Watchmen reviewed by Mark Kermode
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 5 ต.ค. 2024
- The eagerly-anticipated adaption of the cult graphic novel by Alan Moore and Dave Gibbons finally reaches the big screen under the direction of Zac Snyder. Mark reviews it for BBC Radio 5 live.
"Length is not a measure of depth."
So true. :(
the most sexual thing I’ve ever heard him say
THAT'S WHAT SHE SAID
Predicting the Snydercut...
That's how I feel about Gone with the Wind.
True, but it's also not the opposite!
You know what the funny thing is? Mark's impression of Zack Snyder is actually pretty close to how Zack Snyder sounds like in real life.
And very very patronizing.
So many valid points - I think Terry Gilliam’s thoughts regarding a TV mini-series also reflects the oft forgotten fact that the source material was written and edited to be 12 distinct single issues forming a whole rather than a single continuous entity
You have to respect Alan Moores integrity. Lots of people would just take the money and run.
Yes, as much as I absolutely loathe superheroes, comic books and comic book movies and everyone involved with them, I cannot help but admire Alan Moore for his integrity.
I wouldn’t judge him for taking the money but I admire that he doesn’t.
@@venicebeachsportsnetwork6677 Not just comic-book movies, but comic-books in general, superheroes in general, AND every single person involved with them. How can you have such a vitriol for a piece of entertainment, especially when you can just avoid them. "Everyone involved with them" is such a strong statement.
@@venicebeachsportsnetwork6677 It's definitely snobbery at the very least.
Whoaaaa take the money and run
There's a parallel universe where Terry Gilliam made Watchmen and Ken Campbell was Doctor Who.
I wish I lived there.
"Hey Watchmen! It's really cool." perfectly sums up the biggest problem with Snyder and the film.
Nope it sums up Mark as a genuine snob! Which I wholeheartedly support!
Problem is - Watchmen, the comic, IS really cool - one of the most genre-wall-blowing-off comics/graphic novels of the last 30 years. Zack Snyder just wanted a point-for-point bloodless adaptation of the comic without really getting it on a properly thematic level - which is what we got, along with a lot of unnecessary slo-mo. Definitely should have taken the time to do a TV series.... which is, apparently, in the stages of being made right now.
@@NailBombed I agree with the last point, though the HBO series isn't going to be an adaption of the comic. But when you say "bloodless", you do mean that in a metaphorical sense, right? I seem to remember a lot of real blood splattering everywhere in the film.
@Weapons Of Mass Distraction right wing lunatic alert
I think as a film Watchmen is very good however compared to the graphic novel (which is probably the greatest graphic novel of all time) it was always going to struggle but still very enjoyable and a nice twist on the standard comic book adaptations
No the film is so boring and flat they had to make it a series of music videos with america's most loved music tracks it was that bad.
It'll definitely struggle when Zack Snyder is the director.
Mark: I was a copy of the compiled watchmen by a guy called Simon Clark actually.
Simon: Simon Clark?
Mark: yeah, no that's not the interesting bit.
Simon: you're right.
Of course the costumes looked a little bit 80's, that's when the film is set
I think what Mark was saying is that because the characters in the movie lack depth, all you see is a guy in a cheesy 80's outfit. While in the comic the characters are so much more explored, so the fact that they are in costumes makes you ask questions about the person and in doing so you look beyond their aesthetic quality.
Meanwhile, the comic had its own culture - eg. hats that were entirely made up, not part of fashion in real life.
Funny listening to this in 2019 - as the Watchmen miniseries is coming out...
Terry Gilliam was right?
I love the show so far but I really wish we had a better adaptation of the graphic novel than just this movie. Hopefully if the show is successful, they'll do a season adaptation of the original story.
@@JB.zero.zero.1 It's actually brilliant. Yeah I was shocked too.
the show is such trash
@@davidkerr7 How come out of interest? I've heard very few people rag on it so I'm interested as to what has put you off?
"it looks a little 80's"
doesnt it take place in the 80's?
The trailer just reminds you how good the graphic novel is, in effect.
The Directors Cut to me will always be pretty dang good. It’s got mostly great casting and follows the material almost to a T.
