Watchmen 2009 ULTIMATE CUT

the_syco

“Warner Home Video has officially announced release of ‘Watchmen: The Ultimate Cut’ for November 3. Ultimate cut will contain the animated comic ‘Tales of the Black Freighter’ woven into the director’s cut of the film. The total running length will be 215 minutes.”

WOW! This will be so, so, SO COOL!

And yes, your American cousin has it.

Wonder what the next "cut" will be? There's been so many so far

niallon

Watchmen Director's Cut is about 2 and a half hours, Black Freighter is roughly an hour so this is literally just the DC with Freighter thrown in. Still waiting on the Final Cut

Fago123

Presume this is Region 1 only? Any word on a Region 2 release?

the_syco

niallon wrote: »

Watchmen Director's Cut is about 2 and a half hours, Black Freighter is roughly an hour so this is literally just the DC with Freighter thrown in. Still waiting on the Final Cut

You're probably right. Wonder how long they can make it? 4 hours? :pac:

ChumpStain

niallon wrote: »

Watchmen Director's Cut is about 2 and a half hours, Black Freighter is roughly an hour so this is literally just the DC with Freighter thrown in. Still waiting on the Final Cut

AFAIK the Black Freighter is only about 25 mins long so I think this could be the final cut.

niallon

ChumpStain wrote: »

AFAIK the Black Freighter is only about 25 mins long so I think this could be the final cut.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1295071/

I stand corrected, Play.com lied to me! Guess this is it so!

humanji

ChumpStain wrote: »

AFAIK the Black Freighter is only about 25 mins long so I think this could be the final cut.

Well there's the Black Freighter and the documentary (Beyond The Hood, or something) and I think they're about half an hour each so it comes to about an hour.

rednik

Fago123 wrote: »

Presume this is Region 1 only? Any word on a Region 2 release?

The previous blu ray releases were region free and Warner Bros don't region lock many releases but wait until it is reviewed soon as I am and then buy it when confirmed region free.

faceman

Will the ending be the same?

Duggy747

Jesus, the Director's Cut was 3 hours on the button, you'd need some patience for this cut!

Speaking of cuts, imagine watching the original 5 hour version of The Punisher (2004)?

pixelburp

faceman wrote: »

Will the ending be the same?

Yup, as far as I know; Synder openly admitted that the

giant psyhic squid ( jesus, even typing that sounds dumb)

had been totally dropped from the script, these new cuts are just all the additional scenes re-instated into the film.

Can't say I'm in any rush to be honest, the pace of the theatrical cut was positively lethargic at times. I'm not sure if the movie would have worked with more trimming to the script, but dear god, three and a half hours? Errrgh, I don't believe slavish adaptations (ending notwithstanding) work.

kaimera

meh.

now 5 hours of the punisher I'd prolly watch!

Fysh

Feh, it's not going to change the fact that Snyder's film and the script it used managed to mimic the comic's aesthetic very closely while missing the point of the whole thing...I can't help but wonder if they'll fix the gaffe that the theatrical cut had with the original Nite Owl's garage sign, though.

humanji

What gaffe is that?

faceman

pixelburp wrote: »

Can't say I'm in any rush to be honest, the pace of the theatrical cut was positively lethargic at times. I'm not sure if the movie would have worked with more trimming to the script, but dear god, three and a half hours? Errrgh, I don't believe slavish adaptations (ending notwithstanding) work.

Yeah i agree with you.

johnny_ultimate

Yup can't say I'm particularly excited about this - think the only way Watchmen would improve in any significant sense would be to get another director to do a cut. My major problem with the film was Snyder's infuriating over-stylisation of everything, so a few hours more of that isn't appealing!

I'd watch it if they changed the soundtrack though. Which they more than likely won't.

Kess73

pixelburp wrote: »

Yup, as far as I know; Synder openly admitted that the

giant psyhic squid ( jesus, even typing that sounds dumb)

had been totally dropped from the script, these new cuts are just all the additional scenes re-instated into the film.

Can't say I'm in any rush to be honest, the pace of the theatrical cut was positively lethargic at times. I'm not sure if the movie would have worked with more trimming to the script, but dear god, three and a half hours? Errrgh, I don't believe slavish adaptations (ending notwithstanding) work.

I have the directors cut on blu ray, and the additional time actually adds to the film rather than making it drag. It improves on the theatrical version and has key scenes that were missing from the theatrical version like:

Hollis' murder with him and his dog going down swinging and Daniel's reaction to hearing the news. Plus there are extended fight scenes which improve the cut fight scenes.

Fysh

humanji wrote: »

What gaffe is that?

There's a scene showing the sign outside Hollis Mason's garage, with part of the text on the sign reading "Obsolete models a specialty", which is a reference to Dr Manhattan's creation of the electric engine. (I think it's explained in the Under The Hood segment in the comic, but I could be wrong).

Given the film's changed focus and amended alternate history, this is no longer the case - but as far as I recall, the sign still had that text.

Kess73

Fysh wrote: »

There's a scene showing the sign outside Hollis Mason's garage, with part of the text on the sign reading "Obsolete models a specialty", which is a reference to Dr Manhattan's creation of the electric engine. (I think it's explained in the Under The Hood segment in the comic, but I could be wrong).

Given the film's changed focus and amended alternate history, this is no longer the case - but as far as I recall, the sign still had that text.

Not really a gaffe though. There are companies today that specialize in working on older or obsolete cars too as newer cars would be far more computerized in comparison.

In the comic it gets discussed during a converstion between a younger Hollis and Manhattan. The masks are being disbanded and got rid of, and Hollis is saying that he will be ok as he has his trade, mechanic, to fall back on.

Manhattan then casually remarks that he has invented an electric engine and leaves Hollis looking shellshocked/crestfallen.

pixelburp

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

I'd watch it if they changed the soundtrack though. Which they more than likely won't.

+1 to this, god how could I have forgotten; the music was so often too loud, utterly inappropriate for the scene or both of the above ("99 red balloons" blaring out while Dan & Silk Spectre enjoy a cosy dinner out for instance). Maybe it was their way of countering the sleep inducing pace.

Basq

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

Yup can't say I'm particularly excited about this - think the only way Watchmen would improve in any significant sense would be to get another director to do a cut. My major problem with the film was Snyder's infuriating over-stylisation of everything, so a few hours more of that isn't appealing!

I'd watch it if they changed the soundtrack though. Which they more than likely won't.

Once again, johnny_ultimate echos my sentiments exactly!

EDIT: And the two-disc special edition is going cheap at CDWOW right now: http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=62877831#post62877831

Sleazus

Fysh wrote: »

There's a scene showing the sign outside Hollis Mason's garage, with part of the text on the sign reading "Obsolete models a specialty", which is a reference to Dr Manhattan's creation of the electric engine. (I think it's explained in the Under The Hood segment in the comic, but I could be wrong).

Given the film's changed focus and amended alternate history, this is no longer the case - but as far as I recall, the sign still had that text.

I think you may have missed the point of the sign in the book. Yes, it was a literal reference to the fact the Doctor Manhattan had made petrol-engines obsolete, but it was also a reference to how Hollis himself was an "obsolete model" now that Manhattan had arrived.

Which still works in the context of the movie - I'd argue that it's more important thematically than literally.

And it's just as likely he could be specialist in Edsels, for example, a petrol-based car that is obsolete.

Fysh

Kess73 wrote: »

Not really a gaffe though. There are companies today that specialize in working on older or obsolete cars too as newer cars would be far more computerized in comparison.

But it's not - the word "obsolete" implies that a fundamental technological advance has happened, which in the comic makes sense as the old cars needed fossil fuels whereas the new ones could use cleanly-generated electricity.

In the film's context, older cars and new cars still depend on the same fuel to get moving - so older cars are more than likely antiques or vintage models. Obsolete isn't the right term, because the context has changed in the film.

