@Rodafowa

While I don’t disagree with most of what you’re saying, the blood under the door in the prison isn’t a good example because that IS from the comic.

3) The point that Watchmen is a deconstructionist work is lost on people. This is a real world, for some degree of real, with costumed crimefighters. Harsh beatings and curb stompings in real life can cripple and kill… what, do they think this is a comic book?

I think you’re absolutely right that that was the comic’s intent. I’m not completely convinced that was the film’s intent, however.

Other than Zach Snyder’s massive hackery and general BIG STAMPY BOOTS direction (YES, of COURSE we needed to see the blood pooling under the washroom door after Rorschach kills Big Figure because WE HADN’T WORKED OUT THAT WAS WHAT HAD HAPPENED UNTIL WE SAW THAT) my main issue was Ozymandias. In the comic, he’s carefully portrayed as the most balanced of all of the masks – he’s a rock-star type, he’s a philanthrophist, he’s warm and pleasant and down-to-earth, if somewhat lonely and isolated. So his role in the plot comes as a massive kick in the gut. In the film he’s obviously a cold, superior corporate schemer and so the twist loses a lot of its impact. I get the feeling that Rorschach’s initial visit to him in the comic was given to Dan instead to try to show Ozy being decent and friendly, but it didn’t remotely convince. Grrrrr.

Or perhaps Rorschach… still, it amuses me.

Daniel, on the other hand came out a lot better in the movie. He went from being a complete doormat to effectively being the moral compass of the story.

There’s not really anything that was changed in the movie that I take real issue with but I do wonder about how they moved some of the dialog to different characters. Once I finish re-reading it, I may post about that.

Also Veidt is John Galt. ;)

I’m OK with the ironic pop songs, but happy, bouncy-sounding ironic pop songs (despite the German lyrics) not all that much.

I think they made Blake look a lot worse and Rorschach look a lot nicer than in the novel – the scene where Silk Spectre explains that Blake just didn’t get what he’d done wrong is absent, and so you’re left with the impression that, yeah, she just got drunk or lonely or something.

I PAID TO SEE A GIANT BLUE WANG, DAMMIT.

I give them points for ‘First We Take Manhattan…’

3) The point that Watchmen is a deconstructionist work is lost on people. This is a real world, for some degree of real, with costumed crimefighters. Harsh beatings and curb stompings in real life can cripple and kill… what, do they think this is a comic book?

Not to mention the fact that Blake is meant to be seen as an absolutely disgusting person… specifically so his reaction to the plot has the meaning it does.

7) Hey, his blue member alternated between visible and covered, even in the comic. They were true to source material here. Works for me.