That said, I disagree with the validity of a couple of your points. I don’t think it is particularly relevant that the film has a low meta-critic rating or that it was financially unsuccessful. To the extent that popular opinion is relevant, I believe it must be considered over a much longer period, which is indeed consistent with your “last star” methodology of rating movies (i.e. a film can only get the highest rating if it is considered popular years after its release). There are many, many examples of films that are initially unsuccessful and later become popular, Shawshank Redemption being the best I can think of. Shawshank performed dismally at the box office but became a breakaway DVD hit, and of course is now considered one of the great modern films. But an intelligent film critic could have seen Shawshank’s appeal upon a first viewing. I certainly thought it was incredibly compelling the first time I saw it, as did many others. A reviewer that unduly relied on popular opinion in the period between its box office failure and DVD success would unfairly penalize the film rather than emphasize its own inherent value.

More broadly, I don’t put a lot of stock on popular critical opinion. IMDB has the Dark Knight as the 8th greatest movie ever made. I doubt right now I would judge it the 80th greatest movie ever made. To the extent I rely on other critical opinions, I try to look for evidence of deep experience with the medium (for example, the Sight and Sound poll of great films).

At Brian’s advice, I decided to both read the graphic novel (which I did first) and then watch the movie (which I did later in the weekend, a few weeks ago – the Extended Director’s Cut in High Def Blu-Ray). My immediate — and enduring — reaction is that Watchmen was one of the most compelling graphic novels I have ever read, and at the same time, one of the worst films I have ever had the curse of viewing. Ever.

That said, I can understand your rating — the movie had a unique style, it was very (too) faithful to the source material — but I nevertheless feel that any serious movie-watcher who assesses the film on its own merits: the pacing, the vulgarly excessive and meaningless nudity, the arbitrary and laughable translation of major plot moments and storyarc shifts (which are untranslatable for screenplay), etc., would realize that this film – which has a dismally low meta-critic rating, went swiftly to DVD/Blu-Ray after a short box office run, and grossed just double what “300″ made (not a difficult feat) – should be consigned to oblivion.

I hated it.

I have not seen the Director’s Cut, though I know of at least one person who did and did not walk away with a favorable opinion. It might be just too much movie at that point.

Mike – if Nineflick rules (which, of course, it does) then it’s all thanks to the little people like you that make it happen. Awesome comments and I’m glad we agree that Ozymandias needs to be beat up. I just may have to do a Gleaming the Cube review next (Gleaming the Cube!!)

I do think that the violence in the movie turned people off to it. For me it wasn’t a big deal, because I had read the comic the night before and the movies was almost like reading a comic to me. For other people that just went to check out the movie i think it was a little shocking.

I can see how divisive the film can be to the average moviegoer at large, but also within the fan community. It’s got a sprawling, leisurely pace; the “mask killer” plot line kind of meanders here and there, and that it’s not nearly as black and white as even The Dark Knight, but much more challenging to the viewer. But isn’t that part of what makes Watchmen so great as a piece of fiction?

That being said, I would agree that it’s a flawed film, although a very good one. For one, and this has been pointed out in many reviews, while some of the acting is spot-on for the characters, Haley’s take on Rorschach being fantastic as noted, and Jeffrey Dean Morgan bringing a touch of melancholy, pathos and humor to the otherwise repugnant Comedian, Malin Akerman’s take on Silk Spectre left a bit to be desired to say the least. While probably the least-developed main character in the novel, I don’t think she quite pulled it off. And as for your comments on Goode as Veidt, I’d have to agree – he’s a little weak when compared to the character in the book, and I missed him not having his last minute moment of doubt; “I did I the right thing, didn’t I?” he asks. That would have capped his character off nicely. Other than that, I felt Billy Crudup hit just the right notes as Dr. Manhattan, even with the line about dead bodies versus live ones. I thought the origin sequence for him was a prefect translation of the backwards and forwards flow from the comic and looked amazing.

I also like how Snyder used film references throughout – just as Moore and Gibbons used comics references in the graphic novel. For example, Nixon’s War Room isn’t just any War Room, it’s the one from Dr. Strangelove, Vietnam is the ‘Nam of Apocalypse Now, “Ride of the Valkyries” and all, and Manhattan’s quarters are straight out of the end of 2001. And as far as the opening sequence is concerned, it’s flat-out amazing, and puts you right in that world, showing the history of Watchmen, and it’s divergent points from our own world. In my opinion it’s probably the best opening credits sequence since Se7en.

I think they had a tough job with the ending of the movie, and the compromised ending does work. I feel to pull off the ending as written would have been difficult to do, and would have needlessly extended an already lengthy film with additional subplots, and likely would have alienated the audience, with the immense scenes of carnage and the appearance of the Squid. As for the film, it ties everything up pretty well, while still maintaining the approximate tone of Moore’s cataclysmic ending.

I was curious – did you happen to see the Director’s Cut yet? I’m interested in your thoughts on that. While some of the stuff put back into the movie worked for me, I’d have to say the one thing that could have been kept deleted was Laurie’s interrogation by the military. It just seemed superfluous, and impeded the flow of an admittedly overlong film. But taken as a whole, what an embarrassment of riches.