i increased my grade by 1 point which i had said i would.

first half of the movie is pure beauty, the 2nd half, still a mess. A glorious mess.

I'm with bABA First Viewing.

Eh.

Just wait until you see it a second time.

also the change in the ending made .. obviously i had to read up on the novel ending. sounds like a major improvement and frankly, seems quite inconsequential as the general theme remained the same. personally, i think the movie's ending actually gives more meaning to everything.

There's a big difference between framing Dr. Manhattan and using a psychic squid monster. But for sake of expediency, I prefer the new ending.

for me, the end result was the same.

catastrophe
something keeping a watchful eye on them
everyone trying to be nice because of it
watchmen keeping a truce despite hating what happened
Rorschach dying

in the grand scheme of things, as Manhattan would say, the change was insignificant, albeit giving more meaning to the whole story instead of a randomly spawning squid monster. Personally, i would have chosen a baboon

to each his own really ... to me, it just gives more meaning to the character of Dr. Manhattan, who pretty much seems useless towards the end otherwise from a story perspective.

Out of all the people who post in the critic's forum, Magnus is the only one whose reviews I never actually take seriously. I always feel like he's trying to impress an audience rather than authentically giving his actual thoughts on a movie.

A few more thoughts on the movie now that I've slept on it...

I need to see it a second time. People talking about "first half was good, second half was shit," I can't really see where they're coming from, because I frankly was so caught up in the things I couldn't really find a point that marked "first half" or "second half" for me. I have two major problems with this film, but so far they are my only problems, and they are also problems a lot of people seem to have:

1. Malin Akerman does not butcher her role, in fact I'm not even sure any of her lines are cringe-worthy. She just does an abysmal job of getting anyone emotionally attached to her character. Thus, no one gives a damn what happens in any of her storylines, and not only does her romance fail, but the mother-daughter storyline that ENDS THE MOVIE means almost nothing. Once again, she's not terrible, but we might as well had the 2D Silk Spectre from the comic book up on screen, wouldn't have made a difference.

2. Ozymandias' role, his motivation for his grand scheme, is barely touched on until the final scene. Ozymandias here seems to be the man behind the crimes not because he has been driven to it, but because the story needed a villain. So while he does a good job explaining the purpose of his plan, it's hard for the audience, especially people who haven't read the book, to sympathize with him or understand him at all, because in his 8 minutes of screentime, Zack Snyder has just left the camera ominously hanging there on him for a few seconds following every scene he's in, screaming "HEY LOOK THIS GUY IS GOING TO DO SOME BAD SHIT I JUST KNOW IT!" On the flip side, I felt Watchmen the book also left a lot of Ozymandias' motivation out until the end, making it feeling quite convoluted actually, so I'm not quite sure this is the filmmakers' fault entirely. That actually was my biggest problem with the book, so I really can't fault the movie.

Matthew Goode wasn't really bad, he just didn't look the part, or have the charisma to dwarf his limited screen time (for a three hour movie). I think Tom Cruise would have come off as too goofy, but they definitely should have chosen someone with more gravitas for the "villain."

I'm still at an A- though, Manhattan's creation sequence alone will keep it there.

meh .. just don't think a giant squid, in any shape or form could have worked in the ending with most movie goers. i can pretty much say that if i had gotten to that point in the novel, or in the movie to see the squid, i would have laughed, rendering the total seriousness of the movie up to that point, pointless.

I think what Shack meant Magnus is that instead of giving your honest opinion sometimes you sway with what could be a cool, "shocking" opinion. He wasn't referring to your grammar.

Seeing it an hour, ahhhhhh.

Basically. And I'm French.

If I bother seeing it a second time. Maybe on DVD, but that's still a near-three hour commitment to a re-watching a film I'm generally indifferent to, when I could be watching films that I've never seen before and have far more interest in.

Eh.

Not sure you understood the novel then...

Well then, please, enlighten me Dr.

First off, there's no vilain in Watchmen. So the whole "just to have a villain"-aspect is pointless.

I mean, yes, he kills millions, but how many does he save? At least he has a genuine noble goal (not that I say his means were justified). The Comedian is much more of a sadist and a killer with little of any noble goals. Rorschach is a sociopath and clearly mentally unstable (yet probably the most righteous of them all afterall).

The novel is too complex for any black/white paining and there's certainly no villain there or even a traditional hero (Rorschach obviously comes closest).

Moreover, it is simply about much more than Ozymandias and his plan. It wouldn't have been as complex and interesting as it is, had it simply focused on some "madman's masterplan". It is the event that triggers the story and brings it to full circle, but the whole thing is simply beyond that. The novel, that is. The film mostly succeeds in that department as well.

No, I get that he isn't the "villian." But it was the easiest way to refer to him for review purposes, plus that's how 90% of the general viewing audience is going to perceive him.

^ Actually, I walked away with the feeling that the villain was human nature. Ozymandias was just imperfect as the rest of them. A little over the top, yes. But definitely not the villain.

How much time did they spend on the Minutemen?

You basically knew they existed and that's all. Opening credit sequence visually telling their history, rape scene, quick talk with Hollis.

Not enough, sadly.

I thought it was just enough to set up the story. More would have made me wonder if I was watching the Minutemen movie instead of Watchmen (which btw I'm not sure was quite fully explained why they were called that, unless I missed something).

Thanks guys.

I caught up with the graphic novels late last year and the Minutemen saga intrigued me.

i think the real question is how much time they spent on the minute maid!

I think they'll expand the Minuteman in the directors cut.