Poll: Anyone else prefer the Watchmen movie ending?

[Loop Stricken]

Consensus reached: The movie ending made much more thematic sense.

 

[sailor_960]

The comic's ending is based on an old Outer Reach episode, thats distilled awesome.

 

[SirPumpkinLongshanks]

The movie was....more sensible?

However, how the feck was the world supposed to unite when they thought Manhattan did it? What the shit are they going to do against this....well, he's technically a god.

The alien thing, more plausible. The world united against aliens makes sense.

But really?

This may have already been covered, I haven't read every post, but realize that the people in power had to put up a strong front in order to calm the people. It doesn't really matter whether you can do anything or not, people feel better when it doesn't look like they're helpless. In reality everyone would cower in fear of Dr. Manhattan and maintain peace to avoid upsetting him. You get to have your cake and eat it, too.

Personally, I prefer the movie ending. It could have been executed a little better but I found the faux documentary they released alongside the Black Freighter really brought it together.

I don't wanna say that the comic's ending came out of nowhere because they made allusions to it throughout the story, it was just wholly unexpected and, for lack of a better term, seemed too comic-bookish for my tastes. However, that's the one level where it works: it's an excellent satire of the medium. As much as I like the movie ending it'd be totally out of place as part of the original plot.

 

[komodomantis]

I liked the comic ending better just because The other nations would have united against the U.S if they thought Dr. Manhattan was the enemy because Manhattan was practically a god and he was the U.S's weapon.

 

[Dorian6]

Even the author praised the movie, so honestly it isn't that big of a deal.

I'm pretty sure he didn't

In fact, his exact words were "I'll never watch this fucking thing"

 

[The Heik]

The comic version, as it doesn't somehow lead to a sequel!

They're honestly making another Watchmen movie, even though the original comic didn't even HINT at a continuation!

Are the movie people really this stupid and greedy? Where are they going to go with this? Blowing up the universe? Oh Justice, where is thy mighty hand to stop this abomination?!

 

[SuperUberBob]

No, they aren't making a new one. Dispelled rumors.

 

[boholikeu]

Still, anyone can make a bomb with Manhattan's energy radiation if they have the funds and the means, which a lot of people do have in the world.

True, but my point is why would they want to? Aside from Veidt and his grandiose ideas for world peace I can't think of any other motivation that one would have for bombing all the world's major cities and blaming it on Manhattan, and the public is hardly going to suspect Veidt as the orchestrator of all this even though he actually did it.

Money, power, revenge, for shits and giggles. Manhattan would be the perfect scapegoat really.

I'm sorry, but it really just sounds like you are reaching here. I don't see why the public would believe any of this over the more obvious conclusion that it was just Dr. Manhattan. I mean, how would blowing up the world's major cities and then blaming a third party get one more money or power? It seems like the research and development costs alone would make such a plan counter-intuitive, not to mention the fact that if you had those kind of weapons at your disposal you wouldn't need a scapegoat. Really, your scenarios make less sense than blaming the whole thing on Veidt, which itself is already pretty unbelievable despite being true.

There was to much dick in watchmen.

The fact that this was such a big issue for people depresses me. I'm going to go out on a limb here and and guess that you are American. Am I right?

Nope.

Interesting, in my experience it's only people from the US that get all uptight about non-sexual male nudity. I mean heck, Japan censors out the genitals in their pornography and they didn't even edit Watchmen.

Just OOC where are you from in the world?

Consensus reached: The movie ending made much more thematic sense.

It seems so due to the lack of any strong arguments in favor of the book ending. Really, I hate to dismiss so many people as being fanboys, but it's beginning to look to me like those in favor of the alien scenario are looking at it through rose-colored glasses.

The movie was....more sensible?

However, how the feck was the world supposed to unite when they thought Manhattan did it? What the shit are they going to do against this....well, he's technically a god.

The alien thing, more plausible. The world united against aliens makes sense.

But really?

This may have already been covered, I haven't read every post, but realize that the people in power had to put up a strong front in order to calm the people. It doesn't really matter whether you can do anything or not, people feel better when it doesn't look like they're helpless. In reality everyone would cower in fear of Dr. Manhattan and maintain peace to avoid upsetting him. You get to have your cake and eat it, too.

Exactly

I don't wanna say that the comic's ending came out of nowhere because they made allusions to it throughout the story, it was just wholly unexpected and, for lack of a better term, seemed too comic-bookish for my tastes. However, that's the one level where it works: it's an excellent satire of the medium. As much as I like the movie ending it'd be totally out of place as part of the original plot.

