Purposefully.
I don’t think your OP warrants a mollycoddling rebuttal.
Ok. There’s the door, then. I mean, I never asked for a rebuttal. I posted it here because I like talking to people, and I like the discussions here. I don’t know anyone in real life who would even know what Watchmen is. 
anyone else remember an Outer LImits story where a group of scientists attempt to do what Ozzie was trying to do - unite Earth by creating an outside alien for them to fight against? immediate thing I thought of when I got to that part of the Watchmen book.
I liked the book - “Who watches the Watchmen” - I like that. and I liked the whole commentary on superheroes. didn’t bother with the movie, tho I am curious about the big blue dong.
and while I liked the book, it’s no LOTR.
That episode gets mentioned in the last issue.
“Rorschach”, in pity’s name. :smack:
I think the film was mostly going to appeal to the comic fans - of which there are many (I disagree with villa’s specific evaluation, but Watchmen, like LotR, has layers on layers of stuff to explore, expose and wonder about) - and not so much to the casual newcomer. As to Manhattan killing Ozymandias, what would be the point? Punishment?
OtherWaldoPepper - thanks. I have read Watchmen a couple times. how could I have missed that? There are indeed layers, as Malacandra said.
Naw, DC did a comic about a over the hill Supes like back in the 60’s or something like that. Nothing Watchmen did was new.
It’s not even really implied. He jokes about it (“Just don’t ask me where I was when I heard about JFK.”), but so do numerous people on this board.
And his face was scarred in the movie - it’s just harder to see given all the mood lighting and whatnot. I did like that he at least tried to defend himself against his killer. The comic suggests he didn’t.
This bit reminds me of the time I tried to watch the movie “Watchmen”.
Do you have anything official about this? I am curious what this was.
I couldn’t track anything down with a quick google search, but I’d like to see what this is.
Not thinking of “Kingdom Come” by any chance are you?
(No idea how much of a comic person you are, this isn’t meant to be an insult)
Ozzy later adds that the Comedian was in Dallas on November 22nd, 1963.
I suspect he may be thinking of “Whatever Happened to the Man of Tomorrow?”
Which was not from the '60s.
And which was written by Alan Moore.
I was wondering if he meant “Whatever happened to the Man of Tomorrow?” But that one came out in September 1986, which is when the first issues of Watchmen were published, and like KneadToKnow beat me to saying, was also by Alan Moore. And it sounds very different from Watchmen anyway.
Hah, well if that was what he was referring to, it kind of proves that the idea of Watchmen was an original one.
Alan Moore, the guy has been responsible for so many great things in the comic world, it’s kind of crazy.
In the movie, isn’t there a shot of the Kennedy assassination (Jackie climbing on the trunk of the limo), the camera pans slowly to the right, where we see the Comedian getting out of a firing position, rifle in hand?
In the movie, yes, it’s explicit. In the comic, it’s merely suggested.
Justice, I assume. It’s something superheroes often show an interest in.
No, it was in the 60’s or so. Long before Moore ever set pen to paper. No, I don’t remember the issue number, etc.
But, as discussed, Jon is so out of touch - and operating on such an exalted plane - that mere human justice has very little meaning to him. And if he cares at all, he is perfectly capable of concluding that leaving Veidt alive and devoting his considerable abilities to the betterment of mankind in expiation of what he describes in the book as an “awful, necessary crime” serves justice far better than killing him.
Because a being who was superhuman - or a person became superhuman - wouldn’t have the least reason to give a damn about distinctly human concepts like, say, Truth, Justice, and the American Way. He stops being human. He’s super, but not a hero.