"Watchmen" Talkback (Spoilers)

[James Harvey]

The Hugo Award-winning graphic novel chronicles the fall from grace of a group of super-heroes plagued by all-too-human failings. The concept of the super-hero is dissected as the heroes are stalked by an unknown assassin.

WATCHMEN

http://goodcomics.comicbookresources.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/12/Watchmen%201.jpg

Written by: Alan Moore
Art by: Dave Gibbons

It all begins with the paranoid delusions of a half-insane hero called Rorschach. But is Rorschach really insane or has he in fact uncovered a plot to murder super-heroes and, even worse, millions of innocent civilians? On the run from the law, Rorschach reunites with his former teammates in a desperate attempt to save the world and their lives, but what they uncover will shock them to their very core and change the face of the planet! Following two generations of masked superheroes from the close of World War II to the icy shadow of the Cold War comes this groundbreaking comic story — the story of The Watchmen.

Comments? What are your thoughts?

[Calhoun07]

There was supposed to be a sequel called Twilight of the Gods, which obviously never transpired because of a falling out Alan Moore had with DC. The original synopsis of this story winds up online from time to time, but is quickly shut down by DC when it does get put up since it is copyrighted material (and no, I don't have it myself. I did find it on line once before it was taken down but did not save it) so good luck finding it!

[The Guard]

Watchmen is genius, pure and simple. It doesn't need a sequel. The original was so powerful.

Here's my Watchmen page.

http://www.angelfire.com/oh5/daveworld1/WATCHMEN.html

[pencilsharp]

Cal, are you serious? A sequel to the best graphic novel of all time? Urgh... Never have I been glad for DC's hard-headedness and habitual tendencies to tick off their talent, until now.

And SBWH, (I ain't typin' all that...) try to check out a copy of V for Vendetta as well. It's not quite as good as Watchmen, but it is chock full o' Alan Moore goodness!

[Karkull]

It was a great story, but I have to read it again at some point because it's so packed with information!

[SilentBobWooHoo]

Originally posted by Karkull
It was a great story, but I have to read it again at some point because it's so packed with information!

Yeah, I know what ya mean. I had to re-read some pages to absorb all of it because sometimes I was just like "huh?". But nonetheless, it's a great story.

[Calhoun07]

Originally posted by pencilsharp
Cal, are you serious? A sequel to the best graphic novel of all time? Urgh... Never have I been glad for DC's hard-headedness and habitual tendencies to tick off their talent, until now.


Yes, I am serious. It is often more referred to as Twilight of the Superheroes. Actually, click here (http://www.cs.oberlin.edu/~abayer/twilight.htm) for a pretty good site about the general synopsis. I don't think it's the copyrighted material, so I think we're safe with linking it!

[Thomas]

For sure one of the best literary reads of all time in comics. Whiteout is very cool too if you like crime comics, its published by Oni press.

[The Guard]

Read the "Twilight" proposal. It has nothing to do with Watchmen. In this proposal, Alan Moore cites the format of Watchmen as an example. But "Twilight" is clearly a DCU crossover of CRISIS-like proportions, involving all our favorite heroes, the JLA, Metron, time travel, and several older heroes: Uncle Sam, Black Hawk, Doll Man etc. It's clearly NOT a Watchmen sequel. There may well have been a suggested "Twilight of the Gods/Superheroes", but that wasn't it. Watchmen does not need a sequel. The first maxi-series was enough...just enough to make you wonder. Will Veidt get caught because of Rorschach's diary? Will Rorschach's diary get used?

I find the end chilling, because the possibility exists that "Half New York" died for NOTHING. This is a situation that WILL NOT, and CANNOT be present in David Hayter's Watchmen script if he does one. Not in this day in age. So...in the tradition of shameless plugs...I present what would be the greatest film ever if I had 60 million dollars...WATCHMEN.

http://www.angelfire.com/oh5/daveworld1/Movies.html

Mine is the one that ISN'T Sam Hamm's. Nothing against Hamm, but he ruined a classic story with his Watchmen script.

If for some reason that link doesn't work, or the script doesn't dl right (I used wordpad)...Email me if you want WATCHMEN. I focused on the newer generation of heroes, and it STILL times out at around 3 hours...

I'd love any feedback, comments etc. I'm really proud of it, and I want to get it out there. So if you like it, pass it on...

[Thomas]

I didnt even know they were thinking of a Watchmen movie. I will read both scripts ill tell you that. I read the first of the Hamm's and it starts out messed up, but the Comedian seems to be dead on as far as not caring about anything or anyone.

[The Guard]

Yeah. Hamm did write a KILLER opening scene explaining WHY costumed heroes were banned. And the Comedian doesn't give a care.

[Arkangel]

I know I'm new here and I certainly don't want my second post to be considered blasphemy or anything, but last night I finished reading Watchmen for the first time and I don't feel it lived up to the hype.

I've only recently started reading comics again, but don't buy single issues. I like to go on Amazon and browse through the TPB's and graphic novels. So far I've found some I've really enjoyed like the new Justice League TPB's (my brother and I collected the JL International comics from the mid 80's and frankly I thought they were subpar; I really need the JL to be the Big 7), Kingdom Come, The Brave and the Bold (Flash and Green Lantern), and Moore's wonderful What Ever Happened to the Man of Tomorrow?, one of the best superhero stories I've read, although admittedly not deep.

Anyway, I bought Watchmen because so many friends have told me how great it was. The reviews on Amazon were all raves. Of course I thought it was good. I liked the art, and I liked the characters too. But I had problems with the storyline. I know this book was written back in 1986, but for me today all of the Cold War apocalyptic stuff just rings so hollow (I know, I know, how quickly I forget). I loved the superhero nostalgia (which comprised a good portion of the beginning of the story), but really didn't care as much for the political stuff which drove the plot. And the ending just seemed way too easy. I felt so unsatisfied with it. I guess that's the problem with writing such an epic tome, the ending rarely lives up to the great build-up.

All in all I'm glad I read it, but I'm not personally ready to call it the greatest comic book I've ever read. Certainly I don't agree with the most glowing reviews over at Amazon which call it a transcendent piece of literature and the "best book I've ever read" (of course, that's the reviewer's opinion, but if that's a true statement I'd advise him to go down to the library and start reading. Moore's book is good, but I'm not ready to include it in the same breath as Moby Dick , Light in August , One Hundred years of Solitude, Camus' The Stranger and Flannery O'Connor's short fiction, to name just a few).

I'm sure some people might accuse me of not appreciating what Moore is trying to do with the genre, and that I'd rather have just stupid superhero action and trite plots. But I disagree. I'm quite willing to read, and do enjoy, the deconstruction of the superhero mythos, as Waid does in Kingdom Come. I really think it's mostly the political stuff (and the ending) that detracts from my enjoyment of Moore's book.

But I'm posting here tonight because I'd love to hear other opinions, especially from people whose main interest is in superhero comics (the reason I say this is because I have a friend here who majored in sequential art in college and is pretty much a comic book snob. She doesn't read superhero comics for the most part, although she loved Kingdom Come . Anyway, she raves about Watchmen and thinks it's one of the best comic books ever. I just think she's biased against mainstream superhero comics and automatically likes anything that works against those character types).

I look forward to the discussion.

[The Guard]

The reason I like WATCHMEN has little or nothing to do with the fact that it's a superhero comic. You can't look at it like that. Because, though it is a new look at the superhero genre, it's much more. It's has much, much larger themes running through it. The little things. The things that all come together to mean something. Read it again. And again. And you'll start to see things like foreshadowing, symbolism, ect, really be brought out. You'll notice little signs in the background of the panels. You'll notice recurring symbols, and new themes opening up. I've read it almost 50 times, and I'm still finding things. Things like the fact that Nixon is still President. There's a reason for that. You're given hints that The Comedian might have had something to do with his continued employment, and even the deaths of some of his predecessors.

I question if you really understand some of the finer points of WATCHMEN. It's not a simple superhero story, or even a story about a near-apocalypse. What makes WATCHMEN so great, IMO, is the utter bleakness, the hopelessness that Moore conveys. Reread Rorschach's speeches. Reread his diary entries. Look at some of the things Dr. Manhattan says to Adrian near the end. Study the lecture Dr. Manhattan gives Laurie on Mars, carefully.

Some things you need to understand to truly appreciate it:

1. Jon's evolution from man to hero to God.

2. "The end? Nothing ends, Adrian. Nothing ever ends."

3. The significance of Rorschach's journal at the end.

A lot of people do not understand why it ends like it does. I could explain it, but I like to see people discover it all for themselves. That's half the fun. Digging through the thing, becoming part of the world, noting the new look for the police, cars, ect...I'm rambling, aren't I?

I could talk about WATCHMEN for hours with someone who's read it and studied it like I did. There is so much social commentary, so much human truth to it. And so many just...fantastic moments. So many memorable lines. There's a reason it's required reading in a lot of college courses.

[Arkangel]

Originally posted by The Guard
The reason I like WATCHMEN has little or nothing to do with the fact that it's a superhero comic. You can't look at it like that. Because, though it is a new look at the superhero genre, it's much more. It's has much, much larger themes running through it. The little things. The things that all come together to mean something. Read it again. And again. And you'll start to see things like foreshadowing, symbolism, ect, really be brought out. You'll notice little signs in the background of the panels. You'll notice recurring symbols, and new themes opening up. I've read it almost 50 times, and I'm still finding things. Things like the fact that Nixon is still President. There's a reason for that. You're given hints that The Comedian might have had something to do with his continued employment, and even the deaths of some of his predecessors.

I question if you really understand some of the finer points of WATCHMEN. It's not a simple superhero story, or even a story about a near-apocalypse. What makes WATCHMEN so great, IMO, is the utter bleakness, the hopelessness that Moore conveys. Reread Rorschach's speeches. Reread his diary entries. Look at some of the things Dr. Manhattan says to Adrian near the end. Study the lecture Dr. Manhattan gives Laurie on Mars, carefully.

Some things you need to understand to truly appreciate it:

1. Jon's evolution from man to hero to God.

2. "The end? Nothing ends, Adrian. Nothing ever ends."

3. The significance of Rorschach's journal at the end.

A lot of people do not understand why it ends like it does. I could explain it, but I like to see people discover it all for themselves. That's half the fun. Digging through the thing, becoming part of the world, noting the new look for the police, cars, ect...I'm rambling, aren't I?

