Most Helpful Customer Reviews
|
|
38 of 44 people found the following review helpful:
3.0 out of 5 stars
It's good, but..., 27 Jul 2009
...this isn't the Directors cut.
Which means us Brits/Europeans are getting ripped off, seing as the version released in the States is the Directors cut, Snyders fully realised version of the film (not counting the blatently ridiculous 'Ultimate Edition, with the Black Frighter edited in).
Why we don't get the full version now is simply because Warners/Paramount take us for a bunch of mugs, the kind of mugs who'll by the same film twice.
My advice - you got a multi-region DVD player? Import the US Directors cut.
|
|
|
166 of 203 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
We'll never see the likes of this movie again..., 18 Mar 2009
'The Dark Knight' is a fantastic movie.
But if I had to go by how much a movie has affected me? 'Watchmen' wins hands down, for consider: never before has it occurred to me to go to the cinema twice to see the same movie. After seeing it on the Friday of its release, I needed to go back again that Sunday.
When I Read Clive Barker's 'Galilee' some years back I was stunned and amazed... and strangely gutted: I would never have the joy of reading that book again for the first time.
That's how I felt about 'Watchmen' when I first saw it.
It is not like any other superhero movie. Not like any other movie, period. I was amazed they got away with it. How did they get away with it?! For 20 years they tried to bring the original graphic novel source material to the big screen. After so many false starts (remember when Arnie - the now Governor of California - was going to be Dr. Manhattan?!) all anyone had a right to expect was a movie that had nothing much to do with the comic at all. That's why I'm stunned: It's so faithful I cannot help thinking, "How did they get away with it?"
Even if you don't like the movie, you will still think to yourself, "Well I definitely ain't never seen a movie like that before..."
For me 'Watchmen' is more layered than 'The Dark Knight', thus making repeated viewings so enriching.
Sure, 'The Dark Knight' is layered also, but its intentions are transparent, meaning you 'get it' the first time you see it. Its moody cinematography clearly marks it as a serious 'mature' movie.
'Watchmen' is far more subversive:
Here you have a movie which is bright and colourful and - gosh! - doesn't it look fun?! So why does it make some people uncomfortable? Because, on the surface, the movie taunts its audience by appearing to be yet another 'X-Men'.
The visual style of the movie may feel like a comic book, but the brutality of its violence honours the irony of The Comedian character's name: this is all a bad joke - me, you, this world's politicians, this petty thug whose face I'm smashing in, and yet ain't a one of us getting punished by the law for beating someone up cos we're wearing stupid costumes and that makes it all right.
Whereas every other Superhero Movie - including 'The Dark Knight' - celebrates the genre, 'Watchmen' gleefully deconstructs it. And it doesn't need shadow and smoke and dim lighting in order to do so.
On the surface everything is there for yet another formulaic Superhero Movie. After all, it looks the part...
... but this is where the genius of Watchmen's subversion comes in, for although the movie can be enjoyed on purely a visual visceral level, woven through its stock superhero tropes you have tales of rape, cancer and impotency -
- you even have one of the 'Good Guys' assassinating John F. Kennedy in the opening credits.
Compared to that 'The Dark Knight' seems positively pedestrian.
Even the movie's flaws (with the exception of President Nixon's large prosthetic nose) unintentionally work in its favour by holding up a spotlight to its own absurdity of grown men and women dressing up in Hallowe'en costumes.
One purpose of the movie's frequent slow-motion motif that I immediately noticed is that is gives the character Rorschach and Dr Manhattan's voice-overs room to breathe, whilst at the same time lending the movie its comic book look; and yet deliberately confounds your expectations by not being a comic superhero movie.
It's as if The Comedian (a thinly disguised 'Captain America') directed this movie -
A female protestor gets punched in the face without hesitation... by one of the 'Good Guys'. A pregnant woman gets shot at point-blank range... by one of the 'Good Guys'.
It you were to take The Dark Knight's premise of a 'gritty' superhero-movie-for-adults to its logical next level then 'Watchmen' would be the result. Be careful what you ask for because you just got it.
And you thought 'The Phantom Menace' 'raped your childhood'. You'll never look at 'Iron Man' and 'Spider-Man' the same way again.
