What he said, I could never understand why the fanboys got so worked up over the change.Good morning blues said:
Poll: Anyone else prefer the Watchmen movie ending?
- Thread starter boholikeu
- Start date
Recommended Videos
And people who say the comic ending was better make me sad. So very, very sad.Continuum said:
Seriously though, you need to support your opinion because I see better arguments here supporting the movie version than I see supporting the comic ending.
Ok, so let's take that off the table then. While I agree that the squid wouldn't have worked in the movie, the Dr. Manhattan ending is stronger thematically as well.8-Bit_Jack said:
How?8-Bit_Jack said:
You're interpreting this incorrectly. Manhattan isn't superman. He's analogous to GOD in the story (in both the book and the movie). Several characters make the comparison, and in fact Dr Manhattan continuously has to remind people that he's not omniscient. So while it might not make sense that people stop fighting because "superman" might be watching, it definitely makes sense because someone who they perceive to be God is.8-Bit_Jack said:
Heh fair enough, though when I made the poll I was talking more about the whole squid/Dr. Manhattan thing than all the details.8-Bit_Jack said:
i'd probably have to say comic but ill go with movie because i have not read the comic yet, i probably will though, sooner or later
never read the novel, liked the movie ending though. tied up ends nicely, which is unusual for a comic book film.
I liked the way the movie tied in Dr. Manhattan, but I hated the way it did away with the moral ambiguity of the novel. Don't get me wrong, while I disagree with the methods of Ozymandias, I appreciate that Mr. Moore respected the reader enough to let him make up his own mind about who was good and who was bad.
How?boholikeu said:
Because the psychic bomb is literally blasting away humanity with its own worst thoughts. Watchmen (and Rorschach in particular) suggests that the world is drowning in its violence, immorality, and darkness. Then as a wave of mutilation, death, despair, anger, and evil thoughts washes over some of the novel's few examples of the goodness of humanity (the lovers trying to work out their differences, the two strangers becoming friends, the shrink who wants to HELP people...) it effects a literal interpretation of this, which in turn adds to the question of whether or not Veidt has done the right thing.
Yes. I know. Manhattan is God. EVERYONE knows this. But he IS Watchmen's version of Superman nevertheless. And you haven't disproved my point at all. Preparing for an imminent attack from an apparently hostile alien race will unify the world. On the other hand, Dr. Manhattan is from America, who will then be blamed for his supposed actions, which will only cause MORE conflict. This is counterproductive to Veidt's goal.
Yes, but Dreiburg's pussy HaydenVader scream is still worth mentioning because of how atrocious it was. The guy acting seems to have thought so as well, considering he doesn't act it at all, instead simply shouting into the frozen wastes. But that's just one of many problems I have with the movie.
No. The movie ending was stupid. Given the level of nuclear tensions that existed, no-one would be sticking around to determine who just blew up some cities, both the USSR and America would immediately launch everything they had, because if they didn't and it was an attack by the other, they needed to respond in kind instantly or lose decisively.
A giant really fucking obvious dead alien squid that didn't leave a mushroom cloud is quite obviously not the russkies.
A giant really fucking obvious dead alien squid that didn't leave a mushroom cloud is quite obviously not the russkies.
A lot of people have commmented on how out of the place the space squid was, but that was essentially Veidt's plan, in a world of masked vigilantes and one super powered individual, you have to go completely left field to get their attention. It is also the thing that mentally breaks the Comedian, because it's so ridiculous.
I feel the squid wouldn't have worked in the movie though.
My problem is that they made Veidt so scrawny and evil-ish (dark clothes/armour and German accent), when he's essentially Captain America meets Bruce Wayne, charming and the most physically impressive human being alive.
I feel the squid wouldn't have worked in the movie though.
My problem is that they made Veidt so scrawny and evil-ish (dark clothes/armour and German accent), when he's essentially Captain America meets Bruce Wayne, charming and the most physically impressive human being alive.
Movie was awful. It was just 300 in superhero clothes with Zack Snyder gushing almost audibly from behind a camera at the slow motion blood and bone breakage.
My vote went to comic. As stated earlier, tying Dr. Manhattan to the ending was fruitless since he wanders off anyway.
My vote went to comic. As stated earlier, tying Dr. Manhattan to the ending was fruitless since he wanders off anyway.
The whole point of the ending in the book was that it was a threat from without. The world would unite in an effort to defend themselves from an alien force. No one is to blame for the tragedy except an enemy that cannot be seen or fought, so humanity will unite trying to develop the means to do so, now that they have a common threat. Of course they will never actually succeed.
In the movie ending, Dr. Manhattan is responsible for causing the destruction. But he's also an American superweapon. There's still international tension if the USA can be seen as partially responsible for ushering in the tragedy. It's comparable to all of Russia's stockpiled nukes had detonated and resulting in planetwide nuclear winter - the world's going to band together, but they're not going to invite Russia, 'cause their weapons caused it, the pricks. Same logic. The movie ending removes that key component of unconditional innocence.
In the movie ending, Dr. Manhattan is responsible for causing the destruction. But he's also an American superweapon. There's still international tension if the USA can be seen as partially responsible for ushering in the tragedy. It's comparable to all of Russia's stockpiled nukes had detonated and resulting in planetwide nuclear winter - the world's going to band together, but they're not going to invite Russia, 'cause their weapons caused it, the pricks. Same logic. The movie ending removes that key component of unconditional innocence.
What's there to support? I would merely get into a long argument that wouldn't go anywhere. I'm not here to change your mind but that doesn't take away from the fact that Alan Moore wrote the comic so it could not be made into a movie. Zack Snyder just pissed on the source material by changing the ending.boholikeu said:
It's a damn Tentacle Monster. End of. Enjoy your coherent yet fake ending.
That doesn't sound like praise to me, really. Possibly like acceptance, but praise? Not the word I would use to describe it.Nautical Honors Society said:
And me? I can't imagine that they'd get peaceful because of an attack from somebody who is indestructible, since there's no way to fight somebody like that. If there's an alien, at least people can think "Well, maybe they'll attack us later". But that doesn't work with Dr Manhattan; if he doesn't attack people will just think that he has satisifed his urges for destruction.
Honestly I do not care about the mechanism of the movie or the squid itself. Both are plausible in context.
But there is another reason I prefer the ending of the comic and that is the discussion between Dr. Manhattan and Ozymandias about the moral implications of their actions. I can't imagine why they cut this scene from the movie. I guess Zack Snyder thought that moral ambiguity is too much for his audience.
But there is another reason I prefer the ending of the comic and that is the discussion between Dr. Manhattan and Ozymandias about the moral implications of their actions. I can't imagine why they cut this scene from the movie. I guess Zack Snyder thought that moral ambiguity is too much for his audience.