Kevin's Watch

Lord Mhoram wrote:Lord Foul,

The message of both the movie--that some outside factor is faked by Veidt to make humanity bind together--is exactly the same in both mediums; it's only how it's delivered; one is Manhattan (the movie), the other the engineered squid. And neither were that mysterious or imperceptible to me.

The medium is certainly changed, but when that medium is changed from an outside force (the squid) to one of the film's main characters (Dr. Manhattan), it becomes a shift which is more than superficial.

Doesn't make it more memorable than the squid (hell, the artwork on it was just fantastic and freaky), which is what matters the most. In fact it sounds like a trick gear pulled by a screenwriter when they stuck Manhattan in, just like I'm supposed to find meaning from Rorschach's blood looking like a Rorschach blot? It's just stuffed in there, and the bulk of meaning is that these heroes have to accept not only they failed to stop the bad guy but they must let him live, and that's there no matter how it was done. And in the end, Manhattan is an outside force for every character (except Veidt, who understands to some degree), and he's literally an outside force by the story's end (a God).

Zahir wrote:Some things...

No, Jon cannot "see" the journal for two reasons. First, that period in time is flooded with tachyons blurring his vision. Second, he can only perceive the future that happens to him. If the journal does not impact him in such a way as he would notice, then he would not perceive it. Given his plans at the end of the story, one would suppose that pretty much covers anything at all that might happen on earth.

Yeah, Rorschach's death was because he was going to reveal the truth. But there's another reason, i.e. why didn't he simply wait and tell the world later? He's certainly smart enough to do so. But of course that wouldn't be in character, for more than one reason. Alan Moore himself in an interview pointed out that Rorschach has a death wish. He longs to die, to leave this existence that for him is nothing but suffering. But he wants to die with what he perceives as honor (Note: Rorschach is not a sociopath for the simple reason that he cares deeply about the world, so much so he needs to impose some sense of order upon it to make it better). He is smart enough to see what must be done, knows he cannot do it, and so goads someone into killing him.

My own view about the ending..

Spoiler

The lack of a giant squid works for me, as does the blaming of Dr. Manhattan. As a plan it would work because all Ozzy needs is for people to get into the habit of living together in peace. The emotional impact of Nite Owl's reaction to Rorschach's death seemed superior to me, not least because Dan seemed to me the most thoroughly heroic and "good" character. Here was the guy who was Rorschach's friend, his only friend, and the only one to weep for that grim, twisted, dangerous man. He is a man who can and will enjoy the peace Ozzy has created. But Ozzy himself won't. He is left alone. Methinks that last point could and should have been made a little stronger.

Likewise, the very last few shots about Rorschach's journal seem to me to lack the emotional note needed. The journal is the informational equivalent of a land mine--and we should feel someone is about to step on it. I didn't. And methinks that comes down to editing.

Oh, and the old age makeup was startlingly poor.

Zahir,

Don't know about the tachyons, I thought by that time that explanation had been and gone, Rorschachs "actual" intent over and above his stated intent (which would have the same impact as the journal wherever Dr.M was) was clearly "seen" by Dr.M, why then wasn't the journal....which may have been the a part of the same method all along.

I too saw Rorschach's death as a suicide resulting from his implacability, but also in resignation and realisation of what costumes heroes needed to be and the need to weed out those who did not live up to the role model image required. He was an escaped prisoner who had murdered and killed and would drag down further the image of the super hero and his very strength of non compromise allowed him no other avenue.

The Squid DID require a lot more setup and explanation. Explanation that was in many places pretty shaky and hard to swallow. (I DO swallow it, but it doesn't sit well). The meaning, the purpose of the ending I completely endorse, and Snyder preserved THAT. To me, he got rid of most of the things I never liked about the ending in the first place, and actually added a new dimension to it that might give a little more poignancy to Manhattan's end. The corpses littering Manhattan don't really have the same impact without the pirate comic and the surrounding side stories anyway. Also, we had already pretty clearly established what happens when Manhattan destroys something's *intrinsic field*.

