Is the graphic novel's of watchmen worth reading?
I want to express an opposite position. The viewpoint character is Rohrschach. Rorschach was closely based on Steve Ditko's The Question, created when he was under the influence of Ayn Rand. Now when Ditko was deciding Rand was explaining why he'd been messed over by the people he'd been working with, I was actually reading her and being really really appalled, though it was a few years before I read Blavatsky, Gurdjieff and Ouspensky and I realized how much Rand had in common with these occultists and her materialism marked her as either unreflective or as big a fraud as Blavatsky. I've never gotten more than a few pages into the Watchmen, because this Dualist philosophy -- modern Zoroastrianism -- which Rohrschach/Question represents is not especially dramatic and I could never understand whether Moore was respecting it or cynically using it to comment on the story. When the New York Times complained that the choice in the movie was between idealistically killing large groups of people, and cynically killing a few bad actors, I knew what he means. I've successfully read a few graphic novels by Moore and he doesn't seem to go above that level in them, however smart he may be. Hellboy is fun. You might consider reading him.
Parenthetical Citation for Graphic Novel Watchmen?
I'm not entirely sure, never having done so before. However, if I had to I would cite it in the following manner: Let's say the page is Chapter 4 page 27. I would cite it like so: While on Mars Manhattan's powers again manifest themselves as he constructs a new home away from those who shunned him (Moore, IV:27). It starts out with the standard author as with most citations, then states the chapter followed by the page number. The chapter and page number seperated by a colon to show the page is inside the chapter.
For the Watchmen Graphic Novel, is the content overly innapropiate?
The problem is that its to mature. "super man exists, and he's American" Dr. Manhattan doesn't wear pants, at all. Though the book forces you to recognize why. he is the most Intelligent being to his knowledge in the existence of existence, you tell him it's important wear pants and explain to him that he is indecent. He probably wouldn't even acknowledge you and then you would feel quite dumb...what a jerk. Secondly, there is sex but it isn't explicit by any means. If anything once again its to real. The male is over weight and ponchy and old. The girl is also much past her prime. What? Two real people that aren't perfect making love, the heck you say! It's not graphic but then again I wouldn't know what you would consider graphic. The writing it self has a madness to it, the writing is much more offensive then any art you'll find which I think was the point. It really is quite brilliant and I think most should read it but if your not ready for mature themes then you shouldn't read it.
Does the Watchmen graphic novel has content absent from the movie?
The book have a couple subplots that were cut from the film: *Throughout the story, excerpts from the fictional comic "Tales of the Black Freighter" are shown and are in parallel with the main story. *The disappearance of several artists and scientists are mentioned throughout. The disappearance is tied directly with the original ending of the story. The film featured a modified ending that removed the artists subplot. *Several minor characters in the film, such as the prison psychologist, the newspaper seller, and the detectives at the beginning of the film, are given more focus in the book. They are all connected in the original ending. *The book has three chapters of Hollis Mason's autobiography, which reveal the early days of the Crime-Stoppers. *At the end of each section of the book, there are notes regarding certain characters: Adrian's company memos, Sally Jupiter's interview, a report on Doctor Manhattan, the psychologist's notes on Rorschach, etc.
For fans of the graphic novel the Watchmen, who would you cast in the lead roles for a film version?
A little bit, I think. A lot of character and backstory material had to be compressed or left out, but that's the nature of the different media. Visually the film is brilliant. All the effects work. The soundtrack choices, various songs used for atmosphere or timeline touchstones, struck me at first as erratic or even aural assault, but it does work. I think the cast nailed their parts. The big change, from the squid/monster to another "invasion threat", I found quite satisfying. The graphic novel still exists for those who don't like the film (and for those who do). I don't see the point in hoping for a direct, exact adaptation, because that's just retelling a story I already know, and leaves no room for innovation, surprise, interpretation. What was done to bring Watchmen to the screen was done well. (On the scale of "Alan Moore sourced works made into movies" it's easily the best. His story, mostly, made it to the screen. As a counterexample, "V for Vendetta", which I also enjoyed, was not Moore's story, it was a different story told with characters he had co-created. That's not the case with Watchmen.) I like the Watchmen film a lot (caveat: I'm a longtime comics geek who read the original comics in real time). It's not for children.
Just bought the graphic novel the watchmen. Is the newer version make a big difference?
Absolute editions feature a new digital printing process that produces more vibrant and "truer" colors than the standard CMYK process. The stories in the Absolute Editions are exactly the same as the originals, it's just the color representations that are different. Also, they're usually hardcovers instead of softcovers, and usually an overall nicer looking book. So, it's ultimately up to you to decide whether you want to buy the same book over again, albeit more colorful and with a nicer, sturdier cover. http://journal.neilgaiman.com/2006/06/sunday-morning-again.html http://sep7.ca/local/cache-vignettes/L520xH626/absolute_watchmen-489dc.jpg
Does the movie adaption of Watchmen improve on the graphic novel?
