Nonsense. You’re only saying that because no one’s ever done it. 
Sure, but no real human being can do a quarter of the stuff Batman can do, either, and he doesn’t have any powers other than his mind, training and willpower.
That’s not quite true. A lot of the physical feats Batman performs can be done by trained professionals who specialize in that kind of thing. Take the performers of Cirque du Soleil for example. Not that I’m claiming any kind of realism when it comes to Batman but most of what he does is not in the superpower camp. I can suspend my disbelief about guys and gals dressing up and fighting crime even if they don’t have any superpowers. Ozymandias not only stopped a bullet with his bare hands but he hardly received any injuries from it whatsoever. That puts it in the super camp in my opinion. I realize this is a controversial subject, and, as I said earlier, I can certainly see why others on in the non-superpowered Ozymandias camp.
To answer your first question we’d have to figure out whether the artist’s vision is more important than the audience’s interpretation of his work. I don’t remember it being expressly written in Watchman that Ozymandias did not have any powers of any kind. I simply assumed Ozymandias kept his abilities hidden like he did his superior intellect when he was a small child.
Odesio
Ah well, it’s probably not worth quibbling about; it’s just that, to me, the assumption of Ozymandias having powers distorts the whole message of the book, which is fundamentally one of the flawedness of humanity and its heroic archetypes (and humanity’s need for these archetypes), contrasted by the near omnipotent, yet indifferent Dr. Manhattan. This contrast is blurred, and its effect weakened, when we think of Ozy as having superhuman abilities.
I trust Ebert, so I’ll almost certainly go see it.
It looks to me like most of the negative reviews tend to be coming from people who have no familiarity with the book and just don’t understand what they’re watching. I get the impression they’re going in thinking they’re going to see a conventional superhero/action movie ala X-Men, and they’re coming out scratching their heads.
Even Ebert keeps referring to all the main characters as “the Watchmen,” seemingly under the impression that it’s the name of their team, and I’ve read several other reviews (including the two linked in the OP) where the reviewer just appears to be utterly clueless about the material. They think it’s supposed to be about superheroes fighting bad guys, and are baffled that there isn’t any fighting.
The fact that the response from actual fans of the book appears to be generally very positive is heartening to me.
By the way, thank God Snyder got them to shitcan that original script he wanted them to shoot – updating it to modern day and having them all going to Iraq to fight the war on terror? Jesus, why bother at all?
I think it shows that people unfamiliar with the book think it’s just about the characters – the superheroes – and that the particular story doesn’t matter.
Even for the graphic novel, that the group is called the “Crimebusters” is an easy thing to miss. In any case, with regard to the movie, while your general assertion might be correct, this particular example is not. For the film, “Crimebusters” was actually changed to “Watchmen” and the group is referred to as the “Watchmen” in the movie.
An irritating but understandable change.
In the novel, they weren’t even really the “Crimebusters.” Captain Metropolis tried to get them to join a group called the Crimebusters, but they all walked out. The previous generation of heroes had been part of an organized group, but they were called the Minutemen.
At any rate, that’s a change I’m fine with, since having people wonder “Why was it called Watchmen?” is just a bit of a pointless distraction.
Understandable, but completely stupid as it undercuts the meaning in the title. It doesn’t undercut it badly, but it does blur the concept that was put into sharp relief in the graphic novel.
Not a dealbreaker in any way, but annoying.
ETA: I get the studio’s not wanting people to wonder “Why was it called Watchmen”, but thinking about things like that is part of the point.
I believe you’re mistaken.
I saw the script for that page at one point. I can’t FIND it right now, but I’ll keep looking.
The short version is that Moore told Gibbons “A bullet from a policeman’s .38 caliber (or whatever it was) weapon will penetrate x inches of flesh. What Ozy’s going to do is put both fists end to end (as though he’s playing “One-potato/Two-potato” or making a two handed “telescope gesture”–note, Moore didn’t use either of these examples) and he’ll put his two fists in the path of the bullet so that the bullet will travel through 5 inches of flesh across hand one then 5 more inches of flesh across hand two. Be sure to draw his hands bloody and the groove where the bullet dug through flesh.”
This doesn’t actually work either (although it’s a darn good try). Hydrostatic shock would cause a LOT more damage and I don’t think that the meat across his palms is enough to stop a .38, but from the script, it was clear that his powers, such as they were, were ONLY his intelligence. He was smart enough to be able to figure out from the angle of the gun where to put his hands when Laurie shot him.
I have a question for anyone who’s seen the movie: I want to know about one rumored change. Feel free to spoiler it for me.
At the end–as Laurie and Doc Manhattan return to Earth/New York and Ozy sets off his device–giant space squid or no giant space squid?
A Bat-ninja.
Here’s Hitler’s review of the movie, which should answer the question (warning, spoilers):
I can’t view the link from work! 
sigh God bless Bruno Ganz and the internet. It’s a match made in heaven. The Hilary one was even better.
No giant space squid.
It’s a subtitled scene from Downfall I believe, showing Hitler ranting and raving; the subtitles are all about his dissapointment that the ending has no giant squid. 
Heh–thanks guys!
On one hand, I’m kinda disappointed, but on the other, I doubt if it could be made to work on-screen.
However (huge spoilers for the book–don’t read if you haven’t read the comic!!)
A chunk of the plot (and part of the reason for the pirate comic) is about how the writer of the pirate comic and a bunch of others are distilling down everything horrible and ugly that they can think of to make the giant telepathic squid broadcast when it dies (The “teleportation without Dr Manhattan’s mind makes the teleportee go nuts” thing)…Bubastis was an early attempt to gene-engineer so they could make the telepathic space squid…and the missing writers/artists help get Rorschach involved. Plus, the giant squid proves that it’s an invasion, not just a secret soviet attack with a new death-weapon.
It took all of those points (the teleportation/the alien corpse/the inhuman telepathic images/all the deaths) to make the US and the Soviet Union team up.
I don’t see how they’ll get around those points.