Update: WB has released their first clip/scene of the film online and Defamer says it’s not good. We can’t agree with their reading too much.
The review embargo for Warner Brother’s biggest release this year, “Watchmen,” has been semi-breached by nerdworld blogger Matt Selman, who praised the film, which just happens to based on the graphic novel he possesses a love for that could be described as slightly above average.
Selman said of the adaptation, “Sitting in that screening room and watching the visual world of the Watchmen movie unfold was one of the most powerful experiences I’ve ever had. Not film experiences. Just EXPERIENCES. I don’t think I realized how close I was to the original book until I saw such a loving, detail-rich, almost obsessive recreation of that universe. It had my heart pounding and head swimming. I barely slept that night. Someone took the most special personal thing of my adolescence and put it on a movie screen. That doesn’t happen every day” (the report has pissed off a lot of those that played nice and are waiting to deliver their reviews).
But towards the end of his glowing “review” Selman let on that he may not be the most un-biased of judges, “Is Watchmen even a good or bad movie? I have no idea. I stand powerless before the Gods I once worshiped in my attic bedroom, now moving and talking and fighting and loving on a giant screen. And I find myself unable to judge them..”
Well, always impartial blogger Jeffery Wells apparently had a problem with Selman’s fanboyism, and struck back by quoting an anonymous friend of his who has seen “Watchmen.” The source thought the film seemed exactly like, well, a Zach Synder movie.
“I’ve seen Watchmen,” he began. “And speaking as a huge admirer and devotee of the graphic novel, the film is a staggering failure. On the plus side, you’ve got a pretty literal adaptation of the source material. It is at times a meticulous and gorgeous recreation of Alan Moore’s original work. Unfortunately it’s an empty, inert, meandering and, yes, boring 2 hours and 45 minutes.” He also went on to further describe “Watchmen” as having the traits of Synder’s previous work, “Watchmen is just not much of a movie. It has no narrative pull and no characters to invest in. It uses rotely shoehorned-in action scenes, and has a sheen that doesn’t befit the dark material.”
He finished up by proclaiming that, “Watchmen fans are in for a rude awakening.” If “Watchmen” is indeed shallow, action-laden cinema, should we be surprised in the least bit? We have been aware who the director is from the start. If die-hard fans are actually disappointed by “Watchmen,” just wait for their reaction when the inevitable sequel gets a green-light
