In b4 trolls trolling trolls trolling trolls trolling trolls trolling trolls trolling trolls trolling trolls trolling trolls trolling trolls trolling trolls trolling trolls trolling trolls trolling trolls trolling trolls trolling trolls trolling trolls trolling trolls trolling trolley-trolls.

yes i honestly felt that way>>2954

I didn't. I felt Moore achieved the impossible task of bringing the whole superhero genre (men in tights) into a realistic, adult world, paying homage to the classics without slipping into parody... ever. No one else has ever been able to do that. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

For my money, that makes him the greatest comic book writer ever and Watchmen is a truly e-p-i-c work (in the real sense, not the bastardized form used by anon at large).

Sinestroll Corps.

Watchmen is boring right now. Let's talk about Top 10!
Just think Hill Street Blues meets the Justice League only with more incest!

I enjoyed it, but it wasn't pant crappingly awesome. I don't know, I liked it but didn't love it.

The ending sucked. Like, hard deep-throat cock sucking kind of suck. The rest of the book, though, I felt was done really well.

>>2954
Well, anon, what did you think the point of Watchmen was?

At first I was like that too. Then I started thinking. Not in a "you are a retarded me not ho ho ho", thinking about how the things happened in the story.

Do you remember the kid that was reading the comic book that was a perfect metaphor of cold war whose author got kidnapped to make the design of the monster? He was from the beginning doing nothing, but all the other parts, like one fourth of the comic and the explanation of the monster, couldn´t had been there without him.
And then he is part of that sequence when all the side stories converge.
And all that was just to make more humane the deaths, to get also the Rorschach point of view of each life meaning something instead of the big "I saved the world" ending.

Also Rorschach. He couldn't had been a worse character. He was ugly, fascist, boring, didn't like anything that had to do with people.
And yet, his death is a sad one.

See, and I ask forgiveness for some broken english, I just get so exited that I forget how to write properly on my second language; Watchmen is a comic where you don't get everything in your face. You don't have a "this is good this is bad", you don't have a miracle machine for Superman, you don't get a epilogue that makes a resume of what happen in case you weren't paying attention.

I think it is a really good comic. Far more designed for older readers that comics that just add gore to the original concept. Maybe not the best comic book.
Mainly because there isn't a best comic book in the world, there are just favorites.

That doesn't mean that it looses the value of creating a lot of comic language and the merit of such a complex work.

>>2978
I just can´t understand how you feel that way. Really. I guess that it´s a matter of opinions...

OP here,

Perhaps I need to clarify my position, seeing as how some people think I'm trolling. I'm not saying the book sucked. In fact, some of it is pretty good. But that's all. It's good. I don't think Moore made any real profound statements about humanity or morality. And it's clear that he thinks he was, which is why there are those "oh-so-clever" references sprinkled throughout the book.

As for the characters, I did enjoy Rorschach from time to time. There's something about being in the mind of a crazy that can be fun. But Nite-Owl and the Silk Spectre really left me cold. I doubt even when this first came out that it would be insightful to juxtapose Nite-Owl's mid-life crisis and his newfound power in returning to crimefighting.

But, like I said, it wasn't bad. Just definitely did not live up to the hype. I would have expected it to be something I'd want to read again, but I get the feeling I won't. I'm not going to nerd rage on internets if the movie sucks, I know that much.

>>2986Watchmen is all about Rorschach. As much as I enjoyed the book I'll always remember Rorschach.

>>2954
You're misinterpreting what is so great about watchmen. While I personally love the story, as a story, the comic is far more impressive than its story. Watchmen was one of the first to do what it did, to make a comic book an entirely adult experience. Watchmen is an important stepping stone for comic books from a novelty to a legitimate art form that can represent things that literature and movies never can.

tl;dr:
Watchmen proves comics are legitimate media.

>>2995
Bringing a superhero comic to an adult level doesn't make the genre suddenly legitimate. This ain't Shakespeare. They tried, but it isn't. You're still gonna get weird looks or a snicker if you're reading it on the subway.

Nor does it make it a masterpiece. About all it has really done is created a swath of imitators in the industry with varying degrees of success. It's a fun little postmodern romp. Nothing special beyond it. That's what I take away from it, at least.

>>2999 I agree with 2954. Watchmen does help to legitimise comics as a serious form of expression, though I accept that there are still those people who won't be able to see past the pictures and costumes.

It made Time Magazine's top 100 novels of all time so at least it exposed the graphic novel format to a new audience who may have gone their whole lives without ever even thinking about comics.

Watchmen is one of those books were you will learn more and more each time you read it as you get older.

A read it a while ago and I understood the moral juxtaposition between Rorschach with his moral absolutism and Veidt with his moral relativism.

Another time I recognized the patterns of repetition that played out on the pages like music bars.

The last time I admired it was for the cementing of an ideology present in the 80's that I was only partially aware of at a young age, but seem more potent with hindsight.

Shit. If you're 16 and you're just reading it, I don't think you should expect too much. It doesn't hit you like the ending of 6th Sense with the "holy crap" stuff. It hits you with the depth of the material as you learn to appreciate it more and more.

Like all good literature.

The thing is, there isn't anything else to pick up. Moore is not subtle. He wants you to goddamn know when he's making a point in this book. I think the fact that he needed to flat out tell the story of the Gordian Knot while alluding to it throughout the story was incredibly aggravating. Primarily, dear anon, because he thinks we're stupid.

Moreover, Veidt's character development is sacrificed for the "Big Reveal" at the end. He's just not given a lot of depth. Oh, he is explained to us. A great deal about him is explained to us about how he was a hero, and now he's cashing in on it, and that he's smart and generous. But there is no opportunity to connect with him, and that is a huge drawback for the close of the story. His motives, his desires, are all delivered in a plot dump of Blofeldian proportions.

And that's the thing. This would be alright if he were a straight-up villain, this is what they do. But he was a hero, and still is. The Pirate Story doesn't add anything that we wouldn't have already gleaned from the story proper. It merely outlines what should be obvious from the outset. The plan is gimmicky, contrived and the moral implications of his choice have been found several times over in many different sources. There's nothing spectacular here, and that's what disappoints me. There just aren't any new and interesting ideas to grapple with. It's entertaining, I'll give you that. Certainly a class above most comic books. But not much beyond it.

That's the way I see it at least.

I agree, OP. I was expecting this to be the greatest comic I had ever read, since it is so hyped and is the most praised graphic novel, and I was left just feeling... meh. Was it good? Of course. Does it deserve it's praise? No way in hell.

For me, Watchmen brought the whole notion that superheroes are actually human to its most complete sense in the history of comics. The whole book stands as an effigy to the imperfection of humanity illustrated by Ozymandias, Rorschach, and Dr. Manhattan. Ozymandias represented the best of humanity and Rorschach the worst in terms of potential and capability, and they were both right and wrong about what should have been done.

The only person who could have been right about everything was Dr. Manhattan because he was beyond human, perfect in a sense. He saw through time and space, he knew all and yet he could not act against it despite his knowledge of the facts that would be. He always did the right thing because he couldn't do anything else.

Rorschach would have killed everyone that was involved in the big secret.
Him and Comedian were probably the only sane people in that story.

>>3065also Dr. Manhattan was a monster. He would have been the first to go if Rorshach hadn't been put down.

>>3067
I don't see how Dr. Manhattan is a monster and I don't see how anyone can kill someone with so much power and knowledge at his disposal.

>>3056
You're not supposed to connect with Veidt, he's a superhero. He was an ubermencsh, and he saw the world not as an irreparable mess, but a problem to be solved. The thing is, he was too good, and he solved the problem. The funny thing is no one seems to mention that the book has a somewhat happy ending, and it's all thanks to Veidt. Rorschach on the other hand was the opposite of Veidt, he didn't wanna fix the problem,but eliminate it. With these two characters, it;s obvious to see who Moore lies with. But, if you see Rorschach and Veidt as opposites, then you could argue that the comedian is in the middle. He himself didn't seem to have any beliefs, he just kinda went where the money and the work was. I think he didn't want to disappear with all the other heroes cause I;m pretty sure he had nothing else he could do except be some kind of masked mercenary.

after reading it, did anyone else feel sort of...
well...to put it bluntly, i didn't really know what to do with myself.

obviously the book was good, but i can't remember whether i thought it was a masterpiece or simply a good comic, which is the majority of the debate here. Usually when i think something is good, i don't know what to do.

