>I wanted to kind of make this like, 'Yeah, this is what Batman would be in the real world'. But I had forgotten that actually to a lot of comic fans, that smelling, not having a girlfriend—these are actually kind of heroic! So actually, sort of, Rorschach became the most popular character in Watchmen. I meant him to be a bad example. But I have people come up to me in the street saying, "I am Rorschach! That is my story!' And I'll be thinking: 'Yeah, great, can you just keep away from me, never come anywhere near me again as long as I live'?
Many other exampoles, Tyler Durden, Ken etc.
I'm starting to think the anons who constantly b***h about chuds on this board might be mentally ill.
>cut their dicks off and say they're women
What gave you that impression?
it's pol shills trying to play both sides
mindbroken
it doesn’t even make sense. what does it have to do with cannibalistic humanoid underground dwellers?
Projecting is what they do best
Reminder that picrel are the people who call "chud"
>top row, third from left
would break with my big chud wiener
Funny how most of them look exactly like what they're calling out. Really makes you realize that troons were chuds before transitioning. Also makes me wonder how many chuds here will end trooning out some day
The incel to troony pipeline
You guys know chud is used pretty much exclusively ironically here right? No one is seriously calling other people chuds on Cinemaphile. I'm not even sure chapocells use it anymore.
I just call them subhumans. Way more accurate and fun term.
I’m starting to think it’s bait
Anyone who uses the word chud on Cinemaphile dot org is false flag baiting for responses or is so irony poisoned they've started using it seriously
Not even redditors use it anymore
they're trannies so it kind of comes with the territory. however you do have a decent number of numales too.
they're the kind of feminized men who feel threatened by masculine characters
>Fight Club became a key text for a contingent of dissatisfied white men that we might call the “manosphere”: “incels”; neo‑Nazi fitness clubs; the Proud Boys (which the Southern Poverty Law Centre once described as an “‘alt-right’ fight club”); avowed misogynists and male supremacists in the Andrew Tate mould.
>“I’m not responsible for how people interpret things,” says Fincher. The Fight Club being consumed by today’s aggrieved manosphere is not the same as the film that flopped on its box office release in 1999, or the one that became a campus hit on DVD, he says: “Language evolves. Symbols evolve.” But it has still become a touchstone for the far right, I suggest. “OK, fine,” he replies, seeming slightly exasperated. “It’s one of many touchstones in their lexicography.”
>How does he feel about that? “We didn’t make it for them, but people will see what they’re going to see in a Norman Rockwell painting, or [Picasso’s] Guernica.”
>He is implying that it might just be in the eye of the beholder, but Fight Club was overtly tapping into this vein of resentful, disempowered masculinity, wasn’t it? “It’s impossible for me to imagine that people don’t understand that Tyler Durden is a negative influence,” he says. “People who can’t understand that, I don’t know how to respond and I don’t know how to help them.”
kek the harder they try to flanderize their bogeyman the better they make them look
>n-n-no you weren't supposed to interpret it that way
Always love when these fart-huffing "artists" get absolutely dabbed on and there's nothing they can do
Fincher isn't the real villain in that post
it's disgusting how these journalists keep pestering these artists. Fascism is the self-defense reaction of art.
The thing about Tyler Durdens in the real world, is they are just cool charismatic people that people like, and they don't usually form terrorist rings and blow up buildings.
That was basically a strawman.
>don't you even think about reclaiming your masculinity, or this is gunna happen!
It isn't. More realistically you end up as one of those men who gets really into fitness and outdoors stuff, which is good.
>More realistically you end up as one of those men who gets really into fitness and outdoors stuff, which is good.
Don't worry, they hate those too.
>but Fight Club was overtly tapping into this vein of resentful, disempowered masculinity, wasn’t it?
the author overtly acknowledging that men have a valid reason (disempowerment) to be resentful. The lack of self awareness is frustrating.
>OH NO PEOPLE WHO AREN'T ME HAVE VALID GRIEVANCES AND ARE EXPRESSING THEM IN A HEALTHY ARTISTIC OUTLET!!!! THIS CAN ONLY END WITH ME IN A GAS CHAMBER!!!
>NO I WILL NOT CONSIDER YOUR GRIEVANCES WITH AN HONEST AND OPEN MIND YOU ARE LE NAZI DOUBLE PLUS UNGOOD YOU ARE A PROBLEM TO BE SOLVED!!!!
its honestly an infuriating interview probly gonna put up a thread about it some other day
only if you post the author's home address because I would like to beat him with a pool cue until he has a detached retina.
I do appreciate that the interviewer kept pressing and pointing out that Fight Club is 100% written to relate to disenfranchised young men and portray violent rebellion against the status quo as cool. Fricking Fincher sounds so slimy in this, just take responsibility for what you wrote you homosexual.
How can i find this interview?
Probably copy pasting the text into google you mouth-breather
Why interview fincher over this when he didn't even come up with the idea? Ask chuck whatever what it akl meant
The writer is a lot easier to defend given the real ending in the book. The protagonist gets locked up in a mental asylum and keeps hearing the staff whisper to him that they know who he is and are waiting for him to break out, and you're left as the reader to guess if he's really some revolutionary or just an insane motherfricker.
Because Chuck would mop the floor with this idiot. Have you ever listened to him speak? He's a born orator.
>Guys stop thinking Tyler Durden is cool
>S-stop it
>IM TRYING TO HELP YOU
>THIS IS IMPOSSIBLE FOR ME TO UNDERSTAND
>FACIST FRICKING CHUD NAZIS
>make character a normal human being in terms of power
>his cause is simply cleaning up the scum of society rather than childish utopianism
>give him an unshakeable moral code that he refuses to betray even in the face of death
>pit him against a megolamaniac mass-murderer and an autistic inhuman demi-god
>be surprised that people like him the most
is moore moronic? who else is the reader going to like?
no you see his commitment to his ideals is supposed to make him "dumb" and "bad" because he won't give humanity its perfect peace built upon a lie. he's le unlikable manchild!
i liked the funny rapist man
Everyone liked the funny rapist man. I loved the part where he blew that asiatics head off with his 1911.
>who else is the reader going to like?
Own Man.
>dabbles in vigilantism when he's young and naive
>realizes early that on that isn't helping anything
>gets his shit together and contributes to society by being stable and sane instead.
>even gets to frick the hot chick at the end.
owl man and blue man cuck out in the end. rorscasch's eternal defiance, even against fate, is actually heroic even though Moore wants to call it stupid. He undermines his own point by having Rorschach's notes reach the newspaper in the end too, meaning blonde man's plan may or may not have failed.
That's how Rorshach sees it, yes, but isn't a bad thing to be open to other perspectives.
"The mark of the immature man is that he wants to die nobly for a cause, while the mark of the mature man is that he wants to live humbly for one."
The mark of the slave is to do what they say, own nothing, and eat the bugs.
They don't want you to eat bugs. They want you to unalive yourself. Becoming an extremist is playing right into their hands. All you need to be brave is to simply tell the truth.
> Becoming an extremist is playing right into their hands.
what is an extremist? and what would be "extremism" here?
A chud that votes for Trump.
>Trump
Rent free
Chuds hate Trump though because he supports based Israel
a nice quote but it may have just been a coward's cope. we don't have a shortage of losers getting older
Are you sure you want to stand by that quote?
Owl-man is Moore's self insert. He thinks he's normal and cool and just had a blue collar career making funny comics. Of course his self insert fricks his hot colleague. Moore wanted to frick his hot colleagues.
While that may be true, it's kind of obvious Moore hasn't ever had a real job, or had to work with normal people, or even knows an actual vigilante.
It's why he has to debase...he literally doesn't understand humans, but does understand paint-by-colors and his own weird, perverse fetishes.
The other claim is how he is some kind of philosopher or bar for imaginary characters he apparently doesn't even understand either, that he created, that he gets mad over when someone else makes more money with than he did.
>or even knows an actual vigilante.
Where the frick do you live for you to know a actual vigilante?
I saw the director's cut as a teen without any context and came away thinking rorschach is an idealist that all men should strive to be like.
I also agree with him, a society built on lies is foul and shouldn't be tolerated.
In this world you're either a liar or someone who tells the truth.
>give him an unshakeable moral code that he refuses to betray even in the face of death
The media literacy among people today is abysmal. Rorschach is a walking hypocrite who fails to live up to his own code and kills himself not because of some stand but because he can’t handle admitting his binary black or white worldview is fundamentally flawed
>he can’t handle admitting his binary black or white worldview is fundamentally flawed
Because it isn't.
It is. Obviously, it is. Even if you believe a black and white mindset is valid, his version of it was wrong.
You keep saying that and calling him hypocrit but so far you have presented no arguments
If being on the side of the only character willing to stand against mass murder is stupid then call me the biggest moron in the world because frick you
But he doesn’t mind mass murder. He thinks nuking Japan twice was okay. He’s just mad that a person he doesn’t like did it in current day.
The dude, in story, condones mass murder.
He condoned the nuking of Japan, which is a lot more complex than "mass murder".
There was a war on, for one thing.
nuking japan was entirely the fault of their adherence to honor.
when your allies have quit and the enemy is wielding big guns, asking for your unconditional surrender, you do not say 'no' or 'we have some conditions'
>which is a lot more complex than "mass murder"
Amerilard sighted.
>B-BUT IT MASS MURDERING COUNTLESS INNOCENT WOMEN AND CHILDREN WAS A COMPLEX AND NOT BLACK AND WHITE ISSUE!
Rorschach's entire deal is supposed to be binary morality. Black or white, with no in-between. Yet he condones the murdering off innocents to achieve a greater goal. It isn't any different from the Ozy situation.
I'm not America.
It's just things are complex. Do you keep sending men for land invasions, which leads to the further sacrifice of your own men, or do you drop a big bomb?
The Japanese were asked to surrender and they didn't.
I'm sorry you want everything to be simple and tied up with a neat bow. It just isn't sometimes.
The point is to look at it through the lense of Rorschach. His self-proclaimed idealogy is black and white, with no leeway. Yet he condones the murder of innocents because he was told his dad was a glowie who worked for Truman at the time. It's fair the comedian gets away with rape, because in his mind the comedian is an american hero so he gets leeway. These both directly contradict the crux of his entire existence in his own mind. People who glorify or praise Rorschach for being some staunch unmovable force of set morality don't even understand the character.
Yes, I fully "get" Rorschach.
What you're doing here is being Rorschach, ironically.
A bombing during a war, and an act of terrorism by a lone megalomanic are not the same thing.
>well they're both bombings. That's the same, right? Black and white
No.
>But it was a war!
That’s pure rationalisation. Both events involve murdering civilians in the name of stopping a conflict and justifying it by saying “well more people would have died if we didn’t kill those civilians”.
By definition deaths in a war are not murder, because they aren't unlawful killings.
Intentionally killing innocents in war is still considered murder.
Targeting civilians is a war crime.
In theory.
Victors decide who is a criminal.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_war_crimes
The world was on the verge of nuclear apocalypse due to the cold war never having its tensions lowered at any point thanks to US annexing Vietnam etc., which is then stopped by the fake squid attack. It’s the same thing but you want to be a pedantic ass as cope.
Adrian essentially nuked a peaceful city, before the war was even on. It's not the same thing.
In reality we know the cold war amounted to a lot of hot air, so it all looks a bit silly in retrospect.
Entirely irrelevant. The US nukes largely killed civilians. The soviets were rolling tanks in Europe and the world was on the brink of falling to all out nuclear war. The entire fricking premise revolves around open warfare only being stopped by the presence of Dr. Manhattan.
>Also it looks silly because we ended the cold war
Well lucky for us Alan Moore details extensively how the world of Watchmen differs considerably from our history and has massive world politics changing events that directly escalate the arms race and gives no room for tensions to cool, you fricking illiterate moron.
>walking hypocrite
what exactly could make him a "walking hypocrite"? he lived by his code all the way until he died by it.
He murders and he likes to murder. If there were no villains left, he'd find a new reason to murder.
>[HEADCANON]
RorCHAD BROKE you.
So, your assessment of his character is based on a prediction of his behavior in a hypothetical scenario? Fascinating.
He starts the story by daydreaming about the entire city burning down and him personally refusing to help the people dying around him. Yet he’s meant to care about the dead people?
He doesn’t care at all that the Comedian is a rapist. Even though his career as a vigilante is inspired by a rape and murder of a woman.
He kills himself because he can’t handle morally grey world, not because he is taking a stand. He literally takes off his “real face” and asks to be killed. That’s giving up, a compromise. A man of conviction would have tried to fight Manhattan.
You have the media literacy skill of a child.
>A man of conviction would have tried to fight Manhattan.
A moron would've done that.
Rorschach is an insane hobo with clear mental issues.
> He literally takes off his “real face” and asks to be killed. That’s giving up, a compromise. A man of conviction would have tried to fight Manhattan.
yeah except he mailed his finding to journalist before even coming there
>You have the media literacy skill of a child.
<:o
SHUT THE FRICK UP ABOUT "MEDIA LITERACY" FRICKING LIBERAL GOBBLEYDOOK.
>media literacy
gb2 twitter
>his cause is simply cleaning up the scum of society rather than childish utopianism
Rorschach is merely picking off insects considering the clusterfrick that is their world. Worse than childish, he's ineffective in the grand scheme.
>give him an unshakeable moral code that he refuses to betray even in the face of death
Moore liked that a lot too.
>pit him against a megolamaniac mass-murderer and an autistic inhuman demi-god
It was more Ozymandias vs everyone, and Ozymandias won. Evil won.
>be surprised that people like him the most
More like disappointed at all the adults that hero worship him.
>He undermines his own point
Given Tales of the Black Freighter, that was his point.
his point is that Rorschach is right? I know the black freighter tale is an allegory but was the crazed man really Ozymandias? That's really cool if true I did not see it that way originally
Most of the characters are right in some ways, wrong in others. Moore has stated that Rorschach is the closest to being the hero of the story (though technically a story with no heroes) despite also noting how mentally unstable he is.
Ozymandias technically saved the world, but what he did was beyond heinous and is going to blow up in his face like a nuke at some later date.
The Comedian was a brutal motherfricker, but he spoke truths like a Shakespearean fool.
I know. I was talking about the bout at the end when all the major players show up. He defeats all of them right there, the ones he didn't kill, at least. Even the ones that seem to have escaped defeat and death were hurt in some way.
You fool. All Ozymandias gets is the realization that everything he accomplished was in vain. It's literally in the name dude.
>Rorschach is merely picking off insects considering the clusterfrick that is their world
because he's just a man, not a 300iq trillionaire or naked blue deity, and he's a hero
The 300 IQ trillionaire is just a man too.
>It was more Ozymandias vs everyone, and Ozymandias won. Evil won.
I love when morons self-filter. no he explicitly and objectively did not win. Rorschach's journal going to the frontiersman at the end tells us that the plot is ultimately in vain.
see
>It was more Ozymandias vs everyone, and Ozymandias won. Evil won.
Ozymandias literally doesn't win.
>literally named after an Egyptian king mocked for his hubris
>Manhattan who can see the future says Ozy doesn't win
>book ends with Rorschach's journal being published
who can see the future says Ozy doesn't win
Does he though?
I thought Manhattan's comments were more of a nebulous "Time erodes all" kind of deal. Like a "Yeah, you forestalled doomsday but how long do you think that'll last?"
Na he literally shows him a nuke going off, implying that it's not a nebulous far future but rather an impending one
>he literally shows him a nuke going off
wat?
Got the scene in question?
Cause here's the one I'm thinking of.
look at the 6th panel. that is a mushroom cloud
no that's manhattan poofing away. ozy wants closure from manhattan because he sees him as his only real confidant/moral authority and manhattan pretty much just tells him 'war never changes'. if he didn't agree with ozy's plan he wouldn't have killed rorschach.
>that's manhattan poofing away
???
It doesn't "have" to poof away, little moron
>Just poofing!
>But I'm going to completely ignore the fact that manhattan deliberately, and very clearly, walk just to that spot prior taking off!
How does it feel to have a larvae brain
he stands where the sun is and poofs, possibly signifying that just because theres peace now doesnt mean that the future is permanently saved. do you just really need ozy to be wrong?
>He's talking about the heat death of the universe of course!
You are a midwit, my friend
The comic is absolutely on the nose on absolutely everything that shows you, do you really, truly think the ending is a giant gotcha "Haha you didn't win because the sun will run out of energy someday ;)"
Get real
>do you really, truly think the ending is a giant gotcha "Haha you didn't win because the sun will run out of energy someday ;)"
Yes.
Seriously, that's the type of mind frame that Dr. Manhattan operates in, and he's literally talking about restarting life in his own solar system.
Also, you called it a literal nuke, are you seriously claiming that Manhattan showed Ozy a vision of the sun getting nuked?
>do you really, truly think the ending is a giant gotcha "Haha you didn't win because the sun will run out of energy someday ;)"
>Yes.
I have nothing more to tell you
That's okay, because I'll go ahead and explain it more to you.
Dr. Manhattan is not telling Ozy that he failed. He's telling him that the success was meaningless in any scale that he actually operates him. Ozy is asking questions about years and centuries while Manhattan is working in eons.
He doesn't actually care enough about Ozy's question to give him a answer he'd be happy with.
Did you ignore the second part of my post?
It's a model of the solar system.
You can pull meaning from it however you want, but if you try to call it literal then you're going to get weird conclusions that don't really add up with what you're claiming.
Namely that it doesn't imply any real timeframe.
>story that is known for symbolism and is a visual medium and was known for moore writing a moronicly detailed script just happens to have manhattan walk to a specific spot and just happen to make a mushroom cloud while teleporting away
its obviously intentional and symbolic and supposed to look like a mushroom cloud
>and supposed to look like a mushroom cloud
I'm not arguing with that.
What I'm saying is that you're misunderstanding the symbolism itself.
>a guy named after the atom bomb with the symbol for a hydrogen bomb on his forehead shows a dude a mushroom cloud while telling him he didn't win
>no it must be symbolic of the sun burning out reee
>symbol for a hydrogen bomb on his forehead
You... You realize how the sun works, right?
Yes. That's because the sun exploding is the real doomsday clock that earth has to deal with, and Manhattan is the only "human" who doesn't have to worry about it.
I think that's just him poofing away in smoke.
Plus that's a model of the solar system. If you try to take any meaning out of it, then the time scale that Manhattan is referencing could be anywhere between now and the sun exploding.
>who else is the reader going to like?
That's actually not the point of Watchmen.
Maybe you like Night Owl, because he's an endearing Boob, but you also pity him.
One of the main aspects of Rorschach is that his a psychopathic hypocrite, lol.
>psychopath
Definitely mentally disturbed. We saw this during the glimpses of Walter's childhood. He was screwed in the head, and the shit he saw while working as a cape made him even worse.
>hypocrite
No. Rorschach was a lot of things but he was never a hypocrite. He fricking let Manhattan kill him before he let himself become a hypocrite. How could you miss the point of his death so fricking hard anon?
the fact that he lets the comedian live after all the people he raped shows that rorschach's "unshakeable morals" are a larp
I don't think the comedian raped a lot of people. He probably fricked a lot of women under less than honest pretenses. Rorschach wasn't around when he tried to rape Sally Jupiter.
But yeah generally you don't stab your coworkers in the back. It's bad for business and no one wants to work with a guy that does that.
I think if the Comedian was raping women left and right Rorschach would cut his dick off.
it wasn't rape, she clearly wanted it.
if more men raped the women who clearly want it even though they "say" they don't, the world would be a better place.
same goes for setting fire to ghettos
Emailing this to your boss
Hi, I just received your email with a link to this thread about one of my employees. Could you show me which post is his, as I am unfamiliar with this website concept. Thanks.
P.S. redit is a lot easier to navigate.
Thanks
we're all hypocrites
Well he is a commie so yes
> cleaning up the scum of society rather than childish utopianism
do you not see the irony here?
> who else is the reader going to like?
Ozymandias, obviously.
>unshakeable moral code
he breaks random people's fingers just because they hang out in a seedy bar. you just like Rorschach because he is a power fantasy.
he's literally me bros
Fallibility is compelling and characters with ardent principals that are at odds with the status quo are paramount to conflict and interesting stories. It's hard not to root for the pothole over the car because I don't think anyone watches for a smooth ride.
>make admirable vigilante character
>NOOO YOU SHOULD HATE THIS GUY
what a dumbass homosexual
>Rorsach hates rapists, murderers and government workers
>Has a soft spot for Comedian despite being everything he hates.
>Is the only person who genuinely had nothing bad to say about The Comedian.
???
what does "having a soft spot" mean here? don't think rorschach knew about the rape and the Comedian was honest about being a murderer
He is the only Watchman who wants to solve his murderer. No one else cares about The Comedian's death.
Rorschach admired the Comedian as seen in this page. This dialogue wasn't in the movie because Snyder replaced Rorschach with Nite-Owl in this scene for some reason.
Everyone knew about Comedian's attempted rape of the first Silk Spectre because it was in the first Nite-Owl's book. Rorschach dismissed the allegation as "speculation on the moral lapses of a man who died serving his country". He was basically willfully ignorant of it. And he probably didn't know about the pregnant girl in Vietnam because only Manhattan witnessed that he and probably didn't care to tell anyone.
look, Adrian was probably a homosexual so anything Rorschach does to him is automatically justified, mkay
>NIXON IS.... LE BAD!!!!
honestly, leftoids like Moore, or the Simpsons guys, seething and malding about Nixon through the 80's and into the 90's is pretty much maximum assimpacted concussive trauma I've seen prior to Trump. hell the Simpsons guys kept right on seething about Nixon through the 2000's with Futurama, where their Nixon seethe blended seamlessly into their Bush v gore seethe.
zoomer here, is it really seething at nixon or just hating all republicans?
>I'm a millennial born in the late 80s and I recall from a young age noticing a pattern where modern republican presidents were always painted to look stupid/unhinged/incompetent in media whereas democrat presidents were always made to look like hip, smart, party animals. I remember shows like the simpsons and robot chicken turning nixon, bush sr and bush jr into evil/moronic caricatures while democrats like bill clinton and obama were made to look cool.
left-wing boomers have a particular hatred of Nixon
you know that's a good question. I think it's a kind of chicken and egg thing. they probably endlessly seethed at Nixon because he was a republican and then used Nixon as a post hoc justification for their political bigotry. but yeah you're right pretty much anyone on the right makes them seethe. they seethed about bush senior pretty hard for at least one episode (where bush senior is Homer's new neighbor). Gerald Ford got a pass tho ¯_(ツ)_/¯
I believe Ford was on the Warren Commission, which cleared the CIA of any involvement of the Kennedy assassination. Honestly, you would think they would hate the guy for that. Most beloved Democratic president in the history of the party, and Ford participated in the obfuscation of responsibility for it.
Why did they not like Nixon anyway? Didn't he push to end the Vietnam war?
I know he got caught doing some shit, but they all do that.
Is it sheer naivety? They all thought politics is honest back then?
>Why did they not like Nixon anyway?
He basically tried to end the Vietnam war early but also present a tough face by killing as many people as possible. Like, that was explicitly his goal. Get out, but beforehand kill a few million to not lose face.
Didn't bother reading your assertion beyond the title.
My favorite character was The Comedian. He's the only one who cared about the dregs Voight considered expendable. He was an all round hero. It broke my heart at the time that no-one liked him. I identified with him, mainly being sentimental, patriotic, having faith, doing things behind the scenes, whatever. He probably gets recognition now, by buttholes, idolised for being on top, pretend hardcore wienersuckers into everything but trying to save the world. They get it as an excuse for their dirty deeds, they're bad boys too. More cowards carrying signs adopting another style, what are we: traitors, when do we want impose our rule: always. We.
I like individuals. Freedom. Ideals imagined, ascended to. The standard secured despite everything. No excuses. Always loyal. Stay that way and every attack on it is foreign. Sinister stuff projects it's unassailable, sometimes an unexpected fight back is enough to demonstrate a change in authority, a chance to change, be something, stand for more than a spread of ruination. Know at least there is an alternative. Especially for the audience of yourself.
>Rorschach's journal, Wednesday, 27 December, 2023
Of course Cinemaphile admires the rapist.
>be Alan Moore
>write another rape fantasy
>get called a genius for it
Is that really the take away for rorschach from the movie, that he has no girlfriend these people have fricking brain rot, another example would be Patrick Bateman but I dont think I could relate to him
People are drawn to symbols. If you make a strawman you risk accidentally making a symbol and having people say "Hey that hero who really hates criminals and is unflinching in his ideals is really inspiring".
>make a character who absolutely hates criminals because of what they do to society and doesn't give a shit about the stupid personal problems of his fellow masks
>all he wants to do is make the city a better place by using the same terrorizing/violent tactics criminals use against them
>the only one to give a shit about Comedian's murder, kicks off the whole story and figures out the entire plot
>doesn't go along with the moronic giant squid plan and wants the world to know who actually killed those millions of people
>wins in the end anyway despite getting vaporized
yeah, why do people like Rorschach?
Honestly, if you write a supposedly "bad" character and the audience doesn't recognise it as such it's not the audience's fault. You simply suck as a writer.
>noooo you're supposed to accept evil!!!
why are they like this
Funny how they never pick the obvious successful chad characters like Ash Williams as their role model, despite demanding for more characters like him. It's always the underdogs like the guy from Drive
Ash Williams is a blundering fool though? Literally why would Ash Williams be your role model?
Cuz he's cool and independent and gets tons of pussy and everyone like him!
All the women he meets end up as zombies, and it's usually his fault.
That's because actual chads don't watch movies, they only watch sports and the news. What you refer as the underdog is what film buffs view as "chad"
Ash is a fricking moron and a selfish piece of shit though
Because being a failure is a core part of their identity.
>Never compromise in the face of Armageddon
>It's wrong to kill all these innocent people for a perceived greater good
>But also Truman was an American hero who was completely justified in dropping A bombs on Japan and killing countless innocent women and children, because I think my Dad was a G-man that worked for Truman
Crazy how misunderstood Rorschach is as character. I blame Snyder for that one, mostly.
I find worrying that adults dont understand the character of Rosrcharch. I understand if you are a teen and you fastread the comic so you find the character like he is some Batman who gets shit done but if you are an adult??? Jesus
Because you’re too stupid to understand those are the bad guys and you think being an asocial moron is comical and endearing when it isn’t.
desu, regardless of how much I "get" Rorschach, and how he was crazy and short sighted and whatever, I do still dislike criminals more.
I do think a real life Rorschach who made it his mission to clear away petty criminals would basically be making the world a better place.
If you disagree, you're a bad influence on society.
Why is everyone assuming that everyone read the comic? I didn't even watch the movie or read the comic but I thought he was a cool character. Is it really so hard to believe that most of us don't give a shit about the details of some comic book and just think that man with a morphing rorschach mask and a grapple gun is pretty fricking cool? The "you're trapped in here with me" line is also pretty badass.
I get you man. I hardly remember the movie. I even have the grapic novel and don't remember shit about it beyond it being very pretty. All I know is Rorshach has many based quotes.
Based face value art appreciators
Literally nobody is saying he has a bad visual design. Are you schizophrenic?
I'm saying I don't give a frick what the ultra-lib creator intended, they're usually mindbroken and have no understanding of their creations anyways. He's a cool looking character and he acts badass, all the big scenes on youtube make him look really fricking dope. Did you see the shit where he threw the fryer oil on the other prisoner? That shit is crazy. I don't give a frick that he smells or some lame commentary about the dangers of vigilantes or whatever other tired shit they're talking about.
>LE CHUD LE CHUD LE CHUD
Frick off back to Twitter
Cba. Just give me link
https://www.theguardian.com/film/2023/oct/27/david-fincher-on-hitmen-incels-and-spider-mans-dumb-origin-story
thanks
>chuds
WTF is that? You can't create something from your discord echo chamber then use it on the internet hoping people would get it
Why is the word jot filtered like s*y is?
Lack of irony. They also do not invent baby words like chud because they do not autocensor themselves 24/7. This is why most undesirables live away from globohomosexual system which punishes honesty by design. Naturally, these types became very rare due to ubiquitous nature of the system and are basically just a fantasy of those too define things the way they truly are.
>Character is named Rorschach
>Creator is shocked when others have a different interpretation of him than he did
I think he's more shocked that people ignored (or haven't even read about) at least half of the actual character and just cherry-picked a couple of things they thought were cool.
Somebody should tell Alan Moore about the Touhou fandom.
I unironically blame Zack Snyder
>Nuke japan
>Nooooo they were civilians you monster
>Invade japan
>Civilians suicide charge you
If they didn't want their c**t nuked they shouldn't have bombed Pearl Harbor
Nah that didn't deserve a nuke. Mindbreaking your population into a fascist cult that will die for the emperor deserves a nuke.
If America didn't want to see New York destroyed, shouldn't have started the cold war.
>So here's a guy with moral convictions who follows them while all his friends stand around whining that the ends justify the means and people need to be lied to for their own good. They kill him.
>STOP LIKING THIS FRICKER! LIKE THE WHINY HOLIER-THAN-THOU MURDERING CONSPIRATORS!
>So here's a guy with moral convictions who follows them
He doesn't.
people like Rorschach because he kills normal criminals instead of fictional super powered villains, its also why people like The Punisher
>"[Gibbons and I] thought about superhero types like Batman, so I thought, ‘What would he be like in the real world.’ And he’d be very much like Rorschach—if you’re a revenge-driven vigilante, you’re not quite right in the head. Yeah, alright, your parents got killed when you were a kid, whatever, that’s upsetting. But for most of us, if our parents were killed when we were little, would not become a bat-themed costumed vigilante—that’s a bit mental.
>So, I thought, ‘Alright, if there was a Batman in the real world, he probably would be a bit mental.’ He wouldn’t have time for a girlfriend, friends, a social life, because he’d just be driven by getting revenge against criminals… dressed up as a bat for some reason. He probably wouldn’t be very careful about his personal hygiene. He’d probably smell. He’d probably eat baked beans out of a tin. He probably wouldn’t talk to many people. His voice probably would have become weird with misuse, his phraseology would be strange..."
The weird thing is Adrian is the Bruce Wayne in Watchmen.
He forgot to mention the part about Batman being a billionaire. Why would he eat beans out of a can when he has a butler. The guy he's talking about sound more like your average drug addict. He would die after a week of fighting crime.
He accounted for that because the character is consumed by revenge, the mission, fulfilling his destiny. Food in that context is just fuel for his body, a functional thing he uses, he doesn't notice or appreciate things like taste, the pleasure of eating etc. His mission is Technicolor, everything outside his mission is monotone.
There's this weird horseshoe that happens periodically when hollywood writers identify social problems.
Fight Club says "STARBUCKS BAD!", and both chuds and wokes start cheering, but for different reasons.
