Holy crap, it's Rorshach!

[gbeenie]

So, I saw it today on IMAX. I really liked it. There were some tonal things that seemed uneven The sex scene in the Owlship, for one, and some of the music choices were a tad... head-scratchy. But, apart from that, I thought it was a creditable job of translating extremely difficult source material.

As for the climax... I think, first of all, it'd be really difficult to defend the position that the "tentacle-monster" from the book would have been anything other than unintentionally laugh-out-loud funny up on the big-screen. That said, I can see people having problems with how they handled it. However, the movie version of Veidt's plot had to be such that it could make sense to an audience unfamiliar with the book without introducing a LOT of new information out of left field (in fact, the book doesn't really do a terrific job of that, either). Any difficulties I might have had with the movie's climax are outweighed by the knowledge that I really know what else could have been done.

And as far as the notion that "the book got it right," I would say only in terms of its own internal logic. Moore believed, as did a lot of people at the time, that the Cold War was unwinnable, and this belief fuels a great deal of the plot of the book. Now, of course, we know that that belief is not only disprovable; it's disproven. And, given what we now know about the Soviet Union, there's little doubt, at least in my mind, that a strategic asset like Dr. Manhattan would have done anything other than hasten the USSR's demise.

[gbeenie]

I completely understand why they changed the ending and actually like the angle they put on it with Manhattan.  (I think that was vague enough)  The only change that really bothered me is a rather minor one:
When Rorshach is recounting his investigation of the missing girl in the GN he handcuffs the guy and then sets the building on fire.  He gives the killer the chance to escape by cutting himself free.  In the movie they just have him hack the guy up with a meat cleaver.  Since this is a crucial moment for the character I thought it was out of place.  Before that incident he only beat up criminals.

I think the reason they did that was because there was no other place in the movie's plot to to paint the picture of just how fucked in the head Rorschach truly is. It wasn't my favorite thing, but I understand it.

[Tyrant]

Overall, I thought it was awesome. I loved at least 99% of it. Rather than just leaving it at that, I'll go into specifics so I don't sound like some overly satisfied, virginal comic book nerd that just touched his first boob.

Because I'm a lover of theology in general, I felt the God-concept with Dr. Manhattan was beautifully explored and presented with far more clarity than in the comic. The comic bogs it down by throwing us the giant tentacle monster at the end to complicate things. That the movie defines humanity's general viewpoint regarding God using Dr.Manhattan as a vehicle by having him as the scapegoat instead of the "alien invasion" thing was brilliant. We blame God for the bad things in this world, we see Him as being distant and uncaring, we don't see Him interfering to stop the bad things from happening even if He's not the one causing it, etc.. Even down to him killing Rorschach, who knows the truth and says as much (that we cause the bad things, God doesn't) for what he perceives as the logical good for mankind is a very God-like move on his part. Theological debates can abound by the one statement in both movie and book where Dr.Manhattan says he doesn't think there is a God and if there is, he's nothing like Him. Nice.

The exploration of the character of Rorschach was tremendous. He was absolutely nailed. Unlike many others, I appreciated the change they made regarding how he killed the little girl's murderer. Not to come down on the book at all, because his method there was more orchestrated, but the movie gave us a different angle to what the character stands for. He's one extreme on one side of the scale and absolute in his uncompromising ideals. The change reflects that his absolution is at times savage and violent, and that an eye is sometimes the only just payment for another eye. It's not a different take on the concept, merely a different angle on the same take (IMO). Unlike some of the more balanced characters in the story, I've always regarded him and the Comedian as perhaps the sanest characters in the story in a (to quote the Tick) "going saner in a crazy world" kind of way. They GET IT. Everyone else is just shambling and trying to attached higher thoughts and ideals to everything to muck it up.

The casting was tremendous. I can count on one hand the number of movies I've seen where the casting was 100% perfect. This is one of them. Everyone looked their parts. Even secondary characters like Molok and Hollis Mason. The artistic aspect of the movie was gorgeous. Snyder wasn't afraid to use the ridiculous looking costumes (mostly with the Minutemen) which were a beautiful contrast to the heavy-handed philosophy  of the story. Not unlike chocolate with sea salt in it (delicious!). Though Snyder could (and should) cite the comic as serving up 90% of the storyboard shots, putting them into motion to where they would make sense takes a lot of talent and he's earned a ton of respect from me for being able and willing to do that.

