Hey... if they want to refilm those scenes and shoot them x-rated, then I wouldn't object to the rating change, nor would I object to seeing the movie again. ;)

Ingrid Bergman was quite the little number... so I'm going with YES.

We're on to this whole "art" racket.



Cover up!

So, Ingrid Bergman is nude in Watchmen, that's what they're mad about?

Even so, the movie industry needs to clean up its act and stop inserting graphic violence, sex, nudity, and drug use into its movies.

Slumdog Millionaire: Drug use, nudity.
Milk: Drug use, violence, (gay) sex.
The Reader: Sex, violence.
The Dark Knight: Violence, drug use
Curious Case of Benjamin Button: Violence, sex
The Duchess: Sex
Wall-E:
Vicky Cristina Barcelona: Sex

Hmmmm

Insufficient Malin Akerman pics detected.

ninjakirby: Even so, the movie industry needs to clean up its act and stop inserting graphic violence, sex, nudity, and drug use into its movies.

Slumdog Millionaire: Drug use, nudity.
Milk: Drug use, violence, (gay) sex.
The Reader: Sex, violence.
The Dark Knight: Violence, drug use
Curious Case of Benjamin Button: Violence, sex
The Duchess: Sex
Wall-E:
Vicky Cristina Barcelona: Sex

Hmmmm

The Bible: All of the above, and then some.

Hmmmm, indeed.

Look, people, we're talking about a site that gives Pink Panther 2 and Hotel for Dogs both four stars, so I don't really think anyone is going to take their opinion on movies that seriously.

Why does the Moral Brigade think so much about the penis?

Benevolent Misanthrope: ninjakirby: Even so, the movie industry needs to clean up its act and stop inserting graphic violence, sex, nudity, and drug use into its movies.

Slumdog Millionaire: Drug use, nudity.
Milk: Drug use, violence, (gay) sex.
The Reader: Sex, violence.
The Dark Knight: Violence, drug use
Curious Case of Benjamin Button: Violence, sex
The Duchess: Sex
Wall-E:
Vicky Cristina Barcelona: Sex

Hmmmm

The Bible: All of the above, and then some.

Hmmmm, indeed.

THIS.

Kids should not be subjected to that X-Rated crap. And all that adam and eve nudity is just a start!

Ingrid Bergman? *Drool*

yes, this was me

Are Christians so tempted by the gristle missile that they want them banned?

Thrill Drill
Harry & the Henderson's
scepter of sodomy
Skin Flute
Meat Cigar
One Eyed Wonder Weasel
Pork sword
Giggle stick
Penis

Having just scene that movie, the scene in question is pretty raunchy... the kind of stuff as a 13 year old I probably would have tried to see on HBO late at night. kinda unnecessary too :-D not really complaining though.

TheQuest35: Having just scene that movie, the scene seen in question is pretty raunchy... the kind of stuff as a 13 year old I probably would have tried to see on HBO late at night. kinda unnecessary too :-D not really complaining though.

FTFY

/pet peeve

The body - do not look at it.
It is flesh and flesh is sinful.

Dumb-Ass-Monkey: yes, this was me

Child pornographer! Taking underage nude pictures of yourself and disseminating them on the internet is not only sick but a crime as well! You should be arrested and charged for possession and distributing of child pornography!

"Would Casablanca be a better movie if Ingrid Bergman appeared nude?"

Of all the questions ever put before me, throughout my entire life, this one has the most obvious answer.

X rated? Banned! Banned I tell you!

'This movie contains extreme violence, nudity, and sex'

Their press release just added a million to the box office

Though perhaps the reference to male privates flopping about might have undone a couple hundred thousand of it.

"Would Casablanca be a better movie if Ingrid Bergman appeared nude?"



Don't know if it would make it a better movie, but I certainly wouldn't mind.

/DAMN, she was beautiful
//just an opinion

Guess they're trying to make me see it. I likely will, when I can find a good time.

Don't know about the US, but in Canada I've seen ads for the movie on PG shows such as Simpsons reruns on 6PM. Also here they don't advertise the movie's rating on TV either. Only problem I have with this is that with it being a DC franchise (which they do mention in the ad), some less informed parents may assume it is a 13+ movie and allow their young teens and pre-teens to see the movie without much thought.

/anyways, carry on

Can someone help me out with the pronunciation of the guy's name quoted in the article: Dr. Baehr?
Would that be "Bayer" like in the aspirin? Or "Bare" like in naked?

"Ingrid Bergman" by Woody Guthrie

Ingrid Bergman, Ingrid Bergman
Let's go make a picture
On the island of Stromboli
Ingrid Bergman

Ingrid Bergman, you're so perty
You'd make any mountain quiver
You'd make fire fly from the crater
Ingrid Bergman

This old mountain it's been waiting
All its life for you to work it
For your hand to touch its hard rock
Ingrid Bergman
Ingrid Bergman

If you'll walk across my camera,
I will flash the world your story,
I will pay you more than money
Ingrid Bergman

Not by pennies dimes nor quarters
But with happy sons and daughters
And they'll sing around Stromboli
Ingrid Bergman

This old mountain it's been waiting
All its life for you to work it
For your hand to touch its hard rock
Ingrid Bergman
Ingrid Bergman

just got in from the premiere. there is quite a lot of the blue wang
and what violence that is shown is pretty "in your face". was it over the top? not by any means. was it nessicary? that's debateable.
is the graphic novel listed as "not suitable for minors"? not that i can see on my copy, and there, in print for your snowflake to stare at and become tainted by.. blue wang. and graphic novels are more accessible to kids than R movies.. if parents are doing their job. nc-17 or x raiting? for what a charactor in a movie that looks no different than a poster that's probably haning up in a health class about reproductive organs? violence? like some horror movies ten times worse? sheesh.. go ahead, give it an X rating.. your kids will want to see it just for the wang and sex and take everyhing out of context.
All i have to say is re read my first statement and i'm glad they didn't get it backwards.
/tired.. work in 3 hrs..
//jujubee still stuck in my teeth

I really wish they'd just covered up the blue wang. I'm all for authenticity, but I doubt the people upset that he isn't as naked as in the comics could possibly outnumber the amount of people who can't...stop...talking about it.

ninjakirby: Even so, the movie industry needs to clean up its act and stop inserting graphic violence, sex, nudity, and drug use into its movies.

Slumdog Millionaire: Drug use, nudity.
Milk: Drug use, violence, (gay) sex.
The Reader: Sex, violence.
The Dark Knight: Violence, drug use
Curious Case of Benjamin Button: Violence, sex
The Duchess: Sex
Wall-E:
Vicky Cristina Barcelona: Sex

Hmmmm Hurm.

FTFY

LonMead: "Would Casablanca be a better movie if Ingrid Bergman appeared nude?"



Don't know if it would make it a better movie, but I certainly wouldn't mind.

/DAMN, she was beautiful
//just an opinion

Well, her daughter made up for it.

crab66: Are Christians so tempted by the gristle missile that they want them banned?

Thrill Drill
Harry & the Henderson's
scepter of sodomy
Skin Flute
Meat Cigar
One Eyed Wonder Weasel
Pork sword
Giggle stick
Penis

Wait, I never heard that last one.

doremifaq: Can someone help me out with the pronunciation of the guy's name quoted in the article: Dr. Baehr?
Would that be "Bayer" like in the aspirin? Or "Bare" like in naked?

What fraction of fluent English speakers do you think would actually recognize that there's a difference?

um, they don't use X anymore?

It's NC-17

/the more you know

They don't need to label it X, they just need to tone it down

Nude Casablanca? Now there's a photoshop idea.

"After all, would 'Casablanca' become an even better work of art if the script contained a bunch of "f" words, or if Ingrid Bergman appeared completely nude?"

-Is the Space Pope reptilian?

ninjakirby: Even so, the movie industry needs to clean up its act and stop inserting graphic violence, sex, nudity, and drug use into its movies.

Slumdog Millionaire: Drug use, nudity.
Milk: Drug use, violence, (gay) sex.
The Reader: Sex, violence.
The Dark Knight: Violence, drug use
Curious Case of Benjamin Button: Violence, sex
The Duchess: Sex
Wall-E:
Vicky Cristina Barcelona: Sex

Hmmmm

I guess if people stopped wanting those things. But to understand that is to understand our biology.

Surely, they jest...

[reads artile]

Oh, gods, they're serious!

That is to laugh. If their reasoning is sex and violence for their "X" demand; then can we do the exact same thing to the Old and New Testament? There's far worse in there than on "Watchmen".....

Christians, thou amusest me, verily, with thine shennanigans.

From actual review at Movideguide (pops like a blue wang)

The end of this gory, perverse, anti-American movie affirms the international, socialist, humanist worldview of the radical left. The one hero who believes in good and evil is considered an obstacle to progress. Although there are some positive references to faith in Jesus, there are many more references mocking faith, including a mean satire of Leonardo Da Vinci's reverent painting of the Last Supper and denigrations of God. Ultimately, WATCHMEN's perverse interest in sadomasochistic images of gore and blood and its prurient interest in graphic sex scenes shows how morally and intellectually bankrupt atheism, socialism, liberalism, and leftist ideology have become.

I want the goddamn bible rated X.

What is it about male genitalia that bothers them so much, that this "Dr" mentions is specifically? It it were just female boobies would we be hearing from them?

They know they aren't supposed to look, yet feel oddly compelled to...