While it didn't really come out of nowhere, it wasn't directly related to any other aspect of story. That's really what made it feel "out of place" to me.

I also realize that it's part of the satire of comic books, but, meh, there was already plenty of that in Watchmen. I can't really say the alien added anything new on that front, and it definitely doesn't deepen your interpretation of the work like the Manhattan ending does. I guess that's why I liked the movie ending more.

 

[SirPumpkinLongshanks]

I also realize that it's part of the satire of comic books, but, meh, there was already plenty of that in Watchmen. I can't really say the alien added anything new on that front, and it definitely doesn't deepen your interpretation of the work like the Manhattan ending does. I guess that's why I liked the movie ending more.

I don't know that having Manhattan as the villain adds more depth per se. It was a commentary on human nature which is just as poignant whether we're talking about a space squid or a god. That's why I don't mind that they went further with the comic satire in the book but I'll admit that any warm feelings I have toward that ending came in retrospect-the first time I read it I was left wanting.

 

[A Weary Exile]

Even the author praised the movie, so honestly it isn't that big of a deal.

Wait, Gibbons or Moore? I've seen interviews with Moore and he is very stuck-up about adaptations of his work (He refused to work on it) so I doubt he would praise it.

By the way, I've only ever seen the movie (It's my favorite movie. Ever.) and haven't read the graphic novel.

 

[Pokeylope]

The squid is ridiculous, it's unbelievable, entirely outside the realm of possibility. I see alot of folks arguing that Dr Manhattan attacking makes less sense (which in some ways it does) but the squid being ridiculous is the point.

Something so outlandish that everyone on the entire planet would be forced to acknowledge it. It makes sense (to me) that an other-dimensional enemy, one you cant reason with, one you can't communicate with in any way, could unify a planet. It's a situation where planetary alliance would appeal to all parties. (star trek?)

Nobody would wonder what America did to piss Manhattan off, nobody would blame the American military for creating him.
They already mentioned that Manhattan is an un-fightable enemy, no alliance could stand up to him. The squid is unknown, and terrifying in a way big explosions are not because of it.

It comes down to those who read the comic and those who didn't really. I can understand at face value the Dr.M thing seems more plausible but you can't just swap plot elements like that without leaving a mess of annoying little plotholes.

 

[Premonition]

I'm sorry, but it really just sounds like you are reaching here. I don't see why the public would believe any of this over the more obvious conclusion that it was just Dr. Manhattan. I mean, how would blowing up the world's major cities and then blaming a third party get one more money or power? It seems like the research and development costs alone would make such a plan counter-intuitive, not to mention the fact that if you had those kind of weapons at your disposal you wouldn't need a scapegoat. Really, your scenarios make less sense than blaming the whole thing on Veidt, which itself is already pretty unbelievable despite being true.

Not really. It's perfectly possible, if you have enough imagination. Seeing as it is a graphic novel and all, these scenarios being impossible is slim.

 

[boholikeu]

I also realize that it's part of the satire of comic books, but, meh, there was already plenty of that in Watchmen. I can't really say the alien added anything new on that front, and it definitely doesn't deepen your interpretation of the work like the Manhattan ending does. I guess that's why I liked the movie ending more.

I don't know that having Manhattan as the villain adds more depth per se. It was a commentary on human nature which is just as poignant whether we're talking about a space squid or a god. That's why I don't mind that they went further with the comic satire in the book but I'll admit that any warm feelings I have toward that ending came in retrospect-the first time I read it I was left wanting.

The commentary about human nature is just as poignant with a squid or a god, but the inclusion of Dr. Manhattan in the ending not only reinforces the allegory that he is God, it also further deepens (and admittedly somewhat changes) the work's stance on the relationship between mankind and God.

It comes down to those who read the comic and those who didn't really. I can understand at face value the Dr.M thing seems more plausible but you can't just swap plot elements like that without leaving a mess of annoying little plotholes.

Don't really see how you could make this statement. I read the comic years ago and still think it's superior to the movie even though I prefer the movie's ending. Not to mention there are plenty of plot holes that exist in the comic as well, so I don't really think you can argue that one is more plausible than the other.

I'm sorry, but it really just sounds like you are reaching here. I don't see why the public would believe any of this over the more obvious conclusion that it was just Dr. Manhattan. I mean, how would blowing up the world's major cities and then blaming a third party get one more money or power? It seems like the research and development costs alone would make such a plan counter-intuitive, not to mention the fact that if you had those kind of weapons at your disposal you wouldn't need a scapegoat. Really, your scenarios make less sense than blaming the whole thing on Veidt, which itself is already pretty unbelievable despite being true.

