WatchmenComicMovie.com Forum


Talk about the Watchmen comic book mini-series and film
It is currently Sun Dec 17, 2017 2:33 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 28 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon Apr 11, 2011 12:23 pm 
Offline
Crimebuster

Joined: Fri Oct 02, 2009 8:12 pm
Posts: 44
In chapter when Dr. Manhattan was in the interview with Eye for Eye, I gotta wonder what Doug was trying to get out of Dr. Manhattan? I know it was Adrian's plan to scare the blue dude off with accusations that his presence is causing cancer but what was Doug trying to prove to everyone?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 11, 2011 1:41 pm 
Offline
New Frontiersman
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2008 12:26 pm
Posts: 317
That he has a personal, inherent mistrust of and dislike for what he terms "super-people"... Manhattan included.

The disdain in Roth's line of questioning is all too apparent in Chap. III but if you turn to the supplementary After The Masquerade faux Nova Express article 'written' by Roth which appears at the end of Chap. XI, then you get a real taste of where he's coming from.

Referring to himself within as having "liberal sensibilities", Roth goes on to grill Veidt over those whom he regards as being the right-wing members of Veidt's former "superhero fraternity"... again, Manhattan included. Despite Veidt putting Roth straight on Manhattan's entirely apolitical stance, Roth nonetheless harbours his own staunch views and obviously regards Manhattan as being nothing more than Nixon's personal weapon/ally/pawn who has aided and abetted Tricky Dicky's hold on the presidency for far too long, much to Roth's chagrin. These views simply persist - and no doubt fester and intensify - in the ten years that pass between the Veidt magazine interview and the Manhattan television one.

The man just has no love for "super-people"... and revels in the opportunity to show them up in public as being perhaps not quite so 'super' after all.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 11, 2011 3:12 pm 
Offline
Tired of Earth.
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 3:19 pm
Posts: 8131
Location: 1060 W. Addison St.
also, he's a reporter, and they are pesky sons o bitches.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 11, 2011 6:29 pm 
Offline
...you're locked in here with me!
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 7:53 pm
Posts: 10199
WJK wrote:
also, he's a reporter, and they are pesky sons o bitches.


Image

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 12, 2011 3:19 pm 
Offline
Crimebuster

Joined: Fri Oct 02, 2009 8:12 pm
Posts: 44
Indeed but weren't there other reporters in comics that did this and weren't as 'successful' as Roth? I notice that this seems to mostly appeal to real celebrity personalities in general in our world. I wonder if Mooro wanted to point this out.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 12, 2011 3:34 pm 
Offline
Tired of Earth.
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 3:19 pm
Posts: 8131
Location: 1060 W. Addison St.
GAP wrote:
Indeed but weren't there other reporters in comics that did this and weren't as 'successful' as Roth? I notice that this seems to mostly appeal to real celebrity personalities in general in our world. I wonder if Moore wanted to point this out.


Doug Roth was the only reporter that we saw, not counting the part where tons of reporters ambush Jon.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 12, 2011 4:00 pm 
Offline
New Frontiersman
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2008 12:26 pm
Posts: 317
I think by strict definition we can consider Hector Godfrey of the New Frontiersman to also be a reporter and we see plenty of him, but I personally get the impression that GAP was referring to other reporters that appear in comicdom outside the pages of WATCHMEN?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 12, 2011 4:06 pm 
Offline
Tired of Earth.
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 3:19 pm
Posts: 8131
Location: 1060 W. Addison St.
I'd put Godfrey as more of an editor than a reporter, but I can see what you mean.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 12, 2011 4:18 pm 
Offline
New Frontiersman
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2008 12:26 pm
Posts: 317
Other than the menial dogsbody tasks he gives Seymour, Godfrey is a one-man show at the New Frontiersman; in addition to his usual editorial rants and subjective spleen ventings, he certainly more straightforwardly reports on the disappearance of Max Shea et al and the theft of Robert Deschaines's head from the mortuary.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 12, 2011 4:23 pm 
Offline
Tired of Earth.
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2007 11:01 am
Posts: 8035
Location: Clackamas, OR
Personally, I think it's obvious that Moore was using Roth and Godfrey as a commentary on those who use the power of the press to further their own agenda.

They have diametrically opposing views, yet both take their petty disagreements far too seriously, both are irresponsible with the power they have and both are total idiots.

_________________
This is truly a madhouse. And I'm the lunatic running it. I've spent three years wondering if I should be proud or ashamed.

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 12, 2011 7:55 pm 
Offline
...you're locked in here with me!
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 22, 2008 9:19 pm
Posts: 10658
Location: Arkham, Mass.
Writer Of Wrongs wrote:
Other than the menial dogsbody tasks he gives Seymour, Godfrey is a one-man show at the New Frontiersman; in addition to his usual editorial rants and subjective spleen ventings, he certainly more straightforwardly reports on the disappearance of Max Shea et al and the theft of Robert Deschaines's head from the mortuary.


see, I would call Godfrey more of an Op/Ed guy than a reporter. He doesn't report he events he reports his take on the events, which yes he reports, but not the news. consider a Beck, Maddow, Hannity, or Olberman yes they handle the news but they all put so much of their own take on the matter that to only get your news from them is ridiculous. They aren't paid for the news they are paid for opinion, and I think that's more godfrey's job, not actually reporting on the events.

_________________
@RealSlimCAvery
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 13, 2011 7:58 am 
Offline
New Frontiersman
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2008 12:26 pm
Posts: 317
Dr. Brooklyn wrote:
He doesn't report he (sic) events he reports his take on the events, which yes he reports, but not the news.

Yet in the case of those missing members of the artistic and scientific communities, both statements are true.

Godfrey is seemingly the only publisher to have picked up and run with this story; effectively, to report it: whilst Max Shea adorns the cover of New Frontiersman at the news stand, Nova Express has instead gone with coverage of Nixon's cardiac surgery. Granted, in the article itself we see presented at the end of Chap. VIII, Godfrey uses the story as a platform from which to launch yet another of his signature Commie-hating paranoid rants but, nonetheless, the pure news content is undeniably there. Of course, the delicious irony is the fact that Godfrey - whilst totally oblivious to the full implications of his 'scoop' - has stumbled upon what will ultimately prove to be the single most significant news story in human history to date but, because of the reputation of his right-wing reactionary rag (... as a reliable witness... hardly... "without stain") - no-one cares.

Just as that sole issue of the New Frontiersman sits pinned, alone and unnoticed, to the side of Bernard's news stand just waiting for a certain Mr. Kovaks to come and claim it, then so does Godfrey's journalistic exclusive pass a world preoccupied with impending war by (and understandably so)... but an exclusive nonetheless that, if only it had caught on, may even have compromised Veidt's entire scheme which in turn could have seen Godfrey then perversely elevated to the position of greatest investigative reporter of all time. Assuming, of course, he'd go on to live long enough to receive the accolade before the world died screaming in nuclear holocaust...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 14, 2011 9:43 am 
Offline
...you're locked in here with me!
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 22, 2008 9:19 pm
Posts: 10658
Location: Arkham, Mass.
Writer Of Wrongs wrote:
Dr. Brooklyn wrote:
He doesn't report he (sic) events he reports his take on the events, which yes he reports, but not the news.

Yet in the case of those missing members of the artistic and scientific communities, both statements are true.

Godfrey is seemingly the only publisher to have picked up and run with this story; effectively, to report it: whilst Max Shea adorns the cover of New Frontiersman at the news stand, Nova Express has instead gone with coverage of Nixon's cardiac surgery. Granted, in the article itself we see presented at the end of Chap. VIII, Godfrey uses the story as a platform from which to launch yet another of his signature Commie-hating paranoid rants but, nonetheless, the pure news content is undeniably there. Of course, the delicious irony is the fact that Godfrey - whilst totally oblivious to the full implications of his 'scoop' - has stumbled upon what will ultimately prove to be the single most significant news story in human history to date but, because of the reputation of his right-wing reactionary rag (... as a reliable witness... hardly... "without stain") - no-one cares.

Just as that sole issue of the New Frontiersman sits pinned, alone and unnoticed, to the side of Bernard's news stand just waiting for a certain Mr. Kovaks to come and claim it, then so does Godfrey's journalistic exclusive pass a world preoccupied with impending war by (and understandably so)... but an exclusive nonetheless that, if only it had caught on, may even have compromised Veidt's entire scheme which in turn could have seen Godfrey then perversely elevated to the position of greatest investigative reporter of all time. Assuming, of course, he'd go on to live long enough to receive the accolade before the world died screaming in nuclear holocaust...


I guess I can agree with you here, except for your last line. There was no proof that there was going to be nuclear war, Adrian was just assuming it would happen. In our world there were many times times that the Doomsday clock was ticking away towards midnight, but it has not come yet, there is always a possibility, but that doesn't mean it's inevitable.

