WatchmenComicMovie.com Forum

The movie is very close to the book's story structure, flashbacks and all. But one of the most notable deviations is the first 15 minutes.

The book opens with the detectives, and there are flashes of Blake's murder. Rorschach is then introduced as he enters Blake's apartment, and it's then that we learn that Blake was a superhero. - The movie starts with Blake watching The McLaughlin Group, then shows his murder from beginning to end, followed by six minutes of opening credits, the detectives, and then Rorschach entering Blake's apartment.

Some pros to how the movie handled the opening scenes:

1) As Snyder says, the opening fight is a good "hook" for the movie. Grabs your attention immediately, and should make you curious about who killed Blake and why.
2) Gets a lot of exposition and background out of the way early on. It sets up the cold war setting and threat of nuclear war.
3) It set the tone perfectly. The McLaughlin Group, the over-the-top fight scene (with amusing music choice), and the opening credits set up the dark satire very well. (But despite all that, people still found a way to let the satire go completely over their heads)

The cons:

1) The mystrey is not as strong. We know exactly what happened when Blake was murdered. And we know that both Blake and his murderer are superheroes. Unlike the book where the details about the fight are vague, and we don't know Blakes' murderer is a superhero.
2) The moment where Rorschach discovers Blake's costume isn't as powerful. In the book, that's when we discover that Blake was a superhero. In the movie, we already know because of the opening credits.

I'm willing to accept the cons. I think the opening scenes were just solid adaptation. The changes were necessary, and I quite enjoyed them.

That's my opinion. How do you feel about how the first 15 minutes were handled? What were the pros and cons? How does it compare to the book?

_________________
"Computer unnecessary."

Well the opening fight scene and credits were amazing so I wouldn't have it any other way.

_________________
"The world is a fine place and worth fighting for." I agree with the second part.

"There's a cello in your house now."

I don't think we KNOW it's a superhero. The audience could just assume it's an assassin, since they have no idea of the nature of the conspiracy.

I think I would have preferred it if it were closer to how it was in the book. That includes cutting out the opening credits even though everyone loves them.

I think I've talked about this before but I remember watching it and getting a bad feeling about it. It's when we see Blake watching the Mclaughlin Group. Instead of showing us what was happening on his television, we are suddenly in the studio seeing them filming the discussion. I don't like that transition at all, and feel we should have stayed in Blake's apartment the whole time.

The fight itself I could have done without. I just feel it showed us a little too much of Veidt. I would have done it like the book. Have the two detectives go over the crime scene, cut with brief clips of the fight. And although I still haven't seen the DC, I have seen the extended clip of the cops and I think it adds nothing to the movie. I really don't understand it's inclusion. People make the lame excuse that it's to set him up as some "Boogeyman", but it felt totally unnecessary. Doesn't the movie do a good job off getting that point across on it's own without the use of that scene?

As far as the opening credits, I always hear people say how amazing they were. And they are indeed impressive. But they're not necessary. No, we really don't need them to get across that this movie is set in an alternate universe. The story is constantly telling us this is not the America of 1985 we know. Isn't the fact that Nixon is still the President enough of a tip?

If you cut out the credit sequence, and cut the fight down to how brief it was in the book it would leave more time to be devoted to other scenes. Which is why it's a bit odd that Snyder chose to film it how he did, when it seems as if it would have been a constant struggle to get the film under a certain running time.

_________________


"Heard them Walthers like to jump some" "As will you, with one in your elbow."

^ Yes, Snyder was always struggling with the running time... And yet he did it this way anyway. So he must've thought it was best.

And I agree. The opening credits are important for the film. Where else would you have all that background info about the minutemen, and random moments like Doc being on the moon? The opening credits do a lot more than say "this is an alternate history." It gives us glimpses of specific moments where superheroes changed history, usually in an amusing way. And like I said, they also set the tone beautifully.

The book gives most of this info in the text excerpts in between chapters. The opening credits were a much more cinematic way of including all that information.

The movie could never include all the depth from the book, but the opening credits help to at least hint at it.

_________________
"Computer unnecessary."

People won't establish the connection that Blake from the fight and the guy in yellow in the intro are the same at first, but when they see Blake shooting Kennedy, they realize he is either the guy in yellow or the old fart who went out the window. Doesn't reveal squat.

_________________

I think they could have still used some of the Minutemen footage. Only have it cut with Rorschach walking to Rockefeller Centre as he talks about what happened to the Minutemen. So when he says "Dollar Bill got his cape stuck in a revolving door" we'd cut to a shot of that scene, and so on. But without the slomo, of course. He pretty much reiterates what happens in the credits anyways, and I think this would have been a better way to touch upon the Minutemen.



But the thing is it's not as if the info isn't addressed in the movie. Hollis even feels the need to tell Dan (and the audience) exactly who the Minutemen were. We see that Nixon is still President, and Jon tells us how he intervened with Vietnam. So through lines of dialog we are painted a picture of what the world of Watchmen is like. And I think it would have been neater if some of it wasn't so explicit. We could have a photo of Jon on the moon in a frame, or a Nite Owl II Warhol print in a restaurant. Blake could make his joke about where he was when he heard about JFK (which I thought was cooler when he just implied it).

How did non fans react to the credits? Did they think it was a cool montage but failed too notice what was going on? That's something I wonder about. Does it mean anything to see Nite Owl punching a guy when the audience does not yet know who he is? And would they even remember the scene by the time we are formally introduced to him? I think the opening credits are pretty to look at but not vital to telling this story.

_________________


"Heard them Walthers like to jump some" "As will you, with one in your elbow."

You're looking at the opening credits just from the point of view of what background information it gives. That's nice, but the main reason they're brilliant is how well they set the tone of the story. Seeing those classic cheesy comic book style images set against The Times They Are A-Changing set up what the movie is about so brilliantly. The idea of nostalgia, and the "good ol days" being lost and forgotten. And the amusing double meaning "The Times Are A-Changing" lyric.

The opening credits orientates the audience into the world of Watchmen. There's so much information and story to take in in a relativity short amount of time. It makes sense to spend time slowly setting up the world. If you just blindly threw them into a story like this, it would be a mess.

In a graphic novel, or a regular novel for that matter, it's different. You go at your own pace, and can even flip back if you wish. In a movie, you have no control over the pacing. If you missed something, it's too late.

I don't understand exactly why you don't like the opening credits. What's wrong with them exactly?



Why does it matter if they make the connection? If they'd just had a random superhero punching a guy, the effect would be the same. It's all about setting the tone. It's just cool to have it be Nite Owl for repeat viewings.

_________________
"Computer unnecessary."

Like someone said above. I adored the opening 15 minutes and wouldn't have it any other way. Even though it did take alot of mystery out of Blake's murder, I felt it was essential to the film as I think general movie goer's who went to see it, would have been abit dissappointed without it. Whilst it would have made more sense to make it the way it was in the graphic novel for the Watchmen fans, Zack probably thought it was essential to include it in the film, just for the general movie goer's who knew nothing about Watchmen prior to seeing it.

_________________

For nostalgia's sake, I went and dug up this old thread, written back when we had no idea how the film was going to open. Additionally, for what it's worth, I'm still quite proud of my proposed opening on page 2.

I still think that Rorschach's voice-over should have set the tone for the movie as it did for the graphic novel. I'm sure that Snyder thought it would be convenient to lay out the Comedian's murder up front to avoid constant flashbacks. The problem with this is that in the book, the only other flashbacks to the murder happen during Rorschach's visit to Blake's grave and during Veidt's ending monologue. Both flashbacks happen in the movie as well, so Snyder would have been just as well off flashing back to the murder during the detectives' investigation as in the book.

Anyway, Snyder did what he did, and I can't deny that the results are both impressive and informative. Not the path I would've taken, but kudos all the same.

_________________
This is truly a madhouse. And I'm the lunatic running it. I've spent three years wondering if I should be proud or ashamed.

I agree it was a pretty impressive credit sequence.

I don't think the scene in Blakes apartment took away much mystery. Even the most intept detective could have figured out what happened by the mayhem in the room, the broken window, and the body on the sidewalk.

Hey Steve, whaddaya think happened here?

It's obvious. He broke down his own door, thrashed his apartment, and threw himself out the window. Clearcut case of suicide.

Ok, so maybe it didn't happen quite that way.

Seriously though, the true mystery... who committed the murder, and more importantly why, are left hanging.

The only thing I didn't like was having the policemen guarding the crime scene after the fact. Is that standard opreating procedure after the scene investigation is done? I felt like it was just an excuse to show off Rorschach in action...

_________________
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes.

-Juvenal

I never said I didn't like them. I just don't love them like everyone else seems to. I don't think it would make for a poorer movie had they not been included. I understand what you're getting at about setting the tone, my feeling was more on its run time. Again, with so much stuff they needed to include having this credit sequence seemed a little indulgent. And as I said, I think these images (Nite Owl punching a guy, Dollar Bill with his cape stuck, the Silhouette being murdered) would work better when juxtaposed with some Rorschach narration.

_________________


"Heard them Walthers like to jump some" "As will you, with one in your elbow."

