This will not cover The DVD release solely, but will cover the movie in general.
Having read review upon review, for hours and hours, from places like Amazon, Metacritic, and many random forums, This movie can arguably be one of the most controversial ones out there. Some claim it has no plot; others say it has too much of one to watch only once. Some think it was dumb; others herald it as one of the greatest masterpieces of all time. Some say it was a poor book-to-movie rendition; others say it was closer than most other titles in that field. I could go on. but I think you get the picture.
(Current cover art for the graphic novel.)Watchmen is based of a graphic novel of the same name, which is on Times Magazine's top 100 novels of all time.
The story is set in New York, the year is 1985. Richard Nixon is the current president, being on his 5th term. The Doomsday clock is set to five minutes before midnight, signaling that the threat of a nuclear war is very, very real.
Thanks to an Act passed in 1977, Masked Vigilantes, which were rampant for quite a number of years, Had to reveal their identities or quit taking the law into their own hands. This was due to the typical public switcharound of liking something, then getting used to it, then ending up hating it.
It is interesting that although all of the men and women that wore costumes considered themselves heroes or villains, only one had actually any power. His name is Dr. Manhattan, who by a freak accident on a science base in an "intrinsic field Subtractor", which converted every last atom in his body into something more divine. He was taken in by the military as a tool trained to keep other nations in fear of America. He was also considered to be a member of the Watchmen group.
(The members of the Watchmen team, starting from the blue guy and going clockwise by heads: Dr Manhattan, Nite Owl, Rorschach, The Comedian, Ozymandias, Silk Spectre.)The story is mainly narrated by one of the 6 members of the Watchmen team, Rorschach. He sees that another member of the former Watchmen team was murdered, The Comedian, and after seeing some clues come to light, focuses heavily on the idea that someone is "picking off costumed heroes." He tries to convince and warn his friend Daniel, who was the hero "Nite Owl," who at first doesn't listen. HE then tries to warn Dr Manhattan and Laurie, Laurie being the Silk Spectre. As the story progresses, it is revealed that someone is indeed trying to get all the heroes out of the way so that the master plan can take place with no interference.
Now the review part.
Watchmen: somewhere between 2.5 and 3 out of 5.
The story is deep. It is a movie that has to be seen more than once to get the entire picture. The movie does follow the novel it is based off of very well, although it does have significant differences that, if you have read the novel as well as seen the movie, affect the entire movie and even the ending.
The flow and presentation of the story is very, very slow. Too slow in some parts. The amount of material covered is impressive (the director's cut of the dvd being over 3 hours long), but the flow makes it feel like it is about two hours longer at some parts. But the flow is very direct and easy to follow.
Character development is almost nonexistent. The only character you really, truly get to know is Rorschach, and that is because his diary entries populate about half the movie, explaining his thoughts and feelings about what is going on as it unfolds.
The gratuitous adult scenes could have been left out entirely. Those did not need to be added in there. It is directly alluded to in the novel, it could have been the same in the movie.
Worth watching, and more than once, but only if you feel you can watch a movie for (what feels like) four or five hours.
~Koubo
Yeah, the movie's definitely a very, very good one, it just could have been so much better than it was is all. I think probably one of the things that hurt it the most was actually trying to be exactly like the novel from right off the pages. It really should have been more of it's own interpretation of what the novel was meant to be all about rather than focusing a bit too much on making it more of a blockbuster rather than a work of art like the novel was. Far too much of it got lost in translation as a result.
ReplyDeleteI've always been one who personally believes it should have been longer though, actually, maybe actually crossing the 3 hour threshold rather than just 2 hours 40 minutes. That probably would have given it more time to delve deeper into what it should have.
I also fully agree about it being far too gratuitous with the content as well. I mean the novel was not that much more innocent either mind you, but not nearly THAT bad. That really was time that would have been better spent focusing on other things that needed more focus on.
I still haven't seen that movie, which is sad because when I first saw the preview for it at The Dark Knight, I was way super excited to see it. But, then I talked to people who had seen it (after it came out) and they all told my that my money would be better spent seeing something else and to wait until Watchmen came to the dollar theater or on DVD. I still am leary to watch it for fear that it won't live up to what I expected of it, but I probably will eventually see it, if for any reason, so I can say I did.
ReplyDeleteI did hear one interesting thing that nobody knew about from the previews and for those of you who have seen the movie, you can confirm it. Is it true that you can see Dr. Manhatten's junk throughout the entire movie? If so, why did they need to put that in? That's easily something that could have been left out.
I can't really give an opinion of what I thought about the movie, since I haven't seen it, but from what you describe, it could have been done much better than it was.
@Bryson: Well I'd say if you're interested in checking it out, see if you can get a hold of the novel sometime and read that instead. Not that the movie isn't worth watching, but the novel actually might live up to your expectations a lot more.
ReplyDeleteAs for Dr. Manhattan, heh, yeah, unfortunately that is very true....... Although it is right out of novel actually. Basically the idea is that he has no concept of human nature, which also means he has no concept for the idea of needing to wear clothing, and that's why he's naked all the time. Not entirely sure why there's a need felt to actually show the full nudity of it though. It probably has to do with some sort of artistic merits of what the author wanted to portray or something, and because of that I'm not entirely sure it would have been left out of the movie anyways.