99 replies to this topic

[Stefancos]

Yep.

[Alexcremers]

One more thing: I for one am excited for his Superman. If there is a superhero movie that could benefit from Snyder's visuals and action sensibilities, that would be it. It was old-fashined for too long. Superman needs to kick ass!

Karol

Well, I'm a little worried about what Snyder means with "it's going to be my most realistic movie yet". Something tells me he's gonna copy Nolan's style. Or am I seeing it completely wrong?

[Chaac]

I still don't know what drawing style would you choose instead. Watchmen is DC, by the way.

I guess I expected the novel to look like the movie, more arty and less standard comic bookie.

I don't see what's so special about the design of the film. Most of it was already in the book. It's more centered around the story.

Well, I'm a little worried about what Snyder means with "it's going to be my most realistic movie yet". Something tells me he's gonna copy Nolan's style. Or am I seeing it completely wrong?

I think he means it will look like the real world. But who knows.

[Stefancos]

The style is more subtle then it was in 300, but it is definatly there.

[Chaac]

There are scenes where I feel I'm seeing a stage play that then jumps into imitations of comic book panels, so yes. I think Snyder has an idea of how he wants the mise-en-scène to be. And he uses it, and gets things right or wrong by chance. A slow-mo here might look great because he always was going to do that. Something in there might look wrong because he always was going to do that. He doesn't distinguish. I don't know why that is.

[Stefancos]

One more thing: I for one am excited for his Superman. If there is a superhero movie that could benefit from Snyder's visuals and action sensibilities, that would be it. It was old-fashined for too long. Superman needs to kick ass!

Karol

Well, I'm a little worried about what Snyder means with "it's going to be my most realistic movie yet". Something tells me he's gonna copy Nolan's style. Or am I seeing it completely wrong?

I'm just not sure how someone who made Watchmen can make a good Superman movie. They are each other opposites in many ways.

[Chaac]

I'm just not sure how someone who made Watchmen can make a good Superman movie. They are each other opposites in many ways.

I think he can. He's translating other people's output, which is easier with Superman, a character rewriten and interpreted differently many times, than Watchmen, a self contained story heavily based on Moore's sensibilities. No matter how dissillusioned I might have been with what I've seen from him, I keep thinking he will do great.

I need to see Sucker Punch. It would be cool if Snyder did a bunch more of original high budget fantasy stories.

[crocodile]

He's translating other people's output, which is easier with Superman, a character rewriten and interpreted differently many times, than Watchmen, a self contained story heavily based on Moore's sensibilities. No matter how dissillusioned I might have been with what I've seen from him, I keep thinking he will do great.

I concur.

Karol

[Alexcremers]

I don't see what's so special about the design of the film. Most of it was already in the book.

Well, if you don't see the difference in the way they both look, then what's the problem? You should be happy! BTW, I never said the "design" was different.

I'm just not sure how someone who made Watchmen can make a good Superman movie. They are each other opposites in many ways.

Yes, that was the first thing I said in the Supes/ Man Of Steel thread. Supes is such a traditional hero with a very conservative fan club. I expected Snyder would have too many differences with Nolan and that he would leave the project to do his own thing. OTOH, he needs a hit. Maybe, Nolan, the hit wonder, and to whom the masses respond extremely well ( ), is going to make that happen for him.


Alex

[Chaac]

I don't see what's so special about the design of the film. Most of it was already in the book.

Well, if you don't see the difference in the way they both look, then what's the problem? You should be happy! BTW, I never said the "design" was different.

I *am* happy with it, for the most part. This isn't one of my problems. I remember I loved the teaser trailer, which made me read the novel, which made me get serious goosebumps with the next trailers.

[Jason LeBlanc]

I rather liked the fact that apart from Dr Manhattan, so ones "powers" were explained in the movie. They just had them.

Erm, no one else in the movie *had* powers. Only Dr. Manhattan did.

[Stefancos]

Watchmen Theatrical Cut

My first taste of uncompressed 1080p Blu-ray

I'm generally pretty desensitized to violence in films but this film has some really nasty stuff in it. The near rape scene, the killing of a pregnant women are hard to watch.

After seeing the DE earlier, this films actually feels rushed. It was missing some interesting stuff. It's still good though.

I'm very intrigued by the character Rorschach. It's one of the strongest performances I've seen in recent years. And most of the acting is in the voice. So much in fact that when he finally gets unmasked, it doesn't actually make any difference in how the character is perceived. It's a bold, uncompromising performance. I wonder if Jackie Earle Haley was nominated for any acting awards. He should have been.

Nite Owl II in costume in some shots reminded me of Rutger Hauer. especially when he smiles.

The songs and source music is great. But the original score is pretty generic. The thing is that that hardly seems to matter. Maybe the great movies no longer need great scores?

I don't think the new Superman can be as good as this because the source material does not have this kind of depth and texture. Like 300 is not as good as this because the comic, despite the fantastic way it looked was very one-dimensional.

If there is any criticism then it must be the make-up.
Old Carla Cugino just looks like she's wearing old-age make up. Even at the first scene with the Comedian I could see it was an actor under heavy latex. President Nixon looks very phony.

[Alexcremers]

President Nixon looks very phony.

He was a liar. Maybe that's why his nose was so obviously phony? Strangely enough, I thought it was befitting the rest of the scene, which of course is a nod to Kubrick's Strangelove.

The songs and source music is great. But the original score is pretty generic.

It's constantly referencing to the '80s. When Rorschach walks the streets, the music sounds like Vangelis.

[Chaac]

The songs and source music is great. But the original score is pretty generic.

It's constantly referencing to the '80s. When Rorschach walks the streets, the music sounds like Vangelis.

That could play in Blade Runner. Which of course is fitting.

