But…I got that message from the movie, too. Was it not there?
Except making Manhattan the unifying force doesn’t make sense since he is a direct product of the US. The ruskies would never believe they’d turn against their own creation.
The catalyst needs to be alien to work or else the logic falls apart.
The one complaint I had when I saw it in the theater was that you aren’t shown enough backstory on just how much Laurie despised the Comedian. I mean, you’re shown why, but I didn’t feel the gravitas when the other shoe dropped.
That’s an epic moment in comic books, generally, when the dominos tumble for Laurie.
(It is also particularly intriguing because Manhattan must have known, and said nothing.)
I haven’t seen the movie because of the bad press, but I think having read these reviews that now I will.
Manhattan was entirely inhuman. He perceived time in a different way: he could perceive and anticipate cause and effect as well as the spiral iterations of chaos, but could not do anything about it or even control his own actions despite the insight, trapped inside the mechanisms that he alone could perceive. He was certainly incapable of love, and even his lust seemed preprogrammed.
My biggest complaint was one bit of casting/performance. Not a fan of the movie Ozymandias. The comic version had a facade that was softer-edged and seemingly helpful - a charismatic guy who did a much better job deflecting blame from himself. Movie Ozymandias on the other hand pretty much telegraphed his role as a villain - his performance would only have worked for me if he was a red herring.
Otherwise I thought it was pretty solid and most of the rest of the performances were spot-on. Particularly Rorschach and the Comedian.
All in all, I liked the movie a lot, and I respect the fact that they decided to keep the original 80’s setting, but still… it didn’t quite work for me. The obsession with Richard Nixon, Vietnam, the Doomsday Clock and so on came across as dated Boomer angst.
The opening credits were sensational.
And then there was the movie.
It wasn’t bad, but the anarchist plot was basically dumb. It might have been good enough to impress tweens back when the book came out, but the movie wasn’t straight-forward enough for your average tween. V for Vendetta did a bit better by having a minimal cast, minimal dialogue, focusing on ‘coolness’ as the only real argument for anarchism, and having a palette that your average goth can appreciate.
Watchmen has too many characters, too much dialogue, isn’t stupid enough to appeal to the masses nor smart enough to appeal to the trend setters. Some nice visuals, but they’re too colorful and too non-stylized to really last in ones memory in any particular way.
I didn’t hate it, but I can’t really remember much about it beyond the opening sequence and giant blue dong.
Must he have known though? I’m not sure if he could “see” events that occurred before his creation. Plus, I didn’t get the feeling he omnisciently knew everything - he could “look” at a certain point in space-time, but he didn’t automatically have all knowledge just due to his powers.
Heck, remember on Mars, he was telling Laurie something like “In eleven minutes, you tell me you’ve been sleeping with Dreiberg.”, then when she actually told him, he acted surprised and hurt: “You’ve been sleeping with Dreiberg?”
Not “Saw” - the original “Mad Max” movie.
I assumed Moore was referencing the film when he put this in the book.
This was the biggest gripe I have about the film. Veidt ought to have been a square-jawed, clean-cut, Matthew McConnuaghey type who looked like a stereotypical do-gooder. Instead they made him a rat-faced creep from the get-go, thus removing the character’s biggest asset as a villain.
I also agree that the sex scene went on for too long and that the non-squid ending didn’t entirely make sense (although I accept that using the squid would have required a lot more backstory the film didn’t have time for) but otherwise I thought overall it was an excellent adaptation.
All i know is that Rorshcachs casting was brilliant.
It’s not like Jackie Earle Haley was on the tip of everyone’s tongue in 2009.
What’s next, Ike Eisenmann as Captain Boomerang? (Fuck Jai Courtney…he looks like a supermodel)
Yep, I enjoyed the book and the movie. Haven’t cared much for Zach’s work since, though.
I also don’t think Jeffrey Dean Morgan could readily be improved on.
Yeah, I wasn’t crazy about some of the casting decisions, but these two are so perfect they erase all of the other casting sins.
