WHat makes a good GN doesn't always make a good movie *spoiler*

Rating: 3/10 (10 March 2009)

As someone who has NEVER read the comic (or "graphic novel"... back off nerds) and who is an avid film fan, I was only judging it as a movie and I was not impressed.
Let me start with the good points as that won't take as long. I liked how they showed the humanity of the heroes and all their imperfections. It was refreshing and different. Also, some of the characters were very interesting, the story itself was pretty cool and there were a lot of great moments.
HOWEVER... for all the great moments, there were even more moments that went absolutely nowhere. Entire scenes that didn't move the story along and should have been left on the cutting room floor. It was like they just kept going... "HEY GUYS, LOOK WHAT WE INCLUDED!" and "REMEMBER THIS FROM THE COMICS!?!?" and "I BET YOU THOUGHT WE'D FORGOT ABOUT THIS!!!" and it was all very pointless and very distracting from the story. Yet other things went completely unexplained and left me asking, "what's with the horny blue tiger?"
Maybe if I had read the comics first I may have been more happy with it. After all this was a movie for the "Fanboys", but as a film fan, I would have much rather a GREAT movie that the Fanboys would have hated than a lousy movie that the fan-boys loved... and I'm still hearing people complain that they omitted a whole sub-plot about some pirate comic. Like what would have made this movie better is if it was LONGER!?!? Don't worry though... they apparently shot the footage and are saving it for the extended 4 hour ultra-boring edition DVD.
Now I'd Love to see an hour and a half version... That would be GREAT! That what was so frustrating. There was a GREAT movie in there, but it was buried under so much pointless crap. They should have just made the movie about Rorschach... He was by far the strongest and most interesting character and all the really great scenes were all about him. Instead we find ourselves on Mars with Doctor Boring, watching him do pointless things that take us away from where the story is actually happening. Then there are the sex scenes. Entirely pointless and tasteless. I'm not saying, don't let the characters f**k... I'm saying this isn't a porno, I don't need to see every nipple twist, or man ass pumping away... I know what sex looks like, you don't need to show me (though I'm sure this is closer than some of the fan-boys may ever get to sex) You can elude to it. You don't need to show it. After this movie we stayed for a showing of Batman (1989) now that was a GREAT comic book movie! They didn't show the sex... they showed Bruce and Vicki going' upstairs, then showed Bruce wake up at night with Vicki in his bed, tasteful, short, sweet, we know what they did and it kept the story moving. The Watchmen (just like the dark knight) needed some serious editing. It clocked in at a whopping 163 min and there was NO REASON FOR IT! I suggested to a fan (and they disagreed)... make it a trilogy. Make three, hour and a half long movies and you can include EVERYTHING... and it wouldn't have suffered for it. Well, maybe not. I still think that it just wouldn't have translated well onto the screen. Not like Sin City (Never read those books either) witch was apparently shot for shot, panel for panel for the most part. Not that The Watchmen is a BAD book, but some stuff just doesn't translate well.
Also, the soundtrack was terrible. Not bad songs, bad use of songs. The movie takes place in the mid 80's, but most of the music was from the 60's. I'm sure it was a clumsy attempt to draw parallels between the civil unrest then and "now", but it was really just distracting. If they wanted us to stay in the movie they should have just used tunes from the 80's.
Anyway, I've now wasted more time on this movie so I'm gonna stop my rant now. Let me just close by saying I hope they release an EDITED version of the DVD... it's the only way I'd watch it again. Fletch