New Watchmen Trailer

[Pharaoh]

Ya seriously, I've been waiting for someone to document seeing it last night.

We got rid of our tickets at Temple Marketplace, decided to spend the extra two bucks per ticket and go see it at IMAX. Roger Eberts review praised how much more visually engulfing the movie is at that size, so, AMC Deer Valley IMAX, here we come tonight!

Woohoo, can't wait!

[TiLT]

Just returned from a late-night showing of the movie here in Norway. I'm impressed. I loved every minute of the movie, and it was better than I had expected. In fact, I can't imagine Hollywood ever being able to do the story more justice than this. They don't hold back on gore or nudity, and the story is intact and faithfully reproduced (some things have been removed or reduced, but almost never changed, and if they have, the changes are minor and follow the same theme). There is some added action, but it doesn't detract from the story (though it makes the superheroes feel slightly more like actual superheroes).

I'm now eagerly awaiting the release of Watchmen on Blu-ray.

[DamageInc]

Just got 4 free tickets from the Best Buy deal.
I bought 2 1600 point DLC cards and they gave me two of the Watchmen packs.

I'm going next week, can't wait.

The box included an exclusive sneak peak of the movie which was cool, but did not include the "behind the scenes clips" as stated on the box.

[wonderpug]

Impression:  The girl cosplaying as Silk Spectre 1 did an incredible job with her costume and hairdo.  Looked straight out of the 1940 group photo.

[PeteRock]

As with most, Rorschach was by far my favorite character in the book, and the actor playing him did the character justice.  He recreated his exact mannerisms, facial expressions, he even looked just like him.  His portrayal of Rorschach exceeded all expectations.

The film as a whole was like watching the book come to life.  And as I loved the book, I also loved the film.  Although I will say that while the book was dark, I don't think I really grasped how dark the story was until I saw it in motion.  The film showed just how dark the book was.

As others have said, a few elements were removed from the storyline, but all of the most important elements were not only included, but brought faithfully and completely to life.  Rorschach's "I'm not locked in here with you, you are locked in here with me" comment got a theater full of applause.

Fans of the book will not be disappointed as it was an absolutely faithful, accurate, loyal portrayal of the graphic novel.  Those who have not read the book or are turned off by dark, violent, or gory films, may not really appreciate Watchmen, but as a fan of the source material I absolutely loved it.

My wife managed to finish the book literally minutes before the trailers started.  And she liked the film even more than the book.  And with it being fresh in her mind, you could see the awe in her face at how accurate the film was.  She and I both feel that the "adjusted" ending in the film is actually better than what takes place in the book.  It made more sense, it was more fitting of the story's universe, and it actually improved the story rather than take away from it.  Purists may be apalled by these comments, but I think the filmmakers made the story better, which is rarely something you can say about Hollywood.

But what we still can't get over is just how fantastic the film Rorschach was.  Phenomenal.  Jaime thought he absolutely made the film and really took the authenticity to another level.

On a side note, we got to see the new trailers for Terminator Salvation, Star Trek, and Public Enemies.   

[kathode]

Yeah I thought it was great.  It gave me more reasons why I never see blockbusters in the theater though.  Absolutely jam-packed at ours last night, and about an hour in, the theater had to be around 90 degrees.  Three hours in that was tough.  By the end I was coated in sweat.  I think I would've enjoyed the movie much more had I not been fantasizing about running out the exit into the cold air.

I thought the ending was good.  Really it was a near-genius way of wrapping everything together.  It fit with the whole nuclear, cold-war theme and it's very tough to poke holes in any of the logic.  I still believe the comic book ending is a better comic book ending.  It's big, convoluted, and diabolical, and fits with the whole supervillian vibe much better.  But I'm happy to admit the movie ending is probably about the best movie ending they could have come up with.  More snappy and grounded while remaining very sinister.  Lots of similarities with the Dark Knight ending actually.

Very big 

[Caine]

i wholly look forward to this today.  glad to hear it's that good, even if the reviews have been all over the map. 

