The Watchmen: Classic, duh!

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Not that derailing has ever been a problem on ILComics, but this certainly deserves its own thread.

The Huckle-Buck (Horace Mann), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 15:13 (fourteen years ago) Permalink

There's a very good AM interview here: http://www.blather.net/articles/amoore/index.html that answers a lot of questions that came up on the Library thread.

The Huckle-Buck (Horace Mann), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 15:22 (fourteen years ago) Permalink

Fascinating interview. Now Enlightened on Pirate question!

Jocelyn (Jocelyn), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 16:00 (fourteen years ago) Permalink

It's good, but has flaws. You can read more about my opinions in this thread.

Tuomas (Tuomas), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 16:11 (fourteen years ago) Permalink

A quote from there:

"Well, despite being a "superhero" comic, Watchmen is otherwise quite credible and realistic, that's why the ending always struck to me as silly. I don't think the alien could've brought such a peace between the Russians and the Yankees as seen on the last pages of Watchmen, and the fact that Moore had to back the ending up with the psychic's brain bit seems to imply that he wasn't so sure about it either. Anyways, within a few decades people would still have forgotten the alien and the cold war would be back in effect, unless Ozymandias would keep bombarding the Earth again and again with new aliens. So he'd eventually lose anyhow."

Tuomas (Tuomas), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 16:12 (fourteen years ago) Permalink

Ewing to thread plz

tom west (thomp), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 18:01 (fourteen years ago) Permalink

I know what you mean about the ending Tuomas, but I do think it works in the end. The important thing is that the U.S. and Russia get an opportunity to release tensions and stop escalation without either losing face, and that the chance to open up lines of peaceful communication is enough (maybe not to create "utopia", but to stop the cold war at least).

Jordan (Jordan), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 18:07 (fourteen years ago) Permalink

It is sort of a Hayley Mills ending, huh?

The Huckle-Buck (Horace Mann), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 18:10 (fourteen years ago) Permalink

Aside from all the death (Rorshach, half of NYC, Ozymandias, etc.), yeah.

Jordan (Jordan), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 18:16 (fourteen years ago) Permalink

You obv. haven't seen Pollyanna lately.

The Huckle-Buck (Horace Mann), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 18:36 (fourteen years ago) Permalink

I just realized that I don't remember the ending at all.

Casuistry (Chris P), Wednesday, 26 May 2004 01:02 (fourteen years ago) Permalink

SPOILER ALERT: the all lez up

(i doubt those tags mean anything, but they were intended to reduce the size of the letters above)

Huck, Wednesday, 26 May 2004 01:05 (fourteen years ago) Permalink

well, now I know how to do that.

Huck, Wednesday, 26 May 2004 01:09 (fourteen years ago) Permalink

I thought that was Camelot 3000 where they all lezzed up?

VengaDan Perry (Dan Perry), Wednesday, 26 May 2004 01:30 (fourteen years ago) Permalink

Nooo, that's Cherry Tart 2000.

Tep (ktepi), Wednesday, 26 May 2004 01:34 (fourteen years ago) Permalink

This is off the subject of Watchmen, but re: the interview Huck linked, it's interesting that Moore doesn't like The Killing Joke:

Yeah, it was done while I was doing Watchmen, or just after or something, I'm not sure which but it was too close to Watchmen. I mean, Brian [Bolland] did a wonderful job on the art but I don't think it's a very good book. It's not saying anything very interesting.

Granted, it's not as ambitious as Watchmen, but geez!

Tep (ktepi), Wednesday, 26 May 2004 15:27 (fourteen years ago) Permalink

http://iat.ubalt.edu/moulthrop/hypertexts/wm/

Josh Davis (josh_anomaly), Wednesday, 26 May 2004 15:28 (fourteen years ago) Permalink

Damn. I know what I'm doing this weekend. ALL WEEKEND.

The Huckle-Buck (Horace Mann), Wednesday, 26 May 2004 15:36 (fourteen years ago) Permalink

Totally.

Joshua Davis (josh_anomaly), Wednesday, 26 May 2004 15:37 (fourteen years ago) Permalink

Yeah, I clearly have to reread Watchmen now. And the interview has me wanting to read Big Numbers, too, but I have no idea if he ever finished it or if it's collected or what.