I could talk about WATCHMEN for hours with someone who's read it and studied it like I did. There is so much social commentary, so much human truth to it. And so many just...fantastic moments. So many memorable lines. There's a reason it's required reading in a lot of college courses.

Well I did say I'd only read it once. However, you seem to give your own reading and interpretation way too much authority. You speak as if you'd written it yourself. While I'm sure you've found things there that I haven't, it's a bit presumptious to say you know why it ends like it does. I'm sure there are doxens of readings which are as valid as yours. And I need more than just the evocation of hopelesness to proclaim it a great work of art. It's very good, and of course much better than most comic books. But the plot doesn't hold my interest all the way through.

In any case, it's also quite possible that I could read it ten times and make all of the connections and still not enjoy it. As I mentioned, the political stuff just doesn't interest me and the last few chapters of the book are not as interesting as the first few. Not that there aren't several gems in the book. My favorite is the "Black Freighter" story within a story. And the excerpts from Under the Hood after the first few chapters; that's really strong writing. And I loved the artwork by Gibbons. But the story as a whole is not, in my opinion, the greatest comic book story ever. Although, I must admit, I stil don't think I've run across that one yet, although right now I'd say Kingdom Come is right up there.

[Zoddman]

I too, have finished Watchmen lately, and it's not really the type of story that you like or dislike, but the themes and issues expressed in the work as a whole roll through your brain almost constantly after you read it. And really, isn't that what good literature is all about, to make you reixamine the rest of the world?

(P.S., Guard, I'd love to IM with you over Watchmen with you.)

[Don Markstein]

I may not put Watchmen in a category with Moby Dick etc., but I'd put it in a category with The Maltese Falcon and Shane (or is Hondo the western equivalent?). It's a story firmly and deliberately set within a despised genre, that nonetheless has undeniable literary merit, and clearly deserves critical attention. Maybe you like it and maybe you don't (I'm no fan of Moby Dick, myself), but you certainly see things in it that are worth thinking and talking about.

It's rife with conventions of the superhero genre (heroes forming clubs, heroes fighting the first time they meet, even a hero turning to the side of evil -- I'm not an ends-justify-means kinda guy, so I'm not impressed by Ozymandias's allegedly pure motives for what he did). And yet -- here we are, a decade and a half after its first publication, still talking about all the little things we've found in it.

And in some ways, I think Watchmen is a better ambassador of comics to the outside world than Maus, which is easy for the literatti to dismiss as a fluke -- the very fact that it has obvious merit removes it, in some critics' eyes, from being a mere comic book. Maus "passes" for literature, but Watchmen, being steeped in its comic book origins, can't. If they see merit (i.e., depth and thought, not necessarily whether or not they like it) in it, then they have to admit comics can have merit.

By the way, I didn't see the "political stuff" as prevalent enough to affect my judgment. Yes, it's a product of the Cold War era, just as everything else in the world is a product of its time. And it's a bit more realistic in its depiction of how politics is actually played, and how a world hegemony is created and maintained, than some we-must-trust-our-wise-leaders types might think desirable, but it represents a broad spectrum of points of view.

Quack, Don

[Ed Liu]

Howdy,

First off, everybody go click on the link in Don Markstein's post. I don't know how many of you folks know who he is, but suffice it to say it's a Big Deal that he's here. Welcome to the boards, Don!

Just to chime in with a different opinion on Watchmen. The short version is that I think it was and is a truly groundbreaking comic that pushed the boundaries of the genre at the time that hasn't dated terribly well because of its success. Don's comment about how it's a fine work of literature in a medium and a genre that get snubbed by the literary crowd is pretty spot on -- the problem is that many of the "innovations" that Moore used have since been pulled into mainstream comics.

If you go back and read something like Bob Kane & Bill Finger's Batman or Siegel & Shuster's Superman, they will strike you as horribly simplistic and unsophisticated, as will many of the first works of Stan Lee, Steve Ditko, and Jack Kirby. However, those comics almost fully defined the way the comics game was played, up to (and even beyond) Watchmen.

I think the major contribution of Watchmen (and most of the books by Moore and Frank Miller in the 80's) was to take the rules of the game, follow them to their logical conclusions, and not shy away from the end result, no matter where it went. It applied an intelligence to the superhero genre that was not seen before (and is rarely seen since) and granted it an adult sensibility that hadn't been seriously considered before then. That sensibility and intelligence fundamentally changed the rules of the game, and ensured you couldn't look at the same old superhero comics the same way again, just like Siegel & Shuster et al changed the pulps, and Lee/Ditko/Kirby humanized the superhero.

Over time, a lot of the innovations behind Watchmen have filtered through to the more mainstream comics, to the point where they're almost taken for granted. The net result is that lots of modern comic readers can go back and read Watchmen and really think it's nothing special. In a sense, the fact that Watchmen made itself obsolete or even cliche may be the most powerful evidence to show how much of an impact it truly had.

Despite that, I think the kind of intelligence that Alan Moore brings to comics is still terribly rare today. The nested stories-in-stories, all interlinked and tied together, along with details down to the panel level really reached their peak in Watchmen. There really aren't many comics (or ANY art medium, for that matter) that you can reread again and again over the span of ten years, and still re-discover things on every review.

On a lighter note, the other thing worth noting is that Watchmen isn't everybody's cup of tea, and that's a perfectly good position to have. There are lots of things that other people worship which leave me completely cold (Brian Michael Bendis and The Sims, for instance), even though I can understand the appeal on an intellectual level.

Personally, I tend prefer Moore's work on Swamp Thing far more than Watchmen. I think it set the groundwork for what was to come, but it's a far less nihilistic and far more humane work, even if it scares seven shades of poo out of you sometimes.

-- Ed/Ace

[Arkangel]

Originally posted by Don Markstein
I may not put Watchmen in a category with Moby Dick etc., but I'd put it in a category with The Maltese Falcon and Shane (or is Hondo the western equivalent?). It's a story firmly and deliberately set within a despised genre, that nonetheless has undeniable literary merit, and clearly deserves critical attention. Maybe you like it and maybe you don't (I'm no fan of Moby Dick, myself), but you certainly see things in it that are worth thinking and talking about.

It's rife with conventions of the superhero genre (heroes forming clubs, heroes fighting the first time they meet, even a hero turning to the side of evil -- I'm not an ends-justify-means kinda guy, so I'm not impressed by Ozymandias's allegedly pure motives for what he did). And yet -- here we are, a decade and a half after its first publication, still talking about all the little things we've found in it.

And in some ways, I think Watchmen is a better ambassador of comics to the outside world than Maus, which is easy for the literatti to dismiss as a fluke -- the very fact that it has obvious merit removes it, in some critics' eyes, from being a mere comic book. Maus "passes" for literature, but Watchmen, being steeped in its comic book origins, can't. If they see merit (i.e., depth and thought, not necessarily whether or not they like it) in it, then they have to admit comics can have merit.

By the way, I didn't see the "political stuff" as prevalent enough to affect my judgment. Yes, it's a product of the Cold War era, just as everything else in the world is a product of its time. And it's a bit more realistic in its depiction of how politics is actually played, and how a world hegemony is created and maintained, than some we-must-trust-our-wise-leaders types might think desirable, but it represents a broad spectrum of points of view.

Quack, Don


I just wanted to say I had spent a great deal of time at your site before I started posting here and must commend you on its scope and thank you for providing such an amazing resource on the Web for the rest of us.

[zano88]

wow!!
this was a great thread...ive read this book twice
now im going to go read it again!

[Don Markstein]

First off, everybody go click on the link in Don Markstein's post. I don't know how many of you folks know who he is, but suffice it to say it's a Big Deal that he's here. Welcome to the boards, Don!Uh, do I have to live up to this now?

Anyway, thanks for the welcome, to both you and Arkangel, but I'm really not sure how much time I have for message boards right now. I was actually pointed here the other day by a friend, directing me to a discussion in the Termite Terrace section, where a fairly prominent error in the Toonopedia™ was pointed out, which is kinda, like, the opposite of what you guys are saying.

Quack, Don

[JohnCrichton]

I'm reading the WATCHMEN........ and words cannot contain... I now know why they say this is the best and I'm not even half way through.

It's been a looooong time since I read something this good. Glad I finally got around to listening to all the hype!

[MachSabre]

Glad you like it man. I personally feel it's the best comic made to date. (Yes, more than Dark Knight 1. But I know that's just my feeling on the issue.)

[JohnCrichton]

I fwickin' love it!

I really questioned when people were saying that it was better than Kingdom Come, but now.... ain't no denying it.

Not that Kingdom Come is anything to sneeze at....

[James]

EXCELLENT. Another convert, that's what I like to see!! A fantastic book. The ending is great - you have much to look forward to!

[JohnCrichton]

As Hitman's Mr. Excellente would say.... "BUUEEENOOOOO...." :D

[Clayface]

Hehehe. Glad to see you're enjoying it JohnCrichton! It is one of those rare books that really does live up to the hype.

[Venom234]

If only Nixon was president as long as in the book. :)

[MJavert]

Yeah, watchmen is great, one of the seminal works in modern history...

i was at my college bookstore shopping for books earlier in the semester when i saw both DK1 and Watchmen on the shelf...then i looked at the course description and it was something like "The Development of the Modern American Hero" or something like that, and it was just awesome to see that these books were on the syllabus of a major college course, heh, always got a kick out of that...and they say comics aren't literature, bah to them!

Watchmen was a great exploration of exactly what it meant to have 'real' superheroes in the real world, so was DK1, great reads, both of 'em =) Okies, enough BS, g'nite

Rick

[JohnCrichton]

Rorcharch just got finished telling the tale of his origin..... I am in need of a "slack jawwed" icon.

[Matt Hazuda]

Taking your time with the graphic novel JC? I think it took me about 2 days to read it, and I loved it! I need to read it again sometime. :D

[JohnCrichton]

Well, I only get to read it during my breaks at work and even then I'm going over my break allotted time cuz I just gotta get through the chapter.

Other than that, maybe I might catch a little before I go to sleep, but betweent "girlfriend-type stuff" and video games I hardly get a nano to read a frelling book.

Besides, good stuff like this I don't want to end, so I'm more than happy with taking my time reading this.

[Ed Liu]

Howdy,


Originally posted by JohnCrichton
Rorcharch just got finished telling the tale of his origin..... I am in need of a "slack jawwed" icon.

Amusing true story (or at least I read it on the Internet, so it must be true, right? :)):

Apparently, Alan Moore intended Rorschach to be a completely despicable, horrifying human being that the readers would all love to hate. He was deeply mortified when the readers turned Rorschach into the most popular character in the series.

Whether this had any influence on him leaving superhero comics for a while, or in his writing the 1963 limited series for Image is debatable, but not terribly farfetched.

-- Ed/Ace

[Zoddman]

Originally posted by Ace the Bathound
Howdy,



Amusing true story (or at least I read it on the Internet, so it must be true, right? :)):

Apparently, Alan Moore intended Rorschach to be a completely despicable, horrifying human being that the readers would all love to hate. He was deeply mortified when the readers turned Rorschach into the most popular character in the series.

Whether this had any influence on him leaving superhero comics for a while, or in his writing the 1963 limited series for Image is debatable, but not terribly farfetched.

-- Ed/Ace Hmm, weird. I felt that way about the Comedian, not Rorscharch.

Comedian killed (and in Sally Jupiter's case, raped.) innocent people. Rorscharch killed people who were animals themselves.(I.E. the guy who killed and then fed that little girl to his dogs.)

Besides, Rorscharch was the only hero who didn't compromise his moral code in the least. I admire that quality in a person, comic-book or otherwise.

[Jade_GL]

Besides, Rorscharch was the only hero who didn't compromise his moral code in the least. I admire that quality in a person, comic-book or otherwise.

Rorscharch was my favorite character. I liked how he was completely his own man, not comprimising or bending to what other people wante dhim to do. Sure, he was a very strange guy, but he was actually very noble in a way. He had his own code and stood by it.

[James]

Originally posted by Jade_GL
Rorscharch was my favorite character. I liked how he was completely his own man, not comprimising or bending to what other people wante dhim to do. Sure, he was a very strange guy, but he was actually very noble in a way. He had his own code and stood by it.

He reminds me of the main guy from a book I've just read called the Wasp Factory. Outwardly nasty, but there is something in his philosophy which makes him sypathetic.

Funny if Moore did intend to make him horrible to the reader, you'd think he'd see which is the worse character - I don't really think he said that. It's too clear when you read the book who people will be disgusted with and who'll they'll enjoy. Rorscharch is a cool anti hero! We all love Anti-heroes!!

[The Guard]

Couple things. The Comedian never raped Silk Spectre. Hooded Justice stopped him. And Rorschach and his moral code. His "code", his pride, it damned everyone in the end.

[Ed Liu]

Howdy,

I don't think Moore really intended for anybody to be entirely despicable, other than maybe the Comedian. Nobody really fits the traditional comic-book "bad guy" role, not even the guy who is ultimately the bad guy. However, I do think I get why he wanted people to really dislike Rorschach.

I think the real key to Rorschach is the quote Moore uses at the end of his chapter ("Battle not with monsters, lest ye become a monster, and if you gaze into the abyss, the abyss gazes also into you"). The major difference between Rorschach and the other Watchmen is that Rorschach gazes far harder into the monstrosity humanity is capable of, and allows it to consume him. There is no substantive difference between his behavior and the behavior of the criminals he brings to justice, which begs the question of why he's considered a hero at all. In battling monsters, he became a monster himself. You could say the same thing of the Comedian, the "bad guy", and even Dr. Manhattan (although in his case, it's more that he's moved beyond humanity). Faced with the same situation that Rorschach encountered, I have to wonder what the other heroes would have done, and whether they would have gone quite as over the edge as Rorschach did.

So, while he does have admirable traits and comes off as a sympathetic character, that doesn't make him any less of a monster. There are lots of historical figures who have strong beliefs, motiviation to carry them out, and an unwillingness to compromise in carrying them out. You could use those terms to describe John Adams and Winston Churchill, but you could use them also to describe Hitler and Osama bin Laden.

That said, I do find him rather sympathetic, and I'm still a little torn over whether his actions ultimately turn out to be heroic or despicable. I could talk more, but it sounds like John Crichton is still not through with the book, and I don't want to spoil it for him.

-- Ed/Ace

[JohnCrichton]

Finished and I just might go so far as to say that was the best book I've ever read.... novel or comic.

Just..............wow.

The amount of "evil" required to bring about the greater good is enought to make me sick, but what other choice was there?

I can't believe how coldblooded Blue Boy took out Rorsarch(however you spell his name...) and blue when to make his own humanity and become his own god.........

Rorrie's journal tho.... printed in a paper nobody reads and his entries just before he found out the full truth... will the truth ever be revealed?

I've no idea where to start asking questions, but gaht damn...

Is there a interview out there anywhere with Alan Moore that basically asks.... "Dood.... what.... the..... hell? Last I checked mankind wasn't suppose to be writing stuff this good. What's your problem?"

[Matt Hazuda]

Well you finally finisged it and you liked it, that's good to know JC. Yeah the ending is wrong on one level, but it did bring about a major change to the world.

If you really wanna have an ending that messes with your head, watch all of Neon Genesis Evangelion and then the movie End of Evangelion.

I remember at one time there was talk of a sequel to Watchmen, but nothing ever came of it.

Did you like the "pirate comic" subplot? I thought it was a pretty cool sidestory and had a great ending, but nothing can compare to first pages of the last chapter of the Watchmen(it was the last chapter right? Its been a while since I've read it). Apocalypse now baby! :D

[MachSabre]

There is an interview with Moore where he says that he's surprised people still clamor over Watchmen, because he figured after 15 years, it would have been surpassed and had become "Just another story."

It's interesting because where Moore thought that Watchmen would be surpassed, it doesn't surprise me that it didn't. For example, Watchmen had various writing technics thrown in there that writers have been using for centuries. Techniques like simile, indepth foreshawdowing, symbolism, and even good old fashion harrative. A lot of the post Dark Knight/Watchmen writers only took "the Dark and Gloomy" feel from the books, not understanding that these people wrote a story, not just a comic story. (Which I hope I don't have to explain the difference.)

That's not to say other lack these interesting techniques, but they're far and few. There is foreshadowing in Watchmen that drops clues from the beginning about the end of the entire story. If you get a chance to re-read it again, you'll appreciate it that much more catching things you missed the first time around. (I know you're limited on the freetime you have to read it, but if you get the chance, I think you'll really love it even more.)

While it's not as indepth or colorful as Watchmen, I might suggest V for Vendetta, a comic story that takes cues from George Orwell's 1984. Fun little book.

But yeah... The visual of Adrian yelling "I did it!" sent a shiver up my spine the first time I read it. I'm glad you liked it!

[JohnCrichton]

Yup finally finished it and yeah, first couple pages of the holocaust were just... amazing.

"I DID IT!"

One of the most empty, maginficent, happy/sad comments I've ever read in a comic book.

I loved the pirate story and how I guess the main character was a refelction of Adrian.

The death of that artist woman and that writer was about a thousand different kinds of sad tho... :(

[The Guard]

Rorrie's journal tho.... printed in a paper nobody reads and his entries just before he found out the full truth... will the truth ever be revealed?

A lot of people read NEW FRONTIERSMAN. A lot of people know who Rorschach is. That information will get out, since Seymour is reaching for the pile with his journal in it at the end. You make the call.

[James]

An excellent and shocking end to a gripping and well thought out book. It was one of those great comics which kept you guessing where it would turn next, and the multi story strands made the whole thing totally gripping.

I never get bored of reading this book and that's a sure sign of a classic.

[MAXIMUS]

I was going through this talkback and I got to thinking about the book. You know what moment I love in Watchmen? When that crazy magazine got Rorschach's journal after Ozymandias thought he'd gotten away with it.

[Domino]

That is a great moment. One of my favorites is a bit earlier. I still remember the gasp I made aloud as I read the following line from Watchmen #11:

"Dan, I'm not a Republic serial villain. Do you seriously think I'd explain my master-stroke if there remained the slightest chance of you affecting its outcome? I did it thirty-five minutes ago."

[Mackenzie Rainelle]

I second that Oxy "I'm not a Republican" post about Watchmen. That was a "Daaaaaaamn...." moment righ there.

[Kury Wagner]

Finally! I just finished it a week ago. My sister recommended it to me. I finished it in two days. She was shocked because she still hasn't finished it after all this time (she started it awhile ago).

But anyway :anime:, any comments on this book?

[Jor-El]

I personally am not nearly intelligent enough to comment on this book. The best I can do to come anywhere near commenting on it is to say "Wow" and sit here drooling from my wide open mouth.

[Kury Wagner]

I personally am not nearly intelligent enough to comment on this book. The best I can do to come anywhere near commenting on it is to say "Wow" and sit here drooling from my wide open mouth.
So your head bursted after you read it? So did a friend of my sister's.

I didn't. There was one little part that I wasn't so sure about.

Who is Laurie's father?
The Comedian or Jon?

Later,
a fellow comic book lover :anime:

[Eddie G.]

So your head bursted after you read it? So did a friend of my sister's.

I didn't. There was one little part that I wasn't so sure about.

Who is Laurie's father?
The Comedian or Jon?

Later,
a fellow comic book lover :anime:The Comedian.

MINOR SPOILERS
Anyway this is one of the greatest things ever put in comic fine. I tend to get goosebumps when Doc Manhattan gives that last amazing line.

P.S. For anyone who hasn't noticed it yet if you look closely at the scenes New York destroyed you might find some dark humor. Oh and does anyone know if the movie is still going to happen, last I heard they had finished a script.

[Kury Wagner]

I don't think that would be a good movie. Don't get me wrong, it would be a good movie. But I don't think that they could make it as good as the book. Do you follow?

[Eddie G.]

I don't think that would be a good movie. Don't get me wrong, it would be a good movie. But I don't think that they could make it as good as the book. Do you follow?I agree however I read a script review a few months ago that said the script was made this movie out to be incredible.

Anyway I would like to see Watchmen as a 12 part mini series, or 13 episode one season animated series. I think that would be the best way to go around adapting it, but it will never happen. The movie will probably never get off the ground either.

[Sharklady]

I just got through reading 'Watchmen', and certainly agree it has a remarkable plot- all those intricate interweavings! And the artwork is an adequate match, which is saying something. And the use of that comic-within-a-comic, 'Tales if the Black Freighter', was truly imaginative.