It's a more internally consistant, streamlined ending that far from being less impactful, may even be MORE. I may go so far as to say it's the right ending for the story that Moore missed the first go around. Maybe the squid was the right ending in 86. It's not the right ending for a movie today.

The Dreaming wrote:The Squid DID require a lot more setup and explanation.

Yeah, a comic book can afford that, as well as the various strands of side-story the movie missed out on. Snyder did explain that Ozymandias had some kind of an island; scientists had worked for him, and really that's all the squid required as well. I don't remember there being that much needed to explain it that wasn't explained in the sequence of the book where Veidt goes "I did it!" Anyway, it struck much more of a chord for me than Manhattan, a lot of that dealing with the visual representation versus the comic, but also that I didn't need it to be him for it to strike me any more than the core meaning: that the bad guy won and they'd have to keep it quiet.

People would have laughed at the film if a giant squid appeared at the end...serious.

If I recall, you haven't read the comic, right--or finished it? The squid doesn't "appear" but is shown rather masterfully (as masterfully as Gibbon's art on the thing, which is fuckin' A). My whole problem with Snyder is he had to show the sequence of the city being destroyed, as movies want to show or draw out everything that books can achieve with equal dramatic effect and less pyrotechnics (but even pyrotechnically, I found the squid and dead bodies more entrancing than the non-descript blue psychic wave). It's all how it's done and applied that counts, and the comic book does it with more class: the angle of how the squid is introduced, the wide shots of the bodies all evoke an auteur like Stanley Kubrick, while Synder evokes summer popcorn blockbusters.

finn wrote:

Zahir wrote:Some things...

No, Jon cannot "see" the journal for two reasons. First, that period in time is flooded with tachyons blurring his vision. Second, he can only perceive the future that happens to him. If the journal does not impact him in such a way as he would notice, then he would not perceive it. Given his plans at the end of the story, one would suppose that pretty much covers anything at all that might happen on earth.

<SNIP>

Zahir,

Don't know about the tachyons, I thought by that time that explanation had been and gone, Rorschachs "actual" intent over and above his stated intent (which would have the same impact as the journal wherever Dr.M was) was clearly "seen" by Dr.M, why then wasn't the journal....which may have been the a part of the same method all along.
<SNIP>

Seems to me that Doc Manhattan knew what Rorschach intended exactly the same way everyone else in that room knew it--because Rorschach all but came out and said what he was going to do. Dr. M "saw" exactly what everyone else did, and simply put 2+2 together. No powers required beyond average intelligence and a command of the English language.

Besides, it was demonstrated and stated explicitly that Dr. M only perceives his personal past and future--what happens to him. Sh he didn't know about the journal. No need to look for any further "explanation."

I see the point about seeing the destruction as opposed to its aftermath, but honestly I don't have a problem with it.

Zahir wrote:I see the point about seeing the destruction as opposed to its aftermath, but honestly I don't have a problem with it.

Of course; I've about boiled down my argument to where it's all personal preference for all parties involved. Boring, eh?

Lord Foul wrote:If I recall, you haven't read the comic, right--or finished it? The squid doesn't "appear" but is shown rather masterfully

I just read the comic last week, before I saw the movie, and the squid was seriously the worst part of it. It wasn't shown "masterfully," it just appeared.

As far as the explosion goes, the shots of people being vaporized was taken directly out of the comics.

Rigel wrote:

Lord Foul wrote:If I recall, you haven't read the comic, right--or finished it? The squid doesn't "appear" but is shown rather masterfully

I just read the comic last week, before I saw the movie, and the squid was seriously the worst part of it. It wasn't shown "masterfully," it just appeared

Read it again. You don't see the squid appear. It's already there. There are several very detailed, gorgeous panels which slowly reveals the squid, and the squid itself isn't something gaudy or out of place when you finally do see the greater part of it (though not all of it). Of course, how you view the squid's appearance is subjective, but if you do your research you'll see it doesn't "appear". That element is left out, while the movie makes use of it (as movies often do).

