we dont. its a pretty good comic than you re read a few times and always notice new things.
the tv show on the otherhand and the shitty legacy its left behind. i understand the hate.
>Why do you guys hate watchmen?
Cinemaphile doesn't, a handful of anons just have a hateboner for Moore because he doesn't suck them off in interviews.
CG people are such tourist fricking morons. Alan Moore has been happily married forever. CG has a hate boner for him because he’s the reason people now realize that comic books can be a valid artistic medium and not just a bunch of 1990’s EX TREEEM Robot Frog, Rob Liefeld bullshit
The art, by nature, doesn't standout. The 9 panel grid is clunky and it's bogged down in words (hurr durr). It's a perfectly crafted example of a dated, flawed way of making comics.
Manhattan deciding humanity matters because Laurie's Mom and her rapist needed to have a baby to make Laurie and that's somehow unlikely kinda threw me off.
It just doesn't really mesh with how he acted before. "Dead bodies have the same number of particles" and whatnot. Why would he care if Laurie's Mom is attracted to badboys? Why is that cosmically significant if their union is predetermined, as he knows everything is?
I still don't understand it, so I feel it was just a weak resolution in an otherwise perfect book.
yes but manhattan acted like the fact they had a consensual union afterwards is somehow mindblowing and worthy of preserving life. Humans are dumb and have dumb horny emotions, he's acting like a soapdrama plot is suddenly more interesting to him than space
I see what you mean, I really do.
But my problem here is, Manhattan is assigning weight to Laurie's existence, when once he did not assign any human life weight.
Why does Laurie get weight? He brands her a miracle because he presupposes she is unique, but he provides no coherent reason why he would find her existence unique. Any of those millions of children, if in the same circumstances, if given the same name, may turn out quite totally the same.
I suppose no two rocks in Chaotic Terrain are the same, down to the atom. Should manhattan count the number of particle collisions that formed each rock on Mars, he would find it vastly outnumbers the uniqueness of any given human, shaped by emotions and sex.
Manhattan suddenly starts acting like a human, impressed by mundane perceived differences only biased humans find significant. When before he found getting caught in the tangle of their lives only pointless.
Tldr; Manhattan skips a step in deciding Laurie is worthwhile saving.
Step A: "I guess it was (kinda) unlikely that your parents are a woman and her rapist, and that you out of millions of sperm were the fastest"
Step B: this makes you more significant, unique or interesting than a supernovae, quantum mechanics, and the origins and endings of creation because...???
Step C: Profit
manhattan's not a hard scifi concept, more a representation for apathy and despondence (in nuclear america and in people). Once he learns to find meaning in the little things, like human lovelives, then he finds the world is full of meaning.
*hence the finishing quote from Jung, that man must create his own passions. Manhattan's logic isn't perfect under scrutiny, but he's not scrutinising it anymore, human life is unique if he stops being a pessimist and appreciates what uniqueness that it does have.
He assigns weight to Laurie being a miracle of such unlikely circumstances because he's in love with her, or at the very least he cares about her more than he cares about any other human. He becomes aware of how unique her specific birth is because he is just aware of her in general, and then he extrapolates that realization across the remainder of humanity.
>That seems to point up a significant difference between Europeans and Americans. A European says: I can't understand this, what's wrong with me? An American says: I can't understand this, what's wrong with him?
I make no suggestion that one side or other is right, but observation over many years leads me to believe it is true.
Laurie is important: the succession of events isn't just a cosmic queue and small details matter. Some are happy and some are sad. But they are all important in their own way. That's it. Part of the twist is having God realize that makes humans important.
It's perhaps unfair to blame Watchmen itself. It's not really it or Alan Moore's fault that ever pretentious blowhard or people who want comics to be seen as more "adult" took all the wrong lessons from it. But it, much like Dark Knight Returns, is very easy to point to.
People that are addressed for their negativity in the OP hardly answer these threads, but we'll likely see different results for Watchmen.
Let's see if all the autists show up.
Most oft he Watchmen autists are Rorschach fans who hate Moore, not the comic itself. I'm not even convinced they're sincere either, just stirring up culture wars shit.
Maybe it's not the most impressive, but I wouldn't call it boring, at least not on Watchmen, For the Man Who Has Everything, Give Me Liberty, 80s Green Lantern, Marvel Fanfare #41, or The Originals. The Secret Service was pretty boring, though.
>For the Man Who Has Everything >Give Me Liberty >Marvel Fanfare #41
All of these have better art than Watchmen. I've never understood why there's such a failure to recognize that Gibbons did all this other stuff that's even better.
I found a used copy of the TPB from the late 80s for $10 at one of my local comic book stores and the original coloring is SO much better than the recolors.
I’m very stupid. What is Moore actually trying to say in Watchmen? Is it just Cold War “can’t we all just get along and btw right wingers bad” hippie shit?
>"Superheroes are dumb." You know, just like every cape comic he's made in the past 30+ years.
So Supreme and the entire ABC line was a collective hallucination?
It's not from an interview. It's the commentary he wrote for this comic
I recall it being in the 10th anniversary book which was filled with commentary.
God these fricking quote content farm sites. Everything reduced to out of context digestible sound bites, and that's if the quote is even real. This is the kind of garbage that promotes those stupid "the writer believes and supports everything the character says!" takes.
Why? Did Moore say it in an interview? Because character sentences doesnt mean the author agrees with them.
4 weeks ago
Anonymous
I was agreeing with you, but pointing out why the quote ended up being misattributed to Moore rather than correctly attributed to his character, Rorschach ... to wit, because people are stupid. (Or lazy. Or malicious. Take your pick.)
The comic is a classic. The fanbase, especially the one surrounding Rorschach who thinks he was right or don't acknowledge that he's an absolute lunatic and not an ideal to strive towards, is absolutely insufferable.
I still cant get over Bubastis randomly showing up in the final act with no setup. The movie has some beautiful visuals but every scene past the first act feels like Snyder just didnt get it. Way too much focus on "badass" action and not enough effort put into a cohesive structure.
The movie is the best and accurate superhero adaptation. While it completly misses the main point of Watchmen.
Kinda says everything you need to know about Hollywood and adaptations.
I still cant get over Bubastis randomly showing up in the final act with no setup. The movie has some beautiful visuals but every scene past the first act feels like Snyder just didnt get it. Way too much focus on "badass" action and not enough effort put into a cohesive structure.
I wonder if he doesnt want to understand, because without the action scenes and heroic stuff, most people would find it rather boring. I mean he knows what sells so he will change to source that way to appeal to the bigger audience.
Or if he thinks he get it but molds the wrong aspect that much that it seperates from the source that it feels like the opposite?
I mean Watchmen is like Starship Troopers. So over stylised and focusing on the cinematic that it became a parody of what it tried to criticise?
I'm almost positive that it wasn't intentional. Snyder might have talent as a filmographer but any time he's given major creative control he outs himself as a borderline moron that thinks the most b***h basic and hamfisted symbolism is deep. The man simply cannot comprehend the nature of nuance or subtlety, he is mentally incapable.
4 weeks ago
Anonymous
Snyder did get it, it’s just that Watchmen as a comic is an overt satire on superheroes in the real world in reflection of comics
In the movie it’s more a reflection of movies. Hence why you have more callbacks and references to movies than comics. The war room scene with Nixon looking like Dr Strangelove for example is nothing like the comics. Neither is the Shumacheresque costumes on some of the “modern” heroes
4 weeks ago
Anonymous
>Snyder did get it
Nope, and you didn't either.
4 weeks ago
Anonymous
Ok. Mr “media literacy”
4 weeks ago
Anonymous
Yes, Mr. Media Illiterate.
4 weeks ago
Anonymous
>In the movie it’s more a reflection of movies
No it isn't lol, adding bat nipples to Ozymandias does not make it a satire of superhero movies. That's just surface level bullshit, the only thing Snyder has ever been capable of.
4 weeks ago
Anonymous
>you have more callbacks and references to movies than comics
What are those clever moments then?
Snyder knows about cinematography and thinks that's enough to make a movie. He can't even put together a coherent plot, let alone have any sort of complex subtext.
He's just a dudebro that wants to be an intelectual but all he knows is "fake it till you make it".
4 weeks ago
Anonymous
Is Snyder a nepo hire? Only his output and the way he keeps getting work despite turning out one clunker after another says "nepo hire".
4 weeks ago
Anonymous
He has good visuals. Thats probably the only thing that suits can understand. >Why didnt people like Superman vs Batman? It had Batman and Superman it. And a Jesus analogy. And gritty colors!
4 weeks ago
Anonymous
his wife is a producer for WB, yes
4 weeks ago
Anonymous
Called it.
4 weeks ago
Anonymous
I think he's just good at networking and putting up a pitch
4 weeks ago
Anonymous
Every single person who's "good at networking" was born into an already existing network.
4 weeks ago
Anonymous
Sadly true!
4 weeks ago
Anonymous
Could be, Suckerpunch would proof your assumption.
But he could have a good hand for creating something that the majority of viewers get and LeDeep can see some “deeper“ thing.