That is the most perfect Snyder impression I've ever heard
I really like watchmen, yes its way too long but I found it enjoyable
My dad made watch this film with him when I was about 11. I’ve yet to forgive, I’ve yet to recover, and I’ve yet to absolve anyone involved.
I never read the novel, but i enjoyed the movie like no other, the depths of the story (Political and mature subjects) blew my mind, and right afterwards i became a fan. Watchmen introduced the novel to a new generation and it was successful in doing that.
A friend of mine knows Alan Moore very well & it’s totally right that he’s distanced himself from all the screen adaptations of his works. I assume he was paid for his IP though but not sure.
Man, this guy is bang on. Watchmen is the cinematic equivalent of one of those creepy androids they've built that are meant to look human, and which superficially get all the details right, but the whole time you're looking at it your mind is screaming "NO! WRONG! BAD! ARGH!"
It would help if Snyder had even the slightest idea of how to direct actors.
goddamn, this is brutally spot on. he called Snyder's bluff when people only started to see through the guy's bullshit after his disastrous run with DCEU.
Hey watchmen! Its really cool!
Just watched it on Netflix for 1st time in 2018. Loved it. Highly underrated I suspect it will be more appreciated the older it gets.
The one song that worked was 99 red balloons because it is a cheerful happy sounding song that is about an accidental nuclear war. Unfortunately they used it for only a few seconds and at the wrong time.
Alan Moore did say, tongue in cheek i'm sure, that once he saw the money Dave made he regretted doing it.
I'm not Kermode's biggest fan but he's spot on. Watchmen is all show and no go. Style over substance. It was tedious as hell in parts too.
"Style over substance" perfectly sums up all of Zack Snyder's directorial efforts.
SirStoneyOfBow How can one comment be so wrong?
when he says that the costume looks a little 80s, did he forget that the film is set in the 80s?
The directors cut is great,I like the novel as the novel I like the film as a film,people forget you’ve got to approach the two genres differently
That's my big issue with the movie itself. Snyder stayed so loyal to the story and dialogue that he poorly translated it to the cinematic medium.
Dialogue that works in a comic just comes across as silly in a film. A perfect example is the "What happened to the American dream?" line. Your point would make more sense if the movie wasn't such a copy and paste of the novel. Mark perfectly articulated how Snyder failed to capture any depth and complexity.
but how do you reconcile this with his comments on V For Vendetta?
@@d1e1c0k2 have you read V for Vendetta? Its a totally different kind if vibe. The actions are the same, at times, but context is different. For example, when V tortured Evey and then consoles her after the fact. In the film, it was displayed as a guy who deeply cared for her and wanted what was best for her and that although it was hard for him to do; he knew that it was what was best for her. In the book, its displayed as a man who is hell bent on his own agenda that he went out of his way to torture and manipulate some poor girl just to further his own cause. Like I said, different vibe.
@@d1e1c0k2 Late reply I know but V for Vendetta the film,was completely different from the book in so many ways but by far the most important difference was that the films main characters were Eve & V himself,where as in the book/comics,the main characters are the members of the facist regime.Especially the Eric Lynch character,who you spend far more time with in the book & has a character arc that rivals Eve’s.
The film barely looks at the psychology of the characters that make up the facist regime.
I like the film as it is but I respect the political & psychological depth that the book has much more of,given that it has far more time to explore those aspects.
The film was ahead of it's time
The film was ok back then, still ok nowadays.
It was long and complex but for me the origin of Dr. Manhattan scene with Pruit Igoe and Prophecies playing over it made the whole film worth it.
I can see what Mark's driving at, but I still think it was actually a pretty good interpretation of the comic. I mean it virtually used the comic panels as a storyboard, the scenes are set up the same way. The ending was actually I thought better than the comic, which always raised some questions for me. It didn't have the multi layered texture of the comic, or the Black Freighter stuff. As Gilliam pointed out, you'd need a tv series for that (and by the way, I thought the Watchmen Tv series was brilliant). I'm not a fan of Zack Snyder and I agree he's style over substance, but I think this is his best movie.
I loved it, the source material is great and the film was a blast to see on the big screen.
