Watchmen

[Full disclosure: I’ve never read the comic books] Twenty percent of the running time comprises the events that actually happen in the film, while 80% consists of flashbacks familiarizing us with the characters, who didn’t grow on me and of whom only one – Rorschach – is well-written and acted (i.e. interesting). There is virtually no action here, but everything is wrapped up in beautiful visuals full of imaginative montages and slow motion shots with a feeling of fantasy, where nothing is impossible and where a neon blue superhero is constantly philosophizing about something very clever beyond the understanding of us Earthlings. Through the first third of Watchmen, I was filled with awe and excitement (and pleasantly surprised by the amount of sex and violence and the moral depravity of the main characters), but I was looking forward to the end of the flashbacks and the start of a proper film adventure. As there was no change in the second third, I started to feel bored and irritated. I literally suffered through the final third. Had I been the producer of this megalomaniacal political, (pseudo) philosophical, fantasy conversational, R-rated flick, I’d off myself. (02/27/2009)

I was bored as hell for most of the movie, sitting around and actually waiting for a few brighter spots. The bright spots were definitely not worth it though, so I left the cinema pretty bored and annoyed. Worse, though, was that the person who talked me into seeing this "major motion picture" (major only in terms of its running time) was even angrier than I was. 2.5 stars. (06/11/2011)

It hasn't been a year since The Dark Knight and suddenly crowds of people were shouting that Watchmen are too serious for a comic and therefore ridiculous. On the other hand, Batman's established visual style is so firmly maintained that Snyder's work suddenly becomes too colorful for a serious drama. And prejudices, apart from the puritan part of society, also started to affect the average viewer, who suddenly cannot digest a few non-offensive "blue" shots. And so, they miss out on the pleasure of a brilliant adaptation, masterful direction, and performances that not only do not disrupt but precisely fulfill each character and flawlessly disrupt all the previous superhero stereotypes. In my eyes, Watchmen are a masterpiece that paradoxically surpassed its time. They are modern and, despite their generous length, very skillfully directed, but their nostalgic melancholy still has no place in the genre. However, they can easily become an untouchable idol for all those who accept them. (03/12/2009)

Many adjectives can be used for his film. It is impressive, visually polished, excessively comic book-like, and stylishly action-packed. It is a bombastic spectacle that reminds me of the opening of the Olympic Games in Beijing. Unfortunately, I have always preferred small theater forms and similar shows where the idea does not disappear in favor of impressive action that does not impress me. It is over-stylized, illogical, and cold. It is a certain tribute to comics, but to the ones that never appealed to me, namely the superheroes. It is exactly the type of production where I get the impression that the film heroes go through so much effort to achieve a banal goal. I always remember the scene from the first Indiana Jones movie, where a native warrior dramatically fences with a sword in front of a surprised Indiana Jones, only for him to eventually pull out a gun and shoot the warrior while saying "Go to hell." For example, the scene where the villain breaks into the victim's apartment, beats him up for a long time using all the furniture in the room, and breaks a table with him, only to eventually throw him through specially reinforced glass onto the pavement instead of pulling out a gun and shooting him. It is indeed impressive, but incredibly stupid. Watchmen is exactly the type of film where style and effects are everything. Overall impression: 60%. I do not regret seeing  Watchmen, but I do not intend to return to the film in the future. Fans of blockbusters can easily add two stars. (12/14/2009)

Untouched by the comics, but with thoughts of both Gilliam and Greengrass, I end up being thankful for Zack Snyder, who has grown as a filmmaker in his third film. While he was enabled by an obviously strong premise or rather its script treatment, the way Snyder presents the vast world of rejected superheroes is breathtaking. It’s a powerful reflection on America with an almost meditative thought about humans in general. It is based on excellent dialogue by a group of fresh-faced actors who are occasionally sent into excellent action sequences by the director. Rorschach's rendezvous with the cops took me far beyond mere viewer ecstasy. I left the movie theater very pensive, but a day later I was cheering and I know I have to see it at least one more time. Edit I: It was worth it. It's been a long time since I've experienced a second screening of a film that I've enjoyed so intensely. Edit II The D.C. version is "only" a gourmet cherry on top. (03/10/2009)