I was merely stating that the ending for the Movie was far less "out there" and absurd. I don't see how rereading the novel multiple times would disprove my point.
Because it is not any more out there or absurd than a big blue naked god. Granted, the squid monster is pretty absurd in the real world, but in the world of Watchmen, it makes perfect sense. You are displaying quite a cognitive dissonance. If you think the squid is absurd, why is Dr. Manhattan not absurd? Heck, there are plenty of other things in the comic that are a lot more "out there" than the ending. How about Nixon having so many terms?
I agree with Scott. The ending just doesn't have the same impact and the rest of the plot doesn't support it as well. Veidt in the movie has simply provided the world with an actual Old Testament, vengeful god. If the people in the movie put aside their differences, it's only because they are afraid that the new god is watching them. It's not a big leap to imagine that those people are eventually going to start praying to Dr. Manhattan.
The Comedian would have loved that. He would have thought it was hilarious.
The Cthulu-menace of the novel induces fear as well, but it's a fear of an external threat that may return and for which it may be possible to prepare. The squid actually did die, so even though it is a fearful thing, there is hope that any others may be defeated through preparation and cooperation. This would be the type of cooperation that would produce unity, not the grudging cooperation brought about only because a god is watching. The novel ends on a somewhat hopeful note, at least, it's a lot more hopeful scenario than leaving people to constantly wonder if an undefeatable, vengeful, angry god is going to smite everyone at any moment.
The fact that they punched through concrete and destroyed brick walls with their backs was more absurd than a "giant squid"
Yeah, how did they get that power-up?
If you think that Dr. Manhattan is just as absurd as the squid, then the endings are equivocal. That's all I'm saying.
I think the ending of the movie was definitely equivocal.
I was so happy that they left my favorite scene in, when the black kid hugs the newspaper seller, even though the rest of the corner scenes were cut.
Actually, I didn't like that in the movie. The novel spent a lot of time on these characters, and by the end, we really cared about what happened to them. In the movie, they were just two random people out of millions.
If you think that Dr. Manhattan is just as absurd as the squid, then the endings are equivocal. That's all I'm saying.
I think the ending of the movie was definitely equivocal.
Ugh. I trust spellcheck too much.
Anyway, the original ending is better, but I still feel that the movie ending was very passable. I flipped when I saw on the control panel that the code name of the nuclear blast was called "S.Q.U.I.D.".
If you think that Dr. Manhattan is just as absurd as the squid, then the endings are equivocal. That's all I'm saying.
I think the ending of the movie was definitely equivocal.
Ugh. I trust spellcheck too much.
I often can't resist jokes like that. It wasn't offered in a nasty or sarcastic way. I know exactly what you meant and I don't think you were equivocating. LOL.
I was so happy that they left my favorite scene in, when the black kid hugs the newspaper seller, even though the rest of the corner scenes were cut.
Actually, I didn't like that in the movie. The novel spent a lot of time on these characters, and by the end, we really cared about what happened to them. In the movie, they were just two random people out of millions.
But, the thing is, because they didn't spend any time on them it didn't really matter if they kept it in or not. It was essentially fanservice, and fanservice I quite appreciated.
Though, I believe that they actually are in the Black Freighter DVD.
I was so happy that they left my favorite scene in, when the black kid hugs the newspaper seller, even though the rest of the corner scenes were cut.
Actually, I didn't like that in the movie. The novel spent a lot of time on these characters, and by the end, we really cared about what happened to them. In the movie, they were just two random people out of millions.
But, the thing is, because they didn't spend any time on them it didn't really matter if they kept it in or not. It was essentially fanservice, and fanservice I quite appreciated.
Though, I believe that they actually are in the Black Freighter DVD.
The same "fan service" as the S.Q.U.I.D. that felt more like a kick in the balls
You have to keep things in perspective. I'd rather that the director leave an "homage" to the original work than ignore it completely. At least for me, it helped in accepting the changes.
I was so happy that they left my favorite scene in, when the black kid hugs the newspaper seller, even though the rest of the corner scenes were cut.
Actually, I didn't like that in the movie. The novel spent a lot of time on these characters, and by the end, we really cared about what happened to them. In the movie, they were just two random people out of millions.
But, the thing is, because they didn't spend any time on them it didn't really matter if they kept it in or not. It was essentially fanservice, and fanservice I quite appreciated.
Your point is well taken. However, instead of appreciation for the service, I just thought, "Damn. I wish they had spent some time fleshing out those characters." I'd almost rather they'd have been left out.