Snyder did get it, it’s just that Watchmen as a comic is an overt satire on superheroes in the real world in reflection of comics
In the movie it’s more a reflection of movies. Hence why you have more callbacks and references to movies than comics. The war room scene with Nixon looking like Dr Strangelove for example is nothing like the comics. Neither is the Shumacheresque costumes on some of the “modern” heroes
You sure? You sound plausible. But we shouldnt forget that cinema is a different medium and you need to use cinematic symbols because audience is accustomed to that.
I always see this image floating around and I'm amazed that someone actually enjoyed Before Watchmen like this. It is the very definition of mid at its best. Even the Cooke issues are nothing memorable which is probably the worst part about them. It's something that can barely justify its own existence beyond DC wanting more money.
Sorry, i can appreciate that someone poured time into creating it. And i know that this DC just milking.
But i can see more effort than your normal mid or maimstream comic.
And when you cant remember Minutemen than you didnt read it properly. Because what remaimed in my memory is how the Minutemen try to stay relevant and even are eager to fake a heroic act. And how there are a Japanese father and son who tries to stop Japanese saboteurs. Si these two Japanese were the heroes.
>That’s fair enough, as long as people don’t take his word as gospel. They should take *my* word as gospel instead!
[...] >I always see this image floating around and I'm amazed that someone actually enjoyed Before Watchmen like this.
Same. It's written by people who are modestly talented at best, and the art is nothing special.
The art is ok to good. The writing ranges from mid to good. And you can see that they tried to do something with it. Even some Charlton comic homages.
It's not that deep man, it's one of Cooke's weakest works by far and it's clear he didn't have as much passion to it as his usual stuff. It didn't say anything that we didn't already know, that the minutemen were egotistical larpers, and it did the cardinal sin of having to retcon shit for no real reason. At the end of the day it was a blatant cashgrab and those almost never end up being creatively fulfilling. We're talking a 6/10 at best here.
I never talked about deepness. Kinda hard to rate it since the series within Before Watchmen fluctuate. There were some retcons i agree were not needed, but they were so small you didnt recognize the, that hard. I would give it overall a 7/10.
And they were more creative than you think.
>I never talked about deepness
That goes hand in hand with quality, which Before Watchmen was lacking very much. If you're one of those gays that say "just turn off your brain bro" when enjoying something it might be for you but for anyone with standards it's exceptionally mediocre.
4 weeks ago
Anonymous
That doesnt need to go hand in hand. Age of Apocalypse, Invincible, The Boys or Crisis on Multiple Earths.
And the stories are better when you dont turn your brain off.
MinuteMen is about staying relevant and be heroic.
Silk Spectre is about mother-daughter conflict and family business.
Comedian is about duty and politics.
Niteowl is a hidden Rorschach book and is about teamwork and about pushing people to do things.
Ozymandias is about how he became Ozymandias and what is important to a person.
Rorschach is about masks and what lies behind the mask/appearance.
Dr.Manhattan about possibilities and causalities.
Moloch about what makes a villian.
Dollar Bill about tragic hopes.
Not all do it that good, but there is still a theme used than just punching the villian or slice of life.
4 weeks ago
Anonymous
I disagree with all of that, every single comic that you mentioned paled in comparison to the OG that did more with less. Like even the stuff that was only hinted at had more depth than an entire miniseries managed to do. In particular cases like Comedia, Ozymandias, Rorschach, and Manhattan their comics actually devalue said characters with their hackneyed stories.
4 weeks ago
Anonymous
>paled in comparison
Thats a strong word. Sure there is a big gap between Before and Watchmen. Watchmen is by far better and more wholesome. I just dont agree that Before is that bad as some belive.
And very weird examples you choose. Comedian is way more“problematic“ than Ozymandias or Rorschach. And if you choose ome than NiteOwl,is more damaging for Rorschachs character than Rorschach series. But i agree that Rorschach is the weakest story. Manhattan is kinda an ok example, if you dislike how it tries to explain on how Manhattans power works or how he came to be.
I thought about reading the others because it's a cool universe but not only every character is completely fleshed out in the original, from backstory to ending, they're not even written by the same guy so there's a fat chance that they're drizzling shits or decent fanfiction at best.
They are not the original writer, asked by the rightholder to write something and were the ones who said “ok“. It is kinda fanfiction. But for fanfiction it is rather tame or not pompous enough. The only one that reads and looks like fanfiction is Rorschach.
I dont think that every artist or writer really would hesitate.
See HBO Watchmen for “passionate“ fans.
Only people that are full of integrety and passionate Alan Moore fans would deny it.
Was it storytimed? I dont remember that it was. This could be the reason why.
4 weeks ago
Anonymous
Pretty sure I saw it storytimed, but I could be wrong.
4 weeks ago
Anonymous
Ok, i might missed it. Maybe it really went under the radar?
4 weeks ago
Anonymous
What? Pax Americana was really well received when it came out and it was story timed here more than once as well having threads discussing it. Multiversity as a whole was well liked.
How would Moore react to this? >anonymous
rorschach was always /ourguy/
1 month ago
Anonymous
He wouldn't care about some random person on the internet doing whatever the frick they want.
What pisses him off is big companies profiting from that kinda and diluting the works to the point of innocuousness.
1 month ago
Anonymous
Probably eyeroll and start a long monolog what Watchmen is really about and what the fan should have done to criticise something rather than roll in it and make just fun situations.
>moore's communist ideology
Moore is an anarchist.
The reason so many influential people say “I have mixed feelings about it” is due to the fact that it exposed the concept of project bluebeam, while also critiquing it in a way that’s irrefutable. That’s why the squid wasn’t included in the movie version by the way. Can’t be putting the concept of fake alien invasions for the purpose of control on tv.
In more recent interviews, he sort of makes a mention of how communism and capitalism are both misapplied outgrowths of anarchism, so it seems like he renounced the communist part of anarcho-communism.
1 month ago
Anonymous
Ok, didnt read that from him. Maybe he now totally rely on anarchy-wizadry.
The reason so many influential people say “I have mixed feelings about it” is due to the fact that it exposed the concept of project bluebeam, while also critiquing it in a way that’s irrefutable. That’s why the squid wasn’t included in the movie version by the way. Can’t be putting the concept of fake alien invasions for the purpose of control on tv.
/v/'s ocarina of time
/a/'s evangelion
/tv/'s citizen kane
/lit/'s don quixote
/mu/'s sgt. pepper's lonely hearts club band
watchmen.
I do like watchmen, really love it. One of my favorite things ever, the original 12 issues of course. But you should understand the hate it may receive here.
I can't speak for any other anons and can only speak for myself, but I don't hate it at all.
The content outside of it and surrounding it however leaves much to be desired.
And finally, some recommendations from Alan Moore himself.
1 month ago
Anonymous
Recommendations for ants
1 month ago
Anonymous
Are you perchance viewing it on a phone?
1 month ago
Anonymous
get off your phone, moron
NTA, but I can read it on my phone.
1 month ago
Anonymous
Guess the other anon just needs to get his eyes looked at.
1 month ago
Anonymous
get off your phone, moron
1 month ago
Anonymous
You need to open the file in a new tab.
Guess the other anon just needs to get his eyes looked at.
He needs to open the file in a new tab.
1 month ago
Anonymous
That's an interesting list.
[...]
Oh no, he's moronic.
>>>/x/
1 month ago
Anonymous
Interesting ideed. But also overly very juvenile tastes.
1 month ago
Anonymous
>very juvenile
This is comics.
1 month ago
Anonymous
And some comics are more juvenile and some are more mature. Whats your point?
1 month ago
Anonymous
Are you saying Maus is juvenile?
4 weeks ago
Anonymous
No, it is more mature for many juveniles.
1 month ago
Anonymous
>Moore is a Xaime CHAD
based
1 month ago
Anonymous
Say what?
1 month ago
Anonymous
if you don't get it already, explaining won't help
1 month ago
Anonymous
Try me.
1 month ago
Anonymous
>Xaime
Is this some board-specific new lingo?
1 month ago
Anonymous
Jaime Hernandez sometimes goes by Xaime.
1 month ago
Anonymous
Thanks for clarifying.
1 month ago
Anonymous
Watchmen has a nine panel grid structure because of 100 Rooms. I think Jaime's response to being the inspiration was that it's nothing special and just how Ditko did it.
4 weeks ago
Anonymous
There's a lot of really cool stuff here, but also some really mid stuff like Planetary.
4 weeks ago
Anonymous
Planetary is upper-tier capes.
4 weeks ago
Anonymous
It isn't nearly as smart as Ellis thinks it is.
4 weeks ago
Anonymous
You should add The Dark Knight Returns and Miller Daredevil. He wrote a blurb and a review, respectively.
4 weeks ago
Anonymous
No one here made that, some website did
4 weeks ago
Anonymous
Oh, okay.
4 weeks ago
Anonymous
Wait a minute, Cinemaphile told me Alan Moore hated comics!