I loved it too, but I totally get what Mark is saying... It's baggy, overly long, and it doesn't do what the comic book did in terms of exploring the really dark sides of so-called super-heroes who were morally ambivalent because they were, by definition, not interested in normal humanity because the rules didn't apply to them.
I would have loved a Terry Gilliam TV series, though. Good lord....
I really enjoyed the watchmen movie and I read it in my 20’s before the film was made. The problem with comic book movies is ‘the fan boys’. Snyder made the film pretty much shot for shot to the comic and still people hated it. If he had changed things then he would have been criticised for not making it like the original. No director will ever truly win with a comic book movie as there will always be the ‘fan boys’ who wanted it their way and could have done it so much better.
The comic is hard work to read, it’s not a short story (for comic standards) that’s action packed and there is a lot going on. It’s a hard movie to translate to film. You could take any Spider-Man, Thor, captain America story from any year and make a movie but watchmen is one story that’s very involved. A mini tv show would have been good just the way Dean Koontz Frankenstein should have been made but instead a film was made (fair enough koontz film had a lot smaller budget). I say well done Snyder for a brave and well crafted true adaption.
Adapting the bible by showing high-quality scans for 12 minutes a page while vaudeville music plays wouldn't be a good adaptation of the bible.
@@wildcatpeace the problem with that is christians, just like fanboys, will undoubtedly still take issue with SOMETHING because they are absolutely enamored by the source material. I'm not saying Snyder couldn't have done a better job, but it's actually a pretty good movie (the director's cut, NOT the theater cut)
I still utterly love the film.
As a stand alone film it's amazing, as a an adaptation it's ok plus
I thought I was the only won
TheWolverineX2 you are not alone!
@@thelastknight1276 one of my favorite movies of all time
going down the rabbit hole on youtube with Kermode during lockdown. Christ it's nuts that Watchmen came out 11 years ago! Doing this may well be helping me cling to what little sanity I have left, though, so there's that.
As always I enjoyed watching the review, but my own memory of Watchmen - and it's been a few years since I watched it, so Kermode's bit at the beginning about how the way you view media is dependent on what stage of life you're at when you see it rings very true - was pretty positive. I think with a superhero/villain movie it's going to be principally succeed or fail purely by how compelling the main characters are more than anything else, and by and large I enjoyed most of the performances put on throughout. Dr. Manhattan was great and the CGI didn't distract me when he was on screen, as were the Comedian and Rorschach (probably the best and most memorable of the lot, especially at the ending of the film + he gets the best line of the film in the prison canteen. "I'm not locked in here with you. You're in here with *ME*"); the rest were decent enough and had their moments, although I thought Veidt was a bit dull whenever he was on screen and was a bit of a miscast.
I'm doing the same! Watching through so many of these reviews.
I re-watched Watchmen after the recent mini-series as it had been a few years, and I'm still left with my original reaction. It's a beautiful film, it's faithful in looks and moments to the original source material. Scene by scene invoked the memories of reading it originally, and how I felt - but I didn't feel it about *this*, I felt it about my memories of the graphic novel. I wasn't sure at the time if it was an age thing, as you say, dependent on when you are first viewing it. Maybe I was just older, more cynical and it had less impact? The new mini-series though DID give me that visceral feel, that chill of a world just slightly to the side of us and a different road taken. Maybe its because its more currently relevant? I don't know, but I don't think so - I think its about character, it's about being drawn into this world and Watchmen just doesn't do that to me mostly. Rorschach and The Comedian succeed more than most, Veidt had no presence.
Maybe I just don't get or click with Snyder, his films always strike me as visually impressive and faithful, but just never engage me emotionally.
"Leave me alone!!"
Poor Alan. They really should leave him alone.
I honestly loved Watchmen a lot. Especially the ultimate cut.
This review was very entertaining haha
It's one of my favourite films. I can't give much reasoning or pick it apart and say what I liked or didn't like. I just just really love the film.
redred Me too! I think it’s really underrated and yet I completely understand why people dislike it (or don’t rate it as highly as do we)
@@parrogakaparadise9477 I just rewatched it again. I think people, myself included, don't like it because it's too boggy. It simply doesn't make sense narratively. Additionally, Zac Snyder isn't the best director if we're being honest. Hence his forced departure from DC. He cares about visuals more than character; kind of like a knock-off Michael Bay if such a thing exists.