Wokes start cheering because Starbucks isn't owned by LGTBQ+ or [ETHNICALLY CHALLENGED PERSONS].
Chuds start cheering though because they think coffee culture is dumb altogether.
It's gotten much worse recently though, because now the wokes are so desperate to disassociate with anything involving the Chuds the they actually cling to corporate culture now. And we see this happen time and time again.
Now if you criticize Starbucks, woke only agree with you if they think you're brown or enjoy sodomy. Otherwise they'll openly praise it.
It's fricking bizarre.
Its not weird once you realize the wokies have been sponsored by Wall Street and the corporations since the days of Occupy.
Its the crowbar they used to tear apart a genuine gathering of everyone from tea parties to commies looking to kill some ~~*bankers*~~. And its been working ever since.
> Otherwise they'll openly praise it.
No. They just won't shallow your insane brainrot reasons for it. I don't support the USA either, for instance. But the reason for that is not because it's run by a secret cabal of Satanists. That is insane speech and should get you arrested.
>arrested
>for talking shit
lmao I'm not even American and this is moronic.
Also its not a secret cabal of satantists. Its a not so secret cabal of pedos. The satanism hasn't been proven...yet.
>for talking shit
For being mentally insane. That is why we have mental asylums.
>Its a not so secret cabal of pedos
>The satanism hasn't been proven...yet.
You are batshit insane.
Leftists have no issue with you talking shit about any company. They have a issue with you being batshit insane crazy.
>You are batshit insane
Did you just blank out everything about Epstein from your memory banks NPC-anon?
If so just a reminder, the client list will NEVER be released to the public because half of the global elite would be on it. The judge fricking said it on record when he refused to make it public.
The rich and powerful frick kids. This is a fact. And nothing will ever be done about it.
>Did you just blank out everything about Epstein from your memory banks NPC-anon?
It's not a secret cabal. It's the people we know are in charge. Most of which are white old men.
>the client list will NEVER be released to the public because half of the global elite would be on it
We already have the black book and, guess what, most of the people you most likely support are on it.
>The rich and powerful frick kids.
Again, not a secret.
>inb4 "I said it was a not so secret"
Which, alongside your Satanism comment, is proof of how deep your brainrot is. You cannot let go of your conspiracy thinking even when the actual truth is looking you straight in the face. The truth being that the people in charge, the people we know are in charge, can do whatever they want. It's not a question of conspiracies.
Congratulations anon, you've somehow managed to agree with everything I said while still talking down to me.
Thats a fricking amazing skill you've got there. But why use it? Is it because I call it a cabal? Is it because I disagree with your plans to arrest people for speaking and stripping them of their freedoms?
What did I say in my post that pissed you off so much you had to question my mental competency even though you agree with every fact posted in it?
>Congratulations anon, you've somehow managed to agree with everything I said while still talking down to me.
Because you are mentally damaged and the way you talk shows as much.
>Is it because I call it a cabal?
It's because you seem to be under two twin delusions: 1: That his is a conspiracy. It's not. In fact, I'll go so far to say that this point the fact most people could find out about it is part of the point. 2: That the pedophilia is a route to success and not simply a side effect of the power structures.
>What did I say in my post that pissed you off so much you had to question my mental competency even though you agree with every fact posted in it?
The fact you call it talking shit. Or that you think that being obviously mentally damaged is not a reason to be placed in a mental home away from normal people.
>YOU USED THE WRONG WORD YOU'RE MENTALLY DAMAGED
Autism is beautiful.
>Because you are mentally damaged and the way you talk shows as much.
The way I talk? My spelling should be entirely correct, the same with my grammar. What shows off my broken mind?
>It's because you seem to be under two twin delusions: 1: That his is a conspiracy. It's not. In fact, I'll go so far to say that this point the fact most people could find out about it is part of the point. 2: That the pedophilia is a route to success and not simply a side effect of the power structures.
1) A conspiracy is a group of people conspiring together to commit an offence. A conspiracy theory is a smear term created in the late 90s for establishment power structures to slap onto whatever they like. Once upon a time calling the Gulf of Tonkin a false flag was a conspiracy theory, but that turned out to be correct. Once upon a time it was a conspiracy theory to say that the USSR had spies across American industries and government organizations, but the Venona papers once again proved this true
I also never said it was a path to power. I said those in power did it. Wow look...we agree again.
>The fact you call it talking shit. Or that you think that being obviously mentally damaged is not a reason to be placed in a mental home away from normal people.
Ah, so it was me calling you a moron. Well I'm sorry anon, but I think that speech is not a crime and I think that you're a disgusting little weasel of a man for actually believing otherwise.
Let me guess, British? The motherland has been nothing but a disappointment since you let the colonies go.
>What shows off my broken mind?
Word choices. Way you approach subjects. Lack of logic in your reactions.
> A conspiracy theory is a smear term created in the late 90s for establishment power structures to slap onto whatever they like.
No. It refers to theories of people committing unlawful acts together. It's not a smear term, it's a thing that exists.
>Once upon a time it was a conspiracy theory to say that the USSR had spies across American industries and government organizations, but the Venona papers once again proved this true
? You would literally get fired from places if you claim that Wasn't the case.