4 weeks ago
Anonymous
>comics not listed in that chart that Moore praised at one time or another
The Amazing Spider-Man by Stan Lee and Steve Ditko
"Collector's Edition" by Archie Goodwin and Steve Ditko
Frank Miller's Daredevil
The Dark Knight Returns
Crisis on Infinite Earths
Dirty Plotte
Peter Bagge's Hate
Lord Horror: Reverbstorm
Saga
Uber
Steve Aylett's Hyperthick
4 weeks ago
Anonymous
>Uber
He also rates Gillen's WicDiv and Si Spurier's indie comics.
4 weeks ago
Anonymous
>Saga
I wonder why he praised that? For the progressive characters, the sex or the promising storytelling.
Did Saga came back from the hiatus?
4 weeks ago
Anonymous
>I wonder why he praised that?
It was back when Saga first started and it looked to everyone like BKV had finally figured out how to plot ahead.
4 weeks ago
Anonymous
Ok. It really dropped in quality.
The only thing i remember is the nympho arachide woman and an angsts goat man!
killing not constantine and not cable and not lying cat was a mistake. That book went nowhere.
It was your typical comic series. Start promising than the writer doesnt know or catches himself in his plotlines.
4 weeks ago
Anonymous
>It really dropped in quality.
Yes, because it turned out that BKV had not in fact planned ahead and was just pulling situations out of his ass till he ran out of steam.
4 weeks ago
Anonymous
Best way to destroy the good will of your readers!
4 weeks ago
Anonymous
killing not constantine and not cable and not lying cat was a mistake. That book went nowhere.
4 weeks ago
Anonymous
It is baffling, because it's not good at all.
Garth Ennis and George R.R. Martin also liked it.
4 weeks ago
Anonymous
Maybe the promise to be different? But sometimes people praise it because it is progressive or anti-woke.
4 weeks ago
Anonymous
Also likes tv >The Prisoner >Twin Peaks >The Sopranos >The Wire >Breaking Bad >Better Caul Saul >The Simpsons >South Park
4 weeks ago
Anonymous
Reminder that he got LYNCHED by The Return.
4 weeks ago
Anonymous
I'll give him points for putting out-right erotica on his recommends, but still, most of his stuff just comes off as really pretentious hipster-slop, or niche le original pseud choices. Would it have KILLED him to include a single DC property? Or did them giving him the finger over Watchmen sour his grapes too much?
Also, his complete leg-kicking of Winsor McCay, saying that Will Eisner is the one most responsible for giving comics "brains" is unforgivable. Winsor McCay has more talent than him and Eisner combined.
4 weeks ago
Anonymous
>Would it have KILLED him to include a single DC property?
The list was complied by someone else, jackass. Here are some DC recs
>comics not listed in that chart that Moore praised at one time or another
The Amazing Spider-Man by Stan Lee and Steve Ditko
"Collector's Edition" by Archie Goodwin and Steve Ditko
Frank Miller's Daredevil
The Dark Knight Returns
Crisis on Infinite Earths
Dirty Plotte
Peter Bagge's Hate
Lord Horror: Reverbstorm
Saga
Uber
Steve Aylett's Hyperthick
Little Nemo has terrific art, but it's pretty unreadable, and every strip has the same format and punchline. Get over yourself.
4 weeks ago
Anonymous
>why didn't he acknowledge muh mainstream
get over yoursellf
the list didn't include any Marvel either so it was clearly intended to be a collection of non-cape recommendations
Two main reasons it leaves a poor taste in the mouth don’t actually have anything to do with the story itself
A) the influence of watchmen on the rest of the comics industry led to a shitload of imitation Watchmen who mainly didn’t get the point. And just made things dark and gritty. Some of these ARE actually good and different enough to make it its own thing too
B) Alan Moore as a creator is kind of a small minded butthole. It’s easy to hate work based on disliking the creator. Especially if he’s contradictory over the years and has takes that are clearly against his own writing
Rorschach mainly. Just look at all the “media literate” people claiming he failed, was wrong etc.
Even if Moore thought that. By no means does the story as presented decide Rorschach was wrong or he failed. It’s ambiguous. His final act could easily bring down the house of cards Veidt built
Likewise the “media literate” people are extremely selective in memory when it comes to stuff that contradicts their specific interpretation
E.g.
>rorschach is a hypocrite for not supporting Veidt destroying New York and blaming a fictional alien because… he wrote that Truman was right to nuke the Japanese when he was a kid!
Certainly Moore included that in the extras to give you something to think about. But when you think it’s logical to directly compare the US president directly ordering the nuclear bombings, delivering hundreds of thousands of leaflets before hand to said cities via bombers telling them their cities would be destroyed with a new bomb. Then claiming responsibility for it afterwards
And saying “this is JUST LIKE Ozymandias fooling the whole world with a fictional threat by killing his fellow citizens!”
No. It just doesn’t parse out. It’s like saying D Day and the Holocaust are the same because both involve people killing people who didn’t want to die
>Alan Moore as a creator is kind of a small minded butthole.
He's merely strongly-opinionated and stubborn with a brain full of bees. Nothing wrong woth that. Given the projects he works on, I'm not surprised he forgets shit, and he himself claimed to have a bad memory. Plus he's in his 60s and has been using drugs since he was a teenager. I think people expect too much of him.
That’s fair enough, as long as people don’t take his word as gospel which too many do.
It’s just bizarre given how much if his career is taking established characters and putting his interpretation and twist on them that so many of his fans think there’s only one way to “get” his work.
Plus some are plain not good as you’d think, V for Vendetta was a massive letdown compared to watchmen IMO. A bizarre caricature of fascism that really does pull the curtain back on the wizard in showing how far from reality his real beliefs are.
>That’s fair enough, as long as people don’t take his word as gospel. They should take *my* word as gospel instead!
I always see this image floating around and I'm amazed that someone actually enjoyed Before Watchmen like this. It is the very definition of mid at its best. Even the Cooke issues are nothing memorable which is probably the worst part about them. It's something that can barely justify its own existence beyond DC wanting more money.
>I always see this image floating around and I'm amazed that someone actually enjoyed Before Watchmen like this.
Same. It's written by people who are modestly talented at best, and the art is nothing special.
>Plus some are plain not good as you’d think, V for Vendetta was a massive letdown compared to watchmen IMO.
It was good, but yes, not as good as Watchmen. It was one of his earliest comic books, along with Marvelman.
I think V for Vendetta is as good as Watchmen in storytelling. But you can see that Watchmen evolved from V and is more dense and more character driven. I mean the characters are more complex.
But you are right that most of the comics he gets praised for are always characters made by others or expies. Even his ABC line characters are heavily inspired by other characters that you can call the. Expies.
Well, he loves metafiction and does it very well. The value of originality is a rather modern concept, and it's been on the way out for the past 3 or 4 decades.
Sure. Since we have a better knowledge or archive that nothing is forgotten and every new fiction stands on big shoulders. Kinda like “the Simpsons already did that“.
It's not rorschach being right about veidt, it's rorschach being rignt about everything, being morally unimpeachable, and not being a deranged butthole. That's what his fanboys want and that's why they're so resentful of Moore and anyone else who says he's an butthole and intentionally written to be one. Rorschach did nothing wrong because they want life to be black and white and wash away the city of filth IRL.
Rorschach was a violent high functioning sociopath who aimed his hatred at acceptable targets
There’s a reason the entire story is framed from his POV. We see moments like pic related. We see clearly where he’s delusional but also where he is THE ONLY proactive character other than Veidt
If Rorschach didn’t investigate the comedians murder and so on. All the main characters would have died or left earth.
He’s meant to be a tragic hero. A very flawed one. But one who essentially believes fighting the tide is better than succumbing to it
If you’re talking “right” and “wrong” it’s already beyond what his character is about
He caught plenty of criminals without killing them with Nite Owl. Enough an entire prison is full of people out to get him.
After the girls death and his first intentional murder he just became more deranged and splintered
Yes and I'm saying that the fanboys that seethe at Moore saying he's not someone you should aspire to be in real life because they think all those flaws aren't flaws, that he's perfectly sane and does everything right, and saying otherwise makes you le reddit.
Are they in the room with you now? Because I see way more screeching artists complaining about “the fanboys” than these alleged Rorschach fanboys who think he’s Jesus or something
>these alleged Rorschach fanboys
Yeah, I'd say there's at least one of them in the room with us right now.
4 weeks ago
Anonymous
>the fanboys
Are they in the room with you now? Because I see way more screeching artists complaining about “the fanboys” than these alleged Rorschach fanboys who think he’s Jesus or something
What? Is it such a bad thing to say that I'd totally frick a rawshark in the ass?
Personally, like with most of Moore's output, I just get nothing emotionally out of it. It's, ironically, like a clock, it's perfectly crafted, but I just get nothing out of it.
I'll take a less well crafted comic that at least makes me feel over Watchmen.
Anything by Bach is surely more artistic than Mr. Brightside, but you know...
Really? Moore's comics are some of the most emotionally powerful comics I've come across.
Bach also gets me going more than The Killers, so there's that.
It's so popular and beloved that there are types that will hate it no matter how good it is. They are too poisoned by the acclaim to have any goodwill toward it, so they bash it at every opportunity.
I've seen people online practically rip their hair out at Watchmen. It's crazy.
I don't know whose ethics would put the sanctity of a comic book IP over a human life so yes I think taking a job you wouldn't want for the sake of your wife's health is respectable.
I don't really hate it, I just don't care about it. I do admit that gays shilling it like it's the best thing ever annoy me, but that doesn't make the comic itself any worse.
I like Watchmen but there's a big plothole in how Comedian was able to put together Ozys plan from what he could have plausibly learned sneaking around le secret island
we can assume he did some additional detective work beyond just hopping to the island and seeing the squid. He saw the list of targets for "Manhattan" cancer, it's fair to assume he figured out more details of the plan
Where would he go to get the 'give Dr. Manhattans associates cancer' list? Ozy would logically destroy that list as soon as Jane Slater is diagnosed or never write anything down in the first place. And what would he learn from the island except a macabre special effect is being created for a movie? The squid team wouldn't have 'cloned from the brain of a grave robbed psychic' in their files because they don't need to know that. Ozy should know about compartmentalization.
but we know Ozymandias wrote things down because that's how Rorschach and Nite-Owl twigged he put out the hit on himself.
Compartmentalization is all well and good but that really only keeps the people within the organization from figuring out the big picture. An outside figure could potentially dig up all the compartments and put the pieces together, or at least create a close-enough picture
I think the easy password is a contingency to lure Night Owl and Rorschach to Karnak to him so he can brag about the plan. Otherwise the password would be unguessable.
As for Blake - he could use his glowie contacts to dig but they're the sort that will want to know why and if he tells what he knows then its no longer his private investigation
Ozy subconsciously wanted his peanut gallery (in British theatre also known as "the gods") to made up of the people from the Crimebusters meeting all those years ago.
4 weeks ago
Anonymous
I concur, though not Dr. M at the party because he's a wildcard and can't be overpowered. But the cancer list is different, he can't leave that existing or accessible. Night Owl only starts to put it together after the list goes public.
4 weeks ago
Anonymous
The military painting DANGER POISON homie ALERT on his quarters immediately after the tv show is also dumb. He'd be met by a liaison telling him that no involuntary emission of radiation has ever been seen from him, the whole thing stinks and they're going to get to the bottom of it.
4 weeks ago
Anonymous
How would they know? They're not measuring him at all times, though maybe they should have.
4 weeks ago
Anonymous
They would have extensively tested him with his full co-operation, he's a scientist after all. The point is even if he 'leaks', he's the lynchpin of US strategic defense and you don't do anything precipitate with his feelings. You soothe him even if you have doubts
I think you guys are missing the point that for all his "smarts", Ozy was also caught up in the superhero mindset and ultimately was nothing but your typical ridiculous comic book villain.
Sure but finding out plot flaws is fun and good exercise. I guess he was just a Republic serial villain after all
4 weeks ago
Anonymous
I know, but those tests are probably not continued every day in situ. There'd be so many factors to consider, they realistically shouldn't have let come into contact with anyone not wearing protection.
He told and made everyone to frick off and disappeared to Mars within minutes. So cooling him down was more tricky. >finding out plot flaws is fun and good exercise.
Agreed.
4 weeks ago
Anonymous
>So cooling him down was more tricky.
And they do the worst possible thing by having a GI painting a big radiation stencil on his door instead of doing almost anything else. We can speculate that Ozy has some military brass paid off to do that dumb act since he remarks that he's read Manhattan's psych reports
4 weeks ago
Anonymous
>We can speculate that Ozy has some military brass paid off to do that dumb act
Maybe.
>so he can brag about the plan
I don't think he anticipated Rorschach unraveling the plot as far as he did, but his fatal flaw is definitely ego, and that could've led him to leave breadcrumbs, subconsciously or not, that would allow certain people to figure it out so he had SOMEONE to brag to
Where would he go to get the 'give Dr. Manhattans associates cancer' list? Ozy would logically destroy that list as soon as Jane Slater is diagnosed or never write anything down in the first place. And what would he learn from the island except a macabre special effect is being created for a movie? The squid team wouldn't have 'cloned from the brain of a grave robbed psychic' in their files because they don't need to know that. Ozy should know about compartmentalization.
I agree with you that this is compocated but i guess he has sources in secret ervice amd like
we can assume he did some additional detective work beyond just hopping to the island and seeing the squid. He saw the list of targets for "Manhattan" cancer, it's fair to assume he figured out more details of the plan
assumed he collected infos, found some archived papers, hacked some computers.
I think the easy password is a contingency to lure Night Owl and Rorschach to Karnak to him so he can brag about the plan. Otherwise the password would be unguessable.
As for Blake - he could use his glowie contacts to dig but they're the sort that will want to know why and if he tells what he knows then its no longer his private investigation
Either he thinks the complicate obvious answer is the best solution or you are right that he planned to get all witnesses together to swear them in his coup.
Maybe Veidt let him in and told him, then iced him when he wasn't on board with it. He clearly sought the approval of the others when they came, though I suppose that was after there was nothing they could do about it.
You can consider that a plothole. Since it isnt explained and Veidt says he planned it all to be perfect we as a reader have to expect that just discovering the island will not give enough information to connect it with Moloch or the Dr Manhattan plan.
If you want direct explaination and exposition on how Comedian was able to find out, than yes.
We can only assume that he knows how to do undercover work and have his methods to piece the plan together.
I think you guys are missing the point that for all his "smarts", Ozy was also caught up in the superhero mindset and ultimately was nothing but your typical ridiculous comic book villain.
>The comic literally tries to paint Ozymandias as the villain with a switch at the end where he's justified because he brought unification and peace, then Rorschach, the principled "hero" who never compromises is made to be the villain for "ruining" this achievement.
The penultimate story boils down to deliberately reversing the roles of what the reader expected in order to upend the concept of what a "Hero" actually is, not through Comedian raping some woman, or Doctor Manhattan becoming indifferent, but the fundamental concepts behind the actions one takes in the pursuit of "truth" and "justice" being questioned by Moore. That's what the story is about.
The comic beats you over the head in condemning what Ozymandias did as temporary, foolish, and heinous. Pictured is Ozymandias turning back the doomsday clock.
You thinking that Rorschach is "made to be the villain" is your own failure for thinking in terms of black and white.
we dont. its a pretty good comic than you re read a few times and always notice new things.
the tv show on the otherhand and the shitty legacy its left behind. i understand the hate.
It's so uniquely good it makes shitting on every other capeshit easy
>Why do you guys hate watchmen?
Cinemaphile doesn't, a handful of anons just have a hateboner for Moore because he doesn't suck them off in interviews.
Hi Alan, you're still a talentless pedophile.
Go back, zoomer.
Shave that stupid hobo beard and have a shower, Alan.
Take your Ritalin, child.
>pedophile
Spotted the CGer
Seething.
>reduced to memes
CG people are such tourist fricking morons. Alan Moore has been happily married forever. CG has a hate boner for him because he’s the reason people now realize that comic books can be a valid artistic medium and not just a bunch of 1990’s EX TREEEM Robot Frog, Rob Liefeld bullshit
>Alan Moore has been happily married forever
Not only that, he's got a great relationship with his daughter too, down to collaborating in projects.
He still makes superheroes comics with his grandkids as well too apparently
Who would've thought Alan Moore was actually a regular, rather affable fella?
Anyone who has actually watched any video of his interviews/talks/general interactions with the fans, of course
>he's got a great relationship with his daughter
Which one? He have two daughters
didn't his wife leave him for his mistress
His first wife. They parted on good terms. He has since remarried.
WTF I love Alan Moore now.
homie who is we
Only contrarians do
I don't
I acknowledge it's a good comic, but it's boring.
how so?
It made him read text without pictures outside school assignments.
The art, by nature, doesn't standout. The 9 panel grid is clunky and it's bogged down in words (hurr durr). It's a perfectly crafted example of a dated, flawed way of making comics.
>hurr durr
>not hurm durm
You had one job.
ah, not enough big epic splash pages to satisfy your peanut brain
sad
>by nature
What did he mean by that?
He doesn't know why he finds the art unimpressive, so he reached for a phrase that sounds impressive to make his criticism sound stronger than it is.
>The 9 panel grid is clunky
No, it's not.
> flawed way of making comics.
stfu
Too much man. Not enough watches.
I don't. It's one of my favorite comics.
Manhattan deciding humanity matters because Laurie's Mom and her rapist needed to have a baby to make Laurie and that's somehow unlikely kinda threw me off.
It just doesn't really mesh with how he acted before. "Dead bodies have the same number of particles" and whatnot. Why would he care if Laurie's Mom is attracted to badboys? Why is that cosmically significant if their union is predetermined, as he knows everything is?
I still don't understand it, so I feel it was just a weak resolution in an otherwise perfect book.
>Laurie's Mom and her rapist needed to have a baby to make Laurie
You understood that Laurie was born of their consensual union, not the rape?
yes but manhattan acted like the fact they had a consensual union afterwards is somehow mindblowing and worthy of preserving life. Humans are dumb and have dumb horny emotions, he's acting like a soapdrama plot is suddenly more interesting to him than space
If you don't think a consensual union coming out of something like that is mindblowing, that's that I guess.
