Watchmen (TV Series) Thread – SPOILERS INSIDE!!!

Topic

[Todd]

I’m seeing positive reviews for it.
https://www.tvguide.com/news/watchmen-hbo-review-damon-lindelof/

• This topic was modified 5 years, 1 month ago by Todd.

Replies

I’m not sold on Lady Asian yet… she’s too much of an obvious Adrian-like character, as much as mirror-mask dude is too much of a Rorshach-like character.
 
Oh and yes, the kid is definetly a clone… those were obviously memories, not nightmares… but then again, they kinda spell it out, so I hope that’s not meant to be a “mystery”… =/

Come on Jon

Jon wrote:

I’m not sold on Lady Asian yet… she’s too much of an obvious Adrian-like character, as much as mirror-mask dude is too much of a Rorshach-like character.

Her relationship to Veidt is the primary mystery. Is she related to Veidt’s Vietnamese servants he poisoned. Also, many Vietnamese ended up venerating Dr Manhattan as something like the incarnation of god. Has that developed into a real Scientology like religion and would she follow it? Or be it’s leader?

You could speculate that she might want revenge on Dr Manhattan for the war, but it’s a harder case. Looks like Vietnam hasn’t suffered in general by becoming a part of America. Also, she’s certainly benefited.

Reeves, more and more, is looking like he must be Hooded Justice. A cop who then puts on a mask – same as Nite Owl. It follows and it seems like the pills or some other process gives him the rejuvenation needed to remain active.

However, what could he have done? Is there something in Angela’s blood -some legacy- he’s passed on?

As far as Lube Man, I like the idea that Petey could be him, but he did have something of an Asian appearance (though that could just be the ULTRAMAN goggles) so it’s likely one of Lady Triung’s ee’s. Or clone soldiers.

What fell from the sky? Veidt’s escape pod? It would be somewhat anticlimactic for him to end up a gold statue in her garden.

For anyone who’s interested, vol. 1 of Treznor and Atticus Ross’ soundtrack is streaming now:

Anonymous wrote:

and it seems like the pills or some other process gives him the rejuvenation needed to remain active.

 
Actually I understood the pills to be some sort of “memory pills”… given their dialogue… I’m guessing she’ll see stuff from his perspective if she takes them… hence why he tells Lady whatever that she’s doing the same to her daughter and she says “not the same at all”. Maybe they found a cure for alzheimers in that universe, or something like that.
 

Anonymous wrote:

Come on Jon

 
??

I’m not cool with terms like “Lady Asian” – its reductive.

I think Lady Trieu might be the Comedian’s daughter by the pregnant Vietnamese woman who cut his face.
.
Doctor Manhattan might have saved her child after Blake shot her.

Jason wrote:

I think Lady Trieu might be the Comedian’s daughter by the pregnant Vietnamese woman who cut his face.
.
Doctor Manhattan might have saved her child after Blake shot her.

I don’t like it, but it’s a possibility. She’s the right age, but is there any indication that she’s half American? She has a fairly American accent like she was raised here, but otherwise she seems entirely Vietnamese.

However, it is not in Dr Manhattan’s character to do resurrection. He famously said that there is no difference between a living body and a dead one, and, honestly, he doesn’t seem like the kind of guy at that time who would have considered living to be preferable to never having been born. Also, why not bring back the mother, too?

Manhattan is the most interesting character but I don’t think anyone but Moore can really write him correctly. Jonathan Hickman had a similar character in his riff on WATCHMEN called RED MASS FOR MARS. In it, there was a character that was something of a combination of Dr Manhattan’s sense of time and Adrian Veidt’s billionaire philanthropist. He could see the future, but at the same time, he had to go through the motions as well. For example, he already knew every word of a conversation before he had it, but he still had to continue the conversation — otherwise he would not have known what was going to be said.

However, Dr Manhattan is very different. He experiences all of the moments of his life simultaneously, but he can’t change any of it. So he’s like an audience member watching himself in a movie. At the same time, as a character in the movie, he has to still say all the lines as they are written in the script. So, even though he knows that Laurie is going to tell him that she and Dan are sleeping together, and he even tells her that she’s going to tell him this, when she does tell him, he has to act like the revelation hurts because that is the natural sequence of events. There are two Dr Manhattan’s – one that experiences all his existence like a memory and the other that pretends he’s actually going through the events for the first time.

Almost everyone has to cheat, though, to make him work. Even Moore had to come up with the Tachyon interference so that Manhattan could pretend he was blinded to the future. Other writers who’ve tackled him came up with different Multiverse explanations so that he could choose between possible outcomes.

However, at heart, Laurie has it nailed. He just doesn’t give a shit. Even if he was somehow destroyed, he’d still exist in all the moments of his life between his birth and destruction like the Tralfamadorians in SLAUGHTERHOUSE FIVE. Naturally, I imagine Billy Pilgrim was a big inspiration for Jon Osterman.

