list http://www.spout.com/ Recent community activity around Watchmen on Spout Copyright 2005-9 Spout, LLC Spout RSS http://www.spout.com/images/SpoutLogoRSS.jpg http://www.spout.com/ 136 30 http://www.spout.com/films/Watchmen/284896/default.aspx Title: Watchmen
Year: 2009
Director: Zack Snyder
Plot: 300's Zack Snyder brings Alan Moore and Dave Gibbons' critically acclaimed comic book Watchmen to the big screen, courtesy of DC Comics and Warner Bros. Pictures. Set in an alternate universe circa 1985, the film's world is a highly unstable one where a nuclear war is imminent between America and Russia. Superheroes have long been made to hang up their tights thanks to the government-sponsored Keene Act, but that all changes with the death of The Comedian (Jeffrey Dean Morgan), a robust ex-hero commando whose mysterious free fall out a window perks the interest of one of the country's last remaining vigilantes, Rorschach (Jackie Earle Haley). His investigation leads him to caution many of his other former costumed colleagues, including Dr. Manhattan, Night Owl (Patrick Wilson), Ozymandias (Matthew Goode), Sally Jupiter (Carla Gugino), and her daughter, The Silk Spectre (Malin Akerman). Heralded for bringing the world of superheroes into the literary world, Watchmen gave the super-powered mythos a real-life grounding that had been missing in mainstream comics to that point. The film adaptation had languished in one form of development hell or another for years after the book's release, with various directors on and off the project, including Terry Gilliam, David Hayter, and Darren Aronofsky, as well as Paul Greengrass, whose eventual dismissal stemmed from budget conflicts with the studio. ~ Jeremy Wheeler, All Movie Guide
Times Tagged: 139
Number of Lists: 30
Number of blog posts: 45
Number of discussion threads: 14
SpoutRating: 3
]]>Mon, 24 Aug 2009 17:08:10 GMTWatchmen2009Zack Snyder<a href="http://www.spout.com/films/268461/detail.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>300</a>'s <a href="http://www.spout.com/players/P___367818/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Zack Snyder</a> brings Alan Moore and Dave Gibbons' critically acclaimed comic book Watchmen to the big screen, courtesy of DC Comics and Warner Bros. Pictures. Set in an alternate universe circa 1985, the film's world is a highly unstable one where a nuclear war is imminent between America and Russia. Superheroes have long been made to hang up their tights thanks to the government-sponsored Keene Act, but that all changes with the death of The Comedian (<a href="http://www.spout.com/players/P____50599/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Jeffrey Dean Morgan</a>), a robust ex-hero commando whose mysterious free fall out a window perks the interest of one of the country's last remaining vigilantes, Rorschach (<a href="http://www.spout.com/players/P____29701/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Jackie Earle Haley</a>). His investigation leads him to caution many of his other former costumed colleagues, including Dr. Manhattan, Night Owl (<a href="http://www.spout.com/players/P___356977/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Patrick Wilson</a>), Ozymandias (<a href="http://www.spout.com/players/P___339051/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Matthew Goode</a>), Sally Jupiter (<a href="http://www.spout.com/players/P____29147/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Carla Gugino</a>), and her daughter, The Silk Spectre (<a href="http://www.spout.com/players/P___438020/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Malin Akerman</a>). Heralded for bringing the world of superheroes into the literary world, Watchmen gave the super-powered mythos a real-life grounding that had been missing in mainstream comics to that point. The film adaptation had languished in one form of development hell or another for years after the book's release, with various directors on and off the project, including <a href="http://www.spout.com/players/P____91577/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Terry Gilliam</a>, David Hayter, and <a href="http://www.spout.com/players/P___235045/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Darren Aronofsky</a>, as well as <a href="http://www.spout.com/players/P____92504/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Paul Greengrass</a>, whose eventual dismissal stemmed from budget conflicts with the studio. ~ Jeremy Wheeler, All Movie Guide139Tag Target (>10)3045143http://www.spout.com/ProductImages/s284896.jpghttp://www.spout.com/films/Watchmen/284896/default.aspxFilm http://www.spout.com/blogs/risselada/archive/2009/11/4/44295.aspx Post By: Risselada
Post To: Risselada Blog
Post Date: 11/4/2009 1:53:54 PM
Body: I have asked certain users on Spout to recommend a movie to me. I will be blogging about these films as I watch them. This film was recommended to me by Tenenbaums. Breaking Away Tenenbaums has been a pretty active blogger on this site as well, so I was glad to get a recommendation from him. Breaking Away was not a film I had not really heard of before. Maybe I briefly noticed it once amongst a filmography list of director Peter Yates, but I did not realize at all that it featured Dennis Quaid and Daniel Stern in such young roles. Honestly, I didn't recognize either of the actors when they first showed up on screen. Stern looks like the perfect dork. I like that they cast such goofy looking kids instead of just trying to find the attractive ones (well apart from Quaid). Jackie Earle Haley is one of the strangest looking guys around. Check him out as an adult as a brilliant piece of casting in Watchmen. Unfortunately I found the dialogue really horrible, and the plot and pacing quite boring. The main character Dave's constant put on Italian dialect was not endearing to me. In fact it was quite grating. And Paul Dooley as his antagonistic dad was just as horrible to listen to. It was so boring and frustrating to hear them read this script as they went at it. The actual climax with the final bike race is the best part and has some wonderful moments. I can see why people would rank it up there as one of the greatest sports movie moments. But everything leading up to it was so long and boring that it wasn't enough for me to say I liked the movie. I do appreciate the recommendation though! Rating: 5/10
]]>Wed, 04 Nov 2009 18:53:54 GMTRisseladaRisselada Blog11/4/2009 1:53:54 PMI have asked certain users on Spout to recommend a movie to me. I will be blogging about these films as I watch them. This film was recommended to me by Tenenbaums. Breaking Away Tenenbaums has been a pretty active blogger on this site as well, so I was glad to get a recommendation from him. Breaking Away was not a film I had not really heard of before. Maybe I briefly noticed it once amongst a filmography list of director Peter Yates, but I did not realize at all that it featured Dennis Quaid and Daniel Stern in such young roles. Honestly, I didn't recognize either of the actors when they first showed up on screen. Stern looks like the perfect dork. I like that they cast such goofy looking kids instead of just trying to find the attractive ones (well apart from Quaid). Jackie Earle Haley is one of the strangest looking guys around. Check him out as an adult as a brilliant piece of casting in Watchmen. Unfortunately I found the dialogue really horrible, and the plot and pacing quite boring. The main character Dave's constant put on Italian dialect was not endearing to me. In fact it was quite grating. And Paul Dooley as his antagonistic dad was just as horrible to listen to. It was so boring and frustrating to hear them read this script as they went at it. The actual climax with the final bike race is the best part and has some wonderful moments. I can see why people would rank it up there as one of the greatest sports movie moments. But everything leading up to it was so long and boring that it wasn't enough for me to say I liked the movie. I do appreciate the recommendation though! Rating: 5/10 http://www.spout.com/blogs/joem18b/archive/2009/8/5/43427.aspx Post By: joem18b
Post To: joem18b Blog
Post Date: 8/5/2009 7:54:43 PM
Body: After I watch a movie, I read some reviews about it to find out whether I liked it or not. A.O. Scott does a nice job on Watchmen, but he tells me that I didn't like it as much as I thought I did. The gist of his argument seems to be that Zack Snyder brought the 80s graphic novel faithfully to the screen and that this was not a good thing: that the ideas in the book are dated and jejune. Scott's review is so well-written that I felt ashamed about writing one of mine own, this one in fact, and I put it aside unfinished.But wait a minute. Of course the ideas in the book are dated. The ideas in Pride and Prejudice are dated. So what? And of course the ideas are the sort that would appeal to a teen reader. Watchmen was born as a series of comic books. A.O., grow down.But then, I liked "300," so what do I know?A.O. also calls out the primary sex scene in the movie as the worst of the year. Evidently A.O. steers clear of 99% of the DVDs on Blockbuster's shelves. At any rate, what I saw in that scene was an ineffective Snyder attempt to maintain Watchmen's PG-13 rating, an attempt doomed from the gitgo by the movie's blue penis.That blue penis. Over and over before watching the movie I heard about the blue pee pee. I was expecting gratuitous closeups of the prosthesis. I was expecting an azure member of a size worthy of the movie's only true superhero. What th... The little guy was as unobtrusive in the movie as it was in the book. U.S. society is messed up WRT the phallus. Judd Apatow ran a couple of focus groups while making Funny People, to discover how many dick jokes in the movie would be too many dick jokes. The answer: you can't have too many. And what is a man's member a member of anyway?Like Risselada and some other Spouters, I read Watchmen just before watching it. I like to read a book and then see the movie. If the movie heads off in some wrongheaded direction, I might shake my head philosophically, but my bile is not wont to rise when it happens. A shrug is sufficient. For example, Kiera Knightly as Elizabeth Bennet did not do it for me, but I have moved on. I do not brood. Kiera, go back to POTC before Jane Austen comes back from the grave to haunt you. OK, maybe a little brooding eventuated, but hey, Elizabeth Garvie in the role will suffice for me until Pride and Prejudice is remade yet again, which it will be.In the 60s, I went gaga over Fowles' The Magus. But then the movie version became my biggest book-to-movie disappointment. On the other hand, I read Robert Parker's Appaloosa a while back and believe me, Ed Harris is the perfect Virgil Cole in the movie version. Ditto Tom Selleck as Parker's Jesse Stone. Perhaps a reader who found Watchmen magical in the 80s and then waited twenty years for the movie might have problems with it, though I'm willing to bet that most of those folks - I've got no data - loved the movie. Anyway, I liked Watchmen the movie better than Watchmen the graphic novel. Snyder left out the pirates and other boring stuff and stuck to the main line, getting it all in, or so it seemed to me. Fresh faces in his casting choices, a big plus. I watched the movie in pieces, as if it were a mini-series, so it didn't seem to run long. And for me, if not for A. O. Scott, adding a collection of 80s tunes to the soundtrack tweaked the experience in a way not possible to a silent book. Even if those tunes have been played to death, which they have been.There has been conversation about the excessive violence in the movie. Sorry, I must have been distracted by Maggie Gyllenhaal getting blown up in the Dark Knight, and The Joker's pencil to the eyeball, and Saws I, II, III, IV, and V, and folks checking into hostels never to check out again, whatever, so that I missed the fact that Rorschach in prison got a little extreme. He does splash hot oil in a dude's face, but see, I just watched Trailer Park of Terror, in which the victim is lowered whole into hot oil like a very large freedom fry. At any rate, Snyder had obviously given up on his PG-13 quest by the time he cut together the prison fight scenes.Near the end of the book and movie, Dr. Manhattan tells Ozymandias that he's leaving for a galaxy where things aren't so complicated. The average galaxy contains 100 billion stars and there are about 100 billion galaxies in the visible universe. I'm guessing that one collection of 100 billion stars is pretty much the same as another. Stick to your own galaxy, blue guy! Remember, whereever you go, there you are. And about creating some humans of your own: who do you think you are, God? Fundamentalists are outraged! God is not blue! And if you saw His pee pee...!For recent urban total destruction, the late scenes in Watchmen are ok (reimagined from the original), but I liked the devastation in "Knowing" better - speaking of freedom fries.Finally, for your consideration, the beginning and end of the Watchmen review found on "Christian Spotlight on Entertainment." A reviewer with his feet in the mud and head in the clouds:"For conservative Christian audiences, the prospect of seeing Zack Snyder’s “Watchmen” is a non-starter. There is male frontal nudity (albeit blue and animated); numerous instances of blasphemy; shots of women’s breasts; gory violence; and a nude love-making scene... Watchmen is a long viewing. It is sometimes ponderous, grisly, and confusing, but for those who have read the book and have reasonable expectations of what can be done in cinematic form, it is an instant classic — a tour de force which asks universal questions through comic book characters. For Christians, Dr. Manhattan represents the seeker who questions the existence of God and the meaning of life. His questions are in part answered in the realization that life is a miracle, “gold from air,” unexplained by the processes of nature. When the movie is over, the character that viewers will be most interested in is Dr. Manhattan and his journey to another galaxy, a journey he wouldn’t make if he were just interested in matter."
