cleolinda: (Default)
cleolinda ([personal profile] cleolinda) wrote2009-03-06 04:56 pm

Watchmen

So I just got back from the movie (note: or at least I had when I started writing this), and I've got a massive Movie Headache, and I'm a bit overwhelmed by the whole thing, but on the whole, I really liked it. I think the thing you have to understand about Watchmen going in is that, despite what the trailers try to sell you, it's not an action movie. On the surface, it's a slow-burning murder mystery with some apocalypse thrown in, but the majority of it is character study: here's half a dozen "costumed adventurers," here's how they each got into masked vigilantism, and here's how they're coping with a world where they're not allowed to be who they really are--heroes--anymore (short answer: not well). And then, late in the movie, some action shows up, but that's not really what the movie's about at all. In the end, it's not even about the murder mystery--it's about something much, much bigger.

The movie itself is gorgeous--the sets in particular are fantastic, and I may be alone here, but I really like what they did with the hero costumes. (I particularly like Laurie's--even her gloves have garter straps, to the point where the costume's almost a parody of itself. Of course, it's also unironically titillating as well, so the movie's having its cheesecake and eating it too.) And the credit sequence montage is such a great way to brief newcomers on how--and why--the movie's world is different from ours, how costumed adventurers came to be, how the nation reacted to them, and what their role in history was. There were a number of bits in there that I don't remember from the book, so it gets inventive as well.

As far as the acting goes, I felt like Jackie Earle Haley was definitely the standout--but then, Rorschach is such an amazing character. That's one of the things I love about Watchmen (GIGANTIC DOOM SPOILER AHEAD): Rorschach is, depending on the scene, weird, off-putting, loathsome, terrifying, pitiful, and... something I almost want to call "noble." He is, it turns out, the hero of the story--the one who seeks justice, the one who refuses to compromise. And over here, you've got Ozymandias--perfect handsome invincible billionaire Ozymandias, obsessed with making the world better, willing to do anything to save humanity--no matter how terrible. He certainly functions as the villain, and even if you argue that the ends can justify the means, I don't know that he has the right to make that choice in the first place, even if he succeeds at his mission (or does he? Does it really work out in the long run?). So there's this wonderful interplay between what it means to be a hero or a villain within both characters, and what Ozymandias does is so horrifying that it sufficiently tarnishes his exterior perfection and, furthermore, his best intentions. Rorschach is harder to pin down, and harder to explain what exactly redeems him--I can't really explain why I ended up liking him so much in the book, but Jackie Earle Haley manages to bring all those same qualities to life. (And he looks perfect with the red hair.) He also gets the most badass line in the entire movie, IMO, and since this is just my opinion talking, I'll go ahead and tell you that it's "I'm not locked in here with you, YOU'RE LOCKED IN HERE WITH ME!"

(And you know why the most badass line is not "I did it thirty-five minutes ago"? BECAUSE THEY CHANGED IT. Not much, but "I triggered it," etc., just does not have the *EPIC SNAP* simplicity of "I did it." I can't believe they went out of their way to blow something like that, for real.)

I gotta say, though, I have no idea what was going on with Matthew Goode and his (intentionally?) prissy wandering accent. I know he can do an American accent because he was AMAZING in The Lookout, and I actually refused to believe he was British when we were discussing that movie in the car afterwards. So he is, in fact, capable of picking an accent and committing to it; I have no idea what he was doing with Ozymandias there. (ETA: Wait! Maybe this!)

Anyway. I'm sure there are a lot of other things I could say (major point: Ozymandias's new plan didn't bother me at all, because... I really don't know how they would have shown or explained the original one. A giant faux-alien squid developed by artists and writers and scientists from the brain of a dead psychic? Really? This movie's already two and a half hours, you think you've got time to sell an audience on that?), but I'm still a little overwhelmed. It's not a flawless movie, definitely not. And of course it's not as good as the book (which was a complex series of interweaving narratives and print media), but then, when they make a movie they don't burn all existing copies of the book so it's not like a movie irreparably robs you of anything. In my mind, I was judging the movie against what it could have been like--when it did feel right, it felt very, very right, and that's all I wanted. And I feel that's all you can ask for from a book adaptation, no matter how faithful it actually is.

So now I'm going to have a couple of Advil and a lie-down. Yes. If I have an opportunity, I will see it again, though.

