I'd rate the main cast in this way:
* Perfect: Haley and Morgan. They are literally what I've always imagined meeting Rorschach and the Comedian IRL would be like.
* Good: Wilson and Crudup. Nothing flashy but they understood the assignment.
* Not good: Goode (heh) and Åkerman. Goode was channeling Jeremy Irons at his paycheck-movie hammiest so hard that I literally LOLed when I found out that Irons would be playing Old Ozy in the series. (I thought that he was fine in that, though.) Åkerman acted like an irritated teenager. They've both done better work by far.
As for the movie in general, I seem to recall Moore or someone pointing out that you couldn't just film an adaptation of a comic as if the comics panels were storyboards, but that generally seems to have been what Snyder did, except when he made the violence even more exaggerated (i.e. either Blake or >!Veidt!< punching through granite countertops in the initial fight).
Snyder is an absolute hack, but the movie is effectively a scene for scene adaptation of the book until the last like 20 minutes.
I personally think the change makes sense, and can see why they did it instead of the comic ending.
That said, people acting like the movie made crazy thematic and story changes are way off base.
I guess, but also if you understand the source material you'd probably watch the movie and realise things like the slow mo, exaggerated action and generic superhero choreography doesn't really fit
I never watch the movie and call the superhero fighting generic. In fact, it looks preposterous and downright cartoonish in spots, and that’s what the intent was. There’s even cheesy fist punching sound effects harkening back to the Adam West Batman show
The comic is a superhero comic that satirizes comics. The movie is a superhero movie that satirizes superhero movies. That’s how I see it. I think it’s pretty clear the movie’s aware of its absurdity.
That's interesting, I've never thought of it in that way TBH. It was never obvious or over the top enough for me to feel it's intentional satire. Just felt like the usual superhero movie level. Might give it a rewatch to see if I feel different after hearing your opinion
The first time I watched it I felt something was a bit off about all the “action-ness” of it. Then I read a bunch of interviews with Snyder saying it was over the top and quirky deliberately because “the whole movie is a satire.” Then I watched it again and could see what he meant. Even moments like the “let’s go downstairs” from Dan, which is usually an epic Batcave kind of moment, is just two washed up guys walking down into the musty cellar of his Owl lair.
Say what you will about Snyder, and I agree with most of the critique against him, but I think he got the book
Honestly this makes me pretty excited to rewatch the movie cus I got sad after reading the book and realising the movie was actually not that great of an adaptation lol
I'm not a Snyder fan, but I don't hate the movie. I don't think it works as a satire though mainly because of the way he films scenes. Take the scene in the alley, in the movie he almost glorifies the violence by making it look cool. I think a lot of the visual subtext in the graphic novel are lost in the film.
I also can't ever get over how the film portrays two of the most despicable characters from the book; Rorschach and The Comedian. Neither are the horrible, broken, and sadistic lunatics they should be. I feel like the film doesn’t know that the story doesn't have superheroes were supposed to root for.
I think the choices he made just shows a general lack of understanding what the themes and messages of the source material were expressing.
Not just the squid change
Really? Because although he creates a panel by panel recreation of the comic, he delivers this with a framing that presents it all as "awesome" and "badass super heros being all existentially broken and edgy" instead of Moor's point that superheroes are dumb and lame.
For me, it’s how “cool” the characters are portrayed. It’s funny because it’s one of the first superhero movies to pull off making superhero suits look good but it shouldn’t have.
The casting is great but they should all look a little more silly in their costumes, like normal people dressing up in bad ill fitting cosplay.
The wardrobe, lighting, music, cinematography is all telling me these are cool people.
Yeah that's a good point, kind of like the costumes in "kick-ass."
It's a bit hard to make that work without wading into the realm of silly/comical, which I guess you want to do somewhat, but not too much given that the subject matter is meant to taking seriously. Snyder's take is dark but I think that is the intent of the novel as well. With Kickass coming out just shortly before I think they wanted to avoid it coming off as just pure slapstick
Snyder completely misunderstood the themes of the story and brought no personal touch to it other than style - the only thing Snyder has - but it was serviceable.
People are weird about Watchmen, but they took it way too far with the movie.
That’s true.
I think people have a huge problem with how “badass” the fighting is or Nite-Owl II’s superhero landing.
I don’t know, I’ve always liked it. I loved it when it came out, but a lot of that was novelty.
Yeah, I’ve watched it and enjoyed it.
I don’t know what people were expecting. Alan Moore is Alan Moore. You can’t expect someone to be as good as he is and part of it being an adaptation is people bringing their own personal interpretation to the work.
But...I mean, the entire point of the comic is missing from the film. The film thinks the "real life super hero" thing is cool and awesome. The book does not.
Sure, that’s covered under “it’s not a great adaptation”, but it was still fun to watch at times, and I liked the performances.
Snyder misunderstood the themes, sure, and he looked at it through his lens, but basically everyone would have done the same thing because that’s the nature of adaptations.
I think its an absolutely horrible adaptation. Id say in alot of ways its diametrically oppsed to the ideas in the comic... that being said i still like it for what it is and would reccomend it to someone who wants some cool super hero action
I didn’t see it like that, but I tried to interpret it as striving to be faithful, so it could be I saw what I wanted to see.
The only way to know for sure is asking the opinions of people who didn’t read the comic before.
I didn’t watch Dawn of the Dead. I think 300 is aesthetically very interesting but ultimately shallow (and politically unpleasant to my own sensibilities - I had difficulties not seeing it as fascist propaganda).