Tep (ktepi), Wednesday, 26 May 2004 15:42 (fourteen years ago) Permalink

Hot, slobbery, nerditude: Note that this
two-page spread comes in the middle of Chapter V (i.e., where the staples
would have gone in the monthly comic). This is the middle of the story, the
point of convergence where right and left, what you've seen and what you're
about to see, come together. "V" indeed. Could this sequence be the pivot
point or narrative center of Watchmen as a whole? No, since the
mathematical middle of this 12-part epic comes at the end of Chapter VI.
Typically, and in keeping with Watchmen's deep thematic about time,
Moore has brought us to a center which is not a center. We've come to the
middle too soon.

The Huckle-Buck (Horace Mann), Wednesday, 26 May 2004 15:50 (fourteen years ago) Permalink

I wish he would have talked about more recent things like Top 10 in that interview (no idea when it's from), which are less ambitious and more mainstream than some of his projects but still lovely (and I wish there was more). It was a great read over the course of yesterday's workday though.

Jordan (Jordan), Wednesday, 26 May 2004 15:53 (fourteen years ago) Permalink

My opinion -- and I'm embarrassed to be unembarrassed by the fact that I spend a lot of my free time thinking about this book -- is that the story takes a backseat to the mechanics of the storytelling. There's a mention on the Watching The Detectives site that (I'm paraphrasing) Watchmen is meant to unfold one way on first reading, and in a completely different way on subsequent readings. Moore and Gibbons went to great lengths to communicate details (some of them crucial) with a very subtle hand -- stashed away in visual double-entendres, historical and literary references, allegories, "camera" tricks, and so on. The final result, while maybe only better-than-average from a story point of view, is amazingly multidimensional. And the more you read it, the more you find hidden and tucked away in it. And yes, I readily admit to an obsession . . .

Josh Davis (josh_anomaly), Wednesday, 26 May 2004 16:43 (fourteen years ago) Permalink

"Did he finish Big Numbers"...HA!

David R. (popshots75`), Wednesday, 26 May 2004 17:55 (fourteen years ago) Permalink

Damn. I figured not. Is what he did of it available at all?

Tep (ktepi), Wednesday, 26 May 2004 18:22 (fourteen years ago) Permalink

It's clearly standard procedure in any field that your lost/unfinished/aborted work was all set to be your best and most brilliant.

Jordan (Jordan), Wednesday, 26 May 2004 18:25 (fourteen years ago) Permalink

2 issues were published. One panel of #3 appears in one of the Alan Moore at 50 books, I can't remember whether it was the Gary Spencer Millidge one or the George Khoury one.

Eddie Campbell tells the story in How To Be An Artist about as accurately as anybody is willing to confirm. (Basically, Billy The Sink dropped out after #2, Al Columbia was drafted in as a Sink-a-like but fell out with everyone over a girlfriend. He destroyed #3, burned what he had started of #4 and disappeared.)

aldo_cowpat (aldo_cowpat), Wednesday, 26 May 2004 18:41 (fourteen years ago) Permalink

Rock star!

Jordan (Jordan), Wednesday, 26 May 2004 19:08 (fourteen years ago) Permalink

(Camelot 3000 does actually have a penultimate lez-up scene, you know.)

VengaDan Perry (Dan Perry), Wednesday, 26 May 2004 19:34 (fourteen years ago) Permalink

I'm going to retract my comment about Watchmen's storyline being not so great, because I realized it's an inversion of all traditional superhero stories. In Watchmen, the superheroes do not thwart the villain's plans in the nick of time, and they do not save the world (except indirectly, through their failure to stop Veidt). I think Moore even spells this out for us, Veidt reprimanding Night Owl and the rest with his evaluation of their "heroism" -- "your greatest triumph is failing to prevent the world's salvation" or something like that (God I hope that's not a verbatim quote because if it is that means I'm an irredeemable nerd). Moore is, among other things, out to subvert established superhero traditions, and to do that he borrows and fucks with the familiar templates -- and I think that in this case, that includes the story structure of Bad Guy Threatens World With Giant Psychic Monster.

Josh Davis (josh_anomaly), Wednesday, 26 May 2004 19:38 (fourteen years ago) Permalink

That inversion's there in little ways, too -- Night Owl's infatuation, if not more, with the dominatrix-looking supervillainess (I haven't read it in awhile, but you know the one I mean probably), as a flip of the Batman-Catwoman "I beat you up and lock you up, someday we're gonna get it on" dynamic.

Tep (ktepi), Wednesday, 26 May 2004 19:42 (fourteen years ago) Permalink

Hoo-ah, my public library has Camelot 3000, I will take it out now!

The Huckle-Buck (Horace Mann), Wednesday, 26 May 2004 19:48 (fourteen years ago) Permalink

xpost, and the whole issue with the 1974 Police Strike as well.

The Huckle-Buck (Horace Mann), Wednesday, 26 May 2004 19:50 (fourteen years ago) Permalink

I think I would have liked to have been reading it at the time, just to get the full impact of the end of the penultimate issue "half an hour ago".

I think the ending is an important part of Moore's views on superheroes (at that time: in a recent interview he said "I had a bad week 15 years ago and everyone's still suffering"): the path that starts "you will do good or we will beat you up" leads swiftly to giant mind-control aliens and The Big Lie in general.

And now Ned with the news...

Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Thursday, 27 May 2004 10:10 (fourteen years ago) Permalink

three weeks pass...
Re-reading this recently. Puzzler: Why, when Adrian relates his master plan to Dan, Rorschach, etc., and admitting to murdering half of NYC, does he lie about having also murdered his servants?

Josh Anomaly (josh_anomaly), Friday, 18 June 2004 02:58 (fourteen years ago) Permalink

Perhaps he has more emotional attachment to them, and therefore feels actual guilt about killing them?

Does he lie about killing them? this must be researched.

DV (dirtyvicar), Friday, 18 June 2004 08:20 (fourteen years ago) Permalink

That's a good thought. He's pretty detached and tactical about what he does to NYC. He does seem to lie about killing them. He seems to give them drugged wine and then opens the vivarium once they're either incapacitated or already dead; later, in describing how airtight his plans were to Dan and the others, he makes a reference to his servants, the only others to know of his plot, having died by drunkenly opening the vivarium.

Josh Anomaly (josh_anomaly), Friday, 18 June 2004 11:12 (fourteen years ago) Permalink

But what's the point of killing them in the first place? He doesn't try to kill Dan and the others (he only attacks Dr. Manhattan when he's threatening him) because he's sure they won't tell the world about his plot. Wouldn't this apply to the servants as well? Surely they'd be more loyal to him than the "heroes"?

Tuomas (Tuomas), Friday, 18 June 2004 21:58 (fourteen years ago) Permalink

That's another good question. Not sure what Adrian's motivations are as a character but Moore's motivations may be to make Adrian conform to the role of "pharaoh" -- Veidt, in his discourse to his servants about his personal history and inspirations, makes mention of pharaohs entrusting their secrets to their servants, and of those secrets being sealed forever upon the pharaoh's death by the burial of the still-living servants in the pharaoh's tomb. I guess this was the arctic equivalent.

Josh Anomaly (josh_anomaly), Friday, 18 June 2004 22:15 (fourteen years ago) Permalink

. . . which may also imply Veidt was not sure he'd survive the inevitable confrontation?

Josh Anomaly (josh_anomaly), Friday, 18 June 2004 22:18 (fourteen years ago) Permalink

He's certain (and right) that the heroes can be blackmailed. Telling the world and destroying the imminent peace would not be worth it. He's presumably not so confident about his servants. Because heroes are those sort of people and servants aren't.

Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Sunday, 20 June 2004 22:31 (fourteen years ago) Permalink

So Ozymandias is an elitist?

Chris F. (servoret), Monday, 21 June 2004 02:25 (fourteen years ago) Permalink

SHOCKER!!!

VengaDan Perry (Dan Perry), Monday, 21 June 2004 13:32 (fourteen years ago) Permalink

Caught a subtle & cool moment while re-reading the book. Jon, on Mars, having difficulty seeing the future. He makes a reference to killing someone but seems unsure who; in light of who that someone turns out to be (Rorschach), the phrasing takes on a brilliant double-meaning: "I am standing in deep snow, I am killing someone. Their identity is uncertain." I love it.

Josh Anomaly (josh_anomaly), Monday, 21 June 2004 14:16 (fourteen years ago) Permalink

eleven months pass...
I know what you mean about the ending Tuomas, but I do think it works in the end. The important thing is that the U.S. and Russia get an opportunity to release tensions and stop escalation without either losing face, and that the chance to open up lines of peaceful communication is enough (maybe not to create "utopia", but to stop the cold war at least).

-- Jordan (j0rdanc0h3...), May 25th, 2004.

...but didn't anyone notice that at the very end of the comic book, in the last panel, seymour the new frontiersman office assistant guy is fumbling his hands through the papers in the 'crank file', indicating that he eventually may find Rorshach's Journal.?

and remember, it is Rorschach's journal which contains the trail leading to Ozymandias's plans, which if uncovered could threaten the world peace Veidt created.

hence the symbolism of the ketchup stain landing on seymour smiley face shirt, forming the bloodied comedian logo, implying the comedian (and the war-centric worldview to which he belongs) will have the last laugh.

latebloomer: Pain Don't Hurt (latebloomer), Thursday, 2 June 2005 01:22 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

I think everyone noticed the final panel: that's the famous open ending of Watchmen. Seymour's boss says something like, "I leave it entirely to you hands". That last line is obviously meant for the reader: he can himself decide whether Seymour'll pick the journal from the crank file, or some other paper - whether the truth'll come out or not.

I don't think the bloody smiley is a symbol for The Comedian, rather than for the whole comic (remember, the blood stain implies the death of Comedian). But Moore hints elsewhere what he thinks will happen after the ending. The sailor in the pirate stroy is obviously Ozymandias' alter ego; Ozymandias even tells he sometimes dreams of swimming towards a great ship. In the pirate story the sailor tries to save the ones he loves, but his attempt is misguided, and he fails horribly. So Moore is implying Ozymandias will eventually loose. In the end, Moore the anarchist thinks people's freedom to decide is more important than anything else. This is the biggest irony of Watchmen: in the final chapter, Rorschach the fascist becomes the hero, whereas Ozymandias the left-wing vegetarian is the villain. No matter how much we (and Moore, no doubt) revile Rorschach's ideological views, we have to sympathize with him for refusing to accept Ozymandias totalitarian plan.

Tuomas (Tuomas), Thursday, 2 June 2005 07:27 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

The blood smiley and its variations are more symbolic of messy human flaws on inhuman perfections, I thought.

From another viewpoint, Moore is saying that Ozymandias has already lost.

Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Thursday, 2 June 2005 09:04 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

The blood smiley and its variations are more symbolic of messy human flaws on inhuman perfections, I thought.

I agree, but that's sort of the whole theme of the comic. Imperfect perfections. Like the whole symmetry/mirror image thing - I guess most of you have noticed that chapter five has a symmetrical structure; each panel has a corresponding mirror image panel. So the fist panel of the chapter corresponds with the last panel on the first row of the final page, etc. And the two middle pages form a symmetrical image - Ozymandias hitting a guy with statue, so that they're bodies form an big "X". (X is kinda like the symbol of the whole story, just like V was that of V for Vendetta - in V the direction of the story is linear, down and up, whereas Watchmen is all about choices, crossroads, open endings. Seymour can either pick the book or not.) But for the whole story to be symmetrical the mirror image should be between chapters 6 and 7 (because the whole story has 12 chapters), not in chapter 5. So it's a broken symmetry, just like with the bloody smiley, just like with Comedian's face. Imperfect perfection.

Note: I didn't come up with these ideas by myself. If you have lots of spare time, I'd suggest visiting this excellent Watchmen site.

Tuomas (Tuomas), Thursday, 2 June 2005 10:45 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

Hmm, looks like that site hasn't been updated for quite a while... Well, it's still has huge amounts of stuff to read.

Tuomas (Tuomas), Saturday, 4 June 2005 05:55 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

one of the things I have always found a bit strange about Watchmen is how Adrian Veidt is meant to be the smartest man in the world, yet he has a piss easy password on his computer. So, is he smart in a way that doesn't really get computers (it happens), or was he deliberately using his computer system as a lure to bring investigators to him?

DV (dirtyvicar), Sunday, 5 June 2005 08:59 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

Hahahaha. Now everyone will hate Watchmen as much as I do!

http://www.1up.com/do/previewPage?cId=3168969&p=4

Mordy, Thursday, 24 July 2008 02:51 (ten years ago) Permalink

Watchmen puts both Rorschach and Nite Owl on the streets in a game set exclusively at night, when most of the nation's crime takes place.

Dr. Superman, Thursday, 24 July 2008 04:24 (ten years ago) Permalink

If you're wondering who could possibly replace the much-revered Alan Moore in the scripting department...comic fans will be glad to know that respected comic veteran Len Wein is on board to provide the dialogue.

Groke, Thursday, 24 July 2008 16:32 (ten years ago) Permalink

Swamp Thing In Reverse!

David R., Thursday, 24 July 2008 16:37 (ten years ago) Permalink

You know, this is so dumb I don't feel offended by it at all.

Plus, as far as tasteless vid-game tie-ins go, who could beat this?? (Which I bought, incidentally -- bit too hard during the first level.)

Chuck_Tatum, Thursday, 24 July 2008 16:42 (ten years ago) Permalink

My favorite 'miss the point' movie videogame tie-in is The Godfather.

"Dude, I beat the game with FREDO!"

Oilyrags, Thursday, 24 July 2008 16:47 (ten years ago) Permalink

I feel no shame for wanting to play that game (FREDO).

David R., Thursday, 24 July 2008 17:01 (ten years ago) Permalink

Bit disappointed the music on the Platoon game isn't an 8-bit rendering of Adaggio For Strings.

chap, Thursday, 24 July 2008 17:09 (ten years ago) Permalink

three years pass...

I suppose the comics themselves might be okay, but still disappointed in Darwyn for selling out on this:

http://www.newsarama.com/comics/dc-announces-before-watchmen-120201.html

Chuck_Tatum, Wednesday, 1 February 2012 15:55 (six years ago) Permalink

also Abhay OTM a month ago

http://twiststreet.tumblr.com/post/14837611825

Θ ̨Θƪ (sic), Wednesday, 1 February 2012 16:26 (six years ago) Permalink

Sad there's no Neal Adams Watchmen Odyssey announcement.

like working at a jewelry store and not knowing about bracelets (Dr. Superman), Wednesday, 1 February 2012 18:07 (six years ago) Permalink

isn't most of the material you'd put in a prequel to watchmen already in watchmen

the "intenterface" (difficult listening hour), Wednesday, 1 February 2012 18:10 (six years ago) Permalink

Yes.

Dr. Superman, you just made my day. I demand that Neal Adams create this series!

mh, Wednesday, 1 February 2012 19:05 (six years ago) Permalink

Yeah, I'm a bit disappointed that Darwyn Cooke's involved in this. Hard to say if I'm interested or not. I'd honestly rather see a crazy, let-it-all-hang-out sequel.

But prequels are a perfect commentary on superhero comics right now, so prequels it is.

Matt M., Wednesday, 1 February 2012 19:21 (six years ago) Permalink

I finally caught the Watchman movie on cable tonight. I thought they really did a pretty good job considering how much is in the series to get out in a couple of hours.

It doesn't bother me a bit that DC is doing the Watchmen prequels. Personally, I am really surprised they waited this long. It's a great comic story but in the end - it's still a take on the Charlton characters. Whatever gets done doesn't change the original comics.

Why be disappointed in Darwyn Cooke? Ultimately Cooke's most known comics are doing The Spirit, JLA, adapting Richard Stark novels and working on the Batman cartoons. It's totally what he kind of does and probably the perfect guy to do this kind of thing as he will work on the details to get it right. Think about it. It's better than some jagwagon like Geoff Johns doing this and saying "I know what they SHOULD have done".

The Straczynski ones I could see being the screwed up, as he goes on some weird tangents in his comics (the latter half of his Spider-man run and that totally odd ball abandoned Superman run coming to mind). He also kind of already had a take on this one on his Squadron Supreme, as his take on Hyperion and all is pretty much out of the Watchmen playbook. Considering he is doing the comic with one of the Kubert brothers, it probably will end up getting finished by Phil Hester and Scott McDaniels about 5 months late anyway.

earlnash, Sunday, 12 February 2012 06:32 (six years ago) Permalink

Think about it.

oh wow you have TOTALLY OPENED OUR EYES good point

Θ ̨Θƪ (sic), Sunday, 12 February 2012 11:23 (six years ago) Permalink

http://watchmen2creatordarwyncooke.tumblr.com/

Θ ̨Θƪ (sic), Sunday, 12 February 2012 11:32 (six years ago) Permalink

totally with earl here, Cooke is the right choice for the project. not that it had to be done in the first place, but still...

Nhex, Sunday, 12 February 2012 18:45 (six years ago) Permalink

yes, he's right that Watchmen sucks because of a lack of "hope," and that he can fix it by making a story with more hope set before the hopeless one

Θ ̨Θƪ (sic), Sunday, 12 February 2012 23:36 (six years ago) Permalink

ugh

valleys of your mind (mh), Sunday, 12 February 2012 23:37 (six years ago) Permalink

I too idly watched a fair chunk of the Watchmen movie on cable last night and it is absolutely horrible, a completely tone-deaf rendering of the material.

max buzzword (Shakey Mo Collier), Monday, 13 February 2012 03:15 (six years ago) Permalink

that Tumblr's pretty scathing and all, but fuck it, maybe Cooke's kids need braces or something. I'm sure DC made it worth his while to eat his words, and, really, I don't see how his Parker adaptations any different in terms of servicing flawed nostalgia. I enjoyed the first one enough, but have passed on the rest (though someone let me know when he gets around to Slayground!).
This kind of fucking over (or at least complicity thereof) your forerunners is kind of part of the deal if you wanna work for DC or Marvel. If Morrison gets away with glossing over (to put it generously) DC's ongoing shit treatment of Siegel & Shuster, and now this weirdo Ghost Rider biz at Marvel...I dunno, so much of it isn't even IP management, it's Brand management.
And who knows, maybe DC will overexpose & overexploit Watchmen to the point where demand dries up, it falls out of print and rights revert back to Moore & Gibbons in time for the 30th anniversary. (unlikely, but best case scenario)

like working at a jewelry store and not knowing about bracelets (Dr. Superman), Monday, 13 February 2012 03:31 (six years ago) Permalink

If the rights go back, it'll probably go out of print forever, if Moore's actions regarding 1963 are indicative of anything.

valleys of your mind (mh), Monday, 13 February 2012 03:35 (six years ago) Permalink

now this weirdo Ghost Rider biz at Marvel...

What's this referring to?

Tuomas, Monday, 13 February 2012 06:54 (six years ago) Permalink

Almost everything Darwyn ever does is terrific, but I'm not sure he's the "right choice." He's a pessimist, not a nihilist like Moore. Watchmen is as much about the sensibility as the characters, and I can see him cracking the latter, but not the former.

Also, I've met him a coupla times, he's a great guy, and I woulda thought this sort of work was too hacky for him.

Chuck_Tatum, Monday, 13 February 2012 13:44 (six years ago) Permalink

21 Notes on Watchmen 2, excellently thought by Tom Spurgeon

Θ ̨Θƪ (sic), Tuesday, 14 February 2012 00:41 (six years ago) Permalink

a formative experience a tiny bit further in the past than Fantastic Four #1 one was when the Moore/Gibbons series hit the stands.

I was too young to read Watchmen when it came out, but holy shit is this a sobering fact

valleys of your mind (mh), Tuesday, 14 February 2012 02:43 (six years ago) Permalink

And by sobering, I mean "the comics audience lies so far to either side of this that it'll never really occur to most people how disconnected this is"

valleys of your mind (mh), Tuesday, 14 February 2012 02:43 (six years ago) Permalink

My own disappointment in Darwyn taking this job is that it's keeping from doing his own comics based on material that he's come up with himself. I've enjoyed the vast majority of his comics work, but really want to see him do his own thing. But then again, it's not any of my damn business which jobs he chooses to do or not do.

I thought the WATCHMEN flick tried to have its heart in the right place and made some horrible missteps along the way that made me really not like it at all. Less reverence would have served the film far better. Granted, 99% of the audience didn't read the source as I had, but every shot call out to the original material just jumped right the hell out and reminded me that it was a shadow cast by another work.

