Favorite Watchmen Character?

[BeastieRunner]

I recently finished re-reading the Watchmen again and was wondering what people thought of the "super-hero" characters. I personally enjoy Rorschach because of his moral absolutism in dealing with everyone. That leads to some great conflicts and some morbidly humorous encounters.

[onenatv]

I would vote on Rorschach too. The guy was a beast!

[lordlad]

It's a pretty obvious choice. Rorschach ! He was truthful to himself and his believes till the end.........even when facing death. Absolutism at its absolute.

[hshaukat]

Rorschach all the way. Never seen a character like him before or since.

[Young Avenger]

Definitely Rorschach. I've never seen a character like him before. Installing fear into criminals the minute he steps into a bar, his unusual way of speaking, his absolutism. It's hard not to like the guy.

[EZMOHR]

This is turning out to be like I thought it would. And I voted the same character as almost everybody else.

[TJ Shoun]

Dr. Manhattan, Veidt, and Rorschach were all absoltuely fascinating characters but...

The Comedian, hands down.

Combine the the over-glandular Wolverine male sterotype with the twisted amoral philosophy of The Joker, wrap it up in the gruff, hardened exterior of a Nick Fury and you have this crazy bastard.

The Comedian was convinced this world was nothing but a sick joke... and he made no apologies for his selfish actions in what he saw as a meaningless existence. Instead of being sickened by his revelations, he embraced it and laughed at it's pointlessness.

An atheist with conviction. You gotta love that. :)

[RickThunderclees]

Rorschach....although I DID really empathize with Dr. Manhattan and loved Moore's issue on Manhattan's history. That issue is most definitely a work of literature.

[nihil_domini]

Definately Rorschach. The story of the kidnapped little girl is probably one of the most realistic portrayals is a situation EVERY superhero should have run into at some point, and Rorschach's personality is the logical conclusion.

[m3hr]

Rorschach has got to be one of the best characters in any book I've read, but I'm surprised Dr. Manhattan didn't make the poll.

[BeastieRunner]

Rorschach has got to be one of the best characters in any book I've read, but I'm surprised Dr. Manhattan didn't make the poll.

Ah Crap!! I ment to replace him over Captain Metropolis!!

[Apathy Boy]

Hmm... looking at this poll, perhaps the question should've been "Who's your second-favourite character, after Rorschach?"

Rorschach is my favourite - the guy's an absolute scene-stealer, and he has an awesome visual (though not as awesome as his archetype, the Question). But it's close, because I like Nite Owl II a lot. It seems to me that WATCHMEN is ultimately Dan Dreiberg's story, as he's the only character who doesn't let himself get dehumanized by the superheroic lifestyle.

At the very least, Dan provides the story with its heart. I would've liked Rorschach a whole lot less if he hadn't had Dan to play off of...

[NotSuper]

Ozymandias. How DO you tell if the world's smartest man has gone insane?

Veidt reminds me of a George Orwell quote: "What can you do against the lunatic who is more intelligent than yourself, who gives your arguments a fair hearing and then simply persists in his lunacy?"

[Strider119]

Dr. Manhattan was far and away my favorite character

Rorsharch and Comedian are tied for second.


Every character was so superbly layered and appraochable from the readers standpoint though, they were all top notch





make a choice:
strider119

[tkitna]

Dr. Manhattan was far and away my favorite character


I 2nd this.

[Agentum]

hehe, i could have guessed who was the most popular of them.
He is absolutly crazy and asocial but somwhere he does the right thing and questions the right things.

[Mothmonsterman]

Hasn't Alan Moore mentioned at times how he is somewhat put off by everyone embracing Rorschach they way they did?

[Agentum]

Maybe, but i guess he would dislike whatever you would like :D

[RawShark]

who'd you think I pick?

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v140/RawShark/saddler1.gif

[Cash Lone]

Hasn't Alan Moore mentioned at times how he is somewhat put off by everyone embracing Rorschach they way they did?

Yes. He wanted to show how lonely a vigilante truly would be. Thing is, Rorschachs character really had development and thats why everyone digs him. Rorschachs horrible childhood and callous environment were relatable.

My favorite part of the Watchmen are the viewpoints of Rorschach vs. Dr. Manhattan. To Rorschach, there is no moral compass, no larger picture. Just Darkness.

Dr. Manhattan, on the hand, sees the possibilities and infinite structure of life and does believe there is something beyond us.

I chose the Comedian as my favorite watchmen, because (and this is a superficial reason) his costume was boss. that S & M mask cracks me up everytime I look at it. :D

[RabidWolfe]

The thing with Rorschach was that he was right (by this I mean correct - not good in a moral sense)! Everyone thought he was crazy, but he figured the big conspiracy out before anyone else did.

Moore, in essence, made the entire ending a moral confrontation between Ozymanidas and Rorschach. And even though Ozy "wins" in the end, one gets the idea that Rorschach was (oddly) the moral superior of the two.

Ozy's "solution" won't last anyway (anyone ever read the poem Ozymandias?) - it was a temporary fix at best. Pragmatism vs. Absolutism.

Odd, that. That's where Rorschach's popularity comes from. He was the smartest of the bunch, but he didn't have the charisma or money to pull it off. The capitalist (Ozymandias) wins in the end, but Rorschach steals the show.

