Harry Potter trailer

I'll admit that the Cloverfield characters were generally Too Stupid To Live, but since I run into people like that every day it didn't seem that farfetched to me.

I run into those people every day also, but I like to think they wouldn't survive an event like that. Or at least I'd like to get the joy of seeing them eaten, in return for my $10.

ION, Viggo Mortensen nonwithstanding, Appaloosa is not a good movie.

Viggo Mortensen nonwithstanding, Appaloosa is not a good movie.

Yeah, it's not a horrible way to get through an afternoon, but completely forgettable afterwards. It's hard finding movies that Dad likes, though, so it was worth going to see it with him. (He's a John Wayne buff and loves old-fashioned Westerns, so he's very forgiving of films with quality issues, as long as they feature horses and terse men with guns.)

Roger Ebert gives Watchmen four stars:

I didn't think the review was spoilery for the movie; not even really for the book (which it appears he hasn't read). His final paragraph:

I’m not sure I understood all the nuances and implications, but I am sure I had a powerful experience. It’s not as entertaining as “The Dark Knight,” but like the “Matrix” films, LOTR and “The Dark Knight,” it’s going to inspire fevered analysis. I don’t want to see it twice for that reason, however, but mostly just to have the experience again.

I'm sorry Ebert has lost his voice, but I'm very glad he still has his mind, his fingers, and the Internet.

So I saw the movie tonight. I did indeed feel like I missed some stuff by not reading the graphic novel first. I enjoyed the movie and would call it "good" (like about a 3/3.5 out of 5). I enjoyed Spiderman 2 better, but Watchmen is definitely better than Spidey 3 or Xmen 3.

The scene that Jessica referenced above with the music accompaniment made me laugh out loud in the theater, but I actually think that the director intended the scene to be that cheesy.

The main thing that I felt I was missing is the characters' motivations. I do not (for the life of me) understand what was going through the mind of Ozymandias with his final solution. How had he come to the conclusion that this was the only way to save humankind? And did he really think this was a permanent solution? Beau had to explain to me that the point of Moore's novel is to point out that superheroes aren't fun people to be around and that their way of looking at the world was fundamentally flawed. I now get that, but I'm not sure the movie made this point particularly well.

Can I just say there was a whole lot of blue penis action? I was shocked. Damn. Overall, I was entertained by the movie. I didn't laugh as much as most of the people in the theater. I found the violence really gross most of the time. I thought it was over the top, but again I think that was the director's point.

I'm currently reading the graphic novel, and if the scene is the scene I'm thinking about, simply reading it made me laugh out loud, what with the visuals and the whole "FINALLY!" of it all.

My friend who lent me the novel saw the midnight showing and was mightily impressed, thought it was faithful in content and spirit, and absolutely loved it. Although, I'm a little skeptical of her "spirit" report, since she didn't seem to comprehend that it was different than "original content".

I haven't seen it in the movie yet, but my understanding is that the blue penis action is HUGE in the movie, compared to wee (so to speak) in the comic.

it is OUT OF CONTROL.

ah, yes, ita, that was my chicas other comment: her boyfriend and guy friends were a bit discomfited by the presence of the blue bits.