What i mean is, after you finished reading the final page, did anyone else get this odd feeling? For me, when i read it, it was all in one night, so i guess the best description i could give would be that i was sorry it ended... you know that empty feeling, like after you witnessed your grandmother die but it hasn't sunk in yet?

i dunno...i forced myself to reread the whole comic simply because i didn't know what to do with myself afterward.

I just don't like that the story is self-contained. I would have prefered it as a final story for the Charlton Comics characters, as was originally conceived.

>>2999

however it's a graphic novel, not really a comic book

>>3106


falgjaksgqa!

>>3106

Calling a comic book a graphic novel is like calling a video game a reality simulation module.

Artificially lengthens and gives credit to what is essentially a toy.

>>3118
I think it's just a term used for comics that are longer than the average 20-30 page comics.

I call any book containing collected comics a graphic novel. So THERE!

Me too. I think of "graphic novel" as being a printing format. In fact, I refer to all hardcover collected volumes as "graphic novels" as opposed to "trade paperbacks".

Do ashcans exist anymore?

>>2978

but ________ HAD to die. He was in too much misery during the story to stay alive.

>>3131
Define what you mean by "ashcan".

If you mean those little minature comicbooks, then definitely yes. I work at a comicshop and we get such ashcans and the like with the newsletter from our distributor, Diamond. Admittedly, we don't get as many minicomics as we used to though. Mostly we get fullsized 99¢ #0s of stuff nowadays.

>>2954
you just said goram.

>>3168
Indeed I did. It's a perfectly cromulent word.

>>3175
I like your style.

>>3168
You on the other hand I find to be annoying.

>>2999
So because some ignorant fuck on the subway snickers at me I should accept their view that comics are for kids? If we followed that logic the only fucking art we would have is michael bay 'splosions.

>>3065
Dr. Manhattan was a monster, and hardly ever right. He stood there and watched the Comedian shoot a pregnant woman and did nothing. He could have stopped the bullet in the air, he could have disintegrated the Comedian without a hesitation, he could have done so much to save her that he was clearly unwilling to do. I think Epicurus statement on God's benevolance fits in well with Dr. Manhatten:
Is Dr. Manhatten willing to prevent evil, but not able?
Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able but not willing?
Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able, and willing?
Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able, nor willing?
Then why call him God?

>>3077
The Comedian was a reflection of his view of society. His whole persona was a joke that him, and Rorschach, understood.

>>3182

>>Dr. Manhattan was a monster, and hardly ever right.

I was expecting some ill rhymes or some such there. I feel sad now.

>>3183
now I'm sad ;_;

>>3184
Me too. Why didn't >>3182 bust out some rhymes with his philosophy?

:(

Dr. Manhattan was a monster, and hardly ever right.
Aware of all parts of time, but when tachyons blocked his sight.
All the power in the world rested within his hands,
But he would not even lift a finger to save another man.

Silk Specter was his arm candy but eventually she split,
When John decided to pleasure her with more than just one "it."
She ran over to Nite Owl, who tried to be a friend.
They beat a bunch of muggers, and snuggled in the end.

Dan could have fought the good fight, but he gave up years ago.
The Keene Act clipped his latex wings and his ship crashed in the snow.

Edward Blake was crazy. That's what the others said.
That he was like a Nazi and lots wanted him dead.
But truth be told he wasn't nuts, he only didn't care.
Veidt threw him through a window and he plummeted through the air.

Ozymandias had a God complex, and was genre savvy too.
When he saw war on the horizon, he decided what to do.
He built a giant space squid but kept it from the sea.
He tossed it into New York and it caused millions to bleed.

Rorschach was unbending and did what must be done.
Never compromising, always justice done.
He faced the blasts of ice and cold to return to the world.
But John had other plans in store for the man who acted poor.

To protect Veidt's utopia, he could not be released.
The world might think him crazy, but Walter's shoutings had to cease.
"Do it!" Rorschach shouted, better than live the lie.
Manhattan vaporized him, and thus the hero died.

But "truth will out" may still ring true, for Rorschach was no fool.
His journal was left with all the facts to bring down Veidt's sick rule.
The only question is whether it will ever meet their eyes.
We all now have our motto, "Never compromise."

(This was written spur of the moment, so it's not perfect. Feel free to edit or add to it if you can make it better. Now, no more sadness. It's smiley time.)

>>3188
=)

>>3188

I think I am starting to fall for you. That was magical and needs some recording.

>>3188
beautiful ;_;

It was awesome. If you are asking "hey why did this cock bag get to see this movie in Imax and not me?" this is because it is you who is the bag of cock for not watching it. this movie obtained over 9000 smiles. A man reminds me of a pedo from SEVEN COCKS OF FURY HAMMERING MY ANUS this man owns 2 dogs look for him. Rorschach is Epic. New fags live and learn Rorschach masks would be more bad ass than EFG masks.

P.S. Dr Manhattan needs pants
P.P.S. watch the first sex scene and listen to what he says then at the end of the movie listen to what he has to say when he gets asked about downstairs.

SEVEN COCKS OF FURY HAMMERING MY ANUS refers to the retardspawnof fourchan sevenchan

>>3203
this post angers me not because you got to see the movie before me, but just because you're shitting yourself over it because you got to see it before other people. i still doubt that it will be that great

>>3203
I just barely got the jist of this post. Are you retarded or something?

>>3206
Well you doubted it but I bet now that you have seen it you were rocked by its awesomeness, huh?

I think anyone who reads it nowadays will probably not get the full impact. You have to remember that before Watchmen most comics were cheerfull and had happy endings. perhaps not all but all the ones I read anyway.

>>3280
saw it, wasn't especially impressed. was ok, but that's about it

I havent' read it and I don't want spoilers but the fanboys kill me. They always seem to act like this is some sort of bible and reading it holds the truths of the universe.

>>3289
Watchmen is the bible of the comic world because VEIDT DID IT, RORSCHACH DIES , A GIANT ALIEN SQUID KILLS HALF OF NEW YORK

>>3304

I could not agree harder with this statment.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cH2jsabYulI&feature=channel_page

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A-oGty52mbk&feature=channel_page

>>3203
He did need a couple minutes after all. I would have too if she was after me.

hee hee hee. Goram.

>>3188
i totaly wanna see that fat red head kid who found hi sjournal become his successor

Hollywood took a good comic and made it into not only one of the best comic-movie adapttions, but a great movie in its own right.

>>3953
Yeah Hollywood sucks...
wait a minute

>>3953
I loved seeing the prison scene done well. Especially the bit with the fry basket.
I was so happy when I got to see that part in the movie.

>>3989

BUT IN THE COMIC THERE WASNT ANY GLASS BETWEEN HIM AND THE FOOD OMG THE MOVIE WASNT FAITHFUL TO THE SOURCE

>>3991

I don't think any of the fanboys of the graphic novel are upset with the look of the movie (except maybe that they all look so young and night owl is as in shape as veidt, but most still let that pass)

It's mostly the dialogue and music and more minor/subtle things they left out or changed. I'm going to try to sync up the motion comic's audio to the film's video.

>>2954 pretty goram pretentious

Irony is good for your heart, deary...

sup /co/.

So I finished reading OP's post, and I had been expecting to read something new. But that didn't happen. No. Instead, I came to the conclusion that OP has posted COPYPASTE FOUR BIG DICKS UP MY ASSHOLE, ALSO BAN MEIAN nymphS COPYPASTE COPYPASTE COPYPASTE COPYPASTE COPYPASTE COPYPASTE COPYPASTE COPYPASTE COPYPASTE COPYPASTE COPYPASTE

>>2995
Thats absolutely right. I'm not clear about the timeline as to when this came out with regards to all the other seemingly "bad guy does wrong then good guy comes in and saves day" comics that were coming out but the feel and story were good.