One more thing... Is that you Vynson? Is this me?
Image

_________________
@RealSlimCAvery
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 14, 2011 10:42 am 
Offline
New Frontiersman
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2008 12:26 pm
Posts: 317
Dr. Brooklyn wrote:
I guess I can agree with you here, except for your last line. There was no proof that there was going to be nuclear war, Adrian was just assuming it would happen.

... just as there's no proof there wasn't going to be a nuclear war. The subject is eminently debatable, being yet one Mo(o)re quandry that WATCHMEN leaves "...entirely in your hands" as the reader.

Dr. Brooklyn wrote:
In our world there were many times times that the Doomsday clock was ticking away towards midnight, but it has not come yet, there is always a possibility, but that doesn't mean it's inevitable.

Very true. But remember that you write that statement with the benefit of twenty-five year's worth of hindsight since WATCHMEN was created. Back in 1986... things didn't feel quite so secure, trust me.

And not forgetting, of course (as many so often do), all of the "other factors" that Veidt speaks of which embody the "fragility of our world" and which he is also seeking to redress in the long-term via his scheme: boosted international lending rates, debt interest, levelling of the rainforests, nuclear waste... environmental ruin in general, in addition to other issues of - as a species - providing for our old, our sick, our homeless, our chidren's education. Are these problems that, in our world, are similarly just a possibility, the inevitability of which is also ambiguously arguable?

Dr. Brooklyn wrote:
One more thing... Is that you Vynson?

No. Not by a long chalk.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 14, 2011 10:58 am 
Offline
...you're locked in here with me!
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 22, 2008 9:19 pm
Posts: 10658
Location: Arkham, Mass.
Writer of Wrongs wrote:
Are these problems that, in our world, are similarly just a possibility, the inevitability of which is also ambiguously arguable?
True enough, but this raises another question... what kind of carbon foot print does a giant squid have?

Writer Of Wrongs wrote:
Dr. Brooklyn wrote:
One more thing... Is that you Vynson?

No. Not by a long chalk.


........... are you sure?

_________________
@RealSlimCAvery
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 14, 2011 2:25 pm 
Offline
Crimebuster

Joined: Fri Oct 02, 2009 8:12 pm
Posts: 44
Curiosity Inc. wrote:
Personally, I think it's obvious that Moore was using Roth and Godfrey as a commentary on those who use the power of the press to further their own agenda.

They have diametrically opposing views, yet both take their petty disagreements far too seriously, both are irresponsible with the power they have and both are total idiots.


I can see I need to reread again, Godfrey and Roth are pretty much like some people I see in the real world. do you you think that it can be tied to Fox News of all stations? I wish I knew more individual reporters for references.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 14, 2011 2:58 pm 
Offline
...you're locked in here with me!
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 22, 2008 9:19 pm
Posts: 10658
Location: Arkham, Mass.
GAP wrote:
I can see I need to reread again, Godfrey and Roth are pretty much like some people I see in the real world. do you you think that it can be tied to Fox News of all stations? I wish I knew more individual reporters for references.


Roth = MSNBC
Godfrey = Fox

_________________
@RealSlimCAvery
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 14, 2011 4:05 pm 
Offline
Tired of Earth.
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2007 11:01 am
Posts: 8035
Location: Clackamas, OR
Those aren't the only ones either, by a long shot.

Politically motivated journalism is nothing new. Journalists were spinning stories for political influence as far back as Benjamin Franklin's days.

_________________
This is truly a madhouse. And I'm the lunatic running it. I've spent three years wondering if I should be proud or ashamed.

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 17, 2011 9:58 pm 
Offline
...you're locked in here with me!
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 22, 2008 9:19 pm
Posts: 10658
Location: Arkham, Mass.
Curiosity Inc. wrote:
Those aren't the only ones either, by a long shot.


Oh, not at all, it's just that those are the two prominent examples of a conservative and a liberal station.

_________________
@RealSlimCAvery
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 18, 2011 3:27 am 
Offline
Government-Sponsored Weirdo
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 16, 2008 8:39 am
Posts: 7191
Location: Everywhere, Everywhen, UK.
i was just wondering, is Nova Express owned/published by Veidt?

it also only just occured to me that the 2 major news publications mentioned in Watchmen are Nova Express (meaning new, but also implying the explosion of a star, and fast moving) and New Frontiersman (again having New in the title, and a frontiersman being an explorer) so you have 2 publications, one implying that it focuses on fast up to date news the other on newly explored news, but perhaps slower and more in depth.

_________________
We're all actors, Laurie. I'm just an actor who read the script. :?
ImageImageImage


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 28 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
[ Time : 0.100s | 11 Queries | GZIP : Off ]