Not really. It's perfectly possible, if you have enough imagination. Seeing as it is a graphic novel and all, these scenarios being impossible is slim.

I agree that it's possible, but his argument was that the public would find these scenarios more believable than blaming it on Dr Manhattan. If that's true than the alien ending wouldn't hold up any better considering that genetic engineering is portrayed as being much better understood/developed in the comic's world than Dr. Manhattan's energy is in the movie.

 

[Littaly]

I'm guessing this point has been made before, but I can't be bothered to read all the replies. Still, it's worth mentioning more than once.

The part that the movie screwed up royally on was the ending. But it was not the "squid" part of the ending. That was fine, I mean, I didn't hate the squid, but it took some time for me to adjust to the thought of it. Besides, there was no way in hell it could have worked on the big screen. Whether you like it or not, the squid had to go, and they handled it pretty well.

The problem with the ending was that it stank of Hollywood. In the book there is no beating up Ozymandias, no desperate cry when Rorschach is blown up, hell, they don't even leave the Antarctica base once they realize that they've lost. The movie tries really hard to paint Ozymandias as the villain, we don't get his crazy long speech where he explains his motives, his reasoning never really becomes clear. While Ozymandias is the bad guy, he's not the bad guy in the way that the movie wants him to be. That and we miss out on Dr. Manhattans "Nothing ever ends" line.

 

[Kud]

Interesting, in my experience it's only people from the US that get all uptight about non-sexual male nudity. I mean heck, Japan censors out the genitals in their pornography and they didn't even edit Watchmen.

Just OOC where are you from in the world?

I don't have any problems with seeing genitals, I just prefer not to.

Also, Im from Australia.

 

[Pokeylope]

It comes down to those who read the comic and those who didn't really. I can understand at face value the Dr.M thing seems more plausible but you can't just swap plot elements like that without leaving a mess of annoying little plotholes.

Don't really see how you could make this statement. I read the comic years ago and still think it's superior to the movie even though I prefer the movie's ending. Not to mention there are plenty of plot holes that exist in the comic as well, so I don't really think you can argue that one is more plausible than the other.

Plot-holes in the comic are irrelevant to the ones created by the new ending.
While I may have made a generalization, I still don't find it unreasonable that those who read the comic make up the majority, if not the entirety of people bothered by the change.

I just got done explaining in the very post you quoted why the squid is supposed to be 'implausible' as you put it. You don't just throw giant squids into your dark realistic story unless there's a point.

 

[Distazo]

I enjoyed the book more but liked the end they put on the movie instead. It feels more thematically relevent. Besides the fact that Alan Moore was breathing down the director's neck for the entire duration of the filming so such decisions were only made with his say so.

 

[Cody211282]

The "alien" really dated the book, in my opinion, although it provided for some fun vaginal imagery. The movie's plot makes a lot more sense, given that Ozymandias' plan is predicated upon getting rid of Dr. Manhattan anyway.

this is exatly what I was thinking, but honestly, I dont like the bad guy getting away with it ending that the book and movie had.

 

[boholikeu]

Interesting, in my experience it's only people from the US that get all uptight about non-sexual male nudity. I mean heck, Japan censors out the genitals in their pornography and they didn't even edit Watchmen.

Just OOC where are you from in the world?

I don't have any problems with seeing genitals, I just prefer not to.

Also, Im from Australia.

I just think that complaining about the male nudity in Watchmen is like complaining about nudity in a museum or in a documentary about tribal cultures. There may be more of it than you're used to, but that doesn't mean it's gratuitous or offensive.

Plot-holes in the comic are irrelevant to the ones created by the new ending.

I don't see why. A plot hole is a plot hole. There are roughly the same amount in either ending.

While I may have made a generalization, I still don't find it unreasonable that those who read the comic make up the majority, if not the entirety of people bothered by the change.

Er, yeah, of course they are. Why would they be bothered by a change if they have nothing to compare it to? By that logic I could say the movie ending is better because most of the people that preferred the Manhattan ending saw the movie.

I just got done explaining in the very post you quoted why the squid is supposed to be 'implausible' as you put it. You don't just throw giant squids into your dark realistic story unless there's a point.

Actually, you make a good point here, and "implausible" was bad word choice on my part. I meant to say that you can't really argue that one ending is "tighter" than the other (IE has less problems/plot holes/etc).

 

[Endocrom]

I didn't like how Night Owl saw Rorschach die and that Ozy didn't get his day ruined when Dr. Manhattan said "Nothing ever ends"

Also: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hVFHLF9J3rE