Simon Mayo on Mark Kermode's Zac Snyder impersonation: "It'll upset the cats." The best moment in the review.
I like the fact that Snyder just faithfully translated it all the way. It's like he has no ego, he's not pretending Watchmen is his, he's just getting it up there so more people can experience it.
Except, no.
Never ever read the graphic novels / books .....but i fkn loved the film
If you liked the movie, the graphic novel will blow your mind. I definitely recommend it
Wow, good for you. You're missing out coach potato.
I have to agree with the majority of positive comments here, I can quantify my disagreement with MK in a very simple way, a former girlfriend of mine had no prior knowledge of the story, she wasn't a comic book / graphic novel fan and she was enthralled by the movie and adored it from start to end. that's a success as far as I can see.
kissmylilpiggy This exactly mirrors my wife’s reaction.
@@eme.261 That accounts for a lot, my then GF was lacking in depth as well. Hence the ex status.
@@kissmylilpiggy I insulted you earlier. I apologize. It was unwarranted.
@@eme.261No harm done, wishing you good health and happiness especially in these troubled times.
Women aren’t known for being particularly deep
Wow! It's been a while since I've seen Mark being so damning. I also loved the comic. I also thought the film was tedious.
Some of his films are on Netflix. I've just seen Watchmen, I'll bore myself to sleep with Sucker a Punch next.
Stop telling the truth and have genuine and valid points... this might offend somebody! Serious this was so spot on I was almost chocked. One of the best and most professional reviews Ive ever seen.
No matter how good a critic is (Kermode is by far my favourite), it's always likely there will be a few things you disagree on, and this is one. I thought Watchmen was a very good film - not a masterpiece like the novel is, just a very enjoyable viewing experience.
The good doctor has some very good points, as usual, but on the whole I just enjoyed the film more than him.
Holy Fuck! Listen to this guy, he knows what he's doing.
it so odd hearing someone you like rip apart something you love. you don't know who to side with. it's breaking my heart listening to this.
Jamie Darren Well put... especially with Tarantino films
I finally got to see this film (specifically the Director's Cut) for the first time yesterday! Better late than never...
Certainly for the first two thirds of the running time, I was hooked. After that, it seemed to lose its way at times, and the length became a problem.
I suspect that most of what I enjoyed about it was a straightforward transfer across from the source (which I've never read), but while that might mean the film offered nothing new, it nevertheless engaged me, and got me thinking. Combining that with the fact that I'm now hungry to read the original, I'd say the film justifies its existence.
The Frenchman
I've since read the original graphic novel. The contrast between the two is fascinating! I didn't attempt to read the whole thing in one sitting, so my perception may be skewed, but the pacing problems with the film don't seem to exist with the book. Certain other clunky aspects, such as the way in which the first Nite Owl's story was concluded, are definitely faults with the film rather than the story itself.
I do feel that the film's ending works better, both in general and in some of the particulars, although I appreciate that the original ending was partially about doing something that would only make sense in a comic book setting. On the other hand, I'm not convinced that the slight change to the pivotal moment in Rorschach's back story was an improvement.
Overall, I think the film is more "interesting" than "good", if you see what I mean. I would definitely recommend the graphic novel to anyone who enjoyed the film (unless stylised violence is their thing).
It was long but I thought it was great. I haven't read the graphic novel, but it seemed like it was a straight adaption. It looked superb, especially the opening sequence. At least some of the profundity got through.
Kermode is spot on here. It's one thing to make a superficial film, Watchmen, despite being completely hollow, gives the impression that it's dealing with profound material. It's flawed and pretentious beyond belief. There's nothing here. It just brings up some ideas for no reason and doesn't explore them. Every time I reach for it, my hand closes on air.
Death Valley Pretentious? That's absurd. It follows the novel very well, anything not explored is a matter of film time allowed and/or just weren't explored in the graphiv novel itself.
Reel Analysis this is by far the most accurate comment on this video. the original ending is far better, but couldn't have been done correctly in the time available. personally I loved the movie and its almost panel-for-shot recreation of the comic. however, Terry Gilliam's suggestion would have been the best approach to cover all of the themes in the source material
Oh please - If this is what you want close your hand on some literature. To accuse a film of this kind of being shallow! Shallow Compared to what?
IO23777 i agree, the plot is incredibly complex. Greatest hero movie ever created
I can't believe so many people praise Watchmen, it's a very misguided movie that demonstrates that Snyder clearly doesn't understand the source material at all. The EXACT same problems also came up in Man of Steel and Batman v Superman, which fanboys defended as well.
One of the best films I have ever seen...Loved It.
Wow love how much you review in detail. Bravo
"Don't do the voice. You'll upset the cats". Simon Mayo is genuinely hilarious.
I totally agree with Mark. The movie didn't quite understand that the characters are not supposed to be aspirational figures.
You nailed it with one sentence. Another way to describe the watchmen is: "The only hero is the one who kills ALOT of people. Still want to be a hero?"
Fantastic Review. I thought this was a mediocre line-by-line mindless adaptation of a brilliant novel.
this guy is a pretty insightful movie reviewer. he did a good job on Watchman.
Alan Moore is a legend with a lot of integrity and also a very funny chap
The Watchmen was an amazing movie. One of the greatest comic book to movie adaptions ever made.!
i feel the same way, it's a supeehero film that belongs in thw louvre.
+davy j.y. Yep thought it was amazing too. Up there with TDK.
regulator619
i think so, besides tdk is pretty great but it ain't even all that
regulator619
i dunno about what you have or haven't heard
+regulator619 he dark knight is the best Comic book movie and one of the greatest movies made... period
A takedown of an individual is not an analysis of a film
- Who watches the Watchmen?
- Ugh, I dunno...coastguard?
I really like the film. It's flawed for sure, but it just about hangs together and when it's good it's very good.
that was a great review...especially the last minute...
Watchmen is a film you watch twice
A year lol
And remember for a very long time.
Agreed. The Vietnam war scenes in particular were disturbing and not in a good way. Disturbing in a way of "hey doesn't this look really cool!"(as a bunch of Vietnamese people get killed and Vietnamese sex workers get impregnated ie 3rd world people being murdered on mass, exploited and wrecked). I'm cool with violence on screen but not if the guy doing it has no actual awareness of what he's portraying. It was like a 15 year old going "War...Cool".
10FRANKTV Nothing in this comment makes any sense. Good job.
But those scenes are in the comic, what purpose would just leaving them out entail?
My thoughts exactly, especially since I live in Cambodia and have lived in Vietnam.
I thought Watchmen was fantastic. great film.
me too
Just ok.
Watchmen was good, not exactly because of Snyder, but because of the strength of the source material he was adapting. Sucker Punch is proof of what happens when Snyder is left to his own devices and does something that isn't an adaptation of something: A disaster.
Zack Snyder is a great visuals guy, he should stick to that more. Though one thing I like is the opening he did for the film, loved that.
Wondering what' he'll do with Superman
Near enough every time I see a review of his I'm like does this guy even enjoy movies.
Loved Watchmen... Kermode seems to hate surface films as if the implied information doesn't count, and he also seems to hate long, slow movies. All these things keep me interested and enjoying it.
I don't think I care what Mark Kermode opinion any longer. I think you are right about him not really "getting" visual films. He's just full of himself, which started to interfere with his credibility as a movie critic.
Agreed. I like movies and want to see reviews, and at least Kermode's reviews are short and simple. I used to appreciate his reviews and round-ups on the news programme but nowadays his reviews are getting too dismissive.
Him short and simple!? Nowadays he couldn't be short and simple if his life depended on it. :)
Well his point is short and simple, he just repeats it over and over and over... making that short point very clear lol
Ha-ha! Should put a time limit on his reviews then-3 min max...or 1min?
I really loved the part with the burial and the simon garfunkel song
You got a point, it always depends on the artists involved. I always wanted to read Fight Club as well, i heard that there a a lot of differences. It's rare when a film is better than the book or graphic novel, at least to my knowledge.
I only saw the Director's Cut.. and even then I wasn't bored
WoW! He killed Zack Snyder. I felt it was a good film. But I do get Kermode's point.
Kermode is right on the money here. Watchmen is a mediocre film that gestures towards the compelling elements of the source material but never manifests them in a sophisticated way, it does not crystallize the heart of the book the way all great adaptations do.