Not a big deal, really, but it does serve to demonstrate how attention to aesthetic details from the comic doesn't mean that the story and themes have been translated or even understood by those adapting the comic.

Sleazus wrote: »

I think you may have missed the point of the sign in the book. Yes, it was a literal reference to the fact the Doctor Manhattan had made petrol-engines obsolete, but it was also a reference to how Hollis himself was an "obsolete model" now that Manhattan had arrived.

The reason it worked in the comic was that the word "obsolete" was never used by Hollis or Manhattan directly, but still presented to the reader in a clever way and the parallel made obvious enough that the link is established. In the context of the film Hollis is an obsolete model but the cars he works on most definitely are not, for the reasons I've described above. Unsupported by manufacturers and fiddly to keep running, perhaps; but in terms of the technology they use a card today with a computer-controlled engine and integrated satnav is still based on the same principle as the first banger ever made ie burn fossil fuel to convert chemical energy into kinetic energy.

Sleazus

Fysh wrote: »

The reason it worked in the comic was that the word "obsolete" was never used by Hollis or Manhattan directly, but still presented to the reader in a clever way and the parallel made obvious enough that the link is established. In the context of the film Hollis is an obsolete model but the cars he works on most definitely are not, for the reasons I've described above. Unsupported by manufacturers and fiddly to keep running, perhaps; but in terms of the technology they use a card today with a computer-controlled engine and integrated satnav is still based on the same principle as the first banger ever made ie burn fossil fuel to convert chemical energy into kinetic energy.

Strictly speaking, I'd agree with you. If you can drive it, it's not obsolete.

By that logic there is no such thing as an obsolete car.

But the fact that a google search for "obsolete cars" brings up all manner of auto suppliers would suggest that the word isn't necessarily used in the strictest possible manner.

And these aren't necessarily antiques, a lot of people would describe the 1950s Edsel as an "obsolete" model.

It's not perfect use of the English language, but Hollis isn't a well-educated individual. He's solidly working class.

If there was no way anyone ever would put up that sign, I'd agree you have a point. As it stands, yes it's an awkward use of language, but it's certainly not one that breaks my suspension of disbelief (especially in this movie).

Fysh

Sleazus wrote: »

Strictly speaking, I'd agree with you. If you can drive it, it's not obsolete.

By that logic there is no such thing as an obsolete car.

OK, let's try and reframe this back to the comic book and film versions of the in-story world here, because I'm not a car enthusiast and the name Edsel means nothing to me.

In the comic world, the term "obsolete" referred to fossil-fuelled cars - because Dr Manhattan's creation of an electric engine and associated technology had rendered fossil fuels and technologies based on them unnecessary. The obsolescence stems from the fact that a limited physical resource is needed to fuel these cars, and now that the new electric-engine versions exist, there's far less demand for the fuel and thus far less production/refinement going on. It becomes impractical and financially burdensome to continue running a fossil-fuelled car.

In the film world, the term "obsolete" refers to old fossil-fuelled cars of an unspecified nature. Now, this could mean models like the Edsel - but we're not told that. In terms of cars, I'm pretty much your layman audience - outside of the odd thing I might know from watching Top Gear now and again, I don't know anything in detail. I know the basic principles that underpin the engine, but haven't got the faintest idea of how a gearbox works. So "obsolete" to me in that context is the wrong word, because for all the satnav/tomtom/integrated-mp3-player cruft that new cars come with, they still move forward by burning fossil fuels to move pistons attached to a gearbox in pretty much the same way that cars have done since they were invented. The details may change, but there hasn't been a paradigm shift.

It's not a big deal, but in the comic the obsolescence of a fossil-fuel-car-mechanic serves as an elegant way of commenting on Hollis Mason's obsolescence in the face of younger, more violent costumed adventurers because in both cases there has been a paradigm shift. In the film that elegance is lost because the in-story world doesn't allow the same analogy to work.

The biggest question of all, of course, is why I've spent however many minutes I've invested in this thread on discussing an interesting but minor point of trivia pertaining to a film that I consider to be pretty irrelevant. And the answer is, I'm clearly bored

Sleazus

Fysh wrote: »

In the comic world, the term "obsolete" referred to fossil-fuelled cars - because Dr Manhattan's creation of an electric engine and associated technology had rendered fossil fuels and technologies based on them unnecessary. The obsolescence stems from the fact that a limited physical resource is needed to fuel these cars, and now that the new electric-engine versions exist, there's far less demand for the fuel and thus far less production/refinement going on. It becomes impractical and financially burdensome to continue running a fossil-fuelled car.

In the film world, the term "obsolete" refers to old fossil-fuelled cars of an unspecified nature. Now, this could mean models like the Edsel - but we're not told that. In terms of cars, I'm pretty much your layman audience - outside of the odd thing I might know from watching Top Gear now and again, I don't know anything in detail. I know the basic principles that underpin the engine, but haven't got the faintest idea of how a gearbox works. So "obsolete" to me in that context is the wrong word, because for all the satnav/tomtom/integrated-mp3-player cruft that new cars come with, they still move forward by burning fossil fuels to move pistons attached to a gearbox in pretty much the same way that cars have done since they were invented. The details may change, but there hasn't been a paradigm shift.

It's not a big deal, but in the comic the obsolescence of a fossil-fuel-car-mechanic serves as an elegant way of commenting on Hollis Mason's obsolescence in the face of younger, more violent costumed adventurers because in both cases there has been a paradigm shift. In the film that elegance is lost because the in-story world doesn't allow the same analogy to work.

The biggest question of all, of course, is why I've spent however many minutes I've invested in this thread on discussing an interesting but minor point of trivia pertaining to a film that I consider to be pretty irrelevant. And the answer is, I'm clearly bored

Yes, I read the novel. I know why the cars are obsolete in Alan Moore's world. I also know that the finale requires that Manhattan has not yet given us limitless clean energy.

That doesn't change the fact that today in this world, which still has cars running on fossil fuels, specialist companies (like GM Obsolete) sell parts and servicing for "obsolete" models (in some cases as young as 1960s). That's the kind of business that Mason is in in the movie, and I do accept that he would be better using the word "outdated", but I don't think the scene represents a plot hole in the movie. Film is but a distorted reflection of reality and - in reality - people misuse words (particularly when there is precedent within their industry to do so).

I think we both need a hobby.

Boo-yah

The director's cut is an improvement over the original (which I loved). The one scene they should never have cut out :

Hollis' murder with him going down fighting

Turns out to be one of the best scenes of the whole film. Those who didn't like the original cut will probably hate this one more though. Regarding the soundtrack complaints, am I the only one who liked the use of music?

the_syco

Fysh wrote: »

but in terms of the technology they use a card today with a computer-controlled engine and integrated satnav is still based on the same principle as the first banger ever made ie burn fossil fuel to convert chemical energy into kinetic energy.

The comic coming out in '85, lots of this wasn't in a car back then, so would probably have had more of an effect back then. Now, as all cars have these, the technology doesn't seem as advanced to us, nor would the prospect of electric cars (except for a few hundred who had them) for everyone be a future that people could see happening?

=-=

I also liked the music.

Professey Chin

Duggy747 wrote: »

Speaking of cuts, imagine watching the original 5 hour version of The Punisher (2004)?

How did I not know about this?

Wreck

Boo-yah wrote: »

Regarding the soundtrack complaints, am I the only one who liked the use of music?

I loved the use of music in this - particularly the Dylan with the opening montage. And I think people forget that the soundtrack is actually very faithful to the novel - The Times They Are a-Changin, 99 Red Balloons, The Sound of Silence, All Along the Watchtower and a couple more of the tracks used are all mentioned.

johnny_ultimate

Wreck wrote: »

I loved the use of music in this - particularly the Dylan with the opening montage. And I think people forget that the soundtrack is actually very faithful to the novel - The Times They Are a-Changin, 99 Red Balloons, The Sound of Silence, All Along the Watchtower and a couple more of the tracks used are all mentioned.