Jon wrote:

Actually I understood the pills to be some sort of “memory pills”… given their dialogue… I’m guessing she’ll see stuff from his perspective if she takes them… hence why he tells Lady whatever that she’s doing the same to her daughter and she says “not the same at all”. Maybe they found a cure for alzheimers in that universe, or something like that.

Good point. Or that he’s making Angela into the next Hooded Justice and to do that he needs to take away her family the way his was taken.

Anonymous wrote:

I’m not cool with terms like “Lady Asian” – its reductive.

 
I didn’t remember her name… same as for mirror-mask dude… still don’t, actually…
 
Anyways, I hope she’s not the Comedian’s daughter ’cause there ABSOLUTELY no point in doing that. IT owuld actually ruin her character… I’m already not super cool with the hints that Angela might be related to the Hooded Justice.
 
Actually, was the Hooded Justice black? I’m pretty sure in the movie he was white, but I’ve no idea about the book… seems an odd change to make for the movie though, considering how closely they adapted it… =/

That’s exactly the point – you reduce him to an aspect of his character, her to her race and gender. I expect you to be more cerebral.

On the other hand, we could be total deconstructionists and see if these new labels fly : old black guy, black lady, black lady husband, old white lady, white hillbilly guy, old English guy, blue naked man.

Okay the last one works, but only then.

EDIT: I’m not deliberately picking a fight, I genuinely would like to avoid doing this if we could.

Double post

Anonymous wrote:

That’s exactly the point – you reduce him to an aspect of his character, her to her race and gender. I expect you to be more cerebral.

On the other hand, we could be total deconstructionists and see if these new labels fly : old black guy, black lady, black lady husband, old white lady, white hillbilly guy, old English guy, blue naked man.

Uh, she was just introduced and she’s the only 100% asian character so far, no mask, nothing other than what there is, which is not much… so I’m not really reducing her ’cause there’s nothing much to reduce yet, is there? Anyways, the intent wasn’t to reduce her, as you should know.
 
I’d call mirror-mask dude hillbilly dude, but there’s quite a few of those it seems so that’d be pointless… But fine I’ll call him hillbilly rorshach… oh wait no, there’s a fuck ton of those… u_u

Sure thing Mexican Guy.

Is that supposed to be offensive? or prove a point somehow?
 
Anyways, let’s move on ’cause this is a bit silly.

Ok, but because I’m stubborn this is your name henceforth.

Edit: I’m not going to do that, Jon. I’m a bit disappointed you can’t see my point but I’m not going to beat you over the head with it. I just ask you avoid reductive language, even if you can’t see why I do.

Double post

Anonymous wrote:

Ok, but because I’m stubborn this is your name henceforth.

Edit: I’m not going to do that, Jon. I’m a bit disappointed you can’t see my point but I’m not going to beat you over the head with it. I just ask you avoid reductive language, even if you can’t see why I do.

I see your point, I just don’t agree with it. And by all means, feel free to call me “mexican guy”, I have absolutely no problem with that, because that’s what I am and there’s no shame in being a mexican guy, or an asian lady for that matter (even though the asian lady in question is in fact a character in a TV show and not even a real person)… In fact, I’ve been called “the mexican guy” quite often throughout my life and I never felt reduced or anyhting negative… quite the opposite tbh, but whatever. Aaaaaanyhoo…

I’m deleting this post where I grilled you out. I am reminding myself of better interactions on this board.

Moving on…

Well shit, now I want to make a Mexican Grill joke.

Still, the show seems to be doing it, too.

“Did you know Judd was racist?”
“He’s a white man in Oklahoma.”

So far, all the men have been depicted as either evil, submissive or kinda stupid. Laurie had the traditionally masculine role in her relationship with Petey. Much older veteran badass with much younger more attractive partner she uses for sex.

The Vietnamese characters as super intelligent but with some sinister agenda, and the black people as strong, smart but under threat.

Lindeloff said from the outset that this is about race – it’s not a colorblind or gender neutral story. The ethnicity and political identity of the characters is a big part of the story so far. I don’t think we are meant to see past their races at all.

Anonymous wrote:

Still, the show seems to be doing it, too.

“Did you know Judd was racist?”
“He’s a white man in Oklahoma.”

So far, all the men have been depicted as either evil, submissive or kinda stupid. Laurie had the traditionally masculine role in her relationship with Petey. Much older veteran badass with much younger more attractive partner she uses for sex. Angela’s husband Clive provides the mothering role to the children while Angela is absent from their lives even when she is at home as she shares none of her real life with them.

The Vietnamese characters as super intelligent but with some sinister agenda, and the black people as strong, smart but under threat.

Lindeloff said from the outset that this is about race – it’s not a colorblind or gender neutral story. The ethnicity and political identity of the characters is a big part of the story so far. I don’t think we are meant to see past their races at all.

Anonymous wrote:

That’s exactly the point – you reduce him to an aspect of his character, her to her race and gender. I expect you to be more cerebral.

