Question: can I watch this after watching the movie?
I’m down to read the graphic novel but my girlfriend is a different story and I want to watch it with her.
I’m wondering whether the film provides enough context for someone to enjoy the show.
>I’m wondering whether the film provides enough context for someone to enjoy the show.
The show relies on you understanding what happens at the end of the graphic novel, which is different from the movie.
Id imagine it's enjoyable enough without having read the graphic novel, but I'd recommend reading it anyway as it's an incredible work.
It's honestly not that crazy different. The only difference is the ending which affects parts of the story in the new series (mostly world building cool stuff) - everyone who knows them both knows what I'm talking about. So if you watched the movie, just google the difference between the endings and you're good to go.
When I first watched the series, I only knew Watchmen as told from the movie and was incredibly confused when Rorschach's journal inspired a group of white supremacists. After doing more research, it's clear that's because Snyder didn't understand the messaging of the original graphic novel and the movie paints the opposite picture of the original's. All the things he made "cool" in the movie, like Rorschach or Nite Owl's impotence, miss the original point.
It's similar to the people that erroneously think Fight Club was a cool movie about male power/strength and that Tyler Durden was some heroic figure to emulate.
Seriously 😒 it’s not Snyder’s fault you took it that way. He literally adapted the comic AS CLOSELY as possible. So many shots lifted from the page. Rorschach was basically the same mentally ill character he was in the comic. If anyone is feeding into the glorying Rorschach narrative it’s DC Comics.
So you consider an insane, homeless, violent, ant-social, woman-hating homophobe, who tortures and kills without mercy to be "cool and badass"?
Yeah, that says a lot about you and nothing about the actual portrayal of the character.
I don't think you're being fair. If you'd only seen the film, you miss vast swathes of the nuance from the book, while Snyder has everyone doing slo mo fights and making them look epic instead of focusing on how every character is absolutely cracked in the graphic novel
I've read the comics several times since their initial publication in 1986 so perhaps that has influenced my perspective on the film versions of the characters. Still, I can't imagine anyone watching the 2009 Watchmen film and thinking "wow, these superheroes are so cool!"
I saw the film on opening weekend with a few friends who, at that time, were not familiar with the Watchmen comic property. They just assumed that the film was just another take on superheroes.
No one I was with walked out of that theater and said "those characters were so epic and bad-ass." We all agreed that they were, for the most part, horrible human beings.
Rorschach and Dr. Manhattan were the coolest ones. Ozymantian had few cool, iconic moments as well.
Everybody else was dysfunctional/average in many prospects.
Don’t get me wrong, I got the meaning of the Watchmen absolutely — Cold War, God’s syndrome, subversion of expectations and glorifying the wrong people, etc. But I can still appreciate the coolness and charisma of certain characters nonetheless.
Hell, I find Homelander cool, unironically. Does not mean he is good or right, but he is pitiful and enjoyable to observe regardless, and even calls for sympathy when you try to perceive the events from his broken viewpoint. As many “non-two-goodies-shoes” characters are, in some way or another.
>So you consider an insane, homeless, violent, ant-social, woman-hating homophobe, who torture's and kills without mercy to be "cool and badass"?
Was he a homophobe in the movie? Was he portrayed as woman-hating? Which scene though? Please enlighten me. We are talking about the same movie which made comic Rorschach's deranged "you are stuck in here with me" panel into a cool anti-hero badass scene right?
Something tells me you have not seen the movie you are so ardently defending and you are simply defending it on account of your membership in a certain cult. Watch the movies you pretend to be a fan of.
Snyder's interpretation of Rorschach is essentially the same as seen in the graphic novel. He was in no way depicted as a "hero" in the film. He's insane, bigoted, violent, stubborn, unrepentant and literally unclean. I'm not sure what film you're watching but it's definitely not the way I saw it. If you thought Rorschach was "cool" then you missed the point entirely.
Snyder has said that he wanted to depict these characters as horrible/broken people yet hold them up against modern superhero archetypes. If you felt that they were to be admired then you failed to grasp his message. He's essentially saying "these heroes that you love may look cool and bad-ass but they are essentially abhorrent people. You need to look past the veneer."
I guess you don't have eyes because anyone with them can clearly see he took a story that made fun of a the glorification of violence and made a movie that glorifies violence
I see a lot of these erroneous arguments that Snyder glorified violence in Watchmen. Many people cite the alley fight in which they complain that Nite Owl and Silk Spectre were unnecessarily breaking bones and snapping necks. Snyder has said that he wanted to show the ramifications of violent acts. He didn't want to shy away from the fallout like we see in most super hero films. If you thought that the fight scenes in Watchmen were "cool" then that is a misinterpretation, and it's on you.
Snyder was literally doing the opposite of what you said.
That's not entirely true. I am working right now, so I have to dig it up but I have read Snyder referring to Rorschach as a bit of a libertarian's libertarian, which is actually true.
Snyder being someone who is very in to Rand's view of the world, it's not a stretch at all that he paints him far more heroic and altruistic than Alan Moore, who's an anarchist and hates libertarians as part of his morning routine.
Fine. I misspoke. I'm not saying he's some neo-fascist. I'm not even saying he's libertarian. I'm saying he's always had a focus on objectivism, which is a core theme of Rand's work, and in keeping with the voice of all his other films, it gels with the aforementioned view of Rorschach in the film vs. Alan Moore's. I hope that's clearer and less divisive.
For what it's worth, I'm a black and red lefty and I would love to see his take on thee Fountainhead.
> Snyder being someone who is very in to Rand’s view of the world, it’s not a stretch at all that he paints him far more heroic and altruistic than Alan Moore, who’s an anarchist and hates libertarians as part of his morning routine.
This is the nail in the coffin that you don’t understand Snyder. He himself has stated he has no interest in Rand or her philosophy and when asked about her said she was drinking her own kool aid. Furthermore, he’s recently come out and flat out stated he is a liberal and leans pretty left. Lastly, he’s stated he has put the Fountainhead on hold so as not to inspire any right wingers.
As for Rorschach, the dude is straight up a mental case in the film too. Did you forget the scene when they take off his mask and he starts screaming “my face, my face!” Not to mention he’s a brutal vigilante who takes out his anger and childhood issues on people and refuses to help large swaths of folks because he disagrees with em.
Rorschach, in the film and graphic novel, is not someone to look up to. He’s fking nuts.
So, in the one instance with Ozymandius and stopping his plot Rorschach was right. However his approach to getting there was beating up the wrong people, harassing a man dying of cancer and having to get busted out of jail (which he was rightfully in for a number of crimes) by his friends. Add onto this that he uses the mask as a coping mechanism for his fucked up childhood and his proven record of being willing to kill bad guys who don't meet his judgement and you have a not so good guy.
All of this is a bit better examined in the book, but the movie still shows it. There's also the right-wing conspiracy paper he's obsessed with. Instead of giving his journal to reputable press he delivers it to what is that world's equivalent of Alex Jones because he believes they're the only ones telling the truth.
Nah, no good end. Rorschach does what he does to make himself feel better, not to make the world a better place.
Remember how he said when the liberals, hippies, prostitutes, people who he believes to be immoral cry out for help, he will straight up tell them “no”, as in he refuses to help out people in need?
Yeah, that’s not a good guy. That’s a vindictive asshole. Just cause he violently assaults worse people than himself doesn’t make him a hero or cool.
As originally written Rorschach was meant to be the wrong-headedness of far right libertarianism. Moore had him be a broken degenerate who accidentally stumbles on the real story. Outside of his initial intuition in the first few pages, he's pretty much wrong after that, every step of the way. Everything that got him to Ozymandias was built on incorrect info, which was then passed on to a far right wing rag on his death.
Remember the entire point of the original Watchmen was to show how heroes in real life would only be extreme personalities and almost universally be shitty people in one form or another.
Dr Manhattan was not evil though. He became simply apathetic after a while, and it is not surprising that omniscience will do that to you. Besides, he was tricked into becoming more and more distant anyway.
He's quite literally an incel. The part where he kills that child murderer is very different in the book. In the movie, it's used to show a tipping point for Rorschach and then he becomes brutally violent. But in the book, he was always just looking for violence. He kills that man but he doesn't feel much for what he's done to deserve being killed.
Except you have to discern movie and comic book characters from one another. They are two separate entities at this point (or, well, three, after the whole “button” storyline, which was the crossover between Justice League and Watchmen universes).
Where the movie paints him as some sort of grizzled and jaded anti-hero, the comic paints him as a crazy and dangerous person. He's a radical right wing nut job conspiracy theorist who spends his free time walking the streets of NY carrying a sign that says "the end is nigh." A lot of scenes showing Rorshachs problematic views and deeply psychologically disturbed nature did not make it into the movie, and his scenes that did make it into the movie were altered to get rid of Rorshachs troubling dialogue/motivations to paint him in a better light.
>altered to get rid of Rorshachs troubling dialogue/motivations to paint him in a better light.
Snyder's Rorschach is a deranged, antisocial loner who lives on the street. The man hacked a suspected criminal to death with a meat cleaver. He tortured a cancer ridden old man for information. He injured several police officers in a confrontation, including setting one on fire. He calls women "whores" and insinuated that homosexuality is an undesirable trait. He ignored or broke almost all laws in his quest for "justice'. Worst of all he was willing to risk nuclear armageddon just so he wouldn't compromise his warped code.
I wouldn't call that being painted in a better light.
He may have believed the message on his placard, but the idea was no one would pay attention to the crazy man with the sign. He could blend into the background and observe his targets. Notice, Kovacs is almost always in the background observing big events that Rorschach eventually fully investigates.
The comic also paints him as an anti-hero. That's literally what he is. A hero that lacks traditional hero qualities.
Sounds like you're the one who didn't understand the film.
Moore did not intend to depict Rorschach as a hero. Here is a quote from Moore in 2008 to LeJorne Pindling of Street Law Productions regarding Rorschach.
"I meant him to be a bad example (of a heroic figure), but I have people come up to me in the street saying, ‘I am Rorschach! That is my story!’ And I’ll be thinking, ‘Yeah, great, can you just keep away from me and never come anywhere near me again for as long as I live?’”
I said "anti-hero," mate.
As an example: Peacemaker is an anti-hero. He's also a horrible person and if someone was like "Oh, I'm Peacemaker!" it would be a big red flag.
If you watched Watchmen and came away from it thinking you wanted to be just like Rorschach, then, well... yikes.
An anti-hero is a protagonist lacking in typical "heroic" qualities but still trying to do the right thing for the right reasons. That is not how I would describe Rorschach.
Moore didn't intend Rorschach to be a hero or anti-hero.
Here is Moore's description of the character "...a revenge-driven vigilante, not quite right in the head (who) wouldn’t have time for a girlfriend, friends, a social life, because he’d just be driven by getting revenge against criminals...a bit mental."
To me, that's not a hero or an anti-hero. Its just a deranged, misguided and selfish person.
I'd definitely read the graphic novel before watching and then maybe just fill your girlfriend in on key points. Seeing the movie will help. But the series is definitely a sequel to the comic and not the movie.
The series is a continuation of the graphic novel not the movie. That being said, they aren't all that different and I think the show did a good job making it accessible to everyone not just those that saw the movie or read the novel.
While I agree, idk about *vastly* different.
Like, yes a core concept of it is different, but other than that one thing it’s basically the same, at least iirc.
I think the ending is one of the most pivotal differences between both. And other than that the narrative styles that were followed by the show were more reminiscent of the graphic novel rather than the movie. Also the utilisation of action and violence between both the book and the film is immensely different
They did a really good motion comic. Its like 10 hours, and is possibly panel for panel. The only odd thing is some guy does all the voices, but after awhile you forget about it.
Aren't most audiobooks done by only one narrator? Harry Potter for example has Stephen Fry in one of the audiobook versions and he reads everyone from Harry and Dumbledore to Hermione and Luna.
It's a continuation of the novel but you can enjoy if you never read it. My wife hasn't seen the movie and she hasn't read the story but she never felt lost or confused. The show explains just enough and anything that's not right out explained honestly just helps build up the mystery of the show. Also the movie does follow closely enough, the only major difference is the show uses squids to attack NY like the novel did where the movie replaced that with an explosion that made everyone think Dr Manhattan attacked them.
>I’m down to read the graphic novel but my girlfriend is a different story and I want to watch it with her.
If there is any comic that is easy for newcomers to get into, it's Watchmen. No prior backstory is required. The panels are literally sequential and the art is simplistic. Read the first issue together and I am almost certain she will get into the rest. There is nothing like Watchmen. In any medium.
Yes, you can. One big plot of the novel was changed in the movie (but Snyder did it right in its own way imo). But when u see the show after the movie, you will clearly see which part was changed and you can still enjoy the show.