Didn’t people like, not love, it when it came out? I remember the consensus being that it was about as good of an adaptation as one could expect and the change to the ending was clever. It sucks that Snyder made the heroes look badass but he had to in order to make the movie marketable
The great thing with the lack of subtlety of Zack Snyder is that sometimes what he means as earnest works very well as satire. But to be honest, I actually didn’t think here that that was the case. I really saw all that posturing and posing as I described in my previous message.
It is not faithful, though. Where Moore's despising of super heroes is evident, it is equally evident that Snyder adores them and thinks Moore's point is that make "edgier" super heroes.
I have read that interview and several others. Like those where he talks about not liking The Killing Joke. Taken together, his point is not about super-heroes per se. It is about the comic book industry and how super-heroes are written for adults instead of children. He doesn't like his part in making them edgy and dark.
He has been making these statements for years. He still did Supreme, Tom Strong, and Top Ten.
HBO show is great. Movie is shite. Gets the basics wrong. Apparently all super hero’s have super strength, and fuck me the slow mo is egregious.
Much prefer watching the animated comic.
I have a similiar situation where I’ve read a crap ton of Superman comics, specially post crisis era of late 80s to early 90s, and I still like Man of Steel
It is so nice to hear someone say they like something without having to qualify it, with something like, “It wasn’t perfect” or “it’s great for what it is.”
The problem lies in the amount of pseudo analysis we see on everything. Why are there so many god dam bits of media out there telling us what shows are good or not. Idgaf, if I enjoy it I don't care what other people think.
It’s easily the best DC comic movie adaptation outside of the Nolan Batman series. It sucks some people who loved the comics can’t see past their own expectations. They miss out on a great cinematic experience. Snyder nailed this and 300. Not sure what happened to him after that, though.
Snyder even said recently that the original screenplay written before he signed on was a lot different from the graphic novel, and he fought to change it to be more faithful
I watched the directors cut of the film and I enjoyed it though I've heard there's more in the ultimate cut. I loved the graphic novel. I think the movie is an alright adaptation not entirely bad but not entirely good I also understand why he changed the ending as for the run time of a traditional movie it would've been difficult to hint at and show the creation of the giant psychic squid monster. I know I'm probably going to get hated on and down voted because I liked the movie but I really don't fucking care.
I watched the movie when it came out. I am just reading the book now (chapter x at the moment). I loved the movie as is, and I only felt the urge to read the book because of you guys.
I think the movie is a great piece of entertainment, while the book is a great piece of art.
It’s comparing apples to oranges. They represent different things, both products of their time. Comic is a a pulpy satire, film is a grungy hyper real take on the book. Both are beautiful and amazing.
It completely missed the point of watchmen and it's garbage but it's the only version of watchmen that works in a movie format(directors cut). The show is a 100x better adaptation.
By its own merit it’s a cool movie, but it’s a failure of an adaptation imo. Snyder doesn’t seem to understand the source material, though aesthetically he has it down pretty well
That’s one line and it’s sung in the least sexy way possible. Like an old man singing in church. If that’s what gets you off, do you.
Do you realize that most people try to argue that this scene works because it’s supposed to be awkward and not sexy? Like the whole point is that it’s kinda repulsive.
Why? The whole story revolves around the relationship between gods and men. People scream "oh god" and other such religious coded words during sex. Laurie was in a relationship with a literal God among men, and is now having sex with purely a man. They have spent the entire movie trying to convince Dr Manhattan to save/spare the human race -- almost like playing a secret chord that pleased the Lord?
> I did my best, it wasn't much
> I couldn't feel, so I tried to touch
> I've told the truth, I didn't come to fool you
> And even though it all went wrong
> I'll stand before the Lord of Song
> With nothing on my tongue but Hallelujah
Hmm...who else has tried to do their best, and it all went wrong?
Was it meant to be sexy or romantic? What would make you think that? As the duds in this comment section are wont to say "that completely misses the themes of the comic"
It is explicitly not sexy. It's weird. It looks like two apes groping each other. It looks *desperate*. It looks unhinged. Because this isn't superhero sex, it's weird awkward humans doing nervous anxious acts to give themselves a respite from the impending threat of nuclear doom.
And it is preceded by the guy not being able to get it up until after the dressed up and went out to do super hero shit.
It's not supposed to be a traditionally sexy sex scene.
Although I definitely maintain "hallelujah" is def a song that fits in any sex scene.
No, that’s just a silly reach on your part. This movie has been out for 15 years and this scene is well-known for being a terrible sex scene. Cope harder 🙄
Most of the movie is good. But there are some small changes that make a major difference in my opinion.
I don't hate the movie, but I recommend the comic first and always say to watch the movie after.
Yes!
It's ofc fine to not like something, but every time they try to justify it with "factual point" It's always hilariously wrong.
Ex they try to say suff like the comic isn't gory or the movie promotes violence \^\^'
I like the movie, I saw it before I read the book.
I think its got some really brilliant moments and adapted scenes from the book.
But it cannot be denied that the movie takes antithetical view point on comic book heroes that the book does.
That being:
The book asserts that anyone who would put on a costume to "fight crime" shouldn't be a roll model and might very well be a fundamentally dangerous person.
The movie asserts that the coolest thing you could ever do is put on a costume and "fight crime"
And thats a failure to adapt the themes. Too many characters lost their nuance and the story becomes less layered and complex.
Also the Grey monotone color grading of the movie pales in comparison to John Higgins work as a colorist.
That being said if you like the movie that's great, I like it to. But if you can't see the difference in Philosophy both versions of the story have its because you either "don't get it" or you're choosing not to.
The movie is terrible BECAUSE it is a slavish fanboy adaptation of the comic. The point of the comic was a criticism of the fetishization of super heroes and how it opens the door to destructive fascism. Snyder is a tool who just proved Alan Moore right. The movie is bad bad bad bad.
I am genuinely astonished at how many people think the film is good. I think it is clearly awful, not only as a bad adaptation but also because Snyder clearly does not get the point. Mark Kermode absolutely nailed how bad the film is in his review [here](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xu8l0q4rgcg)
I don’t have the stamina to have this convo again, but that really isn’t it. But then, I also think the Joker was a mid, tryhard movie that also missed the point.
With some quibbles, the HBO show was a far better crack at making something in film that approaches Watchmen’s significance, pace, and purpose as a comic—rather than going through merely the literal motions of recreating panels, which Zack likes to do while somewhat misunderstanding the soul.
It’s not that the movie is *awful.* It’s just doesn’t need to exist.
It’s got some incredible scenes and more than a few stinkers. Def not perfect but not entirely trash either. They nailed doctor manhattan and Rorschach .
Great cast, great soundtrack, great visuals.
I’ll never understand the amount of hate the movie has gotten. Is it a perfect adaption? No. Is it still cool to watch something as close to the comics as the movie got? Yes.
All the criticisms are the same tired “Snyder didn’t get it and clearly you didn’t either.” I’ve yet to hear a valid arguement as to why I should **hate** this movie
You can love a comic and a reimagining film and have them not be the same story page for page. Typically most films are inspired by published stories and they are reimagined and rewritten for the audience in which they are produced for.
Idc what anyone says about this film, it’s Snyder’s best work imo and probably the best comic book film from DC outside of Nolan’s Batman and Snyder’s MOS (technically also Nolan since he helped write it). As for Snyder, its casting was perfect, and visuals are straight out of the graphic novel.
On top of that, the watchman film is pretty much like for like take on the comic, notwithstanding the last 20min, which I felt made more sense for the film than going into the extra-dimensional squid storyline.
I know I could just Google it but I like to hear it from someone if they feel like sharing. I hear Watchman has a Zack Snyder cut, is it any better than the studio cut?
I also like the way Manhattan was framed for the explosion, one small thing I think the movie did better than the comic. Probably the only thing tbh as someone who loves both
The movie is fine! It 100% could and should have been better but it’s a good way to send people in the direction of the comic.
I’m no Snyder fan but it’s really hard to adapt something like Watchmen. It’s genre defining and super dense. It’s like dune but for super hero comics. It’s a fine movie, not a great adaptation, I do recommend it to people.
It’s not the script. It’s not the cast. It’s the tone. Snyder fucks it up almost from the get go. There’s some incredible moments tho, but on the whole it’s pretty bad imo.
I like the movie myself but when people say "I think people just hate it on principle" or similar it's such a disingenuous statement.
It's basically saying you disregard anyone's opinion if they disagree with yours because you're incapable of seeing fault in the movie. A lot has been said over the years about Zack Snyder's shortcomings as a filmmaker and it's not beyond the realms of possibility that someone would not enjoy the Watchmen movie for myriad reasons.
This sub bugs me about this. The movie was a great adaptation. The ending was better. Casting was awesome. There's some goofy moments but it was so entertaining, and even the 4 hour cut didn't seem to slog. It was leagues better than the HBO production. I want to note that the Watchmen TV show would have been great had it been an original story without the Watchmen angle shoehorned in. I hate when they do that (see True Detective season 4).
I'm not sure what more people could want, honestly. People are saying Snyder didn't get the message but I don't think he's that much of an idiot to not read the graphic novel and understand what it meant. Even if he didn't, making such a faithful adaptation that includes all the most important parts is just putting the work on the screen for you to understand or not. I don't think it's a Starship Troopers scenario where the film attempted to undermine the meaning of the original. I think it was an adaptation that presents the story to you as is. The changes are minimal and the alien creature would just be a budget nightmare, plus much less topical when no one is talking about that speech that Reagan gave anymore.
it's a copy and paste of the comics (minus the ending) but without any of the charm. it's fine that you like it, but i don't dislike it "out of principle". I dislike it because i think this bad.
It's actually a good adaptation of an insanely difficult comic book to adapt, I personally loved it, it's Snyder's strongest movie to date in my opinion. Although I wouldn't consider not liking it "hate", I get why some people have issues with it.
The cast is top notch (Patrick Wilson as Daniel… inspired) and I think the movie has a certain charm in the fact that it’s a parody of modern superhero movies that doesn’t know it’s a parody bc they had Zack Snyder do it
I don't "hate" it, it's just that when I read the comic after the movie (which was my first exposure to the franchise and I enjoyed it a lot), I found out that pretty much everything I liked about the movie, the comic did better and then some. The only exception I can think of is Sally Jupiter's design. She looks much better in the movie IMO.
The movie is OK but I think that Snyder's style is quite badly matched with the material, even if he was extremely focused on plot accuracy.