[BoosterBronze]

I picked the 'Shack, based on this criteria: He was the only character in Watchmen I was ACHING to see more of. All the characters were cool and well written, but Rorshack was the one I wanted to be in an ongoiong series. There seemed like there was more to tell with him.

[Shellhead]

I voted for "Raw Shark", although my second pick would be the pirate guy. I don't remember any character named Captain Metropolis... is that supposed to be Doctor Manhatten?

[filthysize]

The obvious answer.

I think it has something to do with the fact that I'm a Question fanboy.

[BoosterBronze]

I voted for "Raw Shark", although my second pick would be the pirate guy. I don't remember any character named Captain Metropolis... is that supposed to be Doctor Manhatten?

Cap Metropolis was one of the minutemen, later he tried to form the "Crimebusters" (when Comedian burned his map).
Chubby blonde guy in a silly red suit.

[BeastieRunner]

Cap Metropolis was one of the minutemen, later he tried to form the "Crimebusters" (when Comedian burned his map).
Chubby blonde guy in a silly red suit.

Yeah he wasn't intergral to the story per se . . . and I'm still mad I forgot to change him to Jon! :mad: :mad: :mad:

[MrBeelzy]

Dr. Manhattan, Veidt, and Rorschach were all absoltuely fascinating characters but...

The Comedian, hands down.

Combine the the over-glandular Wolverine male sterotype with the twisted amoral philosophy of The Joker, wrap it up in the gruff, hardened exterior of a Nick Fury and you have this crazy bastard.

The Comedian was convinced this world was nothing but a sick joke... and he made no apologies for his selfish actions in what he saw as a meaningless existence. Instead of being sickened by his revelations, he embraced it and laughed at it's pointlessness.

An atheist with conviction. You gotta love that. :)

Couldn't have said it better myself, well put.

[The Son of Arzonist]

Hasn't Alan Moore mentioned at times how he is somewhat put off by everyone embracing Rorschach they way they did?

Alan Moore has a huge stick up his ass. Anyways, I voted for the Comedian. Very awesome character.

[MadTitan666]

Doctor Manhattan!

[Shellhead]

Alan Moore has a huge stick up his ass. Anyways, I voted for the Comedian. Very awesome character.

Maybe Moore has misunderstood *why* we like these characters. Rorshach and Comedian weren't meant to be role-models, and most fans probably don't admire them as role-models. But they are very distinctive characters who left a lasting impression, in part, because Moore went to the trouble of real digging into their personalities and motivation.

[filthysize]

Maybe Moore has misunderstood *why* we like these characters. Rorshach and Comedian weren't meant to be role-models, and most fans probably don't admire them as role-models. But they are very distinctive characters who left a lasting impression, in part, because Moore went to the trouble of real digging into their personalities and motivation.


Then again, a lot of people like them simply because "they're so cool and awesome", which really, defeats the whole point of Watchmen in the first place.

[Nightcrawler]

Rorschach and Dr. Manhattan are my favorite characters. The most powerful person in the universe, and a lonely vigilante lunatic.

[Shellhead]

Then again, a lot of people like them simply because "they're so cool and awesome", which really, defeats the whole point of Watchmen in the first place.

That would certainly explaining the crappiness of so many 90's comics. Guys like Rob Liefeld enjoyed The Watchmen without understanding why it was so good.

[NotSuper]

Maybe Moore has misunderstood *why* we like these characters. Rorshach and Comedian weren't meant to be role-models, and most fans probably don't admire them as role-models. But they are very distinctive characters who left a lasting impression, in part, because Moore went to the trouble of real digging into their personalities and motivation.
Speaking only for myself, I didn't agree with the things Rorschach was doing or with his beliefs--he was just a fascinating character. He's not my favorite character in the story, but he's definitely up there. You don't really have to *like* (as in liking their personality or agreeing with their actions) a character for he or she to be your favorite. As for Moore, he should have opinions about his own story.

Anyway, I see the story as being more about Dr. Manhattan vs. Ozymandias (God vs. the Overman, nuclear destruction vs. the ingenuity of man, determinism vs. non-determinism, not caring enough vs. caring too much, ect al) rather than Rorschach vs. the World. That's just my view, of course.

[Violently Apathetic]

I hate to go with the crowd, but I gotta say Rorschach.

[Strider119]

Anyway, I see the story as being more about Dr. Manhattan vs. Ozymandias (God vs. the Overman, nuclear destruction vs. the ingenuity of man, determinism vs. non-determinism, not caring enough vs. caring too much, ect al) rather than Rorschach vs. the World. That's just my view, of course.


That's what makes it a brilliant piece of fiction; the fact that is so innumerably layered and can be evaluated through so many different lenses.

Wasn't Watchmen on a Time list of the 100 best contemporary works of literature? I seem to recall it being on there with Catch 22 and 1984 ... which is a big achievement in and of itself, I think.




say goodbye:
strider119

[jemurr]

I was the 40th vote for Rorshach, yay!

Couple of points.

Yes Time did list Watchmen in it's top 100 list.

I'm a poet myself, so I'm curious about this Ozymandias poem. Can someone link it?