BTW, I LOVED it that they had The McLaughlin Group on TV during the first bit of the movie.
Also, Veidt's costume had nipples. WHY do filmmakers always want nipples on their super-suits?
Because it is not any more out there or absurd than a big blue naked god. Granted, the squid monster is pretty absurd in the real world, but in the world of Watchmen, it makes perfect sense. You are displaying quite a cognitive dissonance. If you think the squid is absurd, why is Dr. Manhattan not absurd? Heck, there are plenty of other things in the comic that are a lot more "out there" than the ending. How about Nixon having so many terms?
I'm pretty sure that the he himself stresses multiple times that Dr. Manhattan was -not- a god, he just had incredible power in his hands. If he is susceptible to emotion, he is not a god. Once again, I'm not criticizing the usage of the squid in the comic book at all. It was effective and meaningful, I get it. I'm just saying that it is far more absurd IN COMPARISON TO the ending of the movie. I'm not saying that the movie ending was better than the graphic novel ending. All I meant was that the graphic novel's ending was more convoluted, though obviously more meaningful because of it.
The ending to the Watchmen in the -movie- was caused by the expansion of pre-existing technology (pre-existing in the sense that it had already existed in the Watchmen universe). The ending to the Graphic Novel was caused by a strange new life-form that was developed in Ozy's facility, which required extensive research on both biological creation AND teleportation.
The ending to the Watchmen in the -movie- was caused by the expansion of pre-existing technology (pre-existing in the sense that it had already existed in the Watchmen universe).
That's exactly why it doesn't make sense to me that the Comedian was so upset about it. It's not in keeping with his character. As I said before, the Comedian would have been delighted at the -movie- plot to kill people and then pin the blame on Dr. Manhattan.
Speaking of blame, that's another religious overtone that wasn't present in the novel. The movie Dr. Manhattan "sacrificed" himself, if not to death, then to banishment in order to expiate the sins of humanity. His choice to be sacrificed was Christlike. His banishment in the novel had nothing of this sacrificial flavor.
The movie Dr. Manhattan - Old Testament style vengeful Yahweh to the world at large, but Christ to those who know the truth. I liked the old Dr. Manhattan better.
That's exactly why it doesn't make sense to me that the Comedian was so upset about it. It's not in keeping with his character. As I said before, the Comedian would have been delighted at the -movie- plot to kill people and then pin the blame on Dr. Manhattan.
Speaking of blame, that's another religious overtone that wasn't present in the novel. The movie Dr. Manhattan "sacrificed" himself, if not to death, then to banishment in order to expiate the sins of humanity. His choice to be sacrificed was Christlike. His banishment in the novel had nothing of this sacrificial flavor.
The movie Dr. Manhattan - Old Testament style vengeful Yahweh to the world at large, but Christ to those who know the truth. I liked the old Dr. Manhattan better.
I don't disagree with you on the Comedian part, but I didn't really feel like Dr. Manhattan sacrificed himself all too much. He was already quite unattached to Earth in the first place, and he didn't seem too distraught over having to leave. His demeanor upon being "forced" to leave in the movie seemed very similar to his demeanor in the novel.
I didn't really feel like Dr. Manhattan sacrificed himself all too much. He was already quite unattached to Earth in the first place, and he didn't seem too distraught over having to leave. His demeanor upon being "forced" to leave in the movie seemed very similar to his demeanor in the novel.
In the novel, it's totally his own decision to leave. In the movie, Veidt made the decision for him. Yes, he could have stayed, but then the destruction would have been for nothing. He was just like Jesus at Gethsamane. He didn't want to buy into Veidt's deception, not because he had a burning desire to stay, but because he wanted to exercise his free will. However, he sacrificed himself because he understood that his sacrifice would expiate the sins of the world.
The thing I'll give the movie, is an impeccable music selection for the soundtrack, not only does it go well with the movie itself, but the lyrics of the songs go real well as a comment to whats going on in the movie, I really digged the Hallelujah and All Along the Watchtower scenes.
Also, I don't understand why people complain about the sex scene, I believe it was as graphical and important as it should have been.
Also, I don't understand why people complain about the sex scene, I believe it was as graphical and important as it should have been.
I think some people are upset because Snyder took it beyond the realms of the comic as the scene was only one page and it was incredibly chaste. I actually didn't have any problems with it as the joke at the end made the whole scene worth it.