I was planning on taking my 9 year old godson and 12 year old goddaughter to see the film tonight, but I thought better of it.

If their mom wants to drag them to see rape, blue dick, impotence, and the rest, and answer their questions afterwards, that is FINE... but I'm not doin' it. Nope. Didn't sign on for that.

/can't farking WAIT for tonight
//jealous as hell of everyone who saw the midnight show

was it good?

Brown Jenkems: From actual review at Movideguide (pops like a blue wang)

The end of this gory, perverse, anti-American movie affirms the international, socialist, humanist worldview of the radical left. The one hero who believes in good and evil is considered an obstacle to progress. Although there are some positive references to faith in Jesus, there are many more references mocking faith, including a mean satire of Leonardo Da Vinci's reverent painting of the Last Supper and denigrations of God. Ultimately, WATCHMEN's perverse interest in sadomasochistic images of gore and blood and its prurient interest in graphic sex scenes shows how morally and intellectually bankrupt atheism, socialism, liberalism, and leftist ideology have become.

I find it hilarious that they post all the information about the makers of the movie, but provide no direct way to contact the author of said article. Its like they want everyone to have accountability but themselves...

Also, I love the fact that they're complaining about liberalism when the book was written in 1985/1986.

Maybe they should have brought their concerns to the MPAA BEFORE the movie opened nationwide.

Rain-Monkey: Ingrid Bergman was quite the little number... so I'm going with YES.

This.

Big. Blue. Wang.

Brown Jenkems: From actual review at Movideguide (pops like a blue wang)

The end of this gory, perverse, anti-American movie affirms the international, socialist, humanist worldview of the radical left. The one hero who believes in good and evil is considered an obstacle to progress. Although there are some positive references to faith in Jesus, there are many more references mocking faith, including a mean satire of Leonardo Da Vinci's reverent painting of the Last Supper and denigrations of God. Ultimately, WATCHMEN's perverse interest in sadomasochistic images of gore and blood and its prurient interest in graphic sex scenes shows how morally and intellectually bankrupt atheism, socialism, liberalism, and leftist ideology have become.

I hate christchuckers.

Mind you, a christchucker is different from a true christian.

You know, the kind that helps the poor, and turns the other cheek (aka St. Mother Theresa).

A Christchucker is someone like this..... Link (new window)

A Christchucker's rhetoric can be stopped by combining the following 3 rhetorical devices.
1. Relevant, facts from peer reviewed journals.
2. Logic.
3. Snark (optional)

The American Taliban will NEVER stand for those things.

OH PS....here's another christchucker for ya....he wants to actually install old testament law in america, and he's super rich. YAY!
Link (new window)

Brown Jenkems:
Hurm.

FTFY

You won this thread!!!

ColSanders: Rain-Monkey: Ingrid Bergman was quite the little number... so I'm going with YES.

This.

Seriously. She was drop-dead beautiful.

Brown Jenkems: From actual review at Movideguide (pops like a blue wang)

The end of this gory, perverse, anti-American movie affirms the international, socialist, humanist worldview of the radical left. The one hero who believes in good and evil is considered an obstacle to progress. Although there are some positive references to faith in Jesus, there are many more references mocking faith, including a mean satire of Leonardo Da Vinci's reverent painting of the Last Supper and denigrations of God. Ultimately, WATCHMEN's perverse interest in sadomasochistic images of gore and blood and its prurient interest in graphic sex scenes shows how morally and intellectually bankrupt atheism, socialism, liberalism, and leftist ideology have become.

I find that awesome when the fact that the guy who was so set on good vs evil that he went through with it till the bitter end was an atheist. Really wish my fellow "Christians" would STFU sometimes.

Some studio should make a series of big-budget Old Testament Bible movies, in the mold of Passion of the Christ.

Brown Jenkems: The end of this gory, perverse, anti-American movie affirms the international, socialist, humanist worldview of the radical left. The one hero who believes in good and evil is considered an obstacle to progress. Although there are some positive references to faith in Jesus, there are many more references mocking faith, including a mean satire of Leonardo Da Vinci's reverent painting of the Last Supper and denigrations of God. Ultimately, WATCHMEN's perverse interest in sadomasochistic images of gore and blood and its prurient interest in graphic sex scenes shows how morally and intellectually bankrupt atheism, socialism, liberalism, and leftist ideology have become.
Bullshiat we've been bankrupt for EVER!

The Billdozer: I find that awesome when the fact that the guy who was so set on good vs evil that he went through with it till the bitter end was an atheist

No he wasn't.

Dym: Some studio should make a series of big-budget Old Testament Bible movies, in the mold of Passion of the Christ.

Stupid sexy flanders already did it

Brown Jenkems: The end of this gory, perverse, anti-American movie affirms the international, socialist, humanist worldview of the radical left.

You know, I was wondering how long it would take before they started comparing Veidt to Obama. The answer? Not long.

11 hours! OMGZ!

Yeah, yeah, whatever.

Let's talk about classic hotties we'd like to have seen nekkid.

#1. Grace Kelly
#2. Audry Hepburn
#3. Tippi Hendren
#4. Lauren Bacall
#5. Shirley Temple (Later years, you pervs!)

Dym: Some studio should make a series of big-budget Old Testament Bible movies, in the mold of Passion of the Christ.

Dym: Some studio should make a series of big-budget Old Testament Bible movies, in the mold of Passion of the Christ.

OMFG.
Someone get Micheal Moore right now.

Considering we're talking about wang here, wouldn't a nude Humphrey Bogart be the appropriate comparison?

In that case, no.

/Although I do have to admit that this would make for a great "Here's looking at you" scene...

Flop Flop Flop

I read the Headline as Christian BALE instead of Film...
It confused me.

Ah yes the bible, filled with such child friendly stories as:

Selling one's wife (who also is your sister) into slavery

Daughters getting their father drunk to have sex with him

An old guy mentally telling a bear to maul children because they made fun on him

Child abandonment

Would they approve of this version? Saturday Morning Watchmen (new window)

If only they were saying something like "The fight scenes were unnecessarily long, and took away from the story (by virtue of having stolen time from the movie) and so did the extremely drawn out sex scene between Laurie and Dan." I would totally agree with them and we'd be fine. But no, they're concerned about Jon's penis.
Honestly, out of everything going on on the screen, you're most concerned about the penis in every scene in which it appears? That's not the fault of the movie. That's all you. Some of us were watching him do a really weird half-smile thing at inappropriate times.

Rev. Skarekroe: Maybe they should have brought their concerns to the MPAA BEFORE the movie opened nationwide.

It wouldn't make any difference. The MPAA ratings board is incredibly secretive and listens to no one. Maybe major studio heads or representatives, but even then because they probably sit on the board at the MPAA.

Ask any filmmaker who has been given an NC-17 (the MPAA kiss of death).

Ed Finnerty

Well, thanks a lot. I had managed to put that psycho twat out of my conscious memory until now. Thanks.

Yeah, the old farts are getting horrified by this movie. I watched a morning-show review that gave it two stars just because the reviewer kept saying "they're really going to go there?" when watching the movie.

Good God, somebody made a comic-book that was actually intelligent and tackled real-life issues. How terrifying.

I, for one, am appalled at how this film used graphic depictions of violence agains Asian Americans in the Vietnam segments. This was nothingmore than a shameless attempt to depict Asian Americans as sub-human savages.

It is racist fear-mongering at its worst!

Brown Jenkems: From actual review at Movideguide (pops like a blue wang)

The end of this gory, perverse, anti-American movie affirms the international, socialist, humanist worldview of the radical left. The one hero who believes in good and evil is considered an obstacle to progress. Although there are some positive references to faith in Jesus, there are many more references mocking faith, including a mean satire of Leonardo Da Vinci's reverent painting of the Last Supper and denigrations of God. Ultimately, WATCHMEN's perverse interest in sadomasochistic images of gore and blood and its prurient interest in graphic sex scenes shows how morally and intellectually bankrupt atheism, socialism, liberalism, and leftist ideology have become.


"Watching the movie left bad taste in mouth. It is pampered and decadent, betraying even its own shallow, liberal affectations. Possibly homosexual? Must remember to investigate further."

No review yet on Christian Spotlight. THAT is going to be epic.

Brown Jenkems: From actual review at Movideguide (pops like a blue wang)

The end of this gory, perverse, anti-American movie affirms the international, socialist, humanist worldview of the radical left. The one hero who believes in good and evil is considered an obstacle to progress. Although there are some positive references to faith in Jesus, there are many more references mocking faith, including a mean satire of Leonardo Da Vinci's reverent painting of the Last Supper and denigrations of God. Ultimately, WATCHMEN's perverse interest in sadomasochistic images of gore and blood and its prurient interest in graphic sex scenes shows how morally and intellectually bankrupt atheism, socialism, liberalism, and leftist ideology have become.

Personally, I liked the end of that review.

"WATCHMEN is a repulsive, mediocre, long movie filled with gory violence, graphic sex, extreme nudity, and other immorality. Audiences have never seen so much gore, blood, sex, and sadism, especially in a major action movie meant for a mainstream audience. Ultimately, WATCHMEN strongly affirms humanist, socialist, anti-American values promoting a socialist utopia where liberty, justice and goodness are destroyed for the sake of a totalitarian peace."


Makes me want to see it even more.

CheeseEatingBulldog: Benevolent Misanthrope: ninjakirby: Even so, the movie industry needs to clean up its act and stop inserting graphic violence, sex, nudity, and drug use into its movies.

