The Watchmen

[Gubaba]

If he did nothing to prevent it other than killing millions of people. He knew it was coming for over a year he could have used his wealth and power to try to bring both sides to the peace table, or he could have killed Nixon. The movie did not explain Adrian's early life or career as super hero, and I was not aware that he came from money, but he was still doing this for power. It took forty years to build the worlds nuclear arsenal it would have taken a couple of decades to rebuild it to the the glory of 1985. I should have gone into more detail in to how DR, M could have dismantled the nuclear arsenal.

Again, he already had a lot of power and influence...how could he gain more by implementing a plan that no one could ever know even WAS his plan? He's already got his fingers in nearly every pie out there. If he can have a custom giant feline created especially for him as a pet, he's got some serious pull.

No, the guy definitely had good intentions, and wanted a permanent solution. Peace talks wouldn't have changed people's mindsets; neither would dismantling the nuclear arsenal, even if Dr. Manhattan had gone along with it. Making the world have to band together against a common enemy really DOES seem like a good solution (to me, anyway).

Again, Adrian is pretty whacked-out, but I do think he is honest and forthright to his former colleagues; and I believe him when he said that he made himself feel every death that he caused. He knows what he did was a grand-scale atrocity, but he really thought it was the only way.

But again, the key to everything is the Tales of the Black Freighter, which has a lot to say about what happens to people willing to commit atrocities to save their home...

[miles316]

Again, he already had a lot of power and influence...how could he gain more by implementing a plan that no one could ever know even WAS his plan? He's already got his fingers in nearly every pie out there. If he can have a custom giant feline created especially for him as a pet, he's got some serious pull.

No, the guy definitely had good intentions, and wanted a permanent solution. Peace talks wouldn't have changed people's mindsets; neither would dismantling the nuclear arsenal, even if Dr. Manhattan had gone along with it. Making the world have to band together against a common enemy really DOES seem like a good solution (to me, anyway).

Again, Adrian is pretty whacked-out, but I do think he is honest and forthright to his former colleagues; and I believe him when he said that he made himself feel every death that he caused. He knows what he did was a grand-scale atrocity, but he really thought it was the only way.

But again, the key to everything is the Tales of the Black Freighter, which has a lot to say about what happens to people willing to commit atrocities to save their home...

What is "The Tales of the Black Freighter" is it a book or graphic novel. Every monster has had his reason for committing his atrocity they even have a kernel of legitimacy, but they all eventually do their thing out of selfish reasons power, money.

Adrian could have convinced DR, Manhattan to go along with his plan by explaining it in a logical manner. Night Owl II, and Silk Specter could have been brought over to his way of thinking by using fear of nuclear war. Rorschach probably the one that could have been manipulated the easiest given his utter lack a faith in humanity; could have been persuaded by calming it would have scared morality in to humanity. Painting the city's as bastions of immorality and sin convincing him they were the source of humanity's problems that they were responsible for the little girls death. The reason he tried to drive them away form the life of super hero was because he is planing world domination. Adrian had to drive the only man that could stop him as far away from the earth as possible.

Edited March 10, 2009 by miles316

[Totoro242]

Rorschach certainly accepts his fate in the end though. In both versions. (He knows that he can't escape Manhattan but he hardly goes out with guns blazing anyway.) I think that the people being vapourised in the end reflects effectively what would have happened in a nuclear exchange anyway. The alien thing in the comic looked a bit daft to me by comparison.

BTW.

Why

are

we

using

spoilers

here

anyway

?

LOL, because there are people who clearly havent seen the movie and I would hate to ruin it for anyone, since the ending or the difference between the two endings is an intgral part of the experience

I'm totally cool with changing how the ending came about, it does make more sense as far as reasonable believability is concerned, its just the delivery that fell short IMO

[Totoro242]

But again, the key to everything is the Tales of the Black Freighter, which has a lot to say about what happens to people willing to commit atrocities to save their home...

I always saw it's message as this; if you fight against your enemy on his level, you end up destroying the very thing you wanted to save and become the very thing you are fighting against.

[miles316]

Did Adrian build a tachyon generator to blind DR, Manhattans powers in the graphic novel.

Edited March 10, 2009 by miles316

[Gubaba]

What is "The Tales of the Black Freighter" is it a book or graphic novel.

It's a story-within-the-story that comments directly upon the action in a number of scenes, and acts out the larger themes of the story in miniature.

Every monster has had his reason for committing his atrocity they even have a kernel of legitimacy, but they all eventually do their thing out of selfish reasons power, money.

Again, he didn't have to kill three million people to gain money, power, and influence. He already hobnobs with world leaders and and is a multi-millionaire. What did he possibly gain in terms of power that he didn't already have?

Adrian could have convinced DR, Manhattan to go along with his plan by explaining it in a logical manner. Night Owl II, and Silk Specter could have been brought over to his way of thinking by using fear of nuclear war. Rorschach probably the one that could have been manipulated the easiest given his utter lack a faith in humanity; could have been persuaded by calming it would have scared morality in to humanity. Painting the city's as bastions of immorality and sin convincing him they were the source of humanity's problems that they were responsible for the little girls death. The reason he tried to drive them away form the life of super hero was because he is planing world domination. Adrian had to drive the only man that could stop him as far away from the earth as possible.

Dr. Manhattan's LOVER barely convinced him to go back to earth, and even then, he only stayed briefly. Living person, dead person...it's all the same to him. He doesn't feel much connection to humanity (it's even in his name: "Osterman" = "Ostracized Man"), and shows repeatedly that the future of mankind is really not terribly interesting to him. As Adrian says, it's like asking a person to care deeply about the life of an ant.

What "logic" could Adrian use that would persuade him?

[drifand]

I felt that what the movie got right is mostly just the physical appearances. The direction was uninspired and I think all this slavish following of the comic book panels in place of proper storyboarding for film is a huge mistake. The important bits (to me) such as Rorschach's episode with the psychiatrist, were truncated too much. I hated the error of omission that caused the Comedian to have no proof or reason to be depressed to tears. Did not like the fake-looking Nixon makeup. Did not find the non-canon additions such as Lee Iacocca to be of value or much humour. Missed the squid.

Edited March 11, 2009 by drifand

[bob joe mac]

Saw it loved it not PERFECT but pretty damn close anything that adapts the story to film with 90% accuracy is a pretty amazing achievement by me.

I barely noticed the slow downs and for a lot of them it did the slow down to show that they used the exact same scene from the comic.

The ONLY problem I had with the entire movie was Veidt's cat... if they we're going to cut out the genetic squid stuff why keep the cat in? Also why only put it in at the very very end as I recall it being in the comic just sorta in the background. I dunno only problem I had.

Also one of the funny things I noticed during the couple fight between John and Laurie when you could see Veidt and crew on screen in the background and the acronym for whatever they were working on was SQUID. lol

So for all the fanboy hate they can go set their insanely high exceptions and never be happy with anything that ever comes out ever.

[Gubaba]

So for all the fanboy hate they can go set their insanely high exceptions and never be happy with anything that ever comes out ever.

Yep, I hate everything ever made. There's absolutely nothing I like. At all.

I'm a bitter shell of a man who drinks chilled puppy blood.

(Really, now...just because some of us are not thrilled or supportive of this movie, that means we don't like ANYTHING? Please...)

[bob joe mac]

Yep, I hate everything ever made. There's absolutely nothing I like. At all.

I'm a bitter shell of a man who drinks chilled puppy blood.

(Really, now...just because some of us are not thrilled or supportive of this movie, that means we don't like ANYTHING? Please...)

Well I'm not referring to anyone in particular just been reading FAR to much hate towards this movie and when it comes to all them internet folk it seems NOTHING can please internet folk.

But like I said I think the insanely harsh judgment this movies been getting shouldn't be final until the director's cut is out.

[Loner]

I liked the film, but I won't pass judgment on Snyder's adaptation until the release of the directors cut.

[miles316]

I felt that what the movie got right is mostly just the physical appearances. The direction was uninspired and I think all this slavish following of the comic book panels in place of proper storyboarding for film is a huge mistake. The important bits (to me) such as Rorschach's episode with the psychiatrist, were truncated too much. I hated the error of omission that caused the Comedian to have no proof or reason to be depressed to tears. Did not like the fake-looking Nixon makeup. Did not find the non-canon additions such as Lee Iacocca to be of value or much humour. Missed the squid.

Didn't the comedian discover the conspiracy while spying on the watchman for Nixon, or was he involved in it and had a break down because of it. That is throwing me off too he told mulick (cant spell it) he found a list.

