free forum make a forum for free message boards free forum hosting free phpbb forum phpbb create free forum

rob-spidey-11 · Posted: Mon Mar 16, 2009 5:20 pm Post subject:

Where to begin well i read the book first. Which was ok better the second time but it was somewhat boring. I thought the ending for the book was plain old retarded. would one alien attack on new york city stop the world from killing itself? no. People wouldnt even believe it was an alien attack after they did tests and what not. Rorshach made the book. I didnt like how no one has super powers (beside manhatten) but yet ozymandias catches a bullet at point blank range at the end. right.

As for the movie i thought it was well adaptation and honestly i think people if they see the movies first will like that better than the book. I like how they changed the ending made alot more sense for stopping the nuclear halocaust. As for some of the changes i didnt like how they had rorshach butcher the child rapist to me changes the character. I thought hand cuffing him and leaving him to burn was much better like in the book. beside that I thought the movie was good. I didnt understand why they had the comedian shooting JFK. But they way uped the action. the comedian basically gives no fight in the book. In the book there is one panel of fighting in the jail. Which i deffinitely liked the book could have used at least some action. They also amped the violence rediculously which i thought was unnessecary but expected since snyder was doing it.

I loved the sets costumes it felt right. I wish they would have had rorshach come out of the fridge when he first goes to moloch i thought that was one of the better things in the book it was funny.

As for the media boo them they said it was the first this and first that blah blah blah I personally like batman year one by frank miller alot better. And for changing the way comics are written and done thats a load of shit also the dark knight returns came out months before watchmen and was similiar in the way it was done superman was working for the government, conspiracies. It was just batman and thats why it didnt get recognition like watchmen. To me the media really hyped this book up and i expected so much more i expected it to be better written and better ideas the way it was portrayed. It was supposed to be unfilmable but all it needed was the right cast, crew and director.

As a movie it was a well done rendition of the book but I dont think it tops my top 10. Doesnt nearly touch the dark knight. The dark knight did everything watchmen tried to do with out using graphic violence and sex.

rob-spidey-11 · Posted: Mon Mar 16, 2009 5:28 pm Post subject:

It just goes to show how good of a director christopher nolan is its a shame he got ripped at the oscars.

As for the acting in watchmen it was suburb every character acted exactly how i imagined it being played out. The angleing and shooting was also done very authentic to the book which i enjoyed

The only character problem i have was ozymandias he was very muscular in the book while he was a skinny twig in the movie. They had night owl put on some weight for the part they couldnt have him bulk up?

I enjoyed the movie with all that said. I think it was way to over hyped in magazines and in the media.

UltimateKevin! · Posted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 4:20 pm Post subject:

Also, The Director's Cut offers an extensive layer to the film, but The Ultimate Cut was the story Snyder envisioned for everyone to see. A great film that complements the graphic novel.
_________________
Proud Member of The Ultimate Marvels!! Mr. Green

"If we encounter hostiles, silent throat cuts only." -Brick Tamland

PSN ID -> Lieutenent_Gump

Free Forum