Matt M., Tuesday, 14 February 2012 17:58 (six years ago) Permalink

I thought the Watchmen movie sucked.

valleys of your mind (mh), Tuesday, 14 February 2012 18:58 (six years ago) Permalink

the Watchmen movie thread on ILX was very ugh

max buzzword (Shakey Mo Collier), Tuesday, 14 February 2012 19:01 (six years ago) Permalink

I haven't seen all of his films, but the only thing of Zack Snyder's I've found tolerable was his Dawn of the Dead remake!

valleys of your mind (mh), Tuesday, 14 February 2012 19:03 (six years ago) Permalink

But back to the point: that tumblr repeatedly posting the cover image of the Azzarello series is way, way on point.

The point of Watchmen was that it was a cynical take on the genre. I mean, there have been series already playing out such takes -- like The Authority and the entire history of post-Watchmen inward-looking comics. The best part of the story was that the characters were cutout archetypes. Once you flesh them out, they're no longer just cutouts and the original series has a different context and... ugh.

valleys of your mind (mh), Tuesday, 14 February 2012 19:07 (six years ago) Permalink

I thought the WATCHMEN flick tried to have its heart in the right place and made some horrible missteps along the way that made me really not like it at all. Less reverence would have served the film far better.

That's just it -- it was a reverent adaption by someone who had somehow missed the whole point

Not only dermatologists hate her (James Morrison), Tuesday, 14 February 2012 22:49 (six years ago) Permalink

The comic's strength was in showing the sketchiness of the whole superhero endeavor, that each character had their own reasons for doing it and their own human strengths and failings. Treating the idea of their being superheros seriously. The point of the movie was LOOK MOM I MADE A SUPERHERO MOVIE THAT IS SERIOUS.

valleys of your mind (mh), Tuesday, 14 February 2012 23:37 (six years ago) Permalink

His DAWN OF THE DEAD is really good until it becomes just a sorta regular action movie and then tries to lower the boom at the end. But man, that first 15 minutes are gripping.

Matt M., Wednesday, 15 February 2012 02:15 (six years ago) Permalink

four years pass...

Been reading the Before Watchmen series, started out with what I presumed would be the best one, Cooke's Minutemen series. And it was shockingly good!
Question that's killing me though - who is the blonde-haired orphan ("Jacob"?) in the serial killer's photo (from the Comedian's final story) supposed to be? Adrian?

Nhex, Thursday, 16 June 2016 20:40 (two years ago) Permalink

one year passes...

FIRST LOOK! #DoomsdayClock #1 has what I think is the coolest lenticular cover ever. Thank you, Dave! @1moreGaryFrank @bdanderson13 11/22/17 pic.twitter.com/UltJCZFI6G

— Geoff Johns (@geoffjohns) August 30, 2017

koogs, Monday, 4 September 2017 09:15 (one year ago) Permalink

thought for a minute that that was a heart at 12 o'clock. not sure if the actuality is better or lamer.

koogs, Monday, 4 September 2017 09:17 (one year ago) Permalink

i am powerfully unhyped for this

Wesley Shackleton explained "look at that beast." (bizarro gazzara), Monday, 4 September 2017 09:58 (one year ago) Permalink

I wish I had Photoshop installed so I could turn those blots into Alan Moore's face, a middle finger, and three dollar signs.

Pascal's Penisés (Old Lunch), Monday, 4 September 2017 14:02 (one year ago) Permalink

This is like when young people like shitty bands and it makes you feel old, except the young people are older men and it makes me feel completely neutral

Chuck_Tatum, Monday, 4 September 2017 17:04 (one year ago) Permalink

lol

Nhex, Tuesday, 5 September 2017 06:41 (one year ago) Permalink

eight months pass...

http://variety.com/2018/tv/news/watchmen-hbo-damon-lindelof-1202818921/

Those original twelve issues are our Old Testament. When the New Testament came along it did not erase what came before it. Creation. The Garden of Eden. Abraham and Isaac. The Flood. It all happened.

Sounds like he has the inevitably overwrought ’tude toward the subject matter...

i’m still stanning (morrisp), Wednesday, 23 May 2018 00:58 (six months ago) Permalink

Ah – I steer clear of ILE

i’m still stanning (morrisp), Wednesday, 23 May 2018 01:19 (six months ago) Permalink

Shivers at the phrase "true fans"

Uuuugggggghhhhhh

Chuck_Tatum, Wednesday, 23 May 2018 13:59 (six months ago) Permalink


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.