WatchmenComicMovie.com Forum

I'm sure a topic like this is a spit in the face to most of you here... so I'll gladly take it.

The movie did a few things different, and honestly they were for the better.

* Nigh Owl's suit - much more practical and realistic. Given the high-tech Owl Ship, it would make little sense for Dan to not spend the same amount of time on his costume.

* Adrian's plan - the angle with Dr. Manhattan is much more realistic and logical than building a giant squid. Peopel already knew Dr. Manhattan's abilities. They feared them in a way. Even in a straight up comparison, he is far more dangerous of an enemy compared to a mere alien squid.

* Comedian - I think the movie version is just done better. You see a side that you can't get in a comic book. Jeffrey Dean Morgan ads certain small personality traits that make the character feel more complete. Plus making him older is a good idea. A 22-year old trying to rape a 20-year old is more believable than a 16-year old teen.


Well, I think that's enough to start a fire... Let's have you all rise up and toot that a movie can never surpass the book in any way...

I hate to feed the troll, but meh.

* Clearly meant to reflect the tech-savvy side of Batman that Nite Owl is based on. However, the idea in the comic is showing that while Dan Dreiberg is a mechanical genius, he is socially awkward (and thus impotent unless wearing his cheesy-looking costume, which is still just as cheesy in the movie). Not to mention, most of us like/accept his costume change.

* The cancer frame was only a small part in Veidt's plan. Sure, it seemed somewhat logical to frame him for attacking the world in anger, but ultimately fails in comparison to the comic's ending. Why would Dr. Manhattan attack the Earth just because they believed he is radioactive and gave several people cancer? The idea of some being from another planet randomly attacking New York City is a lot scarier than something you already know. Come to think of it, did you even read the same Watchmen we all did?

* There was plenty of the Comedian from the comic that didn't make it into the film that made him a lot better. Sure, maybe visually he was an improvement, but in terms of character development the comic beats out the film. I don't know where you get that age span thing from, but what are you talking about? Rape is rape, no matter what age. Do you know what a pedophile is?

Also, that last statement, about a movie never surpassing a book, you're quite wrong about that. I can only think of Fight Club and 300 for example right now.

_________________

And that's without mentioning Moore's implications that Veidt was a psychopath, and that his plan was a twisted, bizarre recreation of Alexander's campaigns.

In that same line of thought, the squid is much more effective in representing the message that humanity does not destroy itself when it is destroying something else, in this case, "the alien invaders". At the same time, it also says something about the ideas that support both violence and war, that they are as much of a hoax as Veidt's plan.

_________________

But yeah, WJK makes a valid point about how most of us like the change. The same reason Batman isn't shown wearing greay and black in the movies

_________________
@RealSlimCAvery

Dude, you're THE ONLY one I know that always makes the connection to Blue Beetle

_________________

Right, when I actually read some Blue Beetle stuff, I'll be sure to credit him more appropriately.

_________________

I really hate to agree with Brooklyn, but it's a fair comparison considering the Blue Beetle has tons of tech and Nite Owl is, y'know, based on him.

But they most likely had Batman in mind too when creating the character.

_________________
"The world is a fine place and worth fighting for." I agree with the second part.

"There's a cello in your house now."

Aw c'mon, Brooklyn can be right too, almost never mind you, but he still can be

Although I have to admit that I've only heard him making the connection because I haven't heard Alan Moore saying it out loud like with the other characters, but then again, he never exactly said Nite-Owl and Rorschach were interpretations of Batman either, that doesn't mean that the connections aren't there, as we all know.

_________________

Actually... Alan Moore made the connection first...

Go look at Ted Kords beetle Ship



nd here's another fan's edit



hmmmm...

_________________
@RealSlimCAvery

Moore and DC have both said MANY times that all of the characters in the story were going to be DC's recently accquired Charlton characters, but once they saw how radical Moore's ideas were they told him to change the characters to original ones instead.

_________________
Say, Doc, did I ever tell you I'm the only metal that's liquid at room temperature?

that doesn't count though... because I'm always wrong

But honestly though, other than basic archetype Blue Beetlw is nowhere to be found in Dan, Dan is a sad sack and Ted is a jokster.

Found this, btw

_________________
@RealSlimCAvery

The ending, definitely.

http://www.watchmencomicmovie.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=3971&hilit=

Thought the OP might be interested.

The movie ending was better than the comic book. Hybrid mutated octopus brain teleported to Times Square? A hard pill to swallow. It makes sense to outcast Jon- after all, he is done with humanity and this galaxy for that matter. The movie dovetailed it well. I was surprised to see that beast in the motion comic- I always thought (haven't read it in a quarter century) that Ozzy nuked all major cities anyway.

Veidt nuking all major cities wouldn't make sense since he was trying to prevent that from happening in the first place.

_________________


"Heard them Walthers like to jump some" "As will you, with one in your elbow."

He was trying to prevent the absolute end of the world by nuking all the major cities, it does make sense.

_________________

Wouldn't there have been large scale fall out? In the book he destroys one city, that makes a message. the movie having him take out cities all over the place is getting back to the American philosophy in Vietnam "We had to destroy the village to save it"

_________________
@RealSlimCAvery

Your point ?

_________________

I'm saying that in the movie he was responsible for the very thing he was trying to prevent. Bringing it back to Vietnam, the american soldiers that burnt villages were instructed to because that way the Viet cong couldn't retake the village, so to them they saved the village, but in reality they destroyed the village themselves so it didn't matter if the VC or NVA came back... the damage was done.

_________________
@RealSlimCAvery

How is that any different from what he did in the comic ? He killed millions and yet he claimed to save much more than that, the only difference with the movie is that he just killed more people to save more.

Besides, that ending had to be done if Doctor Manhattan was to be the new target, the new enemy, if Veidt destroyed New York only and blamed it on Doctor Manhattan, then everybody would've thought Doctor Manhattan just turned on the US government, the way Snyder did the ending was exactly as it had to be done and carried almost the same meaning as in the comic.

EDIT: There AYB, you happy now ?

_________________

That post is really fucking confusing when you read Manhattan as another name for New York...

_________________