Watchmen: Doomsday, Thoughts/Ideas?

[revolutionomega]

I know the thread title may be comfusing, but in this thread I'd like to discuss the way the movie "Watchmen" went about the Cold War and armageddon theories.

I was frustrated by the way they had gone about using Dr. Manhattan's power to destroy national landmarks to end the cold war. This is because realistically if this event hadn't happened, there was no immenent Apocalypse to come, as in reality the Cold War just filtered out in the wash due to a stand-still. This was a major character flaw in Ozymadias' case because, as the smartest man in the world, shouldn't he have been able to understand that it was not a definite nuclear war? Why was he not able to comprehend that by keeping Dr. Manhattan sane and able to connect through his future that he might've seen no impending nuclear eruption across the world?

I'd like to hear other thoughts on this, religious POV's are also appreciated as I'd probably like to see some theories as to God's destruction of an evil humanity with the flood in biblical times.

My review------------> Incredible movie overall. 9.5/10 I found the visuals to be stunning, offering testosterone-thrilling action, sex and mental stimulation. My favorite visual was that of Manhattan's Mars creation (something I'd like to name the INFINITY CLOCK), and I found that the subtle humor in the movie was real and well-done. Legendary Pictures always seems to do great work, and I hope for more epics in the future!

[gafandriel]

Hmmm- off topic


watchman was NOT worth my nine bucks

[Afrobean]

Originally Posted by revolutionomega

I know the thread title may be comfusing, but in this thread I'd like to discuss the way the movie "Watchmen" went about the Cold War and armageddon theories.

I was frustrated by the way they had gone about using Dr. Manhattan's power to destroy national landmarks to end the cold war. This is because realistically if this event hadn't happened, there was no immenent Apocalypse to come, as in reality the Cold War just filtered out in the wash due to a stand-still.

That's how it happened in the real world. You can't say with certainty that it would have happened the same in that world. After all, so many things were different in the past, why would expect that to remain constant?

This was a major character flaw in Ozymadias' case because, as the smartest man in the world, shouldn't he have been able to understand that it was not a definite nuclear war?

No one could know for certain save for Dr. Manhattan himself. Cognitive reasoning didn't tell us in the real world that we were safe from nuclear war, so why would it have helped them in this alternate reality world?

Why was he not able to comprehend that by keeping Dr. Manhattan sane and able to connect through his future that he might've seen no impending nuclear eruption across the world?

Maybe Veidt didn't trust him. Maybe he believed that Manhattan was already foregone and too disconnected from humanity and wouldn't help?

Maybe he just wanted to unify the world regardless of whether the end truly was nigh.

[OrganisM]

Originally Posted by revolutionomega

I'd like to hear other thoughts on this, religious POV's are also appreciated as I'd probably like to see some theories as to God's destruction of an evil humanity with the flood in biblical times.

Let's discuss this:

stolen from Gilgamesh which was written thousands of years earlier

wut

[Reach]

Originally Posted by revolutionomega

I know the thread title may be comfusing, but in this thread I'd like to discuss the way the movie "Watchmen" went about the Cold War and armageddon theories.

I was frustrated by the way they had gone about using Dr. Manhattan's power to destroy national landmarks to end the cold war. This is because realistically if this event hadn't happened, there was no immenent Apocalypse to come, as in reality the Cold War just filtered out in the wash due to a stand-still. This was a major character flaw in Ozymadias' case because, as the smartest man in the world, shouldn't he have been able to understand that it was not a definite nuclear war? Why was he not able to comprehend that by keeping Dr. Manhattan sane and able to connect through his future that he might've seen no impending nuclear eruption across the world?

I'd like to hear other thoughts on this, religious POV's are also appreciated as I'd probably like to see some theories as to God's destruction of an evil humanity with the flood in biblical times.

My review------------> Incredible movie overall. 9.5/10 I found the visuals to be stunning, offering testosterone-thrilling action, sex and mental stimulation. My favorite visual was that of Manhattan's Mars creation (something I'd like to name the INFINITY CLOCK), and I found that the subtle humor in the movie was real and well-done. Legendary Pictures always seems to do great work, and I hope for more epics in the future!

Well, it's an alternate history we're talking about here.

He felt that in one way or another, we were going to destroy ourselves. The immediate threat of nuclear war was much greater here than in the actual turn of events. I think the film made that pretty clear.

Conflict and the brutal nature of humans is a theme that kept coming up. I think the smartest man saw our own self destruction as an inevitability as a result of this human nature. By uniting separate powers against a common enemy, it gave the people a way of perceiving the world in different light, the only chance for humanity.


I enjoyed the movie. I thought it had some rather insightful elements.

The sex scene was ...treading far too deeply into absurd parody though, and the blue penis got to be a bit much. I mean, I understand the symbolism of Manhattan being naked, and the logic was to please the fans, since he was naked in the GN. But then why did they double the size of his penis? >_>

[clarinet89]

I saw the movie with my mom and brother. She kept giggling and then asking why he couldn't just put on some pants.