And the overall effect of the explosion was generic for me, regardless of what parts were hermetically inserted from the graphic novel.

Oh, the explosion definitely WAS generic, as was the destruction afterwards. In fact, I thought the resulting destruction was extremely understated in the movie, whereas in the comic it was quite forceful.

Rigel wrote:Oh, the explosion definitely WAS generic, as was the destruction afterwards. In fact, I thought the resulting destruction was extremely understated in the movie, whereas in the comic it was quite forceful.

Didn't someone say Snyder had the bodies in it, but the screen tests told him to take them out?

I'm hearing, "Watchmen: Unrated, with scenes Synder was too much of a wuss to show in theatres" I mean, come on, you'll show dogs chowing down on a little girl's leg, an attempted rape scene, a pregnant woman getting shot, but you won't show a few bodies because "a test audience thought it was too much?"

Lord Foul wrote:

The Dreaming wrote:The Squid DID require a lot more setup and explanation.

Yeah, a comic book can afford that, as well as the various strands of side-story the movie missed out on. Snyder did explain that Ozymandias had some kind of an island; scientists had worked for him, and really that's all the squid required as well. I don't remember there being that much needed to explain it that wasn't explained in the sequence of the book where Veidt goes "I did it!" Anyway, it struck much more of a chord for me than Manhattan, a lot of that dealing with the visual representation versus the comic, but also that I didn't need it to be him for it to strike me any more than the core meaning: that the bad guy won and they'd have to keep it quiet.

More than that, you had to explain the psychic images and history that Veidt fabricated for the squid, to be perceived by all the world's psychics upon the *aliens* *death*(Did we forget to mention there were psychics?) The squid WAS a living organism, it simply died due to Ozzys incomplete teleportation technology. (Which makes living things explode when they teleport, did we mention that?)

It's almost too much for me to swallow in the damn GN. (I'm glad they kept the part where he catches the bullet at least, but it wasn't set up quite as well unfortunately. One of my favorite beats from the GN)

The part where he catches the bullet was really cool...however, I think it was a continuity mistake: only Manhatten is supposed to actually have super-powers...this move would suggest that Ozy actually has em too...it's at least one of the reasons I agree with Snyder's going with a skinnier actor for Ozy, cause he's supposed to be so fast, it wouldn't make sense if he were bulked up....

...and the thing about the psychics...so far, 2/3 through the book, I haven't seen one iota of foreshadowing about any psychics...

The Dreaming wrote:

Lord Foul wrote:

The Dreaming wrote:The Squid DID require a lot more setup and explanation.

Yeah, a comic book can afford that, as well as the various strands of side-story the movie missed out on. Snyder did explain that Ozymandias had some kind of an island; scientists had worked for him, and really that's all the squid required as well. I don't remember there being that much needed to explain it that wasn't explained in the sequence of the book where Veidt goes "I did it!" Anyway, it struck much more of a chord for me than Manhattan, a lot of that dealing with the visual representation versus the comic, but also that I didn't need it to be him for it to strike me any more than the core meaning: that the bad guy won and they'd have to keep it quiet.

More than that, you had to explain the psychic images and history that Veidt fabricated for the squid, to be perceived by all the world's psychics upon the *aliens* *death*(Did we forget to mention there were psychics?) The squid WAS a living organism, it simply died due to Ozzys incomplete teleportation technology. (Which makes living things explode when they teleport, did we mention that?)