Spoilers Ahead


But two aspects about the ending kinna bugged me:

1. The closing events are a bit too similar to those in 'Fail Safe'.

2. And, I can sense their impact must have been different- more comfortably distant- before the real-life 9/11 attacks. Note that disturbingly prophetic line, "It doesn't matter. After New York, nothing matters."

Both aspects would seem to make it less likely 'Watchmen' will ever be made into a movie.

[MAXIMUS]

I believe I read somewhere that this story, or at least the larger grander story going on in the backround behind the Comedians death was an allegory for the Cold War. This is brilliant writing, for those that dont get the somewhat hidden messages and whatnot it is still a great tale. The way Rorschach is really writtne like a villian really is great. Night Owl and the Silk Spectres side story is great too. Comic book writing doesnt get much better then this boys and girls.

[Kury Wagner]

First, I LOVE your avatar. :anime:

Second, I thought Ror was great. He is everything you need in a crazy superhero. :anime: I thought his face looked a lot like Alfred E. Newman (the Mad magazine guy.) Weirdly. But, he had the troubled childhood, and the should-have-never-been-a-mom mother. Which, is why he became the way he was.

I just really liked this book. I'm thinking about reading it again. My sister's boyfriend, reads it every year. And, he likes even more everytime.

[The Malcontent]

For further reading, well the best thing you can do if you're new to the Watchment is pick up some of the other great Moore tpbs: Miracleman, Swamp Thing, From Hell, Killing Joke, et al.

[MAXIMUS]

I alaways felt that the fave under Rorschachs mask was in fact the mask and the mask the face if that makes sense. He just seems to lose all that mystique when it gets takin off, and you know he's just not right without it. I guess you could say that for alot of characters but this one seems to fit just right.

[Marvel_Knight]

I am curious to see how this book is. Would you describe it as a really dark semi super-hero book, or a drama or something like that? Would it appeal to fans of Batman and Daredevil and the like? As for the movie, they do have the movie script online. I plan to download it soon.

[MAXIMUS]

I wouldnt even call it a superhero story. Kind of a noir crime drama on a grander scale. Yes superheros are invlved, but they dont seem to have that feeling that a superhero caries with him. These "heros" just seem to be ordinary people (except for Dr Manhatten whos power is mind boggling). I would call Rorschach the Punisher to the Nth degree because if your guilty of ANYTHING you might as well be dead to him.

[Eddie G.]

Would you describe it as a really dark semi super-hero book, or a drama or something like that? It has superheroes yes, it is a drama, and it is dark. However don't think while you're reading "WOW RAPE! That's so dark for a comic book.", if you just look at how dark it is you won't be able to really apreciate what Moore is trying to say in the book. Escentially the story could of been told without a single cape or mask, it's just more fun this way though.


Would it appeal to fans of Batman and Daredevil and the like? This books is basically the best comic book story ever told, and is probably one of the best written works in the last twenty years. I recomend it for anyone wo enjoys reading.


As for the movie, they do have the movie script online. I plan to download it soon.If you download it then don't read it after you read the book, just trust me on this one

[Mackenzie Rainelle]

But two aspects about the ending kinna bugged me:

1. The closing events are a bit too similar to those in 'Fail Safe'.

Out of curiousity, do you mean the Eugene Burdick novel that got the movie treatment twice (once as a live television broadcast)? If not, feel free to consider my entire post null and void. If so, what's the similarities you're feeling? I really didn't get the same sort of vibe from Watchmen as I did from the novel.

[handOFfate]

jeez,what's the matter with you people? Watchmen is by far the most overrated graphic novel ever written. I still fail to understand why people like it. Way too much jargon, wooden characters, and just plain boring. The worst part is, it's not nearly as intelligent as it tries to be.

[BCVM22]

jeez,what's the matter with you people? Watchmen is by far the most overrated graphic novel ever written. I still fail to understand why people like it. Way too much jargon, wooden characters, and just plain boring. The worst part is, it's not nearly as intelligent as it tries to be.
I don't think that anything is "the matter" with anyone in this thread. Obviously they've all simply enjoyed Watchmen more than you have, and are discussing it like the fans of any work do. You don't like it? Peachy. But you can easily express your opinion without insulting those of others.

[Eddie G.]

jeez,what's the matter with you people? Watchmen is by far the most overrated graphic novel ever written. I still fail to understand why people like it. Way too much jargon, wooden characters, and just plain boring. The worst part is, it's not nearly as intelligent as it tries to be.Well if it is not nearly intelligent as it tries to be would you mind telling us what the hidden messages are?

[Sharklady]

> But two aspects about the ending kinna bugged me:

1. The closing events are a bit too similar to those in 'Fail Safe'.

Out of curiousity, do you mean the Eugene Burdick novel that got the movie treatment twice (once as a live television broadcast)? If not, feel free to consider my entire post null and void. If so, what's the similarities you're feeling? I really didn't get the same sort of vibe from Watchmen as I did from the novel. <


Major Spoilers Ahead- Do Not Peruse Unless You Have Already Read 'Watchmen'.




I am, indeed, refering to Eugene Burdick's novel. And I would agree that the two works provide different reading experiences. But their climactic events are centered on the very same plot point: the need (?) to sacrifice the people of New York City (in part or in full) in order to avert a nuclear holocaust.

I'm not saying this shared point ruins 'Watchmen'; it doesn't. Still, if I'd been writing it I would have chosen another city to decimate, just to reduce that similarity.
In fact, if they ever do make 'Watchmen' into a movie, I won't be surprised if they change the location. For the above reason, and also to avoid comparisons to 9/11.

[sKorpia]

Of course, that point only pertains to people who have read "Fail Safe" and "Watchmen". I've only read Watchmen and, quite frankly, I'd forgotten that it was set in New York. (New York is still some mystical land out there on the East Coast since I've never visited it. Hearing the term "New York City" tends to conjure up a mental impression rather than a physical one. Not sure if this is true for others but that's how it goes for me.)

I read through this in one sitting. Since then, I've been told that I was crazy to go through it in one sitting. And yes, there was a LOT of page-flipping back and forth to get character connections and names and histories straight. But damn, it was worth it. I haven't read it since because I had to return it to my friend but I do intend to buy it. It's in the queue and the queue is long. Actually, if I think about it, the books I really like are the ones that get me to page-flip, to actively engage the book itself a couple of times. Mostly, it's a list of terms at the end of the book (Watership Down or The Silmarillion, for example) but with each little bit of added effort, I feel more drawn into the world. Moore's inserts with character bios, historical bits, and even the advertisement for perfume also aid in this aspect.

I guess what touched me (and what's always touched me) was the focus on people. But there's also something else, something I can't put my finger on. It's there, a je ne sais quoi that's allowed this particular story to endure despite the competition from the copy-cats that followed. What's really interesting is that, having only experienced the copy-catted style in comics (I'm not a Golden or Silver Age fan), this book still stands out for me. Anyone else get the same feeling?

[Sharklady]

> (New York is still some mystical land out there on the East Coast since I've never visited it. Hearing the term "New York City" tends to conjure up a mental impression rather than a physical one. Not sure if this is true for others but that's how it goes for me.) <

I, on the other hand, visit NYC a couple times a year, so it's a Real Place for me. But, as explained, I'd have set 'Watchmen' in a different locale for other reasons. Chicago would probably be my first choice (I've been there, too.)

> I haven't read (Watchmen) since because I had to return it to my friend but I do intend to buy it. It's in the queue and the queue is long. <

You might try ordering from Amazon.com- I did, and my copy arrived within a week.

Or if you'd like to buy my copy I'll sell it to you for cost. It was worth the read, but I don't anticipate doing so repeatedly.
PM me if you're interested.

[Ed Liu]

Howdy,

Supposedly, there is a new Watchmen movie in the works, but I don't think they're even close to a script. Anything you can download on the net is old. If it's the Sam Hamm script, RUN do not walk AWAY from it. I have a hard copy of it and it's one of the worst pieces of tripe I've ever read. I could eat the TPB of Watchmen and some blank paper and barf a better script.

I also dispute the assertion that Watchmen would be a great book without superheroes. I think that's kind of the whole point. It's intended as a work of serious literature that happens to use superheroes as its characters, and proved that you can create a work of serious fiction in the graphic novel format with superheroes -- that it could be something MORE than just guys in spandex beating each other up interminably.

Moore actually lifted a good portion of Watchmen from an old episode of The Outer Limits, if you can believe that (specifically, the roots of Ozymandias' plan). In addition, there's elements that Moore also lifted from Superfolks (http://www.aboutcomics.com/sfolks.html) by Robert Mayer. Mayer's novel is kind of like looking behind the curtain for almost everything Moore did up to Watchmen, including "Whatever Happened to the Man of Tomorrow?" and more than a little of Miracleman. I remember feeling like I just got a peek behind Moore's curtain after reading Superfolks.

-- Ed/Ace

[Kury Wagner]

This story is more than a fairy tale, it's so real, and yet fictional, that I forgot that it was a story sometimes. It's like when you watch a series that leaves you on the edge of your seat. When you talk to someone, who also watched it, it seems real. Like, "did you see `insert name here`? How could he do that to her?" You start to refer to the characters as living people.

Maybe this is just me. I don't know. . .

[Eddie G.]

.

I also dispute the assertion that Watchmen would be a great book without superheroes. I think that's kind of the whole point. It's intended as a work of serious literature that happens to use superheroes as its characters, and proved that you can create a work of serious fiction in the graphic novel format with superheroes -- that it could be something MORE than just guys in spandex beating each other up interminably.I guess I didn't make my point as well as I could have. It's not really that Watchmen could have been told without the use of superheroes, and I do understand the importance of a serious superhero story that qualifies as a novel. What I was trying to say was that there are points in the book (i.e., the question of "Who watches the watchmen and the nature of power, the questioning of what it means to be a good person, the social commentary) that really make the book for a lot of readers. It at least did for me, I spent at minimum a week thinking about it, I have to say that Mr. Moore has affected my view on the world.

So my point really is that if Moore had written a story with the same points, the same view, and if it was well written...well I think I might love it as much as I did the Watchmen. Of course it wouldn't be the Watchmen, and hell it may not be as good as the Watchmen with it's view. I think it's just the substance under the capes that really makes the whole thing work for me, and I'm pretty certain that substance applied to a different non-superhero story would have been as much a classic.

