Scots Taffer on 7/8/2008 at 01:35
Quote Posted by Fafhrd
You mean the parts where they're in full superhero costume? Where the only one who's face you can see clearly is Malin Ackerman, who is actually the same age as Laurie Juspeczyk? Way to miss my point, Scots.
Er. You're throwing around a lot of names I am not intimately familiar with so I guess I'm losing you here, but I don't see how I'm missing your point - all the promo shots (including the new posters) all show the characters as they are, no aging, no make-up, the Nite-Owl is doing a flying kick in the prison break sequence so it doesn't seem to me like he's an older fatter dude.
I'm just concerned they're losing the human vulnerability/insecurity angle and I guess I won't be swayed until I see evidence to the opposite.
Stitch on 7/8/2008 at 02:55
Despite everything I posted earlier, I just watched the trailer five times in a row and fuck me if it doesn't give me a massive, raging erection.
I know, I know, but a dude's only human :(
Bonus points for the hairspray can being brand VEIDT :cool:
Fafhrd on 7/8/2008 at 03:27
Quote Posted by Scots Taffer
but I don't see how I'm missing your point
My point is that we have yet to see a single picture of the characters out of their super hero costumes. Which is when the human vulnerability/insecurity comes in. Christ, the whole point of Dan Dreiberg/Night Owl's character is that when he's out of costume he's a fat, insecure schlub, and when he's
in costume he's suddenly confident, strong, virile, and the second most capable of the retired costumed adventurers.
Bathcat on 7/8/2008 at 03:39
Before seeing the trailer at a
Dark Knight showing, I didn't know anything about
Watchmen other than 1.) the Alan Moore authorship, and 2.) the geek acclaim. But between the trailer and the Wikipedia entry, I'm cautiously optimistic. I like the idea of seeing comic book tropes deconstructed, and the idea of contrast between the our America of 1985 and a swaggering, Nixonian America coming off a victory in Vietnam, appetite whetted for more imperial ventures. What if right-wing fantasies of military victory were fulfilled, and (presumably) the dirty fucking hippies and blacks beaten back in their place? Rorschach, the John Birch style nationalist, sounds like an interesting character.
Dr. Manhattan likewise, but the "GOD-LIKE but so detached he doesn't really bother" thing is potentially really annoying if not handled skilfully. He reminds me of (
http://www.cs.unc.edu/~georges/mypage/images/godman.gif) God-Man.
However, my caution stems from 1.) the flawed
V for Vendetta film (and I know nothing of that comic, either) and 2.) Zach Snyder's stylish homophobic/erotic crapfest,
300.
EDIT: I will probably take flack re:
V for Vendetta, but it compares disfavorably with
Children of MenMorte on 7/8/2008 at 15:57
Quote Posted by Bathcat
EDIT: I will probably take flack re:
V for Vendetta, but it compares disfavorably with
Children of MenAll sensible people agree with you on this. The V for Vendetta film simply isn't much good, while Children of Men is excellent. V isn't a perfect comic either, but it's pretty damn good. A lot of what's wrong with the movie comes from the Wachowskis' screenplay.
Gingerbread Man on 7/8/2008 at 16:30
Quote Posted by Bathcat
Dr. Manhattan likewise, but the "GOD-LIKE but so detached he doesn't really bother" thing is potentially really annoying if not handled skilfully.
It is phenomenally well-handled in the comic, and I can't imagine they would have dropped the ball on it. A
huge facet of the overall story is precisely the Reality of Manhattan.
Look at it this way: The story explores (among other things) what the effects of real life superheroes would be, but as would truly be the case the superheroes have no powers, no real nobility outside of their own fucked up agendas (yeah, even Nite Owl), and -- to put it very disappointingly bluntly -- they really are just schlubs with gadgets. Even if you're the smartest man on the planet and a multi-bazillionaire, Moore makes it plain that nobody, not even superheroes, are innocent.
But then there's Manhattan, isn't there? Like Superman in
The Dark Night Returns, Manhattan is the Real Deal. Oh shit. Oh holy mega-shit. I'm so glad the trailer had that shot of a two hundred foot tall Manhattan casually obliterating shit as he strides across rice paddies in Viet Nam while the Comedian gleefully torches bad guys.
To me, the exploration of Dr Manhattan is probably the strongest element of the story, at least in terms of "real life supers" -- seems like everyone and their Dad has done a "lol what if there were really schlubs in spandex running around like nutters apprehending criminals?" thing, but not too many people go the extra ten feet and say "Okay, but what about REAL supers? What if there really was some guy out there who didn't have to obey the laws of physics, time, sanity, and therefore morality? WHat happens when he finally realises he doesn't have to do what we say and -- more to the point -- no longer finds anything human relevant or interesting?"
Again, a whole lot like Superman in DKR. Except Manhattan is
totally off the scale in terms of power.
Muzman on 8/8/2008 at 02:27
How does he put it? "A living person has the same atoms as a dead one"
Quite the summary. Although it's one of those weird things where you've got to think that, if you had that kind of sense of things you'd have to notice something extra there, like electricity patterns or whatever. But that's one of those nerdy extrapolations (I like to think that to story covers Dr M. movement from just manipulating things to appreciating creating things and things that sustain themselves in general. Could be that Moore's philosophies influenced me there).
It'll be interesting to see if they manage to make it so things can be interpreted lots of ways. Everybody loves their characters and narratives so cut and dried these days. But that'd ruin Watchmen. I always had it that Rorshach's expression at the end meant that despite being a son of a bitch, literally and metaphorically (inexplicably admired by comic nerds everywhere), he's also down to earth enough to actually feel something. The disaster is not some abstract lot of numbers to him like it is to most of the others.
I also got the impression that over the years The Comedian had softened, and while also being a son of a bitch he had his limits and Veidt's wrong about why seeing the island upsets him so.
Turns out I'm mostly wrong about this stuff, at least in terms of authorial intent, but that kind of character uncertainty is in there and makes things more interesting (although if mainstream reaction to The Wire is anything to go by pop culture is allergic to that kind of thing)
Scots Taffer on 8/8/2008 at 03:02
To my eyes Rorschach is by far the most compelling character of the Watchmen. There's a pretty interesting dichotomy at work - if he literally did not care about people at all and truly felt that the world was beyond saving then he would've went along with Veidt's scheme, but the true nature of his character is revealed when he states: Not even in the face of Armageddon. Never compromise.
For all his talk of the city being rotten to the core, people being prostitutes, pedophiles and scum, to my eyes that's Kovacs talking. I'm not sure if his dual identity as both the disturbed kid who grows up to be the right-wing-mag reading sandwich-board "world is nigh" guy and Rorschach are linked much beyond their shared view of the world as a place in advanced state of decay and that's purely because it permeates Kovac's tormented mind (plus it seems to be partly true).
I don't think it's a coincidence that the event to send Kovacs over the edge involved the murder of a child. Rather than it being that his hatred for the world was personified by the masked character of Rorschach and his act of wearing the mask was seeking retributions for all the wrongs of his life and to those other innocents like him, I reckon the murder of the child provided the literal and metaphorical death of what little humanity was left in Kovacs and that became Rorschach. Everything else is Kovacs, who is only a hop, skip and jump from Hannibal Lector, the hollow empty shell of a human being you see in the jail, capable of immense brutality as long as it is justified, full of suspicion, mistrust and bile at everyone around him.
It's easy to personify Rorschach when he has the mask on but I believe his expression never changes, I think he almost always looks like blank slate except for the only instances where we see his flashes of true emotion - the loss of his mask and his confrontation with Manhattan at the end. That's Rorschach; the mask is the only pure thing left in his life and even then it is a constantly shifting, formless thing, black and white, like his views and ethics, but never black or white in the same place for long. That tiny piece of humanity that is defined by Rorschach is constantly moving around, it can't stay still for long, because if it does it'll become corrupted like the rest of him.
That's my two cents on Rorschach anyway. Like you say, Muz, lots of room for interpretation.
Thirith on 8/8/2008 at 07:12
Quote Posted by Scots Taffer
To my eyes Rorschach is by far the most compelling character of the Watchmen. There's a pretty interesting dichotomy at work - if he literally did not care about people at all and truly felt that the world was beyond saving then he would've went along with Veidt's scheme, but the true nature of his character is revealed when he states:
Not even in the face of Armageddon. Never compromise.Not sure I see him like that. In fact, I think Rorschach isn't too bothered about the hundreds of thousands of human beings that died due to Veidt, it's more a matter of principle. For Rorschach, there's a clear distinction between right and wrong - it's all about principles, whereas for Veidt it's almost entirely about outcomes (although that's where his own doubts come into it, as underlined by the Black Freighter comic).
There are only very few flashes that suggest that Rorschach cares about anything else than his own monstrously clear-cut principles: moments with Dan that suggest he feels painfully lonely and his suicide-by-Dr. Manhattan. And this is where he takes off his mask: Rorschach says, "Never compromise", Kovacs screams, "Do it!", i.e. "kill me."
Anyway, that's my take on the character, and it may very well shift the next time I read
Watchmen. :)
Scots Taffer on 8/8/2008 at 08:55
Quote Posted by Thirith
Not sure I see him like that. In fact, I think Rorschach isn't too bothered about the hundreds of thousands of human beings that died due to
Veidt, it's more a matter of principle.
Hm, I definitely don't read his reaction like that...
SPOILER IMAGE ALERT
(
http://img142.imageshack.us/img142/5483/rorschachux1.jpg)
His comment about "another body amongst foundations" sounds a little sarcastic... right?
He did call the actions "evil"... right?
You do see that he's
crying... right?
