|
|
This topic comprises 5 pages: 1 2 3 4 5
|
|
Author
|
Topic: Watchmen (2009)
|
|
|
|
|
Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."
Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001
|
posted 03-11-2009 06:58 PM
quote: Joe Tommassello
Bob - all the advertising and promotion I saw said it was rated "R" - you know...the same rating as "Jerry Maguire". If you want "Tough R" to be an accepted rating then it should probably say that on the poster.
As a matter of fact it did. The "Rated R" logos I saw on TV commercials and posters for Watchmen included this phrase within that rating rectangle: "strong graphic violence, sexuality, nudity and language." Jerry Maguire didn't have a supplemental rating description like that.
quote: Joe Tommassello
Used to be that nudity to that degree got an "X" or "NC-17" automatically and many people probably still assume that is the case.
That's not true. Full frontal nudity does not equate to an automatic "X" or "NC-17," and it hasn't since the ratings system was first put into effect in the 1960s.
quote: Joe Tommassello
Add the fact that there was really no reason for it - and they could have gotten a PG-13 otherwise and had a much wider audience - and it seems a stupid decision by everyone involved. No one would have NOT gone to see it because it was PG-13.
Joe, are you suggesting if Watchmen didn't have the nudity and sexual content it would have been worth a PG-13? The graphic violence content of that movie just on its own merits a strong R rating.
quote: Joe Tommassello
The average moviegoer will not be expecting such content and due to the "comic book" origins of this film might be easily confused into thinking it is more family-friendly.
Adult oriented comic books have been in existence for decades. Graphic novels for adults really came into their own during the 1980s, when Watchmen was first published. Animated movies like Akira and Heavy Metal were released in the 1980s and movies like that were geared for adults, not children.
I have no problem with the adults-only levels of sex and violence in Watchmen. Now, if someone made a new Superman or Batman movie that was R-rated, I would have a problem with that because those characters were created to include kids as members of the audience.
As ignorant as some of today's parents seem to be regarding clearly visible ratings and content warnings, it would be pretty funny for a movie like Fritz the Cat to have its original theatrical release during this time rather than the early 1970s.
| IP: Logged
|
|
Julio Roberto
Jedi Master Film Handler
Posts: 938
From: Madrid, Madrid, Spain
Registered: Oct 2008
|
posted 03-11-2009 08:43 PM
I always found fascinating how different cultures cope with the potentially moraly objectionable subjects.
This film, i.e, is rated Recommended for over 13 in the Philipines, over 15 in Czech, Findland, Norway and Japan, over 16 in New Zeland, Ireland, Netherlands, Portugal, etc.
More interesting is how it can change in different parts of the same country, such as 13+ in french Canada (Quebec) and 14 and 18 in other parts of Canada (i.e. Ontario=18).
In Spain there is no prior censorship based on content, only in the specialized and often self-regulated X-rated market. As a result, movie theaters CAN NOT deny entrance to anyone. The rating system is only a recommendation for parents to grant permission to their children based on a panel of expert's recommedation for age groups (i.e. PG-13, over 18, all audiences). This movie is recommended over 18 in Spain.
As the result of no prior censorship, in Spain, you can get X-rated material free-over the air on television, but usually really late at night. Programs include a rating system and a warning bell when recommeded for over 18+ material is going to be shown on TV.
To be honest, nobody here cares much about their children being exposed to sexual content as much as violence. After all, if my daughter wanted to see a blue penis when she was underage, all she had to do is look out the window from her grandparent's beach house and see how creative some surfer dudes got with their colored tanning protection cream.
But we all understand that customs and "moral values" sometimes differ between cultures and they all have to be respected and make sense equally in their appropiate contexs.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stu Jamieson
Jedi Master Film Handler
Posts: 524
From: Buccan, Qld, Australia
Registered: Jan 2008
|
posted 03-15-2009 08:14 AM
I think it's neither here nor there whether there's nudity in it or not. I like to think (incorrectly it seems) that our society is mature enough not to get hung up over nudity; we're all nude under our clothes anyway! Besides, what's a little blue cock between friends, huh? ![[Wink]](wink.gif)
I'm also surprised about all the hate for this movie. Could it be the nihilistic anti-American themes going on or just expecting a super hero movie perhaps? Anyway, I liked it a lot. Here's my review......
Like Peter Jackson's Lord Of The Rings trilogy, Watchmen distills the spirit of it's source material rather than literally translating it in the style of Robert Rodriguez' Sin City. Much of the detail from the source material is necessarily discarded (some regrettably so - the subplot of Rorschach's alter ego and the death of Hollis Mason, for example) but, as a whole it holds together very well. Those unfamiliar with the source material will find nothing untoward here unlike, say, the Harry Potter films where the plot gaps are enormous. The film evens manages to pull off the near impossible by presenting an alternative ending which is more elegant than the original.
Director, Zack Snyder, displays a penchant for comedy and visual flair in presenting a great opening montage which provides a brief recent history of this alternative universe and sets up the story to follow. He also employs an interesting and provocative use of songs which are almost always inappropriately tagged to incongruous scenes (ballads over fight sequences, for instance) and could easily have become cliché but somehow they work, coming over instead as comical and ironic and further reinforcing that this alternative reality is slightly out of kilter with our own. There's a lot of apparent depth here, it's like several movies in one. Many of the the characters are of sufficient complexity that they could have featured in a simpler (and much lesser) movie of their own. Let's hope that the franchise is not cheapened by a succession of inferior "origin story" sequels.