I love the novel, but only like the movie a lot. I haven’t seen the director’s cut or the version with The Black Freighter cut in. I’ll have to see them, maybe I’ll like it better.
Sure, and it’s been used elsewhere as well.
The specific comments I remember from Snyder et al. was that the original sequence looked too much like something from Saw. Whether that’s a valid assessment and why they were worried about having an original sequence taken for a copycat, when there are so many others that could be said the same of, is I guess irrelevant. It did put a vicious slant on Rorschach that tainted the character, IMHO - he was merciless, he was brutal, he was absolutely unforgiving, but the hacksaw sequence was far more to his character than just hacking the guy to death.
No one’s quite picked up on it, but if I were to edit the film, the first change I’d make is the beginning of the Dan-Laurie restaurant scene. The whole sequence where he walks in, takes off his glasses, sees her, goes gooey, she sees him, goes gooey… OMFG. Just effing awful. I’d cut it to him walking in and taking off his glasses, then the long cut across the restaurant where they’re seated. The romcom goo served absolutely no purpose and yanks you right out of the narrative.
I loved this movie, more even than the graphic novel, and that is rare with me.
I saw this in part as a demonstration that “the opposite of love isn’t hate; it’s indifference”. Dr. Manhattan sets this up with the chilling line from his origin story - “I feel fear for the last time”, and then when he is having sex with Jupiter and says “You had my full attention” when he obviously didn’t mean it. As he becomes less and less human, he pays less and less attention to people until the scene where he finds out his old girlfriend has cancer because of him, and screams “Leave me ALONE!” and empties the room.
Contrast that with the other characters, who still care. Even about the ones they have been battling. Even Ozymandias, who is the bad guy, cares enough about humanity to start a war and kill millions, in order to save billions. Or Rorschach, who cares so much about the truth that he has to die to preserve the lives of billions. Even when they recognize that how they express their caring is absurd - “getting dressed up and going out at 3:00am to do something stupid” - they still do it, because it is how they can still connect. That’s why Night Owl can’t perform sexually without his identity as Night Owl - only after he reclaims it can he consummate his relationship with Silk Stalking.
Plus the brilliance of some of the lines.
or
Regards,
Shodan
He was great in No Country for Old Men 
By the way, I think it’s appropriate to post this, it’s the best: Watchmen if it were a Saturday morning cartoon
I didn’t like the movie at all the first time I saw it but enjoyed it a lot more on second viewing for some reason.
One thing I didn’t like about it was the portrayal of Ozymandias, in the movie he comes across as a fairly standard sinister billionaire, in the graphic novel he was a lot more relatable and likable. In fact there is a small part where he is writing a ‘self help’ section and you get the impression that his enthusiasm isn’t faked, he really does want to help other people, it reminded me of the quote by Mark Twain, '“Keep away from people who try to belittle your ambitions. Small people always do that, but the really great make you feel that you, too, can become great.”.
I don’t think that comes across in the movie at all, Ozymandias is basically a good man who ends up doing terrible things for what he believes are the right reasons.
Also, why the ‘boys’ folder on his computer in his office, am I missing something or what was the point of adding that? (I have no strong feelings either way on his being portrayed as gay or bisexual)
That is amazing!
As for the movie, I feel like I need to watch the extended edition to re-evaluate. I actually own it on blu-ray, but have never watched it. I only saw it in the theatre on original release. I liked a lot of things about it, but overall I came away feeling a bit meh. Some of that is just expectation because I am such a fan of the original novel, but a lot of it was the ending change. I just feel like it made much less sense than the space squid (say that with a straight face). Nuclear attack is just so…pedestrian compared to that - and I don’t feel like it would have motivated Comedian’s “break” in the same way.
Totally agree about the unsuitability of Ozy - bad casting and directing there.
That was a reference back to something in the comic (I don’t think it was in the movie) - after Rorschach meets with Ozy the first time to talk about the Comedian’s murder, he writes in his journal:
“Meeting with Veidt left bad taste in mouth. He is pampered and decadent, betraying even his own shallow, liberal affectations. Possibly homosexual? Must remember to investigate further.”