Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
Box of Bunnies
Apr 3, 2012

by Pragmatica

Bedshaped posted:

No, we need more stories about A. Superman being punched really hard, or B. Superman struggling with being unable to punch something hard enough.

what we actually need is more stories about Superman fighting corrupt politicians, war profiteers, domestic abusers. get back to the good poo poo at his roots

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Niwrad
Jul 1, 2008

She could have just killed the couple off and taken what she wanted. I think giving the baby and money was a nice gesture for them selling their land. I still don't see anything she did in the show that would make her evil.

Thranguy
Apr 21, 2010


Deceitful and black-hearted, perhaps we are. But we would never go against the Code. Well, perhaps for good reasons. But mostly never.
It's interesting how much the two versions of a Watchmen sequel (the show and Doomsday clock) converged.

Both kept Nite Owl offstage the whole time.

Both ended with Dr. M dead, his powers passed on to someone else at the very end In a way that avoids answering what that really means.

Both had Veidt save the world again and also end up being put in jail.

Gorn Myson
Aug 8, 2007






Sinteres posted:

Lindelof says he has a lot of respect for what Snyder did with that movie, and it bothers him that people interpret things in the show as insults against it.
All the people bitching about the version of Doctor Manhattan in the show clearly wanted a Doctor Manhattan that had a similar gravitas that to the the one in the movie. These people spent the last decade bitching about the movie (which was directed by their most hated movie director) but their vision of a TV sequel entirely depended on it. And then it was written by their most hated script writer. I love it.

Mameluke
Aug 2, 2013

by Fluffdaddy

Niwrad posted:

She could have just killed the couple off and taken what she wanted. I think giving the baby and money was a nice gesture for them selling their land. I still don't see anything she did in the show that would make her evil.

She was too competent and confident, and her ideas were too good, breaking a Story Law

It would have landed better if they played it more as Veidt murdering his daughter and less as stopping a light show

Vagabong
Mar 2, 2019
On the matter of Trieu being Veidt's daughter, it's not a particularly substantive criticism but it does bother me that a show interested in dealing with racial inequality basically implied the existence of an ubermensch gene.

Lord knows the original comic had little interest in racial issues but I always thought you could read Ozy's backstory as the Randian ideal of the self made man as at least somewhat self deciving; even if he abandoned his families material wealth he is still an upper class white dude in as society that is orientated to serve that demographic.

By having Trieu become a trillonaire entirely under her own steam in a way that matches Veidt not only suggests that his self aggrandising narrative is correct, but that both there successes were driven by some sort of genetic inheritance, which is a bit poo poo when your trying to address racial issues.

Jedit
Dec 10, 2011

Proudly supporting vanilla legends 1994-2014

JustaDamnFool posted:

By having Trieu become a trillonaire entirely under her own steam in a way that matches Veidt not only suggests that his self aggrandising narrative is correct, but that both there successes were driven by some sort of genetic inheritance, which is a bit poo poo when your trying to address racial issues.

Or it's neoliberal bootstrapping mythology because anyone could have done it, which is possibly worse.

I've had a few thoughts about the finale.

1) They really missed a trick by not having Roxette's The Look playing over the end credits.

2) Wade conking Veidt from behind while he was talking to Laurie was funny because Rorschach tried exactly the same thing in 1985 and Veidt clowned him. After Veidt had shown that he could still catch bullets it was a nice subversion.

3) Another nice callback was Jon not sending Angela away when he teleported the others because he didn't want to be alone when he died. It's a shout out to how Janey ran away when he was trapped in the IF removal chamber and he wanted her there.

That said, it remains uncertain if Manhattan is actually dead. As someone pointed out energy cannot be created or destroyed, only transformed, and his wasn't. He's reassembled himself from dispersion before, and being surrounded by tachyons when it happened may have prevented him seeing beyond that to his reintegration.

4) I agree with everyone who said the show went downhill when Manhattan entered it. All the threads laid down to that point were left to unravel in favour of a new shiny toy and the plot suffered for it.

I AM GRANDO
Aug 20, 2006

JustaDamnFool posted:

On the matter of Trieu being Veidt's daughter, it's not a particularly substantive criticism but it does bother me that a show interested in dealing with racial inequality basically implied the existence of an ubermensch gene.

Lord knows the original comic had little interest in racial issues but I always thought you could read Ozy's backstory as the Randian ideal of the self made man as at least somewhat self deciving; even if he abandoned his families material wealth he is still an upper class white dude in as society that is orientated to serve that demographic.

By having Trieu become a trillonaire entirely under her own steam in a way that matches Veidt not only suggests that his self aggrandising narrative is correct, but that both there successes were driven by some sort of genetic inheritance, which is a bit poo poo when your trying to address racial issues.

The mom was a genius too. She hated Veidt because he had her be a janitor. Also in the show Veidt is stupider and weaker than she is.

mrbotus
Apr 7, 2009

Patron of the Pants
Maybe its already been explained and discussed, but why is Laurie not being brought to trial along with Veidt and the POTUS? She was complicit in the crime.

Arist
Feb 13, 2012

who, me?


nickmeister posted:

Maybe its already been explained and discussed, but why is Laurie not being brought to trial along with Veidt and the POTUS? She was complicit in the crime.

Where is it stated that she wouldn't be?

I AM GRANDO
Aug 20, 2006

I think she says she’s willing to be prosecuted too. It’s at least complicit in her saying she guesses the President is going to jail too.

tarlibone
Aug 1, 2014

it's in the mighty hands of steel
Fun Shoe

Jedit posted:

2) Wade conking Veidt from behind while he was talking to Laurie was funny because Rorschach tried exactly the same thing in 1985 and Veidt clowned him. After Veidt had shown that he could still catch bullets it was a nice subversion.

This has come up a few times.

My thought on it is that yeah, he caught a bullet. A relatively slow, big-rear end bullet. But, he knew it was coming. Reflexes dulled with age are still more capable when the element of surprise is totally lost.

As for how Looking Glass (I think you know that's his name) was able to conk him on the head from behind... Veidt had called him a "hayseed." Where Veidt knew what Rorschach was capable of and had a level of respect for him, he didn't seem to give LG the same level of respect. He viewed LG as a country bumpkin version of a pretend superhero, assuming he even knew that about the guy. Really, all he would have "known" was that Wade was one of the Seventh Day Calvorists who was maybe kind-of a turncoat. He had no reason to pay Wade any attention or give him any respect as a fighter.

mrbotus
Apr 7, 2009

Patron of the Pants
Laurie seemed awfully happy and smug for an FBI agent about to confess to being complicit in mass genocide. Wade didn't give her the stink eye along with Veidt.

Box of Bunnies
Apr 3, 2012

by Pragmatica
at most she's an accessory after the fact, complicit in the coverup. he'd already done the mass murdering 35 minutes ago after all

mrbotus
Apr 7, 2009

Patron of the Pants
Another thing, in a world without smart phones and social media, building a spy network of payphones must have been really easy. Everyone in that world is basically as naive as a granny in 2002 on AOL

LinYutang
Oct 12, 2016

NEOLIBERAL SHITPOSTER

:siren:
VOTE BLUE NO MATTER WHO!!!
:siren:
The world's smartest man poses no more threat to me than its smartest termite.

Old watches, however

MrMojok
Jan 28, 2011

I just watched this whole series again from beginning to end.

I guess it’s normal now to poo poo on everything that doesn’t satisfy every desire and expectation you had. But goddamn, I loved it.

MrMojok
Jan 28, 2011

Preemptive “OK, Boomer” since that passes as contribution here

Nieuw Amsterdam
Dec 1, 2006

Dignité. Toujours, dignité.

Antifa Turkeesian posted:

I think she says she’s willing to be prosecuted too. It’s at least complicit in her saying she guesses the President is going to jail too.

Prosecution? She’s the only living witness.