]]>Wed, 05 Aug 2009 23:54:43 GMTjoem18bjoem18b Blog8/5/2009 7:54:43 PMAfter I watch a movie, I read some reviews about it to find out whether I liked it or not. A.O. Scott does a nice job on Watchmen, but he tells me that I didn't like it as much as I thought I did. The gist of his argument seems to be that Zack Snyder brought the 80s graphic novel faithfully to the screen and that this was not a good thing: that the ideas in the book are dated and jejune. Scott's review is so well-written that I felt ashamed about writing one of mine own, this one in fact, and I put it aside unfinished.But wait a minute. Of course the ideas in the book are dated. The ideas in Pride and Prejudice are dated. So what? And of course the ideas are the sort that would appeal to a teen reader. Watchmen was born as a series of comic books. A.O., grow down.But then, I liked "300," so what do I know?A.O. also calls out the primary sex scene in the movie as the worst of the year. Evidently A.O. steers clear of 99% of the DVDs on Blockbuster's shelves. At any rate, what I saw in that scene was an ineffective Snyder attempt to maintain Watchmen's PG-13 rating, an attempt doomed from the gitgo by the movie's blue penis.That blue penis. Over and over before watching the movie I heard about the blue pee pee. I was expecting gratuitous closeups of the prosthesis. I was expecting an azure member of a size worthy of the movie's only true superhero. What th... The little guy was as unobtrusive in the movie as it was in the book. U.S. society is messed up WRT the phallus. Judd Apatow ran a couple of focus groups while making Funny People, to discover how many dick jokes in the movie would be too many dick jokes. The answer: you can't have too many. And what is a man's member a member of anyway?Like Risselada and some other Spouters, I read Watchmen just before watching it. I like to read a book and then see the movie. If the movie heads off in some wrongheaded direction, I might shake my head philosophically, but my bile is not wont to rise when it happens. A shrug is sufficient. For example, Kiera Knightly as Elizabeth Bennet did not do it for me, but I have moved on. I do not brood. Kiera, go back to POTC before Jane Austen comes back from the grave to haunt you. OK, maybe a little brooding eventuated, but hey, Elizabeth Garvie in the role will suffice for me until Pride and Prejudice is remade yet again, which it will be.In the 60s, I went gaga over Fowles' The Magus. But then the movie version became my biggest book-to-movie disappointment. On the other hand, I read Robert Parker's Appaloosa a while back and believe me, Ed Harris is the perfect Virgil Cole in the movie version. Ditto Tom Selleck as Parker's Jesse Stone. Perhaps a reader who found Watchmen magical in the 80s and then waited twenty years for the movie might have problems with it, though I'm willing to bet that most of those folks - I've got no data - loved the movie. Anyway, I liked Watchmen the movie better than Watchmen the graphic novel. Snyder left out the pirates and other boring stuff and stuck to the main line, getting it all in, or so it seemed to me. Fresh faces in his casting choices, a big plus. I watched the movie in pieces, as if it were a mini-series, so it didn't seem to run long. And for me, if not for A. O. Scott, adding a collection of 80s tunes to the soundtrack tweaked the experience in a way not possible to a silent book. Even if those tunes have been played to death, which they have been.There has been conversation about the excessive violence in the movie. Sorry, I must have been distracted by Maggie Gyllenhaal getting blown up in the Dark Knight, and The Joker's pencil to the eyeball, and Saws I, II, III, IV, and V, and folks checking into hostels never to check out again, whatever, so that I missed the fact that Rorschach in prison got a little extreme. He does splash hot oil in a dude's face, but see, I just watched Trailer Park of Terror, in which the victim is lowered whole into hot oil like a very large freedom fry. At any rate, Snyder had obviously given up on his PG-13 quest by the time he cut together the prison fight scenes.Near the end of the book and movie, Dr. Manhattan tells Ozymandias that he's leaving for a galaxy where things aren't so complicated. The average galaxy contains 100 billion stars and there are about 100 billion galaxies in the visible universe. I'm guessing that one collection of 100 billion stars is pretty much the same as another. Stick to your own galaxy, blue guy! Remember, whereever you go, there you are. And about creating some humans of your own: who do you think you are, God? Fundamentalists are outraged! God is not blue! And if you saw His pee pee...!For recent urban total destruction, the late scenes in Watchmen are ok (reimagined from the original), but I liked the devastation in "Knowing" better - speaking of freedom fries.Finally, for your consideration, the beginning and end of the Watchmen review found on "Christian Spotlight on Entertainment." A reviewer with his feet in the mud and head in the clouds:"For conservative Christian audiences, the prospect of seeing Zack Snyder&rsquo;s &ldquo;Watchmen&rdquo; is a non-starter. There is male frontal nudity (albeit blue and animated); numerous instances of blasphemy; shots of women&rsquo;s breasts; gory violence; and a nude love-making scene... Watchmen is a long viewing. It is sometimes ponderous, grisly, and confusing, but for those who have read the book and have reasonable expectations of what can be done in cinematic form, it is an instant classic &mdash; a tour de force which asks universal questions through comic book characters. For Christians, Dr. Manhattan represents the seeker who questions the existence of God and the meaning of life. His questions are in part answered in the realization that life is a miracle, &ldquo;gold from air,&rdquo; unexplained by the processes of nature. When the movie is over, the character that viewers will be most interested in is Dr. Manhattan and his journey to another galaxy, a journey he wouldn&rsquo;t make if he were just interested in matter." http://www.spout.com/blogs/slerner/archive/2009/7/24/43254.aspx Post By: slerner
Post To: slerner Blog
Post Date: 7/24/2009 2:33:02 PM
Body: Out this week is Zack Snyder's 186 minute cut of comic recluse Alan Moore's graphic novel. Moore refusing to watch any film adaption of his work, should really take a step back and let this one in. This film is about layers and the anti-hero. Really something special.
]]>Fri, 24 Jul 2009 18:33:02 GMTslernerslerner Blog7/24/2009 2:33:02 PM Out this week is Zack Snyder's 186 minute cut of comic recluse Alan Moore's graphic novel. Moore refusing to watch any film adaption of his work, should really take a step back and let this one in. This film is about layers and the anti-hero. Really something special. http://www.spout.com/blogs/risselada/archive/2009/4/29/41879.aspx Post By: Risselada
Post To: Risselada Blog
Post Date: 4/29/2009 12:50:04 PM
Body: Watchmen Watchmen was the first graphic novel I'd ever read. I read it just a few weeks before the movie came out amongst the craze and stacks of the novel in plain view at every book store you would enter. I actually found the novel to be quite exciting at first. Although it became quite convoluted at times, I was hoping it would wrap up nicely. Unfortunately I found many aspects of the climax to be a but absurd and unexpected in a way out of congruity with the rest of the book. I actually somewhat preferred some of the changes made in the climax of the film. Anyways, the film was about what I expected. My favorite part of the book was Rorschach and he was also probably my favorite part of the film. I can't say the acting was great, but it's usually rare when it is in these big comic book movies. It did keep me engaged through the long running time though. I'm not sure if that was because I had already read it and was curious about how it would play out in the film. I was shocked not by the fact that the violence and sexual imagery was boosted up even beyond what was shown in the book, but by the fact that despite this they decided to remove all instances of smoking. The book shows this strange alternate reality where people are smoking these odd kind of pipes with a spherical end. It's kind of strange to me that someone clearly made a decision to censor the original content in a way that the smoking would be removed but decided alternately to beef up the violence and sex. I can understand being concerned about making smoking look appealing to children, but the very fact that these other elements were present gave it an R rating which clearly meant the film was not intended for children. I'm so confused. Rating: 7/10