The Times They Are a Changin' is excellent, yes - in fact, the brilliant opening montage in general was nearly worth going to see. It is everything after that that I disliked - while quotes from the songs work in the context of the novel, they come across as painfully literal and cheesy when you can actually hear the damn things. While none of the music cues post-opening were well-chosen (IMO), the one that really struck me as being particularly awful was Hallelujah - aka how how not to film a sex scene.

The music cues were part of a bigger problem though, and one which I thought would never have been my complaint for a Watchmen film - it was too faithful to the book. In their need to be completely loyal to the book, Snyder et al seemed to forget that they weren't simply pointing a camera at the pages and throwing it up on screen. Cinema and comics are very different mediums, and what may work in graphic form probably won't in film (Nite Owl's nuclear dream stands out in this regard for me). You can be as faithful as you want, with tons of fan service (and yes, I am a huge fan of the graphic novel), but if a film comes across as cheesy and sluggishly paced as a result, then it would have probably have been worth infuriating the fanboys a little in return for a coherent final product (although then again the things they did change - the ending - didn't work either, so perhaps that theory should be disregarded!). Which is why the idea of a final cut does not appeal to me - editing in the likes of Black Freighter (inspired in the comic) would be something that would break the flow even more for me.

rednik

This has been confirmed as being region free.

Fago123

rednik wrote: »

This has been confirmed as being region free.

Nice one! Is there a source for this?

Basq

Linky!

Playback

Region free

Fago123

basquille wrote: »

Linky!

Cheers

event

any word on if the DVD is region free?

Sleazus

DELETE: Because I'm an idiot who can't read!

rednik

The dvd is region 1 locked. Hopefully it will be released in Europe later.

Corholio

Apologies for bumping this older thread, was the most relevant I could find.

Joel Silver gave an interview recently and in it he mentioned the Watchmen film he wanted to make with Terry Gilliam. Below is how it would have ended:

“What he did was he told the story as-is, but instead of the whole notion of the intergalactic thing which was too hard and too silly, what he did was he maintained that the existence of Doctor Manhattan had changed the whole balance of the world economy, the world political structure.

“He felt that THAT character really altered the way reality had been. He had the Ozymandias character convince, essentially, the Doctor Manhattan character to go back and stop himself from being created, so there never would be a Doctor Manhattan character. He was the only character with real supernatural powers, he went back and prevented himself from being turned into Doctor Manhattan, and in the vortex that was created after that occurred these characters from Watchmen only became characters in a comic book.

“So the three characters, I think it was Rorschach and Nite Owl and Silk Spectre, they're all of the sudden in Times Square and there's a kid reading a comic book. They become like the people in Times Square dressing up like characters as opposed to really BEING those characters. There's a kid reading the comic book and he's like, Hey, you're just like in my comic book. It was very smart, it was very articulate, and it really gave a very satisfying resolution to the story, but it just didn't happen.”

I think that would have been an amazing ending personally.

jaykhunter

Not a fan of "what you've been watching is all B.S./you've wasted your time" endings myself but I can see how others would think it's cool.

the_syco wrote: »

“Warner Home Video has officially announced release of ‘Watchmen: The Ultimate Cut’ for November 3. Ultimate cut will contain the animated comic ‘Tales of the Black Freighter’ woven into the director’s cut of the film. The total running length will be 215 minutes.”

Old news, but isn't this incredibly jarring going from 'live action' to animated comic?

Corholio

jaykhunter wrote: »

Not a fan of "what you've been watching is all B.S./you've wasted your time" endings myself but I can see how others would think it's cool.



Old news, but isn't this incredibly jarring going from 'live action' to animated comic?

Just a blanket hating of any ending like that, regardless of the film? Fair enough.

