OTHER SCIENCE FICTION SERIES

Watchmen

POSTED BY: ECGORDON
UPDATED: Monday, December 14, 2009 08:36
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 8155
PAGE 1 of 2

Friday, March 6, 2009 1:54 PM

ECGORDON

There's no place I can be since I found Serenity.


I didn't see any other thread for this, but if I'm wrong please point it out to me.

Got off early today and caught a matinee, and I loved it. I bought the novel a month or so back but decided to wait until after the movie to read it, since there have been too many films that butchered a beloved book. Now I can't wait to read it.

It did not seem as long as it actually is (2 hours, 43 minutes). That's longer than The Dark Knight but it did not lag at any point and I never got the feeling there were any extraneous plots thrown in. Can't say how faithful it might be to Alan Moore's story but it worked for me. Nothing confusing either in plot or character motivations.



NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, March 6, 2009 2:56 PM

CHRISISALL


Thanks for the excellent review, Ec! I want to see it so badly! I loved the novel.

"Thanks." -Hero, 2009

The laughing Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, March 6, 2009 6:14 PM

WASHNWEAR


Quote:

Originally posted by ecgordon:
I didn't see any other thread for this, but if I'm wrong please point it out to me.

Got off early today and caught a matinee, and I loved it. I bought the novel a month or so back but decided to wait until after the movie to read it, since there have been too many films that butchered a beloved book. Now I can't wait to read it.

It did not seem as long as it actually is (2 hours, 43 minutes). That's longer than The Dark Knight but it did not lag at any point and I never got the feeling there were any extraneous plots thrown in. Can't say how faithful it might be to Alan Moore's story but it worked for me. Nothing confusing either in plot or character motivations.



Man, glad to hear it! Like you, I'm holding off reading the novel before seeing it. I'd rather risk thinking the book sucks compared to the movie, than the other way around. Of course, ideally I won't have to think either suck. I guess I should just try to maintain a positive outlook...



It was like that when we got here!

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, March 6, 2009 6:20 PM

CELLARDOOR


Been a couple years since I read the novel, but when I saw the movie this afternoon it seemed more like the graphic novel than any other book-to-film translation I can recall (and I've seen a fair share). Some differences exist here and there, and a few implications were more elaborated, but pretty much the same work in a different form. That's a powerful story, and I hope people will check it out soon! Fairly disturbing in some parts though. It earns the R rating thoroughly.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, March 6, 2009 6:22 PM

ECGORDON

There's no place I can be since I found Serenity.


I just read someone else's opinion on another forum and their's was the exact opposite of mine. They didn't make it clear if they had read the book but it seemed to be implied.

Hopefully I will have my official review on my site sometime tomorrow, plus a friend has promised his review as well, and he is a big fan of the book and a comics geek in general. It will be interesting to see his take on it.



NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, March 6, 2009 6:31 PM

WASHNWEAR


Quote:

Originally posted by CellarDoor:
Been a couple years since I read the novel, but when I saw the movie this afternoon it seemed more like the graphic novel than any other book-to-film translation I can recall (and I've seen a fair share). Some differences exist here and there, and a few implications were more elaborated, but pretty much the same work in a different form. That's a powerful story, and I hope people will check it out soon! Fairly disturbing in some parts though. It earns the R rating thoroughly.



The other day on NPR Bob Mandella was knocking the movie, in part because of its faithful reproduction of the book. He seemed to feel they shouldn't have been afraid to stray from the source material here and there.

He did acknowledge the challenge of pleasing The Base, though.



It was like that when we got here!

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, March 6, 2009 6:42 PM

CELLARDOOR


Quote:

Originally posted by ECGordon:
I just read someone else's opinion on another forum and their's was the exact opposite of mine. They didn't make it clear if they had read the book but it seemed to be implied.






Quote:

Originally posted by WASHnwear:


The other day on NPR Bob Mandella was knocking the movie, in part because of its faithful reproduction of the book.



Yeah... I did find myself thinking, "Ok... so what next? Let's keep moving." I guess that's because it was almost identical and I HAD read the book, so it was kinda like paying more money to read it again with sound effects. I'd still strongly recommend it, but it sure didn't take many/any new directions.

Seeing Rorschach walking and talking was worth the price of admission. What an amazing character. The mask was incredibly well done, and I'm glad it took this long to make the movie so that could be done right with the CG.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, March 6, 2009 10:19 PM

SHINYGOODGUY


I have never read the novel, but I've heard quite a bit about it. I purposefully did not seek it out to read because I wanted to go in unhindered by any preconceived notions.

Every time I saw the trailer for this movie I thought, WOW that looks great. I hope that the movie lives up to what I'm seeing.

Going to a matinee tomorrow, I'll let you know then. I read a couple of moviegoer's reviews and people either love it or hate it. Good sign.

SGG

Tawabawho?

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, March 6, 2009 10:47 PM

BIGRICHARD


saw it 2 nights ago, and I'm still thinking about bits and pieces of it, trying to decide what I did and didn't like.

To begin, it LOOKED great. Snyder definitely has an eye for the visuals, and from the get go it looked amazing. The casting is also perfect, and they all do well, especially (in my opinion) Jackie Earle Haley as Rorschach, Patrick Wilson as Nite Owl, Jeffrey Dean Morgan as The Comedian and Billy Crudup as Manhattan.

I did have a few problems, particularly with the soundtrack, Nixon and Carla Gugino's 'old' makeup.
I actually quite liked the new ending, although it wasn't TOO different.

The scope is AMAZING, and the opening credit sequence is definitely deserving of the praise it's been getting, and it must have been quite a pain to shoot a lot of the scenes for such a small little clip.