Performances are all adequate for their roles although Matthew Goode seems a little miscast as Adrian Veidt, lacking the apparent body mass that would be credibly required to perform the feats of strength that he does, but this is a minor point. The film belongs to Jackie Earle Haley, however. His performance of Rorschach is spot on - he's only a little fella but, boy, can he kick arse! - and improves even further when his alter ego is revealed, shifting the film up another gear when it was already cruising along at a decent clip. Criticism of Malin Akerman is unfounded; her purpose is to stand there and look pretty and bed the heroes as the script requires, a role she performs quite nicely, thank you very much.
While the structure of the plot may be a little multi-stranded to be neatly cohesive, there's more than enough interest in the various plot strands throughout and the result is a comic book.....oops, sorry......"graphic novel" adaptation which surpasses Zack Snyder's previous (and rather woeful) 300; indeed it's one of the best ever made.
9 out of 10.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pravin Ratnam
Jedi Master Film Handler
Posts: 844
From: Atlanta, GA,USA
Registered: Sep 2002
|
posted 03-18-2009 04:10 PM
I saw it at Regal Hollywood 24. The image was a tad dull but I am assuming it was the cinematography and not a dim projector bulb. The booth was noisy as hell, but I tuned it out after 15 min.
I did not read the book. But I liked, not loved, the movie and give it a B, though I thought V For Vendetta was filmed in a more entertaining manner.
I do think the story took itself too seriously but did not give us characters deep enough to merit that solemness. Example: Malin Ackerman's Silk Spectre. It was like she got hired for the sex scenes and nothing else.
MINI-SPOILER START I also did not buy the ending as a long term fix for whatever ails mankind since men will always find an excuse to fight each other. MINI-SPOILER END
As far as parenting, I would not judge it by parents bringing their preteen kids to this one movie alone. I don't think the problem is if your kids end up watching an occasional R movie. The only factor to consider is if the parents are ready to face the embarrassment of collectively watching it when their kids might make funny comments or ask awkward questions. South Park had it right with their Jonas Bros. episode. It is the constant bombardment of PG-13 stuff that has no redeeming value that could have a worse effect on their upbringing than an occasional non-smutty R. The R is meant to be a general guideline, not a "NEVER WATCH R if you are young". You just don't want your kids watching too many of them and if the movie is quality enough to merit exposure to that stuff.
While I had no restrictions as a kid when it came to watching movie, my family is prudish when it comes to the "embarrassment" factor of nudity and such. Still, I was exposed to the penis in a naked fight scene in Shaft in Africa as a lil kid, and all my cousins and I did was to laugh at it. Hell, I even watched Frenzy when I was 8 during a rerelease. I was a mature kid as far as movies were concerned. My mom would not take me to Blame it ON Rio or Basic Instinct type movie(and I certainly wouldnt want to watch that movie with her next to me), but she was confident I could handle serious cinema since two or three R movies a year is not going to warp me.
But I do fault parents for mistaking this movie for a regular comic book movie and taking their kids to it like a routine movie. They need to do cursory research and determine if its appropriate. The only objectionable thing I found was the glorification of the rapist. In a graphic novel, that stuff can pass, but in a mainstream big budget movie, I do not know if that tone is acceptable.
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chad Souder
Jedi Master Film Handler
Posts: 962
From: Waterloo, IA, USA
Registered: Feb 2000
|
posted 03-18-2009 08:17 PM
Sometimes movies get made because there are enough fans of the original work(s) that the movie makers feel they can turn a profit without gaining much of an additional audience. Sex and the City comes to mind. The violence, nudity, etc. in this movie is all expected by existing fans. If new fans are made, so be it, but I don't think they were counting on that to make their money. If you didn't like it, too bad. It was as true to the original comic as possible and that was done for the existing fans, not for new viewers. People surprised by the content are at fault for not researching what they are about to see.
quote: Bobby Henderson
Now, if someone made a new Superman or Batman movie that was R-rated, I would have a problem with that because those characters were created to include kids as members of the audience.
That completely contradicts your statement that quote: Bobby Henderson
That should be enough of a warning for parents to think twice before taking young kids to see this movie. A blue schlong isn't the most morally objectionable thing in this movie. If Mom and Dad have their panties in a bunch over the movie's content they both need to learn how to freaking read. The rated R logo (and all the descriptive stuff underneath) is not there just to jazz up the look of the movie poster.
Regardless of the characters involved, it is always the responsibility of the viewer to research. There is little if any resemblance between Danny DeVito's Penquin and Burgess Meredith's, yet they are the same character. I remember being 14 watching Tim Burton's Batman and seeing children crying, leaving with their parents. The evolution of the Harry Potter movies also comes to mind. Indiana Jones went in reverse, growning softer as they progressed. If Superman was done as the comics portrayed him, it would also be much darker, violent, etc.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
This topic comprises 5 pages: 1 2 3 4 5
|
Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM
6.3.1.2
The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion
and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.
|
Home
![[thumbsup]](graemlins/thumbsup.gif)
![[eyes]](graemlins/eyes.gif)
![[evil]](graemlins/evil.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic