did they use the phillip glass music from the trailer?

I don't think so.

I agree that they shouldn't be selling Watchmen figures at Toys R Us.

If I had a nitpick about the movie, too, it was the Nixon. Too weird looking.

Oh nose!

+1

oh, and the soundtrack kind of sucked.

What in the name of ozymandias was that sex scene?

It was flame throwing hot!

Just curious, what more did you want to see? The movie was already teetering between a hard R and an NC-17. Too much, or not enough for you?

Saw it yesterday afternoon. Amazing!!!
Very long. Definitely for the fans.
A movie that long would have your average punter squirming in their seats.

I found the comic an intense read. When i originally read it i skipped bits.
Seeing it on the big scree though, it felt like the comic came alive.
Scenes were so accurate and framed like the book.

One thing though.... The CGI on the cat 'Bubastis' at the end was absolutely atrocious.
Nixon didn't really bother me, it was kind of satirical and exaggerated comic book style.

Some off the hook ultra-violence and quite a saucy sex scene.
Great music. Wish there was more 80's stuff though.
A couple of the cinematic pieces almost sounded like bits of the Vangelis Blade Runner score.
Were these Glass compositions?

Highly recommended.!! Honestly, too much to take in in one sitting.
Can't want to get it on Blu-ray so i can sit down and go deeper.

When I saw it, there was a family w/ 2 kids (about 8 & 10) sittting a couple of seats down. Guess they thought they were going to see another Spiderman movie. Hell, these kids were not even old enough to see The Dark Knight, IMO. Guess this is not uncommon, since it is a 'comic book movie.'

Reminds me of a Insomniac/ Dave Attel I saw. He was talking about doing his act in a club & seeing a family with a kid. He stopped & told them to get out and asked if they were all going to go home and do heroin as a family.

Poor kids.
There was a visible/audible cringe from the audience when Rorshach went off with the meat cleaver. Pretty gruesome stuff for young kids.

I was a little taken aback at the over the top violence too. Not that it detracted from the film by any means, I really think it sort of added some depth/realism to the movie. A cleaver to the head would be messy, and they didn't hold back. The grinder to the forearms was absolutely brutal, as was the fight scene between the gang and Silver Spec. and Nite Owl in the alley; knives in the throat, bones bursting through arms, the wife had to look away. good stuff!

I must be completely jaded by horror movies, but I don't even think I considered it a gory movie. hmm. Now that you mention it...There was a lot of blood, but I didn't consider it realistic enough to need to look away, or even cringe. It was just comic-book silly, which I think is the point.

Let me speak from the non-fan side of it. I have not read the book, and felt like a lot of things were glossed over (most of which had to be later explained to me by Skylar). I think it was ok as a film, but didn't make me love the story or the characters. I'm told that the book will do this. I know from friends who are fans that there is a lot that just doesn't work in a movie format, so I was not surprised to find that a lot of unexplored things just seemed to be tacked on in the interest of time.

I pretty much expect most CGI to be atrocious, and agree that some of my problems were the goofy blood splatter, the weird tiger thing at the end-again, as someone who didn't read the book, i was like "WTF is that?", and Nixon's nose was pretty distracting.

All in all, I didn't hate it. (which I thought I might!), and did my best to give it a fair shot. I did see a lot of problems with it, but I think this is just the fact of any book turned film. Unfortunately, if you were not already a fan, this didn't really give a full picture. Maybe a trilogy or something would have worked better.

Oh, sure, but planning movies this way only works when you're reasonably sure you're going to make enough money off of the first one to fund the second one, and then all over again.

I'll agree that I didn't like the cat, it didn't seem to serve any purpose.

they don't really explain Bubastis fully in the book either, but one knows from character development that it was probably a genetic creation by Ozymandias. Little things like Bubastis, Manhattan, Rorschach's mask, etc. make much more sense in a comic form. you accept them as part of a completely fabricated world.

I found it really distracting watching the mask change on Rorschach. I think it would have made more sense to have the mask be different every time he appears or after a cut. I never imagined it moving like a psychedelic backdrop at a concert. if anything it should have moved more slowly. This is a nerdy perspective, I know...I'll spare you all my thesis on every other detail.

still decent imo...fun to see the book finally done as a movie. looking forward to the dvd to see if a lot of little details get put in when running time isn't an issue.

Bubastis only worked with the Squid story. It was that little clue given to the reader that Oz was working on genetic mutations. Also, it's cool as hell and weird and fun. But it's purpose was to be a small clue into the end scheme with the Squid.

I couldn't imagine a better Watchmen movie! Even with it's flaws (very few), it's a great movie!

I saw it with a mixed group of folks and everyone liked it.

I recently read the books in anticipation of the movie, and I think it made a big difference. Regardless, my wife, who hadn't read it, still enjoyed it. But she asked me this question:

"Aside from Dr. Manhattan, do the others have actual super-powers?" To which I replied no. They just kind of did it for the excitement, as discussed in the books (if I remember correctly). To which she followed up with, "Then why did they all seem to have extraordinary strength", as evidenced by every fight scene? I guess this relates back to what others have previously mentioned - the addition of the violence and the slo-mo fights. In order to add excitement and stylism, they embellished these scenes. As such, they kind of changed the story yet again, but in a subtle way. These no longer seem to be ordinary humans, which I believe is a major point of the story (normal people with normal problems). It didn't bother me too much, since the movie didn't have as much character development as the books. Just something else I noted, that's all.

my parents saw the movie and asked the same question. Adrian I could understand, but everyone else? hmmm.

True. UFC fighters aren't even that brutal.

Silk Spectre 2 > Anderson Silva

I think the slow motion and the human with super strength thing was most odd in the rape scene. I have a feeling they thought it looked cool kind of capturing images from the comic by doing slow motion...but I think it's so tacky and forced. we know a rape scene is heavy...there's no need to slow it down for effect.

Hayter weighs in:

http://www.hardcorenerdity.com/profiles ... Post:40658

seems like damage control over fandom backlash, would have been nice if he would have mentioned Moore once in the article.

Personally I'm waiting for the download...I don't really want to spend money on it if none of that cash is making it's way back to the author.

I don't think Moore wants to be mentioned, and he's voluntarily giving his royalties away.

Why didn't you mention Gibbons?

movie6.net has it up streaming from different sites. not sure of quality.

A lot was left out that would have helped, but all of those made more sense when there was a squid. The boat exploding, and all that happened in that issue. A LOT of Hollis Mason and his book where never talked about. After thinking about it I would have rather it been a part1 part 2 movie so they could have kept the story. And although the ending worked, I rather it have been the squid. What are you gonna do though, it is what it is , and for what its worth Its not bad.

Its just makes me want to reread the books again. I think when the animated story comes out they may include more that was left out of the movie.