Jump to content
Gerard Butler GALS

3/3 - Hollywood will be watching 'The Watchmen' closely


Recommended Posts

Jackie Earl Haley will always be Kelly from the Bad News Bears to me. :lmao:

I will now have to see more of Patrick's movies ... I think I'll start with Little Children. I've heard that's an awesome movie.

My husband said the same thing about Jackie.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 111
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Well, if you see Little Children your vision of Jackie Earle Haley may change - I've only watched parts of the film though I have it set to record later in the week on Cinemax. I just watched the ending of it tonight - you may NEVER see JEH as the Bad News Bears kid again.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes Little Children was a great film and my Patrick does have a nice arse. I loved Hard Candy just because it was so out there and different. It was an early film for Ellen Page too and I still do not know whether she actually did cut it off or not LOL.

I was going to see watchmen at the weekend but real life got in the way but I will make every effort to see it this week as the clips I have seen and all your reviews make this a film not to be missed.

Moira

Link to post
Share on other sites

from: http://www.usatoday.com/life/movies/news/2...hmen-main_N.htm

Hollywood will be watching 'The Watchmen' closely

By Scott Bowles, USA TODAY

excerpt from article:

Certainly, the film faces challenges most big-studio popcorn fare doesn't:

•Relative unknowns. While lesser-known comics such as Wanted and Iron Man had Angelina Jolie and Robert Downey Jr. in primary roles, Watchmen features lesser-known stars, including Billy Crudup and Jackie Earle Haley.

•A prohibitive rating. Although The Dark Knight had violence aplenty, the Batman sequel maintained a PG-13 rating. Watchmen's bone-crunching bloodshed makes it one of the harder R movies of the year.

•Dense source material Like the film, the Watchmen graphic novel is multi-layered and set in a parallel 1985 universe. "For the audience it's geared for, you have to ask if it's too sophisticated," Thompson says.

Of course, Watchmen has at least one ace up its sleeve: director Zack Snyder, who took another brutally violent graphic novel in 300 and turned it into a smash in 2006.

"They said 300 was going to be a flop, too," says Gerard Butler, the star of the sword-and-sandal epic. "Zack made me what I am today. I've got no doubt he's going to do it again."

So far, the appetite for Watchmen appears ravenous. Ticket reseller Fandango reports that nearly two-thirds of the company's sales this week are for Watchmen tickets.

Even competing studios are braced for a hit. "I think it's going to be huge," says Steve Rothenberg of Lionsgate. "If you look at the big movies this year, it's not with A-level stars getting $20 million paychecks."

read the entire article: here

Newsday 3'9/09

Watchmen' conquers box office

The $55.7 million weekend take for the comic book turned graphic novel turned movie is the biggest of 2009.

excerp from article:

"Watchmen" clocked in with $55.7 million in ticket sales to claim the top spot making director Zack Snyder's comic book adaption about a team of twisted super heros the biggest opening of 2009 so far. The AP reports. "Watchmen" bumped off tyler Perry's Medea Goes to Jail" which had held the top spot the previous two weeks.

Celtic Star

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's funny to read the box office stories because that one (which I saw first at Box Office Mojo) indicates a successful box office take for Watchmen while another at Reuters claims the fact that it was less than the $60 million "expected" and far less than the $71 million taken in by "300" in the same perioed 2 years ago, means it was a "disappointment". At least some of the articles are smart enough to realize that just because Zack is the director of both "300" and "Watchmen" doesn't mean they appeal to the same audiences by a long shot. "Watchmen" is a more difficult movie to sell because it is the "anti-superhero" film so people expecting a clear-cut hero and a clear-cut villain are finding themselves upset and often leaving the movie before the end. But for those willing to wait, those who haven't read the graphic novel, those willing to let the movie sink in and think about its message, the payoff is in the last half hour of the film. I've seen viewer reviews (I read a whole bunch of them on Fandango in search of my own which just a few hours after I posted it was on the 50th page of reviews) that absolutely hated it, claimed it had no plot, and then admitted to walking out only a short time into the film. Maybe people don't want to take the time to educate themselves about the films they see. They watch a one minute trailer and think they know if it is something they will like. I'm sure there are films I do that with as well - I saw a few trailers for comedies last year and knew I wouldn't go see them, likewise with horror films. Sometimes I'll change my mind based on the input I get from friends who've gone - that's the only reason I ever saw "There's Something About Mary" which I found to be very funny. I'm not sure I would have seen "V for Vendetta" had it not been what I heard from others about it and I ended up loving it (with apologies to Alan Moore because I know he believes the movie butchered the graphic novel, which I haven't read).

