No.

no

Links?

>>8122975
links or gtfo

Nope. And so far every critic I agree with has liked it.

/co/'s been worried from day 1. Where the hell have you been?

There are about equal amounts of positive and negative reviews.

Of course I'm worried to a degree, but this is still going to be a good movie. The worry is in that it will be a good one rather than a great one... Which, to be honest, is the best kind of worry to have.

no

As long as RRAAAARRL and "Posibly homosexual? Must investigate further." are in it, I'll be otay.

For that one negative review, there were three positive ones.

Not worried.

My taste is shitty enough for me to enjoy almost everything the critics hate.

Kevin Smith says it's going to be good.

>>8122958

*whispers* no

>>8122958

What, me worry?

I expect it to suck.
I enter every situation expecting the absolute worst.

Optimists are never pleasantly surprised.

>>8123011
RRAAAARRL is gone. The homo line is only in the director's cut.

Serves you right for only worrying about what memes are in. Are you also upset that the 35 minutes ago line is different?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f1wzweizm2o
Look at this fucking thing. It's going to be awesome.

Worry no more.

>>8123011
the second one isn't.

they cut a LOT of shit out.

Sorry to bring up TDK when /co/ now hates it, but I went through the same sort of thing: initial excited love, ambivalence, then thought it was going to be shit, then got hyped up again, then I saw it and enjoyed it.

It's all a phase.

>>8123053
Same here.

>>8123055
.....yes.

>>8122975
>>8122986

Perhaps you should try GOOGLE?

http://www.obsessedwithfilm.com/movie-news/early-watchmen-reviews.php

>>8122991
>>8123018

So do your tastes depend on what other people say?

>>8123011
Both are pretty much confirmed to be out.

>>8123075
People hated it before it came out, bro.

I saw Patrick Wilson clean his glasses and came a billion times.

most reviewers have their thumbs up their asses.
im sure /co/ will like it

I think the very first reviews of dark knight were negative too.

How much failed rape will we see?

*shrugs*
I didn't care for the comic, so I expect that any changes they make won't really bother me too much, so I'll probably enjoy the movie.

Hmm all the negative reviewers are not fans like /co/ which I think ultimatley affects your opinion of a comic book film and how exciting each "boring" part is because it's your favorite book in motion coming to life.

Kevin Smith is someone I can agree with because he is a comic fan.

I saw the way the snow Nite Owl costume looks and I know, from that, I won't hate it.

Stop making these threads. The only reviews I've seen are positive.

I expect this movie to suck.

What I've been hearing is that Snyder tried to stick TOO closely to the comic, and with only a 2:40 movie, it came off as rushed. I'm not worried about its worth as an adaptation, but I am worried about its worth as a movie on its own.

Director's cut will be above god tier, though. It'll deserve a whole new tier named for it.

>>8123159
>Director's cut will be above god tier, though. It'll deserve a whole new tier named for it.

Manhattan Tier

>>8123159
Blade Runner Tier.

Shitty films made epic by directors cuts.

>>8123159
Sny-tier?

Knowing the one comic based movie that was closest to the actual comic was 300, I doubt I'll hate it. I'm not expecting it at all to be like the graphic novel.

Only losers will like this movie.

>>8122958
OH GOD THE COMPRESSION IT BURNS

Will they have the part where Rorschach kills the dogs?

>>8123262
Yes.

>>8123037
>>8123037
>>8123037


when i heard that i felt all warm and cozy and safe.

he's a nerd, he wouldn't let us down =)

>>8123274
So that and S.QU.I.D. make up for everything they cut out, in my opinion.

>>8123262

Then WIN is ensued

>>8123177
I think you meant to say, good films made bad by shitty editing and then made god tier again by a series of alternate cuts. :)

Reviews are for people who can think for themselves.
Pick any of your favorite movies, and it's guaranteed to have had a flood of negative reviews when it first came out.

/co/ has no criteria.

Monsieur Verdoux was considered horrible when it came out. Now it's seen as a great dark comedy.

>>8123392
... Can you say something /co/ related?

>>8123324
Reviews aren't worthless by any means. A good reviewer can write a review that, by reading it, you can gather whether or not you'll like a movie, regardless of if the reviewer did. Unfortunately, there are very few good reviewers around these days.

What about Frank Millar's Spirit? If /co. didnt care about reviews all of us would have seen it

>>8123501
This is true... though all the reviews were by the same guy.

But if it weren't for /co/, I wouldn't have known that, either.

>>8123063
Hahhahaha holy fucking shit that looks awesome. Pity that awesome is not the part I'm worried about, it's more to do with fitting and linking the story together.

>>8123529
I'm thinking that 'awesome' is really all we can hope for in the theatrical cut, and that the coherence of the story is something we need to wait for the director's cut to enjoy.

>>8123090
I liked the first review.
"I loved the graphic novel but this movie sucked. Also it was very close to the graphic novel, but all the characters suck."
Mixed messages, much?

from all the reviews I read, there are just 2 bad ones, both on hollywood elsewhere

and those are the ones linked from that >>8123090 link

I am not worried .... from what I have heard, it won't suck ... it won't be any cinematic masterpiece, but I didn't expect that anyway

some of the acting feels really superficial and overly dramatic. I hope it's only a few scenes, but i really don't have high hopes.

>>8123608

Really? The acting is the least of my concerns. Anything in particular unnerve you?

>>8123608
I'm pretty sure those scenes have been butchered and will feel fine in-context and fully fleshed out.

>>8123583
in the Watchmen comic movie forum there's about three people who have seen it. Two of them liked it, and one of them thought it wasn't anything special.

Here's something unrelated that made me feel more cynical about reviewers. In regards to the album Viva La Vida by Coldplay:

>Also despite giving the album three stars in The Times, Pete Paphides admitted in December 2008 that he was wrong to give it this score and had in fact become his favourite album of the year.

It just made me think, what the FUCK was the point of reading his goddamn review, when he just goes and changes his fucking mind? Like, does his word just mean absofucking nothing?! What a worthless reviewer!

Anyway I hope that helps in regards to the shitty reviews...

from what I have read on watchmencomicmovie.com forums, "the watchmen" have unexplained superpowers

like, they jump 20 meters, they kick through walls, they are simply too powerful for normal persons

plus ... again, from what I have read, everything is really rushed, there is no time to actually introduce or explore each of the characters, so it's just "replaying the events from the comics"

but let's see ... it's just 14 days, damn it

>>8123716
Well, I personally know a guy that works for Warners, he has the actual copy of the movie on the DVD (!!!!!111111)

and he won't tell me a thing except "I saw the first 10 minutes for 15 times, that's how awesome it is"

and that's all I got from him ... damn!

>>8123737
>like, they jump 20 meters, they kick through walls, they are simply too powerful for normal persons

The thing is though, they aren't normal people in the GN either.

Having said that, it's still pretty ridiculous. But I guess I'll have to see it to determine if it bothers me.

There was hurm in one of the clips.

This has set me completely at ease.

>>8123737
Slightly exaggerating their human abilities isn't all that big of a deal, in my opinion. It should help to make the bullet-catching scene seem less out of place, for one thing. I mean, every character still (hopefully) has their major human flaws and failures, and as long as those are kept intact, it shouldn't be all that hard to suspend disbelief at points.

The original score sounds retarded.

Action clips I saw were likely really shittily edited so I won't really judge.

The clips composed of people just talking were awesome.

Pretty sure I'll like it, and I can make up my own mind.

>>8123897
>The original score sounds retarded.
Serious? That's something I've been really looking forward to, judging by the clips on the site.

>>8123846
look at the youtube video linked above
around second 25, you will see flying rorschach, apparently kicked by veidt

don't tell me it doesn't look ridiculous (but yeah, it's just one second or probably less)

>>8123959
It does look ridiculous.

So does the bullet-catch.

>>8123916

Yeah, I was disappointed, too, as Laurie and Doc's little character page themes were fantastic. Maybe they're placeholder pieces in the clips, but what I've heard is very distracting in its mediocrity.

I am thinking it well average 70% on RT.

>>8123959
To be fair, Veidt did some pretty ridiculous shit in the GN as well. Throwing a muscle-bound man through a window(and apparently a strong one) in one shot? Reacting with lightning speed to his own hitman, and of course, managing to catch a bullet at point blank range, I'm not that surprised that he can apparently do some superhuman stuff as well.

>>8124570

You do offer a good point.

>>8124570
It's not a graphic novel.

>>8124717

You're right. It's a movie.

A -very realistic- movie.

>>8124570
Well, for the first one, he mentions that he knows everything the Comedian could do (hard uppercut, that's about it) at some point, so taking him out (especially when he is fuck old) would be a cake walk for him.
The hitman was all Just As Planned, so I'm not surprised there.
The bullet catching? Yeah, that's a bit crazy.

>>8124751

It wasn't so much the beating up the Comedian as it was lifting him and throwing him out of a sturdy window on his first try.

>>8124717
Shut up. We're not having another discussion ruined by bitching about semantics.

>>8124781
Yeah, I think something people tend to forget is how fucking strong windows that high up have to be. It's not just regular glass.

>>8122958


Why would I worry? I experienced the story years ago, and nothing, not even a shitty movie will ruin that.

>>8124805

Though it would be fucking hilarious to see Veidt throw the Comedian at the window, only to have him bounce off the window with a only a small crack in the window to show for all the effort.

i'm happy

I find it a bit strange that many people say the action was great but the dialogues weren't. Judging from the four short scenes I've seen I'd say it's the other way round. The dialogues made me nearly cream myself while the action was just slow motion meh slow motion.

early reviews are for niggers that want to travel on time

>>8124751
Its actually not impossible to 'catch' a .22 Caliber bullet. They are notorious for not always being powerful enough to make an exit wound, so theoretically you could bounce it off of your wrist bone, like Veidt did. He was bleeding after all, not like he caught it in his teeth.

>>8123055
Wait wait wait.
They cut RRAAAARRL and "possibly homosexual"?
Can we just get out all of what they cut so I won't be one of those douches in the theatre yelling "THAT'S NOT HOW IT GOES."

>>8125299
I'm going to have a good look at the audience. If I spot nerds or neckbeards I'm going to comment on everything that was cut out loudly trying to make contact this way.

i worry not

>>8125403
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFUUUUUUUUUUUUU

>>8125403
HOLY SHIT THIS IS GOING TO HAUNT MY NIGHTMARES. WHY DID YOU REMEMBER ME OF THAT GAME?

>>8125299
RRAAAARRL is gone. Most of Mason's later scenes are gone, including his death. The Bernies are in, but have no dialog. Dan visits Veidt in the beginning rather than Rorschach doing so. The dogs still die, but Rorschach kills the man in the same way rather than burning his house. Dr Long's scene at his house is gone. The lesbians are gone. The squid is gone. The 35 minutes ago line is changed. Dan and Laurie's last sex scene is gone.

Many of these are present in the director's cut, though.

>>8125403
I can see Superman's symbol

>>8122958
no we projected negative reviews months ago.

>>8125459
THE FUCKING SQUID IS GONE? I'm sad now. Okay. Time to treat this as "based on the comic" and not the movie version. Will still be awesome... yes... awesome... just... not the same. But awesome. Shit.

>>8122958
I'll be more skeptical of how the movie turns out but I am not worried. The experience of reading the book will never change for me.

>>8125459
so basically it was lobotomized and given a shiny coat of hollywood.
I knew it.

>>8125497
Holy shit, have you been living under a rock?

The new ending is just as good, albeit a little less seemingly random.

>>8125441
BECA---

UBOOOOAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

>>8125459

Those changes really don't bother me, although it is weird considering the fact that Hollis' death was shown in the Japanese trailer. There's no way they could have left everything in without jacking up the movie time too much for normal audiences. Director's cut will be as sweet as a piece of pie.

>>8125512
No more than Lord of the Rings.

>>8125527
I pretty much do live under a rock.
And I loved the batshit crazy 'a squid did it!' ending. That was just bloody perfect.

>>8125558
It was fucking brilliant for what it was, but you have to admit that it wouldn't work particularly well in a movie.

>>8123311
>>8123177

Damn good thing I have only seen the Director's Cut

>>8125545

I was actually talking to a friend of mine about this earlier. He's a huge fantasy/Tolkien geek, and he was comparing the Lord of the Rings movies with Watchmen. Sure, we might not be happy with some of the changes. But the crew is trying their best to remain faithful.

He also compared the Bakshi animated Lord of the Rings with the Sam Hamm script of Watchmen. "See? Look how many things went RIGHT in making this movie."

>>8125570

I don't have to admit shit. People take Watchmen too seriously.

>>8125529
I watched the ending again and it made me cry. Are you happy now?

>>8125591

All of the LOTR movies are retarded adaptations that insult the original material and literally mind-rape anyone with a little care for the books.

And it would make me rage if just like with LOTR, the Watchmen movie is gonna be a success and then praised by critics while being a shitty caricature of the original material.

If it's bad, I want it to fail. If it's good, I don't care if it's successful or not as long as I got to see it at least once.

I have no hopes for the good, THERE IS NO SQUID FOR THE SAKE OF GOD.

>>8126007
Squid's not important. Stop being a faggot.

>>8123177
I'm sorry, Blade Runner: Director's Cut still sucks.