I saw the movie at 330am. By the time Rorschach and Nite Owl got to Antarctica, I was soon falling asleep. Maybe that is why I still like the movie cause I didn't see "Hollywood's" version of the ending LOL.
Watchmen's Tweaked Ending (warning spoilers)
- Thread starter Bakery
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Bakery said:
"If Dr Manhattan became the enemy of humanity, wouldn't part of the population become submissive to him? He had been called a God on more than one occasion afterall. This would just divide humanity into those that want to fight and those that want to worship"
If god came down here and started blowing up cities without a good reason... I see no reason why I'd want to "worship him" since we would obivously just be toys in his little game.
Well, the world already knew he had left for Mars, and the select few cities were destroyed as a "warning shot". Ozzy made it to seem as if Dr. Manhattan had given the world an ultimatum.
As for the decision to cut out the alien, I believe it was done because if they had taken the time to set it up properly, the movie would have dragged. And, if they didn't set it up properly, audience members unfamiliar with the source material wouldn't have bought it.
EDIT: One thing I did like about the movie is how Zach Snyder left all of the major plot deviations until the last ten percent of the movie. That way, even those incensed by the alterations could enjoy most of it.
As for the decision to cut out the alien, I believe it was done because if they had taken the time to set it up properly, the movie would have dragged. And, if they didn't set it up properly, audience members unfamiliar with the source material wouldn't have bought it.
EDIT: One thing I did like about the movie is how Zach Snyder left all of the major plot deviations until the last ten percent of the movie. That way, even those incensed by the alterations could enjoy most of it.
Having seen the movie first and only (in the last hour or so) finished reading the book, I'd have to say I'd favor the movie ending. . . For the movie of course.
Let's face the truth here - fundamentally the plan is the same, only space squid becomes Dr. Manhattan. For all intents and purposes, both endings have the same basic cause (a force of unfathomable power), and the same basic effect (millions of people die). IF you want to question just how long term the new found peace is, that's all well and good but the same holes exist for either ending. But, at the end of the day, it's a lot easeir to grasp blowing up a city with pure energy than it is to grasp the notion of teleporting a squid that kills people with a psychic blast. More importantly, the power of Dr. Manhattan is established even with a basic retelling of the narrative, while the giant squid bit requires all sorts of additional footage in an already long movie to even hope to make an unitiated audience understand.
Let's face the truth here - fundamentally the plan is the same, only space squid becomes Dr. Manhattan. For all intents and purposes, both endings have the same basic cause (a force of unfathomable power), and the same basic effect (millions of people die). IF you want to question just how long term the new found peace is, that's all well and good but the same holes exist for either ending. But, at the end of the day, it's a lot easeir to grasp blowing up a city with pure energy than it is to grasp the notion of teleporting a squid that kills people with a psychic blast. More importantly, the power of Dr. Manhattan is established even with a basic retelling of the narrative, while the giant squid bit requires all sorts of additional footage in an already long movie to even hope to make an unitiated audience understand.
Ancient Greece (or Rome, not quite sure) worshipped incestious, jealous, spiteful, adn anarchic gods.confernal said:
Anywho, I'd say blaming Dr. Manhattan makes more sense than the squid, 15 million people killed by a god-like entity who was shown getting really pissed on TV, and who's still out there, looks like it'd unite more people than Cthulu's suicidal nephew.
Also, all changes are justified in that Nite Owl starts beating on Ozymandias. That bastard.
I remember a screenwriter mentioning in an interview that an image of bloody bodies strewn about New York (like in the comic) wasn't in good taste post 9/11. So they went with the whole vaporizing people idea...plus like everybody already said it would take another 2 hours to explain properly.
Problems with the alteration are thusly.
First Bubastis doesn't make any damn sense being there since they never bothered with genetic tinkering in the altered ending.
Second why should I care if the movie version of New York is blown up? All I have seen of New York up to that point in the movie were muggers, vulgar prostitutes, and prisoners. Maybe if I didn't watch various bones being broken and spent shells shot out in slow motion and bad Nixon impersonations and instead saw some of the better parts of humanity they could have gave audiences a reason to care.
Third...do they realize they were dealing with the Soviet Union? Those guys were pretty hardcore. If we got hit by own super weapon they'd probably take advantage of the situation and invade while we were still panicked. It's quite a gambit that America didn't fire it's own rockets when first hearing a nuclear like explosion had went off in downtown New York City. Anybody remember, "Mutually Assured Destruction"? World's Smartest Man indeed...
