I saw it twice the day it opened, and would recomend others to see it a second time.

I suggest fans of the film go and see it again, just like fans of Pink Floyd bought additional copies of 'Dark Side of the Moon' because 'Thriler' knock it off the #1 spot. Enough of the nit picking!!! Enjoy the film and the fact that it was finally able to be done in a way that would not have worked 20 yrs ago.

No way. I will wait for video, or maybe not even see it at all.
The fact that the screen-writer is begging people to see it makes me want to see it even less.

i would see it again if you haven't changed the ending so much. or actually kept laurie real name which is polish and not lauri jupiter. jupezyck..

i am sorry but you should of kept the alien invasion in instead of making the world against osterman. you said you was faithfull but in the end alan moore was right you where not you ripped the book changed lines and stuff that shouldn't have been changed.

doc manhatten did not destroy 15 cities to stop world war 3. it was one city new york and it was an a pretense of alien invasion that stopped world 3 and had russia pledgeing support and aid for america. the fact you screwed the ending is gonna hurt the film for most fanboys.

The ending was changed, but it didn't actually change the ending. Calm your nerd rage folks, go see the movie again, and support films like these. It was a good movie, and as a good an interpretation as you could get when crossing mediums.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again, GROW UP FANBOYS!!!

Just once I'd like for people to go see a movie just to enjoy it. This constant nitpicking is getting so old it should have died and been buried a long time ago. There's a saying I use, "Those that can't do become critics."

I plan on seeing The Watchmen again because I was blown away.

Odd, the people putting their name on the comment are the ones actually leaving a favorable review. Take that for what its worth.

Exploding people, rape, decapitations by costume super heroes is not entertainment.

@ cycomike:

1. The Jupiter / Jupezyck change was addressed in the graphic novel. It was just carried over into the movie. Not a change.

2. No, Dr. Manhattan didn't destroy those cities. If you think that, I think you do need to see the movie again, because you didn't get the point.

3. z18 is right. The ending didn't really change, just the catalyst that brought about the ending changed. And frankly, I think the movie catalyst fits the storyline better than the book's catalyst. The circumstances at the end of both versions are virtually identical.

Take Hayter's advice and go see it again, people. Or, if you haven't seen it yet, go see it. It's worth the trip.

Cycomike,

"Jupiter" was the name that Sally Jupiter used during the 1940s. That is the same as Martin Sheen using "Sheen" instead of his real Spanish surname Estevez and his son Charlie using Sheen also. Half of Hollywood changes names to make them more acceptable, marketable, or rebel against their parents. How many Jewish actors became Curtis or Lewis? How many Italian actors became Martin or Lombard?

People anglicized their names all the time. For a movie, that makes things move faster and less confusing.

Also, the giant space squid while great for a comic book wouldn't have worked in a movie. Did you read the director's comments about how adding the squid would take forever.

Enjoy the movie for being a movie. Movies have to differ from their source material because different mediums have different constraints (time, budget, special effects, narrative, etc.).

If you don't want to see the movie again, don't do so.

Kicked ass. Must see again. Note to self: get bigger popcorn and tell stupid joke to girl behind counter. Maybe get date. Me so horny.

I used to be a comic reader, but I had not heard of the Watchmen. I tell you this though, the film makers cut out half, if not more, of their revenues by making an 'R' rated adaptation. I'm not going to take my 10 year old to this. I don't know what was in the original graphic novel, but it seems that someone could somehow have toned it to be at least PG. Adults wouldn't have to see it twice if they had made it for a wider audience.

Now you all can joke me for being a boyscout or something similar.

Having been around long enough to have read Watchmen in original (protracted irregular) distribution, I can tell you that this is so far and away the best comic adaptation I've seen. And yeah, I have quibbles with it. But OMG these fanboys are spoiled if they're ragging on this movie.

I mean, are people talking about Elektra like this? EITHER of the last two Hulk movies? Get real.

I think this is going to do phenomenal business on DVD/Blu-Ray.

Right on the money, usagi!

In today’s economy it is ridicules to go see a movie more than once. I would recommend saving your money. The writer just wants his movie to do well, which is fine, but we should look after our lives first not his..

I'll be waiting for Director's cut on DVD. I've waited 20+ years for a movie adaptation. I can wait a little longer....

Laughable, you couldn't adapt Watchmen into a PG movie. The storyline and themes are far too dark to play to younger kids. I would suggest that you do a little research into the series (if you don't want to pick up the graphic novel, Wikipedia has a pretty good article about it). It may not be your cup of tea, but a PG movie wouldn't have a hope of being true to any aspet of the original.

Well, I think it's sad that Hollywood is going to say that they're potentially just not gonna make movies like this again (or even if that's the implied statement here), because the crap they put out now........I do plan on seeing this movie for the first time, but around here (Yakima, Wa.), you wait for the crowds to die down a week or two first.

@ avid film watcher: You said, "Exploding people, rape, decapitations by costume super heroes is not entertainment."

If by "entertainment" you mean "fun and nice and good"--you're right. It's not entertainment in the same sense that a theme-park roller coaster is entertainment. But it IS powerful and hard to watch (and it's supposed to be!) and makes for a gripping film which says something about the human condition; about how we are, how others are and maybe how we can be better.

Was Schindler's List entertainment? Not by the "fun" standard--but it was certainly powerful. Was The Accused entertainment? It won Jodie Foster an Oscar and opened a national discussion about rape and rape victims. But it's hardly in the same category as "Joe Dirt" or "Paul Blart: Mall Cop."

"Entertainment" is a term for movies you watch as an additional refreshment to go with your popcorn.

To the point at hand, though: I'm not going to go see it again. Movies are too expensive as it is, especially in this economy--they're not going to get me to double dip. I'll buy the DVD though, when it comes out.

If Solid Snake begs for help, you bet your ass I'm going to heed the call! (Wow I'm a lot more nerdy than even I gave myself credit for.)

Here is your PG Watchmen

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YDDHHrt6l4w

I was going to see it again anyway, maybe not this week but soon. Anyone who liked the movie was probably going to do the same, so Hayter shouldn't have sounded so desperate with this plea.

This is just pathetic. So "hollywood" will stop making geek centric movies in the future if we don't go see a movie multiple times thereby prop-ing them up. Maybe they shouldn't have made the movie in the first place.

I thought the movie was pretty good but I'm not going see it again just because there is an off-chance that "hollywood" won't make another one like it in the future. Screw you screenwriter guy, maybe you should go write an original story and stop begging us to spend our hard earned money multiple times.

I think I will just boycott all movies and read more novels.

It's a fantastic film and worth seeing again. I plan on seeing it at least twice, and now I'm also reading the graphic novel. You don't have to be a fan of the novel to enjoy the film!

Anyone know what David Hayter's interest in the movie's box office may be besides those stated? I'm sure writers have done this too, but I know cast members often parlay contracts into increased percentages of film revenue _if_ the film grosses beyond a certain threshold. My guess is anyone attached to the film with such a compensation clause isn't getting a big payday based on current projects.

I thought Watchmen was OK, could have been a lot better, could have been a lot worse. Of course I also think the original source is seriously flawed on a number of levels; but I won't belabor my thinking either way here. I will say though that given the nature of the movie, it's obviously not for everyone or even the "mainstream" blockbuster film audience so it's modest/good earnings are about what I'd expect.

usiagi et al., people are passionate about this because it occupies a more cherished place in their lives than the other example you cited. I don't hold that enthusiasm, but I'm not going to diss their sentiment outright.

This is the movie with the fifty million dollar marketing budget, right? I feel like I'm being flagged down by a church group that wants to wash my car in the parking lot. This is not a good sign for Watchmen.

Dr. Manhattan's/Veidt reactor was named S.Q.U.I.D. in the film. I picked that up in the second viewing. Now I will watch it again to find out what SQUID stands for. So it was in the movie after all. I actually enjoyed the ending in the film better than the graphic novel.

My friends and I waited to see the film because we didn't want to fight the crowds. We'll be seeing it the second weekend of release. Hopefully others thought the same thing.

And regarding some people dissing the screen-writer's words - encouraging fans to watch again - by siting them as pathetic, quit being so cynical and condescending. There's nothing wrong with urging fans to embrace a movie, comic, TV show in an underdog genre by supporting it. Anyone who likes science fiction knows that nearly all mediums are harder when their scifi or fantasy. So fans who love this genre need to get out there and support it. So get your noses out of the air and see this picture! I didn't even read the initial novel and I'm going to see it. And if Alan Moore is so high and mighty he can't get behind this exemplary effort to honor his work, then he's a fool. Sorry, don't mean to offend.