All this said, I did sometimes find a slight lack of emotion in the film, and this made it less perfect than I was hoping for, but it is nonetheless, better than most adaptations that we're getting these days, and I'll be sure to get the "amazing-ultimate-super-special-uber-nerd-geek-extended-director's-edition box set", with the Under the Hood and Black Freighter clips, which will now doubt make the film go for about 4 hours.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, March 7, 2009 4:27 AM

DEEPGIRL187


I think that I'm more with the 'stayed too close to the graphic novel' camp, though for slightly different reasons. The fact that some of the scenes were directly lifted from the comic is great, but I think it kind of restricted the actors. A lot of the text is more literary than dramatic, so it doesn't necessarily come out as well as it does when your're reading it.

On the other hand, there were a lot of parts where they struck gold. I don't think they could have found better actors to play Rorshach and The Comedian. Jefferey Dean Morgan made The Comedian likable, which is extremely scary given the circumstances. And while I think he portrayed Rorschach as a little too emotional at time, Jackie Earle Haley still did a wonderful job with what was probably one of the most difficult and fascinating characters to show on screen.

*************************************************

"This is my timey-wimey detector. It goes ding when there's stuff. Also, it can boil an egg at 30 paces, whether you want it to or not, actually, so I've learned to stay away from hens. It's not pretty when they blow."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, March 7, 2009 9:04 AM

ECGORDON

There's no place I can be since I found Serenity.


Here's my non-spoilery review - http://templetongate.net/watchmen.htm

I'll also be uploading my friend's review sometime later today or tomorrow.



NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, March 8, 2009 4:49 PM

MUGGI


Quote:

Originally posted by deepgirl187:
I think that I'm more with the 'stayed too close to the graphic novel' camp, though for slightly different reasons. The fact that some of the scenes were directly lifted from the comic is great, but I think it kind of restricted the actors. A lot of the text is more literary than dramatic, so it doesn't necessarily come out as well as it does when your're reading it.


*************************************************



I agree. What was brilliant dialogue on the page often came off as hokey on the screen.

Having read the comic prior to seeing the film, I actually didn't LOVE it...it was good, worth the money, but ideas and scenes that flow well in the comic medium did not do so on the screen. The film was often disjointed and tough to follow. The lack of backstory on several characters (mostly Night Owl...some very important scenes that shaped his state of mind at the end of the story were completely cut) led to friends who had not read the comic not understanding what motivated the characters.

Comedian and Rorshach were both acted quite well. Night Owl was also pretty well done, Silk Spectre II was...pretty bad. Some fanboys hated Ozy, but I thought he was pretty good too. The actors were not the weak link in the film IMO, the pacing and script were.

I'd also add the level of violence was at times just plain stupid; the comic was violent enough, and to go above and beyond that for no apparent reason was obnoxious.

The sex scene was...uncomfortable. It was pretty obvious they tried to drag it out to fit the timing of the Cohen song that accompanied it. That's some backwards thinking.

As someone else noted, the soundtrack was...not very good. Too predictable. Some songs are just played out...Hendrix' "All Along the Watchtower" and "Flight of the Valkyries" have both been used too many times or in such defining films, they've lost their impact.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, March 8, 2009 5:11 PM

CELLARDOOR


Quote:

Originally posted by Muggi:

As someone else noted, the soundtrack was...not very good. Too predictable. Some songs are just played out...Hendrix' "All Along the Watchtower" and "Flight of the Valkyries" have both been used too many times or in such defining films, they've lost their impact.




I know... "Flight of the Valkyries" is fine Wagnerian opera, but I keep hearing "Kill the Wabbit" every time I listen to it... The Bob Dylan songs were cool though. I kinda liked the soundtrack in general (I'm not going to buy it--Mamma Mia would be higher on my list), but I can see how people wouldn't. Heh, I have limited musical taste.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, March 8, 2009 5:40 PM

GWEK


I thought the use of "Flight of the Valkyries" was brilliant. The music is forever linked with "Apocalypse Now" so to use the same music in a DIFFERENT version of the Vietnam War underscores the connection, I think.

*****

As for the movie overall, I thought it was very good, but not quite excellent. When we got out of the theater, I said to my friends that I think it was as good a WATCHMAN movie as could have been made (and I mean that as a compliment). I've read the miniseries a number of times, but not in the past few years.

I thought the casting was excellent, with the possible exceptions of Silk Specter II (who was good, but perhaps a little weak compared to some of the others) and Veidt (who was by turns brilliant and one of the weakest links in the film... still not sure how I feel about the casting).

I thought that the story was an excellent depiction of the original story, faithful enough to please the vast majority of fans, and I think most of the changes were improvements.

For a movie that clocks in at almost 3 hours, I thought it moved along quite briskly. Seemed much shorter than a lot of 2 hour movies I've seen!

Ultimately, though, I have to judge it enjoyable (and good!) but somewhat "forgettable." I don't see it standing the test of time like, say, Star Wars, Lord of the Rings, or even The Matrix.

Still, I'm looking forward to the director's cut on DVD!

www.stillflying.net: "Here's how it might have been..."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, March 8, 2009 6:46 PM

JEWELSTAITEFAN


Geez, what the heck was that?
Murderers, rapists, serial killers, assassins are superheroes? Where's that get fun?
I was like a surreal liberal fantasyland, not much made sense.
RMN in his 5th term, and there is still MAD? how is that supposed to have happened, except in pure fantassy? Without Jimmy Cotta to prolong the Cold War, how could it have lasted into 1985? It should have been ended 6 years before it did in real life, so about 1982ish. No term limits were enacted? Does that mean also no new VPs? Did RMN's original new VP (GHWB) make it? If so, why would Bush not have been the next candidate, instead of RWR?