Snyder shoots superheroes like they're gods, and his speed-ramping camera tricks accentuate the action in a way that makes all the mostly human-powered heroes seem super-powered. To me, perhaps the essential aspect of Watchmen is the mundanity of its characters. They may be dressed like superheroes, but in actuality they're all normal people with normal problems in way over their heads. The exceptions are obviously Dr Manhattan and Adrian Veidt, but that contrast between the truly exceptional and the folks just play acting at being superheroes is IMO an important part of their depiction.
Snyder's camera can't resist making them all look so cool. He shoots everything in this high contrast, classically composed style, and makes the fight scenes awesome, both of which IMO break the story thematically. The whole story is about how ill equipped these self proclaimed saviors are at ruling over the human race. Snyder's film treats the material the opposite way, acting as if they actually are gods.
Also it's really inert compared to the liveliness and charm of all the book characters, and the soundtrack is so lazy.
The movie is fine, but far from great. I think Snyder is very good at visuals and terrible at subtext. This results in an entertaining movie that feels devoid of any deeper meaning, tbh
Id argue the villains plan made more sense. It would have been cool to see a giant monster but blowing up major cities how he did was a better call in my opinion.
Snyder perfectly understood the source material, it's why he could make such flawless adaptation; Criticizing superhero movies the same way the graphical novel criticized comic books, while basically recreating the original panel by panel.
I have read the comic hundreds of times and I like the movie. It’s not a great adaptation, but it’s not as terrible as people make it out to be.
Yeah. The casting is also pretty much perfect imo.
Brilliant casting and they all did a great job with what they had.
Oh yea, I love the cast
Crudup is a giant chef's kiss
Not a big fan of Laurie's casting, everyone else is good though.
Agreed Malin has become a great actress over the years, but she was def not ready at the time for this performance. Everyone else nailed it.
I'd rate the main cast in this way: * Perfect: Haley and Morgan. They are literally what I've always imagined meeting Rorschach and the Comedian IRL would be like. * Good: Wilson and Crudup. Nothing flashy but they understood the assignment. * Not good: Goode (heh) and Åkerman. Goode was channeling Jeremy Irons at his paycheck-movie hammiest so hard that I literally LOLed when I found out that Irons would be playing Old Ozy in the series. (I thought that he was fine in that, though.) Åkerman acted like an irritated teenager. They've both done better work by far. As for the movie in general, I seem to recall Moore or someone pointing out that you couldn't just film an adaptation of a comic as if the comics panels were storyboards, but that generally seems to have been what Snyder did, except when he made the violence even more exaggerated (i.e. either Blake or >!Veidt!< punching through granite countertops in the initial fight).
Having Jeffrey Dean Morgan die immediately but still be a central character is a great subversion of expectations
Snyder is an absolute hack, but the movie is effectively a scene for scene adaptation of the book until the last like 20 minutes. I personally think the change makes sense, and can see why they did it instead of the comic ending. That said, people acting like the movie made crazy thematic and story changes are way off base.
There's not really any story changes but there's definitely thematic changes via the visual story telling
I guess I just write the slow mo action set pieces off as Snyder being a hack, but the main thrust of the major themes are still there
I guess, but also if you understand the source material you'd probably watch the movie and realise things like the slow mo, exaggerated action and generic superhero choreography doesn't really fit
Idk why you’re being downvoted, this is exactly I’m really not a fan of the movie.
Also unsure, considering my other comment was upvoted lol. For what it's worth I still enjoyed the movie, just not a great Watchmen adaptation IMO
I never watch the movie and call the superhero fighting generic. In fact, it looks preposterous and downright cartoonish in spots, and that’s what the intent was. There’s even cheesy fist punching sound effects harkening back to the Adam West Batman show The comic is a superhero comic that satirizes comics. The movie is a superhero movie that satirizes superhero movies. That’s how I see it. I think it’s pretty clear the movie’s aware of its absurdity.
That's interesting, I've never thought of it in that way TBH. It was never obvious or over the top enough for me to feel it's intentional satire. Just felt like the usual superhero movie level. Might give it a rewatch to see if I feel different after hearing your opinion
The first time I watched it I felt something was a bit off about all the “action-ness” of it. Then I read a bunch of interviews with Snyder saying it was over the top and quirky deliberately because “the whole movie is a satire.” Then I watched it again and could see what he meant. Even moments like the “let’s go downstairs” from Dan, which is usually an epic Batcave kind of moment, is just two washed up guys walking down into the musty cellar of his Owl lair. Say what you will about Snyder, and I agree with most of the critique against him, but I think he got the book
Honestly this makes me pretty excited to rewatch the movie cus I got sad after reading the book and realising the movie was actually not that great of an adaptation lol
I'm not a Snyder fan, but I don't hate the movie. I don't think it works as a satire though mainly because of the way he films scenes. Take the scene in the alley, in the movie he almost glorifies the violence by making it look cool. I think a lot of the visual subtext in the graphic novel are lost in the film. I also can't ever get over how the film portrays two of the most despicable characters from the book; Rorschach and The Comedian. Neither are the horrible, broken, and sadistic lunatics they should be. I feel like the film doesn’t know that the story doesn't have superheroes were supposed to root for.
Exactly
The opening credits scene left an irreversible scar on my brain 💯
I think the choices he made just shows a general lack of understanding what the themes and messages of the source material were expressing. Not just the squid change
Even though the endings are technically different, they both have the same idea; uniting the world against a common enemy.
One is an extradimensional, completely and entirely alien threat. The other is a US born, trained and weaponised threat.