So it will be interesting to see what word of mouth does for Watchmen - some people are going to tell others how horrible it is and others are going to tell how amazing it is. Which opinion will prevail in the coming weeks? I'm hoping to see it for the 2nd time tonight after work.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So it will be interesting to see what word of mouth does for Watchmen - some people are going to tell others how horrible it is and others are going to tell how amazing it is. Which opinion will prevail in the coming weeks?

That's it, Susan. In some ways this is NOT a superhero film. And it definitely is not "300" which had a very direct, action packed story line. People expecting that will be disappointed. And the pacing of the film requires patience - some people can wait for the 'payoff' and some people need to get a 'payoff' every five minutes in a film or it's "no good". It's a film that when somebody says they "loved it", I agree. And when somebody says they "hated it", I agree. I think it's a brilliant film - but whether it's 'good' or 'bad' just depends on what you want from a film or expected from this film.

I really want the extended master cut complete with TBF to see the "complete" vision that Zack had. "Watchmen" is a different world that plays with our perception of time, memory and truth and you can't just visit and say "show me". You have to bring a lot with you - everything you know, everything you've learned, all the tidbits of pop culture, high culture and history for the last sixty years or so - and use it to fully appreciate the film. The film's not going to explain it all to you - you have to do that yourself - and there's a lot going on besides the obvious plot. Some people like that and some just want a film to give it all to them quickly and completely.

I hope it does well enough financially so no one suffers for it. It was a risky film and I'd rather have a risky qualified-success than a predictable block buster. And there are a lot of corporate fingers in the pie to keep happy. (If it doesn't perform as expected at the box office, will Fox and Paramount say"Ooops! Sorry! We changed our minds and it's all yours!" LOL)

Jane

Link to post
Share on other sites

I saw The Watchman at the IMAX and I loved it. I am going to have to put Zack in my list of favorite directors. This guy is a genious!!!!! I took my kids 10 and 14 but I knew what was going to happen in the movie. They watch horror movies and play Call of Duty on the Xbox 360 so it wasn't like anything they haven't seen before. The sex scenes weren't like anything we haven't see on tv like on FX and then Dr. Manhattan nake self didn't bother me one bit. I thought the movie was done very well. This movie is not for everyone. It seems to be one of those movies where you hate it or love it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

*SPOILERS!*

After much deliberation, my best friend talked me into going to Watchmen last night. I decided that if she wanted to see it, then I must also, because we ALWAYS share our movie likes and dislikes. I came away from the film with a mixed review. I loved the detective aspect of the story and was intrigued by how the plot unfolded. I thought the opening montage was sheer brilliance. I have not read the book so I had nothing to compare the film characters with and enjoyed them all. I really enjoyed Patrick Wilson's performance and Jackie Earl Haley was chilling and tragic in his role. I enjoyed the film's exploration of complex political/religious and philosophical themes, and overall I thought it was brilliantly filmed. I was never bored and was very interested in each of the character's back stories.

However, for me, the violence was too much. The gore and bone crunching was NOT necessary and distracted from the heart of the story. I found myself closing my eyes many times, but even with my eyes closed, the over-the-top sound effects were more than enough to indicate what was happening. I am personally disappointed that nothing is too graphic for Zack, because I believe there is and SHOULD be a limit to the graphic violence on film. For me there is a difference between portraying the evil of mankind... and wallowing in it.

I believe Watchmen stepped over a line in that regard, and the extreme violence took away from my film going experience.

Horrible things happen in the world all the time, but I don't need to see them to know they exist. Great evil done by humans was done to innocent victims during the Holocaust... but Steven Spielberg did not resort to graphically showing us that evil through bone crunching bloody gore, and still... we got the message in Schindler's List.

Our film-screens and televisions are becoming the Roman Coliseums of this day, where audiences may gorge themselves on blood and violence.. just for the fun of it.

The scene with the dogs was purely self indulgent on Zack's part. I think he is an amazing director, but sometimes less is more. By comparison I thought the scene where the dwarf is murdered was brilliant.

Swannie

I personally believe it would have been a better movie had he left more of that violence to our imaginations.

