Someone's killing our super heroes. The year is 1985 and super heroes have banded together to respond to the murder of one of their own. They soon uncover a sinister plot that puts all of humanity in grave danger. The super heroes fight to stop the impending doom only to find themselves a target for annihilation. But, if our super heroes are gone, who will save us?
Special Features: (Two-disc and Blu-ray only)
- Watchmen: Director's Cut
- The Phenomenon: The Comic that Changed Comics
- Watchmen: Video Journals (over 30 min)
- Music Video: My Chemical Romance Desolation Row
- Digital Copy - Theatrical Version
- Warner Bros. Maximum Movie Mode (Blu-ray only)
- Watchmen: Focus Points (over 30 minutes) (Blu-ray only)
- BD Live (Blu-ray only)
- Real Super Heroes, Real Vigilantes (Blu-ray only)
- Mechanics: Technologies of a Fantastic World (Blu-ray only)
Comments (21)
To leave a comment, please sign in or use
Facebook or Twitter
null507
The only way this flim could have been done any better would have been to slow it down and make it a high budget miniseries BUT that would have diminished it's impact. Snyder had many obsticals in his way with makeing this movie including a which originally ended with veidt dieing. The one thing I missed was the giant squid. but as soon as I saw it I new it would have been to much to ask for. In the end the Manhattan Scandal made the movie look more real.
3 years agoby @null507Flag
Daydream247
Aye umm..... Did he die?
3 years agoby @daydream247Flag
Daydream247
Well I never read the novels or comic books or whatever... I read the movie and i was lost but i still love it simply because of the darkness they brought to superheores... I just loved the style i guess... idk.
3 years agoby @daydream247Flag
-comrade-
I'm sorry, I didn't mean Sturm and Drang, I meant emotionality.
3 years agoby @taberjohnson18Flag
-comrade-
He captured the STATIC look, but his overly-violent interpretation of the action scenes was a *fail*.
He absolutely missed the spirit of the comic, which I know was multi-layered, but had nothing to do with the over-burgeoning, hot air filled bro-centirc semblance of sturm and drang.
It falls on the same pretexts that X3 did, namely, it lacks any of the gravitas exhibited by it's forebear (in WM's case, the GN).
3 years agoby @taberjohnson18Flag
T.Clark
"No one else could have done a better job than he. Anyone else would have just messed it up."
Well, while I loved Snyder's adaptation, to be fair...you don't know that.
3 years agoby @insertusernamehereFlag
Editboy
YES!! Thank you! I was hoping we'd see this scene in the film!! Don't care what anyone says, Zack Snyder perfectly captured the look and spirit of the graphic novel! No one else could have done a better job than he. Anyone else would have just messed it up. I can't wait for the Director's Cut next week!!
3 years agoby @editboyFlag
-comrade-
Snyder did the best HE could have done, because Watchmen was a perfect example of an idiot's best effort. It was not the best anyone could have done. If we could have seen ten different directors make this movie, Snyder's would have been in the bottom three.
3 years agoby @taberjohnson18Flag
Davon's Movieweb
Can't wait to get this on DVD!
3 years agoby @davon29Flag
Structure (ONSTRA)
Show1Stopper, JUST SHUT UP.
anyways, I see what comrade it saying, but you have to look for it that he cannot deliver all that in only 3 hours. IT IS IMPPOSSIBLE and that's a fact.
he did the best that could've been done. also, the actors did a good job except for some flops like silk specter I. except for these there was nothing wrong.
and AS i said, Zack cannot put only the story in and all the visuals. as said, nothing is perfect.
look at it this way:
at least arround 3 hours if he didn't focus on the visuals. audience who has no clue of the story will be bored and will get out of the theater.
which will take a good hour, the fans will be dissapointed cause the story wont be there.
you can't find any solution to that, expect to try and get the massege to everyone. there are other people who just want to get introduced to watchmen through the movie, you'll wanna lack their experience of watchmen by making it all boring to them.
++ people that are not fans are already dissapointed.
SO, I think he did a good job, not the best one out there, but a good job putting everything together.
AGAIN I SAY, it is the un-makable masterpiece.
3 years agoby @gaj1992Flag
Show1Stopper
this movie sucked big blue d*ck. 3 hours of my life i wont get back and 3$ i wont get back
3 years agoby @show1stopperFlag
T.Clark
*wrong move*
3 years agoby @insertusernamehereFlag
T.Clark
Okay, cool. We disagree. At least I know you're reasoning. The bottom line is that we're both fans of the novel with different opinions on the movie and judging by our long ass comments, people can assume we're both passionate about it.
I'm not gonna sit around wondering about what could have been. It was a great movie(in my opinion, and yes, bringing logic into a discussion based on opinion was the wrong movie. My bad).
There's comic adaptations I hate and wonder what could have been...but that's because they just plain sucked. I guess I just found the Watchmen movie more satisfying than you did and I felt I needed answers as to why you didn't find it satisfying.
3 years agoby @insertusernamehereFlag
-comrade-
I apologise for typos.
3 years agoby @taberjohnson18Flag
-comrade-
now*
"logical"*
3 years agoby @taberjohnson18Flag
-comrade-
Plus, the entire first half of this scene blows. It doesn't make sense. Maybe if Snyder had shown the Knots popping pills and then coming to the logical conclusion "Let's go beat up some old f*cker who clearly, if we're thinking logically, isn't the guy we're looking for at all." Instead they're just a bunch of sh*tty actors with dumb haircuts.
3 years agoby @taberjohnson18Flag
-comrade-
Oh, and don't try to make an argument about "logic" using an opinion:
OPINION[[He stayed as faithful as possible.]] OPINION
So, according to you, he should never be allowed to touch movies again because he "f*cked up" OPINION[[one movie that he didn't f*ck up.]]OPINION
That's logical.
And yes, it is logical. If you were a train conductor and you decided to "try things your way", using the tracks but going way too f*cking fast and jarring the train a lot, and you caused a train wreck, you bet your ass they'd never let you back in the seat.
3 years agoby @taberjohnson18Flag
-comrade-
Check your spelling, the line "you know you're sh*t" is an insult.
His staunch, stiff "faithfulness" to the "Altar" that fans put masterpieces like Watchmen on was his downfall. His rigid compliance to the dialogue and imagery notwithstanding, his movie missed the stronger dynamics of the book completely (missing opportunities to breathe life into the important characters in exchange for slow motion postcards from the book), and doing the worst thing a director in his position could have done: given a bunch of nerds who know very little about the actual process of making movies exactly what they asked for, a virtually shot-for-shot word-for-word (no matter that the actors should actually sound like they mean at least half of their lines) albeit with his bro-friendly spin a la 300. The speech on Mars with Dr. Manhattan was distorted and delivered so badly (not from an auditory perspective smartass) that I just slumped in my seat for the rest of the film, occasionally looking up to admire the good set design. But pretty images do not a good film make.
You say it was everything an adaptation could have been, but you're f*cking settling, and it's simply not true. A bad movie is a bad movie, regardless of how much worse it could have been. I'm sick of having to settle for the least of all evils.Okay, okay, perhaps words too strong for my real feelings. He pulled a "Snyder", meaning he overdid it with his bizarre hyper-violence fetish, really missing the point of the work itself, adapting it staunchly and stiffly, rather than interpreting it respectfully and fruitfully, and most important, cinematically. The static images were very reminiscent of Gibbon's work, but as soon as Dan Dreiberg put's that Knot's bone through his own arm, you can tell that Snyder doesn't get it. The violence in the book is much more of a Scorsese, hyper-real, no frills violence, for a f*cking reason, and Snyder ignored that to try and hook the 300/Frat Guy crowd. The movie reeks of overkill and styrofoam filmmaking, and how dare you tell me that I can't discount this as a proper Watchmen film. It simply was not good enough for me to consider it the appropriate counterpart to the GN. It was a try, and a mediocre one at that.
Game plan? Look at Zack Snyder's other work. He just likes comic violence, and has a decent vocabulary. He was not the right choice for this film.
Are you just a stupid f*cking kid or do you like being a fanboy shill and giving everything the automatic benefit of the doubt? What's your deal? Don't f*cking judge me for having credible opinions. The movie was lackluster. A 2 out of 5.