And has there been a worse film soundtrack? If there has been, I have thankfully rid my mind of it.

At the risk of being struck by lightning for positive allusions to a Will Smith film, I must admit that even Hancock had a better understanding of the relationship which must exist between superhero and public.
Liberals must be overjoyed to have their criminal elements hoisted to suprehero status in this surreal nightmare.

About the only positive thing I can say is that the last film I felt I wanted a refund for was Fireproof, and this wasn't quite as bad as that. But rarely have I enjoyed a film less than this.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, March 8, 2009 7:25 PM

HUGHFF


I posted this on another site. It is very spoilerish so I've followed the protocol

Select to view spoiler:



It has some unquestionably brilliant moments but by staying almost absolutely faithful to the graphic novel, it includes some stuff that, quite honestly, doesn't translate well to film. There are some rambling soliloquies we could have done without - usually Rorschach - for example.

The pluses are:
*some visually stunning moments - e.g. the summary montage at the beginning that traces the history of the Minutemen;
*some killer action scenes - Silk Spectre and Nite Owl breaking into the prison is my favourite bit;
*excellent casting - Carla Gugino (phwoar) and Billy Crudup are strong as always; Mathew Goode, despite getting a bad review in this morning's paper by a disappointed fanboy (for not looking the part, ffs) is appropriately ambiguous and arrogantly certain; Malin Akerman is testicle tightening hot but she's also very good, like when Rorschach has to go to the bathroom;
*the soundtrack works for me - I have to be honest here, my opinion is that anyone who uses "Boring Bob" Dylan in their film deserves only derision, but I'm going to forgive it this once.

The minuses are:
*the aforementioned monologues;
*a tendency to give us something that's obviously a frame from a comic, stationary rather than dynamic - the first frames when NO and SS hook up is the most ludicrous example;
*some unnecessarily repellent violence - don't get me wrong here, there is some repellent violence in the film that is necessary and I've no beef with that, e.g. Rorschach's first kill. However, it seems to me that, sometimes, to prove that comics aren't "kids' stuff" they go over the top in the brutality. There was absolutely no need, when Laurie and Dan were being mugged in the alley, to show bones breaking so violently that they burst through the skin. Indeed, I found the understated violence of Rorschach's final confrontation with Big Figure more effective than the less subtle stuff. This story is obviously not kids' stuff - its themes and characters are too complex, too mature, too real to be a cartoon.

Overall, it's a good movie, well worth $15 and I'd love to see it again to try to pick up some of the tantalizing moments (not the sex scenes - I got them.)



BTW follow this link for a laugh - or a cautionary tale http://www.newgrounds.com/portal/view/485797

www.cpfc.org - my life

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, March 8, 2009 7:41 PM

GWEK


Yeah, I'll agree with most of that review.

www.stillflying.net: "Here's how it might have been..."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, March 8, 2009 7:59 PM

CELLARDOOR


Quote:

Originally posted by GWEK:
I thought the use of "Flight of the Valkyries" was brilliant. The music is forever linked with "Apocalypse Now" so to use the same music in a DIFFERENT version of the Vietnam War underscores the connection, I think.



Gotcha. So my problem rests in the fact that I've never seen Apocalypse Now, evidently. From what you're describing, it's a creative pairing of sound and image.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, March 8, 2009 8:59 PM

SINGATE


I posted this over at ShinyUniverse when this site was down. So at the risk of repeating myself...

THERE WILL BE SPOILERS. DON'T READ IF YOU HAVEN'T READ THE COMIC OR SEEN THE MOVIE!

First off it is an incredible adaptation. Any complaints about it not being 100% faithful are from nit pickers. That being said there are a few changes, mostly towards the end, but I can totally understand why they had to be made.

This was quite literally like watching the book. Almost every significant moment is brought to life hence the 2 hour 43 minute run time. I'm wondering what was actually cut from the movie.

Every character was spot on. The only one that struck me as a little weak was Adrian Veidt. For some reason I expected him to command more screen presence. Part of the problem may be due to a lack of screen time. I actually found him to be the most interesting character in the book so my expectations may have been a bit too high.

This is not a movie for the squeamish. Anyone who thought The Dark Knight was bleak is in for a shock. I am actually amazed at how many children were in the theater. I guess parents just don't believe an R-rated "superhero" movie can be that bad. There is quite a bit of nudity, sex, and violence. The violence is a step down from Snyder's 300 but it is still very stylized and brutal.

I get the feeling this movie is not going to resonate with the public at large. I really don't think they will know what to make of it. It's not a typical good versus evil story. The good guys aren't all that good, in fact some of them are downright amoral. What I expect to happen is people who see this but were not familiar with the material will run screaming back to the comfort of Spiderman and Superman.

Now some specifics:

- I liked how the fight between The Comedian and Ozymandias was fleshed out a bit more. The former really went out strong, though he really didn't get in any good shots.

- Rorschach chopping up the child killer was a change I can live with, it really emphasizes how far over the edge he was driven after finding the remains.

- The most surprising things in the movie were the scenes involving The Comedian's background. I honestly did not expect to see the attempted rape of Silk Spectre or him gunning down the pregnant Vietnamese woman. Kudos to Snyder and the studio execs. Without these moments the audience would not get a complete picture of what the character was all about.