Snyder struggles with serious moments and material to this day; and it’s why Army of the Dead and 300 are his strongest movies - they’re closer to video games than anything and that’s fine, they’re fun movies.
Bang on review.
Kermode being way too unfair on Watchmen, underrated movie that did all it could to adapt something which isn't made for the visual medium. Funnily enough, his criticism of Zack Snyder applies to absolutely everything he's done since Watchmen.
Surely the Watchmen comic is purely in the visual medium? There are no voices or sound effects or music. It's all visual. Okay I'm being pedantic but with tongue firmly in cheek, and I agree it's not a simple task to adapt a book or play to TV or cinema but that's where the skill of all the professionals involved come into it, or should do anyway. Perhaps Snyder did all he could to adapt it well but ultimately he didn't do a good job because the film has a lot of flaws (although I don't hate it - I reserve my hate for Jackson's handling of Middle Earth) but he's not solely to blame of course. Considering his track record I don't know how he keeps getting directorial gigs.
@@north.by.northeast not purely, it's in the narrative and visual medium, more so in the narrative medium than the average comic book
Is the great problem of Zack Snyder.
He is a very talented visual artist, but he is immature, and like a teenager he want to do something deeper, but he doesn't understand deeper stuff.
He watch the Holly Mountain and think that the movie is about naked people and abuse of birds.
Watching the full version of watchmen was obvious that he doesn't understand that the pirates history was an allegory of Adrian past.
That couldn't be showed because would spoil the end.
If he hold in his visual talent and drop the pretension to do smart movies he will be awesome.
"what's a fanboy?" lol
So basically you missed the part where the bad guy projected as the smartest guy manipulates the most powerful being in the world to become the ultimate sacrifice for peace just to be reduced to a practical joke through the uncompromising truth which in it's turn will annihilate the mutilated status quo?
Which I found a quite interesting, worthwhile and let's be honest, rare thing to convey through a movie and I don't think you can do that in a movie of less than 2 hours. There is something beneath it's surface, too bad you couldn't look past the visuals and pacing. Zack is a lot smarter than you give him credit for. He understands the material and it shows. Well at least to me.
You nailed it. I personally loved this movie for so many reasons but the most being that it was just beautiful. It really is a work of art on screen. There's nothing that I'd change on that movie, except maybe the intro song lol.
I don't think Snyder is a great filmmaker but at least he had the humility to trust the original work over any more involved adaptation process. I'm really not sure how bright of a guy he is (Man of Steel doesn't help him here), and while I too would love to see what Gilliam or Greengrass would do with a more radical adaptation, Snyder is probably the best choice to visually parrot the book on screen. Basically even if he doesn't really understand the material, well then cheers to him for realizing it and adapting it in a panel-for-panel style that still let's his viewers understand it, and see the great images from the book. The only real problems I have with the movie is the gratuitous 300-style slow motion that made some of the violence seem too sexy/slick/endorsed by the filmmakers (it should evoke more a sense of ambivalence) and the casting of Ozymandias seemed wrong (too young and brash, much less sympathetic, seems more like the Villian of the movie than he does in the book).
refoliation
I thought the slow mo was applied to give it a more comic book feel, and it worked for me, so I don't subscribe to that argument. Snyder did his best to please Moore (who claimed it could never be made into a movie), by implementing comicbook styles. I can understand it didn't work for everyone, but I liked it. Every slowmo is like a panel to admire the visual artistry.
In case of the casting of Ozy, I understand what you're saying, I didn't mind it that much but I agree that his demeanor was a little too obvious.
He does not understand the material. Watchmen is clearly written from a left wing perspective. Snyder is a right winger and doesn't understand that half the material in the comic is a hard critique and satire of right wing views and the superhero mythology.
@egodrive
The "comic book feel" is completely null in the context of the original comic book. The problem with it is that Alan Moore and Dave Gibbons did not stylize the violence and aimed for a realistic approach, which was quick and brutal, and helped to make the characters believable. Secondly, Synder's implementation of the "comic book feel", even if it was to please Moore (who almost never uses slow motion in his comics), shows that he doesn't even have an understanding of the comics visuals even though he is very much a visual director who is a massive fan of the material. He just doesn't have the ability to understand what he is actually filming.
