Watchmen news: trailer, runtime and more

[Shifty]

You can just wait until the "Ultimate" DVD comes out with the extended cut that is over 3 hours, plus the pirate comic inserted into the film.

 

[Dark Victory]

Thinking about this:
within the context of Dr. Manhattan gives me goosebumps

Wasn't that it the Watchmen Comic- Con footage? Sorry if I'm a little late

 

[Solidus]

I bet with you it is a mere digest from the book. But that is to be seen, of course, when it hits the screen.

Like I said previously somewhere, it doesn't have to do with the pace you read, it has to do with the time it is given when composed.

You can read it as fast as you can, but you can't squeeze decently that amount of experience in a movie of 2:45 h. It's quite detailed, and the detail is the soul of it.

This runtime is almost the same as TDK. It's a joke. A Killing Joke. t:

From what everyone said, that is not the case. Probably the deepest movies of all time, 2001, Blade Runner, either 2 and half, or under two hours. You don't need a 21 hour movie to explain depth, unless you're superficial, and can't take depth from some thing unless its baby spoon fed to ya.

The depth is in between the lines spoken/written either way you look at it, the depth comes from paying attention and watching it multiple times, like Blade Runner, it has many many many layers to it. You don't need a long very long movie to attain such thing.

 

[Mercurius]

From what everyone said, that is not the case. Probably the deepest movies of all time, 2001, Blade Runner, either 2 and half, or under two hours. You don't need a 21 hour movie to explain depth, unless you're superficial, and can't take depth from some thing unless its baby spoon fed to ya.

The depth is in between the lines spoken/written either way you look at it, the depth comes from paying attention and watching it multiple times, like Blade Runner, it has many many many layers to it. You don't need a long very long movie to attain such thing.

What a flimsy argument for Solidus poster!

Of course you can have depth from movies with even less runtime. Pi, by Aronofsky, for instance.

But, of course, that's not the point.

The point is: Watchmen is known for the enormous amount of information, and the virtuoso manipulation of it in the whole book.

2:45h? A digest.

 

[[A]]

I love these long movies.. I can totally stand a 3h movie--I hate people who can't and keeps *****ing about it.. why you had so much coke before the movie, then?! you idiot

 

[Sawyer]

I love these long movies.. I can totally stand a 3h movie--I hate people who can't and keeps *****ing about it.. why you had so much coke before the movie, then?! you idiot

Settle down, Aeghast. Some people simply dont have the same attention span as the rest of us.

 

[DarkReflections]

yeah, for me watching tdk was easy cause i can take a 3 hour movie, especially one involving batman lol, it wasnt realy for my friend cause he doesnt like movies that last that long. so i wouldnt care how long watchmen is as long as there is as much source material as possible.

 

[Spider-ManHero12]

yeah, for me watching tdk was easy cause i can take a 3 hour movie, especially one involving batman lol, it wasnt realy for my friend cause he doesnt like movies that last that long. so i wouldnt care how long watchmen is as long as there is as much source material as possible.

Well, bud, I can defenitely survive a 3 hour film, especially if it's great. the first an second time seeing TDk was easy and great, but by the 3rd time, it was sort of hard. I'm defenitely excited for Watchmen and I know that I'll be able to sit through it.

 

[DDS]

I'm pretty suprised, and disapointed, that none of this footage got leaked.

Right??!!

 

[gwynplaine]

Sorry if this has been answered before but what is the rating on Watchmen ?

 

[Hurm...]

I'm pretty suprised, and disapointed, that none of this footage got leaked.

Right??!!

it wasn"t a public event. People were invited to come.

 

[Hurm...]

Sorry if this has been answered before but what is the rating on Watchmen ?

Without a damn doubt...R

 

[DDS]

it wasn"t a public event. People were invited to come.

Ah, I see.

Still though...if security wasn't paying attention or something...

 

[gwynplaine]

Without a damn doubt...R

Thank you for answering and I certainly hope so.

 

[Solidus]

What a flimsy argument for Solidus poster!

Of course you can have depth from movies with even less runtime. Pi, by Aronofsky, for instance.

But, of course, that's not the point.

The point is: Watchmen is known for the enormous amount of information, and the virtuoso manipulation of it in the whole book.

2:45h? A digest.

Unless you read really really slow, which is fine, but no its not. Even though yes the Night Owl memoirs are taken out as well as the Black Freighter, for the rest of it, 2:45 with out credits is a good length. Because with a lot of the "speaking"/showing info, maybe reading it seems like it would take a long time to express/show, but I don't think that is the case.

A lot of the info was as well visual. So that's fine that you disagree.....but I still think a nearly 3 hour movie for Watchmen is not a digest. Somethings seem longer on paper, then they really are not when played out.

Which its fine to have your views on it. But I just disagree.

 

[Sawyer]

Well, bud, I can defenitely survive a 3 hour film, especially if it's great. the first an second time seeing TDk was easy and great, but by the 3rd time, it was sort of hard. I'm defenitely excited for Watchmen and I know that I'll be able to sit through it.

I completely get what you're saying. The first time was amazing, as was the second because I got to catch stuff that I missed the first time. The third time, I definately took notice of how long it was.

 

[Hurm...]

Thank you for answering and I certainly hope so.

It will be. They did all this for the fanboys, just so they wouldn't get slaughtered. Oh, it'll be R.

 

[CaptainGenerica]

Unless you read really really slow, which is fine, but no its not. Even though yes the Night Owl memoirs are taken out as well as the Black Freighter, for the rest of it, 2:45 with out credits is a good length. Because with a lot of the "speaking"/showing info, maybe reading it seems like it would take a long time to express/show, but I don't think that is the case.

A lot of the info was as well visual. So that's fine that you disagree.....but I still think a nearly 3 hour movie for Watchmen is not a digest. Somethings seem longer on paper, then they really are not when played out.

Which its fine to have your views on it. But I just disagree.

I agree completely.

Frankly, I think it would be a disservice to let scenes play out long enough for everything to "digest". Almost like saying "see this subtle reference? See the thematic depth? Got it? Okay, next scene." It's not interesting if it's spoonfed, and I think it should be densely packed and quickly paced so as to reward multiple viewings.

 

[Solidus]

I agree completely.

Frankly, I think it would be a disservice to let scenes play out long enough for everything to "digest". Almost like saying "see this subtle reference? See the thematic depth? Got it? Okay, next scene." It's not interesting if it's spoonfed, and I think it should be densely packed and quickly paced so as to reward multiple viewings.

Yea that's how I feel, like TDK, or Blade Runner. The movie is so densly packed, and does give way to greatness on multiple viewings. I still find new things on Blade Runner 20 years later after I've seen it MANY times. To me those are the best movies like TDK, or Blade Runner and many others, ones you like to go back to often and watch again and again. That is value to me.

 

[Project862006]

anyone a little scared what Zach said about ending in Q &A :

"thats the part that will be different from GN to film if you read the David Hayter script you know what i mean"

but he also says :

"the ending is slightly different but the intent is still intact"

 

[Sun_Down]

I think that's clearly bad: too much slow camera by the description, and the runtime is absolutely ridiculous for so much material, and so complex.

The movie may be a visual joyride, but with this runtime it is doomed as a version of the book.

This runtime is absolutely ridiculous if you read the book.

It will be like a fast show of the book's "best moments". It should have the runtime of LOTR extended version.

Like this, no matter what Zack is able to do, he can't get that to be the amazing stuff the book is, cinema-wise.

What a flimsy argument for Solidus poster!

Of course you can have depth from movies with even less runtime. Pi, by Aronofsky, for instance.

But, of course, that's not the point.

The point is: Watchmen is known for the enormous amount of information, and the virtuoso manipulation of it in the whole book.

2:45h? A digest.

Jesus christ, quit your whining. It's "fans" like you with your undue sense of entitlement that give comic books fans a bad name. You're bound and determined to dislike this thing based on your assumptions and generally negative outlook. You have NO reason to assume the movie will be bad based on what you inexplicably consider to be a "short" runtime.

So why don't you just skip the film entirely and take your whining somewhere else?

 

[Mercurius]

Jesus christ, quit your whining. It's "fans" like you with your undue sense of entitlement that give comic books fans a bad name. You're bound and determined to dislike this thing based on your assumptions and generally negative outlook. You have NO reason to assume the movie will be bad based on what you inexplicably consider to be a "short" runtime.

So why don't you just skip the film entirely and take your whining somewhere else?

Because it is a great pleasure to get such illuminating, intelligent and wholesome propositions like yours, to answer your very original last question.

And, well, I know it's just my opinion, but I believe the bad name fans have is because they're quite naturally the type who avoids thinking and possibly knows only how to spell "awsome", if so.

Otherwise you're, how did you put it? "negative", yes, "negative".

What is this place, I mean, is that a New Age convention?

 

[Doctor Jones]

Well, bud, I can defenitely survive a 3 hour film, especially if it's great. the first an second time seeing TDk was easy and great, but by the 3rd time, it was sort of hard. I'm defenitely excited for Watchmen and I know that I'll be able to sit through it.

Have you read it? Because you should before you see the film. And I saw TDK 5 times and never got tired of it. Maybe because I'm such a huge Batman fan. Even though I love both Spidey and Batman equally. I was introduced to them at the same time when I was five.

 

[Doctor Jones]

Because it is a great pleasure to get such illuminating, intelligent and wholesome propositions like yours, to answer your very original last question.

And, well, I know it's just my opinion, but I believe the bad name fans have is because they're quite naturally the type who avoids thinking and possibly knows only how to spell "awsome", if so.

Otherwise you're, how did you put it? "negative", yes, "negative".

What is this place, I mean, is that a New Age covention?

Jesus, quit being such a sour puss, and lighten up. You should accept the film for what it is regardless. If you expected a film to be just like the GN you're here for the wrong reason. But who knows how it will turn out? What if it's good? Some how I doubt you'll ever admit it, or you'll just keep it to yourself act like you were right, because with everything you're saying, there's no going back to what you said. Will you admit if your wrong about the film? Because if I am. I know I will.

 

[Hurm...]

Jesus, quit being such a sour puss, and lighten up. You should accept the film for what it is regardless. If you expected a film to be just like the GN you're here for the wrong reason. But who knows how it will turn out? What if it's good? Some how I doubt you'll ever admit it, or you'll just keep it to yourself act like you were right, because with everything you're saying, there's no going back to what you said. Will you admit if your wrong about the film? Because if I am. I know I will.

He's the GoogleMe94 of Watchmen t: Anyone remember that nice fellow? http://forums.superherohype.com/member.php?u=51260