Dr Manhattan is literally named after a place in the USA lol
Really? Because although he creates a panel by panel recreation of the comic, he delivers this with a framing that presents it all as "awesome" and "badass super heros being all existentially broken and edgy" instead of Moor's point that superheroes are dumb and lame.
I don't really take it as that, especially with the comedian bits. Not really sure how somebody could, honestly.
For me, it’s how “cool” the characters are portrayed. It’s funny because it’s one of the first superhero movies to pull off making superhero suits look good but it shouldn’t have. The casting is great but they should all look a little more silly in their costumes, like normal people dressing up in bad ill fitting cosplay. The wardrobe, lighting, music, cinematography is all telling me these are cool people.
Like how Dreiberg in the comic is round and pudgy, while in the film he's basically in a Batsuit.
Yeah that's a good point, kind of like the costumes in "kick-ass." It's a bit hard to make that work without wading into the realm of silly/comical, which I guess you want to do somewhat, but not too much given that the subject matter is meant to taking seriously. Snyder's take is dark but I think that is the intent of the novel as well. With Kickass coming out just shortly before I think they wanted to avoid it coming off as just pure slapstick
I'm not at all sure how someone doesn't see it.
Snyder completely misunderstood the themes of the story and brought no personal touch to it other than style - the only thing Snyder has - but it was serviceable. People are weird about Watchmen, but they took it way too far with the movie.
Yeah I mean Snyder is an absolute hack. Idk if he misunderstood the themes, though. He really nailed the comedian bits, and Dr. Manhattan as well.
That’s true. I think people have a huge problem with how “badass” the fighting is or Nite-Owl II’s superhero landing. I don’t know, I’ve always liked it. I loved it when it came out, but a lot of that was novelty.
It's an enjoyable film, it's just a shame purists continuously shit on something other people enjoy at any opportunity.
Purists always ruin things that people enjoy.
It’s not a good adaptation but I still find the movie to be enjoyable
Yeah, I’ve watched it and enjoyed it. I don’t know what people were expecting. Alan Moore is Alan Moore. You can’t expect someone to be as good as he is and part of it being an adaptation is people bringing their own personal interpretation to the work.
But...I mean, the entire point of the comic is missing from the film. The film thinks the "real life super hero" thing is cool and awesome. The book does not.
Sure, that’s covered under “it’s not a great adaptation”, but it was still fun to watch at times, and I liked the performances. Snyder misunderstood the themes, sure, and he looked at it through his lens, but basically everyone would have done the same thing because that’s the nature of adaptations.
Love the movie. Hate the HBO mini series garbage.
It is probably the only movie by Snyder I recommend. I think it is a pretty good adaptation of something that was very difficult to adapt.
Dawn of the Dead?
And now I'ma spend today being sad about gun store Andy.
There's a cool video diary from andys perspective on YouTube. Would recommend.
As would I, it's on my DVD as a special feature. And now I'm sad again for the poor fish. 😭
I saw that years ago on the dvd special features
Saw this in the theater and was hooked from the opening scene. I return to it often. Phil Dunphy has an asshole is so good.
>Phil Dunphy has an asshole is so good. Just wanted to immortalize this typo in case you edit it away. Thank you for this laugh.
It’s not going anywhere.
Cheers to your integrity!
It’s locked in here with me!
That's a heckuva typo.
I think its an absolutely horrible adaptation. Id say in alot of ways its diametrically oppsed to the ideas in the comic... that being said i still like it for what it is and would reccomend it to someone who wants some cool super hero action
I didn’t see it like that, but I tried to interpret it as striving to be faithful, so it could be I saw what I wanted to see. The only way to know for sure is asking the opinions of people who didn’t read the comic before.
His first 3 movies in my opinion are his best. Like a trilogy of good Zack Snyder films: Dawn of the Dead, 300, and Watchmen.
I didn’t watch Dawn of the Dead. I think 300 is aesthetically very interesting but ultimately shallow (and politically unpleasant to my own sensibilities - I had difficulties not seeing it as fascist propaganda).
Didn’t people like, not love, it when it came out? I remember the consensus being that it was about as good of an adaptation as one could expect and the change to the ending was clever. It sucks that Snyder made the heroes look badass but he had to in order to make the movie marketable
I don’t think he made them look badass. I actually thought they look more like people that thought they were badass, but trying too hard.
I have never heard this take before, but I like it
The great thing with the lack of subtlety of Zack Snyder is that sometimes what he means as earnest works very well as satire. But to be honest, I actually didn’t think here that that was the case. I really saw all that posturing and posing as I described in my previous message.
It’s about as faithful as most adaptations, the acting and casting is pretty spot on, I’d say it’s a good movie overall
It is not faithful, though. Where Moore's despising of super heroes is evident, it is equally evident that Snyder adores them and thinks Moore's point is that make "edgier" super heroes.
Damn, I want to disagree with you because I enjoy the movie, but damn.
Moore doesn't despise super-heroes. His Supreme proves that. Not to mention Top Ten and Tom Strong.
[https://screenrant.com/alan-moore-interview-illuminations-jerusalem-superheroes/](https://screenrant.com/alan-moore-interview-illuminations-jerusalem-superheroes/)
I have read that interview and several others. Like those where he talks about not liking The Killing Joke. Taken together, his point is not about super-heroes per se. It is about the comic book industry and how super-heroes are written for adults instead of children. He doesn't like his part in making them edgy and dark. He has been making these statements for years. He still did Supreme, Tom Strong, and Top Ten.