As far as EVERYTHING else about Watchmen is concerned, hated it. The whole setup of the story just pissed me off. I mean you got a team of "super heroes" and only one that has super powers has the abilities of God. Whats the point of the other heroes? And >>2969 is right. Moore actually went so far away from parody that it got preachy and every character insane. Nite Owl was prolly the only one I cared for till I saw his costume. Everyone else were WAY to overdramatic about shit. I mean Comedian? He wasn't funny nor was he funny ironically like "Why do they call him the comedian when he's so dark? Oh ok!" You need some sort of parody to make a comic book or else it becomes just pages of people fucking talking about how awful the world is. America is a hell of a lot better than Moore makes it out to be in this comic.

Was prolly one of Moores worst comics, at least in my book. You know what was real good and had plenty of parody? The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen. It was still super dark with Hyde eating and raping people and the detailed murders of Invisible Man, but it had a defined villain and hero/villain face off in both volumes, in other words parody.

If you think League is parody, you are confused about what words mean.

>>5506
>'parody' 'parody' 'parody'

You keep using that word, I do not think it means what you think it means.

>>5506

Looks like you didn't get the point about Watchmen. It's a social commentary about politics and culture in the 1980s while also reflecting on the comic book industry at the time. And you couldn't have had any of the character conflicts that were in the story if anyone else other than Dr. Manhattan had super powers.

Watchmen is not supposed to be a superhero comic or a superhero movie; its supposed to be a critique of society and human nature using superhero's to juxtapose a realistic message against something that is by nature unrealistic.

>>3060
Pretty much this for me. I just hope that I'll read it again in ten years and it will really hit me.

i think the people in this thread who didnt like watchmen werent around in the time watchmen was set and came out, they have no idea or very little understanding of the political, social aspects of that time, and is why they dont get or like the comic, its just a case of ignorance really.

I wasn't around either but I enjoyed reading the book, and liked what they did with the movie.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Koadtxrh6PY

>>5815
I get the Watchmen and it's really not that hard to "get" if you know anything about modern history. The problem is it's not really that good. Pretty much every question(who killed the Comedian, who framed Rorschach, Does Dr.Manhattan give people cancer) is answered with the same generic response(Ozymandias organized the Comedian's death, Ozymandias framed, Rorschach, and it was all a part of his plan for world peace). Then there's the useless Silk Spectre(doesn't do anything important to the story at all) and Rorschach(his death was NOT sad). I could go on but really the Watchmen is Moore's worst

I cried when Rorschach died in the film. even though I knew it was going to happen.

>>5860
He took off the mask. Manhattan killed Walter Kovacs, not Rorschach.

>>5862
>He took off his face

fix'd

>>5862
splitting hairs aren't we?

This wall of text has forgot the time paradox.
This was made in October 1987. >>3042 . Before these ideas existed let alone were made real. Heros season 1 and (Fahrenheit) 9/11 made WATCHMEN old news in the idea of 'How many poeple will you kill to save the world?"

This was introducing concepts, opening minds to the depts of morality in the face of extinction. If you're going to think 'Manhatten style' with time, what are you expecting? Why not just watch Excape from LA before NY.
or compare Tetris with the Mona Lisa and Alice. It's ground/mind-breaking at it's time.

Society evolves. That was part of the story fo their world and message in the story for ours.

How much suffering will pave YOUR road to the future? And who's life will it come from? Now ask that of mankind.

You want to blow your mind in the here and now of 2009? Read Blasphemy by Douglas Preston
or Traitor by Mathew Stover.

>>2995 >>3056 >>3065 >>3182 >>3188 >>3318 >>5842 >>5862

I think the movie was better, but I find myself surprised by my own statement.

>>5902

tl;dr, the movie still blows.