P.S. My mother, who had no clue what it was about except that "the commercials look AWESOME," says she really liked it.


Site Meter

[identity profile] khaman.livejournal.com 2009-03-07 04:35 am (UTC)(link)
My opinion is that the music, while jarring, absolutely works for the movie - it takes the place of the overwhelming theme of nostalgia in the book, the thematic advertising, the nostalgic whimsy of the text sections. Almost every song they used connects to someone's memory in pop culture and history somehow - Simon and Garfunkle defined certain aspects of the love generation, All Along the Watchtower and you KNEW we were riffing Vietnam, Ride of the Valkyries means someone's getting napal- I mean Manhattan'd. If it knocks you out of the movie, it knocks you into personal nostalgia.

I loved the little musical Blade Runner cues, personally.

[identity profile] http://users.livejournal.com/_stormthesea/ 2009-03-07 04:46 am (UTC)(link)
AAH I want to see this movie so badly, but I think I'll have to wait until Sunday, or at least tomorrow. If I go tonight then I have to bike there and back in the dark and rain, and, well, I just don't love Watchmen that much.

[identity profile] mysticowl.livejournal.com 2009-03-07 05:57 am (UTC)(link)
Was I seeing things, or did Silk Spectre II's high heels retract to normal, wide heels during jumping, running, and fighting? Or did they just choose not to risk choreographing the fights with the actress (Torontonian, by the way, she was on local radio recently) in stilettos?

[identity profile] not-tragedi.livejournal.com 2009-03-07 06:38 am (UTC)(link)
I was entirely impressed with the soundtrack. "Times are A-Changin'" in the opening credits? Dear God, that was mind-blowingly amazing.

I was incredibly blown away by Rorschach but I also really loved the Comedian. I mean, the actor had to do some pretty heinous stuff (I'm talking about the bar scene and the scene with Silk Spectre the former) but he pulled them off seamlessly. I was overwhelmingly impressed by the entire work together of the cast, though I thought Silk Spectre could have been a bit more emotional at the end. (The later; the former wins for the Dan ass slap.)

[identity profile] karl-moebius.livejournal.com 2009-03-07 06:58 am (UTC)(link)
I think the thing that resonated most with me (post marvel civil-war, and Kingdom Come) is how you met the characters, and they were all pretty damn human, with Rorschach being batman, in a way. He's the only one that's the closest to a hero.

But what I liked is how they were introduced, and these actors did some great work to make me buy into that they're humans that like to do these crazy things, and how it changes them. And then the 'god' thing about dr. Manhattan, and I just started nodding my head, because I thought they were building up to the essential dichotomy of superheroes, which is are they humans plus one, are they police plus one (like Rorschach), or are they human divinity? God minus one, as it were. And Ozymandias plays the side of the superheroes as gods, and Rorschach the superheroes as superhumans, and all of them with very little contact with other people... and the polarized viewpoints, and what is obvious and what is hidden, and the quest for the truth, and... yeah. damn.

I loved the comic. I loooooved Rorschach. And this was... amazing. this is how you're supposed to do justice to a comic book. It's not perfect, but still, it's far far better than most of them.

[identity profile] not-tragedi.livejournal.com 2009-03-07 07:13 am (UTC)(link)

http://www.newgrounds.com/portal/view/485797

Saturday Morning Watchmen anyone?

[identity profile] mycenae.livejournal.com 2009-03-07 07:23 am (UTC)(link)
I can't believe they changed "I did it thirty-five minutes ago." That's like the greatest OH SNAP! moment in the history of OH SNAP! moments. It just fell a bit flat in the movie. How do you de-awesome that!?

I think Matthew Goode was using Christian Bale's Magical Accent Generator (http://i36.tinypic.com/1zoia6r.jpg). (I figured he was using different accents for public and private interactions, but I couldn't quite figure out what they were supposed to be.)

It was a solid adaptation. Mostly I thought "Oh, ok." I saw it with three people who knew next to nothing about Watchmen and they really liked it, so I was glad. I was kind of afraid they'd be like "What did you make us watch!?"

The best film adapted from a book I've ever seen remains L.A. Confidential, which is a very dense complex book. The movie simplified the overall plot quite a bit, but they captured the spirit of the book and the essence of the characters beautifully. I think it might be possible to do a looser adaptation of Watchmen that would be a better film, but it wouldn't be a better adaptation of Watchmen, because it would become something else.

[identity profile] gwynnywonk.livejournal.com 2009-03-07 07:30 am (UTC)(link)
I just got back from it... and while I was expecting it to be gory, I wasn't really prepared for the full grossness of it. (I'm a little squeamish sometimes) So I'm kind of surprised that more hasn't been said about it's goriness. When Sweeney Todd came out, people were all "OMG BUCKETS AND FOUNTAINS OF BLOOD OMG" but that was practically Monty Python's Black Knight compared to this. I don't stomach gore very well, and Snyder certainly added some considerable amounts in at least two scenes. (Notably in his "Let me tell you about Rorschach" flashback scene, which was a little more, uh, direct than in the book.) THOSE WITH WEAK STOMACHS BE WARNED, YEA VERILY.

I'm glad they kept Dan's general nerdy schlubbiness in the movie, and they kept the sex scenes awkward. That said, I am definitely not a fan of these awkward sex scenes. I will never be able to listen to "Hallelujah" again without cringing slightly. My entire theater was laughing and groaning extensively during both Dan/Laurie scenes.

Jackie Earle Haley completely blew me away. His BATVOICE didn't bother me much, and his physicality was perfect. In those moments when he had his mask off, (especially at the end) he was completely stunning. Rorschach could not possibly have been better cast.

Billy Crudup kinda bored me as Manhattan. His voice was too soft and gentle- in my head, Manhattan always sounded deeper and more resonant- like somebody talking from the other end of a tunnel.

Regarding the accent

[identity profile] azzy23.livejournal.com 2009-03-07 07:44 am (UTC)(link)
Actually, I can tell you the deal with the accent. Veidt is the child of Germans. Nazis, if I remember correctly. In the alternate world of Watchmen, Veidt dulls his German accent down on purpose, except when he's being 'real'.

I'm not locked in here with you, YOU'RE LOCKED IN HERE WITH ME!" The entire audience got really rowdy when that line was delivered. Can't really describe a unified reaction. I know I gasped to cover a GIANT FANGIRL SQUEE (because that's EXACTLY HOW THAT LINE IS SUPPOSED TO SOUND!!!), and my friend Mark actually squeed. Some people snickered, some guffawed. A woman behind me sort of groaned "OhmahGOD".

There is so much investment in the characters up to that point, and I think that's the moment when enough shards have added up so that you REALLY UNDERSTAND WHAT RORSCHACH IS. He's pure, he's indifferent. He's neither good nor evil, but he's both too. Utterly uncorruptable, which makes him less human than Dr. Manhattan. That's a really terrifying thing, psychologically.

I agree with you, that's it's a lot to take in. My brain feels exhausted and spent, and totally overwhelmed with ideas.

And also, the backstory sequence for the origin of Dr. Manhattan... magnificent. I was totally enraptured, and I think that might be one of the most gorgeous sequences I've seen... well, in a really long time. I know when I read that sequence in the book I actually was moved to tears.

I absolutely loved the movie, and desperately want to see it again. I wish I could watch it again RIGHT NOW. Maybe several times. Just to try and separate out all the things it made me think and feel simultaneously into smaller, more digestible chunks.

[identity profile] maisontv.livejournal.com 2009-03-07 08:44 am (UTC)(link)
I absolutely loved this movie. Like a lot of other commentators, I thought the soundtrack was great and really put you in the mood of the era. "The Times They Are A Changing" was the best pick of the film and a great way to move quickly through the history of superheroes.

Speaking of the intro, there was some gorgeous cinematography at work here. The intro shots that were shot to look like you were walking through an old photograph were brilliant. My favorite, however, was when Rorschach cornered Mini Me (didn't catch the character's name) in the bathroom and all we got were brief glimpses of him descending as the bathroom door swings back and forth. Just seeing Mini Me backing into a corner, terrified and then seeing nothing was so much more powerful than seeing exactly what Rorschach did to him.

[identity profile] biomekanic.livejournal.com 2009-03-07 09:37 am (UTC)(link)
I liked it, but I think I'll like it more not in IMAX. The IMAX, not so bad?

The 12,000 WATT SPEAKERS! CAN YOU HEAR US! 12-THOUSAND! WATTS! of DOOM! sound system ( btw, did you know it's 12,000 watts? They might mention it a time or 5 in the "Whyfore the IMAX is teh awesomesauce!" promo ). I shouldn't want to cover my ears during a movie.

Seriously, I already have some lose from being young, and dumb and being to close to speakers at concerts. I don't need IMAX's help to add to my hearing issues.

lalalala spoilers

[identity profile] highlystrung.livejournal.com 2009-03-07 09:40 am (UTC)(link)
Yay you've seen it! *coughs* So now I will rant. ;)

1) While watching I felt like I was supposed to be really dumb and really smart all at the same time. For example the very first scene where we actually hear what's being said between Laurie's mum and that guy, it's like, 'oh, ok. So the Comedian's her father.' Then they beat us over the head with it four more times. The first scene was awesome, lots of implications and mind-blowing associations without having to be totally blatant, but then they blow it by just repeating the same point again and again without taking it anywhere, or seeing what else it might imply. It's very much the same with the violence. Initially it seemed to be making the point that 'guys, this is not 'biff! bap!! pow!!' this r srs bsns. also heroes are complex and not all nice'. That was cool, I got that. Yet the film persistantly shoved really graphic violence in the audience's face (bone-snapping, anyone?) to the point where it seemed designed to titillate, because it certainly wasn't serving the story. (And I admit I hold it to a higher standard because it seems to be a movie that puts itself out there as being about the meta and the story.)

In the converse, there were lots of things that could have been explained that just weren't, for example giving us a little more character motivation with Manhattan/Laurie. Like when they were doing the sex, and she freaks out with the many-hands. It had been implied they'd been together some time, so I just assumed he'd done that before. Also with the 'what has become of us?' Well, I don't know mate. Aside from Vietnam, which was also like whoah violence not glory, we haven't really been shown what you do. So, uh... Nothing? As far as the movie's shown me, this is all that you are. (I know that this was a set-up for an awesome Comedian line, but all of those are still examples of how I felt patronised by some things, and bewildered by others.)

2) I didn't care about any of the characters except The Comedian. Oh, and the Minutemen. I actually wanted the movie to be about them, because they succinctly said in that (awwesome) opening montage with the rise-and-fall and the psychological analysis and the society with/against heroes absolutely everything that they fumbled with throughout the rest of the movie. In comparison The Watchmen were lifeless. By trying to make them into vehicles of analysis, they removed their personality. Also, they were all tourists. You can get away with your character not actually doing anything in a book because you're controlling the POV. In a movie, we're watching the external actions, not the internal monologue (except Rorschach and he's the one active character really besides Ozymandias, who you don't know about til the end) and so all the characters have to be characters, not just tourists watching the other stuff go down. Honestly it felt like you could have just cut Nite Owl out of the film, and I wouldn't even have noticed he was gone. Again, he was a little bit of meta about what happens to superheroes in real life and then after that he was completely unnecessary.

3) The meta needs to serve the story, the story does not need to serve the meta. It felt like there were at least two different movies here tied messily together, and a lot of the time rather than seeing any of the products what we saw was the string. The beginning was a good mix of analysis and story, but I really felt it began to sag roughly after Rorschach was captured (that was an awesome scene.) It was there that 'everyone look at the pretty, hee hee!' came in, and after that there seemd to be confusion over whether they wanted the story to serve the pretty or the meta. I think it would have been a better film by far if they'd made both of those work for the story instead.

I did think it could have been a great movie, and without having to depend on the audience having read the comic first. The Comedian's scenes, the initial fight in the gaol, the whole intro (Comedian and Minutemen), the railing on Manhatten for not caring until it was too late, all really, really awesome. Just too much effort had to be put in by the audience to get to the fleeting moments of good.

[identity profile] erm-the-ghost.livejournal.com 2009-03-07 10:10 am (UTC)(link)
I saw it tonight.
And while I loved it to itty-bitty pieces and I'll probably end up spending an obscene amount of money on a special edition DVD of some kind (not to mention the money I'll spend probably seeing it two more times in theatres), I just could not like Laurie. I just couldn't do it.
You're right, though. Rorschach was absolutely amazing. My heart honestly broke when the policemen ripped off his mask and he was like "MY FAAAAACEEEEE".

[identity profile] ironclad1609.livejournal.com 2009-03-07 06:10 pm (UTC)(link)
Am I the only one who doesn't see the big difference between Ozzi's line in the book and the one they used? Okay, I only read it once, but yeah that didn't bother me.
Hell, nothing bothered me.
Three days later I still feel a bit like after LOTR: Someone took a huge, beautiful piece of (written) art and transported it into my favorite medium, taking only what's important and getting the gist of it so perfectly that I am almost tempted to say I like the movie better than the source.

[identity profile] iamnotanoctopus.livejournal.com 2009-03-07 06:25 pm (UTC)(link)
I really like the movie, but I have one majori problem with it. I've seen a lot of people mention that they got rid of the squid, which was disappointing but undeniably practical. I haven't heard anyone pick up my particular beef with the movie, which was between killing off Rorschach and leaving Adrian's fortress. They took out a very poignant scene, the conversation between Adrian and Dr. Manhattan, and replaced it with another oppurtunity to beat us over the head with The Big Point stick. Dan is !MORALLY OUTRAGED! and Adrian is a !MONSTER!, and somehow the tone of the scene suggested that the responsibility was entirely Adrian's. It sort of effed up the point of Rorschach's death, for one, and it told me that Snyder had invested a little too much in Dan as the audience's insert point, if that makes sense.

[identity profile] avaserenity.livejournal.com 2009-03-07 06:59 pm (UTC)(link)
I think people who go in expecting an action move are going to be disappointed because this film isn't an action movie. it has actio in it but it's not an action movie. I saw it last night and I love it. I went in totally blind to what it was about. I haven't read the GN in years so most of it I dont ever remember but I left the movie overwhelmed by it in a good way.

Rorschach is, depending on the scene, weird, off-putting, loathsome, terrifying, pitiful, and... something I almost want to call "noble." He is, it turns out, the hero of the story--the one who seeks justice, the one who refuses to compromise. And over here, you've got Ozymandias--perfect handsome invincible billionaire Ozymandias, obsessed with making the world better, willing to do anything to save humanity--no matter how terrible. He certainly functions as the villain, and even if you argue that the ends can justify the means, I don't know that he has the right to make that choice in the first place, even if he succeeds at his mission (or does he? Does it really work out in the long run?).

There is something noble about him even in the fact that he is obviously a very damaged person, yet his convictions make him noble. I thought he was awesome.

As for Ozymandias, his plan took a minute to really sink into my brain and when it did all i could think was "this is so fucked up". And your questions are exactly what popped into my mind. Who says he get to make that decision? How long with the outcome of that plan hold up?

The movie is grand on a scale and so serious but it's still very awesome in my book.
ext_14351: (cimorene/FTW)

[identity profile] e-clare.livejournal.com 2009-03-08 01:06 am (UTC)(link)
Yes, yes!! Someone else saw The Lookout! I was mildly perturbed by the accent too, but (most of) his delivery and the overall physical performance were both so great that I could let it slide...a little.

silly silly questions

[identity profile] serizawa3000.livejournal.com 2009-03-08 03:17 am (UTC)(link)
I saw the movie today and found it strangely... okay. I didn't hate it, I didn't even dislike it. I liked it okay. I think my favorite thing about the movie was the little minutiae... especially during the opening credits... Ozymandias shaking hands with David Bowie, and there's Mick Jagger, and the Village People in the background... Annie Leibovitz taking Veidt's picture... for a moment there I thought that was Charlize Theron as Veidt's assistant...

Where did Laurie get the gun this time? In the comic, she took it off one of the dead detectives in New York... but... Did she take it from the prison guard she punched out?

Guy at the comic shop said there was an Alan Moore doppelganger somewhere in the movie, but I didn't see him.

The Manhattan on Mars sequence was the "make it or break it" moment for me. Had no idea how they'd pull it off, but they did. Even better, they had the music of Philip Glass in the background.

There were some things I missed... "That's quite a drop" for one...

[identity profile] lisalog.livejournal.com 2009-03-08 03:38 am (UTC)(link)
He also gets the most badass line in the entire movie, IMO, and since this is just my opinion talking, I'll go ahead and tell you that it's "I'm not locked in here with you, YOU'RE LOCKED IN HERE WITH ME!"

Agreed. That was my favorite line in the book, as well.

Back in the day, I took a "Which Watchmen character are you?" quiz and scored as (overwhelmingly) Rorschach. Some friends of mine took it, and all of them scored as Nite Owl. I suppose I should be more alarmed than I am at my results (even though 'tis only an internet quiz that was undoubtedly conceived by a bored fanboy with horrible grammar skills) but I'm not. Rorschach is the man.