[Leaping Larry Jojo]

If Watchmen was not about superheroes, it probably wouldn't be near as popular and well known as it is today. There have been plenty of great, groundbreaking non-superhero comics before Watchmen...but as many here said, the superhero element is what makes Watchmen the classic it is today. Otherwise Watchmen might just be another Love and Rockets--a cult favourite, well respected, but not the phenomenon it is and was when it came out.

[James]

jeez,what's the matter with you people? Watchmen is by far the most overrated graphic novel ever written. I still fail to understand why people like it. Way too much jargon, wooden characters, and just plain boring. The worst part is, it's not nearly as intelligent as it tries to be.

I think you also have to put into context with when it was written. I think it's easy to approach a book negatively once you have heard people gush over it. This was at the time, pretty intense stuff.

Jargon, wooden characters and plain boring? Not nearly as intelligent as it tries to be? Interesting.. I would love to counter by asking what you would consider is a thought provoking, non boring, jargon free book?

I can't see how anyone who reads The Watchmen could honestly say that. I can appreciate it not having to be the best book ever read, but I've seen few books tackle superheroes, and their social context so professionably without ridicule or pretention.

I wouldn't call the characters wooden. I'd certainly say they are sombre and pretty bleak, but not wooden.

I would love to hear you divulge more of what you think on this - it's rare to see someone stand against the praise given to the Watchmen.

[Rune]

When I first read the book, although I knew I'd enjoyed it I also wasn't quite sure what to make of it all, most of my 'superhero' dealings up to then had been either the Marvel or DC staples and I'd become used to the fantastic. Watchmen really deserves several re-reads - or at least it did for me before I could really develop empathy with the chars with the exception of Rorschausch who I liked immediately (and I have to admit initially I found NiteOwl a bit of a whinger.) :p

Watchmen is one of my favourite graphic novels in all its bleak glory but at the end of the day I do prefer Moore's V for Vendetta.

[Marvel_Knight]

I haven't downloaded/read the movie script yet, so I guess that's good. I know that Rorschach guest-appeared (sort of) in The Question #17. Has anyone read that? Back to Watchmen. This would be like a Vertigo tale? Also, Rorschach is the main character right? He had inspiration from The Question (the c ostume at least) so I should give it a shot. But for some reason, my Barnes & Noble don't have it.

[FredNash]

I haven't downloaded/read the movie script yet, so I guess that's good. I know that Rorschach guest-appeared (sort of) in The Question #17. Has anyone read that? Back to Watchmen. This would be like a Vertigo tale? Also, Rorschach is the main character right? He had inspiration from The Question (the c ostume at least) so I should give it a shot. But for some reason, my Barnes & Noble don't have it.
Don't bother with the script, it's about a decade old by now anyway.

There really isn't a main character, like any good book, it revolves around a core of characters and the plot rotates around them from one group to another, with plenty of flashbacks for good measure.

I don't know about the guest shot in the Question. If you're a comics fan, you should check it out, but because you like good comics, not because it has anything to do with the Question, because afaik it doesn't. As to whether it's like a Vertigo title... Vertigo was invented because of books like this, not the other way around, so if you like Vertigo titles, this is essential reading.

I'm surprised that B&N didn't have it, this is usually one of the few 'Graphic Novels' you can count on a big chain store like them having, since it's pretty universally acknowledged as a legitimate work of literature as well as a funny book. If you're in a hurry, try another local MegaBookStore, like Walden or Books-a-million, they should carry it. If you're loyal to B&N and not in a hurry they'll special order it for you, or you could get it from Amazon, or better yet, a locally owned comics specialty store. Locate one near you by clicking here! (http://csls.diamondcomics.com/)

[Jade_GL]

Watchmen was a hard read for me. Some trades have only taken me a sitting, but this one took me a lot longer, maybe 6.

It was very good. I enjoyed it immensely. I especially enjoyed Dr. Manhattan and his story. His whole progression from a normal man to an omnipotent being, to a god, was something that was stunning to me. It took the idea of a *Superman* and really showed the emotions involved with the man and those around him.

I also loved how the comic played with comic conventions. The villain didn't *play by the rules* and that was completely satisfying, as well as scary. I enjoyed the twists.

To tell you the truth, I don't remember much of the plot points, I need to reread it. :)

[Spider-Man]

I picked the the collection up on a whim and I can't put it down. I'd really like to talk about this book! This is probably some of Alan Moore's finest work. It really rivals what he did with V for Vendetta. There's such a complex nature to all of this. Simply a great read!

[Eddie G.]

On of the greatest comic book stories ever told. Some people will be cool and say it's dark for the sake of being dark but like I said most of these people just want to be different. The art is wonderful and Alan Moore's writing works so well that I was able to read it the night I got it in whole.

Some things to notice, when NYC is destroyed there is a lot of dark humor in the rubble. And once you figure out the meaning behind that ticking clock you get one of those "Oh, hot damn, I get it! That's really cool," moments.

Sorry if I sound like a babbling school girl about this it's just that the book is so mind blowing. I'll let Ace or Random Guy say some actual intelligent stuff about the novel.

Oh and I know that Watchmen is Moore's masterpiece, but I actually consider V for Vendetta to be a better story. Watchmen makes you think more, I actually had a discussion of the ending with my dad after he read it (he thinks the ending means that the end justifies the means while I think the ending means that there is no such thing as the end justifying the means and all we can do is be good people). But V is just a more fun read and there is a little more suspense.

[Nick K.]

I've yet to finish this... it drags... =[

Maybe I'll eventually read the whole thing... sigh...

[Condiment King]

It drags? Blasphemy!

Nevertheless, Watchmen is brillant. I put it up with my favorite comics ever. It is quite the provocative, thought-provoking comic. The twist and turns that Watchmen takes are totally unpredictable, even if you've been spoiled the major ending to the comic. There's tons of plots going on in there to keep it very interesting. Alan Moore has written various issues which I have enjoyed, yet Watchmen remains my favorite, unquestionably.

[Hatter]

I picked this up last month, and boy, was I not dissapointed. What an amazing story. Moore's sense of characterization is pitch-perfect. It took me a little while to get used to the dated art and colouring, but now I really appreciate Gibbons' work.

In a way, I'm glad that Moore didn't get to use the Charleton characters as he originally wanted. I like these alternate versions much, much more.

Can't wait for the film.

[Legionaire]

Just brilliant. Have read it several times over the years, and all of it--story, dialogue, layout, etc.--holds up remarkably well. I will say reading it in the original comics issues had its ups and downs. The wait for each issue was excruciating, but that was balanced by being able to discuss each nuance 9 ways to Sunday on the Net, which added a great deal to my understanding.

The pirate stuff and the back-of-the-issue text features do sometimes drag, and they're not completely essential to appreciating the story. But they add a lot of texture to things and are worth slogging through.

My favorite chapter is "Fearful Symmetry". What Moore and Gibbons do here with symmetry in the page/panel layout (even down to who appears in each panel) is extraordinary!

[Reed Richards]

best series EVER. The art is brilliant and FULL of hidden messages and symbols. The story is perhaps one of the greatest ever told.




Just brilliant. Have read it several times over the years, and all of it--story, dialogue, layout, etc.--holds up remarkably well. I will say reading it in the original comics issues had its ups and downs. The wait for each issue was excruciating, but that was balanced by being able to discuss each nuance 9 ways to Sunday on the Net, which added a great deal to my understanding.

The pirate stuff and the back-of-the-issue text features do sometimes drag, and they're not completely essential to appreciating the story. But they add a lot of texture to things and are worth slogging through.

My favorite chapter is "Fearful Symmetry". What Moore and Gibbons do here with symmetry in the page/panel layout (even down to who appears in each panel) is extraordinary!

[Damien]

Geezum. I've been hearing how good this is for quite awhile. Might actually give this a read.

[Knight]

Read Watchmen this weekend and enjoyed everything but the end. Rorschach gets royally screwed and murdered by another hero just so he "wont tell" the truth of what really happened to NY. He got a raw deal for a guy only trying to do the right thing.

So who were the DC counterparts for all the other characters? The Owl was Blue Beetle I know as well as Rorschach being The Question.

[Eddie G.]

So who were the DC counterparts for all the other characters? The Owl was Blue Beetle I know as well as Rorschach being The Question.

[/size]Below is Alan Moore' explanation on who the characters are based on.



The Question was Rorschach, yep. Dr. Manhattan and Captain Atom were obviously equivalent. Nite-Owl and the new Blue Beetle—well, the Ted Kord Blue Beetle—were equivalent. Because there was a pre-existing, original Blue Beetle in the Charlton cosmology, I thought it might be nice to have an original Nite-Owl. I can't really say that Nightshade was a big inspiration. I never thought she was a particularly strong or interesting female character. The Silk Spectre was just a female character because I needed to have a heroine in there. Since we weren't doing the Charlton characters anymore, there was no reason why I should stick with Nightshade, I could take a different sort of super-heroine, something a bit like the Phantom Lady, the Black Canary, generally my favorite sort of costume heroines anyway. The Silk Spectre, in that she's the girl of the group, sort of was the equivalent of Nightshade, but really, there's not much connection beyond that. The Comedian was The Peacemaker, we had a greater degree of freedom, and we decided to make him slightly right-wing, patriotic, and we mixed in a little bit of Nick Fury into The Peacemaker make-up, and probably a bit of the standard Captain America patriotic hero-type. So, yeah, these characters started out like that, to fill gaps in the story that had been left by the Charlton heroes, but we didn't have to strictly stick to that Charlton formula. In some places, we stuck to it more closely, and in some places, we didn't.

Adrian Veidt was Peter Cannon, Thunderbolt; I always quite liked Pete Morisi's Thunderbolt strip... there was something about the art style, almost bordering on kind of Alex Toth style, though it was never as good as Toth, but it sometimes had a pleasing sensibility and a nice design sense about it that I was quite taken by. And I quite like the idea of this character using the full 100% of his brain and sort of having complete physical and mental control. Adrian Veidt did grow directly out of the Peter Cannon, Thunderbolt character.

[Knight]

Dr. Manhattan is a lot more powerful than Captain Atom the guy he is sort of modeled after.

[Anthonynotes]

I read this story some time ago. Pretty entertaining...

The "pirate" stuff, I assume was a commentary on how locked into one genre American comics were (superheroes) by showing a world where pirates are considered the be-all and end-all genre of comicdom (and the pirate-comic fans not wanting to read anything else, similar to current superhero comic fans refusing to read, say, funny-animal comics...).

-B.

[Ben]

This is the comic that ruined comics for me. When I decided I wanted to read more comics, this one was recommended, and I devoured this in two days. I adored it. The result of which was that I thought there must be other American comics out there that are just as good. Alas.

Of course, I'm kidding. Kinda.

Either way, this book has an honored place on my shelf, right next to 1984 and Fahrenheit 451.

[MilkManX]

Another 5 star masterpeice. Sure I had to read it at least 3 times to make sure I was absorbing all of its rich detail and subtext but it was worth it. Makes the Golden Age that much more golden.

[Jack Frenzy]

Read Watchmen this weekend and enjoyed everything but the end. Rorschach gets royally screwed and murdered by another hero just so he "wont tell" the truth of what really happened to NY. He got a raw deal for a guy only trying to do the right thing. Don't feel too sorry for Rorschach...

As the last panel shows, that newspaper flunkie might read his diary and publish the truth of what's going on. Rorschach will get his justice from beyond the grave -- at the cost of world peace.

Rorschach's problem was that his solution to everything was "identify the bad guys and beat them up" vigilantism. As the Comedian demonstrated to Ozymandias, you can't solve real world problems like drugs or nuclear war with a mask and your fists.

Since Rorschach wouldn't compromise his beliefs and let the dead go unavenged for the sake of the "greater good," he had no place in Veidt's new world order and was doomed to die.

Watchmen left a lot of late eighties comic readers quite cynical. The message that "masked superheroes can't make a real difference" undermined superhero comics for several years and helped generate the grim n' gritty "realism" of the nineties. (I still remember how when the Legends miniseries came out a year or two later, many fans could not swallow its "we must believe in our superheroes" message. Moore trumped Byrne.) Plus, the cold war elements resonated all too well with that era's fear of nuclear armageddon, making superheroes seem even more impotent.

When the cold war ended, I think many comic readers (myself included) flashed back to Watchmen and breathed a sigh of relief that things had never gotten that out of control.

[Sr.Infierno]

Do you think the mass murder Veidt commited could be justified and understandable? It seem to me he had the best intentions for the planet but handled things way too sloppily

[Reed Richards]

sloppy?

you orchestrate a plot of that magnitude and tell me if you dont break a few eggs...

[Sandoz]

Do you think the mass murder Veidt commited could be justified and understandable? It seem to me he had the best intentions for the planet but handled things way too sloppily Well, it was supposed to be "sloppy." Nothing short of a disaster of that magnitude would have gotten the world's attention and prevented the mad rush to nuclear war.

Yes, Veidt had the right intentions. He wanted to save the world, and he did--if only for a brief time. Assuming that the tenuous peace lasts, I guess the readers have to decide for themselves if three million lives are an acceptable sacrifice for world peace.

[Arkangel]

No, it's not justified, unless you believe people should be used as a means to an end.

[Sharklady]

I suspect the justifiability would've looked a lot more ambiguous at the time 'Watchmen' was published. World relations were a lot more tense in 1986, when there was still a Soviet Union and a Berlin Wall.

Now that the real-life world has managed to leave the Cold War behind *without* resorting to mass slaughter, Veidt looks as short-sighted, callous, and criminally egomanical as Usama Bin Laden (who, no doubt, also believes his methods are justified.)

[Mynd Hed]

I'm too much of a Rorschach fan to say anything but no. (-:

If you like these kinds of conundrums, though, you should check out a black-and-white film called Fail Safe. Same nuclear standoff, no superheroes-- but there's Walter Matthau! And it has a great twist ending to it.

[Terminatah]

No. Not even in the face of Armageddon. Never compromise.

-Terminatah

[Rasputin]

*dons a professor's cap*

It seems a classic case of Utilitarian vs. Kantian ethics.

Veidt in this case is acting as a Utilitarian. A Utilitarian looks at the consequences of a certain set of options and chooses the one that promotes "the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people" (or "Utility", to shorten the term) and minimizes the greatest suffering to the greatest number of people. For example, if some heinous crime has been committed to which no suspect has been found, with a rampaging mob threatening to lynch people they suspect of committing it, burning things along the way, then a Utilitarian would feel it justified to scape-goat an innocent man to prevent the lynch-mob from causing more damage. In other words, in seeking greater Utility, it is justified to cause people's deaths if more deaths are prevented because of it.

Veidt is faced with a choice, do nothing and see the world's leaders provoke a catastrophic war that will end civilisation, or conspire to commit an act so horrible that people will have no choice but to get along. Veidt chooses the latter, considering that there is no other alternative. (For the purposes of Watchmen, lets assume enough butterflies have been caused by the existence of Dr. Manhattan that nuclear war was inevitable).

Now we come to Rorschach. Rorschach is much more of a Kantian. A Kantian believes that humans are ends rather than means, so that regardless of whether an act has good consequences or not, some things just aren't right. Whether the act of killing, lying or threatening someone, things like these are never justified since these codes of conduct are simply too important to break for any reason. Of course, in Rorschach's worldview committing these acts means that you are henceforth condemned.

What's funny is that Rorschach's younger self (before he was 'Rorschach', though) felt that Truman was justified in dropping the atomic bomb on Hiroshima since less people would have been killed later as a consequence. Go figure. It's blackly comic details like this that the Comedian would have found hilarious.

EDIT: Oh yeah, my opinion? My opinion is the same as the rest of the super-heroes. It's just too big to form an opinion about.

[Sharklady]

> So who were the DC counterparts for all the other characters? <

I don't know if it's intentional, but I see Rorschach and Nite-Owl as the Dark and Light sides of Batman.

Rorschach is the tormented vigilante driven by traumatic childhood events.

Nite-Owl is the crime-fighter with an outlandish night-creature costume, a subterranian chamber full of neat gadgets & vehicles, and a sexy villainess w/ a crush on him (Twilight Lady = Catwoman.)

Perhaps it's not a passing matter, that Rorschach and Nite-Owl used to be partners.

[Knight]

I never put a grade for this series. I gave it a 4 suimply because I hated the ending. It was a downer for a somewhat great series to me.

[Leaping Larry Jojo]

I felt the ending was a bit anticlimatic as well, but it seemed like the most logical ending that would develop. In the end, you see that Rorschach still had that ace up his sleeve, which was a nice touch.

Alan Moore said that he developed Rorschach from what he knew of Steve Ditko. It's funny...if you've ever read any of Ditko's RARE interviews he talks a lot like Rorschach. The clipped sentences, one word answers and the calm but uncompromising stance on his beliefs--that's all Steve. If you guys don't know, Ditko was an Ayn Rand follower...his outlook on life was that you were either good or bad, and nowhere in between.

[Eddie G.]

I suspect the justifiability would've looked a lot more ambiguous at the time 'Watchmen' was published. World relations were a lot more tense in 1986, when there was still a Soviet Union and a Berlin Wall.

Now that the real-life world has managed to leave the Cold War behind *without* resorting to mass slaughter, Veidt looks as short-sighted, callous, and criminally egomanical as Usama Bin Laden (who, no doubt, also believes his methods are justified.)Actually you could make an argument that the ending of the Watchmen sort of does reflect current events. To end the Cold War, Vedit uses questionable means for a common good, similar to the questionable alliances the United States made in their effort to fight the Cold War. The ending of the novel points at while Vedit has made the world good for now, it's all very temporary, in fact the very questionable means that Vedit uses being discovered are hinted at being what will bring this downfall. This could be compared to those who blame a lot of the current problems in the Middle East with things the United States did in the past that were at the time for what was seen as the common good.

[Ed Liu]

Comic Book Science -- WATCHMEN Style!

Howdy,

Just call me "Bumping Old Threads" Ace this week, I guess, but this is too cool not to.

There is really a "happy face (http://www.esa.int/esaMI/Mars_Express/SEMMTFNFGLE_0.html)" (http://www.esa.int/esaMI/Mars_Express/SEMMTFNFGLE_0.html) crater on Mars (http://www.esa.int/esaMI/Mars_Express/SEMMTFNFGLE_0.html).

Some say that Alan Moore knew about this before he wrote the relevant chapter in Watchmen, since this crater was known since the Viking expeditions of the mid-70's (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viking_program).

This just tickles me in too many ways to count.

-- Ed/Ace

[zano88]

wow, it's even got the comedian's blood stain.

[Hanshotfirst113]

It was a great story, but I have to read it again at some point because it's so packed with information!

I agree. It's incredibly dense, and sorting out all of themes and meaning and what's going on is rewarding but demanding. I'm plowing through it now, and it's very complex. My god, is Moore well read.

[cartoonboy]

Major bump!

*Tries to avoid spoilers*

With all the hype for the movie in March '09, wondering if it would be a good idea to read the graphic novel. I've only glanced at the wikipedia of Watchmen when I first head of the movie - but that's about it.

Should I be completely surprised with the movie or have some background going in?

[Hanshotfirst113]

Given what kind of alterations will most likely be made to the source material, I would say that reading the graphic novel prior to viewing in the film would give you a different perspective on it. Personally, if you consider yourself a fan of the genre, reading the graphic novel would probably be a good idea. It's one of the defining works of the comics field, good, bad, or indifferent. It's also just a pretty darn good piece of storytelling. So I'd say yes. Should this go in the comics forum though?

[Ed Liu]

Should this go in the comics forum though?

Why yes. Yes it should. :p

Keeping this parked here for a while, although I expect it will be merged eventually with either the Watchmen talkback (http://forums.toonzone.net/showthread.php?t=15923) or the "What do you recommend?" (http://forums.toonzone.net/showthread.php?t=167852) thread.

If you have any interest in the superhero genre at all, I would recommend the graphic novel whether or not there was a movie coming out about it. As for the movie, Kevin Church summed up how I feel (http://www.beaucoupkevin.com/blog/about-the-watchmen-trailer/2008/07/17/) about it pretty well (warning: graphic language), so I'd actually even go farther and say you could probably read the graphic novel and skip the movie. I expect it's going to end up on the Catwoman side of the comic-book superhero movie scale rather than the Incredibles/Dark Knight side.

I could be wrong, but I saw nothing in 300 to make me think Zack Snyder is the guy who will pull it off. Then again, I wouldn't have thought Peter Jackson for LotR after his body of work before then, so you never know.

-- Ed

[Mad Monkey 7]

Why yes. Yes it should. :p

Keeping this parked here for a while, although I expect it will be merged eventually with either the Watchmen talkback (http://forums.toonzone.net/showthread.php?t=15923) or the "What do you recommend?" (http://forums.toonzone.net/showthread.php?t=167852) thread.

If you have any interest in the superhero genre at all, I would recommend the graphic novel whether or not there was a movie coming out about it. As for the movie, Kevin Church summed up how I feel (http://www.beaucoupkevin.com/blog/about-the-watchmen-trailer/2008/07/17/) about it pretty well (warning: graphic language), so I'd actually even go farther and say you could probably read the graphic novel and skip the movie. I expect it's going to end up on the Catwoman side of the comic-book superhero movie scale rather than the Incredibles/Dark Knight side.

I could be wrong, but I saw nothing in 300 to make me think Zack Snyder is the guy who will pull it off. Then again, I wouldn't have thought Peter Jackson for LotR after his body of work before then, so you never know.

-- Ed

I believe Snyder can pull it off. He got Dave with him on this for knowledge on the work.

[Shawn Hopkins]

Did you see the trailer? Most of those scenes are visual references to the comic book. If you read the book before the movie I think you'll get a lot more out of it. And if the movie is bad, at least you'll have read one of the best comic books ever.

[cartoonboy]

I see there is a hardcover being released in November or just get a copy of the paperback version .

[Cyporiean]

There is an oversized hardcover edition out already, Absolute: Watchmen. Its rather well done, as are all of DC's Absolutes editions

[defunctzombie]

If you don't have time to read it you could try that "graphic audiobook" that itunes has. The first chapter is free so far.

[Shawn Hopkins]

Shoot, it's a comic book. Even though it's a very thick and dense comic book, you could read it in half a day.

[defunctzombie]

...Took me longer than that. :( It's a dense comic book!

[James Harvey]

In anticipation of the upcoming live-action adaptation, DC Comics has released two new hardcover releases - a Watchmen: The Absolute Edition and Watchmen Hardcover!

WATCHMEN

http://dccomics.com/media/product/4/0/4040_180x270.jpg (http://dccomics.com/media/product/4/0/4040_400x600.jpg) http://dccomics.com/media/product/1/0/10206_180x270.jpg (http://dccomics.com/media/product/1/0/10206_400x600.jpg)

Written by: Alan Moore
Art and cover by: Dave Gibbons

This oversized hardcover collection, packaged inside a beautifully designed slipcase, will be the cornerstone of any serious comic book collection. Each page of art has been restored and recolored by WildStorm FX and original series colorist John Higgins and approved by Gibbons to appear as originally intended.

Additionally, this grand tome will include 48 pages of supplemental material produced exclusively for the Graphitti Designs Watchmen hardcover edition and not seen since their original publication. Included therein is a cornucopia of rare and historically valuable treasures, including samples of Moore's Watchmen scripts, the original Watchmen proposal, Gibbons's conceptual art, cover roughs, and much, much more!

Also, DC Comics offers another edition - their first-ever hardcover edition of the Hugo Award-winning epic from writer Alan Moore and artist Dave Gibbons, offered at DC's standard trim size. One of the most influential graphic novels of all time and a perennial bestseller, Watchmen has only grown in stature since its original publication. This volume features a new cover by Gibbons and contains the high-quality, recolored pages found in Watchmen: The Absolute Edition, which were restored by WildStorm FX and original series colorist John Higgins. Also included are selected bonus sketch materials.

Comments?

[BonyT]

SO---Anybody else besides me reading Watchmen for the first time in prep for seeing the movie? I guess I shouldn't be admitting in open forum that I've never read the thing before, but ... well, there it is. I've actually had the GN for years -- somebody gave me a free copy as a bonus with something I bought on eBay; but I've never done more than skim through it a bit until the film came along.

BonyT's Watchmen reading journal
February 20, 2009:

Finished Chapter V last night. Rorschach captured. Imprisoned. Face confiscated. About to reeeally depress optimistic psychoanalyst in Chapter VI.Must pick up pace. Film opens in 14 days.
People will try to distract me from reading this weekend. They'll scream, "Let's go out and do something!" And I'll whisper, "No."

[James Harvey]

You've read the Watchmen comic series, so why not check out Watchmen: The Complete Motion Comic? Click on the link below for more.

-Watchmen: The Complete Motion Comic DVD/Blu-ray Talkback (Spoilers) (http://forums.toonzone.net/showthread.php?t=227814)

Now, thoughts on the original Watchmen comic release?

[creativerealms]

I read Watchmen four years ago but I decided to buy it and reread it this week. Mainly to hype my self up for the movie.

[Xurk]

I too am a member of the much ashamed-of-themselves group of people who have meant to read Watchmen for years [and even own a copy] but never got round to doing so... :sweat: I'm thinking of going to see the movie at the theater tomorrow evening, so I guess I'm not going to be reading the story until after I've already seen the movie.

In one way, the movie won't be spoiled for me that way. On the other hand, I hear that the movie is pretty confusing if you haven't read the story... so I hope not having read it beforehand doesn't ruin the experience.

[wonderfly]

I too am a member of the much ashamed-of-themselves group of people who have meant to read Watchmen for years [and even own a copy] but never got round to doing so... :sweat: I'm thinking of going to see the movie at the theater tomorrow evening, so I guess I'm not going to be reading the story until after I've already seen the movie.

In one way, the movie won't be spoiled for me that way. On the other hand, I hear that the movie is pretty confusing if you haven't read the story... so I hope not having read it beforehand doesn't ruin the experience.

I want to follow up with you and see what you think of it. I'm very interested in how people who've never read the book will feel about the movie after seeing it. I never read "300" before seeing that movie, and enjoyed it greatly, and since this is the same director...

*crosses fingers*

[Ed Liu]

I want to follow up with you and see what you think of it. I'm very interested in how people who've never read the book will feel about the movie after seeing it. I never read "300" before seeing that movie, and enjoyed it greatly, and since this is the same director...

*crosses fingers*

It's funny -- the fact that this is the same guy who directed 300 is exactly why I DON'T want to see the movie. It's one thing to direct an adaptation of Frank Miller, who generally doesn't do subtext, and for one of his more straightforward works to boot. But Alan Moore? Even with a 2:40 running time, I can't see how you can't turn Watchmen the movie into a near incomprehensible mess that's at best a "greatest hits" version of the original story. Add in the way I felt like 300 the movie had even less depth than 300 the comic (mostly because of all the really stupid stuff that Zack Snyder and crew felt the need to add) and I'm deeply concerned that Watchmen the movie is going to do exactly what the comics industry did and absorb all the surface stuff that Moore did (Violence! Sex! Violent Sex! Swear Words! Characters that are total jerkwads!) without looking at what's going on underneath.

My other concern about Watchmen the movie is that people will jump to conclusions about the book based on it. Doing that is fine for 300, since that movie was a slavish adaptation of a book that really wasn't all that deep to begin with. I don't think this will be quite as bad as assuming that Moore's League of Extraordinary Gentlemen is just a big and insanely stupid comic book based on the Sean Connery movie, but I think the risk is there. Then again, I still think a bunch of people take away exactly the wrong lessons about Watchmen the graphic novel as it is. Certainly the comics industry did. It also seems that tons of people have already been buying and reading the book in advance of the movie anyway. It's been a top seller for quite some time already,and I've even seen people reading it on the PATH or NJ Transit while riding home.

On the plus side, Malin Akerman and Carla Gugino look great ;).

In any event, I got a giggle out of this summary of the characters (http://www.postmodernbarney.com/2009/03/what-the-informed-viewer-needs/). Spoilers there.

[James Harvey]

After sharing your thoughts on the Watchmen motion picture (Feature Talkback (http://forums.toonzone.net/showthread.php?t=225848)), why not discuss the graphic novel that inspired it?

WATCHMEN

http://dccomics.com/media/product/4/0/4040_180x270.jpg (http://dccomics.com/media/product/4/0/4040_400x600.jpg) http://dccomics.com/media/product/1/0/10206_180x270.jpg http://dccomics.com/media/product/1/4/1462_180x270.jpg (http://dccomics.com/media/product/1/0/10206_400x600.jpg)

Written by: Alan Moore
Art and cover by: Dave Gibbons

It all begins with the paranoid delusions of a half-insane hero called Rorschach. But is Rorschach really insane or has he in fact uncovered a plot to murder super-heroes and, even worse, millions of innocent civilians? On the run from the law, Rorschach reunites with his former teammates in a desperate attempt to save the world and their lives, but what they uncover will shock them to their very core and change the face of the planet! Following two generations of masked superheroes from the close of World War II to the icy shadow of the Cold War comes this groundbreaking comic story — the story of The Watchmen.

Comments?

[Shawn Hopkins]

In any event, I got a giggle out of this summary of the characters (http://www.postmodernbarney.com/2009/03/what-the-informed-viewer-needs/). Spoilers there.

I liked the one for Rorschach. They should hand that out at the door of the theater. For all the good it would do.

[Ed Liu]

So, so wrong (http://blogs.laweekly.com/style_council/art/rorschach-blue-marilyn-watchme/). Funny, but so, so wrong:

http://blogs.laweekly.com/style_council/watchmengallery%20012%20450.jpg

I am also amused at the "New Rorker" cover, and can happily abandon the rest of the sampled art at that gallery.

[Shawn Hopkins]

Some of that art is rather good. Some of it is a little clumsily obvious, like the thing with the Charlton heroes. I liked the title of one of the Rorschach pieces, though. "Changing Shape ... But Not Mixing, No Gray." That might be a little obvious, too, but it's a good line to use and the piece is interesting.

[Comics_the_QB]

Unfortunatley, I just read it, but I absolutley loved it. Spoilers below.

We start out with Rorschach's journal/thoughts. It seems that Edward Blake, or better known as the Comedian, was killed by an unknown source. Hearing of it Rorshach investigates.

My absolute favorite line in the entire book is:

The accumulated filth of all their sex and murder will foam up about their waists and all the whores and politicians will look up and shout "Save us!"... and I'll look down and whisper "No."

My favorite panel is when Rorschach is on top of the broken window of Blake's apartment. Right before when he searches through Blake's closet. Either that or when he sets the cop on fire.