Regarding the other characters I thought the minutmen group was interesting, partly because we knew so little. Captain Metropolis was so sad and pathetic in the 60s trying to form the group again, with his big gut and going on about how someone has to save the world. Then there's Hooded Justice, what was his deal, was he a communist spy? Sally Jupiter was an intersting idea, fighting crime only for her career. I see so much sleazy potential there for other stories, like her manager bieng connected with the mob, and her ratting out people in the communist witchunts of the 50s so she's the only hero who gets movie deals.

But dam that Rorshach is so nuts, I love him. I've re-read Watchmen many times, but many more times I have just read chapter 6, with him and the shrink, and you find out why he's Rorshach. He's right though, we all have that disgusting side of us, every one of us, that is like the guy at dinner who hears about the kidnapping case. His first reaction is "Oh boy! Was she tied up and gagged and helpless?" That dispicable side is in every one of us, even me.

I too ached for more Rorshach material. I know they'd never do more, but it'd be awesome. If HBO ever did a miniseries about Watchmen, it'd be great if after that they did a regular show about him that took place in the 70s and early 80s.

Regarding Moore and how we all love the Schach, Moore of course is very much to the left politically, and I think part of the point he was trying to make was to show the dangers of the vigilante style justice. I think the other thing that perterbed Moore though was not so much that we all loved Rorshach, but more that the comics market went in that direction after Watchmen.

One of the points Alan wanted to make was Watchmen was here is something different we did with comics, now you go and do your own original daring things with comics. We've showed you one possibility, now you show me another. He wanted to open the doors creatively, but instead the market went toward making every character crazy and dark, etc. That Planetery issue is great where the super character is lamenting that he didn't have to be a secret Nazi project born from transvestite hookers, or whatever that was. Remember, Rorscach was just one character in the book, who else was crazy in that way, besides Comedian maybe. Dr. Manhatten, the Nite Owls, Sally and her mom, they weren't crazy, so why did the market have to drift toward him.

That's what happens in any media though, something good comes out, and instead of inspiring other good works, it inspires pale imitations. How many crappy sci-fi movies have come out because of Star Wars, or bad horror movies because of Halloween. It's a sad but true state of art commerce, it's not hey lets make something neat, it's hey lets do something like X product.

Good reading.

[jemurr]

Regarding Moore and the Shach man, this is quoted from Moore's essay on The Question, who was of course the prototype for Rorschach. This is taken from the Absolute Edition of Watchmen. (Which is way overpriced by the way.)

"The way I see the Question, he is such amd extreme character that even hard-line right wingers would feel nervous about his attitudes and actions. The thing is, in order to present the character fairly, I will have to make those views completely logical and heartfelt so as not to present him as a parody of the right-wing attitudes as seen by a left winger. Depending on which way you look at him, The Question is either the one incorruptable force at large in a world of eroded moral values or he is a dangerous and near-psychotic sociopath who kills without compassion or regard for legal niceties.

I suppose I want to do with the character is keep him as true as possible to the quintessential Steve Ditko character and philosophy. Now, while I've always found Steve Ditko's expressed political opinions to be strange and possibly dangerous, I have a huge amount of admiration for anybody who is prepared to take an unpopular position simply because they happen to believe they are morally right. Morals today are at a premium, whether you agree with them or not. On top of this,I have the greatest possible regard for Steve Ditko as an artist and creator and wouldn't want to portray his characters falsley or inaccurately."

I'd be curious to know more about Ditko's believes and if they really were that "unpopular" I do know that Steve Ditko was a kind of conservative individualist, and was also an Ayn Rand fan, who was pretty out there herself, but so is Moore.

[NotSuper]

I've always thought that the Question and Rorschach were actually different in terms of their politics. Both were ultra right-wing and crazy, but their moral absolutism and weird masks seem to be all they have in common (even their civillian identities are vastly different). That's just my opinion, though.

As for Moore's politics, he's actually an anarchist.

There's a really good interview where Moore discusses Watchmen, The Question, and Steve Ditko--here (http://www.twomorrows.com/comicbookartist/articles/09moore.html)

[NotSuper]

That's what makes it a brilliant piece of fiction; the fact that is so innumerably layered and can be evaluated through so many different lenses.
Indeed. I've noticed that Moore actually builds up to the ending through the entire book. Even Rorschach's opening monologue foreshadows what will happen.

[BeastieRunner]

You just gotta give Rorschach props for having the balls to look death in the eye and to always keep true to himself. He was strong in that aspect. Since lots of people are posting second favorites, I'm going with Night Owl II. I like Jon too, but mainly when it was his backstory, not his "I see quarks and humans mean nothing" idealogy. I do know he eventually changes his thoughts and leaves to another galaxy but Night Owl has just so many damn cool gadgets! And gets the girl!

[Iangould]

I voted Roschach.

What can I say:

"I'm not locked in here with you. You're all locked in here with me."

"I wish that all the scum in the world had a single throat and my hands were around it."

[Jack Destruct]

I would've voted Dr Manhattan...

[Jade_GL]

Here is the poem Ozymandias of Egypt by Percy Bysshe Shelley.

OZYMANDIAS of EGYPT


I met a traveller from an antique land
Who said:—Two vast and trunkless legs of stone
Stand in the desert. Near them on the sand,
Half sunk, a shatter'd visage lies, whose frown
And wrinkled lip and sneer of cold command
Tell that its sculptor well those passions read
Which yet survive, stamp'd on these lifeless things,
The hand that mock'd them and the heart that fed.
And on the pedestal these words appear:
"My name is Ozymandias, king of kings:
Look on my works, ye mighty, and despair!"
Nothing beside remains: round the decay
Of that colossal wreck, boundless and bare,
The lone and level sands stretch far away.

[Dr. Killtrocity]

Dr. Manhattan's not in the poll.(unless he's listed as something else)

He gets my vote.

[LordEd1976]

When in Rome.

I too went with Roschach. I like the character though I have to admit I'd be painting my pants yellow if I met him in a dark alley at night.

I also liked the side characters that populated the book. The two Bernies, Doug Roth, Seymour and his boss, the two lesbians, Dr Malcolm Long and his wife Gloria, Dective Steven Fine and his partner Joe, and Moloch. I love how Moore used these characters to shape the world. A friend of mine who posts around here once told me if he was in charge of doing the Watchmen movie he'd drop them from the story. I've always told him that I disagree. A Watchmen without these characters just feels incomplete.

That said, if I was in charge I would do Watchmen as an animated mini-series on HBO or Showtime or some other pay cable movie channel. Thats the only I think the book can be brought to life in any way that would do it justice. the only change I would is to put the blood drenched clock at the start of every episode.

[Picollo-Magnus]

I reread the series yesterday and WOW....I can't wait for the movie. Just seeing Dr. Manhattan makes me want to reread the early issues of Solar: Man of the Atom. As far as the movie.....

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0409459/
http://www.xanadb.com/archive/comics/20030127.html
http://www.cinescape.com/0/editorial.asp?obj_id=31331&aff_id=0&this_cat=Development+Heck

We can all continue to dream.

[Strider119]

I hear the sticking point for the movie is that no adaptation can do it justice in only one movie, it has to be in at least 2-3 parts ... and no studio is willing to risk making it a series

I heard Darren Aronofsky was a name being thrown around with the film, but he pretty much said that he wanted to stick with the comic as much as possible and he couldnt do it in only one film.




for whom the bell tolls:
strider119

[filthysize]

Greengrass already pulled out (which is a shame).

It's not been officially announced yet, but Zack Snyder has been going around saying that he took the job. I sincerely hope he's lying.

[lordlad]

yes.......i dun think a 2 - 3 hour movie, not even a 3 part 'LOTR style' trilogy format fits the watchmen. I think a 12 part mini series by HBO will be perfect though.

[Kid Monster]

The Comedian. G. Gordon Liddy as Captain America, with a black leather S&M mask. One of the iconic characters of 1980's comics.

And please, oh please, dear Christ in Heaven, PLEASE, don't let there be a WATCHMEN movie, ever. What, were FROM HELL, LXG, and CONSTANTINE just not bad enough? Or how about V FOR VENDETTA, the film that had comics fans breathing a sigh of relief because it was "Ok, I guess" instead of absolute crap? Enough, please.

[dancj]

And please, oh please, dear Christ in Heaven, PLEASE, don't let there be a WATCHMEN movie, ever. What, were FROM HELL, LXG, and CONSTANTINE just not bad enough? Or how about V FOR VENDETTA, the film that had comics fans breathing a sigh of relief because it was "Ok, I guess" instead of absolute crap? Enough, please.

If you're not interested in the film don't watch it. It won't harm the books.

[Agentum]

To me Manhattan was not very likable, he is so distansed from humans.
He is like he should be like an total alien.

[PrimalScream]

hope there is a movvie but i get the feeling that if there is a movie made that rorschach will dominate the movie like wolverine dominated the xmen movies. which may not be a bad thing since Im a rorschach fan.

[Strider119]

To me Manhattan was not very likable, he is so distansed from humans.
He is like he should be like an total alien.

I thought that was what made him so interesting

For a character to have THAT much power, how could he not eventually become disenfranchised with the whole human race? I mean he knew what he was going to become the moment he got his powers since he was omnisent, but he played the part he thought he was supposed to play.

I loved that he got to wearing less and less clothes as the decades passed, since he just cared less and less until when he finnally is forced to abandon earth he abandons his last vestage his physical humanit ... his lil banana hammock


block knocker:
strider119

[Agentum]

Well he is intresting that way yes, but hard to like.

[Kummi]

so obvious: Rorschach ...
Genius how Alan Morre still manages to play with 80 % of the (male)readership giving them no other chance than to like that poor guy that gets nothing but hate by liberals.

In establishing Rorschach Moore proved that he is a very complex political character having a rael heart for the beaten up.

[stealthwise]

If you're not interested in the film don't watch it. It won't harm the books.

No, but it does give a sense of "taint" to what is arguably comics' last untouched masterpiece.

[Ryan K]

I hate being predictable, but Rorschach. Second favorite is Nite Owl though.

[Mothmonsterman]

Greengrass already pulled out (which is a shame).

It's not been officially announced yet, but Zack Snyder has been going around saying that he took the job. I sincerely hope he's lying.

We haven't heard much since the movie rights changed hands to Warner Bros. All I know is that the change was a very good thing, since Universal was absolutely hell-bent on putting it out as a single movie. At least with WB, there is a chance they'll be willing to spread it out to 2-3 parts. If not, then there will almost certainly be some random hack directing, because the good directors turn down projects that they know can't be done.

[Huree]

No, but it does give a sense of "taint" to what is arguably comics' last untouched masterpiece.

Also, if someone WATCHed the Watchmen movie before they read the book they would be thinking of how the movie experience was so different instead of taking the original comic for what it is.

On the other hand it would be cool to see those characters on film. Hopefully if a film does happen the director will be passionate and capable enough to make it good, unfortunately thats pretty rare.

I voted Rorschach too. It was between him and the comedian. We saw a bit more of Rorschach's backstory and he had an awesome costume. I think the comedian was an equally interesting character though, his whole philosophy and his intensity.

Dr. Manhattan was great too I was always anticipating more of his story maybe even more than i was Rorschach's but R is still my favorite at the end of the day.

[Grazzt]

The thing with Rorschach was that he was right (by this I mean correct - not good in a moral sense)! Everyone thought he was crazy, but he figured the big conspiracy out before anyone else did.

Moore, in essence, made the entire ending a moral confrontation between Ozymanidas and Rorschach. And even though Ozy "wins" in the end, one gets the idea that Rorschach was (oddly) the moral superior of the two.

Ozy's "solution" won't last anyway (anyone ever read the poem Ozymandias?) - it was a temporary fix at best. Pragmatism vs. Absolutism.

Odd, that. That's where Rorschach's popularity comes from. He was the smartest of the bunch, but he didn't have the charisma or money to pull it off. The capitalist (Ozymandias) wins in the end, but Rorschach steals the show.

Personally, I completely disagree with almost everything you said in this post.

Paragraph 1: Rorschach realised there was a conspiracy, but he had absolutely no clue about its true aims or objectives. In fact, Ozymandias deliberately planted the clues to confirm his previous conspiracy theory and to get Rorschach out of his hair. It wasn't even Rorschach who figured out Ozy was behind it: that was Night Owl.

Paragraph 2: I never thought of Rorschach being the moral superior of the two. If someone won a moral victory, it was Kovacs. It feels to me like Kovacs managed to wrest control from Rorschach at the very end (what with him having an actual facial expression and taking off "his face"). He was actually willing to face up to the fact that anything that Rorschach did would probably just make life worse for a lot of people.

Paragraph 3: Perhaps it won't last. But Rorschach's solution (killing the random muggers and rapists) didn't seem to be working either. In any case, its bought Ozy some time to do more for the future to prevent nuclear armageddon.

Paragraph 4: I disagree that Schach was the smartest of the bunch. Like I said, Night Owl was the one who figured out it was Ozymandias. Rorschach was a complete and utter failure: he couldn't outfight Ozymandias, he couldn't outthink Ozymandias (both being fooled by the "Hero Killer" conspiracy and being framed for Moloch's death), he couldn't convince anybody of his moral position, and in the end he lost control to Kovacs.

That doesn't make him any less fascinating of a character, but the reason for him being fascinating is how deeply flawed he was, rather than a Batman-like level of uberness.

Oh, I voted for Ozy, by the way. Second and third would have to go to Doc Manhatten and Night Owl II. They're all fascinating characters, however, and I can understand why Rorschach is ahead in the polls despite disagreeing with it.

[Kid Monster]

If you're not interested in the film don't watch it. It won't harm the books.

Mention HOWARD THE DUCK or LEAUGE OF EXTRAORDINARY GENTLEMEN to anyone who is not a comics fan, and then say that a film adaptation can't harm the books. Those franchises will be crippled for decades because of the movies.

[NotSuper]

Paragraph 2: I never thought of Rorschach being the moral superior of the two. If someone won a moral victory, it was Kovacs. It feels to me like Kovacs managed to wrest control from Rorschach at the very end (what with him having an actual facial expression and taking off "his face"). He was actually willing to face up to the fact that anything that Rorschach did would probably just make life worse for a lot of people.
Yeah, I think Moore has mentioned this. He said that Rorschach wanted to die as Kovac (who was still somewhere in Rorschach). In a sense, Kovacs killed Rorschach and then the Doc killed Kovacs.

I also have to agree that Rorschach didn't "win" or have moral superiority over anyone. He's a tragic character with no happy ending. To be honest, I think the character's stronger that way. Otherwise he'd just be the "underdog that triumphs in the end," and that was cliche even in the eighties.

[NotSuper]

Mention HOWARD THE DUCK or LEAUGE OF EXTRAORDINARY GENTLEMEN to anyone who is not a comics fan, and then say that a film adaptation can't harm the books. Those franchises will be crippled for decades because of the movies.
Don't forget Catwoman.

[luricanson]

Mention HOWARD THE DUCK or LEAUGE OF EXTRAORDINARY GENTLEMEN to anyone who is not a comics fan, and then say that a film adaptation can't harm the books. Those franchises will be crippled for decades because of the movies.

