Wednesday, March 11, 2009

Worst (and most hilarious) Watchmen Review Ever [Woah]

Stumbled upon a review of Watchmen today in Valley Scene Magazine, a free throwaway distributed in LA's San Fernando Valley area. Don't know how this magazine (I use the term loosely) ended up on my dining room table, but wow am I glad it did.

When I say this is the worst Watchmen review yet, I don't only mean wow, this paper hated the movie, I mean, wow this reviewer is an idiot. This is the first review I've seen from someone who knows not. A. Thing. About. Watchmen. He knows it was a graphic novel...but...that's about it. What results is one of the most idiotic reviews I've ever read, so much so that it warrants coverage. david, even you will appreciate this.

Read on, after the jump

The reviewer's problems with the movie are the most bizarre yet, clearly missing every bit of understanding one could have. He is actually offended by the film's "misogyny". and "racism". Yeah.

Here are some highlights, the especially idiotic parts bolded,

Worse is a scene where he walks in on the dressing room of superhero hottie Silk Spectre, who is built to look like a 50's dream pin-up. Nobody should dress that sexy unless they're asking for it, the Comedian bellows. The Comedian begins to rape Silk Spectre and when she resists he smashes her face into submission. Fellow superhero Dr. Manhattan (or was it Mathew Goode as Ozymandias?) rushes in to break up the altercation. Why do all these heroes in the returned present lament the death of the Comedian? They should be glad he's dead. even though this was clearly a flashback to before Dr. Manhattan was even Dr. Manhattan and Ozymandias was a superhero...and the guy who walked into the room was Hooded Justice...with a German accent...somehow this guy writes that paragraph? I I I...was he even paying attention? What?!

On the misogyny and racism,

Other abuses to women are on display in this overblown headache of a movie. In one occasion, director Zack Snyder ("300") opts for slow-mo shots of bullets eviscerating the flesh of a woman's leg (she's not introduced as anyone important). There's a name for this kind of disrespect for women in film. It's called misogyny. Yet the film is just as racist as it is sexist as demonstrated in a scene where Dr. Manhattan (a mammoth-size blue-man superhero) blows away a bunch of blank-looking Viet Cong who are made out as dehumanized items in a shooting gallery.

Ummm. That's kind of the POINT. DR. MANHATTAN DOESN'T SEE HUMANITY THE SAME WAY NOW, I I I I can't. But thanks for teaching us what misogyny is. I didn't know. ...

On their lack of powers,

Nothing about the superheroes is remarkable other than Dr. Manhattan's (Whatchamacallit?) ray-blast ability. All these characters do is pound each other with their exceptional strength. In terms of superpunch-force ability, masked Rorschach is the only character who dazzles with his quicksilver moves.

Let's be clear here. These character's aren't ACTUALLY superheros. Only Dr. Manhattan is. Perhaps that's why he is the only one with a real power? Maybe? Just maybe?

On Snyder's direction,

His other gimmick is to pan the camera to display a seemingly pointless object only to reveal blood dripping from that object, or perhaps photograph a door crack to reveal blood spilling out. Playing it all for gross laughs.

Excuse me??? Gross laughs?? The blood pouring out from under the door is CLASSIC. It's not played for gross laughs, you idiot, it's one of the more iconic frames of the graphic novel!

Adapted from the graphic novel by Dave Gibbons originally released by DC Comics in 1986 (which might explain the story setting's retro year), it's not impossible to see that it is trying to create a paradigm of flawed and maladjusted superheroes in a world that seems to be dreamed up from the subconscious fusion of Edward Hopper meets Dante Alighieri.

It *might* explain the film taking place in the 80s?! It's *not impossible to see* it's creating a world of maladjusted superheroes?! WHO ARE YOU AND WHAT ROCK HAVE YOU BEEN LIVING UNDER?!

Look, as time goes by, I've become uber tolerant of people not liking Watchmen or even not getting certain parts, but everyone I know who hasn't read the damn thing still know more than this guy. I'm fine with people having problems with this movie, but miss the mark so completely...well, at the end of the day, it's just pretty hilarious.

In fact, is it possible that this review is a joke?

Evisceration over. Click here for the complete review.


david said...

woooooooowwwwwwww. wow. wows. and this person gets paid for that.

Unknown said...

Best review of a review EVER! Or review of an anti-review...or failed review...or...whatever you'd call that crap writing. But your part was good!

Unknown said...

I'm thinking the reviewer accidentally walked in on "He's Just Not That Into You."

would explain the misogyny comment.