Who Watches the Watchmen?

[spacebrat311]

I do. I'll have more thoughts tommorow after I wake up.

I liked it a lot. It remained very true to the spirit and ideology of the graphic novel, which I think was important. I had some issues with the execution, however. I would have preferred a more naturalistic and less exaggerated approach from a visual standpoint to complement the gravity of the themes. I felt that this was more visually akin to something like 300 (also a Zack Snyder project) when I would have preferred to see it bear more visual similarity to, say, "The Dark Knight."

[bloop]

I want to since I do love the graphic novel, but I may or may not since the wife has precisely zero interest.

[Josh]

My love for the novel is so strong that I haven't quite talked myself into going to see this-- what if it doesn't live up to expectations, etc.-- but I'd wager that I'll get to it eventually...

[spacebrat311]

For existing fans f the graphic novel:

The adaptation is EXTREMELY faithful. Many shots are reproductions of the book's panels, and much of the dialogue is almost direct lift.

The ending is both bery much the same and very much different. I don't want to say to much for those who have not read the graphic novel. The players are the same, the point is the same, the result is the same. How it is done is very different, in a way that makes it possible for the film to be only 3 hours without introducing a lot of the plot elements the original required.

[Josh]

Steven Greydanus, a colleague of mine, writes in his review that this is the most faithful literary adaptation EVER.

And, he gives it a D. 

[bloop]

That's just the watchdog element dragging the score down, so whatever.  He said 3 stars on artistic considerations, which isn't bad.

I kind of wonder what he thinks of the source material. (ah, there it is!  Isn't knocking this source material a little bit like knocking Kind of Blue?)

[spacebrat311]

I found that a lot of the things I felt were mildly flawed had to do with the fact that the movie was perhaps too loyal to its source, to the point that it feels robotic at times because it doesn't feel entirely... self-motivated? Does that make sense?

[Brenden]

I loved it, though there were a few things dragging down the film, nothing really hindered my enjoyment of it as a whole. I'd probably go with a solid B grade, maybe a B+, I haven't decided yet.

[AldaForPresident]

I went with a friend who hasn't read the novel, and she hated it, and I love the novel, and I liked maybe two things about the movie, so I have no idea who it was supposed to have been made for.

[Brenden]

This is one of those movies where I don't get why people hated it, since there really aren't very many serious flaws. The actress playing Silk Spectre isn't that good, but she isn't terrible. The dialogue is clunky at times, but never distractingly so. The sex scene is overly long, but it's only one scene. The biggest complaint I had was that the soundtrack seemed out of place half the time. Other than that, I loved it and want to see it again.

[AldaForPresident]

I don't know, I guess it's my problem I couldn't accept it for what it was, when compared to the novel, so maybe that's my fault. Why must everything be adapted to a movie, is what I think when I reflect on it.

[AldaForPresident]

Oh, and several of the songs they used were used in the novel, so I'm guessing that's why they used them. Not all of them- I'm sure the ones that are out of place are the ones they just picked randomly. Or maybe I'm just a bitter berry. 

[Josh]

I heard there was a slo-mo sex scene set to "Hallelujah," which is 1) not in the book, 2) totally lame, and 3) completely unsurprising, given that Snyder also directed the stylish porno 300.

[spacebrat311]

The sex scene was pretty wtf.

[Aaron]

I heard there was a slo-mo sex scene set to "Hallelujah," which is 1) not in the book, 2) totally lame, and 3) completely unsurprising, given that Snyder also directed the stylish porno 300.

You are correct.