Not really a complaint, more an agreement with others here. I agree that this movie will probably make a bit more sense to folks who have read the comic. Moreso to people who are actually fans of it and have read it a few times especially. Deep thinking and intelligent people who haven't read it will probably understand it, I think. But how many people are there like that, really? In a world where they persist in making these brain dead comedies and Scary Movie rip-offs? I don't care much because I'm a fan of the comic and I feel like this movie was made for me and all the other fans. We got our thing out of it, so everyone else can go see a different movie if they like. From a marketing standpoint, however, I can see where it could be a failure. But since when do we care about marketing? We got our thing and it was good!

I was terrified that they'd show Dr.Manhattan's penis when he was giant-sized. There. I said it. I'm glad they kept it tasteful. I think it's kind of weird they kept him completely nude. It's one of the more minor aspects of the book they could have written out, but it didn't bug me at all. I was more bracing myself to hear snickers and jokes every time he was on screen, tbh. Fortunately the audience was mature.

The biggest gripe I'm seeing is regarding the soundtrack. I agree. Involving Chemical Romance was stupid. But expected. They weren't going to make soundtrack sales any other way. It didn't ruin the movie for me because they play it when it's over. Had they involved the song within the movie, then I might have had issues. The rest of the soundtrack is alright. I'm actually relieved they didn't reference the 80s ensemble much, as much as I love 80s music. I don't think the movie would have been able to keep its atmosphere if we were hearing "Walking On Sunshine" in the background, for instance. I would have liked to hear more of a score because I'm a score-junkie, but that's an individual gripe and don't expect others to think the same way. To the point, the music didn't ruin any of the movie for me at all, so I consider it a minor gripe. As a HUGE fan of Nat King Cole, I'm thrilled to death Unforgettable is on there. The music used helped remind us that this was kind of a period piece, set during the Cold War with lots of flashbacks to the earlier eras of different wars. It drew me in, didn't toss me out.

On my Tyrant-meter, I give this movie a 9.5 out of 10 (up from an 8 since yesterday as I've now had 24 hours to reflect on it). Most accurate movie adaptation of a comic book (that I've seen) ever. Snyder respects his source material. It's not perfect (what movie is?), but it's pretty damn close.

[Courtney]

  to Tyrant's entire review.  After much deliberation, I too have decided that I almost prefer the way the movie ended to the way the book ended. 

[mearnest]

Great review Tyrant.  Aside from my minor gripe about the change to Rorschach, I thought they did an amazing job with him.  One of the guys I saw it with reacted very badly to the change in the ending.  My response to his complaint was this:
Seriously, how do you think an average audience with little to no familiarity with the book would react to the sudden appearance of a giant, pink, vaginal, octopus at the climax of the film?

[gbeenie]

My sentiments exactly, mearnest.

[Relaxing Dragon]

Excellent review Tyrant, said it all better than I ever could. And I too agree with the Rorshach change, I think it fit the moment in the movie better.

[Darth Geek]

I just saw it today and loved it. While I do agree with some of the nitpicks said here, and the major issue that is Dr. Manhattan being intrinsically linked to the US foiling their change to the ending, I look forward to having it on Blue-ray and rewatching it to see the background details and deeply textured world Snyder has created here.

[Compound]

The rest of the soundtrack is alright. I'm actually relieved they didn't reference the 80s ensemble much, as much as I love 80s music. I don't think the movie would have been able to keep its atmosphere if we were hearing "Walking On Sunshine" in the background, for instance. I would have liked to hear more of a score because I'm a score-junkie, but that's an individual gripe and don't expect others to think the same way.

I must strongly disagree. There is no movie that can't be made better by a song by Katrina Leskanic. Case in point:

And GHII and AMV Hell 4 have shown me that the MCR boys at least have a smidgen of talent, allowing me to overlook their image.

[BBQ Platypus]

I just saw it.  I thought it was good.

Not all of it was perfect, but they REALLY NAILED some of the most important parts.  The beginning, the stories of Rorschach and Dr. Manhattan - just perfect.

The ending did need to be changed for the film.  I agree with the change they made to it.

The alien invasion angle worked in the comic book because there was context and foreshadowing behind it.  The presence and existence of the Black Freighter comic caused it to make more sense, as did the supplementary material that was in the book.

In the movie, an alien invasion would just cause it to come out of nowhere.  No context, no explanation - just a giant space-tentacle vagina monster that comes out of nowhere.  It also would have looked ridiculous on screen.

Bottom line - the book was better, but the movie was still good.  8.2 out of 10.

[stansimpson]

Great review, Tyrant.

I was terrified that they'd show Dr.Manhattan's penis when he was giant-sized. There. I said it. I'm glad they kept it tasteful. I think it's kind of weird they kept him completely nude. It's one of the more minor aspects of the book they could have written out, but it didn't bug me at all. I was more bracing myself to hear snickers and jokes every time he was on screen, tbh. Fortunately the audience was mature.

I prayed to Dr. Manhattan that my audience would be more respectful.  They were not in the slightest.  Snickers and jokes were scattered but plentiful.  A friend of mine said the fifteen year old behind said "Why do they keep showing his penis!?".  Def shoulda caught the more respectful midnight showing.  Something I realized the next day tho.  Couldn't one argue that Dr. Manhattan's details were less faithful to the book here?  I mean, in the book, he looked like he was wearing an invisible codpiece, which, imho, might've worked better (or am I saying that so I wouldn't have to put up with the teen heavy crowd?).

The biggest gripe I'm seeing is regarding the soundtrack. I agree. Involving Chemical Romance was stupid. But expected. They weren't going to make soundtrack sales any other way. It didn't ruin the movie for me because they play it when it's over. Had they involved the song within the movie, then I might have had issues. The rest of the soundtrack is alright. I'm actually relieved they didn't reference the 80s ensemble much, as much as I love 80s music. I don't think the movie would have been able to keep its atmosphere if we were hearing "Walking On Sunshine" in the background, for instance. I would have liked to hear more of a score because I'm a score-junkie, but that's an individual gripe and don't expect others to think the same way. To the point, the music didn't ruin any of the movie for me at all, so I consider it a minor gripe.

I share the gripe, but I think it's definitely a *major* gripe for me.  Do the songs work?  Maybe.  Would've a score been better?  Absolutely!  Why settle for less?  I understand why they're in there.  Content-wise, it makes sense.  But the form is all wrong.  A song can be lyrically appropriate... but the style was all wrong.  That disconnect kept reminding me of that scene in "Marie-Antoinette" where the "Fools Rush In" song was completely wrong for the scene.  Do the lyrics fit the plot?  Yes.  But does the musical ambiance fit the visuals?  Hell no.  Not even in an ironic way.  And I wished to Dr. Manhattan that that scene was available on YouTube so I can crap on it some more.  

[Compound]

I -really- hope when the BD comes out we have the option of watching the theatrical cut. I don't want the movie to be any longer than it is; I don't want the Tales of the Black Freighter reinserted. 

Shouldn't be an issue since "Tales" is being released as a stand-alone release on the 24th.

[Tyrant]

The rest of the soundtrack is alright. I'm actually relieved they didn't reference the 80s ensemble much, as much as I love 80s music. I don't think the movie would have been able to keep its atmosphere if we were hearing "Walking On Sunshine" in the background, for instance. I would have liked to hear more of a score because I'm a score-junkie, but that's an individual gripe and don't expect others to think the same way.

I must strongly disagree. There is no movie that can't be made better by a song by Katrina Leskanic. Case in point:

  LOL!!!  (seriously, Pak and I just had a good laugh)    Okay, I stand corrected. That was great!!!

[Edward J Grug III]

I would say that I loved the movie. The ending did leave me a little cold though.

It was fine, I didn't think it was bad at all, and I do understand why it was changed, BUT the original ending is much BIGGER. It's also much more out of left field. It's a huge climax. The movie's ending works, but still seems a lot smaller and... I don't know, less exciting?

[Edward J Grug III]

I do think that the change means that Bubastis is sort of pointless.

Pointless, but so what, you know?

It was cool.