- Now the big one many people will complain about. In the comic New York is decimated by a giant squid monster that had been created by Veidt. In the movie New York and other major cities are destroyed by blasts of energy. The disaster is not blamed on an alien invasion but rather Dr. Manhattan. Although I prefer the book version I can see why this was changed. I also think it works better because for once it wasn't just New York that got wiped out.

So there it is in a nutshell. As long as the theatrical version was I can't wait to see the extended version on Bluray.


_________________________________________________

We live on a placid island of ignorance in the midst of black seas of infinity, and it was not meant that we should voyage far.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, March 9, 2009 3:55 AM

DEEPGIRL187


Quote:

Originally posted by singate:
The most surprising things in the movie were the scenes involving The Comedian's background. I honestly did not expect to see the attempted rape of Silk Spectre or him gunning down the pregnant Vietnamese woman. Kudos to Snyder and the studio execs. Without these moments the audience would not get a complete picture of what the character was all about.



I was talking with my mom about this one. I thought there was an interesting connection in that Snyder and the execs didn't compromise on those scenes and likewise, a big part of the film and the novel is about compromising (or not compromising) your beliefs.

*************************************************

"This is my timey-wimey detector. It goes ding when there's stuff. Also, it can boil an egg at 30 paces, whether you want it to or not, actually, so I've learned to stay away from hens. It's not pretty when they blow."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, March 9, 2009 4:36 AM

WASHNWEAR


Quote:

Originally posted by jewelstaitefan:
Geez, what the heck was that?
Murderers, rapists, serial killers, assassins are superheroes? Where's that get fun?
I was like a surreal liberal fantasyland, not much made sense.
RMN in his 5th term, and there is still MAD? how is that supposed to have happened, except in pure fantassy? Without Jimmy Cotta to prolong the Cold War, how could it have lasted into 1985? It should have been ended 6 years before it did in real life, so about 1982ish. No term limits were enacted? Does that mean also no new VPs? Did RMN's original new VP (GHWB) make it? If so, why would Bush not have been the next candidate, instead of RWR?

And has there been a worse film soundtrack? If there has been, I have thankfully rid my mind of it.

At the risk of being struck by lightning for positive allusions to a Will Smith film, I must admit that even Hancock had a better understanding of the relationship which must exist between superhero and public.
Liberals must be overjoyed to have their criminal elements hoisted to suprehero status in this surreal nightmare.

About the only positive thing I can say is that the last film I felt I wanted a refund for was Fireproof, and this wasn't quite as bad as that. But rarely have I enjoyed a film less than this.



What a fascinating review, and so...RWED-y.

Have you read the graphic novel, JSF? I have not, but my understanding is that many of these nasty liberal elements and story points were in the novel, and since the movie is based on the novel...well, things creep in.

If only David Zucker had been available...



It was like that when we got here!

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, March 9, 2009 4:44 AM

CHRISISALL


Quote:

Originally posted by jewelstaitefan:

Liberals must be overjoyed to have their criminal elements hoisted to suprehero status in this surreal nightmare.


Dude, If I could enjoy Red Dawn, you can like Watchmen.


The laughing Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, March 9, 2009 5:20 AM

RIVERDANCER


Quote:

Originally posted by jewelstaitefan:
I was like a surreal liberal fantasyland, not much made sense.


That's amazing. You can take a complex story about causality and the human condition, a story that may well have one of the most right-wing characters ever to grace the page - though that's hardly what it's about - and sum it up like this. What a small place your world must be.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, March 9, 2009 5:45 AM

MUGGI


Quote:

Originally posted by jewelstaitefan:
Geez, what the heck was that?
Murderers, rapists, serial killers, assassins are superheroes? Where's that get fun?
I was like a surreal liberal fantasyland, not much made sense.
RMN in his 5th term, and there is still MAD? how is that supposed to have happened, except in pure fantassy? Without Jimmy Cotta to prolong the Cold War, how could it have lasted into 1985? It should have been ended 6 years before it did in real life, so about 1982ish. No term limits were enacted? Does that mean also no new VPs? Did RMN's original new VP (GHWB) make it? If so, why would Bush not have been the next candidate, instead of RWR?

And has there been a worse film soundtrack? If there has been, I have thankfully rid my mind of it.

At the risk of being struck by lightning for positive allusions to a Will Smith film, I must admit that even Hancock had a better understanding of the relationship which must exist between superhero and public.
Liberals must be overjoyed to have their criminal elements hoisted to suprehero status in this surreal nightmare.

About the only positive thing I can say is that the last film I felt I wanted a refund for was Fireproof, and this wasn't quite as bad as that. But rarely have I enjoyed a film less than this.



Wow...I gotta admit, I don't think I've ever seen someone swing and miss so badly when trying to understand the point of a film.

No offense man but you saw what you wanted to see, not what was actually on the screen. Rorshach is a hardcore conservative, not a hero. Ozy is a hardcore liberal, not a hero...and ends up murdering millions to get his "Utopia". This is a conservative-leaning work. The Comedian is the jester of the film...he's the only one who sees neither approach works, so plays out a farce of both. In ther end the film/book is about the nature of man though, not their defined political roles.

I find it really strange you readf so much into the geopolitical landscape of the Cold War/who would be VP and completely missed the point of the characters and the message of the film.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, March 9, 2009 6:33 AM

CORNCOBB


@Jewelstaitefan
Methinks you miss the point, or perhaps the film faild to express it clearly (I haven't seen it).
The idea behind the book was not to build up the status of criminals and deviants, but to question the motives of superheroes - what kind of psychological hang-ups must someone have to dress up in a costume and beat up people they see as evil? It's actually disturbingly close to facist and serial killer mentalities, and that's what Moore was aiming for - uncompromising psychological realism.
It sounds like the film also failed to explain the political background, it seemed to make sense in the novel.
Btw, I think of myself as a liberal: I'm anti-war, anti-capitalism, and pro-human-rights. I do however think serious or persistent criminals are scum. We're not all criminal-lovers.

