W2: Watchmen United

[01d55]

Originally Posted by Mirai Gen

You know I totally understand the perspective this is coming from but...it seems a bit silly to get up-in-arms about fictionalized historic events? Might just be me.

Well in actual historical events, a lot of American pilots turned Vietnamese people into fine red mist with their bombs. As for South Korea specifically, there's been a lot of friction between U.S. military bases and citizens of Korea over the years since the DMZ was set up.

[BitVyper]

Honestly changing the particular means by which Veidt kills half of New York doesn't seem like that big a deal.

Did his bombs send out a psychic shockwave that caused people all over the world to actually become "aware" of the faux-threat? Because squidbilly did, and that always seemed like an important, if overlooked, part of the plan to me.

Edit: Thanks to you guys, I'm now getting google ads for a Korean mail-order bride site.

[Mirai Gen]

Originally Posted by 01d55

Well in actual historical events, a lot of American pilots turned Vietnamese people into fine red mist with their bombs. As for South Korea specifically, there's been a lot of friction between U.S. military bases and citizens of Korea over the years since the DMZ was set up.

To clarify my intent, the events happened, and the big naked blue American god part was fictional. And it wasn't even very central to the plot. It isn't like the Japanese watching Pearl Harbor or anything, where they're rooting for foreign soldiers as protagonists to kill their grandfathers and great grandfathers.

[Lumenskir]

Ok, just got back from seeing this. I'm actually eager to see the box-office figures for this week, since I went to a 7:15 showing and there might have been, max, about 20 people. A quarter (ok, 4 or 5) walked out.

Anyways, I kind of appreciate this movie, because it showed how important acting actually is. Jackie Earle Harley continues his recent awesome streak, Billy Crudup was surprisingly good, and if I never see a movie featuring Malin Akerman again it will be too soon (and after she was so good in Harold and Kumar).

On the music, I forget who said it but it did really seem to be the exact choices a 12 year old would make as he read the comic. "Oh man, they're sneaking up on Veidt's tower...and it's Watchmen...what to use?"

But yeah, as someone who never read the comic and sort of got dragged to a showing, there a few things I thought to ask.

1) Am I sort of supposed to hate all the characters on a basic level? Jackie made the best showing since he got the best lines (the locked in line, all the short jokes), but pretty much everyone else was either pathetic or despicable and I couldn't imagine a comic being sustained for any length of time on that foundation. And I'm still kind of shocked that the Comedian has any fans here since his entire arc went from "Oh snaps, I'm killed" to "Let's rape and shit!" Seriously, I've never had a quicker whiplash from wanting to know why a character died to wishing that the rest of the movie was about killing him over and over again.
1a) Why is everyone so bloodthirsty? I could understand Rorsharch's excuse post-event horizon, and The Comedian is a horrible character, but to see the Tweedy Professor start breaking limbs for fun or a common thug getting a knife to the neck (to say nothing of Dr. Manhattan exploding people on a gory whim when he admits he could just shut off their guns as easily) was just jarring (and depressingly often).

2) Are the non-Dr. Manhattan superheroes as super in the comics? There was some Matrix-esque kung fu shit going on, and by the time Ozy was throwing chairs and people like nothing I had to wonder if I missed some secret cue that they were part of some heightened people program (which would explain how Silk Spectre 2, the product of two other supers, was also so super).

3) Is it as obvious in the comics that Ozy is the bad guy so early on? Even if I hadn't read the wiki and the early Tse script, the scene where The Comedian is a dick to him at the Watchmen meeting, and the camera lingers on him being smarmy, was so big a give away that the person I went with 'called' him as the baddie at that point, and she had never heard of the comic before the ad blitz started.

There are a few other things, but they're mostly just gripes with Snyder the director than anything else. I forget who said they hoped that future comic book movies would be more 'adult' like this instead of The Dark Knight, and that's just retarded. I will gladly fight for 'family friendly' stuff like TDK over pointless slow-mo exploding bones and awkwardly long nudie scenes.

[01d55]

I think that stuff should be spoiler tagged, Lumenskir.

First question:

Originally Posted by Lumenskir

But yeah, as someone who never read the comic and sort of got dragged to a showing, there a few things I thought to ask.
1) Am I sort of supposed to hate all the characters on a basic level? Jackie made the best showing since he got the best lines (the locked in line, all the short jokes), but pretty much everyone else was either pathetic or despicable and I couldn't imagine a comic being sustained for any length of time on that foundation. And I'm still kind of shocked that the Comedian has any fans here since his entire arc went from "Oh snaps, I'm killed" to "Let's rape and shit!" Seriously, I've never had a quicker whiplash from wanting to know why a character died to wishing that the rest of the movie was about killing him over and over again.

Just my opinion (also I read the book, didn't see movie) Our view of the comedian is supposed to follow Laurie's; Rorschach is supposed to be unnerving throughout.
Second question (1a):

1a) Why is everyone so bloodthirsty? I could understand Rorsharch's excuse post-event horizon, and The Comedian is a horrible character, but to see the Tweedy Professor start breaking limbs for fun or a common thug getting a knife to the neck (to say nothing of Dr. Manhattan exploding people on a gory whim when he admits he could just shut off their guns as easily) was just jarring (and depressingly often).

Nite Owl and Silk Spectre aren't shown to have killed in the comic, they don't even fight in the prison - Nite Owl drops tear gas to disperse the riot and they meet Rorschach as he's leaving the bathroom. There's one scene where they beat up some muggers but nothing implies that they use lethal force.
Third Question (2):

2) Are the non-Dr. Manhattan superheroes as super in the comics? There was some Matrix-esque kung fu shit going on, and by the time Ozy was throwing chairs and people like nothing I had to wonder if I missed some secret cue that they were part of some heightened people program (which would explain how Silk Spectre 2, the product of two other supers, was also so super).