Slumdog Millionaire: Drug use, nudity.
Milk: Drug use, violence, (gay) sex.
The Reader: Sex, violence.
The Dark Knight: Violence, drug use
Curious Case of Benjamin Button: Violence, sex
The Duchess: Sex
Wall-E:
Vicky Cristina Barcelona: Sex

Hmmmm

The Bible: All of the above, and then some.

Hmmmm, indeed.

THIS.

Kids should not be subjected to that X-Rated crap. And all that adam and eve nudity is just a start!

Especially since those movies aren't for kids.

loathable cockroach: Would they approve of this version? Saturday Morning Watchmen (new window)

Well, that's just nutty.

neritz: Brown Jenkems: From actual review at Movideguide (pops like a blue wang)

The end of this gory, perverse, anti-American movie affirms the international, socialist, humanist worldview of the radical left. The one hero who believes in good and evil is considered an obstacle to progress. Although there are some positive references to faith in Jesus, there are many more references mocking faith, including a mean satire of Leonardo Da Vinci's reverent painting of the Last Supper and denigrations of God. Ultimately, WATCHMEN's perverse interest in sadomasochistic images of gore and blood and its prurient interest in graphic sex scenes shows how morally and intellectually bankrupt atheism, socialism, liberalism, and leftist ideology have become.

Personally, I liked the end of that review.

"WATCHMEN is a repulsive, mediocre, long movie filled with gory violence, graphic sex, extreme nudity, and other immorality. Audiences have never seen so much gore, blood, sex, and sadism, especially in a major action movie meant for a mainstream audience. Ultimately, WATCHMEN strongly affirms humanist, socialist, anti-American values promoting a socialist utopia where liberty, justice and goodness are destroyed for the sake of a totalitarian peace."


Makes me want to see it even more.

Heh. Guess the subtle nuance of the film's last 5 minutes and all its implications about inevitability and human nature were lost on the reviewer.

/Conservative Christian who thought the movie was fantastic.
//Not shocked by the amount of giant blue dicks because I read the "novel" once a year.

Goddam but christians are a tiresome bunch of pantywaists.

Seriously, they are the most fragile, limp-wristed, hand-wringing lot of flimsy people I have ever known. It's getting old, guys. Man up a little.

Question for those having seen it: Yes, we all knowing the "ending" is different, but are the final shots of the movie anywhere close to the final panels of the book? THAT, for me, was the real brain bender in the ending.

Bunny Deville: I was planning on taking my 9 year old godson and 12 year old goddaughter to see the film tonight, but I thought better of it.

If their mom wants to drag them to see rape, blue dick, impotence, and the rest, and answer their questions afterwards, that is FINE... but I'm not doin' it. Nope. Didn't sign on for that.

/can't farking WAIT for tonight
//jealous as hell of everyone who saw the midnight show

was it good?

Saw the 12:01 showing and it rocked. Obviously some parts were left out or changed, but none of them detracted from the story. Even the obvious big change at the end made a lot of sense (and potentially worked better than the original story). Casting was excellent, especially on the parts of Rorschach and The Comedian.

I agree that you probably should skip taking your godson and goddaughter, although it guess it really depends on how open the family is about such things. If I had kids around that age I doubt I'd have any problems taking them to see it, but I'd hesitate to take any of my friend's kids.

PizzaJedi81: Question for those having seen it: Yes, we all knowing the "ending" is different, but are the final shots of the movie anywhere close to the final panels of the book? THAT, for me, was the real brain bender in the ending.

You mean the Rorschach in the snow? I don't remember it, I think it was added, and I think if it was it was the most appropriate change.

"I'm shocked,... SHOCKED to find that nudity is going on in this movie!"

/Your hotlink, sir
//Oh, thank you very much

wyrlss: PizzaJedi81: Question for those having seen it: Yes, we all knowing the "ending" is different, but are the final shots of the movie anywhere close to the final panels of the book? THAT, for me, was the real brain bender in the ending.

You mean the Rorschach in the snow? I don't remember it, I think it was added, and I think if it was it was the most appropriate change.

No, no...I mean the very last page of the book, concerning Rorschach's diary.

(I'm trying to keep this as spoiler free as possible. I'm not sure how it's working. Is it working?)

The more I read, the more I can't wait for Sunday to get here. I'll be busy all weekend but Sunday night I will finally be free to see it.

They fear the giant blue penis.

PizzaJedi81: wyrlss: PizzaJedi81: Question for those having seen it: Yes, we all knowing the "ending" is different, but are the final shots of the movie anywhere close to the final panels of the book? THAT, for me, was the real brain bender in the ending.

You mean the Rorschach in the snow? I don't remember it, I think it was added, and I think if it was it was the most appropriate change.

No, no...I mean the very last page of the book, concerning Rorschach's diary.

(I'm trying to keep this as spoiler free as possible. I'm not sure how it's working. Is it working?)

Oh yeah, that happened too. But there's a lot of debate about it because it's not clear if it's encrypted or what because of something somebody says in the book about it being illegible. It's a neat little cliffhanger.

PizzaJedi81: wyrlss: PizzaJedi81: Question for those having seen it: Yes, we all knowing the "ending" is different, but are the final shots of the movie anywhere close to the final panels of the book? THAT, for me, was the real brain bender in the ending.

You mean the Rorschach in the snow? I don't remember it, I think it was added, and I think if it was it was the most appropriate change.

No, no...I mean the very last page of the book, concerning Rorschach's diary.

(I'm trying to keep this as spoiler free as possible. I'm not sure how it's working. Is it working?)

That's what I thought you were refering to, and yes it's true to the book so far as I can remember.

No YOU'RE a Towel: Flop Flop Flop

Heh. Here in Thailand, they blurred out his junk. Actually did a subtle job of it, making it pretty much unnoticeable and not distracting at all.

But, the kept TEH BOOBIES! So, it's all good. :D

/oddly, they blurred they meat-cleaver bit with Rorschach

It's time for The Stronger Loving Review

WARNING: Review may contain spoilers.

Just got back from the midnight showing. I will now make my review in proper bulletpoint form.

1. Pacing: Dark Knight, 300, and Iron Man were all paced very well. Never did any of these movies seem to drag on, seem jumpy, or otherwise seem improperly paced. Watchmen is extremely jumpy and that is because an hour of it is missing for the director's cut. Many scenes seem like they were longer when filming and fall all too short when on screen such as the bar interrogation scene or Rorschach's psychoanalysis. This causes the entire movie to throw you into a sea of story and you are just left with little snippets. It hurts it overall.

2. Character: Watchmen is a great novel because it is a character-based narrative that leaves you with all the character backstory making them all much deeper than an average comic book superhero. The movie suffers in bringing these characters to life save for Nite Owl 2 and Rorschach for the most part. Dr. Manhattan is portrayed as far too human, Ozymandias seems all too sure of himself (something that he definitely isn't at the end of the novel), and Silk Spectre 2 is really just there. This overarching concept of character is what kills the ending especially leaving me as a viewer in a state of wonderment as to why the characters did what they did, something that was clear in the novel.

3. Visceral Camp: That is how I describe much of the action in this movie. It is very graphic and very hard hitting (no pun intended), but it seems like a more violent version of the old Batman series than anything else. The fight scenes, while pretty to look at, are just overdone in such a way that it makes this "anti-superhero" movie into a movie that is clearly following the simple formula of normal movies of its ilk. The problem with this especially is the gore which end up seeming more comical than actually visceral leaving scenes with gore extremely inconsistant (ie: Rorschach killing the child murderer hits much harder than the Nite Owl/Silk Spectre fights).

4. The Story: The big problem with this movie lies here. The graphic novel had time to fully flesh out characters, explain their motivations through scene rather than out and out telling the audience how a character acts (Zack Synder and David Hayter are is desperate need of the advice "Show, don't Tell."), and develop an intricate story to make it all fit together. Synder is working with less time, yes, but, when you work with less time, some stuff needs to get cut, ganked, whatever verb you wish to use. Instead, in the movie, Synder tried to incorporate a little bit of everything into the movie leaving it standing on a soapbox telling you character motivation and exposition through a megaphone. This doesn't work especially since one of the major focal points, Dr. Manhattan's conversation with Silk Spectre on Mars, is completely disjointed making the whole scene seem tacked on for no other reason than to give Dr. Manhattan a reason to come back to Earth.

The Stuff The Movie Got Right: Since I focused on the negative, I must say that this isn't the worst movie ever made, it has many good points and some nice additions to the original graphic novel.

First of all, Rorschach, Nite Owl II, and Comedian are all portrayed extremely well.

The movie is very pretty and it is good to see an action movie actually use a steady camera for fight scenes.

Nite Owl as a witness is a fantastic addition to the ending and gave him much more emotion than in the graphic novel, a welcome addition.

The opening credits are phenomenal with Synder giving the Minutemen's history through a series of relatively still scenes.

I have little problem seeing this movie again in IMAX in 36 hours, but, the graphic novel is still far superior. I look forward to renting the director's cut of the movie on DVD as well.

/didn't mind the Big Blue Wang of America

That Magnificent Bastard!: Yeah, yeah, whatever.

Let's talk about classic hotties we'd like to have seen nekkid.

#1. Grace Kelly
#2. Audry Hepburn
#3. Tippi Hendren
#4. Lauren Bacall
#5. Shirley Temple (Later years, you pervs!)

