MovieChat Forums > Watchmen (2019) Discussion > strange ride... spoiler musings

strange ride... spoiler musings

posted 5 years ago by AnubisRaydeen (7897)
6 replies | jump to latest

I purchased Watchmen issue at a time off the rack back in the day. I loved it. Thought the movie did a decent job of it too. There's my bias.

The series did a pretty good job honoring that universe ... mostly. It started weak and ended weak but certainly had some 10/10 episodes along the way.

My complaints:
1. Dr M coming back and cares again. This is a complete FU to the character's arc. One of the things I thought was strong about the show was that it was careful to respect the OC. Not in this way though. Nope. When last we saw Dr M, he regarded humans as a stack of molecules no different than a rock or any other assortment of atoms. It was a fascinating take on ultimate power and its perspective. Thrown away.

2. White Supremacists as the bad guys is weak IMO. They exist in far greater number and organization in the mind of the writer than in real life. I get that it is a different universe so anything goes but still, it's like Flat Earthers being the bad guys. Kinda dumb. I do like the Tulsa connection and that setup was super well done and brilliant at times. Trieu using the 7K to do her bidding was interesting and the progress of the story was cool in that way. I just have trouble taking them seriously. Real white supremacists are too idiotic to be so big, organized, and entrenched. It came off as a forced Left-wing boogyman.

3. Help Veidt shower a town with frozen bullets but arrest him for genocide after? That end was so lame.

4. Grandpa murdered your boss but he isn't up for arrest.

5. Rorschach's legacy is racism? He wasn't a racist. Does this writing come from the belief that all conservatives are auto-racist? I was disappointed with this portrayal. Rorschach had his problems but racism was not one of them.

6. Making Hooded Justice gay took away from his story. Diluted the strength of the message. His path was significant and embedded in the wretched racism of the time. Making him gay subtracted from that. The rumors of him being gay were an interesting misfire by the guessing media. Making those guesses accurate is a split in the focus of the narrative.

7. Veidt says his frozen squids will destroy 5 square blocks. The hole in Trieu's hand seemed to support that. Major inconsistencies follow. People get hit and don't die. All the cars and buildings are proving cover instead of being obliterated. For as much intelligent attention applied to detail in this show, this was glaringly and immediately inconsistent.

8. The limp foreshadowing of "yeah, I could make something that a person could eat and become like me" was so obvious and a poor job of writing.

Overall I liked it. Highly recommend it to fans of the OC. The acting is mostly great (so happy to see Gossett Jr again!) but I was not impressed with Regina King. The production value is super high and some episodes and scenes are frankly genius. I teared up both times I watched young Reeves pick up the abandoned baby and begin his hero's journey.

Flawed but good. 6.5/10 w bad ending
(inb4 "stupid moron" and "wrong")

[–] Williamrpeck (11) 5 years ago

Great review, you make some solid points, totally agree.

[–] TylerAArse (2915) 5 years ago

2. But these weren't suppose to be a group of just any Supremacist. They were a special "task force" that considered themselves the best. They probably respected others of their kind, but probably saw them as a lower cast.

3. Extremely lame. Wouldn't they be just as guilty?

4. It seems they forgot all about that.

6. I agree. Where the hell did all that come from, and why was it necessary. It changed no outcome in the story. Seems like that was force-fed to the viewer for no clear reason.

7. I wondered the same thing. I absolutely agree.

8. And damn, I want to know if she walked on water.

Regina King did an okay job, but she would not have been my first choice. I could think of other actresses that would've been better in the role.

[–] R_Kane (15828) 5 years ago

The phrase is “back in the old days,”’ which makes sense.

“Back in the day,” is the product of ghetto culture. Not surprisingly, it makes no sense.

[–] AnubisRaydeen (7897) 5 years ago

Either is fine. Your etymological breakdown of a slang phrase serves no purpose.

I'm going to guess that you loved the series.

[–] R_Kane (15828) 5 years ago

No, it bored the shit out of me so I stopped after 5 flaccid episodes.

No. Only 1 phrase is fine, because it is literate, elegant and precise. I am entirely satisfied with my own counsel.

[–] AnubisRaydeen (7897) 5 years ago

Well you may be a linguist snob but at least you have standards in taste as well.

Personally, I try not to allow anyone to limit my language. My language is my world. If some euphemism or slang doesn't fit into someone's rigid rules of use, it matters not to me unless it interferes with communication. Were I writing a letter to someone of high station, I surely wouldn't use terms like "back in the day" or perhaps the word "shit." However, I can relate to your sentiment at least a little. I hate some slang phrases like "throwing shade" or the use of the word "day" for "they," "they're," and/or "their." So on a certain level, I don't mind you coming at me sideways. Does the phrase "coming at you sideways" make sense to you? Or is it varelse?

We need the next level of grammar predator to enter this fray and feed on you for using “back in the old days" instead of the more precise "In the past."