Anyway, when Rorschach said he thought it was a conspiracy against heroes, I was like, "Oh Hell yeah!"

Anyway, the plot goes even deeper when Rorschach belives someone purposely exiled Dr. Manhatten. It also doesn't help when Veidt is attepted to be assassined. But then, out of nowhere, Rorshach is framed. I loved how he tried to escape. It was awesome! Him lighting police on fire and shooting them with grapple guns was really neat.

I really like all the details Gibbons draws. He truly is an amazing artist. Moore is a genius too. I mean everything about this is great!

Anyway, Rorshach is put into jail and his true identity is revealed. We learn more about his past and what he did.

Then after Silk Spectre and Nite Owl hook up, they dceide to break Rorschach outta jail. This is where I couldn't stop. Plenty of twists and turns to keep you on your toes.

I didn't care for the Mars debate. But then we get to my favorite part. The team-up with Nite Owl II and Rorschach. This was geat. Great dialouge, great art, great pacing. Everything was great.

Then I found out who the villain was-- oh crap. I hope that wasn't too obvious, because I didn't see it coming. Great ending, dialouge and evil plot. Kill half of New York to bring peace to the world!? Damn.

I loved it all. Every bit. Though what happened to Rorschach was sad, I'll get over it. But I didn't get how Dan and Laurie changed their appearance so fast. I mean, they were pretending to be someone else for obvious reasons, but was the change to their phsical appearance permenant?

5/5

[sdp]

When i read watchmen years ago I thought it was highly overrated, I mean none of the "shocking" things seemed shocking to me and whatnot but Eds post early in this thread is true its just that stuff like this has been done many times so its no longer as relevant as it was even if its the one that started it.


With that said its one of the few comic books were I couldn't stop reading and ended up reading the entire graphic novel in less than a day. Started one night around 11, stopped around 3/4 am and then in the morning kept reading until I finished it in the afternoon. It has a lot of things I don't like for me to consider it the best comic of all time but its a great comic.


I know I'm in the very small minority but I'd love to see the Watchmen universe explored again, I mean the implications of someone finding a journal could be interesting.



Two things that always bothered me was Silk Specre 1 and Laurie having the same mole in the same place...And I also didn't like the ending I mean countries would still fight, its human nature I'm sure there would be peace for awhile but eventually tensions would rise especially if no signs of more alien invasions happened. And even if they did the world would not agree on how to deal with it causing war.

[Wolf Boy2]

Okay, after getting my arse handed to me on various forums for criticizing this book, I have decided to visit Barnes and Noble on Monday and shill out the painful $30 to buy and study this novel. :shrug:

It's been a year or so since I read it, sitting in B&N with a lot of time to kill before work. Given the appearant magnitude of the book, I don't think I took it seriously enough to really understand it. I don't remember much subtext other than clocks and Bob Dylan. And I was focusing more on my preconcieved thesis of "this is the book that ruined comics" than I was on the story itself. I had, of course, bought in to the common myth that Watchmen was written to herald the "grim 'n' grity" era of comics, something which Moore himself denies. Also, the author was liberal, British and has a freaky beard ... so I had pretty much decided to dislike it before I even started reading it.

Also, I judged it according to how it compared to my personal favorite comic series, "DC: New Frontier", thus leading me to hate the art because Darwyn Cooke didn't draw it and hate the story because it was so opposite of New Frontier's sunny and hopeful conclusion. None of my conclusions had anything to do with the actual Watchmen book.

In a nutshell, this is me admitting I may have been wrong. Or at least hasty.

One issues I had with the book was that it seemed like a stacked deck. With only one superpowered character, there could be no checks and balances. Anyone with Dr. Manhattan on their side was the winner, period. Also the lack of supervillians eliminates the standard justification for why superheroes are nesscessary, making their presence dubious. Or was this intentional.

It's becomming clear that I don't really understand Watchmen very well. I will post another review when I get a bit more educated on the subject.

[HadesSphere]

Also, the author was liberal, British

So, if someone has politics you disagree with, you automatically hate them or their work? That's kinda sad. I get along with plenty of people who's politics I disagree with, and enjoy their work.

And what's wrong with him being British? Sorry, I once heard someone say they wouldn't read a book because the author was Jewish, and that made no sense to me.

[Palin Dromos]

Okay, after getting my arse handed to me on various forums for criticizing this book, I have decided to visit Barnes and Noble on Monday and shill out the painful $30 to buy and study this novel. :shrug:

It's been a year or so since I read it, sitting in B&N with a lot of time to kill before work. Given the appearant magnitude of the book, I don't think I took it seriously enough to really understand it. I don't remember much subtext other than clocks and Bob Dylan. And I was focusing more on my preconcieved thesis of "this is the book that ruined comics" than I was on the story itself. I had, of course, bought in to the common myth that Watchmen was written to herald the "grim 'n' grity" era of comics, something which Moore himself denies. Also, the author was liberal, British and has a freaky beard ... so I had pretty much decided to dislike it before I even started reading it.

Also, I judged it according to how it compared to my personal favorite comic series, "DC: New Frontier", thus leading me to hate the art because Darwyn Cooke didn't draw it and hate the story because it was so opposite of New Frontier's sunny and hopeful conclusion. None of my conclusions had anything to do with the actual Watchmen book.

In a nutshell, this is me admitting I may have been wrong. Or at least hasty.

One issues I had with the book was that it seemed like a stacked deck. With only one superpowered character, there could be no checks and balances. Anyone with Dr. Manhattan on their side was the winner, period. Also the lack of supervillians eliminates the standard justification for why superheroes are nesscessary, making their presence dubious. Or was this intentional.

It's becomming clear that I don't really understand Watchmen very well. I will post another review when I get a bit more educated on the subject.
I applaud your admission that you may have misjudged Watchmen.
Frankly I don't think anyone can really understand everything that's going on in it after just one reading.
Also be sure to read all the interstitial stuff (Under the Hood, Super-Powers and the Superpowers, etc.). I know that some people when they read Watchmen for the first time skip that stuff assuming that it "bonus material", when it is all actually highly relevant to the characters and world.
Take your time, and don't rush through it. Do just as you said, and study it (heck I actually had it as assigned reading back in college).

Additionally, you shouldn't have to drop $30 on the paperback GN, the list price is $20 (unless VA sales tax is 50%:p).

Enjoy

[James Harvey]

Warner Home Video releases the animated adaptation of Tales of the Black Freighter, the stirring "story within a story" found in the original Watchmen comic series, on home video. Click on the links below for more.

-Watchmen: Tales of the Black Freighter Feature Talkback (Spoilers) (http://forums.toonzone.net/showthread.php?t=226752)
-Watchmen: Tales of the Black Freighter DVD/Blu-ray Talkback (Spoilers) (http://forums.toonzone.net/showthread.php?t=226753)

Any further thoughts on the original Watchmen comic release?

[Wolf Boy2]

Okay, so I have re-read Watchmen. I'm not really sure what to say about it. I still didn't enjoy it a great deal, but that's more a matter of personal taste than anything to do with the book itself.

The best part, for me, was the Dr. Manhattan origin chapter. I loved how it skipped from bit to bit so artisticly ("It's 1985, the picture is falling, 1945 cogs rain over New York .... 1960 and she is leaving me ...."). That chapter was outstanding.

My favorite character was Nite Owl II. Least favorite was that murdering jerk, the Comedian (I'm glad he got thrown out of a window). I didn't like the portrayal of women at all, especially Silk Spectre I and the psychiatrist's wife. I had trouble understanding the Black Freighter subplot, and I had to Google it.

I'll write a review eventually. But I'm still digesting it all.

I was sick when I read it, and the fever gave me nightmare hallucinations of scenes from the book. My brain also added creepy stuff that wasn't in the book, like my nieghbors being loaded onto airships to be vaporized by Ozymandias. DO NOT READ WATCHMEN WHEN YOU HAVE A FEVER. I cannot emphasize this enough. It will give you some crazy visions. You have been warned.

So .... anyone still want to talk about Watchmen?

[Toddman]

DO NOT READ WATCHMEN WHEN YOU HAVE A FEVER. I cannot emphasize this enough.


Truer words may have never been spoken.

(Although I remember guys in college applying the same logic to reading the book and being high at the same time, but I don't remember now if they were warning against it or endorsing it...)


Toddman

[James Harvey]

With the release of Watchmen to home video (DVD/Blu-ray Talkbac (http://forums.toonzone.net/showthread.php?t=232840)k), there's no better time than now to revisit this groundbreaking graphic novel!

WATCHMEN

http://dccomics.com/media/product/4/0/4040_180x270.jpg (http://dccomics.com/media/product/4/0/4040_400x600.jpg) http://dccomics.com/media/product/1/0/10206_180x270.jpg http://dccomics.com/media/product/1/4/1462_180x270.jpg (http://dccomics.com/media/product/1/0/10206_400x600.jpg)

Written by: Alan Moore
Art and cover by: Dave Gibbons

It all begins with the paranoid delusions of a half-insane hero called Rorschach. But is Rorschach really insane or has he in fact uncovered a plot to murder super-heroes and, even worse, millions of innocent civilians? On the run from the law, Rorschach reunites with his former teammates in a desperate attempt to save the world and their lives, but what they uncover will shock them to their very core and change the face of the planet! Following two generations of masked superheroes from the close of World War II to the icy shadow of the Cold War comes this groundbreaking comic story — the story of The Watchmen.

Any further comments on this classic story?

Related Threads:
-Watchmen: Director's Cut DVD/Blu-ray Talkback (Spoilers) (http://forums.toonzone.net/showthread.php?t=232840)
-Watchmen Feature Talkback (Spoilers) (http://forums.toonzone.net/showthread.php?t=225848)
-Watchmen: Tales of the Black Freighter DVD/Blu-ray Talkback (Spoilers) (http://forums.toonzone.net/showthread.php?t=226753)
-Watchmen: The Complete Motion Comic DVD/Blu-ray Talkback (Spoilers) (http://forums.toonzone.net/showthread.php?t=227814)

[Plague Rat]

I'll try my best not to fangirl.

... I think this is a good time to bring up my question: Opinions on Comedian? He did some terrible things, yet I couldn't help but respect him at points and even feel sorry for him. I can't tell whether or not I like him as a character.

Anyone else have any thoughts?