How about:

#1. Audry Hepburn
#2. Audry Hepburn
#3. Audry Hepburn
#4. Audry Hepburn
#5. Audry Hepburn

/ WANT
// Loves me some Audrey

If they don't like violence and nudity, don't go see the film. Its really that simple.

But its not about protecting their precious eyes but that they don't want *anyone else* to see the movie.

American Taliban.

redfenix99: um, they don't use X anymore?

It's NC-17

/the more you know

I thought it was NCC 1701-D

That Magnificent Bastard!: Let's talk about classic hotties we'd like to have seen nekkid.

#1. Grace Kelly
#2. Audry Hepburn
#3. Tippi Hendren
#4. Lauren Bacall
#5. Shirley Temple (Later years, you pervs!)

1. Without a doubt:



If you don't agree, Frank will pop you one upside the head. If you do agree, Frank will also pop you one upside the head.

There as far too little nudity in Watchmen! At least compared to the comic. I was surprised there was so little actually. . .

Ok, so just a question here. I haven't read the book or seen the movie yet, but what's the reasoning behind Doc Manhattan walking around with his schlong on display? I'll probably check out both the book and movie fairly soon but I'm curious.

rickycal78: Ok, so just a question here. I haven't read the book or seen the movie yet, but what's the reasoning behind Doc Manhattan walking around with his schlong on display? I'll probably check out both the book and movie fairly soon but I'm curious.

He's lost touch with humanity. He doesn't even consider himself human anymore. He does wear clothes for, for instance, TV interviews, but there's no reason for him to do so normally.

Son of Thunder: "Watching the movie left bad taste in mouth. It is pampered and decadent, betraying even its own shallow, liberal affectations. Possibly homosexual? Must remember to investigate further."

Bravo.

And I really, really want to make "Possibly homosexual? Must remember to investigate further." into the new Internet meme.

/hotlinked

Oh noes!

Blue peener!

Oh noes!!11!1

/morans

TheGrayCat: They fear the giant blue penis.

All I can think of is that it was some guy's job to spend 8 hours a day CGing that.

hamdingers: TheGrayCat: They fear the giant blue penis.

All I can think of is that it was some guy's job to spend 8 hours a day CGing that.

With Billy Crudup standing over his shoulder saying "Bigger. Bigger. No, bigger. It needs more girth." etc.

merc16: /hotlinked

I'v aays loved the double reference in that.

PizzaJedi81: merc16: /hotlinked

I've always loved the double reference in that.

Grrr...

I kind of wish I could have seen the movie before reading the book, just because I think I would have enjoyed rather than having my brain tell "no, that's not what's supposed to happen.", "Where the hell is _______?" MY friends who haven't read it like it a lot, so I'll go with their view.

Though I did really like how Nite Owl was portrayed.

I watched the movie knowing little about the comic besides that Nixon was involved.

It was awesome.

Debbie Schlussel review. (new window). The amount of wharrrrgarrrbl in this review is staggering. She's always good for a laugh.

i liked it, but probably because i am only a causal fan. the geek rage was strong in some last night.


blue penis

Brown Jenkems: The one hero who believes in good and evil is considered an obstacle to progress.

Since Rohrschach is such an exemplar of Christian values.

Chewbacca_Defense: That Magnificent Bastard!: Yeah, yeah, whatever.

Let's talk about classic hotties we'd like to have seen nekkid.

#1. Grace Kelly
#2. Audry Hepburn
#3. Tippi Hendren
#4. Lauren Bacall
#5. Shirley Temple (Later years, you pervs!)

How about:

#1. Audry Hepburn
#2. Audry Hepburn
#3. Audry Hepburn
#4. Audry Hepburn
#5. Audry Hepburn

/ WANT
// Loves me some Audrey

Amen.

That Debbie woman's review is doubly staggering seeing as many Biblical "heros" weren't exactly great people themselves. A certain adulterous and murdering King David comes to mind...

Round up and strip search all of the usual suspects

Caught the midnight last night, really dug the movie.
I haven't read the novel yet; I plan to, but I decided to wait until after I saw the movie because I wanted to be able to enjoy myself, rather than doing the whole nerd-rage "THEY GOT THAT WRONG!!" routine.

I waas thinking last night, it makes sense that Doc Manhatten would be nude all the time, doesn't it? For all intents and purposes, he's become a god, and is basically functioning on a much higher plane of existence than anything else. Given that "modesty" and "decency" are entirely social constucts, it makes sense to me that they would be irrelevent to Doc's world.

Electrify: Don't know about the US, but in Canada I've seen ads for the movie on PG shows such as Simpsons reruns on 6PM. Also here they don't advertise the movie's rating on TV either. Only problem I have with this is that with it being a DC franchise (which they do mention in the ad), some less informed parents may assume it is a 13+ movie and allow their young teens and pre-teens to see the movie without much thought.

/anyways, carry on

Yes, because the 13 year old boys who want to see Watchmen have never seen a penis.

Bunny Deville: //jealous as hell of everyone who saw the midnight show

was it good?

Hell yeah! I was skeptical about the changes to the ending, but I thought it worked nicely.

/Imax rocked
//haven't slept yet

Not the most revealing photo, but I still wouldn't pass on the advice in the lower left.

So, are there clauses in the contracts Malin Akermen has to sign that she must appear nude in her movies? Because all three movies I've seen her in, she's been nude.

/not that I'm complaining

luckcat: Debbie Schlussel review. (new window). The amount of wharrrrgarrrbl in this review is staggering. She's always good for a laugh.

I think I suffered brain damage from reading that.

Brown Jenkems: luckcat: Debbie Schlussel review. (new window). The amount of wharrrrgarrrbl in this review is staggering. She's always good for a laugh.

I think I suffered brain damage from reading that.

Her allcaps replies in the comment thread were priceless.

mamoru: Hey... if they want to refilm those scenes and shoot them x-rated, then I wouldn't object to the rating change, nor would I object to seeing the movie again. ;)

THIS!!! Malin Akerman is a freakin hottie!

/so much blue penis

luckcat: Debbie Schlussel review. (new window). The amount of wharrrrgarrrbl in this review is staggering. She's always good for a laugh.

Hahaha. I love it when people pick a movie that is clearly made for adults and then complain about how it's targeting children with inappropriate content. NOTE: Just because it's animated or includes "superheroes" does NOT mean it's supposed to be child-appropriate. "How dare they put brutal violence and explicit sex in an "R" rated movie that is clearly advertised as having such content?!?!"

Ugly Baby Judges You: Caught the midnight last night, really dug the movie.
I haven't read the novel yet; I plan to, but I decided to wait until after I saw the movie because I wanted to be able to enjoy myself, rather than doing the whole nerd-rage "THEY GOT THAT WRONG!!" routine.

I waas thinking last night, it makes sense that Doc Manhatten would be nude all the time, doesn't it? For all intents and purposes, he's become a god, and is basically functioning on a much higher plane of existence than anything else. Given that "modesty" and "decency" are entirely social constucts, it makes sense to me that they would be irrelevent to Doc's world.

the explained it more in the book, Doc doesn't see the point in clothes anymore only wears them in public because the gov. thinks the public shouldn't see his penis

pd771: So, are there clauses in the contracts Malin Akermen has to sign that she must appear nude in her movies? Because all three movies I've seen her in, she's been nude.

/not that I'm complaining

If said clause is in her contracts, I want to shake her agent's hand.

/Can't wait to see her boobiesthe movie.

SPOILERS AHEAD

Saw the midnight show.

Great intro, suprisingly good acting, paced well (a bit slow at parts and a bit jumpy in others), not disappointed with the ending.

I feel the movie suffers in that it might have been TOO faithful to the comic. The comic was written to be a model of what kind of story a comic can tell that no other medium can. By following too closely, the movie basically seems to have missed the point.

Not to say that there weren't some real inspired moments in the movie. Like others have said, the intro was remarkable. Really, if you read the comic, you'll probably have a nerdgasm through out the entire opening credits. I went to see the movie with a woman who had not read the comic and even she thought the intro was awesome, although she admitted that somethings went over her head.

Some have noted that the fight scenes were a bit too cartoony or too much like other comic book movies. I disagree. I felt they weren't cartoony enough and that they were even more comic book than other comic book movies. The extra gore didn't add to the realism, it added to the "holy nuts, did a comic book movie really just show someone getting stabbed in the neck with a knife?"ism. These are things we usually don't see in comic book movies. Things like actual "mean" super heroing are usually shown off screen or in a different way. Had this been another movie, we would have probably only have seen a silhouette of Rorschach cleaving the murderer's head. (I was actually disappointed in that we didn't see the dog's head get cleaved. That would have really taken the "holy nuts," grade a full letter higher.) The fight scenes were

The sex scene was also an inspired moment (and not just because we saw SSII's boobs). Others will note that it seemed laughably long, with a lot of man ass. Seriously, I think the camera stayed on Dan's ass for a good 20 seconds. But it was supposed to be laughable. Just listen to the soundtrack while the scene is going on. It is not supposed to be sexy, although SSII's boobs and acting were really good at this part, it's supposed to be funny, a parody of other love scenes in not just comic book movies, but other movies as well.

Finally, the soundtrack was really the right level of awesome and over the top. Fans of the comic will recognize why songs were used when they were, All Along the Watchtower while Rorschach and Dan are flying towards Antarctica? Natch. Sound of Silence during The Comedian's funeral? So corny it is inspired. 99 Luft Balloons for whatever reason before Dan's and Laurie's dinner? Whatever the fark!

