nogodsnomasters85
Not Stirred
I discovered Watchmen in my early teens and fell in love. I thought the movie was amazing, and very faithful to the original text. Post you're thoughts, comments, impressions, etc. I thought it deserved a thread.
Who Watches the Watchmen?
- Thread starter nogodsnomasters85
- Start date
I discovered Watchmen in my early teens and fell in love. I thought the movie was amazing, and very faithful to the original text. Post you're thoughts, comments, impressions, etc. I thought it deserved a thread.
nogodsnomasters85
Not Stirred
Do whatever you want, but my advice is do yourself a favor and read it. The book should always precede the film because no film, nomatter how artfully or faithfully done can reproduce the experience of the original art. This is especially true in this case. Part of Alan moore's rationale was to prove what comics could acheive, how it could be elevated to a higher realm of art, and how a writer could take advantage of the unique properties of the medium, I think you'd be cheating yourself. Also, even at almost 3 hours, it still leaves a fair amount of material out. The story is so complex and multilayered you might be left hanging or lost. It's really meant for people who read it. Trust me, theres' a reason why Time magazine voted it one of the Best 100 Novels of the 20th Century. Read it love it, see the movie, and enjoy the brilliance of Watchmen.
Darth Vegan
truly disappointed
as a longstanding fan of the comic, I was worried sick they'd ruin it, but actually left the theater very happy and relieved. They totally did it justice!
One of the most visualluy stunning things ever put to film. It totally captures the feel of the book, and seriously, the scenes on Mars with Manhattan and his crystal palace? Breathtaking.
I actually like the change at the end. I think it makes perfect sense in the context of the film, and....
*SPOILER ALERT*
honestly, had they gone with the giant squid, I think it would have A. baffled most moviegoers who havent read the book, and B. come off as some goofy Cloverfield bullshit.
A+, cant wait for the directors cut DVD!
One of the most visualluy stunning things ever put to film. It totally captures the feel of the book, and seriously, the scenes on Mars with Manhattan and his crystal palace? Breathtaking.
I actually like the change at the end. I think it makes perfect sense in the context of the film, and....
*SPOILER ALERT*
honestly, had they gone with the giant squid, I think it would have A. baffled most moviegoers who havent read the book, and B. come off as some goofy Cloverfield bullshit.
A+, cant wait for the directors cut DVD!
bysshe
human bean
Do whatever you want, but my advice is do yourself a favor and read it. The book should always precede the film because no film, nomatter how artfully or faithfully done can reproduce the experience of the original art. This is especially true in this case. Part of Alan moore's rationale was to prove what comics could acheive, how it could be elevated to a higher realm of art, and how a writer could take advantage of the unique properties of the medium, I think you'd be cheating yourself. Also, even at almost 3 hours, it still leaves a fair amount of material out. The story is so complex and multilayered you might be left hanging or lost. It's really meant for people who read it. Trust me, theres' a reason why Time magazine voted it one of the Best 100 Novels of the 20th Century. Read it love it, see the movie, and enjoy the brilliance of Watchmen.
The books are always better than the films.
My fellow booksellers gave me a crash course in Claremont before the first X-Men film came out and I'm glad that they did. I will take your advice and check out Watchmen (Absolute Edition) before I see the film.
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
Darth Vegan
truly disappointed
I would say reading it before seeing it is almost mandatory. By all accounts I've heard, people who have not read it are leaving theaters confused and/or not enjoying the movie.
The Cat's Mother
Unmentionable
It seems some people beg to differ. Fandom Wank round up the crazy as usual....
http://www.journalfen.net/community/fandom_wank/1198640.html
bagface
Member
yeah i think i would have been pretty confused had i not been familiar with the source material. my girlfriend started reading it before we saw it and only got about 3/4 of the way done. she says that she's lucky because she got the best of both worlds. she was familiar with the characters but was kept really interested in the movie because she didn't yet know how it ended.
Worm
Taste the diffidence
I liked it. It was as faithful an adaptation as one could hope for. Which is to say, it failed, but that was a given. In a funny way it was best for everyone that Alan Moore took his name off of the credits. You could just take the movie for what it was.
My complaint is that Zack Snyder amped-up the action to the detriment of the central love story between Dan and Laurie. By working in more traditional whiz-bang elements he left the movie open to the criticism that many, in fact, have leveled against it, which is that the worldview it espouses is brutal and almost fascistic. Hard to blame him, though, for wanting to make an exciting movie that played to big audiences.
My complaint is that Zack Snyder amped-up the action to the detriment of the central love story between Dan and Laurie. By working in more traditional whiz-bang elements he left the movie open to the criticism that many, in fact, have leveled against it, which is that the worldview it espouses is brutal and almost fascistic. Hard to blame him, though, for wanting to make an exciting movie that played to big audiences.
bm20950
Open Your Arms
Well if it can at least provoke thought in this way i'd say it merits at least a watch.
A visit to the Imax is in order.
down_in_albion
Clandestine global evil
I read the graphic novel when I was a teen and really enjoyed it. Hopefully will have time to go and see the film tomorrow despite not really being greatly interested in the superhero genre.
Darth Vegan
truly disappointed
well thats the whole thing, it deconstructs the entire superhero genre. Not typical "buff dudes in spandex fighting for truth, justice, and the American way" garbage.
down_in_albion
Clandestine global evil
I know the novel does but I wasn't sure about the film. Just from skimming a few reviews it seems less 'subversive' than the original text and more like a slightly darker superhero tale. Still looking forward to it, mind.
Worm
Taste the diffidence
That's correct. As I said above the director went for some of the traditional superhero stuff, diluting the "deconstructionist" element in the book. Still, the movie does tweak the genre in some important ways. For example (no spoiler here) Rorscach, who emerges as one of the heroes of the movie, is plainly a sociopath.