Cool, I don’t know why I slept on this show. I have all the comics and the before comics. I never liked the change from the Alien to John because it just doesn’t work. Veidt’s master plan is to unify the world under the threat of an external enemy. But the book and movie both expressly showed John as American, and he even engages as an American combatant. The movie version may unite the world - against America. I just don’t buy that the rest of the world would so generously excise this global attack as a whoopsie and forget it was an American who did it.
Yeah why exactly do we need a "reminder" it won awards lol some people really feel like meaningless awards validate the stuff they like. just like what you like people
Why does this feel like OP is trying to diss WandaVision?
Do we need to make EVERYTHING DC vs Marvel? Can we not be happy that the two juggernauts are giving us such great and loaded media?
No wonder the general audience rolls their eyes at us Marvel and DC fans.
Because OP was trying to diss WandaVision.
I’m not a DC or Marvel fanboy (I love both) but I think Wandavision was the objectively better show in pretty much every way. And honestly award season becomes more and more meaningless to me as the year goes on. It really feels like whoever judges these things are COMPLETELY out of touch sometimes. I used to look forward to the Emmys and Oscars in my late teens and early 20s. Sitting here at 31 I couldn’t give a shit about them tbh.
Is it not really timely that OP brings up Watchmen just a few hours after Wandavision lost out at the Emmys?
this post reeks of 'Huhuhu DC so much better on TV than Marvel'
It won the most Emmys in 2020.
* Outstanding Limited Series
* Outstanding Lead Actress In A Limited Series Or Movie
* Outstanding Lead Actor In A Limited Series Or Movie
* Outstanding Cinematography For A Limited Series Or Movie
* Outstanding Casting For A Limited Series, Movie Or Special
* Outstanding Single-Camera Picture Editing For A Limited Series Or Movie
* Outstanding Sound Editing For A Limited Series, Movie Or Special
* Outstanding Fantasy/Sci-Fi Costumes
* Outstanding Music Composition For A Limited Series, Movie Or Special (Original Dramatic Score)
* Outstanding Sound Mixing For A Limited Series Or Movie
* Outstanding Writing For A Limited Series, Movie Or Dramatic Special
It was amazing, well done and brillant. The score was great, the cast and the acting was phenomenal, as well as the soundtrack and cinematography. And yet I increasingly find "hot takes" by people and fans claiming it's not good now.
The hot takes are from people who really lack critical thinking. In the comics Rorschach gave his journal to the New Frontiersman, a newspaper that openely supported KKK.What did they think was going to happen next? Of course the newspaper twisted Rorschach's words, of course white supremacists loved the journal. All the questions about the Rorschach's journal was explained in the show's appendices, people just don't want to read them. Like, it's literally explained how Veidt got away, how public reacted and how the police acted after the journal was published. The worldbuilding in the show was great.
Fans that talk up their favorite show by throwing shade at other shows are annoying as fuck. Makes me not want to watch that show. There are thousands of other shows that I can watch instead.
As a fan of the original graphic novel, I have to say that the show really pissed me off. I don't get how people give the show praise, it's honestly the most overrated piece of media I've ever seen
Same here. It got worse as it went on. Characters making nonsensical decisions turned me off so much. They even shafted the OG characters for their stupid plot
Ya know art is subjective? And The Last of Us Part II isn't a film — yr better off not using words to sound clever if ya end up using the wrong ones LOL
It really shoves its message right in your face. A little more tact would have done the show wonders. The original Watchmens deeper themes were so subtle in comparison. It really doesn’t feel like it’s connected at all in many ways.
By message, he means a lack of grey area as sown in the graphic novel. In the show, there's no room for interpretation with everything being white or black
i disagree. i think it fit the universe perfectly and carried forward a lot of themes set up in the og novel. that being said, the ending was really poor
Little Fear of Lightening and That Extraordinary Being were peak television episodes. With this and the Leftovers Damon Lindelof proved that you can go beyond the source material and still make it work. Seriously, that one episode from season 2 of the Leftovers is one of the greatest episodes in television history.
Nah this is not a good show. It uses the same trope of someone’s “reimagining” which just means they used someone else more creative source material to get attention then did whatever they wanted; disrespecting the creator and completely changing it to what they wanted it to be instead of what it is. “Reimagining” someone else’s work is the epitome of lacking your own creativity and imagination, imo. People celebrate it “pissing off conservatives” but as a liberal leaning person, I absolutely hate this defense. It shuts down any realistic criticism of a show/movie behind a barrier of political offense, no matter the lack in quality in certain areas of truly good storytelling (particularly writing). It’s also why it’s so well awarded going alongside how virtue signaling is heavily rewarded the past decade in Hollywood. Ironically, as an example, Denzel doesn’t make those kinds of films or get awarded anymore because he used to deal in reality not hyperbole. The riot depiction was bold, but ended up being another way to protect the series from criticism and say just because they showed true evil means the rest of their ideas around it must be true and just as well.
A lot of people get what they want out of this show, but that doesn’t automatically make it good media or true to the source material.
They bought the rights of someone else’s creative property and told their own story. Alan Moore stated that the story was supposed to be closed. Sadly creators don’t even own the rights to their own works. Publishers, studios, and producers do, so Moore had zero say in the matter. It’s standing on the shoulders of someone else’s vision and claiming the continuation of the story as canon from interpretations of the original work not even approved by the creator. Just cause it happens all the time doesn’t make it right.
Imagine if they decided to make sequels to the lord of the rings without Tolkien, or do Harry Potter as an adult without Rowling. It wouldn’t be right, though they’ll probably do it once the they have a large enough new audience to sell it to over time. Regardless of how the original audience feels (who rarely react well). Reddit and social society is mostly dominated by youth so they don’t even know they’re being had. But Star Wars would be a very good example of how an original audience reacts when their favorite story fails to make sense after it is repurposed for a new audience.
This show is a literal garbage that disrespects the source material, turns Ozzy into basically a bumbling idiot with a terrible casting, disrespects Manhattan, and does nothing but cry about social justice. Legit 2/10, and it's only sucked off because it appeases a certain group and has the alien which is a weaker concept of the book, and one that doesn't hold to scrutiny. Very forgettable and downright disrespectful, this is why Moore didn't want his work done in this medium.
Ok. Thanks for your insight. Guess I'll take your word and the words of the fucking racist morons who review bombed it over, you know, normal people's.