Here’s everyone who was at Karnak:

Veidt. The accused.

Dreiberg: In Supermax prison and will not testify.

Dr Manhattan: Dead. And people will lose their loving minds when they find out.

Rorschach: Dead

Veidt’s staff: Dead

Laurie Blake is an honored FBI agent and former costumed adventurer best known as the consort of Dr Manhattan and the daughter of two well regarded members of the Minutemen. She is closely associated with the only adventurers active legally after the Keene act.

The prosecutors are going to lose their minds with joy to have such an unimpeachable witness.

Looking Glass is an honored Tulsa police detective who proved beyond a doubt he is not a 7K sleeper agent and he also brought Veidt into custody. He actively assisted the FBI efforts and was deputized by Dr Manhattan himself to help bring the perpetrators of his murder to justice. He was directly affected by the DIE event and was in New Jersey at a religious activity at the time. Another superstar witness.

Starks
Sep 24, 2006

JustaDamnFool posted:

On the matter of Trieu being Veidt's daughter, it's not a particularly substantive criticism but it does bother me that a show interested in dealing with racial inequality basically implied the existence of an ubermensch gene.

Lord knows the original comic had little interest in racial issues but I always thought you could read Ozy's backstory as the Randian ideal of the self made man as at least somewhat self deciving; even if he abandoned his families material wealth he is still an upper class white dude in as society that is orientated to serve that demographic.

By having Trieu become a trillonaire entirely under her own steam in a way that matches Veidt not only suggests that his self aggrandising narrative is correct, but that both there successes were driven by some sort of genetic inheritance, which is a bit poo poo when your trying to address racial issues.

But it’s not like she does this without knowing she’s his daughter. Her knowing her father is the smartest man on Earth is its own form of privilege. She’s successful because of how absolutely desperate she is for his validation. If it was genetic, she would have already been a trillionaire when she shows up to his fortress.

Her story actually exposes the self deceit of Veidt’s Randian backstory, because it mirrors his bootstrapping but is even more obviously driven by sheer insecurity.

Dr Kool-AIDS
Mar 26, 2004

Niwrad posted:

She could have just killed the couple off and taken what she wanted. I think giving the baby and money was a nice gesture for them selling their land. I still don't see anything she did in the show that would make her evil.

Murdering Dr. Manhattan seems pretty evil imo. You can make a greater good argument for it if you think she really had altruistic motivations to do good in the world with the power while he was busy trying to pretend he didn't have it, but she still murdered a guy to take what he had. If Veidt was evil for what he did despite it being for the greater good, so is she.

Mameluke posted:

It'll be hard not to recommend this show but the last two episodes make a hell of an argument

I feel the same way. I was raving about the show up until then, and now my recommendations are a bit more conditional. Personally, I think most of the best parts of the show didn't need to be in a Watchmen sequel at all, and it's too bad they realistically needed a comic book license to get the kind of story they wanted to tell made in a way that would attract more than a tiny niche audience.

Toxic Fart Syndrome
Jul 2, 2006

*hits A-THREAD-5*

Only 3.6 Roentgoons per hour ... not great, not terrible.




...the meter only goes to 3.6...

Pork Pro
It's definitely time to go all :thermidor: if people don't see anything wrong with an unaccountable trillionaire doing whatever they want up to and including killing god to steal his powers...by the way: what did she use all of that money for again? Stopping the nukes and saving Vietnam?
:confused:

Box of Bunnies
Apr 3, 2012

by Pragmatica

Sinteres posted:

Murdering Dr. Manhattan seems pretty evil imo.

"The daughter of a Vietnamese refugee killing the symbol of imperialism that ran roughshod over her country is an evil act", I say about the show where generational trauma is a theme

Box of Bunnies
Apr 3, 2012

by Pragmatica
Angela asks "gee, Jon, why'd you decide to come and do some imperialism over here?" and he's like "idk, i just wanted to fit in :^)" and they yuk it up and it goes unremarked upon again because he was doing his white supremacy overseas where all Americans agree it's fine and good

Alhazred
Feb 16, 2011




Niwrad posted:

Her ideas seemed good and I think it is better that she had the powers than anyone else in the show.

Also I think her strategy of fixing the worlds problems by being Dr Manhattan is better than just donating money and hoping that works for awhile.

Trieu has almost indefinite resources. She could've saved the world in a million ways but instead she decided to use it all on killing Dr. Manhattan.

Alhazred
Feb 16, 2011




It also unreal how much better looking Manhattan looks in the show compared to the movie.

Martman
Nov 20, 2006

Alhazred posted:

It also unreal how much better looking Manhattan looks in the show compared to the movie.
That's a new one!! Seriously though I really haven't heard that response anywhere.

Martman fucked around with this message at 11:41 on Dec 21, 2019

Nieuw Amsterdam
Dec 1, 2006

Dignité. Toujours, dignité.

Martman posted:

That's a new one!! Seriously though I really haven't heard that response anywhere.

I agree with that take.

The CGI Manhattan has not aged well. Why is he ripped like prime Schwarzenegger?

Alhazred
Feb 16, 2011




Nieuw Amsterdam posted:

I agree with that take.

The CGI Manhattan has not aged well. Why is he ripped like prime Schwarzenegger?
The movie version looks like a playstation npc while the tv version looks like an actual physical being:

Ghosthotel
Dec 27, 2008


I don’t know what I’m supposed to be seeing here because he looks 100 times better in the movie shot lmao

The REAL Goobusters
Apr 25, 2008
The dr manhattan in the show looks like complete dog poo poo what are you people talking about

Dr Kool-AIDS
Mar 26, 2004

Box of Bunnies posted:

"The daughter of a Vietnamese refugee killing the symbol of imperialism that ran roughshod over her country is an evil act", I say about the show where generational trauma is a theme

That's fair. I think that motivation was a bit undercooked on the show itself, but it's plausible. I think the farm scene really just presented her in a villainous light (joking about murdering the kid if the parents didn't take their one chance to buy him was pretty rough), so it's hard to look past that and see her as an altruistic figure.

Alhazred posted:

The movie version looks like a playstation npc while the tv version looks like an actual physical being:



The tv version looks exactly like a dude wearing blue makeup and a bald cap, and it doesn't work at all. I don't think the movie version is perfect either, but I do think presenting him as larger than life was the right approach.

Dr Kool-AIDS fucked around with this message at 16:23 on Dec 21, 2019

Servaetes
Sep 10, 2003

False enemy or true friend?
Yeah the TV version of him looks like absolute garbage, sorry

Dr Kool-AIDS
Mar 26, 2004

Dr. Manhattan shouldn't look like Tobias Funke just blued himself imo.

duck trucker
Oct 14, 2017

YOSPOS

Dr Manhattan is fictional and the show and movie both look fine.

Dr Kool-AIDS
Mar 26, 2004

duck trucker posted:

Dr Manhattan is fictional

:monocle:

Farm Frenzy
Jan 3, 2007

Box of Bunnies posted:

"The daughter of a Vietnamese refugee killing the symbol of imperialism that ran roughshod over her country is an evil act", I say about the show where generational trauma is a theme

she has like five extensive monologues and never mentions imperialism

Mantis42
Jul 26, 2010

The REAL Goobusters posted:

The dr manhattan in the show looks like complete dog poo poo what are you people talking about

we're in the phase of every media thread where goons try to gaslight people by holding opinions absolutely no one holds

Sleeveless
Dec 25, 2014

by Pragmatica

Alhazred posted:

The movie version looks like a playstation npc

You're complaining that an otherworldly person who exists outside the bounds of time and space doesn't look real enough, come on. Him being obviously and intentionally unreal is way better than him being a guy painted blue.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Martman
Nov 20, 2006


Can you tell which scene in the movie this is from?

It's a trick question!! bet you couldn't tell

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply