terrible (like Laurie.) V for Vendetta may have been a bad adaptation, but it was a good movie. It had good acting, good direction, and nothing felt out of place or wrong. But Watchmen fails as it's own movie, there's just nothing to recommend in it.

Just because Snyder is a fan of the graphic novel doesn't mean he's a good filmmaker. On the surface it may look like it's a good adaptation, but the surface is all that he understands. Snyder just presents the material, he has no clue what it means. He might do okay on an action scene, but when it comes to presenting sex, a child murder or a near rape he's just not up to it. Scenes that touched me in the book fell completely flat in the film due to the bad changes in the dialouge, the bad acting, and the bad direction. I felt nothing when Laurie told her mother she knew her father was the Comedian. You don't feel any pity for Rorschach, because he doesn't have any human moments. In the book, the young Walter Kovacs is a scared, abused little boy. In the film he's a rabid animal from day one. In the book you understand Veidt and you find yourself wondering if he was right. In the film he's just your typical comic book villain.

Zach Synder's Watchmen has all the violence of Watchmen, and bucketloads more. But it has none of the soul. I truly cared about each and every character in the book, in the movie I felt nothing. It doesn't say anything interesting and it doesn't make you think, it was just the novel on fast forward. When I went to see the film I felt like I was just watching a dumbed down, superficial version of the book with more emphasis on gore and fighting. In the book, Moore had Rorschach kill Grice by setting him on fire. This represented many things. Historically, fire has been seen as a form of cleansing. In the Bible, the holy spirit baptises Jesus' dephiples with fire. Walter Kovacs was essentially burning away the evil his heart, burning away his humanity to become Rorschach. In another sense, he was also subjecting the killer to Hell on Earth because discovering the atrocity had caused Rorschach to lose his belief in Hell. And what do we get in the film? "Fire's not bloody enough! Let's have him chop up his head instead! It will go well with all the cartoony, unrealistic fight scenes with stuck in at the expense of the plot!"

So for me Watchmen failed on two levels. On it's own terms, it's a bad movie. As an adaptation it stuck to the source closely enough, but missed the point entirely.

Oh, and by the way Final, My Chemical Romance covered Bob Dylan for the soundtrack, not Joy Division.