[Alexcremers]

I don't think the new Superman can be as good as this because the source material does not have this kind of depth and texture. Like 300 is not as good as this because the comic, despite the fantastic way it looked was very one-dimensional.

In many ways, 300 is the tight version of LOTR. After I was impressed with Watchmen, I decided to watch 300 but this time from another perspective (after all, I knew the story and during Watchmen I noticed that I was fascinated by 'how' everything was put on film - the 'way' it was told) and suddenly it was equally satisfying. Since then, Snyder has become one of my favorite directors. Style over content!

[Stefancos]

It's constantly referencing to the '80s. When Rorschach walks the streets, the music sounds like Vangelis.

Yeah.

But some of the action music sounded either like Hans Zimmer/Media Ventures or had a Don Davis The Matrix style with those loud orchestral crashes and wallops.

[crocodile]

I'm curious how you'd find the longest version of Watchmen.

Oh, and Brokeback Mountain is certainly better than Crash. At the very least. And I'm not even a fan of this film.

Karol

[Stefancos]

Is it worth watching? I hear it has a cartoon in it?

[crocodile]

As I said before, there is this kid who's reading comic book and the animated film is about that. And it kind of comments on the main narrative. Cartoon is the last thing I'd call it. It's probably even more disturbing than the main film.

Karol

[Alexcremers]

The Ultimate Cut? Can't you order it from Amazon?


Alex - who has the cartoon on a separate Blu-ray

[crocodile]

As far as I know it has been only released in America, due to the whole lawsuit thing.

Karol

[Alexcremers]

So order it from Amazon US.

[crocodile]

Smartass!

Karol

[Alexcremers]

[Stefancos]

So Alex is it worth checking out?

[crocodile]

I've seen that version, Alex.

Karol

[Marian Schedenig]

Isn't the longest cut limited and quite expensive? I'd really like to see this film, but the confusion over the different versions and the price issue have so far kept me from it.

[crocodile]

Isn't the longest cut limited and quite expensive? I'd really like to see this film, but the confusion over the different versions and the price issue have so far kept me from it.

Avoid theatrical version (which is the only version readily available in Europe). Go with DC or UC. I'd recommned to see UC (the longest version), for it is the closest you get to the full Watchmen experience. It includes this animated film intercut with the main feature. It is an intergral part of the comic book so I find it essential to the whole. It wasn't directed by Snyder, but works quite well. If not, just watch DC.

Karol

[Alexcremers]

So Alex is it worth checking out?

I have seen the cartoon but not integrated into the live action film. I wasn't really affected by it.

[crocodile]

It is better seen as part of the film. On it's own it left me rather cold. It's part of a bigger fabric. Did you notice how it mirrors some themes from the film?

Karol

[Stefancos]

Since then, Snyder has become one of my favorite directors. Style over content!

In the case of Watchmen I think style are content are balanced very well, taking an equal share.

Just to be clear, but saying you like how it was put on film, do you mean purely the visual aspect (camerawork, visual effects, editing etc)?

[Quint]

Alex thinks nobody noticed how he carefully exchanged "substance" with "content".

The Great Eye sees ALL!

[Alexcremers]

Just to be clear, but saying you like how it was put on film, do you mean purely the visual aspect (camerawork, visual effects, editing etc)?

Everything that is visual and that is visually expressing something. The cinematography. The composition. The movement. The lighting. I can watch those films without dialogue even though Watchmen is a lot more dialogue driven than 300 (and probably Sucker Punch). Every scene is visually maxed out. There's even something 'electrifying' about how the actors are captured on film (Watchmen) or digital film (300). Anyway, all the things that are part of the director/storyteller's vocabulary. Originally, as comic books, 300 and Watchmen are two different things but I mainly enjoy them because of what Snyder's adds to them.

[Stefancos]

Yeah Watchmen is a lot more talky them most films of this type. But I like that aspect. Especially the voice-overs.
I did not know it was shot on film until I saw the grain on the blu-ray.

But in your opinion, is how an actor is shot more important then his performance?

[Alexcremers]

Good question. Of course, performance is important but I know that I've never seen Rutger Hauer as electrifying or as radiant than in Blade Runner. Back then, Ridley Scott really knew how to capture something or someone. Maybe all his years in advertisement has something to do with that. He sees what the visual forte of an actor (or whatever that finds itself in front of the lens) is and he knows how to highlight it.

[crocodile]

I think that film is the closest you can get to "Gesamtkunstwerk". You know, total art. Where you have so many individual elements that can work that it is almost impossible to properly rate it. You know, that's what is so wonderful about it. It can have a mediocre script, but one can still find some great merits. It is a painting, ballet, symphony, sculpture, photography, theater, everything. It's not just the story, just the pictures or sounds.

That's why I'm not as much interested in changing anyone's opinion on a certain film. I'm just curious what makes it tick for them.

Karol

[Stefancos]

Well most scripts tends to be mediocre, and every story has been told in one way or another. So better make it look a little nice.

[Quint]

It's all down to personal taste and preference, of course. I can understand why someone like Alex values very highly the power of images, but I would personally much rather watch (and listen to) a mesmerising performance by an actor in a good film than stare at a living prop whom is placed there merely (debatable) to be a part of the scenery within the greater composition of a given shot. We all appreciate beautifully framed cinema, but I think Alex resides at the extreme end of the spectrum in that regard, which in truth I personally don't believe to be a good thing (which is not a dig at the fella).

I choose story and characterisation over imagery, but you know what? I'll take 'em both and I do.

[Koray Savas]

The best films do both, Synder replaces all substance with style.

[Stefancos]

If that is true then that would mean Watchmen has no substance at all. Which simply is not true.

Michael Bay however...