]]>Wed, 29 Apr 2009 16:50:04 GMTRisseladaRisselada Blog4/29/2009 12:50:04 PMWatchmen Watchmen was the first graphic novel I'd ever read. I read it just a few weeks before the movie came out amongst the craze and stacks of the novel in plain view at every book store you would enter. I actually found the novel to be quite exciting at first. Although it became quite convoluted at times, I was hoping it would wrap up nicely. Unfortunately I found many aspects of the climax to be a but absurd and unexpected in a way out of congruity with the rest of the book. I actually somewhat preferred some of the changes made in the climax of the film. Anyways, the film was about what I expected. My favorite part of the book was Rorschach and he was also probably my favorite part of the film. I can't say the acting was great, but it's usually rare when it is in these big comic book movies. It did keep me engaged through the long running time though. I'm not sure if that was because I had already read it and was curious about how it would play out in the film. I was shocked not by the fact that the violence and sexual imagery was boosted up even beyond what was shown in the book, but by the fact that despite this they decided to remove all instances of smoking. The book shows this strange alternate reality where people are smoking these odd kind of pipes with a spherical end. It's kind of strange to me that someone clearly made a decision to censor the original content in a way that the smoking would be removed but decided alternately to beef up the violence and sex. I can understand being concerned about making smoking look appealing to children, but the very fact that these other elements were present gave it an R rating which clearly meant the film was not intended for children. I'm so confused. Rating: 7/10 http://www.spout.com/blogs/kadams21/archive/2009/4/9/41520.aspx Post By: KAdams21
Post To: KAdams21 Blog
Post Date: 4/9/2009 2:38:48 AM
Body: "Watchmen" is adapted from the groundbreaking graphic novel that doesn't make itself look like the typical comic-book movie nor does it pretend to be something that it's not. Legendary Pictures (who also produced "300" & "The Dark Knight") has found it niche with films of such caliber and this film's no exception. You don't have to read the graphic novel first to enhance the viewing experience (but it helps), the performances (particularly from Jackie Earle Haley & Billy Crudup) are flawless & the visual effects are spectacular, even for a hard-charging R-rated movie. "Watchmen" delivers on so many levels.
]]>Thu, 09 Apr 2009 06:38:48 GMTKAdams21KAdams21 Blog4/9/2009 2:38:48 AM"Watchmen" is adapted from the groundbreaking graphic novel that doesn't make itself look like the typical comic-book movie nor does it pretend to be something that it's not. Legendary Pictures (who also produced "300" &amp; "The Dark Knight") has found it niche with films of such caliber and this film's no exception. You don't have to read the graphic novel first to enhance the viewing experience (but it helps), the performances (particularly from Jackie Earle Haley &amp; Billy Crudup) are flawless &amp; the visual effects are spectacular, even for a hard-charging R-rated movie. "Watchmen" delivers on so many levels. http://www.spout.com/blogs/digby00/archive/2009/3/20/41147.aspx Post By: digby00
Post To: digby00 Blog
Post Date: 3/20/2009 11:22:18 AM
Body: Given the near 20 years of studio squabbling and failed attempts to translate Alan Moore’s masterpiece to the big screen, Watchmen could have turned out much worse. Zach Snyder somewhat surprisingly sticks incredibly close to the source material, which ends up being the film’s greatest strength and weakness. The two and a half hour spectacle kicks off with a healthy dose of action and an opening credits sequence to Bob Dylan’s The Times They Are a Changin, which is arguably the coolest and richest part of the film. I won’t spoil the surprises, but we get to see what nearly every defining historical and cultural moment of the Cold War era looks like in Moore’s alternate history. The only problem is those who have not read the novel will likely be lost on half the references, a flaw that recurs often throughout the well-layered story...Read the rest of this critic's review here!
]]>Fri, 20 Mar 2009 15:22:18 GMTdigby00digby00 Blog3/20/2009 11:22:18 AMGiven the near 20 years of studio squabbling and failed attempts to translate Alan Moore&rsquo;s masterpiece to the big screen, Watchmen could have turned out much worse. Zach Snyder somewhat surprisingly sticks incredibly close to the source material, which ends up being the film&rsquo;s greatest strength and weakness. The two and a half hour spectacle kicks off with a healthy dose of action and an opening credits sequence to Bob Dylan&rsquo;s The Times They Are a Changin, which is arguably the coolest and richest part of the film. I won&rsquo;t spoil the surprises, but we get to see what nearly every defining historical and cultural moment of the Cold War era looks like in Moore&rsquo;s alternate history. The only problem is those who have not read the novel will likely be lost on half the references, a flaw that recurs often throughout the well-layered story...Read the rest of this critic's review here! http://www.spout.com/blogs/sqweewee/archive/2009/3/16/41080.aspx Post By: sqweewee
Post To: sqweewee Blog
Post Date: 3/16/2009 9:39:53 PM
Body: YUP!! I found a great version for free at http://userset.com/freemovies.html you have to fill out this lame survey but when your done you have access to a bunch of movies :)
]]>Tue, 17 Mar 2009 01:39:53 GMTsqweeweesqweewee Blog3/16/2009 9:39:53 PMYUP!! I found a great version for free at http://userset.com/freemovies.html you have to fill out this lame survey but when your done you have access to a bunch of movies :) http://www.spout.com/blogs/christhilk/archive/2009/3/16/41076.aspx Post By: ChrisThilk
Post To: ChrisThilk Blog
Post Date: 3/16/2009 4:01:52 PM
