Monday, March 9, 2009

The Watchmen: Don't Watch, Man...

Ever since I saw the first preview in the theater about three months ago, I have been touting "The Watchmen" as the first must-see film of 2009.

I left out the word "not". As in, "must NOT see."


You see that blue guy over there to the left?

Well, get ready to see his glowing blue penis, over and over and over throughout the film.

Wait, did you just say--

Yes, get ready to see a Superhero's Super Atomic Johnson dangling in your face for 2 hours and 45 minutes.

I don't care how much time and effort and money went into this film. I don't care one bit how true it stayed to the graphic novel it was based on. I don't care about the carefully choreographed fight scenes and the spectacular visual effects. Seriously; those elements alone usually have me declaring any movie "The Best Movie EVER MADE!"

As soon as you put a glowing blue shlong in my face, your film loses all appeal.

Do it more than once, and all I can think to myself is, "Is this director retarded?"

Call it "art." Call it "important to the plot and storyline." Call ME a "homophobe." As soon as you paint a donk blue and make it glow like a rave toy, you have rendered your film absolutely ridiculous.

Show that glowing blue lightstick more than once, and you have lost every last shred of credibility.

Show it over and over and over for damn near three hours, and you hopefully lose your movie-making license for life.

I give "The Watchmen" a zero on a scale of one to ten. Next time, think of the MOVIE GOER when you spend $125 million dollars of Paramount's hard-earned cash, you idiot, not of your own nuclear-homo-erotic fantasies.


Wyokid said...

Steven, Thanks for the warning! On an ironic note - did you see the product that Google Adsense put on your blog? Bulk Blue Glow Sticks... Have a good one!

Wyokid said...

Thanks for the heads up. On an ironic note, did you notice what product Google Adsense attached to your blog? Bulk Blue Glow Sticks! Have a good one!

Richard said...

Steven; it's s shame that you take a movie based on a graphic novel that is on Time magazine's List of AL Time 100 Novels, and boil its 163 minutes down to what I will bet is less than 1 minute of onscreen time of a flaccid blue penis. You seemed to have no trouble whatsoever with the barely-clothed (and in one scene totally naked) WOMEN. Perhaps someone of your religious persuasion should not be reviewing R-rated movies since your spiritual leaders suggest not even seeing them, much less reviewing them?

HappyBack said...

Hey guys, Angry Richard is back! We've missed your bitter vitriolic rants, Angry Richard. Please comment more often.

Richard said...

Hmm. Um, not sure when I was on here in the first place to be BACK; you may be mistaking me for someone else! I don't think I've ever commented here, before; I could be wrong. Anyway, seriously? My comment was hardly angry, bitter, or vitriolic; and simply labeling it so does not dismiss the points mentioned. Oh well...

HappyBack said...

I must be mistaking you for the last angry jackass named Richard who used to inject "my religious views" into every blog or review I'd write. I don't see what that has to do with my review in any way, shape, or form. I just don't want to see anyone's glowing blue penis. Not once, certainly not twice, and MOST certainly not throughout an 3-hour film.

Anonymous said...

I absolutely hated the movie too. Let's see... the plot wasn't as good as the preview. It was long winded and slow.

1) A woman is violently raped.

2) A full blow sex scene

3) Yeah the 10 xs seeing the naked blue guy was annoying

4) the gory hack-and-slash (felt like I could have seen Texas-Chainsaw Massacre)

I almost walked out... I have warned my friends it is not ALL THAT! I could watch a porn if I wanted all the sex / violence. I could have watched a Horror movie if I wanted to see hack and slash. I thought I was seeing a worthwhile movie with substance, but it was robbed of most storyline and anything significant.

Should have been rated NC-17 at least then people would have been properly warned.

Monica said...

Sounds like Dick (Richard) might have a thing for you Steven. Is he a stalker of yours?

I just came to your blog to see what you thought about this movie. I went to see it today, because I was too scard to see "Hauting in Connecticut" alone.