'Watchmen' ... On A Scale of 1-10?

Title: Watchmen (2008)
Rating: R
Rating Reason: Rated R for strong graphic violence, sexuality, nudity and language.

You took your teenage son to an R rated movie, clearly described as containing those things you found so offensive, and the movie is at fault?

Yep, have to agree. You're fault for not being able to read a rating.

I respect your criticism of this movie (and I agree to a certain degree - the sex and violence were way over the top, at least compared with the gn) but just wanted to clarify something. This portrayal of the 80s is not meant to be historically accurate. What Alan Moore did was create a 1985 where superheroes had existed for quite some time, drastically altering America's course of history.

well aaron as much as I appreciate your criticism and giving people who haven't seen the movie your perspective and opinion, you obviously know nothing about the backstory of watchmen. i agree with you that they didn't express the 80's era with near as much emphasis and character as they could. in the novel, it takes place in an alternative world where nixon's watergate scandal never did affect him much, so he has been elected to his third term. they show dr. manhattan's penis so much (i know it kind of sucked because it just kind of threw unwanted attention into the movie) because they did that so much in the novel, as well. between all the violence and nudity, i personally respect zack synder because a real artist (despite if he made the watchmen or not) doesn't censor his work. it's what makes the watchmen unique from other superhero comics and movies. keep in mind that there are many things that if you didn't like in the movie, they have most likely been derived from the novel. the movie's just the translation.

Well, although I've never read the graphic novel.. it was a good movie(probably would buy it on DVD). I was not only surprised to see a great deal of nudity(thanx to Doc Mannhatten's "constant attention getter"), but also at the # of children(accompanied by parents) coming in to see the movie.

PARENTS PLEASE!!!..... haven't you seen 300? Especially when there were hints given throughout the movie as to who directed it (the first fight scene in the movie with comedian and Ozi..whatever his name is with one of the end numbers on the door falling off reveiling the # 300). Next time...... don't bring the kids.

why would you take an adolecent to see this movie anyway.this is for 18s and over. it is graphic novel not a childrens comic. if you want to see a slap, bang, wallop type of movie stick to spiderman. by the way dr manhattans penis was shown in the comic so why would they change it for you?...the director should be commended for remaining so close to the source material.

In response to the friendly comments on my original post: Just to clarify, I have allowed my teens to see certain rated r movies, such as the terminator movies, and although there is violence, it isn't so bad as to keep teens from seeing the movie. My remark regarding not knowing how violent and how much nudity was in the film was in reference to the ad campaign that came out before the movie, which gave no indication whatsoever regarding extreme violence and over the board nudity and sex. I think at the least this should have been rated nc17. You are right, I have not read the novel. From what I have read the director missed the mark in the translation. Unlike the Lord of the Rings trilogy, where not only did the director get it right, he was over the top in every respect. Regards.

You didn't read the book, did you? It was based on an alternate 1985! So, yeah, it's clearly obvious that Nixon wasn't in office at all in 1985!

Hello, Rated R! It was made for those people who understands what the rating may detail. So, it's not the movie's fault for showing the material to your child, it's yours.

This film wasn't based on YOUR 1980's...it was based on an alternate 1985 in which superheros exist and Nixon has been elected to a third term. So it isn't supposed to feel like YOUR 1985. Also, the next time you bring your son to a rated R film, you might want to read a little bit about exactly what is in the film before you do it...or maybe just ask someone.

I WAS JUST SICKENED TO SIT THROUGH THIS X-RATED PORNOGRAPHIC EXCUSE FOR A SCIENCE FICTION FANTASY. SCIENCE FICTION OF THE PAST WERE ALWAYS CLEAN OF X-RATED SCENES AND VERY INTERESTING. I WAS LUCKY THAT I DID NOT TAKE MY WIFE AND GOOD DAUGHTER TO SEE THIS EMBARESSING FILTH, MADE BY THE HOLLYWOOD GAY AND LESBIAN PERVERTS WHO ARE SEEKING TO UNDERMINE ALL GOOD JUDEO-CHRISTIAN VALUES IN AMERICA. THE PHONEY PREVIEWS DO NOT SHOW THE DEGENERACY DISPLAYED IN THIS MOVIE AND OTHERS LIKE IT, BRAINWASHING OUR GOOD YOUTH!