[identity profile] thesarcasma.livejournal.com 2009-03-08 03:50 am (UTC)(link)
Did anyone get up and leave in your theater?

I hadn't read the comic, so I didn't really know what to expect. Apparently several other people in the audience didn't either.

We had several groups get up and leave. Most noticeably, a mom and dad and their two teen kids, maybe 13 or 14 got up after Rorschach hatchets that child killer in the head.

And then my brother told me that the people sitting next to him got up and left too.

[identity profile] diddakoi.livejournal.com 2009-03-08 08:31 pm (UTC)(link)
Comments on the movie:
- I liked the score.
- Holy blue wang, Batman. <-- new favorite phrase.
- When you invade your villain's lair, shut the god damn door. What, were you heroes raised in a barn?
- I really, really enjoyed the movie. But then, I enjoy playing with tropes and things that are really psychological. I think my friends didn't like it as much because they were probably expecting something more along the lines of Spiderman.

Rorshach's mom wasn't one of the original heroes, right? She was just a prostitute. And in his opening dialogue, who did he say was in a mental home?

[identity profile] foresthouse.livejournal.com 2009-03-08 08:56 pm (UTC)(link)
And now I can actually read this entry, having seen the movie. :) (Which I also really liked).

Yeah, Rorschach is my favorite character as well, and it *is* hard to pin down why, because some things about him are terrifying or loathsome, but there it is! I think in part I like him so much because he at least tries to make things right in the best way he knows how, even after his messed-up childhood and all. And that he does, really, believe in individual justice, whereas as soon as you start getting into "ends justify the means" territory you run the danger of wandering over to the Ozymandias side and killing tons of innocent people "for the greater good". I have to admit I shed a tear when Rorschach died. *sniff* (Always made me sad in the comic, too.)

Speaking of Ozymandias, I totally agree that the weird accent was off-putting. I did actually figure out he was doing Vague German, but it still sounded really weird and almost fake (in the movie). Matthew Goode didn't impress me as much as some of the others, although he was still pretty good.

And give it up for the Comedian! I agree that Jackie Earle Haley was the most stellar performance (man, he nailed Rorschach), but I thought Jeffrey Dean Morgan did a great job of selling the Comedian, who I always thought was a fascinating character (I always wished Moore had done an origin story on him, AND one on Mothman - why does he go crazy?? They never tell you!)

My friend who saw it with me had never read the comic - he thought it was pretty good, and agreed that Rorschach's jail line was the most badass, although he thought some of the dialogue was clunky (and there *were* a few spots where I thought that too, actually).

I totally need to go see it in IMAX now. *g*

[identity profile] spectralbovine.livejournal.com 2009-03-08 10:38 pm (UTC)(link)
He also gets the most badass line in the entire movie, IMO, and since this is just my opinion talking, I'll go ahead and tell you that it's "I'm not locked in here with you, YOU'RE LOCKED IN HERE WITH ME!"
They showed that scene at WonderCon, and the crowd went wild. Because, yeah, pretty badass.

And, for real, what's with triggering?? WE WERE ALL WAITING FOR THAT LINE AND THEY CHANGED IT FOR NO GOOD REASON. I wasn't too bothered, but it made me think about how bothered I was, and there was no need to change it.

[identity profile] deathbyrandom.livejournal.com 2009-03-09 04:14 am (UTC)(link)
Rorschach is, depending on the scene, weird, off-putting, loathsome, terrifying, pitiful, and... something I almost want to call "noble." He is, it turns out, the hero of the story--the one who seeks justice, the one who refuses to compromise.

This.

You said it perfectly. I enjoyed your review, and I very much agree with it.

[identity profile] bumblebee-1983.livejournal.com 2009-03-09 05:14 pm (UTC)(link)
I f'ing LOVE this movie.

Now, my favorite character? Hands down, Rorschach.

Was it me or did he remind anyone else of Clint Eastwood in Dirty Harry? I mean, how he sounded and acted very much reminded me of Eastwood.

And I loved how his mask changed per expression. Sometimes though it was hard to understand him, but DAMN did Jackie do a good job with him!

Second favorite: Nite Owl. Patrick Wilson amazes me. Did he kind of remind anyone else of Clark Kent with the glasses and trying to hide his true identity (sort of, kind of...)?

Silk Spectre is a different kind of heroine, I must say. And I love that kickass attitude of hers, oh so very much.

Page 2 of 3