I cannot really complain about the way the film handles its first fifteen minutes. The fight is one of the most beautiful fight sequences I've ever seen, a perfect marriage of every single element of film. The opening credits, I have to say that I kind of agreed with t3cii for a while but then I noticed quite a few crucial details: All references to Hiroshima.
These are quite important because they really do establish the theme of nuclear war in the film and it also feeds very well into the theme of America descending into a fascist state of sorts thanks to the advent of superheroes. It does what it set out to do and does it very well, which is to get the audience into the universe of the film.

_________________
My unofficial and offical work-> http://www.youtube.com/movieboyandco

The first fight scene in the film felt waaay too long compared to the book. I thought as a piece of cinema the fight scene was really nice. I loved the effects and the choice of music. However in comparison to the book, I do not think it was as effective as in the book it all happens so fast, and this is like the opening and you are like WHAT THE FUCK?? In the film, I felt the length of the fight scene almost lessened the suspense of who did it because you kind of clocked that the Comedian was going to die as he was getting so roughed up, whereas in the book you don't even really have time to think about this until later, as he basically goes straight out the window. If I hadn't have read the book, I may have enjoyed it more, but the book engaged with me far quicker than the film did.

_________________
http://www.last.fm/user/nomapple

Yes, the book teases you more about who the Comedian is and how and why he dies - and maybe if you never read the GN this scene in the movie may seem more over-the-top...

But, I'm going to take the non-die-hard fan position to say that, as a big fan of the GN, the opening fight scene was uber fucking satisfying for me. As my pal Dave Gibbons might put it, it was "fanboy Christmas."

It was great to see that full fight. To have only imagined it from reading the GN, I felt Snyder really granted my birthday wish to see that whole melee play out.

_________________
Those who dance are considered insane by those who can't hear the music - George Carlin

And besides, would you have really wanted it to be the scene where for 10 minutes the two detectives make a bunch of puns?

Well, after watching the director's cut again, I can now say I see why Rorschach attacking the cop was put in. It helps add to the feelings the police and city portray for him, and only goes to further punish him. Plus, this is Snyder's new Watchmen universe. With the changes already thrown in there, this is merely to add onto the setting that the movie presents, in the case of Rorschach, that clearly vigilantes are not liked by the police, or the people. So next time you whine about that little scene and "it shouldn't be there," think about it.

_________________

Normally? No. There wouldn't be two rookies booking hours on a scene like that... EXCEPT...

Blake was a government operative with tons of secrets and the Feds would make sure his apartment was protected until they could get people in there the next day and figure shit out. Same thing happened when Nicola Tesla died... hurm... story? No, not the fucking Prestige.

I still hate montages.

But the opening credits of this film gave us one of the best montages ever. I'd still have preferred to discover the story in a natural way, but Zack didn't have much time. I get that. And he gave us a beautiful title sequence. But there was a price paid in what we knew and when. But... again... there is too much to know and only two hours roughly to convey it all... just reinforces that this IS NOT CINEMATIC.

Why? Because of EXPOSITION. If you can't put the exposition in the storytelling, you have your work cut out for you. I think Zack handled it well, but it isn't the same as that crystal vision that is the Comic Book. It's hard to deliver an alternate reality and a period piece. It wasn't a period piece when Alan wrote it... so Zack had that extra element to deal with and he did it with great talent.

But I think it was unnecessary. I think Watchmen makes a better story in the modern setting. I know, I know... vynson the purist wants to update the story... Not at all. I just don't think the story is dated. It works better today than it did in the mid 80s. But it requires more subtlety.

Zack Snyder has a load of cinematic talent... but subtlety still lurks in the shadows... as subtlety tends.

Zack reminds me of Tim Robbins in Bull Durham. An amazing and blatant talent who hasn't discovered how to "gift wrap" it... so that we have that element of intellecutal surprise.


Watchmen isn't perfect, but I think it was a turning point in the life of a talented director. He will never be able to disregard detail in his career. I think he's less than a decade from making classics. Not the classics that hypsters call clasics, but the kind of films that are remembered.

Or I could be wrong. We'll see. I hear from reliable sources that, in spite of imdb, he has a project coming up that will involve some major scientologists.

Kinda working on that meself. The wings of heaven on my shoes flapping again. If "he" can find the time to read my script with all the reality bearing down.

Vynson-I think of Zack the same way. Although Watchmen is a great film, I think it's far from being Zack's masterpiece. I also get the feeling that in a while, I'm not as optimistic as you and say that in less than a decade he will achieve the stauts of creating true classics, but eventually he will get there, I'm sure of it. I can see him being the kind of director reminicent of Ridley Scott or John Boorman.

_________________
My unofficial and offical work-> http://www.youtube.com/movieboyandco