smpearce wrote:I think its a real shame this film is under performing (as far as the box office is concerned).
Now apart from the new ending it was really nice to see how faithfully this story was adapted to the screen, it was so close to the graphic novel that it should be applauded and deserves every success.
I however am not suprised that the film is not registering with general audiences.
I read the book, i enjoyed the book, and despite the changed ending it worked for me, because i knew from the very start that the Squid was removed....and despite the early disapointment i totally understand the film makers reasons.
The same goes for all the parts from the book they decided to skim over in order to cut down the films running time (although i look forward to the extended dvd release)
I think the problem this movie has, with reaching a general mass audience lies in how it is marketed.
I have several friends, female and male who say that they enjoy the superhero genre but have not read the graphic novel, and so i have asked them what they expected from this movie prior to seeing it.
Nearly all have said ' A darker version of X-men', or 'Like Batman/Dark Knight'
Now for those of us in the know, who appreciate Watchmen, we know hat those assumptions arent correct and dont really do the source material justice, as it primarily a character piece about the phyche's of 'normal' people who wear masks to fight crime, set against an alternate version of the the mid 1980's where the paranoia of a nuclear war with russia is still at the forefront of public awareness.
And so i cant help but think those who are so unaware of the overall story are going in EXPECTING something, yet getting something totally different.
This can affect peoples judgment of movie, it doesnt mean they dont like it, it doesnt mean they dont understand it, it just means they didnt get what they thought they were paying for, which can mean that they leave the theatre in an odd position, not really knowing what they thought of it.
And so word of mouth spreads, and so does negative press and before you know it you have a film that doesnt have an audience.
I also dont think its due to the R rating, 300 was an R, and it was off the success of that that Watchmen finally got greenlit with Zack Snyder at the helm.
I dont think R rated movies should have the stigma that studios associate with them, just because they limit the audience (and the money) that a film can potentially bring in.
Just because a snotty 10-13 year old shouldnt be allowed to view a film based on some graphic content doesnt mean its a film that is so extreme that it TOTALLY alienates an audience)
Afterall the 'Saw' franchise has made a shiny penny for its studio despite being nothing more than an exercise in 'creativly' killing people on screen.
Not to mention those films require NO intelligence on the part of the viewer, are horribly acted, and have little to no substance to the story with character motivations which border on pathetic (so you can tell i hate the Saw movies :-) )
But the point is, those films have always brought in an audience, which is why they continue to make them, and the R rating has done nothing to hinder their success.
And that is what is so sad about Watchmen....
It may have cost a lot to produce, and so greater things are EXPECTED of it, but in truth, as a movie it did what it set out to do...Adapt a great graphic novel faithfully to the screen...
and it did so without compromising its gritty, dark nature to cater for a larger audience to get more asses on theatre seats, make more money and overall sell people short of the overall experience just to fit with pop culture expectations.
Dont get me wrong I dont actually think that Watchmen is one of the greatest literary works of our time (i wouldnt even know HOW to classify ANY literary work), but i really enjoyed the story, and the characters, and i REALLY enjoyed the film, with how much it got right, and even accepted the new ending, despite it flaws in logic....it still worked in context of the movie.
I think had the studio been as brave in marketing the movie as they were in allowing Zack Snyder to go out and make it, the film would stand a better chance, as the general public would feel less confused at what they just saw, next to what they THOUGHT they were going to see.
I'v read the negative reviews for this film, and most of which i just dont understand, because i really felt that if you enjoyed the novel then there is next to no way you could not enjoy the movie, its THAT close (until the end), and even then if you can just ACCEPT that the end is not as you were expecting, its actually ok.
Making the film overall a great piece of work, which deserves more than what its likely to recieve, and would be a total injustice if other future adaptions of works similar are dismissed because of this film, which COULD be considered a failure solely based on its box office takings, rather that the faithful adaption of its content which it represents so well on screen.
what
review 
and 
with a embedded cam to boot. I like to think we are chill here and one doesn't need the best grammar or spelling. One can even say fuck, shit, nigger, or even fagola, for example. There is also the issue of using way too emoticons in our posts and we are approaching a time, as pointed about by The_Somnambulist, that we will be posting only with emoticons. There are actually, literally dozens more emoticons coming by the way. 
:fistbump::wowowow:
's [face_nerd] 
)