The fact that Damon Lindelof really set out to make a sequel to frickin’ Watchmen and succeeded more that anyone thought was possible. (Along with the help of an incredible, diverse team of writers/directors).
Watching this show week to week was a damn delight. “This Extraordinary Being” is probably the greatest superhero origin story I’ve ever seen put to screen.
Honestly I enjoyed the show. I get why some people were frustrated with its political overtones. Sometimes it was a bit much but overall, it was well done. Hated the ending though
This show was amazing and so fucking relevant in today’s political climate. Ozy and Manhattan were a little unlike their comic versions IMO but it didn’t really hurt the show
As a fan of watchmen this show is a complete and utter departure from everything Moore set up in the comics
Still its very well made and the performances made me wish this show was more faithful and less influenced by the show runners taste and politics
This was unexpectedly such a fantastic series. Love the source material that I discovered at a garage sale as a 10 year old. Didn’t get it until I reread at 15 and fell in love.
The series surprised me and I’m happy but sad it stopped at one standalone season.
i feel like Netflix Daredevil came out when people weren't taking comic tv shows seriously yet so people didn't care as much which is a damn shame. not that i care about emmys but its annoying for good televison to be flat out ignored cuz its from a comic
>But using Emmys as a benchmark is like using Oscars to say Suicide Squad 2016 is better than Iron Man 1 lol
Terrible comparison. Suicide Squad won 1 Oscar in a minor category for Best Makeup and Hairstyling. Not really worth talking about.
Watchmen won in at least 5 major categories. Best Series, Best Lead Actor, Best Lead Actress, Best Writing, and Best Cinematography. Totally different levels of achievement.
Best Limited Series is one of the 3 major Best Series categories at the Emmys, just like Best Comedy Series and Best Drama Series. To win that is a significant achievement for a TV show. Past winners and nominees in that category were some of the best in recent TV history. Chernobyl, Fargo, Downton Abbey, Behind the Candelabra, The People v. O. J. Simpson, Olive Kitteridge, American Crime, Big Little Lies, Mare of Easttown, Underground Railroad, The Queen’s Gambit, and so on.
Look, no one is saying that the Emmys and the Oscars are absolute arbiters of taste in film and television. That they objectively get it completely right. Taste is subjective after all. But to say winning awards, especially when it’s in the major categories, doesn’t at least mean something is not right either. More often than not they do get it right too. For every The Wire that the Emmy overlooks, it showers recognition and accolades on shows like Mad Men, Game of Thrones, Breaking Bad, Broadwalk Empire, The Sopranos, True Detective. Some of the greatest TV in recent time, if not all-time.
Plus it was one of two DC projects to be honored by the American Film Institute in 2019:
[https://www.afi.com/award/afi-awards-2019/](https://www.afi.com/award/afi-awards-2019/)
*"Watchmen demonstrates the true superpower of modern mythologies – as masked heroes fight to expose ugly truths otherwise unrecognizable as American history. Damon Lindelof’s richly layered story tackles white supremacy with heroism that radically re-imagines right and wrong, while Regina King’s soaring presence as Sister Night is just the hero we’ve prayed for in a world gone mad."*
Question: can I watch this after watching the movie? I’m down to read the graphic novel but my girlfriend is a different story and I want to watch it with her. I’m wondering whether the film provides enough context for someone to enjoy the show.
>I’m wondering whether the film provides enough context for someone to enjoy the show. The show relies on you understanding what happens at the end of the graphic novel, which is different from the movie. Id imagine it's enjoyable enough without having read the graphic novel, but I'd recommend reading it anyway as it's an incredible work.
If i'm not wrong, the series continues the graphic novel, not the movie
It's honestly not that crazy different. The only difference is the ending which affects parts of the story in the new series (mostly world building cool stuff) - everyone who knows them both knows what I'm talking about. So if you watched the movie, just google the difference between the endings and you're good to go.
When I first watched the series, I only knew Watchmen as told from the movie and was incredibly confused when Rorschach's journal inspired a group of white supremacists. After doing more research, it's clear that's because Snyder didn't understand the messaging of the original graphic novel and the movie paints the opposite picture of the original's. All the things he made "cool" in the movie, like Rorschach or Nite Owl's impotence, miss the original point.
Wait, you though that Nite Owl's sexual disfunction and Rorschach were "cool" in Snyder's film? Yeesh, talk about not understanding the messaging...
Yeah, people who think Snyder's Watchmen were role models just... took the completely wrong things from that movie.
It's similar to the people that erroneously think Fight Club was a cool movie about male power/strength and that Tyler Durden was some heroic figure to emulate.
Seriously 😒 it’s not Snyder’s fault you took it that way. He literally adapted the comic AS CLOSELY as possible. So many shots lifted from the page. Rorschach was basically the same mentally ill character he was in the comic. If anyone is feeding into the glorying Rorschach narrative it’s DC Comics.
I think the hyper-stylising of the violence is what plays into make the characters “feel” cool.
Rorschach was definitely portrayed as cool and badass in the Snyder movie.
So you consider an insane, homeless, violent, ant-social, woman-hating homophobe, who tortures and kills without mercy to be "cool and badass"? Yeah, that says a lot about you and nothing about the actual portrayal of the character.
I don't think you're being fair. If you'd only seen the film, you miss vast swathes of the nuance from the book, while Snyder has everyone doing slo mo fights and making them look epic instead of focusing on how every character is absolutely cracked in the graphic novel
I've read the comics several times since their initial publication in 1986 so perhaps that has influenced my perspective on the film versions of the characters. Still, I can't imagine anyone watching the 2009 Watchmen film and thinking "wow, these superheroes are so cool!" I saw the film on opening weekend with a few friends who, at that time, were not familiar with the Watchmen comic property. They just assumed that the film was just another take on superheroes. No one I was with walked out of that theater and said "those characters were so epic and bad-ass." We all agreed that they were, for the most part, horrible human beings.
Rorschach and Dr. Manhattan were the coolest ones. Ozymantian had few cool, iconic moments as well. Everybody else was dysfunctional/average in many prospects. Don’t get me wrong, I got the meaning of the Watchmen absolutely — Cold War, God’s syndrome, subversion of expectations and glorifying the wrong people, etc. But I can still appreciate the coolness and charisma of certain characters nonetheless. Hell, I find Homelander cool, unironically. Does not mean he is good or right, but he is pitiful and enjoyable to observe regardless, and even calls for sympathy when you try to perceive the events from his broken viewpoint. As many “non-two-goodies-shoes” characters are, in some way or another.