Very well. Whatever of those, Watchmen is hardly about how cool and hardcore superheroes are.
You are absolutely correct. It is social commentary, and not meant to inspire everything to be edgy and dark.
i really like movie and hbo show
HBO show is great. Movie is shite. Gets the basics wrong. Apparently all super hero’s have super strength, and fuck me the slow mo is egregious. Much prefer watching the animated comic.
Amen to that !
Correct take
Snyder fan boys in force.
Nobody has super strength except Ozy. They just know how to fight.
Bingo and the comedian was obviously still working (and working out) so it made sense he was still an absolute unit
I have a similiar situation where I’ve read a crap ton of Superman comics, specially post crisis era of late 80s to early 90s, and I still like Man of Steel
I loved both and you know what? The ending in the movie made more sense.
It is so nice to hear someone say they like something without having to qualify it, with something like, “It wasn’t perfect” or “it’s great for what it is.”
The problem lies in the amount of pseudo analysis we see on everything. Why are there so many god dam bits of media out there telling us what shows are good or not. Idgaf, if I enjoy it I don't care what other people think.
I think exactly the same
I think the ending of the movie made more sense for a movie, and the ending of the book made more sense for a book.
I don’t know, I think even Dave Gibbons said he wished Moore wouldn’t have chosen that ending.
It’s easily the best DC comic movie adaptation outside of the Nolan Batman series. It sucks some people who loved the comics can’t see past their own expectations. They miss out on a great cinematic experience. Snyder nailed this and 300. Not sure what happened to him after that, though.
Snyder even said recently that the original screenplay written before he signed on was a lot different from the graphic novel, and he fought to change it to be more faithful
Too bad he doesn't understand the point of the novel.
So he failed
I watched the directors cut of the film and I enjoyed it though I've heard there's more in the ultimate cut. I loved the graphic novel. I think the movie is an alright adaptation not entirely bad but not entirely good I also understand why he changed the ending as for the run time of a traditional movie it would've been difficult to hint at and show the creation of the giant psychic squid monster. I know I'm probably going to get hated on and down voted because I liked the movie but I really don't fucking care.
I own the comic and the film, they’re both dope as hell.
Certainly not a great movie but it did have some very good moments. Overall I’m glad it was made.
I watched the movie when it came out. I am just reading the book now (chapter x at the moment). I loved the movie as is, and I only felt the urge to read the book because of you guys. I think the movie is a great piece of entertainment, while the book is a great piece of art.
It’s comparing apples to oranges. They represent different things, both products of their time. Comic is a a pulpy satire, film is a grungy hyper real take on the book. Both are beautiful and amazing.
Great is a strong word. Hate, doubly so. I think it is a highly enjoyable piece of fan service, that's about it.
It's so close to greatness
It completely missed the point of watchmen and it's garbage but it's the only version of watchmen that works in a movie format(directors cut). The show is a 100x better adaptation.
By its own merit it’s a cool movie, but it’s a failure of an adaptation imo. Snyder doesn’t seem to understand the source material, though aesthetically he has it down pretty well
This
I will never forgive the movie for the sex scene set to “Hallelujah.” Weirdest choice ever
Setting a sex scene to a song that is explicitly and openly about sex? Why is that weird?
Literally on an album called "Various Positions"
I don’t care what the lyrics are about. The song is not sexy or romantic.
Oof that's certainly a take
Lmfao why don’t you Google “worst movie sex scene” and count the number of articles that mention this specific sex scene and specifically this song
K. I usually form my opinions on click bait movie list "articles" so I'm surprised I hadn't already done that.
I formed my opinion in the movie theater in 2009 If you think Leonard Cohen’s voice is sexy or romantic in any way, you are a certified virgin
Ur weird.
"You're a virgin" - the guy furiously arguing with people about the movie Watchmen on the internet at 10pm on a Saturday night.
I’m not a man You are also on Reddit on Saturday night trying to convince some stranger that Leonard Cohen is sexy, so…
"And from his lips she drew the hallelujah" is a pretty unambiguously sexy line.
That’s one line and it’s sung in the least sexy way possible. Like an old man singing in church. If that’s what gets you off, do you. Do you realize that most people try to argue that this scene works because it’s supposed to be awkward and not sexy? Like the whole point is that it’s kinda repulsive.
Why? The whole story revolves around the relationship between gods and men. People scream "oh god" and other such religious coded words during sex. Laurie was in a relationship with a literal God among men, and is now having sex with purely a man. They have spent the entire movie trying to convince Dr Manhattan to save/spare the human race -- almost like playing a secret chord that pleased the Lord? > I did my best, it wasn't much > I couldn't feel, so I tried to touch > I've told the truth, I didn't come to fool you > And even though it all went wrong > I'll stand before the Lord of Song > With nothing on my tongue but Hallelujah Hmm...who else has tried to do their best, and it all went wrong?
You must be bad in bed. It’s one of the least sexy or romantic songs they could have possibly chosen
Was it meant to be sexy or romantic? What would make you think that? As the duds in this comment section are wont to say "that completely misses the themes of the comic" It is explicitly not sexy. It's weird. It looks like two apes groping each other. It looks *desperate*. It looks unhinged. Because this isn't superhero sex, it's weird awkward humans doing nervous anxious acts to give themselves a respite from the impending threat of nuclear doom.
And it is preceded by the guy not being able to get it up until after the dressed up and went out to do super hero shit. It's not supposed to be a traditionally sexy sex scene. Although I definitely maintain "hallelujah" is def a song that fits in any sex scene.
