|
Post by hallowed on Feb 26, 2009 10:56:30 GMT -7
its so close i can taste it! I'm going to the midnight release in at the new megaplex thing in Ogden. they don't have show times up yet, but if i can see it in IMAX, i will. anyone who would care to join me is more than welcome. i hope to see you all there! love you guys!!
|
|
|
Post by Ben on Mar 6, 2009 8:06:56 GMT -7
SO....what did we all think?
I'll go last.
|
|
|
Post by Frizzle on Mar 6, 2009 15:14:24 GMT -7
freakin awesome. nuff said
|
|
|
Post by Frizzle on Mar 7, 2009 10:47:17 GMT -7
rorshach is freakin pwn sauce. I still can't get over the hot oil scene in the prison.
Shank deflected with a tray followed by a tray to the head. Then he punched through the glass and threw one of the hot baskets of fries on the guy. followed by the line: "I'm not locked in here with you. You're locked in with me!"
epic
|
|
|
Post by hallowed on Mar 9, 2009 10:17:14 GMT -7
i agree with the Frizzle Fry. i love it. story made sense (which is tough, it was a complicated plot), it was well acted - krudup and the night owl dude, and rorshach dude were marvelous - visually it was stunning. music was great, loved the title sequence, that was worth the money and time to me in itself. i love a movie that knows its audience; use of '99 Red Balloons' in its original German was great, all us nerds know that song and what its about, we don't need the MXPX version of it.
i won't say it was a perfect film, ozy was hit and miss on the believeability (is that a word?) for me, and the fight scenes were too long. the ending seemed to drag what with the 'its ozy! -fight- you'll never stop me! -fight- <enter dr mahattan, back from mars> -fight- 'your too late!' -fight- <bullet catch> -fight- rorshach can't live with this brand of justice -fight- follow up. but i realize that's how it happened in the book so i guess my criticism should lie there, not with the film. eeew and definitely could have lived with out the out of control love scene in the middle. gross.
|
|
|
Post by Ben on Mar 16, 2009 12:25:01 GMT -7
The Good: Haley's Rorschach - carries the movie. Near-slavish loyalty to the aesthetic of the novel. Opening credits - worth the ticket price x9000
The Bad: Snyder manages to simultaneous make an incredibly convincing counterfeit and completely miss the point. Dumbing-down of certain elements. Swollen reliance on violence.
The Ugly: Malin Akerman and Carla Gugino are abysmal throughout. The Debbie-Does-Dallas-esque sex scene. The needless and baffling change to Rorschach's origin story. Snyder's slow-motion fetish.
|
|
|
Post by hallowed on Mar 16, 2009 13:44:24 GMT -7
i agree with the "needless" critique of the change in Rorshach's story but i wouldn't call it baffling. i hadn't read that part in the book when i saw the movie and it made perfect sense to me. but again, i don't know why they changed it at all, it wouldn't have taken any more time to tell it the original way. maybe the pyrotechnics dept hit their spending cap. haha
|
|
|
Post by Ben on Mar 16, 2009 14:07:32 GMT -7
yeah, they certainly used up the makeup budget. boo. i just think the original is so much more sinister and satisfying...ah well.
|
|
|
Post by hallowed on Mar 16, 2009 14:27:52 GMT -7
oh for sure. of all the silly things to change... they leave in oxy's weird tiger that made no sense (in the movie version) and change that? i don't get the logic there either.
|
|
|
Post by Frizzle on Mar 16, 2009 23:00:24 GMT -7
questions:
What is rorshach's actual story?
why is his mask constantly changing? just for kicks? it was never really explain
|
|
|
Post by hallowed on Mar 17, 2009 8:47:27 GMT -7
The part about his childhood was accurate. he worked at a textiles as a young man and this celebrity wanted a unique dress so he made this dress with liquid inbetween the lays so the black spots would change with pressure and stuff, so as she moved, the dress would change. but she doesn't want it, so rorshach keeps it cause he thought it was beautiful. then he makes his mask out if it. in the story, instead of hacking that guys head open with a meat cleaver, he chains him up and hands him a hack saw, explaining that he wouldn't have time to cut through the chain (implying he'd have to cut through his arm instead) and then sets the house on fire. he stands outside for 5 hours and watched the house burn to the ground, to make sure the guy doesn't get out.
Kirk, Ben... did i miss anything important?
|
|
|
Post by hallowed on Mar 17, 2009 9:49:39 GMT -7
oh and when he beats up those kids that are picking on him and bites a chunk out of the kid's face... well in the book he blinds the other kid by sticking the kid's cigarette in his eye. blinded with your own cig. that's a bad day.
|
|
|
Post by Frizzle on Mar 17, 2009 11:11:08 GMT -7
ah. ok.
Other questions:
Was the creation of Dr. Manhattan ever fully explained? or was it just some experimental accident with quantum physics like in the movie? That whole entire scene is unbelievable imo. No large dangerous equipment is secluded in a different room without an abort switch to cancel any sequences in case of emergency. But i guess they had no choice in order to get him stuck in the field.
And did they ever say specifically what type of particle field it was? Or was it just some arbitrary particle doohicky?
They went into full accurate depth on how Tachyon particles travel faster than the speed of light and proportionately backwards in time to interupt Dr. Manhattans perception of time. But not how he was created. They could have come up with a little bit better BS for that.
And they didn't mention at all the hydrogen atom on his forhead. They just showed him making it and that was it.
|
|
|
Post by hallowed on Mar 17, 2009 11:25:16 GMT -7
it was really just an accident, and i don't recall specifics on the partical type. the hydrogen atom on his forehead... the goverment made a symbol for him that was the more stereotypical but he said that was pointless, that atoms don't really look like that. he said he if was going to have an atom at all a hydrogen atom made the most sense becuase its perfect in its simplicity. its actually a sorta funny scene in the book cause the government dudes are all afraid of him and nervous around him. he's so stoic and cold; they present him with this outfit and tell him he should call himself 'dr manhattan' and have this cheesy symbol and he's just like 'no, hydorgen atom' and everyone's like 'uhhhh... ok! whatever you want... eeeek!'. haha! That's sorta why he doesn't wear clothes either. he doesn't see the point. at the begining he starts out in a full get up, but as he gets more and more detachted to humanity and earth he wears less and less of the silly costume the government tries to wrap him in.
|
|
|
Post by Ben on Mar 17, 2009 11:58:26 GMT -7
friz, i think the only other info on the experiment that creates Doc Manhattan is that it's an intrinsic field generator...it's pretty vague. cam, you covered it quite well! nicely done my lil viking. The part i was upset about with rorschach was not just the arm-cutting off trap, but the little description about knowing what cats know that makes them scream like babies in the night. that monologue is so powerful and ties in his issues with his mother. there were so many little omissions that totally flattened his character. in the book, you get to see a whole other layer - including how the account of the kitty genovese killing influenced him. in the movie you don't get to see his endearing empathy underneath all of his 'blood ad thunder.'
ps also,. in the prison scene, Rorschach kicks the toilet bowl out to electrocute the goon. in the movie, it just happens after rorschach has smacked him into the toilet. rorschach's trademark is the use of his environment - why the H did snyder rob that really cool and really deliberate tactic? pisses me right off.
|
|