[dreamweaver13]

If he did nothing to prevent it other than killing millions of people. He knew it was coming for over a year he could have used his wealth and power to try to bring both sides to the peace table, or he could have killed Nixon. The movie did not explain Adrian's early life or career as super hero, and I was not aware that he came from money, but he was still doing this for power. It took forty years to build the worlds nuclear arsenal it would have taken a couple of decades to rebuild it to the the glory of 1985. I should have gone into more detail in to how DR, M could have dismantled the nuclear arsenal.

the answer is... because it's what's in the comics. so it was written, so it shall be done.

IMHO, if the ultimate solution in the Watchmen comics was that Veidt just disarmed the nukes, or killed Nixon, or called for world peace (kumbaya lord, kumbaya...), then I doubt that Watchmen would have been hailed as one of the greatest comics of all time. I mean, yes, there's a nuclear threat to destroy the entire earth, and what does the hero do to avert it? take all the nukes away! whoop-de-doo! it's like superman IV all over again.

What i'm saying is that, sure Moore could have chosen a more direct way for Veidt to solve the nuclear crisis, but what point would that have made? The title and the tagline says it all. Who Watches the Watchmen? Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? and Socrates's or Platos's (i can't remember) answer to that was to make the watchmen believe that they are better than those they serve and it's their duty to guard and protect those lesser beings. The premise is that the "watchman" is doing everything for the good of those he serves. but since the only judge of whether his action is moral or immoral, then we have a problem. and what's beautiful about the Watchmen comics is how Moore was able to translate that greatest condundrum into a wonderful story. But if the only solution at the end was as simple as you want it to be, then the premise of "Who Watches the Watchmen" gets lost in the translation.

In the comics (and in the movie as well), i thought it was clear that Veidt's intentions were pure. Granted his method was extreme, but to his mind, as the smartest man on earth, it was the only way to ensure the end of the cycle of violence. Too bad it failed because of Rorscarch's journal.

[Gubaba]

Well I'm not referring to anyone in particular just been reading FAR to much hate towards this movie and when it comes to all them internet folk it seems NOTHING can please internet folk.

But like I said I think the insanely harsh judgment this movies been getting shouldn't be final until the director's cut is out.

Hmmm. I don't know about elsewhere, but the poll results here at least are more positive than not. Admittedly, the professional critics haven't been terribly kind. Neither have most people I've talked to in, y'know, real life.

In fact, the only positive review I heard from from the guy I met (which I talked about some ten or twenty pages back) who had worked on the movie. He said the three-hour cut was much better than the two-and-a-half-hour version.

I haven't seen the movie, so I can't be harsh directly...all I can say is that the things I love in the comic are unfilmable, and nothing i've heard leads me to believe that I'll like the movie.

Speaking theoretically, I think with adaptations of this sort, so much gets lost that changes NEED to be made. A lot of 'em. Watchmen the comic is quite avant garde and experimental, so I think any film of it should have been as well. But people generally don't like experimental movies, and studios DEFINITELY don't like them...and a major studio is the only place the funding needed to make the movie could be raised. I dunno.

(I'm also against the implicit idea that movies need to be made out of EVERYTHING, but I'll save that rant for another place and time.)

[Gubaba]

Didn't the comedian discover the conspiracy while spying on the watchman for Nixon, or was he involved in it and had a break down because of it. That is throwing me off too he told mulick (cant spell it) he found a list.

Poor, poor Max Shea...we hardly knew ye.

[bob joe mac]

Hmmm. I don't know about elsewhere, but the poll results here at least are more positive than not. Admittedly, the professional critics haven't been terribly kind. Neither have most people I've talked to in, y'know, real life.

In fact, the only positive review I heard from from the guy I met (which I talked about some ten or twenty pages back) who had worked on the movie. He said the three-hour cut was much better than the two-and-a-half-hour version.

I haven't seen the movie, so I can't be harsh directly...all I can say is that the things I love in the comic are unfilmable, and nothing i've heard leads me to believe that I'll like the movie.

Speaking theoretically, I think with adaptations of this sort, so much gets lost that changes NEED to be made. A lot of 'em. Watchmen the comic is quite avant garde and experimental, so I think any film of it should have been as well. But people generally don't like experimental movies, and studios DEFINITELY don't like them...and a major studio is the only place the funding needed to make the movie could be raised. I dunno.

(I'm also against the implicit idea that movies need to be made out of EVERYTHING, but I'll save that rant for another place and time.)

The one main thing that could never make it into the movie was the massive back story. I mean holy hell I remember skipping all the news article's and under the hood pages and only reading the main story the first time I read the watchmen. Later I would go online and read about all this history that was in those pages. That is what was hard to put in the movie although they still tried with the opening montage.

I think they movie portryed the main plot nearly perfectly with some scenes that I assume will be in the directors cut like the death of Night Owl 1 Hollis Mason as they introduced him at the start of the film but never didn't do much else with him.

[Gubaba]

The one main thing that could never make it into the movie was the massive back story. I mean holy hell I remember skipping all the news article's and under the hood pages and only reading the main story the first time I read the watchmen. Later I would go online and read about all this history that was in those pages. That is what was hard to put in the movie although they still tried with the opening montage.

I think they movie portryed the main plot nearly perfectly with some scenes that I assume will be in the directors cut like the death of Night Owl 1 Hollis Mason as they introduced him at the start of the film but never didn't do much else with him.

I've said it before, but the thing I loved about the comic that could never make it on to the screen were all the little touches...the way Chapter 5 is completely symmetrical (in that the first page mirrors the last page, the second page mirrors the second-to-last page, and so on until you get to Adrian killing his would-be assassin in the middle), the way that text comments, mostly ironically, on what's going on visually (most of the "Black Freighter" text is like this), all the puns visual and verbal ("FALLOUT SHELTER" getting reduced to "ALL HEL" because of "camera angle" and smoke, the bodybullding ad on the back of "Black Freighter" advertising "THE VEIDT METHOD: I WILL GIVE YOU BODIES BEYOND YOUR WILDEST IMAGININGS"), all that stuff put in the background to be discovered sometimes only on your fourth or fifth reading of the comic. The plot is interesting, but not the best (Alan Moore himself has managed to top it on several occasions). Ditto the characters. The formal characteristics are what make it so powerful and groundbreaking, and those can't be filmed.

But hey, just as long as they don't try to make a Promethea movie next, my complaining is done. Unless my curiosity gets the better of me and I end up renting the DVD of Watchmen when it comes out, and i end up hating it more than I thought I would. But that's unlikely.

[dreamweaver13]

Hmmm. I don't know about elsewhere, but the poll results here at least are more positive than not. Admittedly, the professional critics haven't been terribly kind. Neither have most people I've talked to in, y'know, real life.

In fact, the only positive review I heard from from the guy I met (which I talked about some ten or twenty pages back) who had worked on the movie. He said the three-hour cut was much better than the two-and-a-half-hour version.

I haven't seen the movie, so I can't be harsh directly...all I can say is that the things I love in the comic are unfilmable, and nothing i've heard leads me to believe that I'll like the movie.

But face it, you're gonna see the movie eventually. whether tomorrow or a few years from now, on video or on a random night with nothing else to watch on HBO. and even then, you'll end up comparing it to the comics anyway, so why delay the inevitable? get it done with.

It's not like you can go on with your life, actively avoiding anything to do with watching the Watchmen movie, stepping out of the room when your friends or family want to watch it, unless.... unless youre...

OMG, Alan Moore, is that you????

Edited March 11, 2009 by dreamweaver13

[Gubaba]

hell, for all i know, Gubaba could be Tobey Maguire.

It's not like you can go on with your life, actively avoiding anything to do with watching the Watchmen movie, stepping out of the room when your friends or family want to watch it, unless.... unless youre...

OMG, Alan Moore, is that you????

What is it with you and thinking I'm someone famous...?

[uminoken]

I think they could have pulled off the original ending.....Oh yeah... what was the song playing during Doc Manhattan's arrival on mars/montage?

IMHO, I think the movie was definitely the best job they could have done while still respecting the material. In terms of aesthetics the movie was wonderfully made, with almost every scene being artfully shot. The music selections were fantastic and very well placed. Wasn't too keen on Cohen's singlish version of Hallelujah however. Most of Manhattan's backstory was scored by Starbuck's father - Phillip Glass. The main song is on the Watchmen soundtrack - "The Philip Glass Ensemble - Pruit Igoe & Prophecies"

In regards to the squid - When I first read the comic, although I definitely acknowledge the ideas behind it, the interdimensional squid completely threw me out of the story. Until that moment it was very gritty, psuedo-realistic, alternate world. Throwing in the mind squid suddenly threw it back into the aesthetic of your average monster-of-the-week comic. Having Manhattan be the indirect cause of the holocaust made much more sense within the movie's world. In addition, having multiple cities targeted makes it much more believable that other countries would be willing to talk, whereas in the book other countries are basically taking pity on poor america getting whacked by aliens yet again.