Sorry, but I have to call faulty logic on this one. If one is not a comics fan, then his opinion of the movies mean jack as far as any damage to the books themselves, since he, sadly, isn't likely to pick up any form of sequential art to begin with. And if he is a comics fan, then he knows better.

Or put it another way, one to my liking. I've always considered comics to be like any other form of fiction when it comes to providing source material to projects in other mediums. So is Dracula any less creepy of a novel because Keanu Reeves played Jonathan Harker in a laughable adaptation? Have people stopped reading The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy because of a lackluster film from last year? Or that Leonardo monstrosity posing as Romeo and Juliet ?

The point is, good fiction is good fiction, no matter what the form, and no matter what some schmuck does to it as a film. Last I heard, League was hardly "crippled". In fact Moore was pretty close to finishing up the script to part three

[Noah Johnson]

Here's an interesting curiosity for y'all: Sam Hamm's script for WATCHMEN: THE MOVIE.

http://scifiscripts.com/scripts/wtchmn.txt

Be warned... it sucks. A lot.

Also, I voted for Nite Owl II, who barely edged out Ozymandias. Ozy is, for me, one of the most fascinating characters in comics, and gets one of the best lines in the history of the medium:

DO it? Dan, I'm not a Republic serial villain. Do you seriously imagine I'd explain my master plan if there remained the slightest chance of you affecting its outcome? I did it thirty-five minutes ago.

In the end, though, I had to go with Dan Dreiberg, the most human of them all. Whoever said he's the series' heart was right. Imagine what an empty exercise the entire thing would be without him.

[dancj]

Mention HOWARD THE DUCK or LEAUGE OF EXTRAORDINARY GENTLEMEN to anyone who is not a comics fan, and then say that a film adaptation can't harm the books. Those franchises will be crippled for decades because of the movies.

Howard the Duck was already dead. All the film did is fail to resurrect it.

LOeG on the other hand hasn't (as far as I'm aware) been hurt in the slightest - if nothing else, it's almost impossible to read a review of the film without the reviewer pointing out how much better the book is

Dan

[PrimalScream]

I liked leauge of extraordinary gentlemen. :o

[filthysize]

I liked leauge of extraordinary gentlemen. :o



You are Satan.

[RickThunderclees]

You are Satan.
I also liked LoEG. I also enjoyed Blankets.

[isaac a person]

I voted for Captain Metropolis as a stand-in for Dr. Manhattan, since that was who was supposed to be listed there.

I was always a big sci-fi nut so Dr. Manhattan was pure love :D

[seaflower]

Like most people I like Dr. Manhattan and Rorschach.

But my favourite character has to be Nite Owl 2. In this story full of extremes and clashing ideologies, he gave this story the mortal foil it needed to keep it human. He embodies both the flaws/strengths of normal people, whose weaknesses blind them yet continue to wish for something better.

My second favourite character in the story has to be the Comedian. Not because he is loveable. In fact he is one sick M#$%R f!@KER but he understands and acknowledges the wretched and deprave aspect of human nature in a way few dare. I respect his character because he does something that would horrify most.

[codename_v]

Rorschach.

[literally exaggerated]

probably Rorscharch. None of them are likeable, and all of them are interesting and complex.

[lordlad]

Like most people I like Dr. Manhattan and Rorschach.

But my favourite character has to be Nite Owl 2. In this story full of extremes and clashing ideologies, he gave this story the mortal foil it needed to keep it human. He embodies both the flaws/strengths of normal people, whose weaknesses blind them yet continue to wish for something better.

My second favourite character in the story has to be the Comedian. Not because he is loveable. In fact he is one sick M#$%R f!@KER but he understands and acknowledges the wretched and deprave aspect of human nature in a way few dare. I respect his character because he does something that would horrify most.
the comedia is akin to the joker...........just not as psychotic....

[The Beast Of Yucca Flats]

Dr. Manhattan. I just find the way he sees creation utterly fascinating (but not for creepy reasons like a certain trenchcoated nutcase).

[Huree]

probably Rorscharch. None of them are likeable, and all of them are interesting and complex.

I think Night Owl II and Silk Spectre II were both likeable, and like others said: they are the characters who normal people (like us fanboys) can most easily relate to along with the lesbians, the newspaper guy and the psycologist.

I even would say that all the characters are in some way likable and relatable thats what makes them interesting! How Silk Spectre1 kissed her picture of the comedian near the end of the book. I can't even explain myself, i dont even really want to. man what a great comic.

[Agentum]

But to say one thing, the plot is not that good, to invent an outside alien attack to unite all nations it's naive.

One attack in a american city would not make world peacy, at least he should have attacked Moscow too.

But the comics strenght is it's characters.

[dancj]

I also liked LoEG. I also enjoyed Blankets.

I think he's talking about LXG - not LoEG

[PrimalScream]

You are Satan.

damn the secret is out. did my pitchfork and pointy tail give it away?

[RickThunderclees]

I think he's talking about LXG - not LoEG
AH ha! thanks for clearing that bit up.

[Dwight L. MacPherson]

I definitely had to go with Rorschach.
A scene-stealing, hard-hitting enigma like no other.
But honestly--this wonderful classic is filled with so many wonderful characters that perhaps the question should be "Who is your least favorite Watchman? ;)

[Verminous]

honestly the only thing i enjoyed about the watchmen was rorschach. i would love to see a solo series with this guy.