The Nite Owl character (a thinly disguised 'Batman') is so hung up he becomes impotent the first time he's with Silk Spectre (a thinly disguised 'Wonder Woman'). And yet later - after cracking some heads - ? No problem. That's what makes the 'love scene' in the Nite Owl's airship so hilarious and appropriate: these people get off on beating up some poor schmucks in order that they can become 'whole' and connect. Even this is made blatant by the way the characters grin and mug at each other after fighting the Bad Guys: they're turned on by the violence they're dishing out and they're not ashamed to admit it. The song choice for that love scene?! "Hallelujah" right enough!! LOL!!! That's some serious screwed up Freudian stuff right there...
The Comedian is definitely behind the lens of this movie, chomping on his cigar.
Critics point to the lack of experience in the unknown actress who plays Silk Spectre. Yet, unintentionally, that works in the character's favour: she has an out-of-her-depth naivety, only 'coming alive' when fighting the 'Bad Guys'. Dr Manhattan (a thinly disguised 'Superman') shows the viewer logically what would happen if someone really was superhuman: a guy so powerful that his intelligence has caused him to lose his ability to relate to his fellow man.
"God help us all," right enough as The Comedian says upon noticing this.
And the coup de grace of unintentional flaws which work in the movie's favour? The Osymandias superhero character who ultimately 'saves the world' is flat, bland and totally uninteresting.
Just like they say: bad guys are so much more interesting to play. And this movie makes its 'Good Guys' so flawed that you can't tell them from the 'Bad Guys'.
As to the graphic violence -
As much as I love horror fiction I detest horror movies: they're nothing more than torture-porn.
At the same time, however, I believe the director Jack Snyder is deliberately shaming the audience into guilt because of its lust for violence. Watchmen's violence is not meant to be realistic - the slo-mo effect makes sure of that, whilst simultaneously glorying in it because, hey, that's what you want, right? The Good Guys and The Bad Guys duelling it out? Sure you do, that's what Superhero Movies are all about. You like to hear the crack of bones breaking? Okay. We'll show you it too. We'll show you it in such a way that you feel it, with slo-mo effect to rub your nose in it. After all, that's what you want.
But why do this?
A one point The Comedian character gets punched repeatedly in the face by a fellow 'Good Guy' superhero, until he falls to his knees.
With burst lip and bloody nose The Comedian looks up, grins, and says, "This is what you like, huh? This is what gets you hot?"
The movie is taunting its audience, The Comedian looking into camera and speaking directly to them: you like punch-ups in Superhero Movies, don'tcha? So, we're giving it to ya, whatcha complaining about?
The violence is more graphic than it needs to be in order to make its audience uncomfortable, and thereby shame it.
Remember, 'Watchmen' is an anti-Superhero Movie.
'Watchmen' doesn't 'update' the Superhero Movie so much as crush it beneath its heel.
Welcome to the world of post-'Dark Knight'.
|
|
|
7 of 8 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
Go ahead and watch the Watchmen, 18 Jun 2009
Cinematic superheroes are in a bit of a predicament these days. Most of them escaped their humble beginnings in 1930's cartoons, endured the Cold War paranoia of the 1950's, suffered the indignities of 1960's camp, and fell out of favour in the 1990's before being reborn in the new millennium bigger, smarter, cooler and edgier.
The question is, where can they go from here?
Written in 1986 when comic books were going through a period of stagnation, the Watchmen graphic novel chose to deconstruct the near impenetrable mythos surrounding superheroes by taking them back to their roots, showing them as real, fragile human beings with very human drives, desires and fears thinly veiled behind their crime-fighting masks. It was a landmark title, essentially representing the apex of the graphic novel, so it was inevitable that it would be turned into a film sooner or later. And 23 years later, here it is.
Kicking off in an alternate reality 1980's where Nixon is still President and the Doomsday Clock is ticking ominously towards nuclear armageddon, Watchmen opens by showing the gruesome murder of a former crime-fighter known as the Comedian. His former friend Rorschach, believing there's more to his murder than simple robbery, begins to dig deeper while trying to recruit his former crime-fighting comrades to help him in his quest. None of them are interested, having moved on with their lives since throwing down their masks. Night Owl is now a mild-mannered writer, Ozymandias is a successful business tycoon, Dr Manhattan is a scientist gifted with almost god-like powers and Silk Spectre is his lover.