Link to post
Share on other sites

And that isn't Zack and it wouldn't have been his movie if he'd done that. Would it? It was a bit much but I didnt let that hurt my enjoyment or what the story is trying to tell us. Violence just isnt your thing and maybe for your own sake you shouldnt go to movies like that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

And that isn't Zack and it wouldn't have been his movie if he'd done that. Would it? It was a bit much but I didnt let that hurt my enjoyment or what the story is trying to tell us. Violence just isnt your thing and maybe for your own sake you shouldnt go to movies like that.

I have to agree, Landa. Zack is a brilliant director and uses the violence in the book to tell a story, just like he did in 300. Like I said before, there were a couple of times I had to look away and the scene with the dogs was sad, but let's face it ... none of it was real and in my opinion it was pertinent to the story. I haven't read the book so I don't know what is from the book and what is from Zack's mind.

Anyway, I have a friend who has asked my opinion on whether or not she should see it, and knowing the kind of movies she likes I advised her against it. It's just not for everyone.

Sorry you didn't enjoy it Swannie.

Lisa

Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't wait to see this movie - it looks like it is going to be visually beautiful just like 300 was. I wanted to go see it this weekend but the hubby wanted to see Taken instead (which was really, really good, BTW). So maybe in a couple of weeks. When I heard about the movie, I actually thought for sure that Gerry would end up in it, so I was a bit suprised when he wasn't, and even MORE suprrised wo find out that Patrick Wilson WAS! Go figure!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I found some of the violence uncomfortable and I know Zack has said he likes that kind of stuff but I'm wondering if it wasn't a bit over the top for a reason. We see so much easy violence in films - violence that doesn't offend, doesn't make us flinch, doesn't really bother us - that maybe he wanted us to be squirming in our seats a bit. Fake violence for entertainment like slasher horror films and vigilante films where only the nastiest of the nasties get blown away is all around us. Real violence is much messier and random. Not just the 'bad' people, the one's who deserve it, suffer from it. That and the fact that the bone crunching makes us flinch while the light flash on the map board only seems to engage our intellect. One is up close and personal and the other allows us to remain detached .

Or not. This film is very successful because it gets people talking and thinking. So, I like it for that alone. Now I need a frame-by-frame guide to all the visual references contained in the film. The Annotated Watchmen: Vol. 1-12. LOL

Edited by Jeb
Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly, Jane... from the interviews I've read, I really don't think Zack is trying to teach us anything about the nature of violence. He once said that he wants to make films for his inner 15 year old, and I think that's what he enjoys. He gets off on that sort of graphic violence in films.

Swannie

Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe - but just because he doesn't want to teach us something doesn't mean he doesn't teach us. In lit, a work has at least three valid meanings. The meaning the author intended, the meaning within the work itself, and the meaning I, as the reader, give it. Sometimes they agree and sometimes they oppose one another but they are all valid. Maybe in spite of himself he created more meaning than he was after.

I observe myself and know that I found the arm thing extremely uncomfortable. I looked away and distracted myself with one guilty look when it was almost over. But the ending is clean and uninvolving except as an intellectual conclusion. I can be morally upright and oppose that conclusion but I'm not squirming or turning away from the map. Why not? Because that kind of unseen, cool-minded violence I can distance myself from. That kind of violence is all around me everyday. WIthout being specific, I am involved in that kind of violence, through my Watchmen, everyday but because it is far away and only delivered in debates and cleanly out of site, for the most part, I don't have to face it, don't have to squirm and feel uncomfortable. And maybe I should be squirming.

So maybe, in spite of himself, he does teach me something I need to remind myself of every now and then.

Jane

Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly, Jane... from the interviews I've read, I really don't think Zack is trying to teach us anything about the nature of violence. He once said that he wants to make films for his inner 15 year old, and I think that's what he enjoys. He gets off on that sort of graphic violence in films.

Swannie

You know, as I read your very insightful review I was thinking that Zack's love of movie violence is the expression of a less than mature personality. I use to teach middle school, so I am well versed in the likes of 15 year old boys who tend to love movie violence and gore. Seems to have something to do with being a "man", or what they think that means. At this point in my life I have little patience for the gleeful discussion of movie violence or for those who appreciate it. I am not particulary squeamish, but bored, profoundly bored by the increasing level of gratutious violence in movies. I suspect Game will also not be my cup of tea and I may decide to once again give it a pass, even though it stars my favorite actor. "GB, get busy with Burns, ASAP. I need a Butler fix, just not Game." :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well today I let my inner comic book geek girl out and went to see Watchmen. I have been a fan of comics since Comic #1 of the Fantastic Four and X-men and lots of the Marvel group. By the time my son began to read comics they had become dark with blood and gore drawings and not the light hearted fare that I was used to. So I knew that Watchmen would be like that. I had read up on what it was going to be and viewed the intriguing trailers and knew just what I was getting into. There was blood and gore aplenty but I was thoroughly entertained and blown away with the special effects and the direction of Zack Synder. I loved it and I hope I can get to see it again before it is gone from the theater here. Yes, I think I will buy the special edition DVD which includes TOTBF and I know what is on that.

This is just me speaking only for myself. I am so happy that the movie is doing well for Zack. He did make this movie as close as he promised he would to the graphic novel.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not me! When I want to, I've got a big mouth... and I know how to use it! :p I had a similar discussion last night with my best friend, and we were both put off by what we see as gratuitous violence... yet we both really enjoyed the movie. I am not attacking or denigrating the opinion or viewpoint of others. Just stating my own.

Swannie

Edited by Swansong
Link to post
Share on other sites

"You know, as I read your very insightful review I was thinking that Zack's love of movie violence is the expression of a less than mature personality."

State your honestly felt opinions. I know of no one who is saying you shouldn't. But be prepared to receive rebuttal. I never post anything that I don't hope for a response. Zack is but one of a large audience.

Some might say that mature women (and I am one) who join a movie star's fansite are exhibiting "the expression of a less than mature personality." I wouldn't agree nor would I assume that those who don't agree with me are some how lacking.

Well, at least I wouldn't put it in print. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

"You know, as I read your very insightful review I was thinking that Zack's love of movie violence is the expression of a less than mature personality."

State your honestly felt opinions. I know of no one who is saying you shouldn't. But be prepared to receive rebuttal. I never post anything that I don't hope for a response. Zack is but one of a large audience.

Some might say that mature women (and I am one) who join a movie star's fansite are exhibiting "the expression of a less than mature personality." I wouldn't agree nor would I assume that those who don't agree with me are some how lacking.

Well, at least I wouldn't put it in print. :)

Ouch! Now I have to act mature and turn in my membership in GALS. Guess its only fair and probably long overdue. :wave:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, hats off to Zack Snyder. I went to see this movie yesterday and I must say that the cinematography and direction was fantastic. Although it wasn't my cup of tea, it does deserve an Oscar for cinemtography and special effects. It's just that I prefer my super hero's more along the lines of Superman and Spiderman. Plus, it was a little too dark for me and I came out of it feeling really depressed. In these hard times, I want to go to the movies and find a happier escape from this harsh reality. I want to see movies with a little more hope in them. I guess that's why I liked Slumdog Millionaire. Yes, Slumdog had lots of harsh reality in it but it was uplifting in the end. I like seeing people overcoming tremendous odds.

I'll bet the A listers are shaking in there boots, right now. Because people are going out, in droves, to see movies featuring no name actors. Take a look at Twilight, Slumdog Millionaire, Watchmen, and yes 300. When 300 came out, our Gerry wasn't even a blip on the Hollywood radar screen. Even though this movie isn't nearly as huge as 300 was, it looks like this is going to be Patrick Wilson's 300.

Just in case you all don't remember, Patrick Wilson, was Raoul in the Phantom of the Opera Movie.

Edited by Gerry's Christine
Link to post
Share on other sites

I also think people will know who Jackie Earle Haley is after this - although he will go unrecognized because even when unmasked he doesn't look anything like himself. He is brilliant as Rorschach. Jeffrey Dean Morgan proved he can be a formidable badass after years of being more the nice guy. I love Patrick Wilson, he has done serious work in more independent films like Hard Candy, Little Children and Lakeview Terrace. I'd like to see him get a great role in a good, big studio film.

I must agree with you. Jackie Earle Haley was impressive.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Swannie, I really didn't mean to step on your feelings or opinion, but rather just stating mine as well.

I think everyone has stated their opinions pretty clearly. And just because some of us don't mind the violence doesn't make us immature or desensitized to the problems of society. It means just what I said ... we don't mind violence in movies. I don't think we need to psychoanalyze each other or Zack.

Swannie, you are SO entitled to your opinion of the movie, and if what I wrote intimated that I thought your opinion was wrong, I apologize. But in the same vein, my opinion that the violence was just right is also valid.

I'm kinda done with this ... it's just a movie. I enjoyed it, and can't wait to see it again.

Just in case you all don't remember, Patrick Wilson, was Raoul in the Phantom of the Opera Movie.

I'm pretty sure we all know that. :pointy:

Lisa

Edited by phoenixgirl
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...