Comments on: “Watchmen”: Five reviews from critics that matter to me. And they disagree.

By: coffee

coffee — Sun, 15 Mar 2009 18:07:21 +0000

Rorschach was an especially well developed as a character; i hope the actor that played his role is nominated for some kind of an award (when that season comes around again)

By: Daniel

Daniel — Thu, 12 Mar 2009 17:56:21 +0000

I personally loved the film, even though I can admit it’s not perfect. But Jeff, did you see the Neptune WATCHMEN marquee? “BYO Squid”!

By: Bryan

Bryan — Mon, 09 Mar 2009 17:41:53 +0000

Saw it this weekend. It was brilliant.

It helps to go in knowing what it is NOT about. It is not a Batman or Spiderman. It is not Sin City. It is not even entirely nihilistic (though it is dark).

I saw an exploration of what it means to be a hero… the limits, the valour, the ideals behind each man and woman all pushing against each other in a messy and beautifully balance. It invites us to explore ourselves.

By: Chris

Chris — Sun, 08 Mar 2009 18:47:41 +0000

I agree–McWeeney and Ebert’s thoughts align very closely to mine. It’s definitely a divisive movie–I think those who have read the book several times and memorized it will never be pleased, while the average moviegoer expecting another “Dark Knight” or “Spider-man” will be shocked, appalled and disturbed. I think it works best for those who are open to being challenged and who have read the graphic novel one or two times. I loved it, didn’t mind the changes and think that it’s a flawed masterpiece.

By: Ryan H.

Ryan H. — Sun, 08 Mar 2009 17:11:14 +0000

I’ve been anticipating WATCHMEN like crazy, and I was more or less satisfied with the film adaptation, largely because I’m such a fan of the graphic novel. As it’s often been called, it’s the CITIZEN KANE of the genre, one that toys with what the medium allows in its storytelling. In this way, WATCHMEN was always somewhat “unadaptable” in the sense that it could never do for film what it did for comic books, but that’s not to say they couldn’t make a very good film out of it.

Zack Snyder’s film adaptation is what everybody’s talking about, and frankly, the critical disagreement over it is merited. WATCHMEN is a bizarre piece of cinema, both brilliant and frustrating; WATCHMEN is enchantingly beautiful one moment and then decidedly immature the next. But overall, I can’t help but look on with admiration on this piece of cinema. Zack Snyder has produced a truly stunning piece of film which occasionally hits a bump, but is always audacious and interesting. It’s certainly well worth seeing. There’s really nothing else like it.

By: Daniel

Daniel — Sat, 07 Mar 2009 22:11:06 +0000

Definitely my best movie experience since LotR:RotK.

By: Seth H.

Seth H. — Sat, 07 Mar 2009 05:26:06 +0000

I second Stephen’s endorsement of McWeeny’s (what an unfortunate name) review, and therefore the film as well. Though I can see why someone else might be less enthusiastic. It’s definitely not for everyone.

By: Joseph

Joseph — Sat, 07 Mar 2009 02:27:56 +0000

And it’s up: http://cinexcellence.com/2009/03/06/watchmen/

By: Leo Partible

Leo Partible — Fri, 06 Mar 2009 20:27:57 +0000

Hey Jeffrey,

My reviews been up on IESB.net for about a week:

http://www.iesb.net/index.php?option=com_ezine&task=read&page=2&category=21&article=6384

I’m surprised how the studios are giving early screenings for our geek community waaaay before the mainstream media. We’re already getting ready for Star Trek and Wolverine early!

By: Joseph

Joseph — Fri, 06 Mar 2009 20:14:59 +0000

I’ll have a review up later today, hopefully.