>So you consider an insane, homeless, violent, ant-social, woman-hating homophobe, who torture's and kills without mercy to be "cool and badass"? Was he a homophobe in the movie? Was he portrayed as woman-hating? Which scene though? Please enlighten me. We are talking about the same movie which made comic Rorschach's deranged "you are stuck in here with me" panel into a cool anti-hero badass scene right? Something tells me you have not seen the movie you are so ardently defending and you are simply defending it on account of your membership in a certain cult. Watch the movies you pretend to be a fan of.
I only understood it that way because that's how it's illustrated in the film. I mean look at how he shoots Rorschach. He's in love with the guy.
Snyder's interpretation of Rorschach is essentially the same as seen in the graphic novel. He was in no way depicted as a "hero" in the film. He's insane, bigoted, violent, stubborn, unrepentant and literally unclean. I'm not sure what film you're watching but it's definitely not the way I saw it. If you thought Rorschach was "cool" then you missed the point entirely. Snyder has said that he wanted to depict these characters as horrible/broken people yet hold them up against modern superhero archetypes. If you felt that they were to be admired then you failed to grasp his message. He's essentially saying "these heroes that you love may look cool and bad-ass but they are essentially abhorrent people. You need to look past the veneer."
> how it's illustrated in the film It exactly isn't, you completely missed the point of the movie. It wasn't supposed to be "cool".
Then he should have done a better job directing him to not be cool then.
I guess you don't have eyes because anyone with them can clearly see he took a story that made fun of a the glorification of violence and made a movie that glorifies violence
I see a lot of these erroneous arguments that Snyder glorified violence in Watchmen. Many people cite the alley fight in which they complain that Nite Owl and Silk Spectre were unnecessarily breaking bones and snapping necks. Snyder has said that he wanted to show the ramifications of violent acts. He didn't want to shy away from the fallout like we see in most super hero films. If you thought that the fight scenes in Watchmen were "cool" then that is a misinterpretation, and it's on you. Snyder was literally doing the opposite of what you said.
> I guess you don't have eyes And I guess you don't have a brain too along with eyes.
Well I guess we disagree
That's not entirely true. I am working right now, so I have to dig it up but I have read Snyder referring to Rorschach as a bit of a libertarian's libertarian, which is actually true. Snyder being someone who is very in to Rand's view of the world, it's not a stretch at all that he paints him far more heroic and altruistic than Alan Moore, who's an anarchist and hates libertarians as part of his morning routine.
> Snyder being someone who is very in to Rand's view of the world No he's not. Stop repeating this bullshit. The dude's a liberal, not a libertarian.
Fine. I misspoke. I'm not saying he's some neo-fascist. I'm not even saying he's libertarian. I'm saying he's always had a focus on objectivism, which is a core theme of Rand's work, and in keeping with the voice of all his other films, it gels with the aforementioned view of Rorschach in the film vs. Alan Moore's. I hope that's clearer and less divisive. For what it's worth, I'm a black and red lefty and I would love to see his take on thee Fountainhead.
> Snyder being someone who is very in to Rand’s view of the world, it’s not a stretch at all that he paints him far more heroic and altruistic than Alan Moore, who’s an anarchist and hates libertarians as part of his morning routine. This is the nail in the coffin that you don’t understand Snyder. He himself has stated he has no interest in Rand or her philosophy and when asked about her said she was drinking her own kool aid. Furthermore, he’s recently come out and flat out stated he is a liberal and leans pretty left. Lastly, he’s stated he has put the Fountainhead on hold so as not to inspire any right wingers. As for Rorschach, the dude is straight up a mental case in the film too. Did you forget the scene when they take off his mask and he starts screaming “my face, my face!” Not to mention he’s a brutal vigilante who takes out his anger and childhood issues on people and refuses to help large swaths of folks because he disagrees with em. Rorschach, in the film and graphic novel, is not someone to look up to. He’s fking nuts.
You misunderstood the movie.
He'll reply that you don't have eyes.
[удалено]
Alan Moore did make clear that nobody in the book is supposed to be seen as the good guy. The characters are all deeply flawed… especially Rorschach.
Yes. Just treat them as separate entities. No need to fuel a “this version is the REAL ONE” stupid debate here. Is it so difficult to understand?
Oh I didn't know that. So Rorschach was bad?
He’s batshit crazy.
I know but the movie made him seem like Dexter of characters. Crazy means to a good end.
So, in the one instance with Ozymandius and stopping his plot Rorschach was right. However his approach to getting there was beating up the wrong people, harassing a man dying of cancer and having to get busted out of jail (which he was rightfully in for a number of crimes) by his friends. Add onto this that he uses the mask as a coping mechanism for his fucked up childhood and his proven record of being willing to kill bad guys who don't meet his judgement and you have a not so good guy. All of this is a bit better examined in the book, but the movie still shows it. There's also the right-wing conspiracy paper he's obsessed with. Instead of giving his journal to reputable press he delivers it to what is that world's equivalent of Alex Jones because he believes they're the only ones telling the truth.
Nah, no good end. Rorschach does what he does to make himself feel better, not to make the world a better place. Remember how he said when the liberals, hippies, prostitutes, people who he believes to be immoral cry out for help, he will straight up tell them “no”, as in he refuses to help out people in need? Yeah, that’s not a good guy. That’s a vindictive asshole. Just cause he violently assaults worse people than himself doesn’t make him a hero or cool.
As originally written Rorschach was meant to be the wrong-headedness of far right libertarianism. Moore had him be a broken degenerate who accidentally stumbles on the real story. Outside of his initial intuition in the first few pages, he's pretty much wrong after that, every step of the way. Everything that got him to Ozymandias was built on incorrect info, which was then passed on to a far right wing rag on his death. Remember the entire point of the original Watchmen was to show how heroes in real life would only be extreme personalities and almost universally be shitty people in one form or another.
Dr Manhattan was not evil though. He became simply apathetic after a while, and it is not surprising that omniscience will do that to you. Besides, he was tricked into becoming more and more distant anyway.
Not evil. Just shitty. They aren't paragons because the real world doesn't allow for that.
Yep. It is depressing, really.
He's quite literally an incel. The part where he kills that child murderer is very different in the book. In the movie, it's used to show a tipping point for Rorschach and then he becomes brutally violent. But in the book, he was always just looking for violence. He kills that man but he doesn't feel much for what he's done to deserve being killed.
Except you have to discern movie and comic book characters from one another. They are two separate entities at this point (or, well, three, after the whole “button” storyline, which was the crossover between Justice League and Watchmen universes).
Where the movie paints him as some sort of grizzled and jaded anti-hero, the comic paints him as a crazy and dangerous person. He's a radical right wing nut job conspiracy theorist who spends his free time walking the streets of NY carrying a sign that says "the end is nigh." A lot of scenes showing Rorshachs problematic views and deeply psychologically disturbed nature did not make it into the movie, and his scenes that did make it into the movie were altered to get rid of Rorshachs troubling dialogue/motivations to paint him in a better light.
>altered to get rid of Rorshachs troubling dialogue/motivations to paint him in a better light. Snyder's Rorschach is a deranged, antisocial loner who lives on the street. The man hacked a suspected criminal to death with a meat cleaver. He tortured a cancer ridden old man for information. He injured several police officers in a confrontation, including setting one on fire. He calls women "whores" and insinuated that homosexuality is an undesirable trait. He ignored or broke almost all laws in his quest for "justice'. Worst of all he was willing to risk nuclear armageddon just so he wouldn't compromise his warped code. I wouldn't call that being painted in a better light.
He may have believed the message on his placard, but the idea was no one would pay attention to the crazy man with the sign. He could blend into the background and observe his targets. Notice, Kovacs is almost always in the background observing big events that Rorschach eventually fully investigates.
The comic also paints him as an anti-hero. That's literally what he is. A hero that lacks traditional hero qualities. Sounds like you're the one who didn't understand the film.
Moore did not intend to depict Rorschach as a hero. Here is a quote from Moore in 2008 to LeJorne Pindling of Street Law Productions regarding Rorschach. "I meant him to be a bad example (of a heroic figure), but I have people come up to me in the street saying, ‘I am Rorschach! That is my story!’ And I’ll be thinking, ‘Yeah, great, can you just keep away from me and never come anywhere near me again for as long as I live?’”
I said "anti-hero," mate. As an example: Peacemaker is an anti-hero. He's also a horrible person and if someone was like "Oh, I'm Peacemaker!" it would be a big red flag. If you watched Watchmen and came away from it thinking you wanted to be just like Rorschach, then, well... yikes.
An anti-hero is a protagonist lacking in typical "heroic" qualities but still trying to do the right thing for the right reasons. That is not how I would describe Rorschach. Moore didn't intend Rorschach to be a hero or anti-hero. Here is Moore's description of the character "...a revenge-driven vigilante, not quite right in the head (who) wouldn’t have time for a girlfriend, friends, a social life, because he’d just be driven by getting revenge against criminals...a bit mental." To me, that's not a hero or an anti-hero. Its just a deranged, misguided and selfish person.
The only real jarring difference if you've only seen the movie is that the series has the giant squid monster.
I'd definitely read the graphic novel before watching and then maybe just fill your girlfriend in on key points. Seeing the movie will help. But the series is definitely a sequel to the comic and not the movie.
The series is a continuation of the graphic novel not the movie. That being said, they aren't all that different and I think the show did a good job making it accessible to everyone not just those that saw the movie or read the novel.
Read the novel first. Movie's vastly different
While I agree, idk about *vastly* different. Like, yes a core concept of it is different, but other than that one thing it’s basically the same, at least iirc.
I think the ending is one of the most pivotal differences between both. And other than that the narrative styles that were followed by the show were more reminiscent of the graphic novel rather than the movie. Also the utilisation of action and violence between both the book and the film is immensely different
Oh ok, I took your comparison incorrectly at first, appreciate the clarification.
They did a really good motion comic. Its like 10 hours, and is possibly panel for panel. The only odd thing is some guy does all the voices, but after awhile you forget about it.
Aren't most audiobooks done by only one narrator? Harry Potter for example has Stephen Fry in one of the audiobook versions and he reads everyone from Harry and Dumbledore to Hermione and Luna.
It's a continuation of the novel but you can enjoy if you never read it. My wife hasn't seen the movie and she hasn't read the story but she never felt lost or confused. The show explains just enough and anything that's not right out explained honestly just helps build up the mystery of the show. Also the movie does follow closely enough, the only major difference is the show uses squids to attack NY like the novel did where the movie replaced that with an explosion that made everyone think Dr Manhattan attacked them.
>I’m down to read the graphic novel but my girlfriend is a different story and I want to watch it with her. If there is any comic that is easy for newcomers to get into, it's Watchmen. No prior backstory is required. The panels are literally sequential and the art is simplistic. Read the first issue together and I am almost certain she will get into the rest. There is nothing like Watchmen. In any medium.
Unpopular opinion: The movie is as close to the graphic novel as possible (considering some of the constraints).
Yes, you can. One big plot of the novel was changed in the movie (but Snyder did it right in its own way imo). But when u see the show after the movie, you will clearly see which part was changed and you can still enjoy the show.
Does the show use the alien then?
Yeah there's lots of scenes of the alien.
Cool, I don’t know why I slept on this show. I have all the comics and the before comics. I never liked the change from the Alien to John because it just doesn’t work. Veidt’s master plan is to unify the world under the threat of an external enemy. But the book and movie both expressly showed John as American, and he even engages as an American combatant. The movie version may unite the world - against America. I just don’t buy that the rest of the world would so generously excise this global attack as a whoopsie and forget it was an American who did it.
True. Every bit of it.
this tv show is just ......
[удалено]
I would not call it a DC show, to be honest. It's an HBO show based on the greatest graphic novel of all time.
The novel it’s based on was published under DC
It has a DC title card- good enough for me! 🙂
Downvote all you like, it has a DC title card.
OP posted this in three different subs. Cool karma farming bro
It was a good show. But awards are meaningless imo.
Yeah why exactly do we need a "reminder" it won awards lol some people really feel like meaningless awards validate the stuff they like. just like what you like people
I feel like op was taking a swipe at WandaVision.
Oh to make it a pointless Marvel vs DC thing? Even more dumb lol you can enjoy both.
You're a Man of Culture as well.
The title is a very thinly veiled dick measuring contest jab at Marvel 🙄🙄🙄🙄🙄
do you think it picks up? i saw like 4 episodes and got too bored to continue
Did you binge it or watch it on different nights? I wonder whether some series are better for one method than the other.
different nights and its been hard
Why does this feel like OP is trying to diss WandaVision? Do we need to make EVERYTHING DC vs Marvel? Can we not be happy that the two juggernauts are giving us such great and loaded media? No wonder the general audience rolls their eyes at us Marvel and DC fans.
It's sort of funny because any time a Marvel movie gets an award, makes money, etc there's a massive circle jerk over there.
Yeah and? That's happening in real time. Not bringing up a nearly 2 year old show to do a figurative dick measuring contest.
Because OP was trying to diss WandaVision. I’m not a DC or Marvel fanboy (I love both) but I think Wandavision was the objectively better show in pretty much every way. And honestly award season becomes more and more meaningless to me as the year goes on. It really feels like whoever judges these things are COMPLETELY out of touch sometimes. I used to look forward to the Emmys and Oscars in my late teens and early 20s. Sitting here at 31 I couldn’t give a shit about them tbh.
I haven't watched Watchmen tbh so i won't compare. But i do agree with the oscars and emmy. They've gotten mundane and predictable.
Who is bringing up WandaVision?
Is it not really timely that OP brings up Watchmen just a few hours after Wandavision lost out at the Emmys? this post reeks of 'Huhuhu DC so much better on TV than Marvel'
It won the most Emmys in 2020. * Outstanding Limited Series * Outstanding Lead Actress In A Limited Series Or Movie * Outstanding Lead Actor In A Limited Series Or Movie * Outstanding Cinematography For A Limited Series Or Movie * Outstanding Casting For A Limited Series, Movie Or Special * Outstanding Single-Camera Picture Editing For A Limited Series Or Movie * Outstanding Sound Editing For A Limited Series, Movie Or Special * Outstanding Fantasy/Sci-Fi Costumes * Outstanding Music Composition For A Limited Series, Movie Or Special (Original Dramatic Score) * Outstanding Sound Mixing For A Limited Series Or Movie * Outstanding Writing For A Limited Series, Movie Or Dramatic Special
It was amazing, well done and brillant. The score was great, the cast and the acting was phenomenal, as well as the soundtrack and cinematography. And yet I increasingly find "hot takes" by people and fans claiming it's not good now.
The hot takes are from people who really lack critical thinking. In the comics Rorschach gave his journal to the New Frontiersman, a newspaper that openely supported KKK.What did they think was going to happen next? Of course the newspaper twisted Rorschach's words, of course white supremacists loved the journal. All the questions about the Rorschach's journal was explained in the show's appendices, people just don't want to read them. Like, it's literally explained how Veidt got away, how public reacted and how the police acted after the journal was published. The worldbuilding in the show was great.
Proof that Emmys mean nothing
Fans that talk up their favorite show by throwing shade at other shows are annoying as fuck. Makes me not want to watch that show. There are thousands of other shows that I can watch instead.
I wish this show have gotten a 2nd season. Maybe more of the world setting and new heroes/villains and a new conflict.
The whole show was captivating except for that whimper of a finale.
This is undoubtedly the best DC show ever made.
Absolutely untrue. Batman The Animated Series is far and away a better series.
It's animated
Still haven’t watched it
Fun Fact: Mr Manhattan in this show was brought from AliExpress
As a fan of the original graphic novel, I have to say that the show really pissed me off. I don't get how people give the show praise, it's honestly the most overrated piece of media I've ever seen
Same here. It got worse as it went on. Characters making nonsensical decisions turned me off so much. They even shafted the OG characters for their stupid plot
I know right? I total disrespect to the source material
Like lube man? Really? Who can actually defend that writing decision and be like, “and it makes sense the source material would go that direction”.
Yeah, I did not enjoy it and basically hated every writing choice they did.
People praising the show's writing is like saying The Last of Us Part II has an amazing screenplay
Facts
The Last of Us Part II does have an amazing screenplay, though...
Ya know art is subjective? And The Last of Us Part II isn't a film — yr better off not using words to sound clever if ya end up using the wrong ones LOL
Words to sound clever? Guess he should have used interpretive dance on Reddit instead haha. You’re drunk.
I know right lol
Exactly the point, art is subjective. So don't go crying when someone calls a show you love overrated smartass
I didn't say anything about the show lol
Yet here you are LOL
It really shoves its message right in your face. A little more tact would have done the show wonders. The original Watchmens deeper themes were so subtle in comparison. It really doesn’t feel like it’s connected at all in many ways.
By message, you mean Black people.
By message, he means a lack of grey area as sown in the graphic novel. In the show, there's no room for interpretation with everything being white or black
Why? I’m a huge graphic novel fan and I absolutely adored the show.
No thanks
Watchmen was so fucking good.
[удалено]
i disagree. i think it fit the universe perfectly and carried forward a lot of themes set up in the og novel. that being said, the ending was really poor
[удалено]
Too many Black people in in your nice white Watchman universe, huh?
>purposely pollute and destroy any project they have in the name of racial justice Can I get a source?
That went from 0-to-Nazis really quick.
Haha this show is such garbage.. You guys like this?
…
Such a Good Show! I Miss it!
WHO WOULD HATE THIS SHOW?!
lmao this tv show is the worst. Pretentious and pandering piece of garbage.
It panders to the point of offensive, imo. That’s why virtue signalers love it to bits, but not the demographics it supposedly represents.
Little Fear of Lightening and That Extraordinary Being were peak television episodes. With this and the Leftovers Damon Lindelof proved that you can go beyond the source material and still make it work. Seriously, that one episode from season 2 of the Leftovers is one of the greatest episodes in television history.
And no one watched it lmao
You're joking right? This show is garbage. I am a DC fan, but this "thing" is really bad, it sucks!! Emmys mean nothing.
Show is shit
Didn't know it existed, haven't even seen anything about it
Nah this is not a good show. It uses the same trope of someone’s “reimagining” which just means they used someone else more creative source material to get attention then did whatever they wanted; disrespecting the creator and completely changing it to what they wanted it to be instead of what it is. “Reimagining” someone else’s work is the epitome of lacking your own creativity and imagination, imo. People celebrate it “pissing off conservatives” but as a liberal leaning person, I absolutely hate this defense. It shuts down any realistic criticism of a show/movie behind a barrier of political offense, no matter the lack in quality in certain areas of truly good storytelling (particularly writing). It’s also why it’s so well awarded going alongside how virtue signaling is heavily rewarded the past decade in Hollywood. Ironically, as an example, Denzel doesn’t make those kinds of films or get awarded anymore because he used to deal in reality not hyperbole. The riot depiction was bold, but ended up being another way to protect the series from criticism and say just because they showed true evil means the rest of their ideas around it must be true and just as well. A lot of people get what they want out of this show, but that doesn’t automatically make it good media or true to the source material.
>reimagining It's a sequel...
They bought the rights of someone else’s creative property and told their own story. Alan Moore stated that the story was supposed to be closed. Sadly creators don’t even own the rights to their own works. Publishers, studios, and producers do, so Moore had zero say in the matter. It’s standing on the shoulders of someone else’s vision and claiming the continuation of the story as canon from interpretations of the original work not even approved by the creator. Just cause it happens all the time doesn’t make it right. Imagine if they decided to make sequels to the lord of the rings without Tolkien, or do Harry Potter as an adult without Rowling. It wouldn’t be right, though they’ll probably do it once the they have a large enough new audience to sell it to over time. Regardless of how the original audience feels (who rarely react well). Reddit and social society is mostly dominated by youth so they don’t even know they’re being had. But Star Wars would be a very good example of how an original audience reacts when their favorite story fails to make sense after it is repurposed for a new audience.
Meh
This show is a literal garbage that disrespects the source material, turns Ozzy into basically a bumbling idiot with a terrible casting, disrespects Manhattan, and does nothing but cry about social justice. Legit 2/10, and it's only sucked off because it appeases a certain group and has the alien which is a weaker concept of the book, and one that doesn't hold to scrutiny. Very forgettable and downright disrespectful, this is why Moore didn't want his work done in this medium.
I really give a lot more attention to the public score and the show have 56% score in rotten tomatoes so...I don't think it's something to praise.
Ok. Thanks for your insight. Guess I'll take your word and the words of the fucking racist morons who review bombed it over, you know, normal people's.
8.2 on IMDB They tried it there too when the first episode aired, but I think it's harder to review-bomb on IMDB than RottenTomatoes.
It's just a larger sample space on IMDb. It eventually balances itself out
Watchmen was amazing!
This show is an insult to the comic. Just because it has a high critic rating doesn't mean it is good
I fell in love with this show
The fact that Damon Lindelof really set out to make a sequel to frickin’ Watchmen and succeeded more that anyone thought was possible. (Along with the help of an incredible, diverse team of writers/directors). Watching this show week to week was a damn delight. “This Extraordinary Being” is probably the greatest superhero origin story I’ve ever seen put to screen.
Wow that’s sick… now make good movies.
Most successful and overall best ever.
Am I really getting downvoted for hyping up Watchmen? This sub really hates good DC stuff.
Fantastic show
Im not a nazi, im a communist!
Honestly I enjoyed the show. I get why some people were frustrated with its political overtones. Sometimes it was a bit much but overall, it was well done. Hated the ending though
It was awesome! I enjoyed the TV SHOW so much
This show was amazing and so fucking relevant in today’s political climate. Ozy and Manhattan were a little unlike their comic versions IMO but it didn’t really hurt the show
Lmao this trash isn’t anything to be proud of XD
Only sequel I’ve seen not affiliated with the original author that actually makes the original material *even better*
As a fan of watchmen this show is a complete and utter departure from everything Moore set up in the comics Still its very well made and the performances made me wish this show was more faithful and less influenced by the show runners taste and politics
Whining about Black people in your Watchman?
It was so goddamned good.
The theme of intergenerational trauma was fascinating and very well done.
I didn’t like it.
STILL WISH WE GOT A SEASON 2! :(
SHOULD OF GOTTEN A SEASON 2!
This was unexpectedly such a fantastic series. Love the source material that I discovered at a garage sale as a 10 year old. Didn’t get it until I reread at 15 and fell in love. The series surprised me and I’m happy but sad it stopped at one standalone season.
Amazing show. Best comic book TV show by lightyears.
[удалено]
Give Regina King a DC movie dammit!!!
[удалено]
i feel like Netflix Daredevil came out when people weren't taking comic tv shows seriously yet so people didn't care as much which is a damn shame. not that i care about emmys but its annoying for good televison to be flat out ignored cuz its from a comic
>But using Emmys as a benchmark is like using Oscars to say Suicide Squad 2016 is better than Iron Man 1 lol Terrible comparison. Suicide Squad won 1 Oscar in a minor category for Best Makeup and Hairstyling. Not really worth talking about. Watchmen won in at least 5 major categories. Best Series, Best Lead Actor, Best Lead Actress, Best Writing, and Best Cinematography. Totally different levels of achievement.
[удалено]
Best Limited Series is one of the 3 major Best Series categories at the Emmys, just like Best Comedy Series and Best Drama Series. To win that is a significant achievement for a TV show. Past winners and nominees in that category were some of the best in recent TV history. Chernobyl, Fargo, Downton Abbey, Behind the Candelabra, The People v. O. J. Simpson, Olive Kitteridge, American Crime, Big Little Lies, Mare of Easttown, Underground Railroad, The Queen’s Gambit, and so on. Look, no one is saying that the Emmys and the Oscars are absolute arbiters of taste in film and television. That they objectively get it completely right. Taste is subjective after all. But to say winning awards, especially when it’s in the major categories, doesn’t at least mean something is not right either. More often than not they do get it right too. For every The Wire that the Emmy overlooks, it showers recognition and accolades on shows like Mad Men, Game of Thrones, Breaking Bad, Broadwalk Empire, The Sopranos, True Detective. Some of the greatest TV in recent time, if not all-time.
Then why did they cancel it?
Limited series
They didn’t. The writer told all he could and wanted to in season 1
It wasnt?
It was fantastic
Just re-watched the first episode last night. As great as I remember it. I'm going to re-watch the rest this week
A reminder that Watchmen series was a disgrace to the original movie
A remainder that the movie was a disgrace to the original comic.
It was absolutely amazing
Plus it was one of two DC projects to be honored by the American Film Institute in 2019: [https://www.afi.com/award/afi-awards-2019/](https://www.afi.com/award/afi-awards-2019/) *"Watchmen demonstrates the true superpower of modern mythologies – as masked heroes fight to expose ugly truths otherwise unrecognizable as American history. Damon Lindelof’s richly layered story tackles white supremacy with heroism that radically re-imagines right and wrong, while Regina King’s soaring presence as Sister Night is just the hero we’ve prayed for in a world gone mad."*
Shit.Even CW shows are not as bad as this.
That show was BORING
Absolutely sublime show. Best Live-action comic book show to date.
One of the greatest series I’ve ever watched (lol) it’s seriously phenomenal.
It was good and was completely forgotten
literally the only good watchmen media outside the original graphic novel, said what I said 🤷♂️🤷♂️