Essentially a weapon of mass destruction in his own right, Manhattan has kept the balance of power between East and West more or less even since his accidental creation decades earlier. But when he is framed for murder, he exiles himself on Mars, leaving America unable to prevent a Soviet military build up. With no other choice, Nite Owl, Silk Spectre and Rorschach must reunite to get to the truth of the conspiracy before it's too late.
For someone who hadn't read the graphic novel before seeing the film, The Watchmen was a strange experience. On the one hand, I enjoyed the grim atmosphere, unforgiving violence and brooding menace that's on display. Make no mistake, The Watchmen is a distinctly adult film - this is no Joel Schumacher interpretation of Batman. Limbs get severed, bones get broken and enough blood is shed to fill several swimming pools. When people are in peril, you genuinely feel like bad things might happen. And applause must go to the truly unique and thought provoking ending. I won't spoil it for those who haven't seen it, but trust me, it's not your typical `good guys rush in and save the day' affair.
The actors also do a fine job. Patrick Wilson (having piled on some weight for the role) is passable as Nite Owl. Malin Akerman provides suitable eye candy as Silk Spectre, while Billy Cudrup (in CGI form) spends most of the film walking around in the nude as Dr Manhattan. And yes, it's full frontal. If you're immature, you're likely to get a giggle out of it, otherwise you'll just accept that its important to the character and move on. But the real star of the show is Jackie Earle Haley as gravel-voiced Rorscharch. Every moment he's on screen, it's just impossible not to have fun.
But on the down side, I found myself growing tired of the constant flashbacks and origin stories. I know there are a lot of characters, and I know that to understand their mind-sets and motivations in the present, we kind of need to see the events that shaped them in the past, but it's all done in such a heavy handed, pervasive way. You'll get about fifteen minutes of current events plot development, then suddenly a main character will start some turgid monologue and you just know you're going to have to endure a lengthy exposition detailing pretty much everything that's happened in their life up until that point.
The Watchmen is a l-o-n-g film. The theatrical version came in at 162 minutes, while the directors cut adds another twenty minutes on to this. Normally I'd start screaming about it being self-indulgent and bloated, but its hard to level that claim at Watchmen, mainly because it's difficult to pinpoint specific scenes that are ripe for cutting. They all add something in some way, but I can't escape the feeling that if it were twenty minutes shorter, it would have been a leaner, meaner movie.
Ultimately the blame lies at the feet director Zack Snyder for staying too close to the source material. Aside from some minor changes to the end, he's stayed absolutely true to the graphic novel - to such an extent that virtually every scene and piece of dialogue plays out exactly as it did in the book. His dedication is admirable, I suppose, but the problem is that it betrays a certain lack of confidence and imagination. Books and films are very different media, and what works in one doesn't necessarily translate over to the other. They say a picture is worth a thousand words, but presumably Zack Snyder doesn't feel the same way. There's no attempt to adapt it, to tailor it, to expand it into this new medium. The film literally is the graphic novel brought to life.
So I suppose in that sense, Watchmen is both a success and a failure. Like the graphic novel, it pretty much takes the genre to its logical conclusion. Which begs the question, where can comic book adaptations go from here?
|
|
|
Most Recent Customer Reviews
|
![Watchmen (2-Disc) Special Edition [DVD] [2009]](http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/61XwsYIHFdL._SL75_SS50_.jpg)
![Watchmen (1-Disc) [DVD] [2009]](http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/61r1SrReeKL._SL75_SS50_.jpg)
![Watchmen - Director's Cut [Blu-ray] [2009] [US Import]](http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/514KBN4XDrL._SL75_SS50_.jpg)
![Watchmen - Director's Cut (2-Disc) [Blu-ray] [2009]](http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51cG-a-Ri8L._SL75_SS50_.jpg)
![Watchmen - Tales Of The Black Freighter [DVD] [2009]](http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51jZfuOdwVL._SL500_SS90_.jpg)
![The Spirit [DVD] [2008]](http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51KypNF-3uL._SL500_SS90_.jpg)
DVD ~ Samuel L. Jackson
![Underworld 3: Rise Of The Lycans [DVD] [2008]](http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51EIwIgWATL._SL500_SS90_.jpg)
DVD ~ Rhona Mitra
![Knowing [DVD] [2009]](http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41qWKl7DNtL._SL500_SS90_.jpg)
DVD ~ Nicolas Cage
![Outlander [DVD] [2009]](http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/517fWT4OgrL._SL500_SS90_.jpg)
DVD ~ James Caviezel
