Poor as a movie AND an adaptation.

Rating: 3/10 (31 August 2009)

*may contain minor spoilers, but just stop reading this, read the novel, forget the film and move on with your life enriched by the novel and the 2,5 hours NOT spent on the film*
A reader of the novel, I watched The Watchmen with clenched butt cheeks from the start, cheeks Zack Snyder should have kept closed instead of making this movie.
From the beginning I was agonized: some made up scene about a horribly, AND I MEAN HORRIBLY acted "discussion" about nuclear holocaust. This is the end of the world they are discussing and these people aren't even the slightest passionate?
The references to the novel are out of place and make situations way to obvious. The beginning ruins the end and things said at some of the very last chapters in the novel are packed in the first half hour. This is done because in the novel, for a long time, only Rorschach believes there's truly a dire situation, BUT WE CAN'T MAKE A Hollywood MOVIE WITHOUT ACTION, DRAMA AND SUSPENSE NOW CAN WE? The "summery" of Under The Hood, which are pages from Holly Mason's autobiography in the novel, cover things so hastily they feel very, very forced (especially the Silk Spectre being a lesbian which is quite a topic in the novel, here is a hasty detail), they set no mood and parts of them are entirely made up.
It just goes downhill. It's so strange how there's a novel in front of these writers, there's a script, sceneries, characters and they simply FAIL to get any of it across. Especially Veidt's character completely misses the point of him (and is terribly, terribly acted).
Rorschach is like a damn superhero, even though the thing that makes The Watchmen great is that they AREN'T that, they are merely men in costumes.
*some details discussed to elaborate* Just the opening scene where the novel CLEARLY shows Rorschach using the grappling gun to REALISTICALLY climb the apartment building, here he gets pulled up by some freak of nature device. We've all seen Mythbusters, it can't happen if you don't climb. One might say "It's a movie, come on" and I'd agree if it were a Marvel, I'd say "Meh, I guess" if it were Batman, but I say "No way in hell" when it's The Watchmen.
I also very much missed him trying to open that closet with sheer force or lock-picking before finding the button, because it shows he's not some super investigator. This may be considered a detail and me nitpicking, but I feel I have a right to want to see the novel on the big screen and not some sorry "butt with double s" adaptation, because the novel is LITERATURE. It doesn't require a remake by an arrogant Hollywood snob.
On this subject, what the hell is that scene of him breaking in at Dr. Manhatten's lab? He's not a parcour expert or Spiderman or something! Then, he smashes the window even though two guards JUST walked away, but they don't hear a thing. *end details*
Enough detail bashing, the whole plot line is poorly rewritten, the whole movie is poorly acted with Rorschach bobbing his head like a power ranger. Especially Silk Spectre II obviously has no idea what acting is.
I've heard "We didn't want to confuse the audience" a lot during the making of this movie, but honestly, I think Zack was just confused. He looked at a brilliant piece of literature and thought "HUH? WHERE IS ALL THE ELABORATIVE AND UNNATURAL DIALOGUE AT? HOW CAN I UNDERSTAND THIS BOOK IF THEY DON'T EXPLAIN THINGS THAT HAPPENED IN THE PAST RIGHT AWAY?"
The endless adaptations and remakes are annoying, but at least most of them don't just butcher the actual concept. This is just Zack Snyder saying he's above a brilliant writer, saying Hollywood is better than literature.
7.9? Grab the novel, read it through, watch it again, THEN you'll know what you're talking about. I'll never accept anyone calling this film good or even decent without realizing how poor it is in comparison.