>but I think that speech is not a crime
It's not a question of crime, it's a question of social sanity. Free speech does not work if you cannot tell apart the difference between reality and fiction. Believing the USA is secretly controlled by Satanists is fricking mental, if only because Satan is not real. Best you could argue is they roleplay as Satanists to get a rise out of people. But that is not the reason why they are bad, nor what most people argue about anyway.
>Let me guess, British?
Dutch.
look how empty this freakjob's posts are.
>green
white
...... space.........
>green
white
....... space........
nothing is said, just focusing on little fragments to time waste, almost like he's been told by an infographic on another site how he has to post here.
what a stupid homosexual
>It's not a question of crime, it's a question of social sanity
So not even a crime, you just want to throw them in because a nebulous, ill defined term that can and does change meanings decade to decade.
You do know thats the sort of thought process that got gays thrown into asylums right? You really want to go down that fricking rabbit hole of 'social sanity?" Because it ends in some dark places.
>Believing the USA is secretly controlled by Satanists is fricking mental, if only because Satan is not real
And a fedora tipper too. Man will the stereotypes never cease.
Allow me to meet insult with insult for the last time, because I'm done here. You are a short sighted monster. An authoritarian stooge who cannot see the consequences of the policies he champions as long as they only affect the people he disagrees with. You are, in essence, a European. A 'current year' mainland European who shames your ancestors with every breath. You disgust me and I pray you die before you are able to affect any sort of real social change and drag that nightmare of a continent into an even worse of a mess than its currently in..
But since you are on Cinemaphile I can probably sigh in relief knowing you never will.
This guy thinks Bill Clinton sneaks into pizzeria basements to frick kids on dirty mattresses
Did you are so fricking bonkers get your head checked please
russian oligarchs were paying 100s of thousands to have a holiday spending a week homeless - they really have nothing else to do and want a thrill.
>Again, not a secret.
Alright, then what are their names? Surely if it's not a secret we know every specific offender, yea?
Again, you can find a copy of Epstein's little black book online.
question is, do they do it because:
a) they are already evil and being evil is how they made their money
b) they have nothing else to spend their money on and everything else has become boring
c) all their friends do it so they might as well
d) they have to as it is part of a blackmail club, everyone is complicit and so everyone is silent
e) something else
f)......?
Most likely it's a bit of everything. I do absolutely belief it's a blackmail ring though. Basically a way to prevent anybody from breaking rank.
Uh, in English please?
You totally misunderstand people's issues with Starbucks. I've never heard a legitimate leftist type person complain the owner just isn't benevolent or queer enough, and I live in Seattle. It's consistently about union busting, wages, work conditions, and the usual distaste for billionaires. Standard corporate vs worker gripes.
Please try to understand, although Starbucks employs many idiotic leftists that may believe in unions, they themselves do not believe in unions and they have to do what they must to stop those idiot leftists from fricking up their business model.
The former CEO certainly whined about them enough to let it be known this is the case. Guy quit just in time to not show up in DC to get questioned about said union busting.
>You totally misunderstand people's issues with Starbucks
No, I don't. At all.
If you've spoken to these people even once, the number one thing they believe in is solidarity and they intentionally bleed all these issues together into one amalgamated world view. Execs realize this and know they can get away with everything else as long as it's black and gay enough, because that's the final filter all of the other stuff passes through before they're willing to consume it.
You should never take them at their word on anything else they complain about because that is never the buck that breaks.
>Wokes start cheering because Starbucks isn't owned by LGTBQ+ or [ETHNICALLY CHALLENGED PERSONS].
I love it when Cinemaphile chuds think they understand anything about “woke” people.
Didn't we literally have riots about this 2 years ago where they basically tried to shut down every business that wasn't gay or black enough?
Hell, they even made a flag for it so that as long as your business waves it then they're basically immune.
>Didn't we literally have riots about this 2 years ago where they basically tried to shut down every business that wasn't gay or black enough?
Is this seriously how you remember the riots? Because this is even more deluded than the usual "Troy style razing" we used to get.
Frick off israelite
I can't wait until in four years the riots were about gays getting angry because a school wouldn't allow a drag queen to teach kids.
>Is this seriously how you remember the riots?
Uh. Yeah. Because that's the only real thing the riots accomplished.
>Yeah
You are moronic.
>Because that's the only real thing the riots accomplished.
They made a lot of bad right wing people very angry.
You know I'm right.
You’re delusional
>Many other exampoles,
You basically named all of them.
The average man, in order to sustain a job and stay out of jail, endures disrespect and must occasionally kneel. He isn't allowed to fight back against scum, and must capitulate to his bosses. Those "chuds" simply do not give a frick and have no boss. When it comes to being tried, overreaction is their only reaction.
Every time someone mentions Watchmen I think of this
Moore isn't a good example. He also wrote v for vendetta which can easily be read as pro fascism because when they knock the government off the first thing that happens is a bunch of gangs start raping women and hording food. Moore has been mindbroken forever by the fact his oshi, Steve Ditko, is king chud
Moore is a complete cuckold
>being so dedicated to what's right you disregard personal matters is heroic
YES
Dumb esl poster
What are some other instances of this? I’ve got
The Joker
Alex from Clockwork Orange
The entire military in Starship Troopers
Patrick Bateman
Hannibal Lecter possibly?
Isn't it WEIRD how [OLD FILM] doesn't align with [WRITER'S MODERN DAY BELIEFS]?