You can't "deconstruct" comic book superheroes in a film anyway. "Deconstruction" implies dismantling a structure using the parts from which the structure is made. A "Watchmen" movie could only deconstruct other films-- which it only does in tiny little bits, mainly in one fantastic scene that gave me goosebumps (hint: Wagner).
Last edited:
nogodsnomasters85
Not Stirred
WATCHING THE WATCHMEN
I've been watching the film and referencing the novel nonstop for the past few days. Alan Moore's story could take a whole book to dissect but I wanted to briefly share some of my observations. Again, it's difficult to sum up such a dense and complex work but ultimately I think Watchmen revolves around three central themes: What constitutes Morality? Specifically Deontology (Rorschach) VS. Utilitarianism (Ozymandias), A meditation on power, how it affects those who have it and those who don't, and lastly, as mentioned, a deconstruction of the superhero, all of this revolving around a murder mystery/detective story lending a noir feel to the whole thing.
Power
Alan Moore seems to be siding with John Acton's famous quote: "Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely." In fact it's almost as much of an indictment of power as "V For Vendetta" but where that was essentially an anarchist primer, Watchmen is more subtle with it's messages. There are numerous examples; first of all, Nixon, who is still president in the Watchmen world, and is also probably the most potent symbol of power corrupted in the American psyche. Moore's superheroes are often morally dubious and show virtually no concern for social compacts or mores, they do what they please, when they please. The Comedian, the murder victim and lynchpin to the story, is essentially a fascist who takes sadistic glee in his violent vocation. Ozymandias, who sees himself as a hero, (Most villains do.) uses his intellect and near infinite resources to change the course of human history. Then theres' Dr. Manhattan who has essentially the power of a god and how this affects international politics. Moore also focuses on those without power, the protesters whose message "Who Watches the Watchmen?" (From the roman poet Juvenal.) appears over and over. Power is reflected on in every facet, from super-powers, to the superpowers, to nuclear power, etc.
Morality-Ethics
Do the ends ever justify the means? This is the question posed at the end of the story. Adrian, who seems to be influenced by a more Utilitarian school of thought like Bentham or Mill, is willing to commit mass murder to avert nuclear war, which leads to an irreconciliable conflict with the Deontologist Rorschach who gravely sums up Kant's position in the line "Never Compromise. Even in the face of armageddon." But this theme of morality also permeates the book. All the characters are morally complex. Even the Comedian who appears to be a borderline sociopath has a few redeeming moments of humanity, the closest thing to a hero we have is Nite Owl II, and he's having an affair with one of his' best friends' girlfriend.
Deconstruction of the Super Hero
Moore obviously loves super-heroes, so do most Watchmen fans, and thus Alan Moore lovingly blasts apart the superhero myth. Most comic characters are caricatures, crude oversimplifications with little depth or realism. The good guys are always good the bad guys are always bad. Theres' a clear dilineation between good and evil. Moore incinerates this archetype with a scorched-earth policy, facing us with superheroes that can be tormented confused, ugly, fallible, and, ultimately, human.
I've been watching the film and referencing the novel nonstop for the past few days. Alan Moore's story could take a whole book to dissect but I wanted to briefly share some of my observations. Again, it's difficult to sum up such a dense and complex work but ultimately I think Watchmen revolves around three central themes: What constitutes Morality? Specifically Deontology (Rorschach) VS. Utilitarianism (Ozymandias), A meditation on power, how it affects those who have it and those who don't, and lastly, as mentioned, a deconstruction of the superhero, all of this revolving around a murder mystery/detective story lending a noir feel to the whole thing.
Power
Alan Moore seems to be siding with John Acton's famous quote: "Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely." In fact it's almost as much of an indictment of power as "V For Vendetta" but where that was essentially an anarchist primer, Watchmen is more subtle with it's messages. There are numerous examples; first of all, Nixon, who is still president in the Watchmen world, and is also probably the most potent symbol of power corrupted in the American psyche. Moore's superheroes are often morally dubious and show virtually no concern for social compacts or mores, they do what they please, when they please. The Comedian, the murder victim and lynchpin to the story, is essentially a fascist who takes sadistic glee in his violent vocation. Ozymandias, who sees himself as a hero, (Most villains do.) uses his intellect and near infinite resources to change the course of human history. Then theres' Dr. Manhattan who has essentially the power of a god and how this affects international politics. Moore also focuses on those without power, the protesters whose message "Who Watches the Watchmen?" (From the roman poet Juvenal.) appears over and over. Power is reflected on in every facet, from super-powers, to the superpowers, to nuclear power, etc.
Morality-Ethics
Do the ends ever justify the means? This is the question posed at the end of the story. Adrian, who seems to be influenced by a more Utilitarian school of thought like Bentham or Mill, is willing to commit mass murder to avert nuclear war, which leads to an irreconciliable conflict with the Deontologist Rorschach who gravely sums up Kant's position in the line "Never Compromise. Even in the face of armageddon." But this theme of morality also permeates the book. All the characters are morally complex. Even the Comedian who appears to be a borderline sociopath has a few redeeming moments of humanity, the closest thing to a hero we have is Nite Owl II, and he's having an affair with one of his' best friends' girlfriend.
Deconstruction of the Super Hero
Moore obviously loves super-heroes, so do most Watchmen fans, and thus Alan Moore lovingly blasts apart the superhero myth. Most comic characters are caricatures, crude oversimplifications with little depth or realism. The good guys are always good the bad guys are always bad. Theres' a clear dilineation between good and evil. Moore incinerates this archetype with a scorched-earth policy, facing us with superheroes that can be tormented confused, ugly, fallible, and, ultimately, human.