"Gorramit Mal... I've forgotten my line."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, March 9, 2009 7:37 AM

STORYMARK


Hardcore right wingers don't like exploration of the grey tones. Good guys are good, bad gutys are bad - the end. Blur those lines, they get shut down and can't look at what's in front of them on their own terms.

And the "liberal fantasy" thing is pretty funny when the most-liked character in the film is, as was mentioned, one of the most conservative characters ever rendred, and spends a good portion of the movie complaining about liberals.

"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, March 9, 2009 7:51 AM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


Quote:


Liberals must be overjoyed to have their criminal elements hoisted to suprehero status in this surreal nightmare.



Well, it IS easy to elevate criminals and terrorists to superhero status in real life - all you have to do is call them "freedom fighters", "mujahideen", and "contras"! Voila! Terrorist = Superhero in the minds of conservatives!

Mike

I can't run no more
with that lawless crowd
while the killers in high places
say their prayers out loud.
But they've summoned, they've summoned up
a thundercloud
and they're going to hear from me.

- Anthem, by Leonard Cohen

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, March 9, 2009 7:52 AM

PHOENIXROSE

You think you know--what's to come, what you are. You haven't even begun.


Quote:

Originally posted by Storymark:
Hardcore right wingers don't like exploration of the grey tones. Good guys are good, bad gutys are bad - the end. Blur those lines, they get shut down and can't look at what's in front of them on their own terms.


As Rorschach so aptly demonstrates

I just read the comic, I was told I had to before I'd be allowed to see the movie. The story fascinated me, the links and the cause and effect, the wild perspectives of the various characters. And I know that Rorschach is considered one of the great characters of history, but he was not my favorite. I was much more interested in the perspectives of Nite Owl and Dr. Manhattan. The motivations of both Silk Specres also intrigued me, to a lesser extent.

I'm very eager to see the movie, now. And I have to say, I don't think following the source material is a flaw; my main beef with Lord of the Rings was where it departed from the books, which it only did a little.

[/sig]

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, March 9, 2009 9:49 AM

PIRATENEWS

John Lee, conspiracy therapist at Hollywood award-winner History Channel-mocked SNL-spoofed PirateNew.org wooHOO!!!!!!




More (Moore) predictive programming from offshored Hollywood, of Illuminati's Pyramid (Scheme) Corp creating global governance (dictatorship) out of false-flag terrorism (JFK assassination from grassy knoll and WTC 9.11 per Operation Northwoods by Tricky Dick Nixon). Nixon BTW is president in Watchmen, whose White House plumbers confessed to shooting JFK in the Real World. "We had to terrorize USA to save USA" was the motto of this movie. New World Odor Satanism requires telling the sheep exactly what will happen to them, since silence is consent to adhesion contracts.

Similar to Batman The Dark Knight founding 9.11 Truth while "justifying" superhero UAV jets crashing into skyscrapers to assassinate US presidents during the president's false-flag UAV attacks on USA, written weeks BEFORE 9.11. If you don't read the book you don't get the joke. Since 99% of sheeple don't read, they never know what hit em.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1802095826640429181
http://piratenews-tv.blogspot.com/2008/12/dark-knight-dvd-holy-batshit
-911-truth.html

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, March 9, 2009 10:09 AM

STORYMARK


PN, shut the fuck up. Noone bought your BS Dark Knight conspiracy crap. Just because there's a new comic movies, it doesn't mean we want to be subjected to your insane paranoia again.

"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, March 10, 2009 10:01 PM

SHINYGOODGUY


I'm having a tough time trying to decide whether or not this movie was a masterpiece. It had great visuals, of which director Zack Snyder could be considered a genius, but that's only one aspect.

The script....well, the jury's still out for me again in this area. Why? Because you get top notch performances by Jackie Earle Haley as Rorschach and Jeffrey Dean Morgan as The Comedian. I also liked the actor who played Nite Owl (Patrick Wilson). So I'm not quite sure what to make of it with these solid performances. Is the criticism due to bad acting or bad script? Maybe it's a bit of both.

But what I liked about Watchmen was it's storytelling style and tone; it was almost like a protest from the 60's - loud and charged with energy and ending in violence. The violence reminded me of the ultra-violence in A Clockwork Orange (a Stanley Kubrick film), which was considered for it's time overkill (no pun intended) and was given an X rating for it's trouble, but that, by today's standards, is considered somewhat tame.

Still though "Clockwork" was ahead of it's time in the depiction of artistic violence that drove the story along. But I didn't get that feeling here in Watchmen, it felt at times tacked on to appease the audience who wanted to see superhero action. That goes to story pacing, in '300' Snyder used the action to near perfection but here it made for awkard starts and fits against the overall storyline. But this is a minor quibble.

I actually enjoyed the detective-solving-a- mystery approach that was used. The Blog, if you will, of the main character - Rorschach. It was unlike your typical superhero movie and kept my interest focused on him as he investigated the murder. The use of the soundtrack was almost flawless, as Snyder used 60's and 70's music to underscore and puntuate scene after scene. I especially liked the opening sequence and the scene (Dylan's The Times They are A Changing)where Dr. Manhattan leaves Mars to return to Earth (Hendricks All Along the Watchtower), very interesting choices.

