Well, consider that she was a has-been actress whose looks were fading. And she loved glamor and excitement, yet ended up married to a boring nerd.
Cops and social workers will tell you that abuse victims often make excuses for their abusers.
My theory is, he caught her right after she had a fight with her husband, and put on a Prince Charming act. Probably alcohol played a role.
Agreed; it was like having a random soft core porn scene in the middle of The Dark Knight or something. Everything else was golden.
Unless I’m missing something, the point of that scene was about releasing pent-up sexual frustrations, fufilment, human contact, intimacy etc etc yada yada yada. That could have been accomplished just as easily with some passionate kissing, a shot of clothing falling to the floor, maybe a hand up against the the cockpit (heh) glass, followed by the flamethrower thing, then cut to post-coitus scene.
Look, I like porn. A lot. But if I want to see hot women in thigh-high boots having teh sexx0rz, there’s, I don’t know, about 80% of the Internets devoted to that sort of thing, along with countless magazines and DVDs. I don’t need to- and don’t want to- see it in a “mainstream” cinema-release film.
I liked how Snyder made the superheroes more superhero-y. I thought I’d hate the ramped up violence, but it actually made it believable that they could fight crime. It’s one thing Moore missed in the book, you never got a sense of these guys as larger than life fighters. I liked how Rorschach used kicks and punches in prison. Just throwing a vat of hot fat at the thug didn’t make him seem like a super-fighter, it just made him seem like a guy who was lucky to have a vat of hot fat at hand.
I just saw it today and I liked it. A lot. Way better than the Dark Night. With the Dark KNight I couldn’t wait until it was over. With Watchmen the nearly three hours flew by. Although it wasn’t the graphic novel I feel it was a pretty good adaptation. I’m not a fanboy but I did re-read the book before seeing the moving and made mental notes about the changes. I can understand why some of the changes were made but not all of them.
The casting was kick-ass. The Comdedian, Niteowl II and especially Rorschach (way better than Ledger’s Joker). I was pleasantly surprised to see Danny Woodburn as Big Figure. I always enjoy him in whatever role he plays. All in all an enjoyable movie.
Ok, so again with the talking out of my ass (really I want to see the movie, it’s just a timing of the showing thing that keeps biting me). So big disclaimers on how Snyder may have totally fucked up the execution so that the point was lost but…
Based on the Graphic novel and the clips that I have seen from the film so far it seems as though Snyder was trying to take basic action movie cliche’s and turn them on their head (nipples on Night Owl’s costume) much as Alan Moore did with comic cliches. An explicit sex scene would then be more appropriate than the “James Bond” style scene that would have made you feel less icky.
Ok, now to go back to suffering quietly while you all talk about a movie that you have actually seen. By the time I get to see it I don’t know if anyone will still be talking.
I don’t know, the Mrs. really liked the love scene, with all the details. It certainly paid big dividends later…
I don’t feel icky. The corresponding pages in the GN were pretty much in the “James Bond” style I mentioned earlier, and in a movie where we were hoping for minimal cuts from the source, it was a bit offputting to jam in (heh) more detail in this scene that was necessary. He was aroused and he nailed her but good. We get it.
I didn’t mind that the sex was explicit, I minded that the scene was laughably bad.
Hooray for Hollywood…! 
Lucky bastard.
Film makers do realize that the song Hallelujah was on Shrek for crying out loud, right?
[quote=“Tool_of_the_Conspiracy, post:247, topic:486579”]
[li]The masks’ super-human strength undermines the “Dr. Manhattan vs. humans” dichotomy.[/li][li]Some of Nite Owl & Silk Spectre’s uses of that strength blur the “Comedian & Rorschach vs. empathetic characters” contrast. When the heroes do things like stabbing a street thug in the neck, there isn’t much difference between them and the sociopathic anti-heroes. (And we lose the irony of those anti-heroes being the ones who won’t go along with Veidt’s plan.)[/li][/QUOTE]
I don’t agree that they made it look like Nite Owl and SS (and Ozzy) had superhuman strength-If I were driven and trained enough, I could do a lot of those fighting moves too. I half-expected Owl to pull out “talons” of some sort, though). And not to re-open an old Comic Geek’s debate, but when you’re fighting seven thugs with knives, you do what you have to, especially if you’re not wearing your armored costume at the time.
I missed the way Rorscharch discovered Blake’s costume. It was a neat bit of little detective work. A friend of mine had an interesting complaint, though: He felt that Rorscharch’s maks moved too much and was kinda distracting.
I did a thread search and didn’t see this posted yet: **Patton Oswalt **(comedian, voice of Ratatouille and part of the nerd intelligentsia) posted this on his blog.
There’s a bit more after that…
A fair point. Snyder should at least get props for trying when so many other talented directors (I’m talkin’ to you, Terry Gilliam) walked away.
I have not read the book. I saw the movie last night. I don’t want to simple echo what so many other posters have said, but I agree with a lot of what has been said. I am on the waiting list for the book at my local library. I am interested in how the Giant Space Squid comes into it and the explanation for Ozymandias’ pet. Rorschach was easily the mostly fully realized character in the movie and very sympathetic. I wonder how that will color my reading, since I gather that he wasn’t as sympathetic in the book.
Here is an article about some of the things you might have missed in the opening sequence. The first one is pretty fasintaing and cool. The original Night Owl apparently stopping the thieves from killing Bruce Wayne’s parents, and thereby never allowing Batman to exist.
I also like the snow globe one.
Very cool! I missed both of those. Makes me a little proud that I came up with the DaVinci Last Supper bit on my own. 
Rorschach in the movie was almost spot-on true to the character in the book. If you found him sympathetic in the movie (I certainly did–he’s always been my favorite in the story) then you will likely find him so in the book.
Interestingly, he’s based on two previous characters (the first of which was based on the second): The Question and Mr. A from Charlton Comics, both of whom were created by Steve Ditko and explicitly meant to be Objectivists (adherents of Ayn Rand’s philosophy). I find Rorschach to be a very Objectivist character, which is part of why I like him. Ultimately, he was the only one who didn’t compromise his beliefs.
Oswalt is my favorite stand up comedian, and there’s some funny quips and insights in that rant, but JESUS - he’s one of those guys that LOVES EVERYTHING. Yeah, he took some shots at widely panned movies, but damn people like that are beyond me. It’s like Marge Simpsons’ art teacher played by Jon Lovitz reaction when he sees a janitor painting a stair railing: “Another triumph!”
Keep in mind that he’s named “Rorschach” for a reason.