Body: I did see Watchmen opening weekend but haven’t had the strength/time to write up anything approaching a review of the film and, quite frankly, still don’t. But I did want to share my overall impression of the film. Unlike my brother-in-law, who saw it with me, I didn’t completely hate it and want to start attacking those involved in the film with pointed sticks. In fact I quite liked it and felt that while it’s still largely impossible to completely adapt the sourch graphic novel into even a 2:45 film, the filmmakers did a pretty good job of accomplishing what they could. High points include: Jackie Earl Haley’s portrayal of the detective Rorschach: Filmspotting’s Adam or Matty (I can’t remember which said it) were right when he said it was a performance that approaches what Heath Ledger did as The Joker in The Dark Knight. Jeffrey Dean Morgan as The Comedian: Yeah, he exists only to provide motivations of one form or another to the rest of the characters - he is the Macguffin - but he sells it. The moments when Zack Snyder departs from the source material but remains true to the story: No squid? No problem. The idea that Ozywhatever would try to accomplish his goal by turning the world against Dr. Manhattan completely works within the movie’s logic and gets around the problem created by 1) the fact that a giant alien squid would have looked ridiculous and 2) the fact that its creation would have been impossible to tell without including The Black Frieghter and about 35 more minutes of footage involving an artist’s colony. Low points include: Malin Ackerman as Silk Spectre II: Oh just kill me now. I’m convinced she wasn’t actually on the set but that Snyder just filmed her at the first table read and dropped the footage into his digitally-created sets. “That scene” on the Owlship: Yeah, you know the one I’m talking about. If Snyder were looking for minutes to cut from the film I can show him about six that could be lifted easily. Despite those few problems with it I did like it and am looking forward to seeing it again, when I can be free of all the expectations and hype that surrounded its release, something that without a doubt colors everyone’s perceptions of the finished product. Originally posted on:Chris Thilk
]]>Mon, 16 Mar 2009 20:01:52 GMTChrisThilkChrisThilk Blog3/16/2009 4:01:52 PMI did see Watchmen opening weekend but haven’t had the strength/time to write up anything approaching a review of the film and, quite frankly, still don’t. But I did want to share my overall impression of the film. Unlike my brother-in-law, who saw it with me, I didn’t completely hate it and want to start attacking those involved in the film with pointed sticks. In fact I quite liked it and felt that while it’s still largely impossible to completely adapt the sourch graphic novel into even a 2:45 film, the filmmakers did a pretty good job of accomplishing what they could. High points include: Jackie Earl Haley’s portrayal of the detective Rorschach: Filmspotting’s Adam or Matty (I can’t remember which said it) were right when he said it was a performance that approaches what Heath Ledger did as The Joker in The Dark Knight. Jeffrey Dean Morgan as The Comedian: Yeah, he exists only to provide motivations of one form or another to the rest of the characters - he is the Macguffin - but he sells it. The moments when Zack Snyder departs from the source material but remains true to the story: No squid? No problem. The idea that Ozywhatever would try to accomplish his goal by turning the world against Dr. Manhattan completely works within the movie’s logic and gets around the problem created by 1) the fact that a giant alien squid would have looked ridiculous and 2) the fact that its creation would have been impossible to tell without including The Black Frieghter and about 35 more minutes of footage involving an artist’s colony. Low points include: Malin Ackerman as Silk Spectre II: Oh just kill me now. I’m convinced she wasn’t actually on the set but that Snyder just filmed her at the first table read and dropped the footage into his digitally-created sets. “That scene” on the Owlship: Yeah, you know the one I’m talking about. If Snyder were looking for minutes to cut from the film I can show him about six that could be lifted easily. Despite those few problems with it I did like it and am looking forward to seeing it again, when I can be free of all the expectations and hype that surrounded its release, something that without a doubt colors everyone’s perceptions of the finished product. Originally posted on:Chris Thilk http://www.spout.com/blogs/spoutblog/archive/2009/3/13/41019.aspx Post By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 3/13/2009 6:00:32 PM
Body: The Internet seems eerily quiet today, which is probably due to all the blog writers being miles above wifi signals, flying towards Austin for SXSW. Of course, there are some posts here and there discussing rumors about Jon Favreau directing The Avengers and continued commentary on Watchmen’s box office future and Joaquin Phoenix’s “brawl” in Miami, but there’s not much new news to get excited about. So, I’ve decided to highlight some recent SXSW-related posts from other blogs in anticipation of the festival. I won’t be there this year, and the Bloggery posts will be taking a week off in order to let SpoutBlog focus on film reviews, interviews and other SXSW goodies, so this is my one chance to be a part of the SXSW fun, albeit from a very cold, very jealous perspective up here in NYC. I wish everyone down in Austin a good time and, more importantly, a lot of good movies. Pop Candy’s Whitney Matheson, who is attending SXSW, but not the film portion, reminds us homebound movie lovers that we (and she) can watch SXSW films, including Joe Swanberg’s Alexander the Last, on IFC’s Festival Direct channel this week. Anne Thompson notifies us that we can also watch some of last year’s films on Hulu. Lewis Wallace at Underwire directs our attention to SXSW Bingo, which should be played by any of you down in Austin. Not only does it look fun, but you can actually win an Amazon Kindle 2. Please let us know if you do play so we may follow your gaming via Twitter. I also hope to hear about more film critic fights, though if the guys at Pajiba aren’t kidding, I may not have to worry: There are several Southerners on staff. When we drink, some of us may get carried away by the atmosphere of our motherlands and start shit-kicking other movie bloggers. We apologize in advance (except for you, Harry Knowles. You had it coming). In honor of the festival’s attention to both film and music, The Screengrab will be taking a look at some favorite movies about music, any of which we should be able to rent in our respective neighborhoods. Here’s a bit from Andrew Osborne’s list, specifically his appreciation for Stop Making Sense: I never got a chance to see David, Tina, Chris & Jerry play live — not all at the same time, anyway — but dancing in the aisles with dozens of fellow Head-heads during the classic concert film’s theatrical run was the next best thing…kinda like Jonas Brothers: The 3D Concert Experience without the special glasses and shitty music. Indeed, Demme makes his subjects pop off the screen without 3D technology, pyrotechnics or any of the usual rock-doc clichés: all he needed was a lamp, a big suit, a good shot list and one of the best rock bands of all time. And of course there will always be the reviews, from which we homebound film fans can find out what films to check out — if they ever make their way to our respective necks of the woods, that is. Michael Tully of Hammer to Nail gives us an interesting disclaimer for his site’s forthcoming reviews: No contributor is allowed to write a review of a film that he or she worked on in any capacity. However, if a writer genuinely responds to a film made by someone else on the HTN team, this is fair game. We are here to primarily write about low-budget, under-the-radar films that might otherwise slip through the cracks, and to exclude a film from consideration for these tenuous reasons seems to betray the mission of our site. Our friendships with and connections to individuals within the indie film world shouldn’t be crosses to bear. If anything, they are proof that we are engaged and involved participants in this community. If you think this is all some incestuous circle jerk, read my review of Treeless Mountain or David Lowery’s review of Silent Light or Cullen Gallagher’s review of Billy the Kid. We love movies, and we’re here to write about them. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog
]]>Fri, 13 Mar 2009 22:00:32 GMTSpoutBlogSpoutBlog on spout.com3/13/2009 6:00:32 PMThe Internet seems eerily quiet today, which is probably due to all the blog writers being miles above wifi signals, flying towards Austin for SXSW. Of course, there are some posts here and there discussing rumors about Jon Favreau directing The Avengers and continued commentary on Watchmen’s box office future and Joaquin Phoenix’s “brawl” in Miami, but there’s not much new news to get excited about. So, I’ve decided to highlight some recent SXSW-related posts from other blogs in anticipation of the festival. I won’t be there this year, and the Bloggery posts will be taking a week off in order to let SpoutBlog focus on film reviews, interviews and other SXSW goodies, so this is my one chance to be a part of the SXSW fun, albeit from a very cold, very jealous perspective up here in NYC. I wish everyone down in Austin a good time and, more importantly, a lot of good movies. Pop Candy’s Whitney Matheson, who is attending SXSW, but not the film portion, reminds us homebound movie lovers that we (and she) can watch SXSW films, including Joe Swanberg’s Alexander the Last, on IFC’s Festival Direct channel this week. Anne Thompson notifies us that we can also watch some of last year’s films on Hulu. Lewis Wallace at Underwire directs our attention to SXSW Bingo, which should be played by any of you down in Austin. Not only does it look fun, but you can actually win an Amazon Kindle 2. Please let us know if you do play so we may follow your gaming via Twitter. I also hope to hear about more film critic fights, though if the guys at Pajiba aren’t kidding, I may not have to worry: There are several Southerners on staff. When we drink, some of us may get carried away by the atmosphere of our motherlands and start shit-kicking other movie bloggers. We apologize in advance (except for you, Harry Knowles. You had it coming). In honor of the festival’s attention to both film and music, The Screengrab will be taking a look at some favorite movies about music, any of which we should be able to rent in our respective neighborhoods. Here’s a bit from Andrew Osborne’s list, specifically his appreciation for Stop Making Sense: I never got a chance to see David, Tina, Chris & Jerry play live — not all at the same time, anyway — but dancing in the aisles with dozens of fellow Head-heads during the classic concert film’s theatrical run was the next best thing…kinda like Jonas Brothers: The 3D Concert Experience without the special glasses and shitty music. Indeed, Demme makes his subjects pop off the screen without 3D technology, pyrotechnics or any of the usual rock-doc clichés: all he needed was a lamp, a big suit, a good shot list and one of the best rock bands of all time. And of course there will always be the reviews, from which we homebound film fans can find out what films to check out — if they ever make their way to our respective necks of the woods, that is. Michael Tully of Hammer to Nail gives us an interesting disclaimer for his site’s forthcoming reviews: No contributor is allowed to write a review of a film that he or she worked on in any capacity. However, if a writer genuinely responds to a film made by someone else on the HTN team, this is fair game. We are here to primarily write about low-budget, under-the-radar films that might otherwise slip through the cracks, and to exclude a film from consideration for these tenuous reasons seems to betray the mission of our site. Our friendships with and connections to individuals within the indie film world shouldn’t be crosses to bear. If anything, they are proof that we are engaged and involved participants in this community. If you think this is all some incestuous circle jerk, read my review of Treeless Mountain or David Lowery’s review of Silent Light or Cullen Gallagher’s review of Billy the Kid. We love movies, and we’re here to write about them. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog http://www.spout.com/blogs/spoutblog/archive/2009/3/13/41010.aspx Post By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 3/13/2009 11:01:08 AM
Body: What is worse about the now-infamous Watchmen sex scene (watch it here), the distracting soundtrack or the explosive metaphor at the climax? Even if intended to be funny, and regardless of its (more-subtle) appearance in the graphic novel, the fire blast as stand-in for ejaculation is so cliché that it has no place in a story that means to shatter conventions. Plus, sexual metaphor is a little unnecessary in a film that already has a lot of nudity and a distinct moment of impotence. Especially at the end of a scene that is quite gratuitous compared to the comic’s depiction, that blast is more a symbol of how incorrectly handled Watchmen is than of the orgasms it’s intended to represent. Between that shot in Watchmen and our recent list of sexiest non-sex scenes, we have had bad sex-scene clichés on the brain. So, to relieve us from the tension of list-making blue balls, we’ve decided to release this short burst of a list for discussion. Think we should have included saxophone-heavy soundtracks or any other cliché you’ve come to notice, let us know in the comments. 1. The Explosively Metaphoric Climax Watchmen may have the worst example of this cliché, and that’s saying a lot considering the practice of using everything from fireworks to popping soda/champagne bottles to rockets firing to trees spontaneously combusting to nuclear explosions during kissing and sex scene climaxes has been extremely popular throughout film history. Explosive metaphors sometimes work well in classic films that required veiled innuendo (see To Catch a Thief, The Girl Can’t Help It and Cool Hand Luke for some good examples), but anything that’s come after the terrific montage in The Naked Gun 2 ½ is overkill. 2. The L-Shaped Blanket This is a basic movie cliché that people have complained about for years and doesn’t necessarily have to be tied to a sex scene. It’s the typical appearance of an “L-shaped” sheet or blanket that exposes a male character’s chest while covering the female’s (or “LL-shaped” sheet, in the case of Bob & Carol & Ted & Alice). When it appears after a sex scene, though, it’s even more frustrating, particularly if that scene has already featured nudity. The problem with continuing to show the woman’s breasts may have to do with the tradition of non-sexual representation of the female body, unbroken and casual, in movies. Or, it could just be the difficulty of not being able to use a body double in such wide-shot situations. Either way, it’s frustratingly unrealistic. Then again, so were separate beds for married characters; there are just some things we have to put up with from censored and modest Hollywood movies. 