No, only Manhattan has capital-s Super powers. Veidt is a natural genius and is big on self-improvement, so he gets to be "Peak Human" in the mode of Captain America or Batman.
Fourth(3):

3) Is it as obvious in the comics that Ozy is the bad guy so early on? Even if I hadn't read the wiki and the early Tse script, the scene where The Comedian is a dick to him at the Watchmen meeting, and the camera lingers on him being smarmy, was so big a give away that the person I went with 'called' him as the baddie at that point, and she had never heard of the comic before the ad blitz started.

Not even remotely. He doesn't get a "lol evil" colour scheme, his face is stock superhero, the scene where Comedian shoots down his plan plays sympathetic to him.

I read the book after having the big ending spoiled, and it was still really good. You should track it down if you can.

[Kaneda]

Originally Posted by Lumenskir

On the music, I forget who said it but it did really seem to be the exact choices a 12 year old would make as he read the comic. "Oh man, they're sneaking up on Veidt's tower...and it's Watchmen...what to use?"

With the exception of a couple songs (99 luft balloons and Sound of Silence I think), all the songs were referred to in the book. "All Along the Watchtower" was really mainly for the sake of the "a wild cat did growl, two riders were approaching, and the wind began to howl" moment.

1. They aren't meant to be clearly defined heroes and good-guys. I found Dan more likable than you I guess, but you're supposed to either like them in spite of their flaws or not, the book reads just as well either way. Their flaws are part of what made the book so cutting edge. I ended up liking all the characters by the end, in the book and the movie. One of the themes was always "people can do bad things, but people are complicated complicated and things aren't black and white, you might like them anyway."

1a. I dunno why Dan and Laurie were killing people and what-not, that really bothered me. Dr. Manhattan explodes people because he does what the government orders him to do, and because of his general detachment.

2. Ozy's meant to be an incredible athlete, and obsessed with reaching peak mental and physical ability. That aside, no, they're just skilled in combat from their years of vigilantism. Laurie trained since a young age (because of her mother), and you never find out much about Dan's past.

3. I didn't notice when I first read the comic, but it didn't strike me as a major surprise either. I always considered the real twist to be that what he was doing was saving the world.

[Mirai Gen]

RE to Kaneda, 1a; I thought that was odd too, but I took it to be a furthered insistence upon the fact that the good guys really aren't that nice. Plus it totally shattered preconcieved notions of comic-book violence in film form, which is why I was okay with it - I mean you get X-Men and Batman where you trade a few blows then "HAHA TILL NEXT TIME, SPIDER-MAN!" and the villain and hero part ways.

Then you go in to see Watchmen and you have Laurie knifing thugs in the neck and snapping arms and legs in two and twisting necks.

And RE to Lumenskir, 1), actually yeah. Take everything about heroes being heroic and flip it upside down and you'd have the basic idea behind Watchmen. Again, kind of the point of that scene in my head.

Not too sure about 2, but I think its more of a whole oh superheroes beating the fuck out of each other is fine, nobody gets hurt cause superheroes never do, but then there's the alley fight which (as I said) is nothing but gore and bloodshed. If you'd notice nobody should be able to survive being thrown into a concrete pillar head-first and just get up, dust off, and put your dukes back up (Rorschach).

[Lumenskir]

I think that stuff should be spoiler tagged, Lumenskir.

Sorry bout that, fixed.

Plus it totally shattered preconcieved notions of comic-book violence in film form, which is why I was okay with it - I mean you get X-Men and Batman where you trade a few blows then "HAHA TILL NEXT TIME, SPIDER-MAN!" and the villain and hero part ways.

Even though I don't think I got as much out if it as you, I do think this film helped me understand comics a bit more. For a long time I've sort of been picking up through osmosis (and TVTropes) that comics went through an unnecessarily 'grim' phase, and I guess Watchmen the movie is just an extension of that. Personally, the alley fight scene was just so over the top that t eventually transformed into the prime comedic scene (especially since Dr. Manhattan's interesting scene was overlaid on top of it). I think I still prefer the comic book violence we currently have, instead of Steven Seagal-y "Oh shit, bone snap!"

But then again, I think this is just more me harping on Snyder the director than the actual comic (according to 01d55). Reading over what Meister said, I think if a lot of the 'connective tissue' scenes were added it would do something more for the non-comic book reading average viewer (well, the average viewer who doesn't mind long movies).

[Jagos]

Personally, the alley fight scene was just so over the top that it eventually transformed into the prime comedic scene (especially since Dr. Manhattan's interesting scene was overlaid on top of it). I think I still prefer the comic book violence we currently have, instead of Steven Seagal-y "Oh shit, bone snap!"

See, this is where it went all wonky for me... Nite Owl and Spectre doing this when there was no indication they'd kill them before. This is a moment where I believe Snyder pulled one out of a dark place. How can I like them if they're similar to the Comedian with one degree of difference?

[The Wandering God]

I remember reading once that if you are in a fight and the other person is trying to kill you (which the thugs in both cases obviously were), that is, if you try to use only moves that will incapacitate your opponent, you will die.

In case you failed to notice, this was self defense. It was 2 against, what 9?, in the alley? Yeah, I'm actually fine with that. When you are outnumbered by 3 or more to one, and they are trying to kill you, it's okay to use lethal force to defend yourself.

And in the prison scene, they are in their costumes, so it's not even like they can claim ignorance of the other person's prowess anymore.

And if I just saw another thug get their leg broken like that, I can't exactly blame them for doing the same to me when I attack them.

As opposed to the Comedian who actively was chasing down rioters. That is a bit more than "one degree" of difference.

The Wandering God