I've just come back from watching it with my mom.... Nobody told me that it was this graphic! It's way more violent and sexually explicit then I thought/remembered. I have to agree on the ending, it wasn't as good as in the comic. Also, my mom noticed an awful lot of twin towers in the background, and other general patriotism. Did any of you notice it too?
I've just come back from watching it with my mom.... Nobody told me that it was this graphic! It's way more violent and sexually explicit then I thought/remembered.
I've just come back from watching it with my mom.... Nobody told me that it was this graphic! It's way more violent and sexually explicit then I thought/remembered.
The thing I'll give the movie, is an impeccable music selection for the soundtrack, not only does it go well with the movie itself, but the lyrics of the songs go real well as a comment to whats going on in the movie, I really digged the Hallelujah and All Along the Watchtower scenes.
Also, I don't understand why people complain about the sex scene, I believe it was as graphical and important as it should have been.
While in general I agree, "99 Luftballons" was really weird. Even though thematically the song is quite fitting for the movie as the song is about nuclear war, it certainly did not fit the scene it was used in. I think "99 Luftballons" is too upbeat a song for Watchmen.
While in general I agree, "99 Luftballons" was really weird. Even though thematically the song is quite fitting for the movie as the song is about nuclear war, it certainly did not fit the scene it was used in. I think "99 Luftballons" is too upbeat a song for Watchmen.
Makes perfect sense. There is a ton of airship and balloon symbolic imagery in Watchmen.
Also, my mom noticed an awful lot of twin towers in the background, and other general patriotism. Did any of you notice it too?
The World Trade Center was standing in 1985. You also have to remember that it takes place at the height of the cold war. I'm too young to remember any of the cold war myself, but I think there WAS a lot of patriotism then.
The World Trade Center was standing in 1985. You also have to remember that it takes place at the height of the cold war. I'm too young to remember any of the cold war myself, but I think there WAS a lot of nationalism then.
Also, my mom noticed an awful lot of twin towers in the background, and other general patriotism. Did any of you notice it too?
The World Trade Center was standing in 1985. You also have to remember that it takes place at the height of the cold war. I'm too young to remember any of the cold war myself, but I think there WAS a lot of patriotism then.
I'm saying the MOVIE had a lot of shots of the twin towers, and other patriotic themes. In the comic, there is no shot of New York being rebuilt, with the towers standing firmly in the background, if you know what I'm saying.
I didn't really feel like Dr. Manhattan sacrificed himself all too much. He was already quite unattached to Earth in the first place, and he didn't seem too distraught over having to leave. His demeanor upon being "forced" to leave in the movie seemed very similar to his demeanor in the novel.
In the novel, it's totally his own decision to leave. In the movie, Veidt made the decision for him. Yes, he could have stayed, but then the destruction would have been for nothing. He was just like Jesus at Gethsamane. He didn't want to buy into Veidt's deception, not because he had a burning desire to stay, but because he wanted to exercise his free will. However, he sacrificed himself because he understood that his sacrifice would epiate the sins of the world.
I don't know that I'd properly call it a "sacrifice." Dr. Manhattan didn't really seem to care much one way or another (the whole "without condoning or condemning" thing). In the movie, as you've pointed out, his character was far more like a god in the way that humans use them (rather than being portrayed as what a god would actually be, if one were to exist). I still very much get the feeling that the movie Dr. Manhattan is detached from humans, as he is in the book, so he doesn't really care if they use him as a demon or not. Personally, I wish he would've expressed his indifference directly (as he did in the book), but I think he still comes off as an indifferent character.
Like I said in the other thread, the movie Dr. Manhattan, with the movie ending, is a reflection on the nature of gods and how they are used by men. I still think it makes the nihilistic point that there really is no god directing things for us; rather, it is we who direct our own destiny. Everything else is a tool.
Makes perfect sense. There is a ton of airship and balloon symbolic imagery in Watchmen.
You really need to watch the movie first. While the song selection makes sense, where they used it felt really jarring and awkward.
I agree. While I could see the song being used in at some point in the movie, it was to upbeat for the scene it was in.
I agree as well. The songs in the soundtrack were either too obvious, like The Times, They are A-Changin', or were totally weird choices, like All Along the Watchtower. 99 Luftballoons is a song from the general time period and is about nuclear war, but it didn't make sense in the scene in which it was played.
I didn't really feel like Dr. Manhattan sacrificed himself all too much. He was already quite unattached to Earth in the first place, and he didn't seem too distraught over having to leave. His demeanor upon being "forced" to leave in the movie seemed very similar to his demeanor in the novel.
In the novel, it's totally his own decision to leave. In the movie, Veidt made the decision for him. Yes, he could have stayed, but then the destruction would have been for nothing. He was just like Jesus at Gethsamane. He didn't want to buy into Veidt's deception, not because he had a burning desire to stay, but because he wanted to exercise his free will. However, he sacrificed himself because he understood that his sacrifice would expiate the sins of the world.
I don't know that I'd properly call it a "sacrifice." Dr. Manhattan didn't really seem to care much one way or another (the whole "without condoning or condemning" thing).
But, as I said, he's sacrificed his free will and his newfound interest in humanity. He was skeptical of free will and the human condition in general until his conversation with Laurie on Mars, but that conversation convinced him that there was something to care for in the human condition. Veidt himself said that he understood that Doctor Manhattan was not as disconnected as everyone believed even before Mars. Additionally, Doctor Manhattan is going to be remembered by the people in the movie as being an evil son of a bitch. His character has been destroyed, and, even if he might not care for it too much, that is a sacrifice.
Doctor Manhattan's sacrifice is not quite dying on the cross, but it was a sacrifice nonetheless.
I also had a problem with all the fighting in Veidt's lair. Not that I didn't think it was cool, but part of the point of that encounter in the book was that any fighting by that point was futile. Additionally, Dan and Laurie have to buy into the scheme in the book. In the movie they just walk away. I don't think Veidt would have let them do that. An implied acceptance would not have been enough for him.
Comments
The Comedian would have loved that. He would have thought it was hilarious.
The Cthulu-menace of the novel induces fear as well, but it's a fear of an external threat that may return and for which it may be possible to prepare. The squid actually did die, so even though it is a fearful thing, there is hope that any others may be defeated through preparation and cooperation. This would be the type of cooperation that would produce unity, not the grudging cooperation brought about only because a god is watching. The novel ends on a somewhat hopeful note, at least, it's a lot more hopeful scenario than leaving people to constantly wonder if an undefeatable, vengeful, angry god is going to smite everyone at any moment. Yeah, how did they get that power-up? I think the ending of the movie was definitely equivocal. Actually, I didn't like that in the movie. The novel spent a lot of time on these characters, and by the end, we really cared about what happened to them. In the movie, they were just two random people out of millions.
Anyway, the original ending is better, but I still feel that the movie ending was very passable. I flipped when I saw on the control panel that the code name of the nuclear blast was called "S.Q.U.I.D.".
Though, I believe that they actually are in the Black Freighter DVD.
BTW, I LOVED it that they had The McLaughlin Group on TV during the first bit of the movie.
Also, Veidt's costume had nipples. WHY do filmmakers always want nipples on their super-suits?
The ending to the Watchmen in the -movie- was caused by the expansion of pre-existing technology (pre-existing in the sense that it had already existed in the Watchmen universe). The ending to the Graphic Novel was caused by a strange new life-form that was developed in Ozy's facility, which required extensive research on both biological creation AND teleportation.
Speaking of blame, that's another religious overtone that wasn't present in the novel. The movie Dr. Manhattan "sacrificed" himself, if not to death, then to banishment in order to expiate the sins of humanity. His choice to be sacrificed was Christlike. His banishment in the novel had nothing of this sacrificial flavor.
The movie Dr. Manhattan - Old Testament style vengeful Yahweh to the world at large, but Christ to those who know the truth. I liked the old Dr. Manhattan better.
Wife- (Leaning over to whisper) Umm, is that Dr. Manhattan's.....
Me- Yes, just like in the comic.
Also, I don't understand why people complain about the sex scene, I believe it was as graphical and important as it should have been.
Like I said in the other thread, the movie Dr. Manhattan, with the movie ending, is a reflection on the nature of gods and how they are used by men. I still think it makes the nihilistic point that there really is no god directing things for us; rather, it is we who direct our own destiny. Everything else is a tool.
Doctor Manhattan's sacrifice is not quite dying on the cross, but it was a sacrifice nonetheless.
I also had a problem with all the fighting in Veidt's lair. Not that I didn't think it was cool, but part of the point of that encounter in the book was that any fighting by that point was futile. Additionally, Dan and Laurie have to buy into the scheme in the book. In the movie they just walk away. I don't think Veidt would have let them do that. An implied acceptance would not have been enough for him.