3. “Actress Inferior Position” This is the first entry in Roger Ebert’s Little Movie Glossary: A Compendium of Movie Cliches and was submitted by Ebert’s late friend and review-show partner Gene Siskel, who wrote, “In movie sex scenes, which are usually directed by men, the POV at the moment of climax is almost always the man’s, so that we see the actress, not the actor, losing control.” Well, this may be true enough that it encourages boys to grow up thinking sex is completely about conquering a woman by making her orgasm, but after seeing Patrick Wilson’s “O” face in that Watchmen scene, audiences might rather keep this cliché as standard. Of course, Malin Ackerman’s loss of control isn’t exactly enjoyable either. 4. Food Mixed With Sex Food can be quite sexy, and there are certainly a lot of decent films that explore the connection between eating and making love (Houston Press has a great list of ten such films). But some films have taken the concept too far and now it’s become a bad sex-scene convention. First, Hot Shots! lampooned the famous ice-and-food foreplay scene from 9 ½ Weeks, officially labeling the food/sex combination a cliché. Then, 12 years later, Young Adam conclusively killed the whole idea with its disgusting custard-covered lovemaking scene. 5. Cigarettes as Phallic Symbols Back during the Hays Code days, cigarettes were clever devices used as metaphoric hints at sexual activity. When characters shared cigarettes, such as in Now, Voyager, To Have and Have Not and Rope, it implied a sex act. When Marlene Dietrich held a cigarette in any of her films, the prop was a phallic symbol implicit in projecting an image of bisexuality. And ironically, in a film as explicit as 9 ½ Weeks, a cigarette may have been a required stand-in for Mickey Rourke’s penis during a strip-tease scene, because male nudity continues to be a taboo while the naked female body is common on the big screen. However, not all cigarettes in films represent sex and/or phallus, but due to the heavy employment of the prop in such a way for so many years, it’s hard for moviegoers (particularly those of us with film studies degrees) to think of them as anything but sex symbols. Fortunately, Hollywood is being forced to censor out cigarettes from their movies (getting slack for even featuring a pack of cigarettes), and meanwhile they continue to break sexual taboos at the same time. So this cliché is likely to go way very soon. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog
]]>Fri, 13 Mar 2009 15:01:08 GMTSpoutBlogSpoutBlog on spout.com3/13/2009 11:01:08 AMWhat is worse about the now-infamous Watchmen sex scene (watch it here), the distracting soundtrack or the explosive metaphor at the climax? Even if intended to be funny, and regardless of its (more-subtle) appearance in the graphic novel, the fire blast as stand-in for ejaculation is so cliché that it has no place in a story that means to shatter conventions. Plus, sexual metaphor is a little unnecessary in a film that already has a lot of nudity and a distinct moment of impotence. Especially at the end of a scene that is quite gratuitous compared to the comic’s depiction, that blast is more a symbol of how incorrectly handled Watchmen is than of the orgasms it’s intended to represent. Between that shot in Watchmen and our recent list of sexiest non-sex scenes, we have had bad sex-scene clichés on the brain. So, to relieve us from the tension of list-making blue balls, we’ve decided to release this short burst of a list for discussion. Think we should have included saxophone-heavy soundtracks or any other cliché you’ve come to notice, let us know in the comments. 1. The Explosively Metaphoric Climax Watchmen may have the worst example of this cliché, and that’s saying a lot considering the practice of using everything from fireworks to popping soda/champagne bottles to rockets firing to trees spontaneously combusting to nuclear explosions during kissing and sex scene climaxes has been extremely popular throughout film history. Explosive metaphors sometimes work well in classic films that required veiled innuendo (see To Catch a Thief, The Girl Can’t Help It and Cool Hand Luke for some good examples), but anything that’s come after the terrific montage in The Naked Gun 2 ½ is overkill. 2. The L-Shaped Blanket This is a basic movie cliché that people have complained about for years and doesn’t necessarily have to be tied to a sex scene. It’s the typical appearance of an “L-shaped” sheet or blanket that exposes a male character’s chest while covering the female’s (or “LL-shaped” sheet, in the case of Bob & Carol & Ted & Alice). When it appears after a sex scene, though, it’s even more frustrating, particularly if that scene has already featured nudity. The problem with continuing to show the woman’s breasts may have to do with the tradition of non-sexual representation of the female body, unbroken and casual, in movies. Or, it could just be the difficulty of not being able to use a body double in such wide-shot situations. Either way, it’s frustratingly unrealistic. Then again, so were separate beds for married characters; there are just some things we have to put up with from censored and modest Hollywood movies. 3. “Actress Inferior Position” This is the first entry in Roger Ebert’s Little Movie Glossary: A Compendium of Movie Cliches and was submitted by Ebert’s late friend and review-show partner Gene Siskel, who wrote, “In movie sex scenes, which are usually directed by men, the POV at the moment of climax is almost always the man’s, so that we see the actress, not the actor, losing control.” Well, this may be true enough that it encourages boys to grow up thinking sex is completely about conquering a woman by making her orgasm, but after seeing Patrick Wilson’s “O” face in that Watchmen scene, audiences might rather keep this cliché as standard. Of course, Malin Ackerman’s loss of control isn’t exactly enjoyable either. 4. Food Mixed With Sex Food can be quite sexy, and there are certainly a lot of decent films that explore the connection between eating and making love (Houston Press has a great list of ten such films). But some films have taken the concept too far and now it’s become a bad sex-scene convention. First, Hot Shots! lampooned the famous ice-and-food foreplay scene from 9 ½ Weeks, officially labeling the food/sex combination a cliché. Then, 12 years later, Young Adam conclusively killed the whole idea with its disgusting custard-covered lovemaking scene. 5. Cigarettes as Phallic Symbols Back during the Hays Code days, cigarettes were clever devices used as metaphoric hints at sexual activity. When characters shared cigarettes, such as in Now, Voyager, To Have and Have Not and Rope, it implied a sex act. When Marlene Dietrich held a cigarette in any of her films, the prop was a phallic symbol implicit in projecting an image of bisexuality. And ironically, in a film as explicit as 9 ½ Weeks, a cigarette may have been a required stand-in for Mickey Rourke’s penis during a strip-tease scene, because male nudity continues to be a taboo while the naked female body is common on the big screen. However, not all cigarettes in films represent sex and/or phallus, but due to the heavy employment of the prop in such a way for so many years, it’s hard for moviegoers (particularly those of us with film studies degrees) to think of them as anything but sex symbols. Fortunately, Hollywood is being forced to censor out cigarettes from their movies (getting slack for even featuring a pack of cigarettes), and meanwhile they continue to break sexual taboos at the same time. So this cliché is likely to go way very soon. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/war/MemberTagFilms.aspxwar
Number of films tagged: 6176

Number of people who tagged: 180

Number of times used: 607

]]>Tue, 08 Dec 2009 04:50:24 GMT6176180607Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/romance/MemberTagFilms.aspxromance
Number of films tagged: 7160

Number of people who tagged: 169

Number of times used: 1002

]]>Fri, 04 Dec 2009 00:50:40 GMT71601691002Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/murder/MemberTagFilms.aspxmurder
Number of films tagged: 8748

Number of people who tagged: 157

Number of times used: 830

]]>Fri, 04 Dec 2009 02:57:25 GMT8748157830Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/death/MemberTagFilms.aspxdeath
Number of films tagged: 4306

Number of people who tagged: 140

Number of times used: 526

]]>Mon, 16 Nov 2009 17:27:13 GMT4306140526Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/dark/MemberTagFilms.aspxdark
Number of films tagged: 223

Number of people who tagged: 137

Number of times used: 390

]]>Wed, 23 Sep 2009 22:40:47 GMT223137390Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/sex/MemberTagFilms.aspxsex
Number of films tagged: 2414

Number of people who tagged: 126

Number of times used: 548

]]>Fri, 04 Dec 2009 00:50:42 GMT2414126548Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/action/MemberTagFilms.aspxaction
Number of films tagged: 318

Number of people who tagged: 111

Number of times used: 459

]]>Wed, 09 Dec 2009 20:48:03 GMT318111459Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/drama/MemberTagFilms.aspxdrama
Number of films tagged: 525

Number of people who tagged: 102

Number of times used: 624

]]>Tue, 08 Dec 2009 22:39:10 GMT525102624Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/sci-fi/MemberTagFilms.aspxsci-fi
Number of films tagged: 217

Number of people who tagged: 102

Number of times used: 375

]]>Fri, 04 Dec 2009 19:33:53 GMT217102375Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/escape/MemberTagFilms.aspxescape
Number of films tagged: 2868

Number of people who tagged: 76

Number of times used: 279

]]>Tue, 01 Dec 2009 19:51:44 GMT286876279Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/relationships/MemberTagFilms.aspxrelationships
Number of films tagged: 203

Number of people who tagged: 74

Number of times used: 249

]]>Sat, 28 Nov 2009 14:40:59 GMT20374249Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/thriller/MemberTagFilms.aspxthriller
Number of films tagged: 199

Number of people who tagged: 74

Number of times used: 244

]]>Fri, 04 Dec 2009 19:33:53 GMT19974244Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/religion/MemberTagFilms.aspxreligion
Number of films tagged: 1123

Number of people who tagged: 67

Number of times used: 176

]]>Thu, 03 Dec 2009 03:31:00 GMT112367176Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/prison/MemberTagFilms.aspxprison
Number of films tagged: 2437

Number of people who tagged: 62

Number of times used: 167

]]>Tue, 01 Dec 2009 19:02:27 GMT243762167Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/rape/MemberTagFilms.aspxrape
Number of films tagged: 1050

Number of people who tagged: 54

Number of times used: 124

]]>Fri, 04 Dec 2009 01:36:01 GMT105054124Tag