Film Score Monthly
FSM HOME MESSAGE BOARD FSM CDs FSM ONLINE RESOURCES FUN STUFF ABOUT US  SEARCH FSM   
Search Terms: 
Search Within:   search tips 
You must log in or register to post.
  Go to page:    
 Posted:   Mar 12, 2009 - 11:36 AM   
 By:   Sarge   (Member)

The meat cleaver is just way too over the top for that scene (and also screws up Rorschach's character a bit).


One could make an argument that they actually toned down the horror of that scene... didn't Rorschach burn down the entire building in the graphic novel, along with everyone (guilty and innocent) in it?

As for the overall violence, I accepted it in the ROBOCOP vein - it's Grand Guignol, and it didn't strike me as being any more violent than the source material.

 
 
 Posted:   Mar 12, 2009 - 1:15 PM   
 By:   Kev McGann   (Member)

I did something I have only done once before in a cinema. Fell asleep. The last time was Out Of Africa, back in the mid-eighties.
The whole thing reminded me of an over-long, drab, miserable, violently unfunny version of Mystery Men, which was much more enjoyable.
I though Push was bad last week, but this set new levels of shitdom. Bummer...and the year had started quite well, cinema-wise frown

 
 
 Posted:   Mar 12, 2009 - 3:18 PM   
 By:   antipodean   (Member)

I did something I have only done once before in a cinema. Fell asleep. The last time was Out Of Africa, back in the mid-eighties.
The whole thing reminded me of an over-long, drab, miserable, violently unfunny version of Mystery Men, which was much more enjoyable.
I though Push was bad last week, but this set new levels of shitdom. Bummer...and the year had started quite well, cinema-wise frown


This has been quite a commonly-heard reaction from a number of audiences - that the movie was boring, they (allegedly) fell asleep (allegedly), they wanted to or actually walked out, it was pretentious, it was too violent (even though it's rated R/18), etc.

I agree that the pacing and the build-up of suspense isn't like what you'd find in other movies, especially as you reach the final third. Personally I didn't notice it at the time, because I was so familiar with the novel and its episodic structure, and received just as much from the movie. I guess the ending would have been anti-climactic for someone who didn't know the original material.

But then that's the risk that the director accepted in trying to adapt what has long been regarded an unfilmable graphic novel - and as I've mentioned above, he had to make his decisions on what to cut and what to emphasize. His version will not please everybody (or anybody, possibly) but the credit is that at least he's tried, even if he stumbles along the way.

One reason why there has been such a diverse range of audience reactions and opinions from those who (allegedly) slept through it to those who enjoyed it also comes from the fact that the original material isn't simple. For those who know the graphic novel, precisely because it was so deftly crafted and layered so deeply, everyone came out with their own personal experience of what the commentary was about. If you gave this material to ten directors, you'd probably have had ten completely different films in terms of style and content - but for better or for worse, the only one we have is Zack Snyder's.

One final point. I agree some parts of the movie were slow - but it was never "boring". People are entitled to sleep in the cinema (it's their coin, after all) - but it also makes me wonder if audiences today have such short attention spans that they are unable (or unwilling) to invest in a film which chooses to take its time with exposition.

 
 
 Posted:   Mar 12, 2009 - 4:13 PM   
 By:   Kev McGann   (Member)

I know I am entitled to sleep in a cinema, as is anybody, but I don't pay my money to do this (I find my bed or sofa much more comfy).
I also DID sleep during this film, there is no allegedly about it. I was startled out of my slumber by a loud explosion or music blast. My attention span is pretty good, I usually hate super fast, no chance to focus, editing etc. But this thing just went by me. Zero attachement to any of the characters or situations and Richard Nixon's Cerano nose was unbelievable (but did get the only laughs from the audience).

 
 Posted:   Mar 12, 2009 - 9:25 PM   
 By:   Natrebo   (Member)

I wonder if the same people who can't watch this movie are the same who wouldn't be able to sit through KOYAANISQATSI?

I for one was thoroughly entertained by WATCHMEN... and I was bored to death by BENJAMIN BUTTON (even though the original music was better).

 
 Posted:   Mar 12, 2009 - 9:32 PM   
 By:   Jon A. Bell   (Member)

I wonder if the same people who can't watch this movie are the same who wouldn't be able to sit through KOYAANISQATSI?

I for one was thoroughly entertained by WATCHMEN... and I was bored to death by BENJAMIN BUTTON (even though the original music was better).


Other than the Glass music taken from the film, what does WATCHMEN have to do with KOYAANISQATSI? They're not even apples and oranges -- they're apples and a Ford Taurus.

And I somewhat liked WATCHMEN as I was watching it, but enjoyed BENJAMIN BUTTON more (and it has a much better score, as you say.)

I don't see what either film has to do with WATCHMEN, though.

 
 
 Posted:   Mar 12, 2009 - 10:03 PM   
 By:   antipodean   (Member)

I wonder if the same people who can't watch this movie are the same who wouldn't be able to sit through KOYAANISQATSI?

That's an interesting question. I think Koyaanisqatsi is visually very interesting and still holds up very well despite its age, even if some of its effects and techniques have since become part of the standard cinematographic repertoire.

Then again, Koyaanisqatsi has no "story" as such, no dialogue, no exposition, no "actors" in the usual sense, although it was intended (in its time, anyway) to be provocative and as an indictment of society - so who knows what the ADD generation will make of it.

 
 Posted:   Mar 12, 2009 - 11:59 PM   
 By:   Natrebo   (Member)


Other than the Glass music taken from the film, what does WATCHMEN have to do with KOYAANISQATSI? They're not even apples and oranges -- they're apples and a Ford Taurus.

And I somewhat liked WATCHMEN as I was watching it, but enjoyed BENJAMIN BUTTON more (and it has a much better score, as you say.)

I don't see what either film has to do with WATCHMEN, though.



I've heard boring tossed around in reviews of all of these films, but for me it only fits for BENJAMIN BUTTON - maybe I'm the only one, but that is my taste, and am honest when I say that.

 
 Posted:   Mar 13, 2009 - 5:16 AM   
 By:   Josh "Swashbuckler" Gizelt   (Member)

I never got the impression that these heroes were merely conventionally endowed humans. You *could* get that impression from the story, but I believe the first scene with The Comedian lays that perspective to rest.

This proves my point. The idiom through which Snyder portrayed violence gave you the completely wrong impression about these characters. The only person who is supposed to have any powers whatsoever is Jon, the rest are just regular people who have chosen crime fighting for their own (often suspect) reasons. By overpumping the action sequences, they all come across as supers; the stylization may have worked for 300, but it was completely inappropriate in this context.

One could make an argument that they actually toned down the horror of that scene... didn't Rorschach burn down the entire building in the graphic novel, along with everyone (guilty and innocent) in it?

Rorschach handcuffs the kidnapper to the stove, lights the fire and gives him a hacksaw, telling him that it would probably be faster to cut through his arm than the stove. This ties into his "let them burn" attitude as seen in the jailhouse. There is nobody else in the building when Rorschach burns it down; it is isolated (which is why the kidnapper was able to do what he did there).

The scene is cold, showing Rorschach completely detaching himself from humanity (the implication is that his partnership with Nite Owl II begins to deteriorate after this point). By turning it into a hot-blooded, furious murder it takes some of the complexity away from Rorschach. I understand that films are about streamlining a story, but this was a bit of characterization that came across to myself and many others as just having been wrong for Rorschach.

Keep in mind, on the whole I felt that the movie was a very good adaptation. The moments where changes happen more because of the director's issues than for dramatic reasons are made all the more infuriating for that reason.

Rape scene too much? Phhh - the rape scene from Clint Eastwood`s western was longer and more disturbing. This was an *attempted* rape scene. A Hangman character pleasantly (satisfyingly) pummels the perpetrator. I can`t understand a distaste for this bit of theater. Oh well.

In the book, there are only a few blows... Sally can, after all, take care of herself. The implication was that part of the reason why Blake was able to go as far as he did was because she was just shocked that he would be doing this.

 
 Posted:   Mar 13, 2009 - 8:26 AM   
 By:   Mr. Jack   (Member)

Rorschach handcuffs the kidnapper to the stove, lights the fire and gives him a hacksaw, telling him that it would probably be faster to cut through his arm than the stove.

Which reminds of the last scene in the original Mad Max.

 
 Posted:   Mar 15, 2009 - 8:11 AM   
 By:   Josh "Swashbuckler" Gizelt   (Member)

Rorschach handcuffs the kidnapper to the stove, lights the fire and gives him a hacksaw, telling him that it would probably be faster to cut through his arm than the stove.

Which reminds of the last scene in the original Mad Max.


Yes indeed... hollowed out vigilantes out for vengeance seem to think alike...

 
 Posted:   Mar 16, 2009 - 7:14 AM   
 By:   Sir Patrick Spens   (Member)

Veering back to topic a bit, I felt the songs were way more effective than the score. Seeing as it's set back in 85, I kinda wish the score had more of a new wavey or perhaps an Andrew Powell/Alan Parsons quality about it, but that might've proven a bit too distracting...
Solid flick though. Even glad they dropped the squid (which was gross).

 
 
 Posted:   Aug 2, 2009 - 3:36 AM   
 By:   Thor   (Member)

Wow, what a discussion this film spurred a few months ago. Lots of dedicated fans here, apparently. I only got around to it yesterday, and FYI, I have never read the graphic novel.

As far as the violence discussion is concerned, I had no problem with that whatsoever. Why? Because it was well-adapted into the DEFINED UNIVERSE that this was - a weird, retro-fitted landscape of alternate realities and time epochs thrown together, wherein corrupted morals rule the day. It's a FANTASY. Compare the violence here (and the rape scene, for example) with the realistic violence and the Monica Belluci rape scene in IRREVERSIBLE, this comes off as pure Tele Tubbies in comparison! It's all about context.

Other than that, it was a pretty good flick, although a little too confused and "messy" as a mythic tale, but that may be leftovers from the original novel, I don't know.

Music was appropriate and cool. Was that an ESCAPE FROM N.Y./Carpenter groove I heard in some of the prison scenes?

 
 Posted:   Aug 2, 2009 - 7:50 AM   
 By:   Shaun Rutherford   (Member)

I watched this movie with the air conditioning on and didn't hear any of the score at all until they went to fly that stupid Owl ship.

 
 
 Posted:   Aug 2, 2009 - 7:53 AM   
 By:   Thor   (Member)

I watched this movie with the air conditioning on and didn't hear any of the score at all until they went to fly that stupid Owl ship.

Was it an owl ship? I thought it was a pair of binoculars, as in "watchmen", you know.

 
 Posted:   Aug 2, 2009 - 8:14 AM   
 By:   mastadge   (Member)

It belonged to Night Owl.

 
 Posted:   Aug 2, 2009 - 9:35 AM   
 By:   Hester_Prin   (Member)

The evolution (or dissolving) of commentaries on this topic is fun to read.

I read the "illustrated novel" for Watchmen and found it a long drawn out, confusing, badly drawn and indulgent mess.... yet out of curiousity I went to the film with a friend. We both left the theatre and after a long silence agreed it wasn't a film worth making or seeing. The violence seemed paramount over plot or even the slightest character development. Not my kind of film, obvously. I don't remember an ounce of music.

I did see 300, and even with its stylized almost cartoon violence, enjoyed the film. It had balance. It had its tender moments (which I discovered were not in the original 'illustrated novel'). As to Bates score, I liked it... found its exotic quality fascinating. I never care if someone steals, borrows, or interprolates music. It is the final product that counts. It seems that many here are prepared to dislike music based completely on lack of originality.

Vaughan Williams' Fantasia on a Theme by Thomas Tallas, Six English Folk songs for piano & violin.... Holst.... Copland... Ravel.... Ibert.... endless composers of old lifted ditties from other sources with wonderful results.

And as I wrote somewhere before, John Williams' has always laughed that he lifted from numerous sources for Star Wars.

Horner? Well, bless his heart for learning how to cut back on his work load. His theme for Titanic even appearing in Legends of the Fall.

Who was it that said if you are going to steal, steal from the best? In the classic film THE RED SHOES there is a line: "It is worse to steal, than to be stolen from." It was meant to bring comfort to a young composer whose teacher lifted his work for a concert piece. Da Vinci (before he became encoded) said something like, "Create a masterpiece, someone steals the idea; then come up with another one."

;-)

 
 Posted:   Aug 2, 2009 - 9:55 AM   
 By:   David Kessler   (Member)



Haven't heard it but the continual lynching of Bates and other composers is clearly a sign that film score fans are angry, socially maladjusted (mainly) guys who have way too much time on their hands. wink


I Agree
Puny whining XXXXs that do not have anything better to do with their lives and think they can do it better themselves...
Enjoy Bates music for what it is and Doomsday as a fun tribute to Mad Max/28 days later etc...
Stop complaining when nothing important comes out of you people more than nagging on composers music.
Love it or hate it, it´s your choice. Stop listening to a certain composer if you don´t like him , but quit complaining like a child...

 
 
 Posted:   Aug 2, 2009 - 10:49 AM   
 By:   Suicide is imminent   (Member)



Haven't heard it but the continual lynching of Bates and other composers is clearly a sign that film score fans are angry, socially maladjusted (mainly) guys who have way too much time on their hands. wink


I Agree
Puny whining XXXXs that do not have anything better to do with their lives and think they can do it better themselves...
Enjoy Bates music for what it is and Doomsday as a fun tribute to Mad Max/28 days later etc...
Stop complaining when nothing important comes out of you people more than nagging on composers music.
Love it or hate it, it´s your choice. Stop listening to a certain composer if you don´t like him , but quit complaining like a child...


Hm....

So people are not allowed to state their dislike for a film score on a board that's set up for people to....give their opinion on film scores. Huh. As for people wasting their lives, well, again, the whole point of this place is to discuss film scores, not to try and get laid or get a promotion of solve world hunger or (finally) try and prevent my impending impotency. Finally, I might not know how to put together a car but if I get in one that doesn't work properly for me I'll know it and have a right to tell someone, so there goes your whole "if you can't do better don't complain" shenanigans.

The end - I win!!! Better luck next time, my brother in life-wasting. (insert winky smiley face to indicate that this last sentence was just a bit of tomfoolery and nothing really vindictive here)

 
 Posted:   Aug 2, 2009 - 1:13 PM   
 By:   David Kessler   (Member)



Haven't heard it but the continual lynching of Bates and other composers is clearly a sign that film score fans are angry, socially maladjusted (mainly) guys who have way too much time on their hands. wink


I Agree
Puny whining XXXXs that do not have anything better to do with their lives and think they can do it better themselves...
Enjoy Bates music for what it is and Doomsday as a fun tribute to Mad Max/28 days later etc...
Stop complaining when nothing important comes out of you people more than nagging on composers music.
Love it or hate it, it´s your choice. Stop listening to a certain composer if you don´t like him , but quit complaining like a child...


Hm....

So people are not allowed to state their dislike for a film score on a board that's set up for people to....give their opinion on film scores. Huh. As for people wasting their lives, well, again, the whole point of this place is to discuss film scores, not to try and get laid or get a promotion of solve world hunger or (finally) try and prevent my impending impotency. Finally, I might not know how to put together a car but if I get in one that doesn't work properly for me I'll know it and have a right to tell someone, so there goes your whole "if you can't do better don't complain" shenanigans.

The end - I win!!! Better luck next time, my brother in life-wasting. (insert winky smiley face to indicate that this last sentence was just a bit of tomfoolery and nothing really vindictive here)


BUT my fellow soundtrackfan...Many people dont discuss, they form some kind of hatred for a composer and continue bashing this composer just for the hell of it, and it doesnt matter which soundtrack it is, only if the composers name are on it...
If there could be a soundtrack mob, I see many people joining it and that is sad...
If you do not like it, you are entitled to say so, but starting a hate campaign is ridiculous i.m.o
Thats what Im stating and Im sticking to it smile

 
You must log in or register to post.
  Go to page:    
© 2014 Film Score Monthly. All Rights Reserved.