I recommend that everyone see it atleast twice, because there are some many different things about this movie to enjoy. It was violent, sexual, and strange, and .....everything. I can't wait to see it again myself

Sorry, I forgot, I haven't even seen the movie or read the graphic novel myself so I'm speaking in ignorance. I apologize for wasting your time with my obviously uninformed rant. I am a posterchild for why so much hollywood entertain sux these days.

I think that overall the movie was the best that could have been accomplished given the time limitations of the theatrical format. I would have preferred a 12-part HBO series with each part an hour long, focusing upon one issue of the graphic story.... But, that just did not happen.
As for the changes from the graphic story that others are soooo upset about; IT HAD TO HAPPEN. The graphic story was just too multi-layered , too complex to have every detail put on screen --even in a film as long as the this.
I actually think that the film endgame plot with Dr. Manhattan made better sense than the graphic 'mutated psychic squid alien' . The graphic story made much of the downside of Dr. Manjhattan`s influence upon the world, and it just makes better sense for him to be made the threat/ scapegoat that brings the Global Superpowers together. It`s less complex, but quite obvious from a narrative perspective when you think about it. Furher, if you want to stick to the whole 'gritty reality' perspective that is the essence of 'Watchmen", WHAT MAKES MORE SENSE...THAT ADRIAN VEIDT WOULD / COULD GENETICALLY ENGINEER A FAUX ALIEN ...OR MANIPULATE DR. MANHATTAN TO FIT THAT ROLE ?

The film has flaws--flaws aplenty. But the ending was not one of them.

Well I only went a saw one movie last year and that was Batman. And I went and saw Watchmen this year. Sorry With DVD release's coming so fast now there not a lot of reason to go watch the movie with a sticky floor when I can sit at home and watch it on my 60" screen and if I need a break I have the pause button!

I'm not all about this guys whining/begging, but he has a good point. The problem with most comic book movies has been studios "tweaking" them because they didn't feel it would appeal to the masses. If Watchmen fails it proves that movies that are made to appease fanboys will only bring in fanboys and we'll continue to end up with fantastic 4's and X-3's forever. If we want our comic book movies to be made faithful to source material, then we have to have proof that they'll make the money that way.

Cycomike, please don't complain about Sally and Laurie's last names as used. There was a shot of Laurie's driver's license, with her real last name on it. As in the comics, Jupter was the way they made the name accessible to Americans. It has been done a lot by immigrants.

Vzx, if you want to see a good interpretation of a complex story, you should see the movie. This is a film that really is better seen on the large screen of a theater.

The point the screenwriter was making is that this isn't a remake of a comedy or slasher film from thirty or forty years ago. It's a rarity from Hollywood, a film with material in it that encourages analysis and thought. I like to see such movies come out, instead of Dude, I Farted in Class 4, or I Know Who You Cut Up With a Saw Last Friday the Thirteenth 6. Encouraging the movies that aspire (and largely succeed!) to more is hardly a bad idea.

FWIW, my wife and I had read the comics as they came out back in the eighties, and we thoroughly enjoyed this treatment. It isn't the same, but it works very well.

In case you hadn't gotten the point anywhere else, don't take any pre-teens to this movie unless they are *very* mature, and leave the immature teenagers home, too.

Perhaps you should have made a better movie. I did not read the graphic novel...and if the movie is true to the novel then perhaps I should have so that I would not have wasted my time going to see it in the first place.

The trailer shows really cool action sequences, special effects, etc it was a good trailer, however...it is not the movie. The movie is quite boring...slow...it was like going to see the movie the village promoted as a scarey horror film but really was just a great drama. This movie was like the village...i went in thinking i was getting something else...only instead of the bait and switch for a good drama...i get whats left in the trash.

Watch OUT! I mean watchmen...stupid Mystery Men equivalent but only it tries to be serious.

BTW, if you have to beg people to watch your movie...you already know you've failed miserably...at least pretend to have some dignity left rather then beg on your knees to waste MORE of our money and a godforsaken another 3 hours for your mistakes.

Awesome movie!!!!!!!!! Hollywood finally made a good comic movie.

Who the frak cares?
Watchmen is THE WORST HERO MOVIE since the BORING TO DEATH Batman 2
We want action not erection problems!

I loved the movie, but given Hayter's idiocy in using a fracking *rape joke* in his pathetic begging for people to spend their hard earned money to see the movie *again*, he's just lost my repeat ticket purchase. I'll download the movie before putting my money in this scumbag's pocket.