It's almost too much for me to swallow in the damn GN. (I'm glad they kept the part where he catches the bullet at least, but it wasn't set up quite as well unfortunately. One of my favorite beats from the GN)

How you understand details is subjective, though I got much of that easily enough. But I also feel those details are utterly insubstantial (except the squid dying upon being teleported, a key fact I thought was quite glaring when I first read Veidt's explanation). For me the importance wasn't the A or B hows but the main effect this faked alien had on me (and I was blown away, especially in how the comic executes it: the whole book had been twisting this foreboding of the end and then it goes to that end, rather than the heroes stopping it). Similarly, how Rorschach and Nite Owl solve the mystery isn't all that compelling to me or a linchpin to my enjoyment of the book; it's the realizations of who actually was behind Blake's killing and how vast the conspiracy really reached. The mysteries and "hows" were always subordinate to the characters (proof of this being that the flashbacks are probably the best part of the comic).

And in the end I think the psychics and squid are more fun, while the movie has to have a streamlined, closed idea that you can't go further into and learn more of. For me, this lends to Watchmen's conspiracy feel and that there's a greater world mythology in the book than the movie. Layers is what makes a masterpiece, and while its mysteries are answerable with effort, in many great works they are not (Tom Bombadil).

As for Ozymandias, raver: I had personally wished to see someone with a bigger physique play him (if you think big guys can't move fast, look at professional linebackers). In the end I wasn't so bothered, simply because they cut out a lot of the book's scenes displaying him as a physical specimen, and its only effort to make him sound smart was the movie basically declaring "he's the smartest man in the world." They even left out the great scene where he's watching the TVs to judge what product line to make next for his company. His prowess and intelligence, which are both humorous and all-encompassing in the book (as encompassing as his public image), should have been encased in an equally-perfect physique. But in the movie I see this skinny fellow who I have to take at word value just happens to have these amazing moves, whereas in the book it's easier for me to believe as other aspects about him are just "too good".

Lord Foul wrote: But in the movie I see this skinny fellow who I have to take at word value just happens to have these amazing moves, whereas in the book it's easier for me to believe as other aspects about him are just "too good".

I could say the same thing with the newspaper clippings from the end of Chapter 8 where we find out that so many influensial people are disappearing...one of two have been mentioned previously, but not enough for it to be something on the radar...so this clipping would fill the same role as just stating, "psychics are being kidnapped"

Well, That and the fact that psychics don't exist. It's another fly to swallow, and I'm tired of swallowing it. The big lie in Watchmen is Dr. Manhattan, it's dangerous in any fiction to have more than one big lie. Adding psychics makes the story lean just a little too much towards fantasy, and the psychics didn't even enhance the story at all. It's a lie with no purpose, and it only diminishes the impact of the story. (A major premise being that super powers are *not* common in this universe.)

Yeah, I have no idea why they couldn't keep the awesome interposition of Ozys gymnastic event with Dan's impotence. I'll definitely grant that his character felt very incomplete.

Well, the biggest lie is the alien--and also a wink from Moore to readers that it's a comic and, 2) it's the most fascist thing you can think of: fabricating an alien race that's hostile to unite people. Not Jews, gypsies, etc., but an ALIEN from outside our planet. I think it worked on me on several levels--historically and in terms of being a comic.

And again, with psychics, it is a comic. I'm willing to take several things in a grandiose context with a comic that is so warm with humor and inane things (Ozymandias just being one; hell, the whole world in the comic is out of control, as is the Comedian; everything about it is unreal, so psychics don't seem so out of place to me). And just because you could tell the future or perceive things doesn't mean you can kick ass like Dreiberg. I think the comic shows that there's superheroes and everyone else, and it's merely because these people dedicated their hearts and souls to it; if there's clairvoyants they're another thing entirely.

I guess part of it has to do with the fact that I am about as jaded by psychics in fiction as I am by Vampires. I'm even more annoyed by the fact that the idea of psychic powers has actually bled OUT of fiction and into the real world. Most people don't realize exactly how fantastic the idea of prescience, telepathy and telekinesis really is, which is to say TOTALLY FREAKING IMPOSSIBLE.

I can forgive Carrie. I can forgive Dune. But pretty much every appearence in fiction after Dune I usually find abrasive. (I really like Dick's Ubik, but that's actually pretty ahead of it's time satire.)