[kommisar[os]]

movie is possibly one of the biggest flops of 2009. sorry. I work at a movie theatre, and it was waaaaaay too overhyped for what it was.


the content of the movie however was probably too deep for the average mind to grasp and probably nobody really understands the setting of the story.

[Afrobean]

Originally Posted by kommisar[os]

movie is possibly one of the biggest flops of 2009. sorry. I work at a movie theatre, and it was waaaaaay too overhyped for what it was.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watchmen_(film)#Box_office

"As of March 15, 2009, the film has earned $86,005,000 in North American and $26,632,667 in foreign box office, bringing its worldwide total to $112,637,667.[138]"

So after like 10 days, it's made 112m of its 120m budget and you declare it "one of the biggest flops of 2009"? Read this:

Thanks to its opening weekend, Watchmen currently sits third in all time openings for the month of March,[130] as well as the third highest grossing weekend for the spring season, which is defined by the first Friday in March through to the first Thursday in the month of May.[131] It is the sixth largest opening for an R-rated film in North American history,[132] and is currently the highest grossing R-rated film of 2009.[133] Watchmen currently sits as the thirteenth highest grossing film based on a DC Comics comic book,[134] and the eighth highest grossing film of 2009.[135]

Shut the **** up.

[ieatyourlvllol]

I think kommi means it was somewhat of a flop in terms of reception rather than financial takings.

[Afrobean]

Originally Posted by ieatyourlvllol

I think kommi means it was somewhat of a flop in terms of reception rather than financial takings.

"Flop" only has one meaning: "box office bomb", and it's far too early to make such a bold statement about this film, especially when the income from the first 10 days nearly reaches the film's production budget.

Barring any insanity in the litigation deal with Fox, I don't see how this movie won't prove itself profitable.

But I digress. Poor reviews, bad word of mouth, or poor popular opinion does not mean a film is a flop. The only thing that can make a film a flop is if "the production and marketing costs greatly exceeded the revenue retained by the movie studio."

[OrganisM]

Originally Posted by kommisar[os]

the content of the movie however was probably too deep for the average mind to grasp and probably nobody really understands the setting of the story.

Uhh it's not that hard to understand. Although I'd agree that the average person isn't all that intelligent, you sound very pretentious and uppity speaking that way.

Also, Watchmen has been generally pretty well received, even if it's not been heralded is one of the great classics.

[kommisar[os]]

flop as in it didn't do nearly as good as it should have for such an anticipated movie. I would disagree that it's one of the top movies of 2009 especially the way the public received it. It was either a good movie or a huge waste of 3 hours. I don't need a true english bourgeois definition of flop

also, chill bro. its a movie. I don't mean to get into financial/statistics debate.

[NFD]

Race To Witch Mountain being number 1 was retarded. It made $25 million when they didn't expect it to make $20 million. I bet Watchmen's going to be number 1 again this weekend though.

[stretchypanda]

Hey guys this thread isn't about what you thought about Watchmen or any other movies. I'll bet there's a thread about that in Media. This thread is about a specific plot part.

[OrganisM]

I don't think it's unreasonable to require correct usage of terms.

[stretchypanda]

That's never inappropriate. On topic, plx.

[Viccica]

I personally thought it was interesting to twist history into the movie.


Whether or not it was executed well was another story.

Personally, I loved the movie. Although **semi-spoiler alert** my favorite character died.

Which made me sad.

[revolutionomega]

That's why I placed this in chit chat, as it was a general discussion along with various thoughts on the quality of the movie itself. I couldn't think of a specific category to place it in.

@ Reach: The blue penis was a bit too much and many people commented on that.

@Afro:I understand what you're saying and that's an interesting point. I feel that, however, Veidt had overcompensated for humanity destroying itself and caused utmost chaos then destroying the fabric. The fear of absolute Apocalypse is another reason for human violence as we all (in turn) shoot into a self-defensive mode. On the other hand, the sudden chaos globally could also influence insanity on the weaker-minded and cause more destruction that way. In terms of Dr. Manhattan, yes I agree that by that point he had lost his grip on humanity and became an outer being, but his breakthrough on understanding the importance of life was an important part.

@kommi: I think Watchmen being a flop was strictly IYO and more power to you. I definitely agree that the movie was not for the weaker-minded as I know a couple friends who left mid-movie as they didn't understand it (and then missed all the intense action and 'good stuff' causing me to laugh).

[Viccica]

Something I forgot I don't feel like editting in because school computers = slow:

I don't think the movie was entirely about the having an effect on events the past, so much as it was a portrayal of human behoviour and emotion in the event of a crisis situation. It portrayed a very pessimistic view of human nature, yes, but it had a pretty decent resolve towards the end. Changing history? No. Using history to get a point across? Yes.






Also, blue penis was indeed a bit much. If there wasn't something in the movie that was obscenely unneeded, it was that.










One other thing: Anyone notice the room number at the beginning? =p

3001
*gunshot*
300

[NFD]

At least the Cold War ended.