Mickeroo

Snyder's ending is better than that imo, what he proposes there would change the whole point of the ending, at least Snyder tried to come up with an ending that would make sense in trying to fulfil the same function as the original(though not entirely successful).

I think what Silver says there is an even harder sell than the comic's ending.

Skerries

only found out today that Glen Hansard turned down the role of Rorschach as he was promoting Once at the time

Skerries

Skerries wrote: »

only found out today that Glen Hansard turned down the role of Rorschach as he was promoting Once at the time

No he turned down the opportunity to audition for the role. Big difference between being offered an audition and being offered a role.

Oafley Jones

Can anyone confirm that the (excellent) opening sequence was farmed out and has almost nothing to do with Synder? I remember reading this before the movie opened and now can't find anything to back it up. Did I just dream this all up?

weemcd

jaykhunter wrote: »

Not a fan of "what you've been watching is all B.S./you've wasted your time" endings myself but I can see how others would think it's cool.



Old news, but isn't this incredibly jarring going from 'live action' to animated comic?

I found it a little jarring, I can see the parallel, and in a sense it helped me understand the main film a little better. But the film clocks in a hefty run-time already and could probably have done without the animation.

Just my opinion but it's better to view separate to the main film, breaks up the natural flow of the story, like an ad break!

jaykhunter

Corholio wrote: »

Just a blanket hating of any ending like that, regardless of the film? Fair enough.

Hate? Don't care for is more accurate. I just find "it was all a dog's dream" to be a cop-out twist for the sake of it, like you were tricked into getting emotionally invested into a storyline. That's me though.

weemcd wrote: »

Just my opinion but it's better to view separate to the main film, breaks up the natural flow of the story, like an ad break!

That's what I'd be thinking as well. Maybe at some point they'll fully animate watchmen (like TotBF) and add them together and that'd be more cohesive.

elWizard

I'd quite like to see the Ultimate edition actually; I'm sure it's only a curiosity but I'd be interested. it would have to be on Blu-ray though, can't be doin with any of that DVD muck.

Hmmm, I wonder is it on Amazon?

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Watchmen-The-Ultimate-Blu-ray-Import/dp/B002IYEQR4/ref=sr_1_15?ie=UTF8&qid=1393588993&sr=8-15&keywords=watchmen

Sweet, there'll be change left out of this spare €300 I have lying around. And, hey, postage is only €1.50 , to the bargain alerts forum!

Greyjoy

Oafley Jones wrote: »

Can anyone confirm that the (excellent) opening sequence was farmed out and has almost nothing to do with Synder? I remember reading this before the movie opened and now can't find anything to back it up. Did I just dream this all up?

I know that he used the same studio to make the opening credits for his Dawn of the Dead remake but I don't know how much input he had with either. I think if he had stuck closer to the style of the Watchmen opening titles it would have been a better film - showing new events that felt like they could have taken place in the setting of the comic instead of slavishly recreating panels & scenes from the story.

elWizard

elWizard wrote: »

I'd quite like to see the Ultimate edition actually; I'm sure it's only a curiosity but I'd be interested. it would have to be on Blu-ray though, can't be doin with any of that DVD muck.

Hmmm, I wonder is it on Amazon?

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Watchmen-The-Ultimate-Blu-ray-Import/dp/B002IYEQR4/ref=sr_1_15?ie=UTF8&qid=1393588993&sr=8-15&keywords=watchmen

Sweet, there'll be change left out of this spare €300 I have lying around. And, hey, postage is only €1.50 , to the bargain alerts forum!

Think you might want to take a second look at amazon as I got it on the US site for under 50 euro delivered awhile back.

elWizard

Deleted User wrote: »

Think you might want to take a second look at amazon as I got it on the US site for under 50 euro delivered awhile back.

Ah right, better. I was just bein facetious really, bemused that someone, somewhere thought they might get €300 for it.

50 is still a hella lot for a 5-year old, fairly divisive, movie tbh, though you do get the book too. But presumably if you've come this far you already have that. So, the €50 question - is it worth it?