The book this was made about was a graphic novel. It was made for adults. Comic fans are well aware of this, where-as the rest of the population thinks it's "just a comic book". This was also a book Time put on it's top 100 books of all time. Now the movie studio does list "violence, nudity, adult language, adult themes" after it's description of the movie and many websites, such as this one also mention that. As far as you "not getting it", I can't help you with that.
I felt the movie was very faithful to the book. The changes that were made didn't take away from the story. The movie could have been a lot more violent and bloody. When NY gets blown-up, the people were not suppose to be vaporized, they should have shown bloody bodies everywhere. There were slow parts, but that's how the book reads. I would say if you haven't read the book but are interested, see the movie. It will take less time than reading, and you'll still get the story.

I was a teenage boy once, and I don't think yours was complaining about the sex scenes. And I don't think two are over the top. As for Dr Manhattan's penis, see Nerd Alert's explanation. Again, reading the book and understanding the story should clarify why he's naked when he is. And lastly, if it really was that offensive, you'd get your butt out of the seat and take your kid home so all his friends can laugh at him.

Well,the violence & the sex scenes are completely necessary, because it's an adaptation of the book, not just some film that was thought up yesterday & is intended to be child or family friendly. The story, script, & characters shouldn't be changed just because some ***hole, who probably wasn't familiar with story in the first place, gets all but hurt over someones nipple popping out of their blouse. The "R" rating is there for a reason, it's not something to just be bypassed because a kid has his parent with him. Just because someone is wearing a cape, doesn't mean it's all fun & games. It's not a movie for the youth, The only changes to the story that may have been necessary was the ending, because some people Obviously would have been confused. Which there really is no reason to be, if someone had actually read the description of the movie which many websites & newspapers state, they would have read something like "Set in an alternate universe circa 1985, In a gritty and alternate 1985, set in an alternate reality which closely mirrors the contemporary world of the 1980s, Set in an alternate history of 1985." So I'm going to explain for everyone who didn't read the book, just in case you were confused like some other people. Nixon is president because he passed a law that allowed him to run for a third term. Dr. Manhattan allowed the world to rapidly advance via technology, which explains the electric cars & also toward the end of the story when Nite Owl & Rorschach crash land outside Adrien's Lab. They have what look like Segway's that hover a few feet off the ground. Adrien Veidt A.K.A Ozymandias was able to take out Edward Morgan Blake A.K.A The Comedian, because he is a world class athlete. A winner of multiple Olympic Gold Medals for such activities as gymnastics. He also lives in Antarctica, because it isn't owned by anyone, he decided to move his laboratory to this secluded & private continent. Nite Owl is originally pissed off & snaps at Rorschach after springing him from jail because he finds out that Hollis Mason, the first Nite Owl was beaten to death by an angry mob of teens. Otherwise, being the coward he is, he would never had confronted Rorschach. When Nite Owl & Rorschach went to Adrien's lab, Rorschach kept trying to fight Ozymandias, he asked Adrien several times to "get rid of the cat". Because fighting him was hard enough without being mauled by Bubastis as well. Just in case anyone was wondering why Rorschach gave up, he didn't. Then there's the ending, which got the point across. But in the original ending, it is explained that Adrien was trying to duplicate Dr. Manhattan's teleportation, that there was a problem with the teleporting & every time an object passed through to it's destination, it exploded for one reason or another. So what Adrien did was enlarged a giant octopus to the size of a large building & transported it to the center of New York City, so when it exploded it would kill millions of people & strike fear into the hearts of everyone around the world. So everyone would stop fighting.

Your overbearing sheltering doesn't seem healthy to a growing teenager. I'm not going to tell you how to raise your child, but generally asking your youth 'does this make you uncomfortable?' seems like a better judgment call than imposing a less than easy-going attitude. Chances are, your child has seen just as much violence as this movie portrays, and flipping out over penis and some sex scenes (which I may add are prevalent throughout the graphic novel) only adds to the uneasiness and uncomfortableness brought about when displayed in books or shewn in other films of the similar, honest, genre. And to assume that The Watchmen is anything less than honest is absurd. Dr. Manhattan was naked in the story, therefore, he is naked in the film adaptation. The heroes beat criminals brutally in the graphic novel as they do in the film adaptation. To downplay the severity/regularity of these so audience-moms won't worry about their sweet 14 year old son getting nightmares about exploding men and blue dick (rather than discussing the obvious thought-provoking questions the story raises about free will, what we're justified in doing, the greater good, etc. intelligibly) seems exorbitant in the least. Really? Look past the obvious and think about the subject matter at hand and maybe try to encourage your son to do the same. In reality, the cinematography and visual effects were amazing and the acting couldn't have done better (you poor, shallow, excuse for a member of society).