We are in agreement on that point then.

@pakidan: There's no guarantee that you'll have the same reaction as me! You may very well like it.

@Gilgamesh: No, there is no cartoon. There will never be a sequel, either: there was only ever one story about Watchmen, and Moore wrote it a long time ago. If you want to see all the stuff that the movie didn't show (and there is a ton of it) then I suggest reading the graphic novel. It may help you ejoy the movie even more!

Terry Gilliam almost got to make a movie out of this back in the 90's, but in his infinite wisdom he decided the source material was too large to cram into a single film and would be better suited as a TV miniseries. They should have let him make it. They also should have let him make the first Harry Potter film, but that's another story in the long list of stories that end in Terry Gilliam getting shafted.

But I guess I should see this at some point since every post about it mentions a giant blue dong, which is awesomer than most giant blue dongs considering this film's target market is young teenage boys who don't like dongs and haven't read the novel.

I thought someone who read the comics would have loved this movie.

I'd recommend it to the fans of the comic, but to people who didn't read it, it's a entertaining action flick that is good to watch if nothing else is on.

Also, considering how powerful he was, Dr. Manhattan needed to materialise himself some pants.

All I could think about during that movie was "please, no more wang physics".

I enjoyed it, but had I not read the novel I probably would have been completely lost.

There's a reason why Alan Moore doesn't want his comics adapted to movies...

I do not mean to imply that this movie was made solely of bad parts. To imply that would be a lie: there were several parts which shone through brilliantly.

The actors for Rorschach, Dr. Manhattan, and the Comedian fit their roles perfectly, pulling them off better than I could have hoped for. The parts for the characters themselves were very well written, too, and what little exploration was done of their pasts and motives was handled very capably and even-handedly.

The Comedian, in particular, was handled masterfully. I don't think he could have been put to film better by any director in thei ndustry. There were tiny touches throughout the movie - like Nite Owl II's mention of how the Comedian once used the flamethrower in the same way as Silk Spectre - which wasn't even in the novel, but showed how Snyder put in a little nod to the Comedian and Spectre's relationship. The man clearly loves the material he was working with, and is a very capable director.

The problem lies in the material itself. The Watchmen is made up of some very good parts, but the limitations of cinema means that it cannot be conveyed as the book was - it can't be helped, but it meant that the adaptation was its own worst enemy.

It's a shame, because Zack Snyder did very good work making something that I think is terrible.

Yeah, and it's most likely called "The League Of Extrordinary Gentlemen"

As for Watchmen i was disapointed that they removed the squid. But it sounds from impressions like a faithful adaption. They are going to make an animated feature of the pirate comic too i heard.

If my post made no sence you haven't read the comic. Do it now.

ehhh I just saw the movie. I saw it free so I can't complain...

but some of the alterations to the movie caused some things to just... lose their impact completely. Some of it was good. Some of it was accurate. Some of it was so far from the graphic novel it was a bit bizarre. But i guess that could be expected of anything that gets movie-ized. But some of the things they omitted didn't make any sense to omit.

So errr whatever. And why is everyone so focused on the blue dong?

Because people like to act vaguely homophobic about a man who's grown so far beyond human conventions that he walks around naked.

We both have not read the novel. I don't even know if it is available in Europe but we both went in to it with different expectations. Mine where pretty high, my mates' was already pretty low. I then just took what I enjoyed, the alternate history, the visual displays and the styling.

Also, I have no problem with frontal male nudity. Hell, we all watch porno do not deny it. I think it just came over a bit weird that Dr. M. would sometimes where some sort of codpiece, and then he didn't. And like someone said, it might be a bit weird to have it in a movie where its demographic is not quite used to that sort of thing.