From a normie standpoint, why wasn't it kino

from a normie standpoint, why wasn't it kino

Too boring and not enough action

Doctor Sneedhattan

why does Snyder love the motion to be slowed?

Dr. Manhattan (liberalism) killed Rorsach (Ayn Randism)

changing the ending

I know two normies who watched it, and the ending made them mad.

>Ayn Randism
You mean Objectivism. And the reality of this is grim and not a good thing for the future.

>why wasn't it kino
Because it was Wilesesque

Fact: Alan Moore doesn't like this film or V for Vendetta either.

Okay so Ozymandius tries to kill Dr. Manhattan by having him be ripped apart in the same way he came into being - but his genetically enhanced cat went in there too..

So, where's the Dr. Manhattan cat?

BRAVO SNYDER

rorsach's inability to understand that good people can do bad things and that those bad things can lead to good things killed him

Fun fact: Alan Moore is a weird old faggot that cries about everything.

Alan Moore is a salty bitch and didn't understand what work on a comic book not every time works on a movie. So fuck him.

It's a really intricate and complex 12 issue comic book adapted into a nearly 3 hour film (though that changes depending on the cut you watch).

For example, Moore and Gibbons only had enough plot for about 6 issues when they originally came up with Watchmen, they were then commissioned to do 12 issues. So they would do one issue that had a straightforward, linear plot and the next issue would be a non-linear flashback issue expanding on the backstory of one of the characters. This was the basic pattern for the whole comic, one issue of plot, one issue of backstory, wherein certain flashbacks might be seen multiple times of the course of the series from different characters viewpoints. They did this in the movie too, but it meant that: 1. Without having a distinct issue ending it means the narrator just seems to switch randomly depending on the scene and 2. it creates enormous pacing problems which in my opinion is the reason loads of normies don't like the film.

I like watching this movie occasionally.
It feels like a movie that has a lot of messages and political commentary that went over my head.
I generally enjoy movies for the cinematic experience.

The blue guy story was pretty cool.
Was kinda sad when the doggo thing died.
Visuals were nice, characters were definitely different and defined enough to enjoy (though I understand a lot of fans of the book(s) were not happy with them).

what's the fucking deal with the blue flappy dick appearing every 10 to 30 minutes?

Cat was killed, Manhattan is simply able to regain his form easily and that thing doesn't kill him.
Don't know if he tells this in the movie but in the novel he said this exact thing, that he trained for years to rebuilt his entire self from one atom.

dumb interpretation of the story betraying a fucked up internal moral compass. For your interest moore himself sides with rorschach.

Adrian's plan is crazy and arrogant and a tremendous reminder of what could happen if we had super heroes of that influence in our world

I kept away from this movie for years because I was a watchmen super fan and hated snyder, I associated him with dumb stuff like 300.

Watched it for the first time this year, and I liked it really much. A great companion to the comic book series.

By the way I learned to love the snyder after mos and bvs

Over bloated, style over substance, shallow shit flick. Fact.

This, also Nixon is intended as a positive character and this is very explicative about Snyder's thoughts

>in the novel
It's a comic book

I like the ending. It is a moral question of killing millions to save billions that a super genius designed, but we know from our actual timeline that the nuclear war never happened so you have to consider that maybe Ozy should have just let humanity do its thing instead of trying to interfere. Bit of a slow movie but I thought the story was good.

Ruins the whole point of the film and the main draw for me to buy a fucking ticket. Retards.

I feel like Snyder's direction is just complete mismatch for this movie. I think they were going for a film analogue for the graphic novel: What if we take the usual superhero formula and deconstruct the shit out of it? We take the usual superhero format and veneer, but then twist the perspective on the characters so that instead of the usual do-gooders, we get some people who have to grapple with what motivates, informs, and results from the usual violence and actions superheroes take in a world that actually reacts to them.

So they hand it off to Snyder who is going to make the most blockbuster-y superhero movie ever with camera work that's slick and stylish and really fetishizes the violence, but in a context that really flips the genre on its head. Unfortunately, some of that is lost because Snyder fetishizes the violence in a way that feels like he just thinks its cool. In the comic, Nite Owl and Silk Spectre walk through a prison where the lights are out talking about how fucking awful and horrible all the mangled bodies are because the prisoners are just violencing the hell out of each other. I think they beat up like one pair of people in the way. In the movie, you get this dumb fucking fight scene where they beat up like an entire cell block of dudes in the usual Snyder fashion and keep smiling at each other. Because Snyder thinks the fighting is cool and thinks that the bit where Nite Owl only feels good while doing heroing (because of that scene where he's impotent without his suit and had fun beating up gang people again) is a positive trait for the character instead of something that, you know, the character actually gets over because it's a bad thing.

It's like Snyder just fundamentally misunderstands what he's adapting.

Stop being a repressed incel and realise dicks are not a big deal? Male form has been used in art for millenia as a symbol of power, intellect, hope etc. etc.

Unflippantly, what movie do you think reflects what Watchmen SHOULD have been like (maybe a few examples for things like cinematography, pacing, character development and dialog).

No I think your assessment is unfair

plenty of violence in the comic book, from night owl and silk spectre 2 reducing the gang to pulp to all the rorschach scene.

The movie makes the action styilish and cool but who cares. It's a great companion movie to the comic book in my opinion

The funny thing is that he tried to do the same with Man of Steel and BvS, when he already did a superhero movie based on the idea of deconstructing the superhero premise.

I see it in black and white terms like rorschach and the author, moore, who notoriously sides with rorschach. ADrian is crazy and the end is a sort of examination of what would happen with super people who have the arrogance of believing they have the right and capacity to save the world. We are led to think of rorschach as a sociopath but it's people like veidt or manhattan who are the real danger

they are not deconstructions. Batman and superman are ultimately bigger than life super heroes. They only go through hard times and through internal conflict in superman's case, because he is a human first.

But ultimately Superman saves the world again and in doing so redeems bruce who is born again as a superhero looking forward to saving the world instead of torturing criminals

I don't think Rorschach's story is at all supposed to make him into a sociopath, but as the only human and moral person of all of them, which is why the end of the movie shows that his journal is going to the inbox of some paper to show that the truth is going to get out there. Rorschach is by far the most likable character in the movie for his hate of degeneracy like politicians and others who think they know average humans better than they know themselves.