A lot of people aren’t going to have all of the character names memorized, so it’s easy to take the most identifiable aspect of a character to describe them. It could be job title, ie, “the sheriff” or the “business woman,” or race, ie, “black woman” or another identifying indicator like “guy in the wheelchair,” the “guy with the moustache” or “the guy with the thick southern accent.”

Sure, it’s reductive, but it communicates the idea. You’re going to remember Lady Trieu as the “Lady Asian” more than “the woman wearing a white jacket.” People watching the series might not even remember that she’s specifically Vietnamese unless they’re familiar with the source graphic novel where Vietnam was an important element of the story, and you’re picking up on all of the Vietnam references.

lorcan_nagle wrote:

For anyone who’s interested, vol. 1 of Treznor and Atticus Ross’ soundtrack is streaming now:

<iframe title=”Spotify Embed: Watchmen: Volume 1 (Music from the HBO Series)” width=”300″ height=”380″ allowtransparency=”true” frameborder=”0″ allow=”encrypted-media” src=”https://open.spotify.com/embed/album/3TB6SKSLA7zUN1jIKwO31e”></iframe&gt;

Their music for this show is fucking awesome. I really loved NUN WITH A MOTHERF*&*ING GUN and OBJECTS IN A MIRROR in the first episode.

Speaking of nuns with guns, that was a funny burn when Laurie started making fun of Angela’s costume.

“Maybe nuns killed your parents or maybe you were raised by nuns after your parents were killed.”

The funny thing is that Laurie pretty much intentionally disproves specific trauma for her origin. She didn’t know her father or anything about the attempted rape of her mother until she was practically retired from being a hero. She was pushed into becoming one, and really she went back to it because it turned her on sexually.

At the end of Watchmen, she and Dan weren’t going back into the masked vigilante to work anything out. It was just good for their sex life.

Going out and beating people up in order to get turned on ISN’T a sign of trauma then?
.
I’m catching up with the show so I’m just skimming the thread for now.
.
It’s another high quality series that isn’t grabbing me yet, but I want to like it. I’m aiming to finish the first season anyway.

SteveUK wrote:

Going out and beating people up in order to get turned on ISN’T a sign of trauma then?

Not necessarily. In the comic, they rescued a bunch of people from a fire. Didn’t beat anyone up.

Being a crime fighter so I can have a better orgasm has no more to do with past trauma than anything else people do for better sex.

Petey is just wrong, and it’s clear in the scene. Silk Specter 2’s origin has everything to do with her relationship to her mother and she didn’t even know about her dad. Her relationship with Jon was more about wanting a masculine presence in her life and what better choice than “Blue God?”

In the comic, she finally deals with her mother and father. She faces what was right in front of her – she probably did repress the realization Blake was her dad – but she still wants to wear the mask.

At heart, though, I can see why the series hasn’t grabbed some people. Other than Laurie, none of the characters really grab me either. I’m absolutely not sure what Angela wants exactly, so everything she does doesn’t mean anything to the story.

Anonymous wrote:

At heart, though, I can see why the series hasn’t grabbed some people. Other than Laurie, none of the characters really grab me either. I’m absolutely not sure what Angela wants exactly, so everything she does doesn’t mean anything to the story.

 
Yeah that’s kind of an issue with the show so far… I feel the same about Angela, I don’t really care about her yet. That’s why the show only clicked with me when Laurie came on board, since she’s a familiar element I’m interested in, specially considering how she’s changed over the years. The Adrian bits have been okay, but a bit too weird and disconnected from the rest of the show for me to care all that much.
 
Speaking of the nuns joke, I totally didn’t get it ’til now… xD
 
As for the Petey’s exposition bit… I think Laurie knew Blake tried to rape her mom, which is why she hated him beforehand. But at any rate, it was a clunky exposition dump for the viewers’ benefit, rather than Angela’s… But it really was a bit clunky.

Anonymous wrote:

Lindeloff said from the outset that this is about race – it’s not a colorblind or gender neutral story.

Correct.

Jason wrote:

Sure, it’s reductive, but it communicates the idea. You’re going to remember Lady Trieu as the “Lady Asian” more than “the woman wearing a white jacket.”

If you’re not putting in any effort perhaps. Calling someone by their job title or social status or clothing is fine. “When someone is an Aboriginal senator, you call them that, but not “the Aboriginal” because it reduces them to only who they are ethnically and ignores what should otherwise be relevant. This is particularly true for minorities who aren’t historically in these positions, characters or otherwise, because it ignores the fact that they are beyond the tropes associated with the racial stereotype.

The comment didn’t happen in a vacuum, and frankly, I think reducing a main character to their broadest racial identifier says more about the viewer than the show or the way the show expects the viewer to react with it. Particularly when an actually natiomality is expounded on, and you would be lazy to miss the references. I think Jons comment was lazy and he could have put in more effort. Which is, and has always been my point.

FWIW, Someone I was with at the time, of Korean decent, was particularly annoyed by his comment, took pains to explain to me why, and I put more stock in her opinion then I am likely to for anyone on this board. It’s certainly true that people have higher and lower thresholds for this stuff but we should put in the bare minimum effort.

This is all I’m going to say on the matter.

Dave wrote:

Well shit, now I want to make a Mexican Grill joke.

Since it’s @Tim, how about “shrimp on the barbie”?

The racial elements are the most interesting thing about the show so far. The story isn’t delivering much to grab people, but it still uses stereotypes and just flips them in interesting ways. Angela is not some female version of a male superhero like Batwoman or Ironheart or some female counterpart like Catwoman or Elektra. She is the superhero. She is the Batman or Daredevil of the story performing that role with a subordinate love interest who, so far, is recognized more for his sexy looks than any other element of his personality. Laurie is the sexist, jaded badass detective like Philip Marlowe or Dirty Harry who harasses her much younger and more attractive junior partner with no consequences.

Angela is a black superhero, but in this society – in Tulsa at least, black people appear to be the privileged class – possibly even the majority, while the white population is poor, underserved, economically disadvantaged and persecuted by the authorities. It’s a neat alternative viewpoint. When the 7th Kavalry attacked on “The White Night,” you now have to wonder if it was really as black and white as Angela thinks it is. This is a situation where social roles are reversed, so the 7th Kavalry can’t be directly equated with the KKK. They may be more similar to the Black Panthers or the violent wings of the Nation of Islam.

Especially if after that night, the authorities’ response is to give their police – who may have already been coming down hard on the white population – even more power to do violence with the anonymity of the masks and their “jolly pirate nicknames.” Let’s take a bad situation and make it worse seems like the strategy there.

Then drop in “Lady Triue” (almost a superhero name like Sister Night) and her cadre of Vietnamese employees/servants, possible clone daughter and somewhat nefarious and absolutely mysterious secret plan. Other than her American accent, her introduction and appearance on the show is close to a Bond villain like Dr. No (a contender for most racist fictional character in the genre) or the earlier version Fu Manchu. Does anyone think she’s really the good guy in this story?

So why write such a straightforwardly stereotypical Asian mastermind? There must be some sort of twist coming in that character.

There are almost no good guys, really, which was the point of the original Watchmen. Dan and Laurie were the best of them, but they had several airships full of character flaws. Nothing that happened to them, as children or adults, justifies anything they do or believe is right. Same for these characters.

Trieu’s “legacy in the blood” speech, though, is ominous. Veidt’s legacy is in the blood that he spilled that he believed was necessary to save the world.

Jon wrote:

As for the Petey’s exposition bit… I think Laurie knew Blake tried to rape her mom, which is why she hated him beforehand. But at any rate, it was a clunky exposition dump for the viewers’ benefit, rather than Angela’s… But it really was a bit clunky.

In the comic, she likes Blake when she first meets him and then later reads about his actions in Hollis Mason’s book. However, it’s nothing to do with her childhood. She’s already a costumed vigilante when she finds out. Instead, it’s the legacy of her mother she’s dealing with and it’s not what sends her into the costume. The whole idea that what strange things you do now have something to do with facing one serious trauma of the past is bull, and Laurie knows this because she went through it. Her whole dialogue with Sister Night about trauma is all tongue in cheek and she’s making fun of Petey’s dependence on sketchy psychobabble in that scene. She knows there is more to it.

A lot of people have assumed that Judd was in the 7th Kavalry because he has the KKK uniform, but that ignores a lot of the mirror image this world is compared to ours. Again, the 7th Kavalry is much more like a militant racial organization akin to violent offshoots of the Black Panthers or Black Muslims. The White Night wasn’t a privileged group getting together to punish a bunch of defenseless poor minorities. Instead, it was a marginalized white power group attacking an authority that probably was guilty of violence against the poor whites in the area. The masked police are far more like the KKK when they take down Nixonville and I think Angela understands that. The realization she’s suppressing is that Judd being KKK doesn’t change anything, because in this situation, she’s just like the KKK, too.

We know that Rorschach was telling the truth in his journal, so, knowingly or not, the authorities in this world are there to protect a system built on a big lie.

I do wonder who’s making squid rain? Knowing Lindelof it’s gonna take forever to get some answers though… u_u

Obviously from Squidlor, the Squid God

Jon wrote:

I do wonder who’s making squid rain?

My guess is it’s the Dharma Initiative.

Apparently the original squid dissolved so no one could examine it, but that may have seeded the atmosphere with little squid bursts. Squid rains could simply be real rains forming around the eggs in the air. In the book, the team on Veidt’s Island did come up with a complete life cycle for the creature.

Also, Veidt had plenty of time to pour more around the world before he disappeared. That’s an interesting question. The 7th Kavalry believe the government is behind the fake squids, but it was Veidt in Rorschach’s journal. Does President Redford or the FBI know the truth? Laurie is the only one in the story who was there with Veidt when it happened and she’s now FBI. So did she ever reveal it to anyone?

Well I mean it’s very possible the gvmt found out eventually and saw the need to keep the charade going. Or maybe Veidt did in order to squash the conspiracy theories created by Rorshach’s journal, yes… Maybe that’s what that space needle building is for… they do have the delivery method in place… Plus Trieu is into cloning, so she could be behind it all… for some reason

I hope it’s something more interesting than cloning. Bubastas wasn’t something more than a clone. It was a designer organism.

What does race mean, if they can create entirely unique or entirely alike groups of people?

Tough question here is if the show four episodes in is actually any good. I’m really only watching for the connection to WATCHMEN the comic. There is not a lot to the story or characters that really grabs me.

I have wondered how the show would fare to someone completely unversed in all things Watchmen.

Anonymous wrote:

Tough question here is if the show four episodes in is actually any good. I’m really only watching for the connection to WATCHMEN the comic. There is not a lot to the story or characters that really grabs me.

Tough question but valid. It may not be until the end before we can answer that question.
.
There is quality in the series and some good scenes with good performances. (I am personally loving the scoring for the series.) But overall for me, the show as of now is “B-” at best. Nothing so far is blowing me away. It has been set up so far and this Sunday’s episode looks to be a bit more set up as it seems to go deeper with Looking Glass. I am getting the feeling that the last four episodes will move at a breakneck pace to answer all the questions. Though to be honest, I am not sure what all the questions are. That is another issue I have with the series: The “mysteries” really haven’t been that compelling.

There are only 8 episodes?

I had assumed 12. That’s disappointing somehow

Anonymous wrote:

There are only 8 episodes?

I had assumed 12. That’s disappointing somehow

Actually, it is 9 episodes. Sunday (Episode 5) is the midpoint.

That’s just dumb.

Who’s dumb idea was that? Probably Ronnies, right?

Anonymous wrote:

I have wondered how the show would fare to someone completely unversed in all things Watchmen.

Liz never read the comics, does not recall ever seeing the film, and yet she is really intrigued (in a good way) with the show.
Meanwhile, I have to bite my tongue so as not to spoil anything for her.

njerry wrote:

Meanwhile, I have to bite my tongue so as not to spoil anything for her.

I’m not exactly sure if you could spoil anything. It’s not very clear what the show expects a viewer to know or not know. It’s a mystery wrapped in an enigma shoved in a trunk and driven over a ravine into a rushing river. Nobody knows anything and if they do then they don’t know they know it.

I am getting the feeling that the last four episodes will move at a breakneck pace to answer all the questions.

The Pilot TV podcast had the first 6 episodes to review and the critic there marked out episode 5 as the highlight.

Jon wrote:

Knowing Lindelof it’s gonna take forever to get some answers though

.
He’s said that the season is self-contained so it should all wrap up in 5 weeks’ time.
.
We watched episodes 3 and 4 a few days ago. I’m very familiar with the comic, wife vaguely remembers the movie but I gave her a quick rundown before the pilot – we’re both pretty confused. I get that that’s kind of Lindelof’s thing (never watched Lost or Leftovers) but my patience is already running low, to the point that I’m not even particularly interested in the next episode. I’ll probably still watch it, but I’m not super keen.
.
The only thing keeping it alive for me is the speculation.
.
The ScreenCrush easter egg summaries are pretty interesting:
.

Andrew wrote:

We watched episodes 3 and 4 a few days ago. I’m very familiar with the comic, wife vaguely remembers the movie but I gave her a quick rundown before the pilot – we’re both pretty confused. I get that that’s kind of Lindelof’s thing (never watched Lost or Leftovers) but my patience is already running low, to the point that I’m not even particularly interested in the next episode. I’ll probably still watch it, but I’m not super keen.

Since the show uses many the elements of the comic that the movie left out – it is a little disconnected from the film. Also, it does kinda bug me that Dr. Manhattan is apparently still on Mars when he clearly planned to depart the galaxy entirely in the comic. That could be fake, but I think it’s as presented in the show.

At heart though, I think I’m really only interested in seeing the original Watchmen characters involved in the same story. Laurie’s appearance brought my interest up, while I’m not that captivated by the new characters.

While I was watching tonight’s episode, I was eating calamari.

Andrew wrote:

<iframe width=”1060″ height=”596″ title=”WATCHMEN Episode 4: Every Easter Egg and Secret + ANALYSIS” src=”https://www.youtube.com/embed/f3h011c_HoE?feature=oembed&#8221; frameborder=”0″ allowfullscreen=”” allow=”accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture”></iframe>

Wait, is that saying there are 73 easter eggs in one episode? Is there any room left over for a plot?

Well that’s interesting… finally some character developpement for mirror guy… Actually a pretty neat backstory, surprised they kept this for episode 5, but whatever… It’s kinda wwierd how since Laurie came on it’s been almost like another show, maybe it’s because they’re starting to really pepper the Watchmen connections in, but, I dunno, if their intention was to let us get acquainted with the new characters they kinda failed, at least in terms of pacing.
 
Anyways, it’s starting to get interesting, some neat plot-twists… the Adrian on whichever moon it was thing was kind of a let down tbh (no way his home-made suit would be useful), but the senator one was a lot more interesting… HOWEVER, the video thing was… I dunno… it feels REALLY fuckin’ lazy, and not something Adrian would do, or at least I don’t think so. Also, he didn’t looks the part of a young Adrian, tbh… Anyways, this might be a controversial bit for the show.
 
Aaaand lastly, what everyone’s gonna be talking about, no doubt, the squid: I mean, yeah, but it’s kinda cheating… they just get to use the cool visual while not really going through the how’s like in the CB… I reckon now people are gonna say “oh you see, you can do it on screen, it looks fine” or whatever, but nah, that’s not really it, is it? the movie would’ve needed a good other 20 minutes just to explain that whole thing, here they just rely on the viewers’ knowledge of the book, which again, is kind of cheating (unless they go into greater detail, which I doubt).
 
The whole flashback part was a good scene though, I’ll give ’em that.

Oh I forgot… while I think it’s better we’re getting proper connections to the CB now, I’m starting to get an weird sense of déjà vu… this episode kinda ramped up the similarities with the plot of the CB. I mean, at first it was just that both oppened with the murder of someone and a mystery, but now there’s a lot more “parallels” going on… I know it’s a fine line, between homage and copy, but I hope they can skate it better than this…

I really enjoy watching the show, but this enjoyment will not last unless they manage to tie Everything up neatly, and manage to convince me that this story could not have been told without the Watchmen setting.

But for now, I’m mostly happy with it.

With the timing along with the impeachment hearings, the whole series is worth on “squid pro quo”.

It’s Alan Moore’s birthday, byw.

Speaking of Moore:

‘Watchmen’ Creator Alan Moore on ‘Worrying’ Superhero Trend: ‘White Supremacist Dreams of the Master Race’

Watched E5 last night. Very close to dumping the show. Some of the acting is atrocious (the guy yelling “What happened”, and Laurie’s laughter when the car fell), and the pacing is so inconsistent. Extremely slow burn followed by clunky exposition/info dump.

The the squid attack was a conspiracy with fewer than half a dozen people aware of the truth, and able to keep it to themselves is believable. That every senator or whatever gets briefed on the truth and keeps their mouth shut is not.

Andrew is wrong.

As Always.

Minus 100 points!

Andrew wrote:

Watched E5 last night. Very close to dumping the show.

Or at least wait until all the episodes are out an watch them when you get around to it. It hasn’t been that compelling to drive a “must watch” approach.

The Ozymandius space walk was interesting….

Anonymous wrote:

Or at least wait until all the episodes are out an watch them when you get around to it. It hasn’t been that compelling to drive a “must watch” approach.

It seems like the kind of show though that relies on so much speculation and mystery that it could easily be accidentally spoiled.

Anonymous wrote:

It hasn’t been that compelling to drive a “must watch” approach.

For me it has been. Just watched episode 3 (which just came out in Germany), and I couldn’t wait to watch it. Loved everything about it, too. And it’s cool to finally begin to understand what’s going on with Veidt, too (or at least I think so).

Fantastic episode this week.

paul f wrote:

Fantastic episode this week.

It really was, Stephen Williams did brilliant job directing that episode. It was gorgeous.

Yeah the direction was really really good, but I can’t say I liked the episode… I really don’t like flashback episodes like that near the finish line… they completely halt the pace of the show… and considering it’s only 8 episodes, I don’t see how they’ll do anything satisfying by episode 8. This is gonna clearly end up not resolving anything at all… =/

Nine episodes this season, I think.

Not gonna make much of a difference, I reckon.

Lindelof has said everything gets resolved this season.

At the end of the second podcast, he even says in which episodes we find certain stuff out:

I still feel that the show in unfocused. The comic was also, in some ways, with long Flashbacks and seperate plots, like the guy and the kid at the newsstand, but it kept it’s momentum with  the main plot with the murder investigation. I’m still not sure what the show is about.

paul f wrote:

Lindelof has said everything gets resolved this season.

 
We’ll see.. I don’t trust him all that much on that front…

David Hayter: For any curious #Watchmen fans, Here is the final, color corrected clip of the Watchmen test I directed in 2003.

Iain Glen as Nite Owl, Ray Stevenson as Rorschach.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZkDqxCbyGVk&feature=emb_logo

I didn’t really like it and im glad that Hayter didn’t end up doing it.  At the time i remember cheering him on.

I think im coming around to not being a fan of Iain Glenn.  I liked him as Captain Friendzone in game of thrones, but he’s not a very good Bruce Wayne in Titans, and I don’t think he’s a very good Dan Dreiberg. For all it’s faults, I thought Patrick Wilson did a good job in Snyder’s Watchmen.

Tobias Radesäter wrote:

I still feel that the show in unfocused. The comic was also, in some ways, with long Flashbacks and seperate plots, like the guy and the kid at the newsstand, but it kept it’s momentum with  the main plot with the murder investigation. I’m still not sure what the show is about.

Yes, and the format of the comic basically made the pace an intrinsic part of the story. The visual framework and mirrored panels created a sense of the story even before you read a word. Also, the scenes are fairly compressed into one space. Though the story takes place in many locations, even Mars, they are usually in confined spaces. So, progress is better defined as the chessboard is limited for the players in each scene.

In terms of time, there’s still just short of 3 hours of content.

That’s a lot of time to cover and tie up the threads.  We’re two thirds in and we’ve got one third left.  It’s about to enter the third act.

It’s not like it’s LOST with 6 seasons of plot.

Also, am I correct in inferring the complaint is that the show has had a meandering pace where nothing significant has happened, but there’s not enough time to bring it to a satisfying conclusion?  That’s slightly tautological.

Anonymous wrote:

Also, am I correct in inferring the complaint is that the show has had a meandering pace where nothing significant has happened, but there’s not enough time to bring it to a satisfying conclusion?  That’s slightly tautological.

Oxymoronic, surely.

Your face is oxymoronic

 

(Yes its oxymoronic not tautological, its been a long day)

Sorry for the pedantry. As a lawyer I’m sure you can appreciate that it’s involuntary.

I appreciate a correction to a glaring error.

Correcting people on their glaring errors is like, you know, my whole thing.

Well I’m sure both of you meant contradictory… and no, it’s not… Not much has happened in terms of plot advancement and nothing says they will advance the plot much forward… I mean, just last episode was a fully character-driven episode, it did NOTHING to advance the plot of the show, unless we’re gonna pretend that Sister Night’s family tree was this huge element or this huge mystery.

Let’s see, what’s the plot so far: So a murder mystery, which was just solved (the how, ’cause the who got solved in ep1, so… “solved”), but that was never really the point, in fact it was just the starting point. We got Adrian’s plot that hasn’t really gone anywhere so far… We have… jesus what else? The mystery of the raining squid? =/

I just realised I’m not sure what the show is about… u_u

I mean, we’re assuming that a lot of people have plans to do something, but we don’t even know what those plans are for yet, like the Senator’s or Lady Tribeam’s or Adrian’s (beyond escaping his prison), or the old man’s… like where is this going? We don’t even have a hint of that yet, how the hell are they gonna resolve anything if barely anything’s been set up?
 
Edit: I’m not sure I made my point clear… So it’s basically this: So far the show seems to be built around a bunch of small mysteries (as in a lot of random weird shit happening just because, like the squid rain), with barely any plot in sight… it’s almost like just a collection of random mysteries so far… So yeah, the pace has been rather slow, and I don’t see a resolution to the larger plot (that we don’t even know yet) in sight (even though some of those smaller individual mysteries might get solved). And this is coming from someone with knowledge about the CB and why some things might be important later on… I’m not sure what a noob would make of this show… it’s probably just a bunch of random shit happening for some unkown reason…

Mostly I’ve lost interest in finding out what the show was about primarily because it wasn’t clear what many of the characters wanted to achieve through the means of the story and then some of the revelations were more ridiculous than surprising. Like Veidt’s video (why make a video, again?) or the actual location of his estate.

Laurie was the most interesting character and the recent flashback episode was a nice story on its own. I’m more interested in the concepts and setting than the bigger picture. It seems torn between an anthology series set in the Watchmen world and a continuing series. I’d prefer the former I imagine.

The original Watchmen had something of a anthology format too but with a bit more clarity to the purpose and relation to the central story.

I dont want any further seasons, unless they focus more on the concepts from the original GN.

I dont think much of Jeremy Irons Veidt, which is odd because he’s the most prolific actor in the cast (perhaps tied with Tim Blake Nelson).

I just don’t buy him as the smartest man, with his dialogue tics and scenery chomp chomp nom nom nom hmmm tasty scenery yum yum scenery bits.

I buy Jean Smarts Laurie, world weary etc.  I dont mind the ninth kavalry as sort of rorschach inspired.  The whole idea with masked enforcers in the police force is fine.  Phone booths to dr manhattan are all cool.  I’m not sure if i love the hooded justice revision but its well done and im interested to how it connects.

But Veidt, sadly Veidt, being probably the most prominent member of the original cast, just does not work for me.

Edit: Squid rain was answered in episode 5 and a large part of the Senators plan was too, enough to be able to connect the dots and know more information is coming.

But, if the show bores you, then stop torrenting it. Go ride a bike instead.

Stop being so tautological, Tim.

Everyone is being *such* a tautology in this thread.

Especially Jerry

Anonymous wrote:

I appreciate a correction to a glaring error.

Correcting people on their glaring errors is like, you know, my whole thing.

I thought your whole thing was cute, adorable puppies?

His two whole things are correcting people on their glaring errors and cute, adorable puppies.

And your face.

His three whole things are correcting people on their … among his many whole things are…

..an almost fanatical devotion to the Pope.

Wait; wrong thread…

Anonymous wrote:

I’m not sure if i love the hooded justice revision but its well done and im interested to how it connects.

it was done well and it is a sign how the “classic” Watchmen characters created by Moore and Gibbons boost the series (except Veidt who doesn’t really feel like the same show at all).

Out of all the superhero shows on television, I’d definitely put it in the top 3 behind The Boys and The Tick and just above Gotham.

Just before the first episode I had read the first paragraph or two of a negative review that used the word “pretentious”.
It was enough to have me hesitant just before, and then that intro scene in the first episode had me worried that review was right “on the money”.
.
After 6 episodes I can honestly say I am loving this. Characters, casting, music, all of it.
Tim Blake Nelson? Why would I know him? But now I can argue pics of him without that ‘stach should be removed from the internet.
.
With 3 episodes left I can’t believe this will “be it”. No way. A second season has to be set-up.
If you have Jeremy Irons then you have to have more of him, a lot more.
Need to see other characters a lot more too.
3 episodes definitely not enough.
.
I Hope:
– this is being well received outside of the comic-book community
– Lindelof sticks the landing (even if I suspect it leads to more)
(had more but I’ll just say I’m thinking positively here)

Sean Robinson wrote:

Tim Blake Nelson? Why would I know him?

He’s sort of an indie darling.  He also played the would-be  Leader in Norton’s Hulk

Jon wrote:

Well I’m sure both of you meant contradictory

Nah. Potentially, you could use “paradoxical”, though. But I would advise to let people have their oxymorons. It’s not often you see those in the wild.

Sean Robinson wrote:

Tim Blake Nelson? Why would I know him?

Fucking O Brother Where Art Thou?, man!

.

And I am completely with you. Still love everything about the show (we’re up to ep4 here in Germany, now.).

I do have some sympathy for Tim’s complaint, though – Iron’s Veidt seems too… sadistic, I guess? Too rough? There was an aura of deep-felt compassion and empathy about him in the comic, which made his monstrosity all the worse. I think they went wrong in losing that.

Sean Robinson wrote:

After 6 episodes I can honestly say I am loving this. Characters, casting, music, all of it.

I like it okay. It puts my wife to sleep, though, so I can’t really keep up with it.

Even though it is very different from the movie version, it does some of the same things in focusing only on the active main characters. If you remember reading the comic book back when it was monthly, there was an unusual amount of panels devoted to the story arcs of the “bystanders.” The people whose lives only tangentially intersected with the costumed vigilantes who were doomed to be victims of Veidt’s plot. The New Yorkers as well as the talented members of Veidt’s Island film project.

Without the voice of “those who ‘don’t matter’ to the bigger picture” represented, it’s not as strong a statement on the inhumanity of the heroes’ arrogance. The tragic flaw of many of the characters is that they believe their interests are in the interest of the entire community, country, race or even the entire species of the planet. A lot of Watchmen, the comic book, was a repudiation of that Ayn Randian exaltation of the “superior person” over the individual struggle of any single person.

Christian wrote:

I do have some sympathy for Tim’s complaint, though – Iron’s Veidt seems too… sadistic, I guess? Too rough? There was an aura of deep-felt compassion and empathy about him in the comic, which made his monstrosity all the worse. I think they went wrong in losing that.

Yes this is well articulated. He’s malevolent which Veidt isn’t. He’s a control freak who thinks he’s doing this all for the betterment of humanity. Irons comes across as a control freak but also he’s chaotic and perverse and vicious, may be that’s due to his enclosure but I’m not sure. I think it’s just their take on the character.

Anonymous wrote:

He’s a control freak who thinks he’s doing this all for the betterment of humanity. Irons comes across as a control freak but also he’s chaotic and perverse and vicious, may be that’s due to his enclosure but I’m not sure.

That’s a good explanation. Why should he care about anyone there? They aren’t the people he made the “sacrifice” for. They are barely human. He may feel that he needs to behave this way in the situation he unwillingly found himself in.

Oookaay.

This feels like the train is about to derail bad. I really hope the show sticks the landing but I’m not sure if that will happen.

It was interesting

‘Watchmen’ Recap: A God Among Men

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

He’s a control freak who thinks he’s doing this all for the betterment of humanity. Irons comes across as a control freak but also he’s chaotic and perverse and vicious, may be that’s due to his enclosure but I’m not sure.

That’s a good explanation. Why should he care about anyone there? They aren’t the people he made the “sacrifice” for. They are barely human. He may feel that he needs to behave this way in the situation he unwillingly found himself in.

Its as good an explanation as any but I would prefer the character to be a little less wild.  That’s Irons more than anything.  More Alfred in the character would have gone a long way

Uhmmm oh boy… this does look like it’s gonna go spectacularly wrong. I’ll give them that, I didn’t not see that coming, BUUUUUUUT that’s not exactly a good thing since it feels completely like pulled out of an ass.
 
We’ll see I suppose… a bit of a let down as an espidoe though… a lot more flashbacks (and it looks like we’re in for a lot more) and some really odd choices… I’m not sure I like how Laurie suddlenly went stupid for convenience’s sake… =/

I liked it. I’m not panicking.

Explaining Everything From WATCHMEN’s Explosive 7th Episode