Menu
What's new
By:
Filters

"Now Showing"

I agree with Peep.

Watchmen was just so... mashed up?

*SPOILERS*

The first half was this mashed mess of back stories, with no sense of a plot, just random clips shoved together. After the first 90 minutes I just sort of thought "um... so what has happened?" And yet, despite this HUGE amount of back story, you didn't care about any of it and none of it added ANYTHING to the film! It felt like it was obvious in the novel it had gone further and actually involved you properly, but, because they cut chunks out, it just became nonsensical, and I'd have cut a lot more of the backstory.

The last half was BETTER, but, still, terrible. The sex scenes just lasted days. Yes, we get it, you're both quite attractive and don't look terrible writhing around on top of each other... can we change the scene PLEASE? Sex in the ship, sex here, randomly naked somewhere else... *yawn* When they actually started being superheroes, it started to work a little more, but, evolved into nothing more that X Men.

The whole story was VERY scarily similar to The Incredibles as well xD Dunno if the novel was a source of inspiration to Disney...?

The ending was a bit random as well. It felt like it could have had an impact if I wasn't so mentally drained by that point. And so, it just felt a bit contrived and like "OMG, lets make an OMFG ending". And failed.

The fight scenes were, however, EXCELLENT. The scene with the mask man using spray to make a little flame-thrower, smacking the guy into water, fight at the start, breaking bones in the alley, sawing that guy's arms, the whole prison scene and the murder of the 6 year old. These were all BRILLIANT moments, and the film really shone when it got into this really violent "super-hero" film domain. Like, a grittier, adult, violent X Men. Unfortunately, for as awesome as it was when it got bloody, it just didn't last long. There are no HUGE awesome fight scenes, there's just glimmers of brilliance stuck into the rest of this VERY tedious film.

I can't imagine ANOTHER 45 minutes will make it better!

2/5
 
I also saw Watchmen on Friday night. I thought it was great, exactly what I was expecting out of it. It's a shame bits like the black freighter subplot were taken out, but it was pushing 3 hours already. The changed ending is actually better than the one in the book, which did surprise me. And Rorschach was the ****ing man!
8/10
 
Seven Pounds

The fact that my boyfriend kind of told me the entire story before I actually got the chance to watch it made it pertty predictable obviously, but it was still a fantastic movie! It was slow paced, but I felt a connection with the characters, and it had a unique storyline. Ending was SOO sad as well!

8/10
 
Slumdog Millionaire deserves what it has. Absolutely epic film, and a really enjoyable story and fantastic characters. Hardly a flaw in sight!

9/10
 
Righto then, Watchmen... Having not read the graphic novel I was totally unaware of any of the story and character depths, so I was looking forward to it...

Spoilers may follow, if you don't wanna know about some of the details, don't read...

Now, the film was interesting, very interesting, it seemed to be unsure mainly as to how to deal with those who hadn't read the novel (like me) and those who have read it...
Now the length seems to be a major talking point (John's review last page) and my view is that the length was ok, but the content is some parts made it feel much longer...
The main problem was the fact there was no linear time cycle, we kept jumping back and forth several times throughout the film in order to explain little pieces of the story, including an origin about 90 minutes into it... Indeed, this factor kinda put me off a bit, especially when in between these scenes there were many of an awesome type, but then as the action stopped (since fight had finished or whatever) we usually ended up in the past... Again...

That's the negative out the way, now the characters, Rorschach was most definitely the best, but all the actors did exceedingly well in all their parts, and the stunts and SFX were all rather awesome...

Scene wise the fight scenes were pretty awesome, though gory to the 8th degree (including parts that wouldn't look out of place in a Saw film, I point in direction to the prison scene), and some of the shots definitely looked like they could've just been pulled out of the novel, especially the two door shots (Comedian's apartment at the start, and the bathroom door in the prison)...

So typical Synder production really, stylish shooting, with the speed button being pressed at several instances... It's a question really of how the content of the novel could be relaid into the film media, especially since the time-line was more jumbled than a Rubik's Cube in some places... Maybe a better option would've been to arrange the story from Dr. Manhattan's creation, to the original Minutemen, then the credits, and then Comedian's death... This may have prevented the numerous back-story scenes appearing later in the film and slowing it down... Alas, I sense the purists would not like that idea very much...

It was a good film, not too far from excellent, but the time-line and pacing messed it up really...

7/10

Trailer wise today I now definitely want to see Lesbian Vampire Killers, it looks rather epic on the scale of Shaun of the Dead... But of course, trailers always show the beste bits, so it's hard to tell really...

Wolverine looks interesting as does Star Trek's reboot... That's all we got...

And a Saw ride advert :lol:[/b]
 
^Lesbian Vampire Killers does look good. I wasn't too sure first of all but now it looks really funny.
Star Trek does look great as well. But I've never watched it on TV as I've found it really boring.
 
To get away from the Watchmen reviews for a bit, I saw some cinematic history on TCM on Friday night.

I'm currently reading Danse Macabre by Mr Stephen King. It's essentially his work (in 1981) summing up what has made horror (in books, radio, films and TV) what it is today. One work he mentions is the 1932 film Freaks. The film caused an outrage when it was released, and was banned in most countries. It got certified in the late sixties though, but is one of those underground cult things.

It was directed by Tod Browning, who was an acclaimed 1920's horror director/writer. He worked with Lon Chaney, and made the famous Bela Lugosi version of Dracula. Freaks killed his career due to the huge amount of negative press it got.

It's generally regarded as one of the best horror films ever made... Though, it's not in the sense most of you would consider it.

the reason it was so shocking is because Browning didn't use special effects for the film, but used real life freaks instead. This was too much for the audiences of the time to deal with - it was tyoo shocking and horrific.

I think perhaps the most shocking thing was that so much dialogue was given to people clearly unable to act :lol:

However, the film is really interesting as a kind of historic document. It's just over an hour long, so you can cope with watching to poor acting. It's just a great snapshot of a great horror director working at that time, but the really interesting thing is the freaks themselves.

Carnival freak shows eventually died out, but in the 20's and 30's were massively popular. This is a fantastic opportunity (if you ever get a chance to see it) of getting a look at the world of the freak show. I mean, no matter how poor you think the film is (I thought it was very poor), you just have to watch it when you see characters like these doing their stuff.
browning7.jpg


The rest of the cast (The living skeleton, Mini Haha, the He/She, Siamese Twins, etc, etc, etc) just bring the weirdness home.
freaks.jpg


One of those films that if you have any interest in the horror genre, or just looking at freaks of nature (without wishing to spend time in the company of Steven ;) ) you just have to see.

Dreadful, but you just have to watch it...
 
Oh wow, I didn't know "Freaks" had an actual cast like that. Is it even a horror movie though? I mean, the plot summary on IMDb says something about a lady marrying a ringmaster for his inheritence, and then the "circus freaks" discover that. I just don't get how that's a horror, explain? :p

Looks very interesting though.
 
Horror is in the eye of the beholder Tay. It's not just about limbs being ripped off and blood flowing.

The Haunting is a horror film, yet we never see the creature/ghost stalking the guests to hill house. Not a single drop of blood spilled. Yet the film has some of the most frightening scenes I've witnessed.

The horror in this case, is that of the revenge laid down by the freaks. They take the beautiful, arrogant trapeze artist and... Well, that's the point of the film (though half an hour of footage of this happening, and a gelding of the strong man were removed to try and get the film released - and it still failed).

It's a snapshot of a different time, and as much a horror as any - it's just that being 1932, the film is much simpler. I guess it depends on how much the freaks give you the chills, or how much they amuse you. Personally, I find Arachnophobia a comedy (comedy horror admittedly), people who dislike spiders find it a pure horror.

As I say, most of it is really awful in reality, but there are some bits from the end of the film which I think I'll carry to my grave...
 
^ Ah, yeah, that's basically what I was wondering, was how much of it fit into today's standards of horror films. Personally, the freaks don't give me much chills, but I'd probably have to watch the movie to make a full decision on that.

As for Arachnophobia, that creeps me out big time. The movie itself was kind of stupid, but the spiders, oh my God :p .
 
I was a little bit disappointed with Watchmen. Firstly I was exhausted so I was having trouble staying awake. Secondly they pronounced "Roschach" wrong. They were saying it "Rawr-shack" instead of "Raw-shaw" like it should be said. Thirdly I honestly didn't really get what was going on. The nuke's were cool though plus the MCR song at the end.
 
Regarding the Watchmen films and the slightly average reviews it's getting over here, can I ask how many of you guys have read the graphic novel?

....Oh, and not to go totally off topic here - watched The Lives of Others. It was good.
 
I haven't read it.


But, if you need to have read the graphic novel to enjoy the film, it's a failed film. Case in point - V For Vendetta is a film that makes perfect sense and is brilliant regardless of whether or not you've read the novel.
 
Now you see, that's interesting.

I think that unlike V, Watchmen is more of a fanboy film. I've heard from others that, although it's not an exact copy of the book, it's kept true and you really would have had to read the novel before hand to enjoy the film... more.
So basically, people that haven't read the novel will be confused (term used loosely there) from all the time jumps and what have you.

V, like you said, is a good movie whether or not you've read the comic. Although, not all fanboys/girls were happy that it was that way.
I guess their called elites (or...what? I don't know...) Rather a stuck up attitude really.

I've yet to see Watchmen. Pissed that it's not showing in the Electric Cinema until the 20th - I'm hardly gonna sit through 3hrs in an Odean.

....Oh I also saw Funny Games (German) - god awful.

(not sure if any of that ^ made sense....I stop now)
 
I enjoyed Watchmen.. I've read the book.

My friends who came with me who hadnt read the book enjoyed it more.
 
Then, as it alienates audiences and doesn't actually make sense on its own, it's a bad film.

Good novel? Sure.

Bad film.
 
^ Fair enough. I'm really not disputing that - I agree.

I supposed........I don't know, it's really hard for me to type exactly what I'm trying to get at. Internet is really good at misinterpretation. But cheers for the thoughts.

^ ^ I'm hoping thatll be the case when I go with a few next week. Only one has read the novel....
 
Really enjoyed Watchmen (saw it on the imax, but dont think that made any difference).

Not read the book, but bought it on the way home (which shows I liked the movie I guess).

(I also bought a watch, but thats just coincidence I think ;-) )
 
^As long as you didn't buy some men too...

I finally watched In Bruges at the weekend. Its one i've been wanting to watch for a while, and I eventually got round to watching it with Lucy. Its an odd film, very slow-moving and almost sleepy, a lot less action-filled than i'd expected. Still, there's some great dialogue in there, and its very subtly funny. Its nice to see Colin Farrell acting with his own voice for a change too, I think people have forgotten he's Irish by now!

7/10 - It was a bit slow, but the dialogue got it through.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top