But I will have to give this movie a solid B+. It is good but not great. I feel it is totally worth the price of admission but some scenes left you wanting more, which will be probably given to you on the special edition director's cut with over an hour's worth of, unrated, never before seen footage. If you can go with a good crowd, enjoy.

(I am running on two hours of sleep and I have just taken my last midterm. If there are any grammar mistakes, I assure you I do not care. Suck it.)

luckcat: Debbie Schlussel review. (new window). The amount of wharrrrgarrrbl in this review is staggering. She's always good for a laugh.

It'd help if she'd actually paid attention to the movie too.

Ronald Reagan is thinking of running for President in 1998.

1988, but that might have been a typo.

A close up of man repeatedly getting an axe-blade driven through his skull while he's being butchered

I thought it was tastefully done, very Tarantino-esque, mostly off screen and you see the shadow of what's happening more than the actual impact.

A man's hands and arms being sawed off with an electric saw angle grinder--we're shown the bloody stumps and the bloody sawed off limbs in close up shots

Stupid cooze.

A man with vat of hot french fry oil deliberately thrown over his head--we literally see him fry, and he ultimately dies, we're told (no kidding)

It shows his heart monitor flat-line, that's not being told he dies, that's seeing him die, big difference, especially given what was happening in the movie at the time.

Superhero "The Comedian" being thrown off a roof of a tall building--we see his body hit the ground and the blood flow out

No, we don't see his body hit the ground, we see it AFTER it hit the ground.

Two superheroes have an explicit sex scene in a spaceship--she's on top, then he's on top, awesome--you can teach your young kids multiple sexual positions before they even reach puberty, by taking them to see this (there's a less explicit sex scene between the slutty superheroine and another superhero not long before that).

Ok, this movie's rated R for a reason, NOT FOR CHILDREN!!!

This woman needs to get laid, she clearly has issues with her own sexuality.

I just saw the premiere last night/this morning and there is a lot of blue wang in the movie. Surprisingly enough it's overshadowed by the violence. The violence and the gore was rather intense in the movie; I wasn't really prepared for that. Some parts it was a bit over the top. I didn't really mind the sex and the nudity but the violence really got to me.

/it was strange when people were laughing at some of the really violent scenes

What's their problem with sex?

(1a)God is infallible, correct?
(1b)God cannot sin nor create sin, correct?
(1c)Therefore, sex cannot be sinful (see 1a and 1b) [lust, however is a different issue]
(1d)Didn't God create it purposefully?
(1d-1) Sex wasn't created solely for procreation, else it would not be pleasurable and would be 100% successful each time. The sheer fact that sex exists and that it is pleasureable and isn't 100% spot on means God intended it that way (see all of the above). Base odds of any sexual coupling resulting in a baby is 2%, giving a 1 in 50 chance. Psychologically speaking, this would associate sexual pleasure with the partner prior to a baby being brought forth--thus engendering a desire to help, protect, and otherwise care for the "pleasure-giver" and the offspring.
(1d-2) What does that mean for single instance couplings that result in a baby?
(1d-2-a) God is all knowing, he knew that would happen, therefore he allotted for it and allows it under the guise of random happenstance.

Ergo, sex isn't bad and it's allowed. Random sex has tacit approval. So what's the big deal, biatch?

Nudity... Didn't God create man and woman naked in that garden? He likes nudity.

Isn't modesty a form of guilt and a sinful leftover from man's follishness (the whole apple incident)? If so, were one to come to terms with nudity, and not have a problem with it, one would be able to overcome the sin, therefore eliminating it? So, to not have an issue with nudity would be to bring a person back into line with the original intent of God's holy design. Possibly allowing re-entry to the Garden.

So, what's the big deal, biatch?

Violence.... Random murder is bad; but what about violence that prevents greater attrocity or is in self-defence? God has already spoken about those and has given the approval to such. The Commandment is "Thou shall not murder" (not "klll"). So, as long as the killing is in the "greater good" it's approved of.

So, what's the big deal, biatch?

I just wanted to throw my hat in the ring in favor of the following

- Ingrid Bergman appearing nude in Casablanca
- Malin Akerman appearing nude in this movie, or any other.
- Carla Gugino appearing as nude in this movie as she did in Sin City

sarahelizabeth: I just saw the premiere last night/this morning and there is a lot of blue wang in the movie. Surprisingly enough it's overshadowed by the violence. The violence and the gore was rather intense in the movie; I wasn't really prepared for that. Some parts it was a bit over the top. I didn't really mind the sex and the nudity but the violence really got to me.

/it was strange when people were laughing at some of the really violent scenes

Welcome to the new millennium. People are really, really jaded these days. Which is probably why the director had to ratchet up the horrific violence - the original graphic novel was extremely violent in its day... but now looks relatively mundane.

FTA: "The motion picture industry keeps changing its standards. No wonder the MPAA's rating system confuses parents."

This is true, though.

Bullshiat. The trailers and ads for this movie ALL said "Rated R" and that it included graphic violence, sex, nudity, and foul language. She says that anyone who takes their kid to see this is a moron, but still blames the movie for having that content in the first place. WTF??

fudgefactor7: violence that prevents greater attrocity

-----------------------------SPOILER-----------------------------

-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Reminds me, when they mentioned the number of people killed in the attacks at the end, "to preserve the greater good," didn't darconix provide a similar number just to prove a point about Obama? (about 5% of the US population)

OMG darconix is Veidt!!!

/not really
//he's not smart at all...

Definitely seeing this sometime this weekend, but just curious:

I've never read the novel or anything. How violent is this movie? Is it like horror movie violent/gory or just a lot of shootings, etc? I wanna go with some girl but she's easily freaked out by gore and may not enjoy it. She assumes that I've read the novel or something since I am adamant about seeing it.

lol I just realized that my previous post reeks of "So I have this friend... not ME but a friend.."

But seriously this girl is a wuss and I don't want someone cringing next to me everytime something happens.

Pxtl: sarahelizabeth: I just saw the premiere last night/this morning and there is a lot of blue wang in the movie. Surprisingly enough it's overshadowed by the violence. The violence and the gore was rather intense in the movie; I wasn't really prepared for that. Some parts it was a bit over the top. I didn't really mind the sex and the nudity but the violence really got to me.

/it was strange when people were laughing at some of the really violent scenes

Welcome to the new millennium. People are really, really jaded these days. Which is probably why the director had to ratchet up the horrific violence - the original graphic novel was extremely violent in its day... but now looks relatively mundane.

I think that the original level of violence would still exceed the expectations of the average superhero film viewer. I mean, compare the Spider-man movies to the Watchmen book for violent content, and you have an immediately obvious difference.
I just wish that the sex and violence had been faster, so they could actually get the story told and have more of the scenes from the book. Also, I really don't get the smoking changes. No smoking in the kiddy Kovack's flashback, no looking for a lighter to accidentally start a flamethrower, but the short guy and the comedian get to puff cigars the whole time they're onscreen? I don't mind getting rid of the one on Mars, but those two were kind of relevant.

WienerButt: I've never read the novel or anything. How violent is this movie? Is it like horror movie violent/gory or just a lot of shootings, etc? I wanna go with some girl but she's easily freaked out by gore and may not enjoy it. She assumes that I've read the novel or something since I am adamant about seeing it.

The novel was Dark Knight level violence, with the exception of a handful of scenes that were supposed shock you, as part of the plot (not just gratuitous gorn). It sounds like the movie version has cranked it up a bit, with stuff that happened off-camera in the novel happening on-screen.

Pxtl: WienerButt: I've never read the novel or anything. How violent is this movie? Is it like horror movie violent/gory or just a lot of shootings, etc? I wanna go with some girl but she's easily freaked out by gore and may not enjoy it. She assumes that I've read the novel or something since I am adamant about seeing it.

The novel was Dark Knight level violence, with the exception of a handful of scenes that were supposed shock you, as part of the plot (not just gratuitous gorn). It sounds like the movie version has cranked it up a bit, with stuff that happened off-camera in the novel happening on-screen.

The movie cranked it up a farkton. Think: Bone protruding through skin, watching a guys hands getting cut off with the camera on the whole time, a closeup of a knife going into a neck. I think there were others, but those are the ones that stick out. (no pun intended)

Iron Hand: FTA: "The motion picture industry keeps changing its standards. No wonder the MPAA's rating system confuses parents."

This is true, though.

Still, R still means "No one under 17 admitted without parent"

Though it should read "No one under 17 admitted without adult"

Didn't think I'd have a chance to use this graphic again so soon but it seems appropriate:

WienerButt: lol I just realized that my previous post reeks of "So I have this friend... not ME but a friend.."

But seriously this girl is a wuss and I don't want someone cringing next to me everytime something happens.

Gotta be frank with you, it's pretty gory, some parts are on par with the Saw movies, that is one this Schlussel got right, that actually did surprise me, as well as the ubiquitous penis sightings.

optional: Brown Jenkems: The one hero who believes in good and evil is considered an obstacle to progress.

Since Rohrschach is such an exemplar of Christian values.

Chewbacca_Defense: That Magnificent Bastard!: Yeah, yeah, whatever.

Let's talk about classic hotties we'd like to have seen nekkid.

#1. Grace Kelly
#2. Audry Hepburn
#3. Tippi Hendren
#4. Lauren Bacall
#5. Shirley Temple (Later years, you pervs!)