A little bit, I think. A lot of character and backstory material had to be compressed or left out, but that's the nature of the different media. Visually the film is brilliant. All the effects work. The soundtrack choices, various songs used for atmosphere or timeline touchstones, struck me at first as erratic or even aural assault, but it does work. I think the cast nailed their parts. The big change, from the squid/monster to another "invasion threat", I found quite satisfying. The graphic novel still exists for those who don't like the film (and for those who do). I don't see the point in hoping for a direct, exact adaptation, because that's just retelling a story I already know, and leaves no room for innovation, surprise, interpretation. What was done to bring Watchmen to the screen was done well. (On the scale of "Alan Moore sourced works made into movies" it's easily the best. His story, mostly, made it to the screen. As a counterexample, "V for Vendetta", which I also enjoyed, was not Moore's story, it was a different story told with characters he had co-created. That's not the case with Watchmen.) I like the Watchmen film a lot (caveat: I'm a longtime comics geek who read the original comics in real time). It's not for children.
Ariel Williams's answer to Who are the most mysterious characters in global literature?I nominate Mycroft Holmes. The only person that makes Sherlock Holmes look common by comparison. Yet little is properly known of him he is a mystery man wrapped in intrigue.... "Heavily built and massive, there was a suggestion of uncouth physical inertia in the figure, but above this unwieldy frame there was perched a head so masterful in its brow, so alert in its steel-gray, deep-set eyes, so firm in its lips, and so subtle in its play of expression, that after the first glance one forgot the gross body and remembered only the dominant mind" ....Sherlock Holmes says that "Occasionally he is the British government [...] the most indispensable man in the country." ... "The conclusions of every department are passed to him, and he is the central exchange, the clearinghouse, which makes out the balance. All other men are specialists, but his specialism is omniscience."—"The Bruce-Partington Plans"He could be an even better detective then Sherlock according to Sherlock himself but makes snap decisions based upon his brilliance and seems unwilling to do the legwork necessary to fully verify his conclusions and yet he is most often still correct. ... "he has no ambition and no energy. He will not even go out of his way to verify his own solutions, and would rather be considered wrong than take the trouble to prove himself right. Again and again I have taken a problem to him, and have received an explanation which has afterwards proved to be the correct one. And yet he was absolutely incapable of working out the practical points" ...—Sherlock Holmes, speaking of his brother in -- "The Adventure of the Greek Interpreter"Of course I could have said Brainiac 13 and his 64th century knowledge, The Spectre, The Presence or Living Tribunal, and The One Above All but most would not get those references. The Presence (DC Comics) / The One Above All (Marvel Comics) are essentially the creators of their universes / all universes and possess Omniscience. They know all in all universes and our Earth, this universe we are in now even has its own designation amongst all the named alternate realities in Marvel. Thus they presumably know everything and every book or comic here too.
Ariel Williams's answer to Who are the most mysterious characters in global literature?I nominate Mycroft Holmes. The only person that makes Sherlock Holmes look common by comparison. Yet little is properly known of him he is a mystery man wrapped in intrigue.... "Heavily built and massive, there was a suggestion of uncouth physical inertia in the figure, but above this unwieldy frame there was perched a head so masterful in its brow, so alert in its steel-gray, deep-set eyes, so firm in its lips, and so subtle in its play of expression, that after the first glance one forgot the gross body and remembered only the dominant mind" ....Sherlock Holmes says that "Occasionally he is the British government [...] the most indispensable man in the country." ... "The conclusions of every department are passed to him, and he is the central exchange, the clearinghouse, which makes out the balance. All other men are specialists, but his specialism is omniscience."—"The Bruce-Partington Plans"He could be an even better detective then Sherlock according to Sherlock himself but makes snap decisions based upon his brilliance and seems unwilling to do the legwork necessary to fully verify his conclusions and yet he is most often still correct. ... "he has no ambition and no energy. He will not even go out of his way to verify his own solutions, and would rather be considered wrong than take the trouble to prove himself right. Again and again I have taken a problem to him, and have received an explanation which has afterwards proved to be the correct one. And yet he was absolutely incapable of working out the practical points" ...—Sherlock Holmes, speaking of his brother in -- "The Adventure of the Greek Interpreter"Of course I could have said Brainiac 13 and his 64th century knowledge, The Spectre, The Presence or Living Tribunal, and The One Above All but most would not get those references. The Presence (DC Comics) / The One Above All (Marvel Comics) are essentially the creators of their universes / all universes and possess Omniscience. They know all in all universes and our Earth, this universe we are in now even has its own designation amongst all the named alternate realities in Marvel. Thus they presumably know everything and every book or comic here too.