I don't want this to come out like a soundbite but, Watchmen was like a cross between X-Men, The Matrix and The Dark Knight but on steroids. It put forth it's message, sometimes in a heavyhanded way, that humankind is worth saving in spite of itself. I don't believe that this movie will be fully appreciated in it's own time, except of course by the die-hard fans, because of some minor flaws, but make no mistake Watchmen has flashes of brilliance and will be a cult classic for some time to come. Wait, it already is.

SGG

Tawabawho?

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, March 11, 2009 1:36 AM

PIRATECAT


Rorshach my hero. The HOFFA of Superheroes. He was kick ass. Tricky Dick's pinocchio nose in the movie cracked me up. Well it's a pretty good flick.

"Battle of Serenity, Mal. Besides Zoe here, how many-" "I'm talkin at you! How many men in your platoon came out of their alive".

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, March 12, 2009 5:28 AM

SHINYGOODGUY


Tricky Dick's pinocchio nose in the movie cracked me up.

My son (who's 26 and read the novel BTW) didn't like the movie and said that that was one of the worst make-up jobs he's ever seen.

I told him that it was purposefully done that way to make a point. At least that's what I got from it. Tricky Dick was made to look grotesque because of his war mongering.

"Pinocchio nose" that's a good one!

SGG

Tawabawho?

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, March 12, 2009 7:24 AM

LETOV


I'll be brief. (Edited: ok, looking back over it, not so brief)

I first read the comic in the 80's so I've literally been waiting 20 years for this to come about.

I thought it was good though probably not perfect. I loved 90% of the casting. The main casting I didn't much like was Ozy. I actually think the actor did a good enough job. It reminded me of a not-as-successful miscast as Hugh Jackman as Wolverine in the x-men movies. If you compare the actor to the character in the comics, a horrible mis-cast. But, the actor got the job done.

There were a few things changed plot-wise from the book which I had no problem with. There are certain things which I just don't see a mass-market audience buying. I really didn't have any trouble with the change to the ending as I think it didn't really change the point of the ending, just the particulars. In some ways, after a bit of thought, I actually like it better than how the book ended it.

My real issue with the movie, and the thing that pulled me out of the experience at times, was the violence. This actually really surprised me, because I always thought of the book as being quite violent for its genre. I would have been horrified if they'd tried to make the movie PG-13. I simply felt that they ratcheted the violence and gore level higher than was needed, as if trying to make the point that "Yes, this is really violent" over and over again.

Without getting into specific scenes, there's just no need to depict bones jutting out of skin and some of the spraying blood and gore. It made me think about the choices made in making the movie, not just the movie.

Of course, the thing about the movie that really scared me is that it seems more people were bothered by the sexual content and Dr. Manhatten's genitalia than by the violence. I weep for a society where people take their pre-teen kids to the movie, despite its R-rating, and complain there's too much sexual content without batting an eye at the violence.


So, in summation, I really liked it, with reservations.


- Leto_V

"Well, my days of not taking you
seriously are certainly coming to
a middle." - Mal

"What the hell is an aluminum falcon?!?" - Palpatine - Robot Chicken

Benford's law of controversy
"Passion is inversely proportional to the amount of real information available."

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, March 12, 2009 7:39 AM

BLUESUNCOMPANYMAN


I myself read the novel in 1993, and therefore waited 16 years to see this film. I was very let down with the horrible casting of Sally Jupiter at age 67. The actress was foolishly young to be playing her. A far better choice would have been Sharon Gless, the actress who plays Michael Westin's mom on Burn Notice.

The young Sally Jupiter was fine, but everytime the 67 year-old sally opened her mouth I wanted to throw my popcorn at the screen. Just horrible.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, March 12, 2009 8:31 AM

STORYMARK


Her makeup wasn't terribly convincing, but I adore Carla Gugino, so I was okay with it.

"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, March 12, 2009 11:55 AM

EMBERS


Quote:

Originally posted by CellarDoor:
Quote:

Originally posted by Muggi:

As someone else noted, the soundtrack was...not very good. Too predictable. Some songs are just played out...Hendrix' "All Along the Watchtower" and "Flight of the Valkyries" have both been used too many times or in such defining films, they've lost their impact.




I know... "Flight of the Valkyries" is fine Wagnerian opera, but I keep hearing "Kill the Wabbit" every time I listen to it... The Bob Dylan songs were cool though. I kinda liked the soundtrack in general (I'm not going to buy it--Mamma Mia would be higher on my list), but I can see how people wouldn't. Heh, I have limited musical taste.



I thought the music was awesome, very retro...
constantly refering back to movies and associations of the 1970s and 1980s...
When I heard Fligth of the Valkyries I was seeing 'Apocalypse Now' (1979) with a similar setting of helicopters attacking...
the burial scene reminded me of the stoner scene in Easy Rider (1969)...
There was a weird retro tone to 'Watchmen' that was beyond awesome IMO.

edited to add: as I read on in this thread I see that Gwek already made the point about Apocalypse Now... (sorry about that).
This was a film that didn't necessarily require that one has read the graphic novel, but it does seem to be better if you are very familiar with popular culture for the last 3 or so decades...!





New Firefly fans should check this out: http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.asp?b=2&t=15816

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, March 15, 2009 1:30 PM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


Just got back from seeing it.

Wow.

Not as in " wow " what an awesome movie, yay! But it was a good movie, imo. Just not a yippie, rah rah type of story goin' on here. Lots of deep, darkness.

You see, I've no knowledge of the Watchman story before going into the movie, so this was my initial exposure.