How about:

#1. Audry Hepburn
#2. Audry Hepburn
#3. Audry Hepburn
#4. Audry Hepburn
#5. Audry Hepburn

/ WANT
// Loves me some Audrey

Amen.

#1. Rita Hayworth

/would put the blame on mame
/better not be obscure

sewiusproductions: ubiquitous penis sightings

Dave Barry would have a blast with this tread...

/Hello Cleveland! We're Blue CGI Wang!

YOU LOST!!!

Christians give Christ a bad name.

I felt that the gore and violence while over the top was justified. When Manhattan is blowing people up it shows how little he does care about people. Not that he's a psychopath, he's just detached from it all. A dead person and a live person are the same. When he kills someone and the gore splatters the people around it's just the same if they were there whole.

/thought that some of the splatter was funny. Could have done without the squishy blowing people up sound effects, made it too over the top silly for me.

Zombie Eater: Christians Evangelicals give Christ a bad name.

sewiusproductions: WienerButt: lol I just realized that my previous post reeks of "So I have this friend... not ME but a friend.."

But seriously this girl is a wuss and I don't want someone cringing next to me everytime something happens.

Gotta be frank with you, it's pretty gory, some parts are on par with the Saw movies, that is one this Schlussel got right, that actually did surprise me, as well as the ubiquitous penis sightings.

When I heard about the intense violence, I had hoped it would be more along the lines of over the top Tarintino than Saw.

Saw the flick last night, girlfriend and I were the first ones in. There was so much **** in that movie last night we were giggling our arses off. I don't want to spoil what's under the stars, but for all of the trendy shiatheads who hadn't read the graphic novel, there was a lot of audible shuddering. Don't think the movie deserves an X, but probably is the best 'superhero' type movie made, thus far. Hopefully *ever* made.. The only thing that sucked was the soundtrack. Hah. Farkin' 80's...

CityExile: sewiusproductions: WienerButt: lol I just realized that my previous post reeks of "So I have this friend... not ME but a friend.."

But seriously this girl is a wuss and I don't want someone cringing next to me everytime something happens.

Gotta be frank with you, it's pretty gory, some parts are on par with the Saw movies, that is one this Schlussel got right, that actually did surprise me, as well as the ubiquitous penis sightings.

When I heard about the intense violence, I had hoped it would be more along the lines of over the top Tarintino than Saw.

It's a combo, while some parts (like in Schlussel's article where the guy's arms get cut off, and some of the bullet wounds) were pretty gory, others were off the screen or so fast you blink and miss it. (like when Rorschach kills a guy with a butcher's knife)

Persnickety: Big. Blue. Wang.

OH MY GOD, yes. So farking great-- and big, fat N.O. arse, undulating. Oh my God, was laughing so hard.

The message I keep getting from these uptight Chritians who keep telling that nudity is the worst thing imaginable is: God is ashamed of his own work.

NGM: Persnickety: Big. Blue. Wang.

OH MY GOD, yes. So farking great-- and big, fat N.O. arse, undulating. Oh my God, was laughing so hard.

Dude, the way everyone was talking, I expected some giant dick, but that wasn't that big or distracting, and Nite Owl is supposed to be some out of shape guy.

pd771: NGM: Persnickety: Big. Blue. Wang.

OH MY GOD, yes. So farking great-- and big, fat N.O. arse, undulating. Oh my God, was laughing so hard.

Dude, the way everyone was talking, I expected some giant dick, but that wasn't that big or distracting, and Nite Owl is supposed to be some out of shape guy.

This.
Honestly, people, it's a dick. Fifty percent of you have one. Or a hundred, depending on the metric you're using.

sewiusproductions:

It's a combo, while some parts (like in Schlussel's article where the guy's arms get cut off, and some of the bullet wounds) were pretty gory, others were off the screen or so fast you blink and miss it. (like when Rorschach kills a guy with a butcher's knife)

That's good to know, thanks. Was hoping that the real graphic stuff wasn't too drawn out.

wyrlss: pd771: NGM: Persnickety: Big. Blue. Wang.

OH MY GOD, yes. So farking great-- and big, fat N.O. arse, undulating. Oh my God, was laughing so hard.

Dude, the way everyone was talking, I expected some giant dick, but that wasn't that big or distracting, and Nite Owl is supposed to be some out of shape guy.

This.
Honestly, people, it's a dick. Fifty percent of you have one. Or a hundred, depending on the metric you're using.

And per previous description, it is just there. He's not whapping anyone in the face with it. Beakers aren't being knocked to the ground. The thing doesn't move at all. A static dick if you will. It is larger than in the graphic novel, but it doesn't have a speaking role.

Thanks for the warning. I won't be seeing this.

I saw the midnight showing last night. I was excited, but very trepidatious going into the movie last night. I really was worried about it mostly being either: too dense/difficult for normal audiences who hadn't read the book beforehand to understand what was going on - or - they'd dumb it down so much that it would pretty much turn into a parody of what it shoudl have been.

I'm happy to report that I left very pleasantly satisfied. They kept pretty much all the major stuff that should have been kept in and a few things that were left out really weren't necessary for the plot and you felt like most of it was left out only because the movie was already 2 hours and 40 minutes and they could only make it so long for general release. I am confident that a lot of the little colorful stuff I would also like to have seen will be added in to the extended cut DVD.

There were a few small changes... But in each case the main idea, the reason for that bit of character or plot development, was left intact. A lot of the movie was lovingly accurate as far as the book was concerned, but it wasn't slavishly chained to it either. In fact, I really liked the flow of the story quite a bit.

And make no mistake - this movie earns it's R rating. The brutal parts are BRUTAL, the sexy parts are SEXY. It was an adult superhero movie based lovingly on an adult superhero comic book. Oh yeah, and the blue wang thing? WAY way way overhyped. It's there, but it's not a focus and it's not over done either... If someone complains about it then it really says a lot about that person... though I guess we're just not accustomed to much male nudity since it's seldom done when compared to female nudity (plenty of that too... Silk Spectre II is FARKING HOT).

Snyder earned my money and then some on this. I'll be seeing it again on Sunday with my friends and again next week with my wife. And I REALLY can't wait for that extended DVD now.

Has anyone mentioned yet that "Giant Dr. Manhatten and His Swingin' Blue Junk" would be an awesome name for a band?

Just sayin'

This movie sure is pissing off a lot of people.

Must be doing something right.

catchow: Has anyone mentioned yet that "Giant Dr. Manhatten and His Swingin' Blue Junk" would be an awesome name for a band?

Just sayin'

Carla Gugino (SSI) wasn't half bad either, with the near boobies shot in the attempted rape scene.

catchow: Has anyone mentioned yet that "Giant Dr. Manhatten and His Swingin' Blue Junk" would be an awesome name for a band?

Just sayin'

I'd go to that concert.

LonMead: "Would Casablanca be a better movie if Ingrid Bergman appeared nude?"



Don't know if it would make it a better movie, but I certainly wouldn't mind.

/DAMN, she was beautiful
//just an opinion

Veronica Lake (new window) is one of the gals from the black n white movie period that I find beautiful.

Note: Movies and Comics ARE DIFFERENT MEDIA

What works in a comic, might not work in a movie and vice versa. Each has its own aesthetic.

Also: Opinions != Facts

loathable cockroach: Would they approve of this version? Saturday Morning Watchmen (new window)

That is hilarious.

Pxtl: PVPOnline doing Watchmen satire with comic-strip characters.

That was actually pretty funny.

1. Louise Brooks
2. Ingrid Bergman
3. Audrey Hepburn
4. Ava Gardner
5. Greta Garbo

/really, any ordering would be fine

Gulper Eel:

Bada bing! Absolutely top of the list, no question.

I keep telling my wife the ol' Al Bundy line: "till death do us part, and then I'm free to date again." And Ava is #1 on my afterlife list of dead celebs I'm gonna spirit-fark. Or something.

/you know, if there is an afterlife
//hey look, only 6.5 hours till I can go see The Watchmen ...

sewiusproductions: Pxtl: PVPOnline doing Watchmen satire with comic-strip characters.

That was actually pretty funny.

Best part:



props to Scott Kurtz

jbtilley: Thanks for the warning. I won't be seeing this.

Your loss.

I think the most important lesson from The Watchmen is:

a blue penis is a sign of God-like powers,not poor circulation


/the more you know

Goonie_Goo_Goo
"Ingrid Bergman" by Woody Guthrie

Came here to post this, but you beat me to it.

Guthrie never recorded that, right? I've only heard the Billy Bragg version.

That Magnificent Bastard!: Yeah, yeah, whatever.

Let's talk about classic hotties we'd like to have seen nekkid.

#1. Grace Kelly
#2. Audry Hepburn
#3. Tippi Hendren
#4. Lauren Bacall
#5. Shirley Temple (Later years, you pervs!)

#6. Kim Novak

I wanted to see this before, but knowe I really want to see it.

There was no rape. It was an attempt that failed. At least get some facts straight.

American shame conditioning is getting boring. Sure wish I weren't a product of it.

Cover your shame!

detfrost1: Brown Jenkems: From actual review at Movideguide (pops like a blue wang)

The end of this gory, perverse, anti-American movie affirms the international, socialist, humanist worldview of the radical left.

Wait. What does the church have against humanists?

Wikipedia: Humanism is a broad category of ethical philosophies that affirm the dignity and worth of all people, based on the ability to determine right and wrong by appealing to universal human qualities, particularly rationality, without resorting to the supernatural or alleged divine authority from religious texts.

Oooohhhh. Got it.

ceruleanPhotography: There was no rape. It was an attempt that failed. At least get some facts straight.

You're expecting a Fundie whiner who wants all discourse held to the level of a 5-year-old to understand nuance.

It's not going to happen.

Electrify: Don't know about the US, but in Canada I've seen ads for the movie on PG shows such as Simpsons reruns on 6PM. Also here they don't advertise the movie's rating on TV either. Only problem I have with this is that with it being a DC franchise (which they do mention in the ad), some less informed parents may assume it is a 13+ movie and allow their young teens and pre-teens to see the movie without much thought.

/anyways, carry on

Luckily the movie is rated R and since the previews were on PG shows parents were there to explain why 13+'s should not go see it or explain what they may see.

Sex, it is not just for talking about in the school yard anymore.

Yeah, snuff films have rights when it comes to the chance that children might see them..

/

sewiusproductions: Ok, this movie's rated R for a reason, NOT FOR CHILDREN!!!

You know that & I know that, heck... anyone who has actually read the comic book knows that this film wasn't for minors.

There's just that 10% of people though that automatically think that superheroes mean kid friendly. My first thought upon seeing the sex & violence was that there was bound to be someone biatching about how bad it was for their kids. I'm sorta sad to see that I was proven right so quickly. I don't think it should be rated X or anything, though. That's just ridiculous.

You just want to tell her "It's rated R, crazy christian lady. Why the hell are you taking your kids into a rated R flick if you don't want them to see sex, violence & nudity?"

/did notice that Dr. Manhattan got an upgrade from his comic book counterpart, though
//and that it wasn't affected by the severe cold of Antartica
///giggity

Battlestar Girlactica: sewiusproductions: Ok, this movie's rated R for a reason, NOT FOR CHILDREN!!!

You know that & I know that, heck... anyone who has actually read the comic book knows that this film wasn't for minors.

There's just that 10% of people though that automatically think that superheroes mean kid friendly. My first thought upon seeing the sex & violence was that there was bound to be someone biatching about how bad it was for their kids. I'm sorta sad to see that I was proven right so quickly. I don't think it should be rated X or anything, though. That's just ridiculous.

You just want to tell her "It's rated R, crazy christian lady. Why the hell are you taking your kids into a rated R flick if you don't want them to see sex, violence & nudity?"

/did notice that Dr. Manhattan got an upgrade from his comic book counterpart, though
//and that it wasn't affected by the severe cold of Antartica
///giggity

They said the same thing about South Park.

Doogled: TheQuest35: Having just sceneseen that movie, the scene seen scene in question is pretty raunchy... the kind of stuff as a 13 year old I probably would have tried to see on HBO late at night. kinda unnecessary too :-D not really complaining though.

FTFY FTFG

/pet peeve

G= Grammar lol.

protectyourlimbs: Yeah, snuff films have rights when it comes to the chance that children might see them..

/

THIS THIS THIS

I went to Catholic school my whole life until college. Christians absolutely love parading around the fact that a man was tortured and suffered an excruciating death for them. Twice a year we would watch the old Jesus of Nazareth story, which was still pretty brutal to be showing a 7 year old kid, and no one had any objections or problems with it because it tied in with faith.

It's farking ridiculous that the religious right has an issue with a movie made for ADULTS. Get a hobby or get laid.

An episode of HOUSE was on the other day ("No Reason"). This episode featured a guy with a grotesquely swollen tongue, an eyeball swelling up and bursting right out of his head, a testicle exploding blood into a doctor's face, and a surgical robot cutting a guy belly to chest, with cracking bone and oozing blood and guts all over the place. All presented in full-color graphic glory.

This is acceptable for afternoon TV viewing, while Janet Jackson's partially clad nipple, exposed for less than 1 farking second, sends the country into a tailspin of moral controversy.

I love horror flicks, but even I winced during most of that episode, and if I was a kid it would've given me nightmares. Don't get me wrong, I like the show, but the explicit nature of the gore was not required and was very disturbing to watch.

I just wonder how many of these letter-writing crayon-pushers wrote letters about that particular episode, or about violence on TV in general? It seems every show is dripping in blood these days, even Family Guy (always violent, but lately much more so) and The Simpsons.

Where's the sex? I'd much rather watch sex and nudity than the gorefest that is regular television.

All2morrowsparTs: They said the same thing about South Park.

Yep & lots of people still didn't realize that not everything that's animated or dealing with superheroes or whatnot is child friendly. I'd worry about society, but I have to remind myself that there's still a good percentage of people who realize that & don't allow their kids to watch something that they don't think is appropriate or talk to their kids about it (if they do let the kids watch it).

I'm planning on going again tomorrow to see it on IMAX. I want to catch the smaller details that I didn't catch last night & watch the morons freak out over the sex, violence & nudity.

Brown Jenkems: From actual review at Movideguide (pops like a blue wang)

The end of this gory, perverse, anti-American movie affirms the international, socialist, humanist worldview of the radical left. The one hero who believes in good and evil is considered an obstacle to progress. Although there are some positive references to faith in Jesus, there are many more references mocking faith, including a mean satire of Leonardo Da Vinci's reverent painting of the Last Supper and denigrations of God. Ultimately, WATCHMEN's perverse interest in sadomasochistic images of gore and blood and its prurient interest in graphic sex scenes shows how morally and intellectually bankrupt atheism, socialism, liberalism, and leftist ideology have become.

Don't ya love it when the people who believe the Sky Wizard call you intellectually bankrupt?
Jesus was a socialist. Your entire platform is a contradiction.
Be more like Jesus except the part where you care for the poor and the sick. Or the "turn the other cheek" part. or the casting off of worldly and material things. No just the part where we condemn others for what they do. That's all we're about. Righteous indignation.

"This kind of content used to be rated X or NC-17," Dr. Baehr added. "The motion picture industry keeps changing its standards. No wonder the MPAA's rating system confuses parents."

How so? "Die Hard" was rated R back in good olde 1988. "Dirty Harry" was rated R in 1971. "Max Payne," was rated PG-13 after being cut down from an R rating in 2008. Almost four decades apart and the R-rating seems pretty farking consistent to me. Go see "Ilsa She Wolf of the SS" (1975) or "In the Realm of the Senses," (1976) and then play the fun game of which one of these things is not like the other, Dr. Baehr.

kivelo: An episode of HOUSE was on the other day ("No Reason"). This episode featured a guy with a grotesquely swollen tongue, an eyeball swelling up and bursting right out of his head, a testicle exploding blood into a doctor's face, and a surgical robot cutting a guy belly to chest, with cracking bone and oozing blood and guts all over the place. All presented in full-color graphic glory.

This is acceptable for afternoon TV viewing, while Janet Jackson's partially clad nipple, exposed for less than 1 farking second, sends the country into a tailspin of moral controversy.

I love horror flicks, but even I winced during most of that episode, and if I was a kid it would've given me nightmares. Don't get me wrong, I like the show, but the explicit nature of the gore was not required and was very disturbing to watch.

I just wonder how many of these letter-writing crayon-pushers wrote letters about that particular episode, or about violence on TV in general? It seems every show is dripping in blood these days, even Family Guy (always violent, but lately much more so) and The Simpsons.

Where's the sex? I'd much rather watch sex and nudity than the gorefest that is regular television.

whooooooooooa now.. don't start fighting their battles. I don't want HOUSE toned down because Watchmen didn't get a X rating for showing bluebirds on the big screen.

I think, as a parent, maybe the parents should parent the kids. I know HOUSE, CSI, HEROES and some other shows are not good for kids so I don't let my kid watch.. Doesn't mean I wont DVR and watch myself later.

I am not saying everything goes, use common sense. I don't want my kid stealing a bus and going around town picking up people but I am not going to tell people to stop the rampant use of bus drivers during school hours.

SPOILER

The squid makes an appearance.

When Veidt triggers that thing he triggers, you can briefly see the name of that thing he triggers on the computer banks - S.Q.U.I.D.

Battlestar Girlactica: not everything that's animated or dealing with superheroes or whatnot is child friendly



agrees
/hot

I saw Wall-E last summer and those robots were NUDE!

Doesn't Disney have any shame? They put pants on Mickey Mouse back in the day.

/Happy the Hedgehog does not approve of this post.

I saw the midnight showing last night, and here is the little mini-review I typed up for some friends: (warning: mild spoilers.) Keep in mind I neither read the comic nor would ever care to.

-----

OK, so this 5 hour movie was about a musician from the Blue Man Group who was bitten by a radioactive spider which turned him into a uncompromising nudist with the power to intervene in neo-colonial wars. This happened in an alternate timeline where Richard Nixon, played by Merkin Muffley being played by Peter Sellers, has been President since 1912. The actual plot was murky and mostly irrelevant but it involved old timey vaudevillian actors battling the forces of ... it wasn't clear exactly, but possibly something to do with the Chrysler corporation, a menacing midget, and Zorn from "A View To a Kill". There was some alcohol and rape involved, and a giant space clock, also plenty of space cock. This film was directed by a 14 year old boy whose mother is no doubt very disappointed in him. The best moment in the movie is when you see the T&A of Lucy "Xena" Lawless from another, younger, firmer, timeline. The worst moment is the other 98% of this film which doesn't involve this actress in a state of undress. You should definitely see this movie if you like seeing lots of blue wang, or if you felt the storytelling style of Sin City was too coherent and linear.