I don't, it happens. So Manhattan DEFINITELY shouldn't.
Everything happens.
man once looked at the sky and thought it wed never get higher than mountain tops.
it's not JUST Laurie, she's just the catalyst for making him realize every other human is also their own thermodynamic miracle
I see what you mean, I really do.
But my problem here is, Manhattan is assigning weight to Laurie's existence, when once he did not assign any human life weight.
Why does Laurie get weight? He brands her a miracle because he presupposes she is unique, but he provides no coherent reason why he would find her existence unique. Any of those millions of children, if in the same circumstances, if given the same name, may turn out quite totally the same.
I suppose no two rocks in Chaotic Terrain are the same, down to the atom. Should manhattan count the number of particle collisions that formed each rock on Mars, he would find it vastly outnumbers the uniqueness of any given human, shaped by emotions and sex.
Manhattan suddenly starts acting like a human, impressed by mundane perceived differences only biased humans find significant. When before he found getting caught in the tangle of their lives only pointless.
NTA, but perhaps how we see Manhattan acting around individual people tells us a different story than his words do.
Humans are more complex than rocks.
Not through the scale Manhattan sees them.
He does once he speaks about competing spermatozoa.
>Why does Laurie get weight?
Ai dess yo!
Tldr; Manhattan skips a step in deciding Laurie is worthwhile saving.
Step A: "I guess it was (kinda) unlikely that your parents are a woman and her rapist, and that you out of millions of sperm were the fastest"
Step B: this makes you more significant, unique or interesting than a supernovae, quantum mechanics, and the origins and endings of creation because...???
Step C: Profit
he never said more, just that human life is a thermodynamic miracle in and of itself, which he lost sight of once his awareness expanded
manhattan's not a hard scifi concept, more a representation for apathy and despondence (in nuclear america and in people). Once he learns to find meaning in the little things, like human lovelives, then he finds the world is full of meaning.
*hence the finishing quote from Jung, that man must create his own passions. Manhattan's logic isn't perfect under scrutiny, but he's not scrutinising it anymore, human life is unique if he stops being a pessimist and appreciates what uniqueness that it does have.
Good point.
He assigns weight to Laurie being a miracle of such unlikely circumstances because he's in love with her, or at the very least he cares about her more than he cares about any other human. He becomes aware of how unique her specific birth is because he is just aware of her in general, and then he extrapolates that realization across the remainder of humanity.
yeah it's this one OP
same message as Interstellar
love is above everything lmao
>That seems to point up a significant difference between Europeans and Americans. A European says: I can't understand this, what's wrong with me? An American says: I can't understand this, what's wrong with him?
I make no suggestion that one side or other is right, but observation over many years leads me to believe it is true.
Laurie is important: the succession of events isn't just a cosmic queue and small details matter. Some are happy and some are sad. But they are all important in their own way. That's it. Part of the twist is having God realize that makes humans important.
>It just doesn't really mesh with how he acted before.
It's called character development you soulless husk masquerading as a human being.
Moore just likes rape
because DC has been chasing that high for years, trying to make their characters copy a parody.
It's perhaps unfair to blame Watchmen itself. It's not really it or Alan Moore's fault that ever pretentious blowhard or people who want comics to be seen as more "adult" took all the wrong lessons from it. But it, much like Dark Knight Returns, is very easy to point to.
Honestly, it's more down to Rorschach fanboys than the comic itself.
You reminded me that i really like Batman Begins. TDK gets all the love, but Batman Begins is my favorite of the trilogy.
Furry fandom goes in the trash
because i hate gnosticism and alan moore's evil ideology
Moore isn't a Gnostic. Heck, in the 1980s he wasn't even an occultist. Quite the opposite.
People that are addressed for their negativity in the OP hardly answer these threads, but we'll likely see different results for Watchmen.
Let's see if all the autists show up.
Most oft he Watchmen autists are Rorschach fans who hate Moore, not the comic itself. I'm not even convinced they're sincere either, just stirring up culture wars shit.
comic was better than the movie at least
Because it's artsy-fartsy trash.
How do you mean?
"Artistic" shit is always bad by nature.
Why?
Midwit take.
Not even. That's the mark of a certified dimwit.
In what way do WE hate it?
Dave Gibbons art is generally boring.
Maybe it's not the most impressive, but I wouldn't call it boring, at least not on Watchmen, For the Man Who Has Everything, Give Me Liberty, 80s Green Lantern, Marvel Fanfare #41, or The Originals. The Secret Service was pretty boring, though.
>For the Man Who Has Everything
>Give Me Liberty
>Marvel Fanfare #41
All of these have better art than Watchmen. I've never understood why there's such a failure to recognize that Gibbons did all this other stuff that's even better.
More impressive art, but not better. Storytelling wise, Watchmen is far superior. Also, the original issues have the best colors.
He's not the best but the coloring and paneling really elevates his usual stuff and goes a long way to making it memorable.
I found a used copy of the TPB from the late 80s for $10 at one of my local comic book stores and the original coloring is SO much better than the recolors.
>Why do you guys hate watchmen?
The comic itself is great. It's what it's influence did to superhero comics that made people hate it.
I’m very stupid. What is Moore actually trying to say in Watchmen? Is it just Cold War “can’t we all just get along and btw right wingers bad” hippie shit?
He's saying a lot things with Watchmen.
I realized that even as a stupid person but what is the main point Moore is making?
"Superheroes are dumb." You know, just like every cape comic he's made in the past 30+ years.
but that's not what Supreme is about at all
>"Superheroes are dumb." You know, just like every cape comic he's made in the past 30+ years.
So Supreme and the entire ABC line was a collective hallucination?
If they weren't on the IGN best comics ever list these people won't know it exists.
Thanks for the completely irrelevant point
He's right though.
Yes. It's not good.
Don't give up on life because of the ugly aspects of the human condition.
>What is Moore actually trying to say in Watchmen?
Letting a handful of people have power over everyone else is a mistake.
>Is it just Cold War “can’t we all just get along and btw right wingers bad” hippie shit
How can someone read Watchmen and come out thinking this?
well he did say he was very stupid
Here's a piece of it
I only hated the movie.
I love the original graphic novel.
>graphic novel
Moore prefers to call them "funny books".
Yeah, well, he's British, and doesn't know how to speak American correctly.
Brits refuse to take anything seriously. It's why they don't have an empire anymore and 'The City of London' controls them.
>Serious comics for serious persons, such as myself.
That's not what Watterson meant, you absolute homosexual.
Either way Watterson is a homosexual for saying that.
Can't find the interview this quote is from. Anyone got the link?
It's not from an interview. It's the commentary he wrote for this comic
>1993
Oh, he's talking about 90s grimdark slop from the Big Two. All is forgiven, Bill.
Moore thinks you weren't supposed to agree with his stinky detective.
Moore wrote complex characters with both positive qualities and flaws
I recall it being in the 10th anniversary book which was filled with commentary.
God these fricking quote content farm sites. Everything reduced to out of context digestible sound bites, and that's if the quote is even real. This is the kind of garbage that promotes those stupid "the writer believes and supports everything the character says!" takes.
Shouldnt this be Rorschach quote!
Yes, but people are stupid.
Why? Did Moore say it in an interview? Because character sentences doesnt mean the author agrees with them.
I was agreeing with you, but pointing out why the quote ended up being misattributed to Moore rather than correctly attributed to his character, Rorschach ... to wit, because people are stupid. (Or lazy. Or malicious. Take your pick.)
Oh, sorry, i misread that.
It's all good, anon.
A lot of losers who hate their fathers project that hatred onto Alan Moore. It’s just common parasocial stuff.
The comic is a classic. The fanbase, especially the one surrounding Rorschach who thinks he was right or don't acknowledge that he's an absolute lunatic and not an ideal to strive towards, is absolutely insufferable.
The film didn’t help his image, having owlman break down seeing him die rather than him dying alone
I still cant get over Bubastis randomly showing up in the final act with no setup. The movie has some beautiful visuals but every scene past the first act feels like Snyder just didnt get it. Way too much focus on "badass" action and not enough effort put into a cohesive structure.
>every scene past the first act feels like Snyder just didnt get it.
That's because he didn't. The man has no understanding of anything except vibes.
The movie is the best and accurate superhero adaptation. While it completly misses the main point of Watchmen.
Kinda says everything you need to know about Hollywood and adaptations.
>The movie has some beautiful visuals but every scene past the first act feels like Snyder just didnt get it
That's every Snyder movie. The man can make a pretty scene but he is completely incapable of actually understanding the material given to him.
I wonder if he doesnt want to understand, because without the action scenes and heroic stuff, most people would find it rather boring. I mean he knows what sells so he will change to source that way to appeal to the bigger audience.
Or if he thinks he get it but molds the wrong aspect that much that it seperates from the source that it feels like the opposite?
I mean Watchmen is like Starship Troopers. So over stylised and focusing on the cinematic that it became a parody of what it tried to criticise?
I'm almost positive that it wasn't intentional. Snyder might have talent as a filmographer but any time he's given major creative control he outs himself as a borderline moron that thinks the most b***h basic and hamfisted symbolism is deep. The man simply cannot comprehend the nature of nuance or subtlety, he is mentally incapable.
Snyder did get it, it’s just that Watchmen as a comic is an overt satire on superheroes in the real world in reflection of comics
In the movie it’s more a reflection of movies. Hence why you have more callbacks and references to movies than comics. The war room scene with Nixon looking like Dr Strangelove for example is nothing like the comics. Neither is the Shumacheresque costumes on some of the “modern” heroes
>Snyder did get it
Nope, and you didn't either.
Ok. Mr “media literacy”
Yes, Mr. Media Illiterate.
>In the movie it’s more a reflection of movies
No it isn't lol, adding bat nipples to Ozymandias does not make it a satire of superhero movies. That's just surface level bullshit, the only thing Snyder has ever been capable of.
>you have more callbacks and references to movies than comics
What are those clever moments then?
Snyder knows about cinematography and thinks that's enough to make a movie. He can't even put together a coherent plot, let alone have any sort of complex subtext.
He's just a dudebro that wants to be an intelectual but all he knows is "fake it till you make it".
Is Snyder a nepo hire? Only his output and the way he keeps getting work despite turning out one clunker after another says "nepo hire".
He has good visuals. Thats probably the only thing that suits can understand.
>Why didnt people like Superman vs Batman? It had Batman and Superman it. And a Jesus analogy. And gritty colors!
his wife is a producer for WB, yes
Called it.
I think he's just good at networking and putting up a pitch
Every single person who's "good at networking" was born into an already existing network.
Sadly true!
Could be, Suckerpunch would proof your assumption.
But he could have a good hand for creating something that the majority of viewers get and LeDeep can see some “deeper“ thing.
You sure? You sound plausible. But we shouldnt forget that cinema is a different medium and you need to use cinematic symbols because audience is accustomed to that.
Only dumb contrarians and morons for whom the it went way over their heads actually hate it.
I dont think you know how to use the word “hate“
fixed your image
>discounting Saturday Morning Watchmen
homosexual
some sacrifices must be made
For a puritanian, this is the only solition. A Rorschach version.
But if you are open minded like Ozymandias than
is the real deal.
At least they got Pax Americana right
With a good writer and less editorial it would be a miracle not to hit.
I always see this image floating around and I'm amazed that someone actually enjoyed Before Watchmen like this. It is the very definition of mid at its best. Even the Cooke issues are nothing memorable which is probably the worst part about them. It's something that can barely justify its own existence beyond DC wanting more money.
Sorry, i can appreciate that someone poured time into creating it. And i know that this DC just milking.
But i can see more effort than your normal mid or maimstream comic.
And when you cant remember Minutemen than you didnt read it properly. Because what remaimed in my memory is how the Minutemen try to stay relevant and even are eager to fake a heroic act. And how there are a Japanese father and son who tries to stop Japanese saboteurs. Si these two Japanese were the heroes.
The art is ok to good. The writing ranges from mid to good. And you can see that they tried to do something with it. Even some Charlton comic homages.
It's not that deep man, it's one of Cooke's weakest works by far and it's clear he didn't have as much passion to it as his usual stuff. It didn't say anything that we didn't already know, that the minutemen were egotistical larpers, and it did the cardinal sin of having to retcon shit for no real reason. At the end of the day it was a blatant cashgrab and those almost never end up being creatively fulfilling. We're talking a 6/10 at best here.
I never talked about deepness. Kinda hard to rate it since the series within Before Watchmen fluctuate. There were some retcons i agree were not needed, but they were so small you didnt recognize the, that hard. I would give it overall a 7/10.
And they were more creative than you think.
>I never talked about deepness
That goes hand in hand with quality, which Before Watchmen was lacking very much. If you're one of those gays that say "just turn off your brain bro" when enjoying something it might be for you but for anyone with standards it's exceptionally mediocre.
That doesnt need to go hand in hand. Age of Apocalypse, Invincible, The Boys or Crisis on Multiple Earths.
And the stories are better when you dont turn your brain off.
MinuteMen is about staying relevant and be heroic.
Silk Spectre is about mother-daughter conflict and family business.
Comedian is about duty and politics.
Niteowl is a hidden Rorschach book and is about teamwork and about pushing people to do things.
Ozymandias is about how he became Ozymandias and what is important to a person.
Rorschach is about masks and what lies behind the mask/appearance.
Dr.Manhattan about possibilities and causalities.
Moloch about what makes a villian.
Dollar Bill about tragic hopes.
Not all do it that good, but there is still a theme used than just punching the villian or slice of life.
I disagree with all of that, every single comic that you mentioned paled in comparison to the OG that did more with less. Like even the stuff that was only hinted at had more depth than an entire miniseries managed to do. In particular cases like Comedia, Ozymandias, Rorschach, and Manhattan their comics actually devalue said characters with their hackneyed stories.
>paled in comparison
Thats a strong word. Sure there is a big gap between Before and Watchmen. Watchmen is by far better and more wholesome. I just dont agree that Before is that bad as some belive.
And very weird examples you choose. Comedian is way more“problematic“ than Ozymandias or Rorschach. And if you choose ome than NiteOwl,is more damaging for Rorschachs character than Rorschach series. But i agree that Rorschach is the weakest story. Manhattan is kinda an ok example, if you dislike how it tries to explain on how Manhattans power works or how he came to be.
I thought about reading the others because it's a cool universe but not only every character is completely fleshed out in the original, from backstory to ending, they're not even written by the same guy so there's a fat chance that they're drizzling shits or decent fanfiction at best.
They add absolutely nothing to the original. It's like reading Moby Dick prequels by jobbing novelists.
Yeah, it kinda is not as good as Watchmen. And they are interpretations of the characters.
But i was heavily surprised on Moloch and Dollar Bill.
Before Watchmen is just bad fanfiction
They are not the original writer, asked by the rightholder to write something and were the ones who said “ok“. It is kinda fanfiction. But for fanfiction it is rather tame or not pompous enough. The only one that reads and looks like fanfiction is Rorschach.
Anyone that was passionate for Watchmen wouldn't write a sequel for it knowing the original creatives behind it didn't consent.
I dont think that every artist or writer really would hesitate.
See HBO Watchmen for “passionate“ fans.
Only people that are full of integrety and passionate Alan Moore fans would deny it.
HBO Watchmen was no different from Before Watchmen in that regard.
You will always find some agreeing to the job.
I don't think that exactly conducive to good writing though, especially when you're writing for a pre-existing IP.
bold of you to assume the Big 2 care about good writing
The discussion was about if people would write or draw Watchmen stuff. Not that we get good writing. I might have misunderstood
and it isnt about finding people but comparing the quality.
Pax Americana was good. Why isn't Peter Cannon by Kieron Gillen on here?
If it doesn't get memed, Cinemaphile doesn't know it exists.
Pax Americana was really popular here when it was released.
Right, and Peter Cannon was not.
Was it storytimed? I dont remember that it was. This could be the reason why.
Pretty sure I saw it storytimed, but I could be wrong.
Ok, i might missed it. Maybe it really went under the radar?
What? Pax Americana was really well received when it came out and it was story timed here more than once as well having threads discussing it. Multiversity as a whole was well liked.
Peter Cannon, not Pax Americana.
I looked into it and it was just Peter Cannon like Charlton.
Yes, since DC did not own him, he didn't appear in Pax Americana.
I mean it was its own thing and so it will not gather a big crowd by character recognition.
but we love the watchmen and minutemen
It's really good, and Alan Moore is a bellend these days.
Why?
>magic man bad
If I was a homosexual like you I'd say he's a bellend too, 'cause I'd love him
i miss the RRAARRRGGHHL memes
What meme?
Watchmen memes!
How would Moore react to this?
>anonymous
rorschach was always /ourguy/
He wouldn't care about some random person on the internet doing whatever the frick they want.
What pisses him off is big companies profiting from that kinda and diluting the works to the point of innocuousness.
Probably eyeroll and start a long monolog what Watchmen is really about and what the fan should have done to criticise something rather than roll in it and make just fun situations.
It's too kino.
Nice
>you're not trapped in here with me
>I'm trapped in here with YOU
>AAAA HELP MEEE
My favorite scene
It's badly written.
I don't like the characters, so I don't like the story. They're just mouthpieces.
/Co is basically a bunch of 14 to 25-year-olds with a sixth grade reading level thanks to our public schools.
it's pretty good, outside of the cringy parts where moore's communist ideology shines through.
Could you name any parts where that happens?
I don't remember the specifics (it's been years since I read it), but the way moore describes historical events is through the communist lens.
Could you point to some vague example?
>I don't remember but it's like this
Sounding like a Jordan Peterson fan
It's not that weird to remember your impression of something without remembering the specifics of why you got that impression.
No, it's not weird at all. c**ts like you are actually quite common and banal.
>can you be more specific
>no but I'm still right
>moore's communist ideology
Moore is an anarchist.
Pic related.
I think he is an anarcho-communist. Or whatever comes the nearest to a wizard.
I think he dropped the communist bit in the 2000s.
He got more magic obsessed and dandy. But he still is an anarcho?communist.
He felt flattered by the V for Vendetta masks at Occupy Wallstreet.
In more recent interviews, he sort of makes a mention of how communism and capitalism are both misapplied outgrowths of anarchism, so it seems like he renounced the communist part of anarcho-communism.
Ok, didnt read that from him. Maybe he now totally rely on anarchy-wizadry.
Oh no, he's moronic.
The reason so many influential people say “I have mixed feelings about it” is due to the fact that it exposed the concept of project bluebeam, while also critiquing it in a way that’s irrefutable. That’s why the squid wasn’t included in the movie version by the way. Can’t be putting the concept of fake alien invasions for the purpose of control on tv.
Whats project bluebeam?
/v/'s ocarina of time
/a/'s evangelion
/tv/'s citizen kane
/lit/'s don quixote
/mu/'s sgt. pepper's lonely hearts club band
watchmen.
I do like watchmen, really love it. One of my favorite things ever, the original 12 issues of course. But you should understand the hate it may receive here.
Why's that red guy's one leg so long?
Thats a red flubber,
Deconstructions are unnecessary trash.
I can't speak for any other anons and can only speak for myself, but I don't hate it at all.
The content outside of it and surrounding it however leaves much to be desired.
I know nothing about comic books is watchman a good place to start ?
>is watchman a good place to start
No. It'd be like starting mecha anime with Evangelion.
What kind of stories do you like?
I like a story when someone is intelligent enough to see the coming storm when everyone else is to busy
At the risk of overloading you with information, I'll dump some old Cinemaphile recommendation images.
And finally, some recommendations from Alan Moore himself.
Recommendations for ants
Are you perchance viewing it on a phone?
NTA, but I can read it on my phone.
Guess the other anon just needs to get his eyes looked at.
get off your phone, moron
You need to open the file in a new tab.
He needs to open the file in a new tab.
That's an interesting list.
>>>/x/
Interesting ideed. But also overly very juvenile tastes.
>very juvenile
This is comics.
And some comics are more juvenile and some are more mature. Whats your point?
Are you saying Maus is juvenile?
No, it is more mature for many juveniles.
>Moore is a Xaime CHAD
based
Say what?
if you don't get it already, explaining won't help
Try me.
>Xaime
Is this some board-specific new lingo?
Jaime Hernandez sometimes goes by Xaime.
Thanks for clarifying.
Watchmen has a nine panel grid structure because of 100 Rooms. I think Jaime's response to being the inspiration was that it's nothing special and just how Ditko did it.
There's a lot of really cool stuff here, but also some really mid stuff like Planetary.
Planetary is upper-tier capes.
It isn't nearly as smart as Ellis thinks it is.
You should add The Dark Knight Returns and Miller Daredevil. He wrote a blurb and a review, respectively.
No one here made that, some website did
Oh, okay.
Wait a minute, Cinemaphile told me Alan Moore hated comics!
>comics not listed in that chart that Moore praised at one time or another
The Amazing Spider-Man by Stan Lee and Steve Ditko
"Collector's Edition" by Archie Goodwin and Steve Ditko
Frank Miller's Daredevil
The Dark Knight Returns
Crisis on Infinite Earths
Dirty Plotte
Peter Bagge's Hate
Lord Horror: Reverbstorm
Saga
Uber
Steve Aylett's Hyperthick
>Uber
He also rates Gillen's WicDiv and Si Spurier's indie comics.
>Saga
I wonder why he praised that? For the progressive characters, the sex or the promising storytelling.
Did Saga came back from the hiatus?
>I wonder why he praised that?
It was back when Saga first started and it looked to everyone like BKV had finally figured out how to plot ahead.
Ok. It really dropped in quality.
The only thing i remember is the nympho arachide woman and an angsts goat man!
It was your typical comic series. Start promising than the writer doesnt know or catches himself in his plotlines.
>It really dropped in quality.
Yes, because it turned out that BKV had not in fact planned ahead and was just pulling situations out of his ass till he ran out of steam.
Best way to destroy the good will of your readers!
killing not constantine and not cable and not lying cat was a mistake. That book went nowhere.
It is baffling, because it's not good at all.
Garth Ennis and George R.R. Martin also liked it.
Maybe the promise to be different? But sometimes people praise it because it is progressive or anti-woke.
Also likes tv
>The Prisoner
>Twin Peaks
>The Sopranos
>The Wire
>Breaking Bad
>Better Caul Saul
>The Simpsons
>South Park
Reminder that he got LYNCHED by The Return.
I'll give him points for putting out-right erotica on his recommends, but still, most of his stuff just comes off as really pretentious hipster-slop, or niche le original pseud choices. Would it have KILLED him to include a single DC property? Or did them giving him the finger over Watchmen sour his grapes too much?
Also, his complete leg-kicking of Winsor McCay, saying that Will Eisner is the one most responsible for giving comics "brains" is unforgivable. Winsor McCay has more talent than him and Eisner combined.
>Would it have KILLED him to include a single DC property?
The list was complied by someone else, jackass. Here are some DC recs
Little Nemo has terrific art, but it's pretty unreadable, and every strip has the same format and punchline. Get over yourself.
>why didn't he acknowledge muh mainstream
get over yoursellf
the list didn't include any Marvel either so it was clearly intended to be a collection of non-cape recommendations
I have read the killing joke and bone. time to get to the rest !
Yes. It's a good story and stands on it's own without issue.
That page and this page are the two core concepts of the book.
>Manhattan leaves behind a mushroom cloud
nyoh ho
Great stuff.
Because I'm gay.
Watchmen is great
Two main reasons it leaves a poor taste in the mouth don’t actually have anything to do with the story itself
A) the influence of watchmen on the rest of the comics industry led to a shitload of imitation Watchmen who mainly didn’t get the point. And just made things dark and gritty. Some of these ARE actually good and different enough to make it its own thing too
B) Alan Moore as a creator is kind of a small minded butthole. It’s easy to hate work based on disliking the creator. Especially if he’s contradictory over the years and has takes that are clearly against his own writing
Rorschach mainly. Just look at all the “media literate” people claiming he failed, was wrong etc.
Even if Moore thought that. By no means does the story as presented decide Rorschach was wrong or he failed. It’s ambiguous. His final act could easily bring down the house of cards Veidt built
Likewise the “media literate” people are extremely selective in memory when it comes to stuff that contradicts their specific interpretation
E.g.
>rorschach is a hypocrite for not supporting Veidt destroying New York and blaming a fictional alien because… he wrote that Truman was right to nuke the Japanese when he was a kid!
Certainly Moore included that in the extras to give you something to think about. But when you think it’s logical to directly compare the US president directly ordering the nuclear bombings, delivering hundreds of thousands of leaflets before hand to said cities via bombers telling them their cities would be destroyed with a new bomb. Then claiming responsibility for it afterwards
And saying “this is JUST LIKE Ozymandias fooling the whole world with a fictional threat by killing his fellow citizens!”
No. It just doesn’t parse out. It’s like saying D Day and the Holocaust are the same because both involve people killing people who didn’t want to die
>Alan Moore as a creator is kind of a small minded butthole.
He's merely strongly-opinionated and stubborn with a brain full of bees. Nothing wrong woth that. Given the projects he works on, I'm not surprised he forgets shit, and he himself claimed to have a bad memory. Plus he's in his 60s and has been using drugs since he was a teenager. I think people expect too much of him.
That’s fair enough, as long as people don’t take his word as gospel which too many do.
It’s just bizarre given how much if his career is taking established characters and putting his interpretation and twist on them that so many of his fans think there’s only one way to “get” his work.
Plus some are plain not good as you’d think, V for Vendetta was a massive letdown compared to watchmen IMO. A bizarre caricature of fascism that really does pull the curtain back on the wizard in showing how far from reality his real beliefs are.
>That’s fair enough, as long as people don’t take his word as gospel. They should take *my* word as gospel instead!
>I always see this image floating around and I'm amazed that someone actually enjoyed Before Watchmen like this.
Same. It's written by people who are modestly talented at best, and the art is nothing special.
>Plus some are plain not good as you’d think, V for Vendetta was a massive letdown compared to watchmen IMO.
It was good, but yes, not as good as Watchmen. It was one of his earliest comic books, along with Marvelman.
I think V for Vendetta is as good as Watchmen in storytelling. But you can see that Watchmen evolved from V and is more dense and more character driven. I mean the characters are more complex.
But you are right that most of the comics he gets praised for are always characters made by others or expies. Even his ABC line characters are heavily inspired by other characters that you can call the. Expies.
Well, he loves metafiction and does it very well. The value of originality is a rather modern concept, and it's been on the way out for the past 3 or 4 decades.
Sure. Since we have a better knowledge or archive that nothing is forgotten and every new fiction stands on big shoulders. Kinda like “the Simpsons already did that“.
It's not rorschach being right about veidt, it's rorschach being rignt about everything, being morally unimpeachable, and not being a deranged butthole. That's what his fanboys want and that's why they're so resentful of Moore and anyone else who says he's an butthole and intentionally written to be one. Rorschach did nothing wrong because they want life to be black and white and wash away the city of filth IRL.
Rorschach was a violent high functioning sociopath who aimed his hatred at acceptable targets
There’s a reason the entire story is framed from his POV. We see moments like pic related. We see clearly where he’s delusional but also where he is THE ONLY proactive character other than Veidt
If Rorschach didn’t investigate the comedians murder and so on. All the main characters would have died or left earth.
He’s meant to be a tragic hero. A very flawed one. But one who essentially believes fighting the tide is better than succumbing to it
If you’re talking “right” and “wrong” it’s already beyond what his character is about
He caught plenty of criminals without killing them with Nite Owl. Enough an entire prison is full of people out to get him.
After the girls death and his first intentional murder he just became more deranged and splintered
Amniotic level of mentation.
Yes and I'm saying that the fanboys that seethe at Moore saying he's not someone you should aspire to be in real life because they think all those flaws aren't flaws, that he's perfectly sane and does everything right, and saying otherwise makes you le reddit.
>the fanboys
Are they in the room with you now? Because I see way more screeching artists complaining about “the fanboys” than these alleged Rorschach fanboys who think he’s Jesus or something
damn you really trumped that guy's anecdote with your anecdote
>these alleged Rorschach fanboys
Yeah, I'd say there's at least one of them in the room with us right now.
What? Is it such a bad thing to say that I'd totally frick a rawshark in the ass?
It's good, but the author has too big ego/activist boner to stop acting like a political visionary despite being wrong about Cold War
anyone have zach hadel's old watchmen flash cartoon?
Who?
Ruined the industry with navelgazing 2-edgy-4-u "deconstructions," innit?
No, the people doing the shitty grim-n-gritty comics did.
Anal More couldn't have predicted that people who try and ape his comic, now would he?
Moore is a Zionist cuck who doesn't understand Rorschach.
>capeshit trying to be serious instead of fun
instant garbage
Watchmen is fun.
Personally, like with most of Moore's output, I just get nothing emotionally out of it. It's, ironically, like a clock, it's perfectly crafted, but I just get nothing out of it.
I'll take a less well crafted comic that at least makes me feel over Watchmen.
Anything by Bach is surely more artistic than Mr. Brightside, but you know...
Go back to bed, Morrison.
Really? Moore's comics are some of the most emotionally powerful comics I've come across.
Bach also gets me going more than The Killers, so there's that.
>mr. bright side
Had to look that up and I’m 36. Maybe heard it in a bar or something once but I don’t remember it.
>Mr. Brightside
nice bait
>Being more moved by The Killers than Bach
Art is subjective and whatever but that's kinda sad.
because I love allan moore.
It's so popular and beloved that there are types that will hate it no matter how good it is. They are too poisoned by the acclaim to have any goodwill toward it, so they bash it at every opportunity.
I've seen people online practically rip their hair out at Watchmen. It's crazy.
Noticed that Hideaki Anno provokes the same reaction, from exactly the same people.
I don't. It's a masterpiece.
At least one of the Before Watchmen people did it because they needed money for their spouses medical bills, I think Adam Hughes?
That's respectable.
Is it? It's understandable maybe but respectable? I wouldn't consider selling out your ethics for a paycheck to be respectable.
If his wife was ailing, it's a good reason to ride a cash-grab train.
It's a good reason but it's not a respectable reason.
I don't know whose ethics would put the sanctity of a comic book IP over a human life so yes I think taking a job you wouldn't want for the sake of your wife's health is respectable.
I think Cooke did it because he needed money too? Wasnt he ill?
I think Azzaeello did it because he liked Rorschach.
I don't hate it, but am a bit depressed that no other mainstream comic even came close to achieving what it did.
I don't really hate it, I just don't care about it. I do admit that gays shilling it like it's the best thing ever annoy me, but that doesn't make the comic itself any worse.
It's shilled as the best thing ever for a good reason.
I like Watchmen but there's a big plothole in how Comedian was able to put together Ozys plan from what he could have plausibly learned sneaking around le secret island
we can assume he did some additional detective work beyond just hopping to the island and seeing the squid. He saw the list of targets for "Manhattan" cancer, it's fair to assume he figured out more details of the plan
Where would he go to get the 'give Dr. Manhattans associates cancer' list? Ozy would logically destroy that list as soon as Jane Slater is diagnosed or never write anything down in the first place. And what would he learn from the island except a macabre special effect is being created for a movie? The squid team wouldn't have 'cloned from the brain of a grave robbed psychic' in their files because they don't need to know that. Ozy should know about compartmentalization.
but we know Ozymandias wrote things down because that's how Rorschach and Nite-Owl twigged he put out the hit on himself.
Compartmentalization is all well and good but that really only keeps the people within the organization from figuring out the big picture. An outside figure could potentially dig up all the compartments and put the pieces together, or at least create a close-enough picture
I think the easy password is a contingency to lure Night Owl and Rorschach to Karnak to him so he can brag about the plan. Otherwise the password would be unguessable.
As for Blake - he could use his glowie contacts to dig but they're the sort that will want to know why and if he tells what he knows then its no longer his private investigation
Ozy subconsciously wanted his peanut gallery (in British theatre also known as "the gods") to made up of the people from the Crimebusters meeting all those years ago.
I concur, though not Dr. M at the party because he's a wildcard and can't be overpowered. But the cancer list is different, he can't leave that existing or accessible. Night Owl only starts to put it together after the list goes public.
The military painting DANGER POISON homie ALERT on his quarters immediately after the tv show is also dumb. He'd be met by a liaison telling him that no involuntary emission of radiation has ever been seen from him, the whole thing stinks and they're going to get to the bottom of it.
How would they know? They're not measuring him at all times, though maybe they should have.
They would have extensively tested him with his full co-operation, he's a scientist after all. The point is even if he 'leaks', he's the lynchpin of US strategic defense and you don't do anything precipitate with his feelings. You soothe him even if you have doubts
Sure but finding out plot flaws is fun and good exercise. I guess he was just a Republic serial villain after all
I know, but those tests are probably not continued every day in situ. There'd be so many factors to consider, they realistically shouldn't have let come into contact with anyone not wearing protection.
He told and made everyone to frick off and disappeared to Mars within minutes. So cooling him down was more tricky.
>finding out plot flaws is fun and good exercise.
Agreed.
>So cooling him down was more tricky.
And they do the worst possible thing by having a GI painting a big radiation stencil on his door instead of doing almost anything else. We can speculate that Ozy has some military brass paid off to do that dumb act since he remarks that he's read Manhattan's psych reports
>We can speculate that Ozy has some military brass paid off to do that dumb act
Maybe.
>so he can brag about the plan
I don't think he anticipated Rorschach unraveling the plot as far as he did, but his fatal flaw is definitely ego, and that could've led him to leave breadcrumbs, subconsciously or not, that would allow certain people to figure it out so he had SOMEONE to brag to
I agree with you that this is compocated but i guess he has sources in secret ervice amd like
assumed he collected infos, found some archived papers, hacked some computers.
Either he thinks the complicate obvious answer is the best solution or you are right that he planned to get all witnesses together to swear them in his coup.
Maybe Veidt let him in and told him, then iced him when he wasn't on board with it. He clearly sought the approval of the others when they came, though I suppose that was after there was nothing they could do about it.
>Maybe Veidt let him in and told him
He'd never do that, he regretfully kills his loyal Vietnamese servants because they know too much
>plothole
Cinema Sins singlehandedly destroyed a generation's interest in understanding what this term actually means.
You can consider that a plothole. Since it isnt explained and Veidt says he planned it all to be perfect we as a reader have to expect that just discovering the island will not give enough information to connect it with Moloch or the Dr Manhattan plan.
>You can consider that a plothole.
Nope, because it ain't a hole in the plot.
You're a plothole.
If you want direct explaination and exposition on how Comedian was able to find out, than yes.
We can only assume that he knows how to do undercover work and have his methods to piece the plan together.
Because frick alan moore.
Alan, is that you?
I think you guys are missing the point that for all his "smarts", Ozy was also caught up in the superhero mindset and ultimately was nothing but your typical ridiculous comic book villain.
There's that too.
Because it tries to justify genocide and make the man who exposes it out to be the bad guy.
It doesn't do either of those things.
>The comic literally tries to paint Ozymandias as the villain with a switch at the end where he's justified because he brought unification and peace, then Rorschach, the principled "hero" who never compromises is made to be the villain for "ruining" this achievement.
The penultimate story boils down to deliberately reversing the roles of what the reader expected in order to upend the concept of what a "Hero" actually is, not through Comedian raping some woman, or Doctor Manhattan becoming indifferent, but the fundamental concepts behind the actions one takes in the pursuit of "truth" and "justice" being questioned by Moore. That's what the story is about.
The comic beats you over the head in condemning what Ozymandias did as temporary, foolish, and heinous. Pictured is Ozymandias turning back the doomsday clock.
You thinking that Rorschach is "made to be the villain" is your own failure for thinking in terms of black and white.
Are you guys actually going to watch a men?
No, i am a male watcher!
I wonder why Moore choose a pirate story and not a western as intercomic.
Because people keep using it to start shitty threads on Cinemaphile.