I'm not saying they should have went with a giant squid. The giant squid was intentionally convoluted to make a jab at the super villain plots of your typical comic book villain and likely WOULD have turned off movie audiences. But still there must have been something else they could have done that would work better. Hell if they weren't so determined to follow the comic book they could have shown the explosions going off around the world. That way Dr. Manhattan would have definitely become a common enemy.
First Bubastis doesn't make any damn sense being there since they never bothered with genetic tinkering in the altered ending.
Second why should I care if the movie version of New York is blown up? All I have seen of New York up to that point in the movie were muggers, vulgar prostitutes, and prisoners. Maybe if I didn't watch various bones being broken and spent shells shot out in slow motion and bad Nixon impersonations and instead saw some of the better parts of humanity they could have gave audiences a reason to care.
Third...do they realize they were dealing with the Soviet Union? Those guys were pretty hardcore. If we got hit by own super weapon they'd probably take advantage of the situation and invade while we were still panicked. It's quite a gambit that America didn't fire it's own rockets when first hearing a nuclear like explosion had went off in downtown New York City. Anybody remember, "Mutually Assured Destruction"? World's Smartest Man indeed...
I'm not saying they should have went with a giant squid. The giant squid was intentionally convoluted to make a jab at the super villain plots of your typical comic book villain and likely WOULD have turned off movie audiences. But still there must have been something else they could have done that would work better. Hell if they weren't so determined to follow the comic book they could have shown the explosions going off around the world. That way Dr. Manhattan would have definitely become a common enemy.
They did. Well, they didn't explicitly show the other cities going boom, but it was stated that he blew up a bunch of cities.ButtonedDownParadox said:
Ah. I kinda tuned out whatever Ozymandias said since the actor was determined to play him like Christopher Lee or something.implodingMan said:
What I liked: mostly faithful, and provided a great animated vision for an inanimate graphic novel. The intro sequence laying the background information was just fantastic, though some details were left unexplained: many of my friends left the theatre asking if Rorschach had any supernatural powers, because very little light was shed in the movie about how his mask shifted.
What I didn't like: it seemed as though Snyder was trying to make a point of making the movie gorier than the book for the cinema audience. His alterations of Rorschach's dealings with the child kidnapper and his adolescent assailants seemed to merely go for a show of blood over the more horrifying, well thought-out actions in the book. I did like that in the movie Big Figure's man cuts off his comrade's arms rather than his throat, because it makes more sense as far as clearing the locks goes. Bones crack and burst through flesh; punches go through walls and heads get split. Cool, but it ain't Watchmen. I disliked the fact that he made the heroes superhuman- they swung with the strength of ten bulls and possessed the agility of felines. Only in depicting Rorschach's infiltration did I feel that such traits were in place. The movie also dumbed down the round nature of Rorschach's and the Comedian's personalities. He made Rorschach a crusading hero with 'some faults' while leaving the Comedian to be a complete villain, ignoring his heroic, redeeming qualities (in the book, that is). We don't see much of that in Hollywood, and here was a truly perfect chance to introduce some originality into the shitswamp that is popular media.
What I really hated: Snyder's treatment on Dr. Manhattan. He ruined a character for me. He made him emotional, bringing him down to human level and human critique. In the book, Dr. Manhattan was entirely out of touch by the time the events start rolling. He didn't leave and come back because of his emotions, but because of his frustration with humans; he simply wanted to know more and feed his natural curiosity- working on his machine, discovering things about the universe and time, and marveling at its beauty. He decided to return when he convinced himself that life is a rare enough incidence for his interest to be satisfied. When reading the book, what enthralled me most about him was the fact that he died as a human and was reborn something else- no longer human, no longer feeling love or hate or any direct sympathy. The fact that I didn't know what to make of him or how to assess his personality made him so interesting. That is something we don't see often either. Manhattan is a unique and unforgettable character, and the fact that Snyder corrupted him just ruined my day, and affirmed an odd notion that Hollywood sometimes insists on failing when given a chance to succeed in bringing out something original or intellectually stimulating. The new ending, as well, is way less creative than the squid, and I agree with the OP about the sense the squid makes over the tweaked version.
