• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Rottenwatch: WATCHMEN

Status
Not open for further replies.
Wow, this whole JFK thing is starting to become like the GAF conspiracy threads :D

I just remembered a scene that really shocked me: The soldiers just blasting through the hippies.

I´ve seen the whole "put a flower into his rifle" thing before (Homer as a hippie etc) and I can place it into the general time, but I don´t know the exact incident. Wikiepedia entry or something, please. The hippie movement and anti-Vietnam protest were a bit before my time and I know more about Germanies troubles from that time, the American side wasn´t really part of my school education.
 
Binabik15 said:
Wow, this whole JFK thing is starting to become like the GAF conspiracy threads :D

I just remembered a scene that really shocked me: The soldiers just blasting through the hippies.

I´ve seen the whole "put a flower into his rifle" thing before (Homer as a hippie etc) and I can place it into the general time, but I don´t know the exact incident. Wikiepedia entry or something, please. The hippie movement and anti-Vietnam protest were a bit before my time and I know more about Germanies troubles from that time, the American side wasn´t really part of my school education.

Kent State
 
Son of Godzilla said:
There's a section in the book talking about the actual mask, how it's made from some super awesome dress that constantly changes it's pattern. due to science. I didn't notice his match changing that much either.


Yeah, in the comic the dress is tied to Kitty Genovese.
 
Evlar said:
The second one, with the cover that looks like my avatar.

EDIT: First one, too.
I'll go for the second one. The first one is basically a rerelease? Why does it have fewer pages?
 
Saw the watchman for the first time today. Loved it. Really entertaining plot and characters. I've never read the comic but it must be ridiculously good for the movie to have turned out so well.

I didn't think it was going to be as violent and dark and gritty either. A surprise I most welcomed. The fight scenes in this movie were also really well done and choreographed, I really enjoyed them, yet another thing I didn't see coming. The acting was also very well done for most of the cast.

Rorschach is the man. I'm guessing this is probably already old news but it bears repeating. Rorschach is the motherfucking man. What an awesome character, and one of my all time favorites now.

"I'm not trapped in here with you, you're trapped in here with me!"

Badass.

So far my favorite movie of 09. Really, really enjoyed it. I did not think I would enjoy it this much but the plot, characters, settings are all right up my alley in terms of entertainment.

9.5/10 =)
 
Absolutely loved the below scene happen the way it did in the movie. I was grinning like a moron through out that intro sequence.

the_kiss1.jpg


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V–J_day_in_Times_Square
 
Hey I haven't read the GN but I was reading the Wikipedia entry and noticed something that was weird about Roscharch:
It says the guy who killed Blair Roche was a dress maker, and we know Roscharch was a dress maker too. It says that it was after Blair Roche's death that he basically became Roscharch for good. The mask he wears is from a woman who refused it after he made and who was murdered later on. Anyway, it sounds like it could be that Roscharch was actually a serial killer, and he might have killed at least Blair Roche. Roche somewhat sounds like Rosch-arch (roche means rock in French), or is there already an explanation for his name? It would also make Roscharch a walking contradiction in the sense that he wants the truth to prevail and is against the idea of not telling the world about what really happened by the end of the story, but at the same time he's hiding his past under a mask. Ok maybe I'm seeing something that isn't there:p I just find it strange that Roche's murder would also just happen to be a dress maker.
 
Ether_Snake said:
Hey I haven't read the GN but I was reading the Wikipedia entry and noticed something that was weird about Roscharch:
It says the guy who killed Blair Roche was a dress maker, and we know Roscharch was a dress maker too. It says that it was after Blair Roche's death that he basically became Roscharch for good. The mask he wears is from a woman who refused it after he made and who was murdered later on. Anyway, it sounds like it could be that Roscharch was actually a serial killer, and he might have killed at least Blair Roche. Roche somewhat sounds like Rosch-arch (roche means rock in French), or is there already an explanation for his name? It would also make Roscharch a walking contradiction in the sense that he wants the truth to prevail and is against the idea of not telling the world about what really happened by the end of the story, but at the same time he's hiding his past under a mask. Ok maybe I'm seeing something that isn't there:p I just find it strange that Roche's murder would also just happen to be a dress maker.
The name Rorschach mainly comes from the inkblot-test, called Rorschach test.
 
Ether_Snake said:
Hey I haven't read the GN but I was reading the Wikipedia entry and noticed something that was weird about Roscharch:
It says the guy who killed Blair Roche was a dress maker, and we know Roscharch was a dress maker too. It says that it was after Blair Roche's death that he basically became Roscharch for good. The mask he wears is from a woman who refused it after he made and who was murdered later on. Anyway, it sounds like it could be that Roscharch was actually a serial killer, and he might have killed at least Blair Roche. Roche somewhat sounds like Rosch-arch (roche means rock in French), or is there already an explanation for his name? It would also make Roscharch a walking contradiction in the sense that he wants the truth to prevail and is against the idea of not telling the world about what really happened by the end of the story, but at the same time he's hiding his past under a mask. Ok maybe I'm seeing something that isn't there:p I just find it strange that Roche's murder would also just happen to be a dress maker.

Hey, maybe you should, like, read the book? That or just continue drawing ridiculous conclusions and trying to bed them in Wikipedia snippets...
 
I loved it. Great movie. The action scenes could've been better but everything else was just right. The ending was really different and awesome too. Will watch again.
 
MNC said:
The name Rorschach mainly comes from the inkblot-test, called Rorschach test.

Ah right I thought I read that. Still, weird that the guy would just also happen to be a dress maker.
 
Ether_Snake said:
Ah right I thought I read that. Still, weird that the guy would just also happen to be a dress maker.


Wow, I never realized that. I'd chalk it up to symmetry, not some weird serial-killer theory. The whole Rorschach story is full of symmetry.
 
Flynn said:
Funny coincidence that is.

Don't get cheeky with me, mister! I fingered
Adrian
as the badguy once issue 5 came out, based on the symmetry alone (of the issue itself, and the series' overall symmetrical layout).
 
Ether_Snake said:
Hey I haven't read the GN but I was reading the Wikipedia entry and noticed something that was weird about Roscharch:
It says the guy who killed Blair Roche was a dress maker, and we know Roscharch was a dress maker too. It says that it was after Blair Roche's death that he basically became Roscharch for good. The mask he wears is from a woman who refused it after he made and who was murdered later on. Anyway, it sounds like it could be that Roscharch was actually a serial killer, and he might have killed at least Blair Roche. Roche somewhat sounds like Rosch-arch (roche means rock in French), or is there already an explanation for his name? It would also make Roscharch a walking contradiction in the sense that he wants the truth to prevail and is against the idea of not telling the world about what really happened by the end of the story, but at the same time he's hiding his past under a mask. Ok maybe I'm seeing something that isn't there:p I just find it strange that Roche's murder would also just happen to be a dress maker.
Read the god damn GN, ffs.
 
Arcipello said:
well it certainly wasn't obvious in the novel... i had a feeling id seen his face before but it was only when i went back to the first chapter and spotted him again that i figured it out..unfortunately you cant rewind the film in the middle of the cinema and say "Look everyone..it was him all along!"

making things totally clear and obvious to the viewer isn't always the right way.
I felt it was pretty damn obvious that he was rorschach in the 1st chapter when the people (detectives? I forget who) are talking about rorschach and this red haired dude's grill is all up in the panel. I just said "Oh, so that's rorschach."
 
Ether_Snake said:
Hey I haven't read the GN but I was reading the Wikipedia entry and noticed something that was weird about Roscharch:
It says the guy who killed Blair Roche was a dress maker, and we know Roscharch was a dress maker too. It says that it was after Blair Roche's death that he basically became Roscharch for good. The mask he wears is from a woman who refused it after he made and who was murdered later on. Anyway, it sounds like it could be that Roscharch was actually a serial killer, and he might have killed at least Blair Roche. Roche somewhat sounds like Rosch-arch (roche means rock in French), or is there already an explanation for his name? It would also make Roscharch a walking contradiction in the sense that he wants the truth to prevail and is against the idea of not telling the world about what really happened by the end of the story, but at the same time he's hiding his past under a mask. Ok maybe I'm seeing something that isn't there:p I just find it strange that Roche's murder would also just happen to be a dress maker.


Here, let me mercifully point you in the RIGHT direction:

'Kitty Genovese'
 
Question: Do they ever explain why the Heroes are so god damned strong? They just seem supernaturally strong, fast and agile and no one ever mentions anything about it.

Were they just a bunch of gifted humans who decided to become super heroes, is it as simple as that? This is really bugging me.
 
SilentProtagonist said:
I felt it was pretty damn obvious that he was rorschach in the 1st chapter when the people (detectives? I forget who) are talking about rorschach and this red haired dude's grill is all up in the panel. I just said "Oh, so that's rorschach."

I don't think it's that obvious... but his face is immediately more recognizable. You see him quiet a few times in the graphic novel. So when it's revealed it all comes together. In the movie you get like one good look at him way at the beginning and are expected to remember who it was.

Forceatowulf said:
Question: Do they ever explain why the Heroes are so god damned strong? They just seem supernaturally strong, fast and agile and no one ever mentions anything about it.

Were they just a bunch of gifted humans who decided to become super heroes, is it as simple as that? This is really bugging me.

Well... it's misleading in the movie. Other then John, they are all regular humans. It's a bit over the top in the movie. In the graphic novel the battles are definitely toned down, but they are all extremely competent fighters. I guess they are just very dedicated fighters who have developed a lot of talent through training (Nite Owl busting people noses with two fingers and whatnot).
 
Forceatowulf said:
So they're just gifted and they leave it at that. That's kinda disappointing.

Have your read the graphic novel? This is in the movie, but it's not all that prominent. One of the themes in the book is what would compel a normal person to put on a costume and do what they did. I think you would appreciate the fact that they were normal if you read it.
 
Forceatowulf said:
Question: Do they ever explain why the Heroes are so god damned strong? They just seem supernaturally strong, fast and agile and no one ever mentions anything about it.

Were they just a bunch of gifted humans who decided to become super heroes, is it as simple as that? This is really bugging me.


they spend most of their time.. or at least, they used to spend most of their time.. training.. fighting.. lifting weights.
 
Forceatowulf said:
I have not read the Novel yet but I will start tomorrow.

Good. They have little segments of the book the original Nite Owl wrote at the end of each volume. They do so much for the background and atmosphere.
 
hokahey said:
Another reason the movie sucked. This should have been obvious when his mask came off, and it should be clear he wasn't picketing everything. It was the same damn sign.
It wouldn't have worked because everyone knows Jackie Earle Haley plays Rorschach.
 
i watched the movie and was kinda disappointed. I was expecting more considering all the hype.

It was reminiscent of a tired RPG plot.
 
Varna said:
Good. They have little segments of the book the original Nite Owl wrote at the end of each volume. They do so much for the background and atmosphere.
Holy shit dude you were right. The Nite Owl chapters at the end of the volume really help answer some of my questions and other things I didn't quite understand.

Good shit so far.
 
Ignatz Mouse said:
I noticed them, but I never imagined that it was those two. I thought it was about how, in this world, gay couples were more accepted. In 85 you'd almost never see a couple that "out" in public.

Gibbons also said it wasn't written as them in the script and he didn't intend it to be them, but it said it would be cool if it was.
 
Docpan said:
That is what you guys consider insanely detailed... ? Wow. That's hardly what I would consider to be "dense." (I guess none of you are familiar with James Joyce?) This is what I would call "necessary information."

Color me disappointed.

For what is typically done for a graphic novel/comic book, it is pretty detailed, yes.
 
Docpan said:
That is what you guys consider insanely detailed... ? Wow. That's hardly what I would consider to be "dense." (I guess none of you are familiar with James Joyce?) This is what I would call "necessary information," and quite straightforward at that.

Color me disappointed.

Most comics authors don't compose the panels in prose, they leave those choices up to the artist.

This has led at least one artist to quit a project with Moore, claiming he had no room for his own end of the collaboration.

And... it's not Joycean, but I've seen other panel write-ups from Moore than run about a page long. Consider that the above was for one relatively tiny panel.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom