I guess you didn't realize you were renting a decent movie based on an amazing graphic novel that is in many ways cynical and damning of superhero's and fluffy action moveis - because that's what this story is about.

The movie essentially tries to do what Jackson did with LOTR - take the big action beats that last like two pages in the source and expand them for thrills, while retaining enough of the narrative to remain intelligent. I think the movie failed a little at this, particularly the ending (which was changed in certain key ways) lost key themes and resolutions IMHO.

But in the end, I don't want to knock you, but from your points it simply sounds like you're juding the movie vs expectations you had on a basic level that were invalid. Note I don't mean for the movie specifically, but in general, you were expecting a superhero action movie, which Watchman actual isn't really at all. It's a superhero deconstruction movie.

Maybe you should rent 2001 next time... (actually just joking on that one, if you thought Watchmen dragged then I worry I'd be responsible for you self harming yourself watching 2001).

i HATED this movie it suck ass just when you think it gets good it gets even worse!! the "heros" are just a bunch of Z-listers and horribly unlikeable
it is 1 of the worst movies i have ever seen!!

Errr... I think most people have already pointed out that you completely pre-judged the film thinking it was going to be a super hero film when it clearly wasn't. It points out the flaws of having super-heroes, and you were never really meant to like the Comedian.

I'm not going to say you should read the comic or try watching again as it's clearly not for you, but I suggest you stick to short no-brainer films like Transformers from now on.

You should do a little research before watching the movie... it's not standard idiotic superhero fare.

I'd have to say I disagree with you. I kinda liked the movie. I thought it was a good adaptation to film from the graphic novel.

Not perfect mind you, but I thought the director did a good job portraying all the important parts from paper to film.

My only beef with the movie was a little weak acting. Naming names, The Comedian and Ozmandias just didn't quite capture the right tone. I actually thought that the screenplay improved the story in some substantial ways, by getting rid of those distracting pirates and replacing the "space alien" with something a little closer at hand.

Other than that, I think it's expected that some of the many ideas presented in the movie would fly over the head of the average viewer. I'd hope that throwing so many would cause at least a couple to stick, though...

I've never read the graphic novel but I watched the movie last night.

Pros:
The fundamental underlying storyline. Humanity in all its perverseness leading to our own annihilation and our hopes for a God-like being to save us from ourselves. It was political, theological and thought provoking.

I also enjoyed the anti-hero Rorschach. His partially controlled antisocial personality disorder was both well portrayed and sourced (his childhood issues).


Cons:
At times it failed to engage the audience with proper pacing and poor narrative. Dr. Manhattan could easily have changed many great things in his early days when he still had a normal Human conscience but didn't. Even before Vietnam he had the power to change the world but it was in Vietnam when we learned of his altered human connection.

The sex scene seemed out of place. Had it been more implied instead of eating up 5 minutes of screen time, it would actually have been a more powerful scene. It was done well, just in the wrong movie.

I also didn't like how the original Watchmen played very little in the film. You see them in the beginning and a few carried over into modern times while some didn't even get replacement characters (Silhouette).


Overall an OK movie that could have been done better.

^^

Good points. The challenge they faced, and didn't quite solve, was they were adapting a narrative designed around a serial comic book.

The Watchmen narrative was put together to fully exploit being a comic, and in no way was designed around a classic 3 arc film narrative. A small example, the middle of the entire sequence, and the middle of Rorsarch segment, has a double page centerfold that is perfectly symmetrical, using the actual comic layout to convey 'his fearful symmetry'.

Also, there were too many characters to remotely develop in the time they had. I think in truth they either needed to bite the bullet and shoot for closer to 3.5 hour to 4 hour runtime, or they needed to be bolder in adapting it to the film format.

The movie would have been good to watch if it just had the Rorschach parts in it.. Instead they bogged it down with 8 sex scenes and alot of blue penis shots.
I am really glad I lost my glasses that day I went to see it with my family.
I mean, with that much sex it's basically a porno. And don't say there wasn't penetration because in the dream scene there was.
Maybe it's not the film though, maybe it's the3 source material. Surely the writer could have gotten his point across without a good chunk of the "action" being guy 1 and scarlet chick banging each other.
The ending was good though. Made me think.

To anyone saying "stick to brainless action movies"....

Fuck off. Watchmen isnt some sort of super complex deep story. The director did a horrible job in conveying the story properly, and made one of the most boring movies ever.