G.I. JOE looked okay in images, but as soon as I saw the Delta 6, as soon as I heard Wayans speak, in fact, as soon as I saw more than twenty seconds of the movie, I knew Stephen Sommers was doing the wrong thing. GI JOE was always supposed to be like a high-tech Dirty Dozen, but he's basically just made Transformers 2 with human weapons instead of alien robots. Now, who knows, the movie could be surprising and be fun and action-packed in the right way (though I doubt it), I don't know, I haven't seen it yet. But I have seen Watchmen. And I tell you know, it was a dud, which is an insult to the creative power behind Alan Moore's masterwork. I figured that From Hell didn't such an awful job, neither did V For Vendetta (in fact I think that's exactly what I had envisioned for Watchmen in terms of story adaptability. Something streamlined, but retaining all the core Watchmen elements). Snyder's movie is just as unimportant during the two minutes after the (yes, very cool and well done) opening sequence (that was actually not his idea, btw) as it is during the two minutes at the end. It is a self-negating film. I wasn't taken anywhere by it, neither were a lot of people. I guarantee you, anyone who says the BOOK didn't shift them or move them in some way just wasn't even trying. With this MOVIE, anyone who tried to invest themselves in it was severely let down.
You liked it. Cool. You know, there's this other movie of a similar calibre called X-Men 3. If Snyder's Wathcmen was your kind of film, I think X3's right up your alley.
3 years agoby @taberjohnson18Flag
T.Clark
Comrade, I really don't know what you wanted out of this movie. He stayed as faithful as possible. So, according to you, he should never be allowed to touch movies again because he "f*cked up" one movie that he didn't f*ck up. That's logical.
Seriously, you know you're sh*t, but Watchmen was as faithful as it could be. You're finding faults in it that don't need to be found. So you think he could have used more of his imagination instead of copying the book "page for page"(I'm not assuming, that's what you've said in a comment before). That's understandable. But you of all people should know that if he did that he'd have been given even more sh*t...and that opening credits sequence was all him. The exclusion of the fake alien invasion also took some balls and it worked out nicely.
You also say that it seemed like "a kid hopped up on Mountain Dew trying to explain Machiavelli." Okay...so just because he includes awesome visuals and extended fight scenes makes him the equivalent of a hyper toddler? That's bull sh*t. Watchmen's story wasn't just the focal point of it. It wouldn't have had as much as a lasting impact without Gibbons' art and color schemes, and Snyder's visual style was a perfect fit to make the film just as vibrant as the book. You say you can never look at this as a Watchmen movie...that's also bullsh*t. Like I said, it was faithful, and I know, I know...bringing the panels to life with actors means nothing if the actors don't do their jobs, but they did.
It wasn't a perfect movie. Silk Specter I was miscast(Carla Gugino did not suit that character at all and that's where the emotion lacked, because the character in the book was far more sympathetic). Some scenes were left out that probably could have made the film better(like more of Dr. Long). BUT, as a FILM ADAPTATION, it was everything it should have been. Could another director had made it more emotionally charaged? Maybe. Or they could have f*cked it up. At least Snyder stuck to the source material...even if you(wrongly) think it was the wrong way to stick to it. The novel will always be a masterpiece and Snyder made the right move to stick as faithful as possible while also using his own visual style. When fans like you wouldn't be satisfied no matter how a Watchmen movie was presented, it's probably in his best interest he stuck to his game plan.
By they way, a while ago you were saying that G.I. Joe: Rise of Cobra is what a G.I. Joe movie should be. Fun, exciting...all that stuff. Now you're saying it'll suck. Not a whole lot has changed. I mean, you might have changed you're mind, I do a lot...but I've gotta ask: did you just change your mind or do you like being more critical than you need to be(also the case with Snyder's Watchmen)? What's you're deal?
3 years agoby @insertusernamehereFlag
-comrade-
Zack Snyder has sh*t for brains. He should never be allowed to touch a movie of any real importance ever again. Go back to commercials and music videos, you f*cking hack.
3 years agoby @taberjohnson18Flag
-comrade-
I can see why they cut this, those Knots act like rejects from a sh*tty high school play. Baaaaaaaaaad acting. Like, worse than Akerman.
3 years agoby @taberjohnson18Flag