[Grazzt]

Oh, here's something hilarious.

Chibi Watchmen. (http://hamfist.blogspot.com/2006/04/just-dont-ask-please.html)

Chibi Rorschach is so awesome.

[Your Impending Doom]

long time comic reader but I just recently bought and read Watchmen.

I'd be interested in hearing people's opinions on casting choices when/if they ever make this into a movie.

[BeastieRunner]

long time comic reader but I just recently bought and read Watchmen.

I'd be interested in hearing people's opinions on casting choices when/if they ever make this into a movie.

I really don't want a movie.

[Agentum]

honestly the only thing i enjoyed about the watchmen was rorschach. i would love to see a solo series with this guy.
You have missed the point with Watchmen i think.
And for the solo series you have to do with the Question books out there, like O'neils from the late 80s.

[rfahey]

One attack in a american city would not make world peacy, at least he should have attacked Moscow too.

I don't know. If a supposed alien teleported into a major metropolitan city and killed millions of people, the rest of the world might take notice. Eventually Ozymandias would probably have to do something else to keep the charade going, but I'm sure it would decrease hostilities in the short run.

[rfahey]

Rorschach for me, followed by Comedian, Ozymandias, and Dr. Manhattan. For some reason I really didn't like Night Owl II, though I really liked Night Owl I. Nite Owl II was almost too ordinary for me.

[Radical]

I'm torn between Rorschach (the black-and-white morality) and Dr. Manhattan (the cool godlike powers; am I missing the point of Watchmen for that?).

[Noah Johnson]

I'm torn between Rorschach (the black-and-white morality) and Dr. Manhattan (the cool godlike powers; am I missing the point of Watchmen for that?).
You may in fact be missing it twice...

[BeastieRunner]

http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/1127/2161/1600/blot.jpg

That's awesome whoever found that site!

[Grazzt]

That's awesome whoever found that site!

Another awesome thing that I found on Livejournal were Watchmen cookies. Someone made cookies in the shape of people and then icened them to look like Watchmen characters. Oh, and the smiley face button with the blood across one eye. If I find it again I'll post a link to this thread.

You may in fact be missing it twice...

This made me laugh for some odd reason.

[The Recluse]

Anyone who answered with something other than "Rorschach" for this one is just trying to be different.:)

[dancj]

You may in fact be missing it twice...

Nah - Maybe with doc Manhattan, but I'd say likeing Rorsharch for his black and white morality is getting the point reasonably well. Liking him cos he's a badass would be missing the point

[Agentum]

yes "cool" is a bit misplaced.

[Noah Johnson]

Anyone who answered with something other than "Rorschach" for this one is just trying to be different.:)
Meh. Rorschach's one-note. I didn't like the Question the first time around either. Dan Dreiberg, though... that's a hero. A human, fallible, totally lovable hero.

[ultramandingo]

when is the moth-man action figure comming out?

[ChthonicSpirit]

But to say one thing, the plot is not that good, to invent an outside alien attack to unite all nations it's naive.

One attack in a american city would not make world peacy, at least he should have attacked Moscow too.

But the comics strenght is it's characters.

Thread necromancy, but here goes.

Veidt was trying to make a point. If he'd attacked both cities, it would have been clear that it was about both superpowers - America and Russia. He wanted it to be about the entire human race. For his plan to work, the russians needed to fear the threat, but also to sympathize to some degree with the American victms. If Both cities had been attacked, the Russians would have feared, but not sympathized.

It had to be one city, but it had to be the one city that would get the most attention. Remember, in the Watchmenverse America has been on a winning streak since the arrival of Dr. Manhattan. And it is Nixon's warlike policies that have been promoting the conflict with the Russians. It had to be the Americans in order to shatter their illusions of invulnerability, which in turn was necessary for them to cooperate with the Russians. New York was the logical choice, the famous modern city.

[murda_hayte]

There was me thinking that I would be the only one who loved Rorschach!

[Majinlex]

I voted for Dr. Manhattan. Especially in those last few issues he was just fantastic. I loved his rhythm of speech and language. I guess you could attribute that to Moore. Plus you gotta love a guy who's not afraid to show off his blue wang :D

[murda_hayte]

I voted for Dr. Manhattan. Especially in those last few issues he was just fantastic. I loved his rhythm of speech and language. I guess you could attribute that to Moore. Plus you gotta love a guy who's not afraid to show off his blue wang :D

Is that THE blue wang shot, in the door of the bar, just before he shoots off to mars? .... a classic :rolleyes:





:o

[Agentum]

Thread necromancy, but here goes.

Veidt was trying to make a point. If he'd attacked both cities, it would have been clear that it was about both superpowers - America and Russia. He wanted it to be about the entire human race. For his plan to work, the russians needed to fear the threat, but also to sympathize to some degree with the American victms. If Both cities had been attacked, the Russians would have feared, but not sympathized.

It had to be one city, but it had to be the one city that would get the most attention. Remember, in the Watchmenverse America has been on a winning streak since the arrival of Dr. Manhattan. And it is Nixon's warlike policies that have been promoting the conflict with the Russians. It had to be the Americans in order to shatter their illusions of invulnerability, which in turn was necessary for them to cooperate with the Russians. New York was the logical choice, the famous modern city.

Not very logical to me, people don't care that much about USA as they thought, and USA don't care about others so much either especially not so that they wouldn't seek help from communists.
It is quite possibly that it could have lead to even a colder war instead of peace i think.
But this is comics and if they wanted they world to be that simple then thets ok i think.

[dancj]

People don't have to care about the US. They just have to notice - and people do notice the US

Dan

[kel25]

I really wasn't expecting this to be so one sided.

[Albert]

Rorschach... with Dr. Manhattan second. One has all the power of the universe, the other... the other is willing to put a cigarette out in your eye to win.

[PastePotPete]

Wow! What a surprise! The tough-as-nails brutal vigilante character won!

Actually, I got no qualms with that seeing as how Rorschach is the brutal vigilante by which all other brutal vigilantes should be judged. A great character.

But I went with Dr. Manhattan. I thought his character was so bleak and sad, even more so than Rorschach, because Manhattan had limitless power but was spiritually dead because of it.

Also, I thought it was funny when he tried to create doubles of himself to have sex with his wife. Funny/sad.

[PrimalScream]

I read on wikipedia and other things that rorscharch had supressed homosexual feelings for night-owl or whatever his name is. I didn't really pick up on that in the book. did anyone else?

[BeastieRunner]

I read on wikipedia and other things that rorscharch had supressed homosexual feelings for night-owl or whatever his name is. I didn't really pick up on that in the book. did anyone else?

Personally, no I don't think so. Also I think wikipedia is a crappy place to get information since anybody can edit entries.

[dancj]

It doesn't seem to say that now. At least not on the Watchment page

[PrimalScream]

someone must have changed it.

[PrimalScream]

someone must have changed it. it also mention the facts to this was that he didn't like being around women and felt weird in the clothes shop handling womens clothes which he would later make into a mask resembling a rorsharch card.

[Evo Schandor]

Being an architect, I had to go with Dr. Manhattan mainly because of the following quote - "A world grows up around me. Do I shape it or do it's predetermined contours guide my hand?" (That's from memory so it may not be an exact quote) It's actually been sort of a guiding "principle" when I design anything. I could go on about how this ties into some prominent architectural thought but I can already see the drooping heads and the glassy eyes...

[Rorschach4100]

Obviously Rorschach first and Doc. Manhattan second.

[Paradox]

"Dan, I'm not a Republic serial villain. Do you seriously think I'd explain my master-stroke if there remained the slightest chance of you affecting its outcome? I did it thirty-five minutes ago."

For that alone, I would have voted for Ozy, but there's so much more.

[Paradox]

PrimalScream thinks it's either or:

someone must have changed it. it also mention the facts to this was that he didn't like being around women and felt weird in the clothes shop handling womens clothes which he would later make into a mask resembling a rorsharch card.

My thoughts are that Rorschach is completely asexual through trauma. His early experience with his mother and the dream that later followed indicates that he sees sex as some kind of monster. He's no more interested in boys than girls.

The whole thing stems from the handshake incident where Rorschach doesn't let go of Dan's hand. That's not homosexuality, it's Rorschach desperately clinging to the last of his human emotions with his only friend.

[Kara Zor El]

I read it a good few times and liked a different one best each time. But in the end it's Adrian Viedt for me. He catches a bullet for God's sake, fools Manhatton and saves mankind by slaughtering New York.

[PrimalScream]

My thoughts are that Rorschach is completely asexual through trauma. His early experience with his mother and the dream that later followed indicates that he sees sex as some kind of monster. He's no more interested in boys than girls.

The whole thing stems from the handshake incident where Rorschach doesn't let go of Dan's hand. That's not homosexuality, it's Rorschach desperately clinging to the last of his human emotions with his only friend.

he does seem to be kinda homophobic I think. The part way he says something about adrain "possibly closet homosexual" seems abit negative. but yeah i think I agree with what you said.

[brundlefly]

I'll go with Ozymandias, the rare mastermind who gets to actually see his plans come to fruition. He's got bits and pieces of all the great schemers (Luthor, Ra's, the Bond villains, even some of Doom's regal pompousity). The "I already did it" speech, catching the bullet, blowing up NYC, wiping out Nite Owl and Rorschach without breaking a sweat.... so much great stuff there. Tied for second are Rorschach and Doc Manhattan.

[swinebread]

I liked Dr Manhattan a lot when I was a kid, but now that I'm much older (and fatter)
I’m going for the less obvious choice and choosing NightOwl II.

[marshal99]

Dr Manhatten. :)
http://img144.echo.cx/img144/4441/manhattan6rk.jpg

[Tobias March]

I LOVE getting into arguments about this :D Especially since I always choose Ozymandias. Because here is a 'villain', who truly believes he's doing the right thing and what's more succeeds. Of course Manhattan can see beyond present time and recognizes the futility of their actions as superheroes (Alan Moore marking their ascent towards godhood, Superman punching planets out of orbit, Dr. Strange recreating the universe while battling Sise-Neg etc.), but Ozymandias plans and executes his scheme perfectly! Because superheroes win, villains lose, and Ozymandias believes he's a hero. Love it.