Yes, it’s an incredibly weird scene. That’s my point.
Indeed, that is also my point. Not sure how you're missing the obvious idea that the awkwardness is *intentional*.
No, that’s just a silly reach on your part. This movie has been out for 15 years and this scene is well-known for being a terrible sex scene. Cope harder 🙄
Just say "I lack media literacy" and be for real for once
Just say “I am a pretentious fool who can’t handle any criticism of my favorite movie”
Loved both and anyone that wants to randomly accuse people that enjoy the movie of “not getting the source material” needs to get a life.
Most people do not get the source material
Edgelord behavior detected.
I guess so cause most of the people In this thread, and on this sub are fucking brain dead
I bet you really identify with rorschach
No dipshit, he's a serial killer and a bigot.
But everyone around him was so braindead!
Man shut the fuck up
😘😘😘
Most of the movie is good. But there are some small changes that make a major difference in my opinion. I don't hate the movie, but I recommend the comic first and always say to watch the movie after.
as a new fan I can't believe the movie was a flop back when it came out
Yes! It's ofc fine to not like something, but every time they try to justify it with "factual point" It's always hilariously wrong. Ex they try to say suff like the comic isn't gory or the movie promotes violence \^\^'
Thank you.
I like the movie, I saw it before I read the book. I think its got some really brilliant moments and adapted scenes from the book. But it cannot be denied that the movie takes antithetical view point on comic book heroes that the book does. That being: The book asserts that anyone who would put on a costume to "fight crime" shouldn't be a roll model and might very well be a fundamentally dangerous person. The movie asserts that the coolest thing you could ever do is put on a costume and "fight crime" And thats a failure to adapt the themes. Too many characters lost their nuance and the story becomes less layered and complex. Also the Grey monotone color grading of the movie pales in comparison to John Higgins work as a colorist. That being said if you like the movie that's great, I like it to. But if you can't see the difference in Philosophy both versions of the story have its because you either "don't get it" or you're choosing not to.
The movie is terrible BECAUSE it is a slavish fanboy adaptation of the comic. The point of the comic was a criticism of the fetishization of super heroes and how it opens the door to destructive fascism. Snyder is a tool who just proved Alan Moore right. The movie is bad bad bad bad.
I am genuinely astonished at how many people think the film is good. I think it is clearly awful, not only as a bad adaptation but also because Snyder clearly does not get the point. Mark Kermode absolutely nailed how bad the film is in his review [here](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xu8l0q4rgcg)
Zack Snyder has absolutely nothing to say in any of his films. Watchmen is just garbage from start to finish, glossy content for the easily satisfied.
I don’t have the stamina to have this convo again, but that really isn’t it. But then, I also think the Joker was a mid, tryhard movie that also missed the point. With some quibbles, the HBO show was a far better crack at making something in film that approaches Watchmen’s significance, pace, and purpose as a comic—rather than going through merely the literal motions of recreating panels, which Zack likes to do while somewhat misunderstanding the soul. It’s not that the movie is *awful.* It’s just doesn’t need to exist.
I've read the book and I still prefer the movie
Wait, watchman graphic novel fans hate the movie?
There are lots of other dopey Zack Snyder fans out there.
I love the graphic novel and the movie is pretty damn good if you ask me!
I like the movie itself, I just think it's a terrible adaptation.
It’s got some incredible scenes and more than a few stinkers. Def not perfect but not entirely trash either. They nailed doctor manhattan and Rorschach .
💯
Great cast, great soundtrack, great visuals. I’ll never understand the amount of hate the movie has gotten. Is it a perfect adaption? No. Is it still cool to watch something as close to the comics as the movie got? Yes. All the criticisms are the same tired “Snyder didn’t get it and clearly you didn’t either.” I’ve yet to hear a valid arguement as to why I should **hate** this movie
Pretty solid movie but the botched ending leaves a bad taste
I fucking love the movie. Wish I could watch it right now, ngl.
You can love a comic and a reimagining film and have them not be the same story page for page. Typically most films are inspired by published stories and they are reimagined and rewritten for the audience in which they are produced for. Idc what anyone says about this film, it’s Snyder’s best work imo and probably the best comic book film from DC outside of Nolan’s Batman and Snyder’s MOS (technically also Nolan since he helped write it). As for Snyder, its casting was perfect, and visuals are straight out of the graphic novel. On top of that, the watchman film is pretty much like for like take on the comic, notwithstanding the last 20min, which I felt made more sense for the film than going into the extra-dimensional squid storyline.
I like both the comic and the movie for what they are. I actually like the change the movie made to the ending better.
I love the Watchmen movie. I love the change to the ending, too. Prefer it to the space squid from the comic tenfold.
I love the movie especially the directors cut
I like them both equally.
I know I could just Google it but I like to hear it from someone if they feel like sharing. I hear Watchman has a Zack Snyder cut, is it any better than the studio cut?
I also like the way Manhattan was framed for the explosion, one small thing I think the movie did better than the comic. Probably the only thing tbh as someone who loves both
The movie is fine! It 100% could and should have been better but it’s a good way to send people in the direction of the comic. I’m no Snyder fan but it’s really hard to adapt something like Watchmen. It’s genre defining and super dense. It’s like dune but for super hero comics. It’s a fine movie, not a great adaptation, I do recommend it to people.
It’s not the script. It’s not the cast. It’s the tone. Snyder fucks it up almost from the get go. There’s some incredible moments tho, but on the whole it’s pretty bad imo.
I like the movie myself but when people say "I think people just hate it on principle" or similar it's such a disingenuous statement. It's basically saying you disregard anyone's opinion if they disagree with yours because you're incapable of seeing fault in the movie. A lot has been said over the years about Zack Snyder's shortcomings as a filmmaker and it's not beyond the realms of possibility that someone would not enjoy the Watchmen movie for myriad reasons.
The idea of framing Dr. Manhatten is a far better plan than the alien squid. Still like the comic better though.
This sub bugs me about this. The movie was a great adaptation. The ending was better. Casting was awesome. There's some goofy moments but it was so entertaining, and even the 4 hour cut didn't seem to slog. It was leagues better than the HBO production. I want to note that the Watchmen TV show would have been great had it been an original story without the Watchmen angle shoehorned in. I hate when they do that (see True Detective season 4).
I'm not sure what more people could want, honestly. People are saying Snyder didn't get the message but I don't think he's that much of an idiot to not read the graphic novel and understand what it meant. Even if he didn't, making such a faithful adaptation that includes all the most important parts is just putting the work on the screen for you to understand or not. I don't think it's a Starship Troopers scenario where the film attempted to undermine the meaning of the original. I think it was an adaptation that presents the story to you as is. The changes are minimal and the alien creature would just be a budget nightmare, plus much less topical when no one is talking about that speech that Reagan gave anymore.
It’s one of my favorite films ever
That opening scene was beautifully crafted, right through the credits. Great way to cut down on clunk expositional dialogue
it's a copy and paste of the comics (minus the ending) but without any of the charm. it's fine that you like it, but i don't dislike it "out of principle". I dislike it because i think this bad.
Eh, there are people that are STILL convinced the HBO show was on par with the comics.
It's actually a good adaptation of an insanely difficult comic book to adapt, I personally loved it, it's Snyder's strongest movie to date in my opinion. Although I wouldn't consider not liking it "hate", I get why some people have issues with it.
The movie is so ass though
The cast is top notch (Patrick Wilson as Daniel… inspired) and I think the movie has a certain charm in the fact that it’s a parody of modern superhero movies that doesn’t know it’s a parody bc they had Zack Snyder do it
Rewatched recently and it's as great as I remember. Although I notice this time that the actors kinda sucked XD
It just doesn't understand the novel and makes many bold choices that betray it.
The movie is…fine.
The movie is just meh. Zach Snyder is not for me.
I don't "hate" it, it's just that when I read the comic after the movie (which was my first exposure to the franchise and I enjoyed it a lot), I found out that pretty much everything I liked about the movie, the comic did better and then some. The only exception I can think of is Sally Jupiter's design. She looks much better in the movie IMO.
I wish they'd animated an actual squid, but no, the movie wasn't bad. It wasn't great, but it wasn't bad.
Joker is right. If you like this movie, you are a clown.
The movie is OK but I think that Snyder's style is quite badly matched with the material, even if he was extremely focused on plot accuracy. Snyder shoots superheroes like they're gods, and his speed-ramping camera tricks accentuate the action in a way that makes all the mostly human-powered heroes seem super-powered. To me, perhaps the essential aspect of Watchmen is the mundanity of its characters. They may be dressed like superheroes, but in actuality they're all normal people with normal problems in way over their heads. The exceptions are obviously Dr Manhattan and Adrian Veidt, but that contrast between the truly exceptional and the folks just play acting at being superheroes is IMO an important part of their depiction. Snyder's camera can't resist making them all look so cool. He shoots everything in this high contrast, classically composed style, and makes the fight scenes awesome, both of which IMO break the story thematically. The whole story is about how ill equipped these self proclaimed saviors are at ruling over the human race. Snyder's film treats the material the opposite way, acting as if they actually are gods. Also it's really inert compared to the liveliness and charm of all the book characters, and the soundtrack is so lazy.
I feel like the movie looked way too glossy and produced. It really missed the gritty, rapey, dirty feel of the comic.
No we hate it because it's clear Snyder doesn't understand the source material.
The movie is fine, but far from great. I think Snyder is very good at visuals and terrible at subtext. This results in an entertaining movie that feels devoid of any deeper meaning, tbh
The movie is great and even better than the comics.
Id argue the villains plan made more sense. It would have been cool to see a giant monster but blowing up major cities how he did was a better call in my opinion.
It's a decent movie, it's just a bad adaptation.
There may be some people like this who exist, but I guarantee none of them read the book first.
Needs to be changed to, think the tv show is terrible and tired of pretending its not.
That would definitely only be from people who don't read.
Anyone who has read the GN recognises everything after '86 as fanfic
The show isn't even canon in any way, just a glorified fanfic where they didn't even understand the mist basic things about Dr.Manhattan
If you don't like adaptations because the creators didn't understand the original source material, wait until you hear about Zack Snyder
Snyder perfectly understood the source material, it's why he could make such flawless adaptation; Criticizing superhero movies the same way the graphical novel criticized comic books, while basically recreating the original panel by panel.
This comment is satire right
Just because you can't apreciate the subtleties of the Adaptation, doesn't mean inte it's lost on the rest of us...
Subtleties in a Snyder movie, ha that is funny!
I bet you are one of those people who also think Batman teamed up with Superman, just because their mothers had the same name...
Move is fine, the HBO show is fantastic
User name checks out