Sorta spoilery stuff

Select to view spoiler:




From the start, I had a bit of trouble trying to suss out the plot line, from the REAL events w/ the alternate world which was set up in the story. There was some predictable political biases I noted, but it wasn't overly dripping with such, as I had feared it might.

I see where The Incredible's got it's concept. Former super heroes forced to retire because the Gov't couldn't stand the competition.

Anyway, as one not sure what to expect, I kinda liked this movie. It was about as gory as I was lead to believe, and a bit more sexual too. I had heard of a violent rape scene, which turned out not to be, thankfully. But I was caught off guard w/ the steamy scene later on. Soft core porn, essentially. Anyone who sends a kid under 15 to see this flick is nuts, imo.




Overall, I didn't think the movie was too long, too slow (save for a brief part here or there ). In some respects, this movie was strikingly honest, which is a switch for how most "comic book movies " tend to be.

Might be the mood I'm in or something, but I'd give it a solid B.



It is not those who use the term "Islamo-Fascism" who are sullying the name of Islam; it is the Islamo-Fascists. - Dennis Prager

A concern of the GOP is that the people aren't informed enough to understand their policies, while a fear of the Dems is that the people ARE.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, March 15, 2009 7:07 PM

PHOENIXROSE

You think you know--what's to come, what you are. You haven't even begun.


I finally got a chance to see the movie today, and honestly I just adored it. It was certainly true to the novel, though a few things were necessarily cut. A few other things were condensed, and in the course of that there were several moments that were not in the original work, though most of them were great moments. I particularly liked "It's your turn now, doctor. Tell me what you see." I thought that was brilliant.

spoiler for book and movie alike

Select to view spoiler:


The ending, I almost liked better. The whole concept of alien invasion uniting the world is perfectly sound, and it worked well, but the "psychic explosion" angle of the graphic novel seemed a little odd to me. Jon has this great power which, when duplicated, would certainly cause a blast of epic proportions, whereas a human psychic's brain might prove less dramatic. Also, targeting cities worldwide seemed a much more effective tactic than focusing only on New York. I had been worried, when I heard the ending was changed, but I was pleasantly surprised by how they pulled it off.



Certain things were hard to watch. There was a lot of blood, a lot of violence. A lot of the violence came directly from the book, but it's... more visceral when it's on screen. The attempted rape, the inmate getting sawed, and Rorschach's first kill made me wince the most, they were very graphic. The sex was also fairly graphic, but I didn't find that hard to watch
As an aside, the first showing I tried to go to they had some technical difficulties with the sound, which actually proved to be a blessing, as I noticed the already-fussy toddler near the front of the theater before the movie started, and was able to leave and exchange for a later show on a different screen, which had no such abysmal parenting taking place.

I only have one problem with the movie, really. It's a small thing, but I really loved the linked events of Jon becoming Dr. Manhattan. He knows how to repair watches, though he's pushed onto another path, Janey's watch gets broken, he tells her he can fix it, and the ultimately repaired watch is in his lab coat, which he left in the chamber, and in going to retrieve it he becomes a being who transcends time. It's a really brilliant and beautiful chain, and I was disappointed to not see it in the film. There were some other things I felt the lack of, but none as acutely as that detail. I'm sure not everyone focuses on the same things I do, so I might be alone in this particular sentiment, but that was the only thing I really wished were different. A small thing, and not really a flaw in the movie itself. If I only have one major pang like that when watching a book set to film, it's a rare and precious adaptation.
I'll just mention one last thing, because the soundtrack has been brought up a few times. I really liked it. I thought it fit well, for the most part. I'll also point out that 'Ride of the Valkyries' is mentioned by name in the text of the book, so it's an homage to Apocalypse Now, but might also be a reference to that mention. There were also certain songs whose lyrics were quoted at the end of the chapters, and I think it would have been pretty shiny if more of those could have been included in the soundtrack, but that would have just been some icing on the cake.

[/sig]

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, March 15, 2009 11:20 PM

SHINYGOODGUY


Yeah, I caught a glimpse of a couple of young kids in the theatre where I saw it. Who brings a young child (6 or 7 y.o.) to an R-rated movie?

I also was subjected to a young child crying and fussing a few rows in front of me at the beginning of the movie (perhaps he fell asleep after a few minutes). I do not understand bringing a kid younger 14 y.o. to a movie like this, especially becuase it was R-rated.

I think the drop off at the box office was due to word of mouth that this wasn't "Spiderman" or "X-Men" type of movie - both those were PG-13 I think. When I went to see "300" I did not see as many kids in the theatre as I did for Watchmen.

What are parents thinking about?

SGG

Tawabawho?

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, March 16, 2009 6:00 AM

BLUESUNCOMPANYMAN


Quote:

Originally posted by Shinygoodguy:
Yeah, I caught a glimpse of a couple of young kids in the theatre where I saw it. Who brings a young child (6 or 7 y.o.) to an R-rated movie?
What are parents thinking about?



I don't get it either. Furthermore I saw Watchmen at a Thurs night midnight opening. There were plenty of HS kids in there who surely had school on Friday. Then later I returned with my wife on Sunday and....yes indeed...kids as young as 7 in the theater. I thought about that when Laurie/Dan had their "moment" or when Manhattan made the occasional person explode.

In my home I had home theater furnature made specially for owning my geek media with children about. The shelves of my DVD library are open on the bottom 4 but the top 2 are behind a lockable door. Movies of questionable content reside there. Watchmen will find it's home behind a lock along with things like Alien, Aliens, the Mad Max films, Kill Bill, Ect, Ect. Lower shelves have things like LOtR, buffy, Dune, Dark Crystal, Firefly, ect. Also behind the lock is my Firefly Box set signed by the cast.

