IIRC, they do mention that many people had tried to replicate it, particularly in the USSR, and they’d just ended up disintegrating themselves. The implication is that it took a certain kind of genius to be able to rebuild one’s self after being blasted to atoms, and only Dr. Manhattan possessed such an intellect.
Indeed, today with 41 reviews counted it’s at 76%.
But take a look at the “top critics” average. 14%
Now there are only eight “top critic” reviews counted at the moment. But with this many (41/8) reviews in, I’ve never seen such a huge disparity between the general average and the “top critics” average.
We’ll see what happens as more reviews trickle in though. But that’s such a weirdly huge disparity I’m not sure what to think right now.
In general, I find that the movies with a lower “top critics” average than the overall average are fun enough to watch, but in a “repeat to yourself ‘it’s just a show, I should really just relax’” sort of way. But if it stays at 76%/14% the new injunction may have to be “watch–but only while comatose.”
Re:Ozymandias having superpowers: Nope. He’s just had the time and money to get himself really really really well trained. Like Batman. Add to that his smarts and money, and yes he’s very dangerous. I think the bullet-catching was something he’d worked out theoretically, but he never practiced it, because what if he messes up? One-trick game.
I didn’t care for his costume in the trailer, but it wasn’t a great costume anyway. Hard to make it look good.
Most people seem to weigh in on that side. You and others have given me good reasons to support your argument though I’m still on the side of him having some powers. I don’t care how much training you have you can’t catch a bullet in your hands. Therefore he has powers.
What if Alan Moore simply believed that if you really really really trained hard, you could catch bullets, yet that’s not actually the case? Would his error then mean that Ozymandias has superpowers, even though he’s expressly written as not having them?
Anyway, I just got back from seeing the film an hour or so ago. I liked it, for what it’s worth. Surely there’s things to quibble about and whatnot, but I think a lot of the early pannings came from critics that had the ‘this film should never have been made’-bug firmly wedged up their assess, who would’ve thrashed it even if it was the greatest marvel ever committed to celluloid. It’s not, but it is a movie well worth watching – my greatest quibble at this point would probably be that the ending changed some implications regarding the source material’s reflections on human nature, and I’m not sure I agree with the point as it was made.
It seems like everyone’s saying now that trying to stay too close to the source material hampered the film’s creativity and originality, and while there’s something to that, if they’d let the film veer off course an iota more, everybody would now be screaming about the violation of the original vision or some such. Given this tightrope walk, I say the film does remarkably well.
Also, there’s lots to discover throughout the film, and I’m afraid I’ve missed a few things, so keep your eyes open!