[dreamweaver13]

What is it with you and thinking I'm someone famous...?

still haven't forgiven me for that one, eh?

[Gui]

Saw it yesterday

It's "Watchmen for Dummies"

Not really bad, but not good either: just somewhere in the middle...

[miles316]

the answer is... because it's what's in the comics. so it was written, so it shall be done.

IMHO, if the ultimate solution in the Watchmen comics was that Veidt just disarmed the nukes, or killed Nixon, or called for world peace (kumbaya lord, kumbaya...), then I doubt that Watchmen would have been hailed as one of the greatest comics of all time. I mean, yes, there's a nuclear threat to destroy the entire earth, and what does the hero do to avert it? take all the nukes away! whoop-de-doo! it's like superman IV all over again.

What i'm saying is that, sure Moore could have chosen a more direct way for Veidt to solve the nuclear crisis, but what point would that have made? The title and the tagline says it all. Who Watches the Watchmen? Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? and Socrates's or Platos's (i can't remember) answer to that was to make the watchmen believe that they are better than those they serve and it's their duty to guard and protect those lesser beings. The premise is that the "watchman" is doing everything for the good of those he serves. but since the only judge of whether his action is moral or immoral, then we have a problem. and what's beautiful about the Watchmen comics is how Moore was able to translate that greatest condundrum into a wonderful story. But if the only solution at the end was as simple as you want it to be, then the premise of "Who Watches the Watchmen" gets lost in the translation.

In the comics (and in the movie as well), i thought it was clear that Veidt's intentions were pure. Granted his method was extreme, but to his mind, as the smartest man on earth, it was the only way to ensure the end of the cycle of violence. Too bad it failed because of Rorscarch's journal.

In the graphic novel at the end does it show the rebuilding of New York, and if it does show the rebuilding. Is Adrian's company rebuilding the city like it shows in the movie because I see his company logo all over ground zero. That is what is making impossible for me to believe that Adrian did it purely for the good of man kind.

I'm thinking of buying the watchman motion comic from On Demand from my cable provider. Does it follow the original comic or the movie.

[Gubaba]

In the graphic novel at the end does it show the rebuilding of New York, and if it does show the rebuilding. Is Adrian's company rebuilding the city like it shows in the movie because I see his company logo all over ground zero. That is what is making impossible for me to believe that Adrian did it purely for the good of man kind.

I'm thinking of buying the watchman motion comic from On Demand from my cable provider. Does it follow the original comic or the movie.

Why are you so afraid of motionless pictures and text? Just buy the comic!

[Mog]

As one of the few schmucks who hasn't fully read the comic yet, you should at least give the film this much credit: after watching the film, I'm itching even more to read the comic.

If the film can elicit a similar response from other folks who haven't read the comic yet, then I think the film has served its purpose.

No doubt the film will never replace the comic book version (Great pieces of art have a way of forcing you accept them at their terms and not your own). But I think it should be cool if the film acts as the proverbial "gateway drug" for the comic book.

[bob joe mac]

As one of the few schmucks who hasn't fully read the comic yet, you should at least give the film this much credit: after watching the film, I'm itching even more to read the comic.

If the film can elicit a similar response from other folks who haven't read the comic yet, then I think the film has served its purpose.

No doubt the film will never replace the comic book version (Great pieces of art have a way of forcing you accept them at their terms and not your own). But I think it should be cool if the film acts as the proverbial "gateway drug" for the comic book.

100% agree with you after the movie my buddy who went with me borrowed it off me immediately lol.

[miles316]

Why are you so afraid of motionless pictures and text? Just buy the comic!

It would have cost me like twelve dollars to watch the entire motion comic On Demand, and it would have cost me twenty five dollars to buy it at Wall mart. That is why I was asking if it differed from the movie.

[Gubaba]

It would have cost me like twelve dollars to watch the entire motion comic On Demand, and it would have cost me twenty five dollars to buy it at Wall mart. That is why I was asking if it differed from the movie.

Libraries are free and convenient!

"Give a hoot!

Read a book."

[dreamweaver13]

It would have cost me like twelve dollars to watch the entire motion comic On Demand, and it would have cost me twenty five dollars to buy it at Wall mart. That is why I was asking if it differed from the movie.