I'm trying to make a call about where BSG should go.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, March 16, 2009 6:04 AM

PHOENIXROSE

You think you know--what's to come, what you are. You haven't even begun.


It astounds me, really, how few parents seem to pay attention to things like that. They must not have read the graphic novel, but they know that's what it's based on, and a comic book movie must be okay for kids, right? The rating seems to fly right over their heads. The same thing happens with video games, the assumption that a video game must be okay for kids. There are certain sectors of society that still have the impression that true adults don't play video games or read comic books. It's ridiculous, intellectual laziness that leads to equally lazy parenting. At least, that's the best I can come up with. Maybe there are parents who truly just don't care about what their children might be exposed to.

[/sig]

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, March 16, 2009 6:40 AM

DEADLOCKVICTIM


.... well, when you consider that some parents are just "kids" themselves, nothing surprises me.


eta: oh, and great movie, excellent adaptation - i will see this one many more times....



NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, March 16, 2009 6:58 AM

STORYMARK


I havn't been to an R rated movie in years without seeing kids there.

Some people should not breed, plain and simple.



"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, March 16, 2009 7:30 AM

CORNCOBB


Quote:

Originally posted by bluesuncompanyman:
The shelves of my DVD library are open on the bottom 4 but the top 2 are behind a lockable door. Movies of questionable content reside there. Watchmen will find it's home behind a lock along with things like Alien, Aliens, the Mad Max films, Kill Bill, Ect, Ect. Lower shelves have things like LOtR, buffy, Dune, Dark Crystal, Firefly, ect. Also behind the lock is my Firefly Box set signed by the cast.

I'm trying to make a call about where BSG should go.



Remember the 'pegasus' episode?
I'd put it behind the lock.

"Gorramit Mal... I've forgotten my line."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, March 17, 2009 11:50 AM

BLUESUNCOMPANYMAN


If anyone is interested in an intelligent 90 minute discussion of Watchmen by true Comics experts, including Kevin Smith, I would recommend this link for a downloadable .mp3:

http://www.slashfilm.com/2009/03/12/kevin-smith-and-the-filmcast-revie
w-watchmen-filmcast-ep-41
/

It is every bit of 90 minutes and would require a thoughtful listener, but it's worth it. Be advised of frequent use of the f-bomb if you have children. Kevin Smith's insights are interesting.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, March 17, 2009 4:39 PM

PHOENIXROSE

You think you know--what's to come, what you are. You haven't even begun.


What a great discussion! Thanks for the link

Oddly, the thing that sticks most in my head is their wish that the song from the trailer (The Beginning Is The End Is The Beginning) had been used for the end credits. I totally agree with that. I mean, I agree with a lot of what they said, but that bit is sticking right now.

[/sig]

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, March 17, 2009 6:00 PM

PIRATECAT


AU, did you catch some of the lines. The sudtle humor. When Nixon was in the war room with his generals talking about fall out. Nixon replies "ah the last gasp of Harvard let them think their way out of fision" I just love that. It's the sterotype of Nixon being a war munger, pinocchio nose means liar, but to give him a sense of humor well thats not true. The man was great a true genius. The real crooks where Kennedy and Johnson. But that is for another time.

"Battle of Serenity, Mal. Besides Zoe here, how many-" "I'm talkin at you! How many men in your platoon came out of their alive".

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, March 18, 2009 10:49 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


I was in HS & college in the 80's, so it was a bit of a strain for me to watch the alternate reality view of a period in which I really lived. Nixon was a bit before my time, to be honest. I kinda get the need to not tread on actual events, but there were so many reminders of how things were, it kinda annoyed me. Why ? Because I'm very familiar of how things actually were, and I'm cognizant of how "Hollywood" loves to rewrite history, hell, even rewrite the present! But this wasn't so much about that, and I enjoyed the twist in general.

Good flick, overall, but clearly not for everyone.



It is not those who use the term "Islamo-Fascism" who are sullying the name of Islam; it is the Islamo-Fascists. - Dennis Prager

A concern of the GOP is that the people aren't informed enough to understand their policies, while a fear of the Dems is that the people ARE.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, March 18, 2009 2:12 PM

ECGORDON

There's no place I can be since I found Serenity.


I finished reading the graphic novel last night, but I want to see the movie again before I make any other comments.



NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

YOUR OPTIONS

NEW POSTS TODAY

USERPOST DATE

OTHER TOPICS

DISCUSSIONS
Best TV Show For Fall 2021?
Sun, December 5, 2021 19:08 - 18 posts
So Joss Whedon tried to save Batman, Superman, Wonder Woman and kinda fails? 'Justice League' was a box office flop?
Thu, December 2, 2021 15:24 - 13 posts
Binge-worthy?
Fri, October 8, 2021 23:45 - 63 posts
Emergence, and Evil
Tue, August 31, 2021 20:09 - 25 posts
Better than Us
Tue, August 31, 2021 19:54 - 3 posts
What Have Been The Stellar Sci-Fi Shows?
Tue, August 31, 2021 19:52 - 51 posts
Best TV series, decade by decade.
Tue, August 31, 2021 19:50 - 45 posts
Brain Dead
Tue, August 31, 2021 19:49 - 11 posts
BrainDead
Tue, August 24, 2021 08:46 - 8 posts
Defiance- does this look good or what?
Wed, June 9, 2021 16:37 - 64 posts
The Expanse
Wed, June 9, 2021 10:45 - 24 posts
Why have British tv never fully funded 'Dr Who' for a movie?
Wed, June 9, 2021 08:01 - 1 posts

FFF.NET SOCIAL