[RedJak]

I saw it this morning at 10 AM showing that was sparsely attended.  Although I have never read the novel I have been on the internet long enough to have information subtly enter my head though diffusion.  It is just odd to see the characters and to be able to name them without ever seeing the source.  

Anyways, I liked it and I think it works as a film partially because of the Nolan Batman films.  Those films created an expectation of a serious take on superheroes that broader audiences can accept and other films (like this) can comment and build upon.  Much like the superhero comics of the 80s took themselves (very) seriously as a genre.  

My advice is to go into it like you just got a miniseries on DVD and are sitting down to watch the whole thing.  Its about the little stories more than the grand story.        

    

[Moliere]

Rorschach's "I'm not locked in here with you, you are locked in here with me" comment got a theater full of applause.

They got this line, but dropped the ball on his second best line ever: "Somebody knew Roy Chess. Somebody hired him. Don't worry...won't insult legendary underworld solidarity by suggesting you surrender name without torture."   

She and I both feel that the "adjusted" ending in the film is actually better than what takes place in the book.  It made more sense, it was more fitting of the story's universe, and it actually improved the story rather than take away from it. 

I'm one of those purists who have to disagree with this assessment.

Spoiler for Hiden:

I understand why they did it for the sake of brevity allowing them to drop additional subplots (psychiatrist's home life, news vendor/comic reading boy, missing artists, etc.) but logically I don't think it made more sense than the comic. I don't see the world staying in peace because they're afraid of Dr. Manhattan.

[The Grue]

For those who have seen this, I need to know something.  I love the comic and know it has some violence in it.  However, I hate violent movies and to be more specific ones which show gore.  Nothing ruins a movie more for me than having someone get shot in the head and seeing splatter or watching some guy's head cave in.  The guy who did this is the guy who did 300, which I have never seen since I know how violent it is.  Should I skip this movie?  I'd hate to because I love the graphic novel so much, but I really don't want to sit through some of these scenes that I know could be in there from the graphic novel and see grossness.

[th'FOOL]

For those who have seen this, I need to know something.  I love the comic and know it has some violence in it.  However, I hate violent movies and to be more specific ones which show gore.  Nothing ruins a movie more for me than having someone get shot in the head and seeing splatter or watching some guy's head cave in.  The guy who did this is the guy who did 300, which I have never seen since I know how violent it is.  Should I skip this movie?  I'd hate to because I love the graphic novel so much, but I really don't want to sit through some of these scenes that I know could be in there from the graphic novel and see grossness.

There is some gore, but not a whole lot.  It'd be a shame for you to miss it due to a small handful of scenes...

[Moliere]

For those who have seen this, I need to know something.  I love the comic and know it has some violence in it.  However, I hate violent movies and to be more specific ones which show gore.  Nothing ruins a movie more for me than having someone get shot in the head and seeing splatter or watching some guy's head cave in.  The guy who did this is the guy who did 300, which I have never seen since I know how violent it is.  Should I skip this movie?  I'd hate to because I love the graphic novel so much, but I really don't want to sit through some of these scenes that I know could be in there from the graphic novel and see grossness.

Skip it. There is plenty of gore and graphic violence. Even without Dr. Manhattan's blue shlong dangling out in every other scene it would earn an R rating for the violence.

[The Grue]

There is some gore, but not a whole lot.  It'd be a shame for you to miss it due to a small handful of scenes...

Skip it. There is plenty of gore and graphic violence. Even without Dr. Manhattan's blue shlong dangling out in every other scene it would earn an R rating for the violence.

Alright, I guess this might be a subjective matter since I got two different answers.  Could I trouble one of you to post some examples of what kind of content is in the movie?

[wonderpug]

For those who have seen this, I need to know something.  I love the comic and know it has some violence in it.  However, I hate violent movies and to be more specific ones which show gore.  Nothing ruins a movie more for me than having someone get shot in the head and seeing splatter or watching some guy's head cave in.  The guy who did this is the guy who did 300, which I have never seen since I know how violent it is.  Should I skip this movie?  I'd hate to because I love the graphic novel so much, but I really don't want to sit through some of these scenes that I know could be in there from the graphic novel and see grossness.

I'm guessing you'll want to skip it.  It's not non-stop gore like other movies but they don't pull any punches with the gory scenes when they do come.

You've read the graphic novel so I'll just go right out and spoiler list a few of the things that'll be rough for you:

Reminder: Spoilers!

Spoiler for Hiden:

Rorschach flashback where he brutally kills a guy with a cleaver.
Some pretty gruesome aftermaths of Manhattan making people explode.
Man's arms getting sawed off.
Kennedy assassination recreated with a close, clear view.

There's more, but from how you described yourself I'm guessing that'll be enough to help you decide.

[The Grue]

For those who have seen this, I need to know something.  I love the comic and know it has some violence in it.  However, I hate violent movies and to be more specific ones which show gore.  Nothing ruins a movie more for me than having someone get shot in the head and seeing splatter or watching some guy's head cave in.  The guy who did this is the guy who did 300, which I have never seen since I know how violent it is.  Should I skip this movie?  I'd hate to because I love the graphic novel so much, but I really don't want to sit through some of these scenes that I know could be in there from the graphic novel and see grossness.

I'm guessing you'll want to skip it.  It's not non-stop gore like other movies but they don't pull any punches with the gory scenes when they do come.

You've read the graphic novel so I'll just go right out and spoiler list a few of the things that'll be rough for you:

Reminder: Spoilers!

Spoiler for Hiden:

Rorschach flashback where he brutally kills a guy with a cleaver.
Some pretty gruesome aftermaths of Manhattan making people explode.
Man's arms getting sawed off.
Kennedy assassination recreated with a close, clear view.

There's more, but from how you described yourself I'm guessing that'll be enough to help you decide.

Yeah, I guess I will probably skip.  I liked it back in the day when movies hinted at gruesome things, but left it to your imagination.  Now Hollywood feels they have to show everything and it is a big reason I don't watch too many movies anymore.

[wonderpug]

Yeah, I guess I will probably skip.  I liked it back in the day when movies hinted at gruesome things, but left it to your imagination.  Now Hollywood feels they have to show everything and it is a big reason I don't watch too many movies anymore.

I get what you're saying in general, but in the case of Watchmen they didn't add any gore for gore's sake; it was all stuff that was in the graphic novel. 

[The Grue]

Yeah, I guess I will probably skip.  I liked it back in the day when movies hinted at gruesome things, but left it to your imagination.  Now Hollywood feels they have to show everything and it is a big reason I don't watch too many movies anymore.

I get what you're saying in general, but in the case of Watchmen they didn't add any gore for gore's sake; it was all stuff that was in the graphic novel. 

No, I know that.  I don't want to see it represented in film in high detail.  In the comic there's maybe a panel or two and it looks like a cartoon.  Hollywood has gotten good with gore and I just don't like looking at it, despite the fact I know it isn't real.  Doesn't matter whether they added it or not...I still don't like it.  You can still get the point across without showing it at all.  For instance, let's say you have a gun pointed at a guy's head.  In the older days, they would cut to something else (black or do a transition) and you would hear a gunshot.  You knew what happened.  Now they feel they have to show it and I don't like looking at it.

[Razgon]

Yeah, I guess I will probably skip.  I liked it back in the day when movies hinted at gruesome things, but left it to your imagination.  Now Hollywood feels they have to show everything and it is a big reason I don't watch too many movies anymore.

I get what you're saying in general, but in the case of Watchmen they didn't add any gore for gore's sake; it was all stuff that was in the graphic novel. 

No, I know that.  I don't want to see it represented in film in high detail.  In the comic there's maybe a panel or two and it looks like a cartoon.  Hollywood has gotten good with gore and I just don't like looking at it, despite the fact I know it isn't real.  Doesn't matter whether they added it or not...I still don't like it.  You can still get the point across without showing it at all.  For instance, let's say you have a gun pointed at a guy's head.  In the older days, they would cut to something else (black or do a transition) and you would hear a gunshot.  You knew what happened.  Now they feel they have to show it and I don't like looking at it.

but...but, you'r a GRUE!

anyways, I get what you mean, although, I'm getting (unfortunately) hardened to it in movies. What I dont appriciate is the former serious news shows on tv that now HAS to show you the bloodstain where someone was shot for instance...now that is just pure idiocy, because, its just for shockeffect

[Isgrimnur]

Yeah, I guess I will probably skip.  I liked it back in the day when movies hinted at gruesome things, but left it to your imagination.  Now Hollywood feels they have to show everything and it is a big reason I don't watch too many movies anymore.

I get what you're saying in general, but in the case of Watchmen they didn't add any gore for gore's sake; it was all stuff that was in the graphic novel. 

No, I know that.  I don't want to see it represented in film in high detail.  In the comic there's maybe a panel or two and it looks like a cartoon.  Hollywood has gotten good with gore and I just don't like looking at it, despite the fact I know it isn't real.  Doesn't matter whether they added it or not...I still don't like it.  You can still get the point across without showing it at all.  For instance, let's say you have a gun pointed at a guy's head.  In the older days, they would cut to something else (black or do a transition) and you would hear a gunshot.  You knew what happened.  Now they feel they have to show it and I don't like looking at it.

but...but, you'r[e] a GRUE!

He stays in the dark so that he doesn't have to see what happens when he eats.

[CeeKay]

saw it today and I loved it even without reading the graphic novel, but I don't see myself seeing it again in the theater and will probably wait until blu ray, unlike one of my friends who is planning on seeing it again tomorrow.

[Moliere]

Rorschach an Objectivist hero?

he’s also the only man around who stands up for everyone’s right to be judged individually on the basis of their character and actions, their right not to be a means to someone else’s higher end—no matter what one might think of that end. He knows what it means to be human—that’s why he has to condemn those he kills as having betrayed the essence of man qua man, relegating them to the status of dogs to be put down.

[Tebunker]

Jackie Earle Haley as Rorschach is awesome. I find it funny that he plays two of my all time favorite movie characters. I always loved Bad News Bears, and the Kelly Leak character just rocks, and now that he is Rorschach and a well done role at that is just awesome.

I was very happy with a lot of the movie. I thought the sex scene was overdone and not really tasteful, but that was about it. I am alright with the ending, and I understand how the comic's ending would've been harder to fit in. Otherwise, I'll probably grab the Blu-Ray. My wife liked it, and I'll watch it again.

[Fireball1244]

I loved the movie. And loved it even more the second time I saw it, when I wasn't distracted by the deviations from the novel. The opening credit sequence is just inspired, and while at times the movie's forward momentum lagged, it was always because of the sheer reverence Snyder and crew were paying to the source material.

I look forward to a directors cut, which should restore a lot of what was missing in this cut:

Spoiler for Hiden:

The Black Freighter, for one, some scenes with the kid and news vendor, and the murder of Hollis Mason

I'd give the movie a solid B+, based on A+ source material.

[jblank]

I had read the graphic novel, my brother had not, but we BOTH loved the film. I have no qualms about giving it ***1/2 out of ****.

[CeeKay]

$55.7 million this weekend.  It pretty much destroyed the competetion 

[stimpy]

Saw it over the weekend with 2 friends, neither of which read the book or knew much about the film, other than my recommendation that we go see it.
The one I thought might like it pretty much loved it.
The other, not so much. Thought it was good, but kinda long and involved for anyone who had little knowledge of the source.

It was great having them lean over to me throughout the movie asking questions about characters and plot lines.
Made the inner geek in me very happy to have the answers

[PeteRock]

She and I both feel that the "adjusted" ending in the film is actually better than what takes place in the book.  It made more sense, it was more fitting of the story's universe, and it actually improved the story rather than take away from it. 

I'm one of those purists who have to disagree with this assessment.

Spoiler for Hiden:

I understand why they did it for the sake of brevity allowing them to drop additional subplots (psychiatrist's home life, news vendor/comic reading boy, missing artists, etc.) but logically I don't think it made more sense than the comic. I don't see the world staying in peace because they're afraid of Dr. Manhattan.

Spoiler for Hiden:

You use logic as the reason behind your assessment, however I fail to understand how humanity uniting against an alien species is any more logical than governments uniting against a commonly feared real-world foe.  I think the change grounds the film more in reality than a teleported squid monster.  The Viet Cong surrendured to Dr. Manhattan out of fear for his god-like powers.  The U.S.S.R. was stockpiling nuclear warheads out of fear for Dr. Manhattan's powers.  The United States both respected and feared what Dr. Manhattan was capable of, hence their confidence in Dr. Manhattan's ability to stave off nuclear war.  But, following multiple attacks around the world, all seemingly at the hands of Dr. Manhattan, eventually leading to an alleged attack on United States soil, why wouldn't humanity be any less likely to unite in peace against the most feared organism on the planet.  I don't think a common fear against something from another planet is any more logical than peace born from fear of something so much closer to home.  But, as I only read the novel in the last year, I'm not as much a purist as those who have been reading the story for over 20 years, and I appreciate the modernization and grounding of the story as I felt the squid monster took what was otherwise a realistic look at vigilantes and the psychological aspects of such questionable behavior and gave it too much of a comic book-ey ending.  I can see how some wouldn't like the adjusted conclusion, as it would have been pretty cool to see a giant squid monster asplode in downtown New York, but I think the Dr. Manhattan twist grouned the story a bit better.

Jackie Earle Haley as Rorschach is awesome.

Hell.  Yeah.  I was almost creeped out by how much he looked like the character from the novel.  He was spot-on down to the freckles on his face. 

What I'm most excited about is that my wife finally read the graphic novel (she finished the story moments before the movie trailers started at the theater), and as we normally read different books, or she's read certain stories a while ago and I've only gotten around to them recently, it's really nice to be able to chat about the book and the film and our thoughts on both.  She loved both the book and the movie so much that we may be seeing it again sometime soon. 

[Moliere]

Spoiler for Hiden:

You use logic as the reason behind your assessment, however I fail to understand how humanity uniting against an alien species is any more logical than governments uniting against a commonly feared real-world foe.  I think the change grounds the film more in reality than a teleported squid monster.  The Viet Cong surrendured to Dr. Manhattan out of fear for his god-like powers.  The U.S.S.R. was stockpiling nuclear warheads out of fear for Dr. Manhattan's powers.  The United States both respected and feared what Dr. Manhattan was capable of, hence their confidence in Dr. Manhattan's ability to stave off nuclear war.  But, following multiple attacks around the world, all seemingly at the hands of Dr. Manhattan, eventually leading to an alleged attack on United States soil, why wouldn't humanity be any less likely to unite in peace against the most feared organism on the planet.  I don't think a common fear against something from another planet is any more logical than peace born from fear of something so much closer to home.  But, as I only read the novel in the last year, I'm not as much a purist as those who have been reading the story for over 20 years, and I appreciate the modernization and grounding of the story as I felt the squid monster took what was otherwise a realistic look at vigilantes and the psychological aspects of such questionable behavior and gave it too much of a comic book-ey ending.  I can see how some wouldn't like the adjusted conclusion, as it would have been pretty cool to see a giant squid monster asplode in downtown New York, but I think the Dr. Manhattan twist grouned the story a bit better.

There can be no compromise even in the face of Armageddon.

Todd Klein's movie review in the form of Rorschach's journal.

In theater, usual drek previews, one with some promise. Film begins. Not exactly as book, but capturing correct mood. Story unfolds. Feels right. Actors well chosen, convincing. All unknown to me. (Admit, don’t get out much.) Past credits, many scenes and dialogue right from book. Subplots missing, minor characters only walk-ons. Compromise. But, time of film must be considered. Actually surprised at how much of book on screen. Bladder convinced film long enough.

[PeteRock]

Spoiler for Hiden:

You use logic as the reason behind your assessment, however I fail to understand how humanity uniting against an alien species is any more logical than governments uniting against a commonly feared real-world foe.  I think the change grounds the film more in reality than a teleported squid monster.  The Viet Cong surrendured to Dr. Manhattan out of fear for his god-like powers.  The U.S.S.R. was stockpiling nuclear warheads out of fear for Dr. Manhattan's powers.  The United States both respected and feared what Dr. Manhattan was capable of, hence their confidence in Dr. Manhattan's ability to stave off nuclear war.  But, following multiple attacks around the world, all seemingly at the hands of Dr. Manhattan, eventually leading to an alleged attack on United States soil, why wouldn't humanity be any less likely to unite in peace against the most feared organism on the planet.  I don't think a common fear against something from another planet is any more logical than peace born from fear of something so much closer to home.  But, as I only read the novel in the last year, I'm not as much a purist as those who have been reading the story for over 20 years, and I appreciate the modernization and grounding of the story as I felt the squid monster took what was otherwise a realistic look at vigilantes and the psychological aspects of such questionable behavior and gave it too much of a comic book-ey ending.  I can see how some wouldn't like the adjusted conclusion, as it would have been pretty cool to see a giant squid monster asplode in downtown New York, but I think the Dr. Manhattan twist grouned the story a bit better.

There can be no compromise even in the face of Armageddon.

Fair enough.  I'm just glad I wasn't turned off by the ending, and it was a pleasant surprise, at least for me, to finally see Hollywood make a positive change in a film rather than once again ruining a beloved franchise. 

Todd Klein's movie review in the form of Rorschach's journal.

In theater, usual drek previews, one with some promise. Film begins. Not exactly as book, but capturing correct mood. Story unfolds. Feels right. Actors well chosen, convincing. All unknown to me. (Admit, don’t get out much.) Past credits, many scenes and dialogue right from book. Subplots missing, minor characters only walk-ons. Compromise. But, time of film must be considered. Actually surprised at how much of book on screen. Bladder convinced film long enough.

Nice.   

[Isgrimnur]

Wolverine/Rorschach I'm a Marvel. I'm a DC.

[Moliere]

Wolverine/Rorschach I'm a Marvel. I'm a DC.

 

[Nth Power]

I saw it yesterday and thought it was fanastic.   I read the graphic novel a few years ago, but didn't reread it before seeing the movie.  Characters were almost exactly how I imagined they would be, so kudos on the casting.  The only thing I didn't like was the music in some spots, but it's a minor complaint.   I can't wait to pick it up on DVD.

[farley2k]

Wolverine/Rorschach I'm a Marvel. I'm a DC.

 

That was pretty funny.

[CeeKay]

Wolverine/Rorschach I'm a Marvel. I'm a DC.

 

That was pretty funny.

On a scale of 1 to 10 what kind of whores are we talking about?

[msteelers]

Just got back from seeing it. Loved it. I hadn't read the book before, but I finished it last night, and I am completely stunned at how faithful this adaptation is.

I'm surprised there are some complaints about the music. I thought the music was great throughout.

[CeeKay]

me and a friend were talking last night, and I mentioned something I noticed but neither of us were definite if it was something that happened or just a trick of the lighting:  was Nixon's nose getting bigger everytime they showed him?

[PeteRock]

me and a friend were talking last night, and I mentioned something I noticed but neither of us were definite if it was something that happened or just a trick of the lighting:  was Nixon's nose getting bigger everytime they showed him?

One of my gripes was that the film's Nixon was terribly unconvincing.  After seeing clips from a film like Frost/Nixon, the film version of Nixon in Watchmen with all of his makeup was reminiscent of Dick Tracy.

[Moliere]

This would be an example of not respecting the source material. Watchmen cartoon?!

Rorschach is friends to the animals...when he's not clowning around.

 

[CeeKay]

This would be an example of not respecting the source material. Watchmen cartoon?!

Rorschach is friends to the animals...when he's not clowning around.

 

Watchmen coming to Saturday morning!

 

you're mad that I called you a gimp, aintcha?

[Moliere]

Watchmen coming to Saturday morning!

 

you're mad that I called you a gimp, aintcha?

Due to time constraints, I only read 1 in 10 of your posts. That one didn't make the cut.