Most people here have been saying that the comics is different from the movie, but not in plot, storyline or characters. it's really hard to explain. so just buy it, or borrow it from someone, or even download the thing, and judge for yourself.

and to answer your question, no, the comics did not show any reconstruction by Veidt, if i recall correctly (correct me if i'm wrong, guys). and if the message you got from the movie's end is that Veidt did it all to conquer the world and the construction business, than that's one more sign that something got lost in the translation when it was made into a movie. as for me, even if i saw that reconstruction part, i didn't interpret it as Veidt having financial motives. but that's just me; i might be biased because i read the comic.

[miles316]

Most people here have been saying that the comics is different from the movie, but not in plot, storyline or characters. it's really hard to explain. so just buy it, or borrow it from someone, or even download the thing, and judge for yourself.

and to answer your question, no, the comics did not show any reconstruction by Veidt, if i recall correctly (correct me if i'm wrong, guys). and if the message you got from the movie's end is that Veidt did it all to conquer the world and the construction business, than that's one more sign that something got lost in the translation when it was made into a movie. as for me, even if i saw that reconstruction part, i didn't interpret it as Veidt having financial motives. but that's just me; i might be biased because i read the comic.

In the film his company is profiting from the catastrophe it just does not site well with me. Maybe if they had shown a paper saying Veidt resigning from his company, or undergoing some kind of penance for his dark deed. It might be different.

[Gubaba]

In the film his company is profiting from the catastrophe it just does not site well with me. Maybe if they had shown a paper saying Veidt resigning from his company, or undergoing some kind of penance for his dark deed. It might be different.

He already underwent penance... As he says (and this time, I had to pull out the comic to check), "I know people think me callous, but I've made myself feel every death. By day, I imagine endless faces. By night...

Well, I dream about swimming towards a hideous... No, never mind. It isn't significant."

(Of course, he's wrong about that last bit...it's EXTRAORDINARILY significant...)

The extent of his financial gain at the end of the comic is that he has released a new brand of cologne.

I seriously doubt even he would kill three million people just so his new scent would be a hit.

[promethuem5]

Just got back from it and wow, I LOVED it... took a non-comic book fan from work and her friend, and they were both glad they saw it at the end. The film was INTENSE, and that's both in a good and bad way, but overall I loved it and voted for 5 stars. I'm in decompression right now, and definitely going to reread the book now, but yeah, this one seemed spot on to me. I can see where people complain a bit about the pacing, but I'll decide on that after rereading the book... I don't think it was bad at all, but I suppose people could feel the middle drags on a bit, where we're past introducing the characters but not ready to get to the heart of the plot yet.

I also found the casting and technical aspects of the movie phenomenal... Rorschach was excellent right to the end, Manhattan was just the right amount of distant and clueless while being omnipotent, and Owl was great too, and the modern costume really worked.

The opening montage also blew me away... especially with the music, which was excellent throughout the film. The work done to set this as a period piece really paid off, and I for one appreciated it greatly.

[dreamweaver13]

Btw anyone got the OST? how is it?

[uminoken]

Btw anyone got the OST? how is it?

I've got both score and soundtrack and made a one cd compilation choosing the best between the two.

Most of the soundtrack is self-explanatory, Cohen's 'Hallelujah' grows on you, and 'Watchtower' is fun as always, and the rest of the music is very well-chosen just like in the film, but the highlight has got to be Glass' piece 'Pruit Igoe & Prophecies'. Very liturgical and perfectly suited to Dr. Manhattan.

The score itself is actually pretty darn good. Except for 'Prison Riot' which sounds ripped straight from Bate's 300 score, the rest of the cd varies from atmospheric cues (most of them lasting only a minute or so), lush string writing ('Don't Get Too Misty Eyed', 'I Love You Mom'), to vibrant hero music ('Rescue Mission', 'Silk Spectre') to massive epic cues ('What About Janie Slater', 'Just Look Around You', 'Countdown').

Overall I think it's his best score, a cross between Zimmer's more atmospheric Batman scores and traditional themed superhero writing.

Edited March 13, 2009 by uminoken

[Gubaba]

Btw anyone got the OST? how is it?

It's good, of course, but you probably have most of the music from it already.

I do think that getting My Chemical Romance to whittle "Desolation Row" down from nine verses to three and a half, and covering it as though it had been a Sex Pistols song (and throwing in a bit of Hendrix for good measure) was not a good idea. But who knows, it might grow on me.