Who Watches the Critics? The Critic Response Thread

Doctor Jones

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Sep 14, 2008
Messages
40,446
Reaction score
6,222
Points
103
I know it may be a bad title. And I don't know if there is already one. But I've been wondering. I usually don't care what critics think, but this could be interesting. Obviously one of the most revered pieces of literature of all time could be as well recepted or could not be so in its film form. So, how do you think the critics could respond to this?

This is the place to post reviews positive or negative, disussion of them, and rottentomatoes.com score.
 
Yeah, hopefully soon we'll be getting a few advanced screening reviews. Even if they have half the complexity of the book, I don't see how critics won't like it.

I'm hoping critics will be able to look at it as visually spectacular, but still incredibly story driven.
 
Watchmen is in no way one of the most revered pieces of literature of all time. It's one of the best graphic novels, and comic book fans love it, but let's not pretend that its up there with Shakespeare or Orwell.
That said, I think this will be well received by the critics. It's shaping up to be an intellectual film that closely follows its source material. If the acting is good, then this should do well with the critics.
 
Watchmen is in no way one of the most revered pieces of literature of all time. It's one of the best graphic novels, and comic book fans love it, but let's not pretend that its up there with Shakespeare or Orwell.
That said, I think this will be well received by the critics. It's shaping up to be an intellectual film that closely follows its source material. If the acting is good, then this should do well with the critics.
I agree, and the new site update had a good feel of how good the acting can be. The only person I'm worried about is Malin. I've seen a few comedies with her, and the acting wasn't that great. Then again, they were comedies, so this could be her shining moment.

You never know...
 
Why? Because they have it in a list of 100 novels chosen by 2 people? I realise that those 2 critics put it in the top 100, but that has little to do with how revered it is in general. Relatively few people have even heard of it.
 
seeing how it is the only GN to be in there is saying something
 
Time Magazine would disagree with you.
P'shaw, Time Magazine? Who'd listen to those clowns?

But seriously, whether or not Watchmen is revered literature is for another thread.
 
Shouldn't it be "Who Critques the Critics"?
 
Time Magazine would disagree with you.

Watchmen received critical praise, both inside and outside of the comics industry. Time, which noted that the series was "by common assent the best of breed [sic]" of the new wave of comics published at the time, praised Watchmen as "a superlative feat of imagination, combining sci-fi, political satire, knowing evocations of comics past and bold reworkings of current graphic formats into a dysutopian mystery story."[57] In 1988, Watchmen received a Hugo Award in the Other Forms category.[58] Since its release, Watchmen has garnered praise as a seminal work of the comic book medium. In Art of the Comic Book: An Aesthetic History, Robert Harvey wrote that with Watchmen, Moore and Gibbons "had demonstrated as never before the capacity of the [comic book] medium to tell a sophisticated story that could be engineered only in comics".[59] In his review of the Absolute Edition of the collection, Dave Itzkoff of The New York Times wrote that the dark legacy of Watchmen, "one that Moore almost certainly never intended, whose DNA is encoded in the increasingly black inks and bleak storylines that have become the essential elements of the contemporary superhero comic book," is "a domain he has largely ceded to writers and artists who share his fascination with brutality but not his interest in its consequences, his eagerness to tear down old boundaries but not his drive to find new ones."[60] In 1999, The Comics Journal ranked Watchmen at number 91 on its list of the Top 100 English-Language Comics of the 20th Century.[61] Watchmen was the only graphic novel to appear on Time's 2005 list of "the 100 best English-language novels from 1923 to the present".[62] Time critic Lev Grossman described the story as "a heart-pounding, heartbreaking read and a watershed in the evolution of a young medium."[63] In 2008, Entertainment Weekly placed it at number 13 on its list of the best 50 novels printed in the last 25 years, describing it as "The greatest superhero story ever told and proof that comics are capable of smart, emotionally resonant narratives worthy of the label literature."[64]


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watchmen

Watchmen was the first (and thus far, only) comic book to win the prestigious Hugo Award for excellence in science fiction.

http://www.toonopedia.com/watchmen.htm
 
Last edited:
Assuming it's even good, I think most critics not familiar with the book won't "get it". I have a feeling there will be a lot of reviews from critics for whom Watchmen is over their heads, and they make remarks about this "Director of ultraviolent macho porn epic 300, Zack Snyder's" film with "Billy Crudup playing CGI-created glowing naked blue man" and "guy called Rorschach with posessed sock over his head" etc.
 
Assuming it's even good, I think most critics not familiar with the book won't "get it". I have a feeling there will be a lot of reviews from critics for whom Watchmen is over their heads, and they make remarks about this "Director of ultraviolent macho porn epic 300, Zack Snyder's" film with "Billy Crudup playing CGI-created glowing naked blue man" and "guy called Rorschach with posessed sock over his head" etc.

I dont get how supposed Watchmen fans can have so little faith that Watchmen is good enough to win people over. Maybe it stems from some elitist nerd attitude that everyone who doesn't read comics is a dribbling moron, but I really believe that if the movie is as close to the book as it seems, most people who see it will like it. I think The Dark Knight showed that people can appreciate a more intelligent superhero story, Watchmen just takes that a step further.
 
I dont get how supposed Watchmen fans can have so little faith that Watchmen is good enough to win people over. Maybe it stems from some elitist nerd attitude that everyone who doesn't read comics is a dribbling moron, but I really believe that if the movie is as close to the book as it seems, most people who see it will like it. I think The Dark Knight showed that people can appreciate a more intelligent superhero story, Watchmen just takes that a step further.

Agreed with everything in that post :up:
 
if they foucus on slow-mo action, the reviews will be bad. if they focus on character development and plot, i think they will be good. THAT is where Watchmen shines, not action.
 
if they foucus on slow-mo action, the reviews will be bad. if they focus on character development and plot, i think they will be good. THAT is where Watchmen shines, not action.

You should read the reviews of the first 30 minutes of the film. Slow-mo is almost non-existent except for a few parts.

I think Snyder knows what Watchmen is about....:o
 
Yeah, and the reports have said that the slo mo is tasteful and done right. Like Blake being thrown out the window. Perfect there.
 
Well New York Comic-Con is in a few weeks, where they'll be showing the first 30 minutes. We'll all be sure to report back on that.

And potentially film it.
 
I think it will have a generally positive, if somewhat mixed and apprehensive critical reception. The one problem with Snyder is that he does so much to recreate the visuals of the graphic novels he adapts. 300 was nearly panel for panel visually identical to the graphic novel, and he seems to be intent on recreating a ton of the panels in Watchmen as shots in the film. Now, I know that I will most likely love the film, but I just don't think Synder as a filmmaker has it in him to really elevate Watchmen beyond the source material. For me, the only filmmaker who has ever done that is Christopher Nolan in The Dark Knight. I think while Watchmen will be an excellent and doggedly faithful adaptation of this historic graphic novel, it will never really be more than that. An adaptation of a comic-book/graphic novel. Synder just doesn't have it in him, and neither do his writers. Also, the performances seem to be a little bland, with the exception of Jackie Earle Hayley and possibly Billy Crudup. Crudup has always been great and so has Jackie Earle Hayley. But like any other comic-book adaptation, for every one or two great performances by Hayley or Crudup, there's a terrible performance from Jeffery Dean Morgan or Malin Akerman.

However, like I said, I think the one fatal flaw of the film that will keep it from being a truly great cinematic work is Snyder's fanboy faithfulness. The main problem with 300, while an awesome action movie and visually stunning, was that it was too faithful and had a a useless subplot designed to give Lena Heady something to do. I just have this sinking feeling that Watchmen will be really made for the fans. This isn't necessarily a bad thing, as we are the biggest critics of these sorts of films, but at the same time, it won't be able to have an impact the way the graphic novel did. And there is certainly no way this film will have the kind of cultural and cinematic impact that The Dark Knight did. I'm very happy with what we are getting, but I don't think it will be as powerful and important as it's source material by a longshot.
 
I think while Watchmen will be an excellent and doggedly faithful adaptation of this historic graphic novel, it will never really be more than that. An adaptation of a comic-book/graphic novel. Synder just doesn't have it in him, and neither do his writers.

I must be easy to please, because I'd be just fine with that.

Also, the performances seem to be a little bland, with the exception of Jackie Earle Hayley and possibly Billy Crudup. Crudup has always been great and so has Jackie Earle Hayley. But like any other comic-book adaptation, for every one or two great performances by Hayley or Crudup, there's a terrible performance from Jeffery Dean Morgan or Malin Akerman.

It's too soon to judge the performances, and I think JDM's Comedian looks like one of the best parts of Watchmen.

However, like I said, I think the one fatal flaw of the film that will keep it from being a truly great cinematic work is Snyder's fanboy faithfulness. The main problem with 300, while an awesome action movie and visually stunning, was that it was too faithful and had a a useless subplot designed to give Lena Heady something to do. I just have this sinking feeling that Watchmen will be really made for the fans. This isn't necessarily a bad thing, as we are the biggest critics of these sorts of films, but at the same time, it won't be able to have an impact the way the graphic novel did. And there is certainly no way this film will have the kind of cultural and cinematic impact that The Dark Knight did. I'm very happy with what we are getting, but I don't think it will be as powerful and important as it's source material by a longshot.

In all fairness, it would be nearly impossible for the movie to have the same impact the GN did. Once something's been published or released for the first time adaptations and remakes just can't reproduce the shock of the original work. Too many people know about the surprise ending and the GN's deconstruction of the superhero genre to be really impacted by the movie. Quite a few members of the audience will be surprised by what they see, but I think most of them will just go along with it; true analysis is for fanboys.
 
I love movie critics. Here's why.

A good critic isn't necessarily someone with good taste. It's someone who can write a thoughtful review of a movie in such a way that, whether or not the critic liked the movie, you will be able to tell from reading the review whether or not you will like the movie.

Roger Ebert said that (I paraphrased), and I think it's spot on. Made me realize what critics are really for.


But anyway--is there a point to making this thread so early? Like a month ahead of time?
 
Last edited:
A few reviews will be rolling in one week from today, February 17th.

*crosses fingers*
 
A few reviews will be rolling in one week from today, February 17th.

*crosses fingers*

It's about damn time... still a week though? I was hoping by the weekend... ah well.
 
Cool. It will be nice to see some posted here.

My guess on Rottentomatoes.com is 70-78%. Thoughts on the score?
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"