I feel like if Watchmen came out right now, it would make so much more money and would have critics and reviewers in awe. I'm surprised it's rated so low for how great this movie is. Deserves at least to be in the above 8/10 range. Ifor I compare Avengers to Watchmen, and Watchmen is a 7.7, Avengerso has to be a 6/10.
shareYou might have watched the ultimate cut which is much better than the theatrical version. Snyder's bvs original cut is also miles better than the theatrical one.
Look inside yourself and understand the universe
I remembered seeing watchmen in the theater and thinking it was good, I saw it again with the directors cut and I thought it was a masterpiece. BvS was pretty bad for me in the theater and the ultimate edition was just as bad, just a very disappointing movie for me.
shareI think the R rating has a lot to do with why it's not as popular as other comic book movies, and it also makes me surprised that anyone gave them the budget to even do this movie. There's few light moments or big screen action. There's no witty one liners in between the brief action scenes either. The hot white knuckle action isn't for everyone, especially those that are fans of fantastical explosions in The Avengers. Those types of comic book films are almost all action, and little substance.
While Watchmen does embrace the fantasy elements, it is not what I would call a traditional superhero movie. It's much more of a dark mystery film than it is an action superhero movie. Still, the stylized approach of Watchmen is just as dazzling and I'm guessing that's why many have seen it.
Watchmen is probably one of the most ambitious films in recent memory, and the fact that it came out in 2009 is even more impressive in my opinion. Condensing the material must not have been easy, and you can tell they really tried to make this movie enjoyable for everyone. They failed to do that though, and I can't really fault them that much on that point. The backstory in the film is murky at best, and if you aren't familiar with the comics it could leave you scratching your head.
At the same time the environment weighs the movie down so much, everything looks and feels heavier and stiffer than it should be. When I watch this at home I feel like I need to pause for a moment to breathe. I would say Watchmen is a movie filled with some of the best scenes and acting, but the general flow and direction of the film leaves a lot to be desired.
The combination of those two things alone would turn me off. But even if you do know the source material, it isn't for everyone, and I think that's why the adaption is ultimately flawed. It does not depart enough, and sometimes you need to do that for the story to translate on film. I have mixed feelings about the Watchmen graphic novels, and I'm not alone. The material is filled with tropes and each one of them is on full display throughout the movie. Rorschach, the viewers eyes, is a one dimensional right wing nut case brimming with misogyny. He's an unreliable narrator (so original), and I detested viewing things through his scope. Again, with no understanding of the graphic novels, that would be yet another turn off.
On top of that the film is full of too much testosterone that it becomes toxic after an hour or so of the same crap. You feel imprisoned in this world, but maybe that was the goal. Ackerman's weak lead was not enough to offset that sadly, and that's ultimately a failing on Snyder's part when translating the material to the big screen.
I loved that the viewer gets the idea that these are not altruistic idealists. They're vigilantes first and foremost, with little to no faith in humanity. You question their true motives. When you spend an hour or more within this world, you feel why nobody has hope. Then towards the end of the movie you do start to get a better understanding of the film's message, source material or no.
I wouldn't call Watchmen a masterpiece, because it is not without it's flaws, but I think it should be much higher up on the list, if not second to TDK with an extra note added that this film does aim higher. Unfortunately for me, it didn't quite hit that mark. Even so, I still prefer to recognize ambition over perfection.
Because it essentially cuts the heart out of the GN. It looks good, but everything that made the GN special is absent from the movie.
The new home of Welcome to Planet Bob: http://kingofbob.blogspot.ca/
It is a long dragging film, with many different stories. The film often grows on people, when they know the story better and is more familiar with the characters. The poster who compared its reception to Blade Runner might on to something.
I liked parts of the film, when I saw it in the cinema. But I thought the film was overproduced and too stylistic with a lack of content, just like 300.
It's not that low but certainly deserves to be higher.
shareIm not surprised at the IMDB rating, this is not a film for everybody and for people that just want to watch a fun film without diving deep into it they will probably be disappointed. I think this is a masterpiece that has several layers to it that absolutely cannot be consumed fully in only 1 viewing.
"Come in, dispatch. Send more paramedics."
A film should stand on its on merits without requiring anyone read the source material. Case in point: Unless you read the book, David Lynch's Dune was an incoherent mess. And even then it barely captured the spirit of the book. Same thing with The Lovely Bones, which was turned into a confusing film. Seeing Watchmen, I can kind of see where they were going with some of the ideas but I'm not a fan of comic books; filmmakers shouldn't just assume that everyone read the comics or graphic novel or whatever you want to call it. Message to filmmakers: psst, you'll get a more receptive audience if you include everyone.
share[deleted]