Stitch on 14/3/2009 at 01:22
In my experience there's always a bunch of reasons not to go do something by yourself, and these reasons are actually nothing but bullshit.
The Alchemist on 14/3/2009 at 03:33
Quote Posted by BEAR
Saw it. Thought it was OK. Great for first 3/4 perhaps, last 1/4 lacking. Unsure as to the benefit offered by ending over real ending. Still not really disappointed. This as someone who read the graphic novel several months ago for the first time (after hearing discussions about the movie.
Good impression!
....right?
Scots Taffer on 14/3/2009 at 05:33
Sure, I might end up seeing this one myself too as not many people I know are game for a 2hr45min movie about superheroes that might be good.
I got over the whole "going to the cinema alone" thing about 2 years ago because I love cinema and had missed it for a year after my daughter was born.
Angel Dust on 14/3/2009 at 06:22
Before I started going out with the with the woman who recently became my wife 95% of my film going experiences where alone. I simply didn't know anyone who wanted to see most of the films I was interested in and I greatly prefer the big screen, no matter the genre, for seeing a film. Luckily my wife is a big film buff too so now I have someone to go and have a post film dicussion with. Still when I film pops up she has little interest in I have no qualms about being a 'Nigel No-Mates' for the evening.
Regarding 'Watchmen': my brother saw it last week and gave it the thumbs down. He didn't think it was awful but he certainly felt a lot of the human drama was missing. He felt the film would have been much better if instead of inserting unnecessary and poorly executed action sequences, Synder had instead developed the characters more. He thought the new ending was a smart choice since the old ending would have meant scenes explaining the artists etc would have been required , which would have lead to a longer running time or, more likely, even more trimmed back characterisation. He felt the inclusion of the shot of the newpaper vendor and the boy embracing before they are vapourised was indicative of the whole experience; Synder visually replicating a powerful image from the comic without actually understanding why it worked in the comic. My brother has told not to bother seeing it and I'm going to listen this time since he has a similar taste to myself for these kinds of films and the same level of appreciation for the comic.
BEAR on 14/3/2009 at 17:49
Quote Posted by Angel Dust
He felt the inclusion of the shot
of the newpaper vendor and the boy embracing before they are vapourised was indicative of the whole experience; Synder visually replicating a powerful image from the comic without actually understanding why it worked in the comic.
I got the feeling this was just fan service. A person who hasn't read the comic won't even know why that shot was relevant whatsoever, only someone who knows already will even notice what the shot was, so I'm not sure why that would really bother anyone.
Fafhrd on 14/3/2009 at 23:02
All the news stand stuff was shot but was cut for time (as were the first flashback of Laurie talking to Blake after the Crimebusters meeting, Laurie confronting Blake at the state dinner, the death of Hollis Mason, and Dan's reaction when he finds out about it.) , so saying 'Snyder doesn't get why that shot was important' is silly.
BEAR on 15/3/2009 at 00:01
And if he hadn't added SOMETHING of them people would have complained about that. That part was a total non-issue to me, the ending was a much bigger problem. If they'd gotten that right, I would have been incredibly impressed.
The directors cut will likely be much better.
Scots Taffer on 15/3/2009 at 03:42
Can people stop giving the film a pass on the basis of its cutting room floor parts and what may make an extended DVD version please. It's a fucking useless and irritating argument.