One of our more fanatical techs came in this morning and said he went to the midnight showing last night. All he could talk about is how it felt like Dick Tracy all over again and how we set comic book movies back 20 years.

Any truth to this?

smerfnablin: One of our more fanatical techs came in this morning and said he went to the midnight showing last night. All he could talk about is how it felt like Dick Tracy all over again and how we set comic book movies back 20 years.

Any truth to this?

Fanboys can be idiots. It's a decent movie. It doesn't compare to the original work, but he's a moron if he thinks it was awful.

I can't think of a worse time at the movies than sitting with a bunch of pretentious geeks, angrily defending the plot of a movie based on the only funnybook they'd rather call a novel. I'm purposely waiting a while to see this, until the crowds of fanholes dry up a little.

wyrlss: hamdingers: TheGrayCat: They fear the giant blue penis.

All I can think of is that it was some guy's job to spend 8 hours a day CGing that.

With Billy Crudup standing over his shoulder saying "Bigger. Bigger. No, bigger. It needs more girth." etc.

STUNT COCK!

movie reivew in a nutshell: two hours too long and most of it is dismemberment porn for all the future serial killers

and just a question. if you were a god, and could morph into any shape you wanted, why the hell would you need a giant 12 foot penis flopping around and getting in your way?

All2morrowsparTs:

Luckily the movie is rated R and since the previews were on PG shows parents were there to explain why 13+'s should not go see it or explain what they may see.

Sex, it is not just for talking about in the school yard anymore.

Except, as I said earlier, THE RATINGS ARE NOT ADVERTISED ON TV IN CANADA. So semi-responsible mommy (which is more responsible than 80% of parents out there) is watching TV with 13 year old son, sees an ad for a DC Comics movie called Watchmen, and decides to let 13 year old watch it because she is unaware of the extreme VIOLENT AND SEX content in the movie.

If you're giggling at a farking penis, you probably aren't old enough (mentally) to watch this. There are even more man-boys on Fark than I previously thought.

The Billdozer: Brown Jenkems: From actual review at Movideguide (pops like a blue wang)

The end of this gory, perverse, anti-American movie affirms the international, socialist, humanist worldview of the radical left. The one hero who believes in good and evil is considered an obstacle to progress. Although there are some positive references to faith in Jesus, there are many more references mocking faith, including a mean satire of Leonardo Da Vinci's reverent painting of the Last Supper and denigrations of God. Ultimately, WATCHMEN's perverse interest in sadomasochistic images of gore and blood and its prurient interest in graphic sex scenes shows how morally and intellectually bankrupt atheism, socialism, liberalism, and leftist ideology have become.

I find that awesome when the fact that the guy who was so set on good vs evil that he went through with it till the bitter end was an atheist. Really wish my fellow "Christians" would STFU sometimes.

Not only that but Rorschach,at least in the comic, wasn't even quite so absolute in his beliefs as even he liked to think. Early in the GN, when he goes to inform Dr. Manhattan and Silk Spectre II of the Comedian's murder, Laurie throws it back at Rorschach that the comedian tried to raper her mother. His response is not to deny it, say it wasn't true, but rather he down plays it as a "moral lapse" of a good man, meaning that even he is not above being subjective in his application of his own moral code.

loathable cockroach: The Billdozer: I find that awesome when the fact that the guy who was so set on good vs evil that he went through with it till the bitter end was an atheist

No he wasn't.


In the graphic novel, in the chapter The Abyss Gazes Also, we learn more about Rorschach and his general philosophy on life. While he never explicitely states that he doesn't believe in God, much of his dialogue implies it. Specifically where he talks about how upon truly becoming Rorschach he realized that we (referring to humanity) are all alone and that there is no meaning to the world except what we choose to impose. I would take this as a denial of a greater order to the universe, specifically as embodied by the existance of God. If that doesn't make him an athiest, I'd say it still makes him at least a deist (God exists but has nothing to do with the world, clock-maker God) or an agnostic.

WienerButt: lol I just realized that my previous post reeks of "So I have this friend... not ME but a friend.."

But seriously this girl is a wuss and I don't want someone cringing next to me everytime something happens.

Everytime she cringes, honk her tits. Make the "Honk honk" noise as well.

protectyourlimbs: I think, as a parent, maybe the parents should parent the kids. I know HOUSE, CSI, HEROES and some other shows are not good for kids so I don't let my kid watch.. Doesn't mean I wont DVR and watch myself later.

I am not saying everything goes, use common sense. I don't want my kid stealing a bus and going around town picking up people but I am not going to tell people to stop the rampant use of bus drivers during school hours.

I agree that parents need to be more aware and proactive, but my problem isn't so much with the violence or gore depicted as it is with the casual acceptance of it as opposed to sex. Any kid could stumble across that episode and their parents would likely just shrug "meh" and go back to reading their People magazine.

But if HOUSE had shown a breast with nipple intact, the letters and phone calls would be piling up. Parents would be outraged. So-called "family focus" groups would be calling for sponsors to pull out and for the network to cancel it.

Blood, guts, and extreme violence are fine for our children to consume en masse; but the slightest hint of nudity and sexuality is morally destructive to their sense of well-being. I just find that to be ass backwards.

Blood, guts, and extreme violence are fine for our children to consume en masse; but the slightest hint of nudity and sexuality is morally destructive to their sense of well-being. I just find that to be ass backwards.

I wonder if that's because most kids (no matter what sort of violent media they get exposed to) won't kill anyone.

But lots of kids engage in risky sexual behaviors. I can see how parents of a normal 15 year old might reasonably worry about him knocking someone up. I doubt they'll worry that he'll explode a large city to avert nuclear war.

Raising a kid is a lot like governing a country. It's pretty easy to do on a message board.

bidness: I saw the midnight showing last night, and here is the little mini-review I typed up for some friends:

really stupid. dont write reviews anymore, even for friends.

luckcat: And per previous description, it is just there. He's not whapping anyone in the face with it. Beakers aren't being knocked to the ground. The thing doesn't move at all. A static dick if you will. It is larger than in the graphic novel, but it doesn't have a speaking role.


now THATS how you write a review!

I just got back from the movie and I enjoyed it thoroughly. Not something I'd let my son see for a few years, but still good.

Yes, it had graphic violence and nudity, but it didn't bother me. Even the blue wang.

Sorry, I found it a wee bit boring. I guess I would have to read the comics/graphic to really appreciate it. I kept thinking the blue guy was a watered down Silver Surfer from Fantastic Four 2. Lot's of yammering. Decent violence. But in the end I don't believe it will translate to a broad spectrum of super-hero fans. It seemed more like a love letter to it's own fans. I know my feeble intellect simply cannot grasp what a masterpiece it is. Oh well. At least I now know there is another mall cop movie coming out.

DarthBrooks: Insufficient Malin Akerman pics detected.

For those that missed it the first time,

Insufficient Malin Akerman pics detected.

protectyourlimbs: Yeah, snuff films have rights when it comes to the chance that children might see them..

/

Ya know what gets me?

In regards to Passion of the Christ: Oh, the children HAVE to see this, to see how our Lord and Savior SUFFERED for our SINS! (Heh...I was hearing church lady as I typed that...or at least a Southern lady.)

In regards to...well, just about any other movie with any level of sex or violence: Or, why must Hollywood put out such FILTH and degreDAtion? Oh, how hard it is to protect our children from this violence and filth!

Just something I noticed.

darkvstar 2009-03-06 05:50:28 PM
movie reivew in a nutshell: two hours too long and most of it is dismemberment porn for all the future serial killers

and just a question. if you were a god, and could morph into any shape you wanted, why the hell would you need a giant 12 foot penis flopping around and getting in your way?


You seem to be more than a little preoccupied with male nudity in this film. Please don't take your insecurities out on this film.

I'm curious to know why you weren't bothered at the female nudity.

/was more amused than anything else at how blase the other characters in the film were at Dr Manhattan's nakedness

matt2891: In the graphic novel, in the chapter The Abyss Gazes Also, we learn more about Rorschach and his general philosophy on life. While he never explicitely states that he doesn't believe in God, much of his dialogue implies it. Specifically where he talks about how upon truly becoming Rorschach he realized that we (referring to humanity) are all alone and that there is no meaning to the world except what we choose to impose. I would take this as a denial of a greater order to the universe, specifically as embodied by the existance of God. If that doesn't make him an athiest, I'd say it still makes him at least a deist (God exists but has nothing to do with the world, clock-maker God) or an agnostic.

In the film itself he says that his conversion to Rorschach was the death of his faith, that "If there was a god he didn't care what we did."

Heh.

luckcat: And per previous description, it is just there. He's not whapping anyone in the face with it. Beakers aren't being knocked to the ground. The thing doesn't move at all. A static dick if you will. It is larger than in the graphic novel, but it doesn't have a speaking role.

Gee, thanks a lot. I ignored Jon's peener through (almost) the entire movie.

Now all I can think about is his giant blue schlong wagging around singing "Hello, my honey. Hello, my baby. Hello, my ragtime gaaaaaal...."

/fairly devout Christian

I didn't take my fiance to see it- i.e. she probably wouldn't like the dismemberment and excessive blue wang, but I went myself and had no real problems with the film- no different from the book, except for no squid at the end- I definitely can understand not taking kids, but for rational adults it should be fine, and the part where Manhattan asplodes Vietcong to the Ride of the Valkyries is just hilarious

Did anyone else here think Silhouette was incredibly hot, or was it just me?

Here's Malin Akerman: