Comments on: Watching the Watchmen: The Emperor’s New Clothes

By: Doctor Zen

Doctor Zen — Mon, 15 Dec 2008 06:25:48 +0000

I was also umnimpressed with the plot; nothing new in it. I'd read a zillion stories in BATMAN and other comics about a club or other gathering of people being killed off and the culprit is always the one who survived his assassination attempt. Ozymandias's schemes were old and creaky by then too; the earliest I remember seeing them were on THE OUTER LIMITS (The Architects of Fear, 1963) and THE MAN FROM UNCLE (The Shark Affair, 1964)… oddly enough, both episodes featured Robert Culp.

Comparing WATCHMEN as a GN to works like PRIDE OF BAGHDAD, remember that WATCHMAN was originally published as a 12-issue miniseries, so it's not so much a GN as a trade pb collection.

The Watchmen were based on the 60s Charlton Comics heroes, so Dr Manhattan was Captain Atom, whose origin was similar. Nite Owl/Blue Beetle, Silk Spectre/Nightshade, Rorschasch/The Question, etc. Those guys had a short-lived team called The Sentinels, which means the same as Watchmen. Way I heard it, DC planned to use the Charltons but Moore balked at darkening such beloved heroes.

By: pinkraygun

pinkraygun — Sat, 13 Dec 2008 05:46:09 +0000

I believe the Hugo is reserved for science fiction works. Maus is definitely not that.

Maus did win the Pulitzer (I believe), which is a far more prestigious award than the Hugo, anyway.

By: Sonia

Sonia — Sat, 13 Dec 2008 03:23:51 +0000

I'm a Pulp Fiction fan, but I wouldn't dare argue its merit because I know it relates to me but I don't know that I can convy or convince someone of that (similar to my choice of religion, etc). I'd apply the same argument on the Donnie Darko phenomenon, which i loved but I don't understand why people keep going on and on about how "complex" it was. I think it was fairly simple, or can be broken down simply, relating to a tme warp… (and now I wanna get up and dance!)

By: Bram

Bram — Sat, 13 Dec 2008 02:17:53 +0000

Um, wow. A little too much for me to take on, but I will address one thing:

Gibbons' art — specifically how he draws women — has been the subject of mockery around here. But, I think that the fact most of what he was called upon to illustrate was people talking makes the job more challenging.

The way he stages the panels, the recurring motifs built up over the long term, the transitions, the overall design of the pages is, well, just masterful. This is a guy who has a true understanding of how to tell a complex story through imagery, and it's on display here. How much was his decision and how much was Moore's, I have no idea — but his work just adds another level to the story, something that few artists are able to do.

By: lilacsigil

lilacsigil — Fri, 12 Dec 2008 22:56:20 +0000

Yes, I’m not defending Watchmen as the greatest comic ever written – it is a product of its time, it was given an award at that time, and it greatly contributed to major changes in the comics genre (better or worse is debatable!) I just don’t find it very productive to criticise the contents of the comic on the basis of hype 20 years later.

By: lilacsigil

lilacsigil — Fri, 12 Dec 2008 22:34:46 +0000

“Pride and Prejudice” is not a commentary on other works, though. “Watchmen” is, and like most satire or social commentary, is far more likely to date. And the Hulk (in his pure green rage form) never achieved anything either – he raged, Dr Manhattan retreats.

By: Writing From the Inside » Blog Archive » Watching the Watchmen: The Emperor’s New Clothes

Fri, 12 Dec 2008 16:00:35 +0000

[...] comic book, and, after having fun purchasing a copy, read it I did. Here is a link to my review on pinkraygun.com. [...]

By: Sylvia Bond

Sylvia Bond — Fri, 12 Dec 2008 10:49:09 +0000

I was mostly poking fun at the feelings of pretention I was getting from the "only graphic novel to win a Hugo!" claim, and the moniker of "graphic novel" really seemed to take the cake. Of course, over time, the genre will develop new ways of identifying different elements within it, and The Watchmen and others are a far cry from the early comics I read as a kid.

As for "Maus" YES! I always wondered why that has never won a Hugo, personally, because I think it's the better work.

Regards,

Sylvia

By: Sylvia Bond

Sylvia Bond — Fri, 12 Dec 2008 10:43:56 +0000

I can understand totally what you mean. Your reactions to those movies (I've seen AN, but not NCFOM) sound like mine to "Pulp Fiction" about which everyone I knew was raving. They adored it, but it left me cold. Not because of the violence necessarily, but because I simply couldn't relate to any of the characters. I remember getting into a shouting match at a Christmas party of all things a few years back, and was finally able to get that through to the other fellow. Pulp Fiction was brilliant, true, and full of new and edgy filming techniques. Bravo for them, but without a character I could even begin to understand, it's not a movie I'd care to watch twice. So I don't think you're alone there. Rorschach is the only character I could relate to in The Watchmen and he's the psycho, so go figure!

By: lilacsigil

lilacsigil — Fri, 12 Dec 2008 09:48:45 +0000

Not to sound culty, but I wonder if Watchmen has been diluted by all the imitations and, in some cases, blatant rip-offs of it. I think that, after it was published, the fetish for “dark” heroes suddenly came into play, and thus the power of this dark version of the bright and bubbly heroes of the 30s to the early 80s was undercut for 21st century readers. A lot of the things you criticise here are in themselves criticisms of earlier comics, like Dr Manhattan’s origin story parallels the Hulk’s.

By: Sonia

Sonia — Fri, 12 Dec 2008 09:31:29 +0000

I'm in the process of readng "The Watchmen" (and by "process" I mean that I borrowed it from my sister and it is sitting on the shelf in my bathroom) and your review Syvia reminded me of the feelings I had when I watched "Apocolypse Now" and, more recently "No Country for Old Men". I wanted to appreciate the genius but something was missing (and, for the umpteenth time, it wasn't the ending of No Country that bugged…I had a weird feeling throughout). And I can understand flashes of goodness if not greatness) in both, I'm still lost on the whole "genius" label.

By: Teresa

Teresa — Fri, 12 Dec 2008 09:09:28 +0000

I haven't yet read Watchmen, so I'm not reading your whole review yet. But I did want to comment on the whole "graphic novel" vs. "comic book" thing. Graphic Novel is actually a term – it's not just a comic lover's way of being pretentious. Graphic novels are novel length stories in comic form. Comic books are the weekly/monthly books you get in the comic shop regularly. I'm glad the term graphic novel exists, because I wouldn't necessarily call full-length works like "Maus", "From Hell", "Watchmen" or "Pride of Baghdad" comic books.

What I love, though, is that we have to come up with all these different terms because the comic form is becoming so popular that regular booksellers are carrying them and so we need to come up with labels for all their various forms. I do like that.

By: Sylvia Bond

Sylvia Bond — Fri, 12 Dec 2008 06:06:49 +0000

Good point. Not the most logically drawn of chracters, I think. I found him very confusing.

By: AlphaGirl

AlphaGirl — Fri, 12 Dec 2008 05:59:22 +0000

My favorite scene with Dr. Manhattan is when he's in the talk show studio and wigs out, screaming "LEAVE ME ALONE!" But, despite all of his protestation that he was no longer human, that was a very human reaction.

By: AlphaGirl

AlphaGirl — Fri, 12 Dec 2008 05:57:29 +0000

While I understand that Dr. Manhattan had evolved and didn't consider himself human anymore, his indifference was maddening.

By: Sylvia Bond

Sylvia Bond — Fri, 12 Dec 2008 05:23:51 +0000

Hey, that's an interesting point, looking at it like a period peice, although the peices you mention have stood up better through time than the Watchmen. I rather like Eric Frank Russell's story "The Wasp" which although written in 1957 is still pointed and apt, as well as being hysterical. I wish someone would turn THAT into a graphic novel.

By: Sylvia Bond

Sylvia Bond — Fri, 12 Dec 2008 05:19:35 +0000

That's kind of what I was thinking, that the strength of the original work should be able to stand up admidst the sea of copy-cats. Sure, imitation is a form of flattery, but Pride and Prejudice is still number one. As is Gone With the Wind, in spite of the SEA of bodice rippers none of which even come close.

As for the Hulk, yes, I can see that Dr. Manhatten's story is similar to the Hulk's, but as a kid, what I loved about the Hulk was that he DID something with his powers. He didn't just mope around, which, yes, he sometimes did. He was sad, and angsty. But what I loved about him was his rage. He would turn GREEN and most of his clothes would come OFF and there was rampaging and stomping and destruction. In the midst of which, the Hulk would do something that would benefit society. Unlike Dr. Manhatten, who despite being blue and naked, was a boring character.

Regards,

Sylvia

By: Sylvia Bond

Sylvia Bond — Fri, 12 Dec 2008 05:15:11 +0000

Hey, thank you for that. I really thought I was a voice screaming in the wilderness because I've encountered a few people who are as passionate about this work as I am about Supernatural. I can totally understand that they are, but in this case, I couldn't understand the why of it. Thought it wasn't as good as it was claimed to be.

And you liked Rorscach too, that's interesting. I thought his character was very clearly defined, like you say, black and white. I knew his backgrounds, and could understand his motives. Everyone else, yeah. Grey, grey, grey.

Regards,

Sylvia

By: Robin

Robin — Fri, 12 Dec 2008 03:42:49 +0000

I read Watchmen for the first time a couple of months ago, and yes, it has some flaws. It is very convoluted, and the worldview is indeed dated. I was quite irked that the only two prominent female characters were relegated to girlfriend-of-the-main-hero status, and just happen to be mother and daughter. Most of the characters are frustratingly selfish and plagued by tunnel vision.

That said, I did enjoy it. The key (for me, anyway) is to look at it as a period piece. Much like Ray Bradbury and Philip K. Dick, Alan Moore predicted a future that greatly differed from the actual path of our history (both here and in V for Vendetta).

By: RKB

RKB — Fri, 12 Dec 2008 02:55:18 +0000

Your not the only one who can see that the Emperor is naked, on my first read of Watchmen, i was beyond thrilled. The more and more re-readings i did of it, I still thought it was really good, but not great, and for sure dated. I did think it was easier to read and follow than something like war and peace, but probably only because I liked Rorschach so much, because he could care less about the greater good. If every character is a gray character, someone who sees the world in black and white is a nice change of pace. Props to Alan Moore for that, but in general his work hasn't held up well with me.