Guess im watching this 10 years after i saw it and 20 years after i read it cause the mini series is being auto picked up by the Algorithm. Ozimandius would be proud to see his "Utopia" complete. I guess we never had a real world Rorsarch to whisper from the roof top. The end is nigh.
whenever mark asks simon if he's seen/read something, simon ALWAYS says no
I dont go out of my way to watch comic book movies. Watchmen is the exception. Brilliant film I've watched many times.
Had a critical agenda from the off. The movie is fantastic and is more layered that he proclaims.
Snyder is awesome.
I loved this movie. I think he forgot it is actually set in the 80's so being Duran Duran or Spandau Ballet-looking is probably right.
One of the key ideas behind Watchmen is that the 'heroes' are fallible humans too. It's entirely fitting that their costumes are not very 'cool'. Silk Spectre even makes a point of saying how she doesn't like her costume, IIRC. Nite Owl is a geeky nerd and his costume and gadget look corny. The film has more depth than Mark gives it credit for.
It's funny. After seeing Watchmen way back when I called it "the best film that ever bored me." I had not read the graphic novel so was unfamiliar with the story. I thought the film's storyline, characters and it's complexities were great. It should have been wonderful for provoking discussions at the restaurant afterwards.... but I just didn't want to think about it anymore. I think Mark nailed the reason why.
I thought it was generally okay but the Slow Motion, Dr Manhattan being fully CGI and Silk Spectre's horrendous fringe really put me on edge. Also I thought that the fact that the ending was so different to the ending in the comic totally undermined the fact that it stuck so closely to the story of the rest of it, which just made me question why they didn't just adapt the whole thing into a more filmic story.
Mark doesn't like Snyder because his style simply doesn't appeal to him, that's okay cause I love it and absolutely love watchmen
Snyder puts style over substance - that's the problem. Even if you (somehow) like his style, there's nothing under it
Watchmen is a very good film but not a good director
If that's what you got from this review, you really need to watch it again, and pay more attention. There is far more to Kermode's opinion than that; it's not even like you would need any other video to demonstrate that. Pay more bloody attention mate.
Unfortunately the best part of Watchmen is the opening credits.
"from the visionary director of 300"? 300 was fun, but hardly the work of a visionary.
Tell me one film, that had the same visuals and esthetics like 300?
TheMusic4Soul Spy Kids
TheMusic4Soul and where did he get that vision from, which inspired his adaptation of the comic book 300
Back in 2007, it was visionary and Snyder was seen as the next big thing, a wunderkind in the making.
@daleprechaungold I agree. Except I was very excited for Zack's movie, because I assumed he'd be obsessed with recreating the look and feel of the original INSTEAD of making it say his own thing. I like 'adaptations' as well as 'translations' and I believe both approaches have merit.
V was an adaptation (contemporarily understandable forces of good and evil rather than the exaggerated comic world of Anarchy VS Facism)
Watchmen was a translation. Faithful to a fault.
I don’t think it’s ALL style and no substance, but it doesn’t capture the complexity of the book. You don’t get why Watchmen is a big deal by watching the movie.
True, partly because Snyder devotes far too much time to the action set pieces, and not enough to the stark contrasts in the character's worldviews.
For me, something that typifies what is wrong with Watchmen can be seen in the opening scene (and every time that scene plays out or is referred to).
In the book, the scene shows a near-defenceless pensioner violently brutalised by an assassin who outclasses him in literally every way. In the movie the scene is a bombastic fight scene with hype bullet time, presumably becaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
Whoa, sorry about that, fell asleep on my keyboard because I hadn't seen anyone die for like thirty seconds.
I originally saw Watchmen at the cinema. I had not read the comics, but had been told by my brother (a massive comic book fan) that Watchmen was one of the greatest comics ever. I saw the movie and thought it was okay, but that was about it. Later, I decided to get the DVD to give it a second try. I was absolutely blown away by it. It is the only film I can recall where this has happened. I told my son (who had watched it with me at the cinema) and he watched it again and felt the same way. So, my advice is: if you watched it once and did not think much of it, watch it again. You may be very pleasantly surprised.
My dad said the same thing
I liked Watchmen, but the only version I watch now is the Ultimate Cut, which is unfortunately not available in the UK.
V for Vendetta didn't live up to the source material but like The Shining was able to stand by itself.
As a big Alan Moore fan, I thought Watchmen, V for Vendetta, and From Hell were all really good, though everything pales in comparison to the graphic novels.
I disagree with the criticism that Watchmen lacks depth. It is full of historical references, and offers a disturbing interpretation of political reality with a grand myth. The basic premise of the story is that these vigilantes-turned-superheroes have been used by nefarious forces and are finally eclipsed by that villain Nixon who is leading the world to Armageddon. Then someone plans to save the world from nuclear holocaust with a grand conspiracy, which may be undermined by the truth. The film is dark, twisted, and quite unlike anything we have seen before in this genre.
Moore is one of the few artists trying to address the contradictions that abound in scandals like Iran-Contra, perhaps thinking that a more sophisticated understanding of our own duality might help lead us to a solution.
I also recommend checking out Kill the Messenger, a film about the late investigative reporter Gary Webb; author of Dark Alliance: The CIA, the Contras, and the Crack Cocaine Explosion.
Corey Barcus great comment, thank you.
I love this movie
I thought it was ok. Not as good as the book but lots of adaptations aren’t. I can’t understand why people liked John hillcoat’s adaptation of “the road”. Now there’s a film that doesn’t live up to the book.
Must compare and contrast the movie and book at some point.
I thought Watchmen was okay, but cluttered and unfocused. I've never read the original comics - I can believe that they're excellent.
The thing that struck me when watching the film, which was cluttered with characters who were quite often uninteresting to me, was how much potential there was in Doctor Manhattan.
The rest of them were inch-deep archetypes - misanthropic, nihilistic bores or do-goody hippies - but Manhattan was, is, a character you could comfortably centre an entire movie around. His was by far the most interesting narrative and it asked by far the most interesting philosophical and political questions - eg. what it means to have the most powerful weapon of mass destruction of all time when that WMD just happens to be a human being with free-will and, to a certain extent, the same emotions and motivations as the rest of us.
That just struck me as a fascinating arc, and the best moments were those that centred around the slow evolution of Manhattan from a normal guy with relationships and desires, into a more and more detached demi-god. I'd like to read the originals just to see what his storyline was like there(I don't really read comics or graphic novels so that'd be a bit of a departure).
At its best, Manhattan's story in the film was a realism-based retread of Superman. It actually dealt with the moral, political and philosophical nuances that Superman's films, for many different reasons, never explored. So there were bits of Watchmen that were fascinating, and that could have been spun out into entire films or even TV series.
I still like the idea of Greengrass doing a version though. Terrific at action, stylish and far more subtle than Snyder.
+The Sprawl It's a very well fleshed out story, and has a literary quality to it. Ozymandias is equally compelling in the series, in fact a lot more sympathetic. I think what Watchmen as a comic suffers from is it's own legend, I don't think it has stood up too well. It is fantastically original as much of AM's work is in regards to but it leans too heavily on tone as a narrative. In my opinion 'The Dark Night Returns' is as good if not better in terms of making the medium of comics deliver something uniquely creative and completely absorbing. Nevertheless Dr Manhattan is a great invention, and that if anything is what really bothers me about the comic. It is not as incongruous in the movie because he says so little, but the change of heart and his reasoning (which comes across as nonsensical for such a rational being) for it sticks out in the story, and ruins the concept. As you said the other characters are archetypes seemingly created with an element of disdain. Ultimately Watchmen is lot of never fully realized ideas which are disguised by the density of the story, and the profundity of Dr Manhattan. It is a very good comic, but by no means a great book.
Weird that i agree with a lot you say on other reviews... But this is my favourite movie, and you crushed it. hurts my heart man
I loved watchmen
WHY DID THEY CHANGE THE ENDING?
My buddy made me read the novel. I usually don't read much non-fiction, but I couldn't put the book down. Incredible story and artwork. Any reasonable person would know after reading Watchmen no film adaption would ever compare, and this man struggles to breath just to rant about the films faults. The film is decent and the novel is art.