What I didn't like: it seemed as though Snyder was trying to make a point of making the movie gorier than the book for the cinema audience. His alterations of Rorschach's dealings with the child kidnapper and his adolescent assailants seemed to merely go for a show of blood over the more horrifying, well thought-out actions in the book. I did like that in the movie Big Figure's man cuts off his comrade's arms rather than his throat, because it makes more sense as far as clearing the locks goes. Bones crack and burst through flesh; punches go through walls and heads get split. Cool, but it ain't Watchmen. I disliked the fact that he made the heroes superhuman- they swung with the strength of ten bulls and possessed the agility of felines. Only in depicting Rorschach's infiltration did I feel that such traits were in place. The movie also dumbed down the round nature of Rorschach's and the Comedian's personalities. He made Rorschach a crusading hero with 'some faults' while leaving the Comedian to be a complete villain, ignoring his heroic, redeeming qualities (in the book, that is). We don't see much of that in Hollywood, and here was a truly perfect chance to introduce some originality into the shitswamp that is popular media.
What I really hated: Snyder's treatment on Dr. Manhattan. He ruined a character for me. He made him emotional, bringing him down to human level and human critique. In the book, Dr. Manhattan was entirely out of touch by the time the events start rolling. He didn't leave and come back because of his emotions, but because of his frustration with humans; he simply wanted to know more and feed his natural curiosity- working on his machine, discovering things about the universe and time, and marveling at its beauty. He decided to return when he convinced himself that life is a rare enough incidence for his interest to be satisfied. When reading the book, what enthralled me most about him was the fact that he died as a human and was reborn something else- no longer human, no longer feeling love or hate or any direct sympathy. The fact that I didn't know what to make of him or how to assess his personality made him so interesting. That is something we don't see often either. Manhattan is a unique and unforgettable character, and the fact that Snyder corrupted him just ruined my day, and affirmed an odd notion that Hollywood sometimes insists on failing when given a chance to succeed in bringing out something original or intellectually stimulating. The new ending, as well, is way less creative than the squid, and I agree with the OP about the sense the squid makes over the tweaked version.
The gaint space vagina was a fan favorite, in my opinion this movie was the please the fans SO PLEASE THEM!!! Add 15 minutes to explan it, it would be 1 less thing for a bunch of Watchmen nerds (me included) to ramble about and say the movie wasn't a grand protrail of the comic because it was worked with wrong.
I actually think it could have been a budget issue. I mean, all the blue explosions probably did cost a lot of money, but they had a lot of them to begin with. It would probably cost less to replicate the same thing than to design a giant squid.
The main issue I have is the fact that in the graphic novel, there was no figure to scream in Adrian's face "NOOOOOO YOU'RE WROOONG!". I think the moral ambiguity in the graphic novel was a good thing, and we didn't really need Dan feeding us our opinion, even though most would agree that what Adrian did was wrong.
The main issue I have is the fact that in the graphic novel, there was no figure to scream in Adrian's face "NOOOOOO YOU'RE WROOONG!". I think the moral ambiguity in the graphic novel was a good thing, and we didn't really need Dan feeding us our opinion, even though most would agree that what Adrian did was wrong.
I didn't mind the movies ending. I think that if they wanted to include the giant squid they would have had to include the backstory of the scientists creating the squid. All in all it would have easily pushed the movie over the three hour mark. I also agree that there should have been an epic destruction scene.
That being said I much preffered the books ending over the movies. After reading some of my fellow Escapist's posts I now realize some of the plot holes that I initially missed. I think this requires another viewing.
That being said I much preffered the books ending over the movies. After reading some of my fellow Escapist's posts I now realize some of the plot holes that I initially missed. I think this requires another viewing.
Knonsense said:
i must agree, when i was going through those, like, 3 pages of the ruined and bloody New York, i was like OMG. I just was astounded by the image. i definitely don't think people would be laughing if they had that scene in the movie. but i must agree as well that it would of taken longer to explain the giant alien squid.Bakery said:
I thought the film ending worked just was well as the original.... neither are perfect and both resolutions begin to fray at the edges if you examine them too closely.... Ultimately Watchmen, both the film and the book, aren't really about plot or story... They're about characterization, and examining and deconstructing the super-hero archetype.
I think you need to read the book again. I'm re-reading it myself for comparison and contrast with the film, and am finding it much more violent then I recalled....Kikosemmek said: