Watchmen (Spoilers)

[John Q. Public]

Nope, E, this is the first time I've expressd an opinion about it. (This was the first time I stumbled across a place where it was thrown open for forum debate).

I was pulled in, followed it, grew to dislike most characters, then turned off by the cynical ending. Just wasn't my cup of Irish whiskey.

John Q. is obviously the author of the 2 Watchmen bashing threads Bendis saw last week.

I personally don't have a problem with you not liking it. And Doc I wouldn't presume that the reason he didn't like it is because he didn't read it "word for word". Different strokes for different folks.

Did Bendis write it? News to me. Anyway, thanks for your defense of freedom of opinion.

 

[E]

Did Bendis write it? News to me.

There was an interview that came out earlier this week (I think) where he was asked something about people not liking House of M, and he said it happens, and that he had seen 2 threads earlier "bashing" Watchmen, which I guess is supposed to mean that if people will bash Watchmen, they will bash anything.

 

[John Q. Public]

There was an interview that came out earlier this week (I think) where he was asked something about people not liking House of M, and he said it happens, and that he had seen 2 threads earlier "bashing" Watchmen, which I guess is supposed to mean that if people will bash Watchmen, they will bash anything.

Duh. Bendis said if people will bash Watchmen they will bash anything? I respect the following Watchmen has, but I just didn't like it. The difference is, Watchmen aimed high and missed, and I can appreciate that. Bendis aimed low (though talked a good game) with HOM and missed that. Big difference. This is my only board, and, sensing an undercurrent of hostility, will gladly post a get-out-of-town thread poll. There's such a dry period in the UU right now that I think, newbie that I am, you guys are eating your own. I enjoy this board, but I've just got to laugh when someone who has the same tastes as me, like this Doc dude, says "Everybody hates you." Dees-funk-shill-knoll.

 

[Fuzzy Birds]

I'll admit that the first time I read it, I was distinctly underwhelmed. It has grown on me, but I still think it's an occasionally flawed, mildly dissapointing read. Still good though, but not quite deserving of all this fame. Maybe an 8.5 out of 10 for me.

But, I suppose it all comes down to personal taste. Different strokes and all that.

 

[E]

Bendis said if people will bash Watchmen they will bash anything?

In not as many words. That's what he was implying.

Or maybe more accurately, even a book like Watchmen, which is generally considered to be great, has its detracters.

 

[E.Vi.L.]

I enjoy this board, but I've just got to laugh when someone who has the same tastes as me, like this Doc dude, says "Everybody hates you." Dees-funk-shill-knoll.

It looked to me as if Doc Comic had his tongue planted firmly in his cheek when he wrote that.

Different strokes for different folks

As long as every folks stroke.

It's important to relax.

 

[Doc Comic]

It looked to me as if Doc Comic had his tongue planted firmly in his cheek when he wrote that.

I did. And "hate" is such a strong word. Not liking someone and hating someone are two completely different things. I'm just saying that I got a weird feeling; first the 'To Punch' thread fiasco, and now this. Something's not right.

 

[E.Vi.L.]

It's because of the "Doc" part of your nick.

In comic tradition, it makes you either a megalomaniac villain or a straight laced hero who takes everything at the first degree.

If you were just called "Comic", you wouldn't be having this problem.

 

[Guijllons]

And

Try

To

Imagine

How

Little

I

Care.......

Quite a lot it seems, what I wrote was hardly a flame, nor was it an attack of your opinion of the book. It was a comment on your belief that people do only like the book because they believe they are supposed to.

And just so that you're clear, when someone does type that they don't care in an extravagant manner in response to a mere comment, they are just laying themselves open as the person that really does take what they believe a little too seriously and screams the word 'target'.

 

[Dr.Strangefate]

It's because of the "Doc" part of your nick.

In comic tradition, it makes you either a megalomaniac villain or a straight laced hero who takes everything at the first degree.

Precisely!

Because Doctors either save lives or don't, so people polarize them...

 

[marvelman]

ummm... (*gotta get this back on topic...*) like... Doctor Manhattan...????

 

[Doc Comic]

Precisely!

Because Doctors either save lives or don't, so people polarize them...

Exactly. I save lives while you take them.

 

[iceman]

oh man. i've waited since the punching thread for john q. public to say something stupid, and it couldn't have happened on a better topic.

to think, before reading the other pages of the thread where john q. public opens his digitized mouth, i was simply going to post:

"not to offend anyone, but i think anyone who doesn't like watchmen is an idiot."

i'm still going to say that, but now i'm going to say other things that are meant to be offensive, such as this:

i think anyone who doesn't like watchmen is an idiot.

 

[compound]

To be fair, I think it kinda skews one's judgement if you're already familiar with other "deconstructionist" superhero stories, by the time time you read Watchmen. I'm referring to Supreme Power, or The Authority, or Powers (especially the "Sellouts" and "Forever" arcs), or Rising Stars, or for that matter, Moore's take on Supreme, or even Astro City -- any title that explores the social and political implications of having a super-being of near-god-like power exisitng alongside everyday civilization. Once you've read those, it's a little more difficult to appreciate the impact and originality of Watchmen, even if you're aware that it's one of the first to be released, chronologically. By that point, you may well have soured on its degraded legacy.

Still, it would be difficult to deny the intelligence and research effort that went into the plotting, as well as the (then) unconventional approach to visual story-telling.

 

[marvelman]

Yes, I agree Compound. But, I must say, I bought my first Authority volume (YAY!!!) after reading watchmen, and Watchmen enhanced it, I think.

 

[John Q. Public]

oh man. i've waited since the punching thread for john q. public to say something stupid, and it couldn't have happened on a better topic.

to think, before reading the other pages of the thread where john q. public opens his digitized mouth, i was simply going to post:

"not to offend anyone, but i think anyone who doesn't like watchmen is an idiot."

i'm still going to say that, but now i'm going to say other things that are meant to be offensive, such as this:

i think anyone who doesn't like watchmen is an idiot.

Nice comeback. I'm staggering from this blow. Anybody see the old 1960s Kirk Douglas movie "Failsafe?" Where they blew up New York to avoid retaliation for an accidental USSR strike? Watchmen was that, only with cheesy ripoffs of iconic characters. Being called an idiot by you is quite the compliment.

Hey, I specialize in stupid comments, Einstein. It's the self-important responses (usually devoid of a spellcheck) that makes this so much fun! Just put me on "ignore" and you'll be just fine.

 

[John Q. Public]

I did. And "hate" is such a strong word. Not liking someone and hating someone are two completely different things. I'm just saying that I got a weird feeling; first the 'To Punch' thread fiasco, and now this. Something's not right.

Hmmm. Could you be more specific? Or is it just a bad vibe? C'mon, Doc. Sort out your feelings. I'll understand.

 

[E]

To be fair, I think it kinda skews one's judgement if you're already familiar with other "deconstructionist" superhero stories, by the time time you read Watchmen.

I totally agree.

And you could add Ultimates to that list as well.

 

[John Q. Public]

Quite a lot it seems, what I wrote was hardly a flame, nor was it an attack of your opinion of the book. It was a comment on your belief that people do only like the book because they believe they are supposed to.

And just so that you're clear, when someone does type that they don't care in an extravagant manner in response to a mere comment, they are just laying themselves open as the person that really does take what they believe a little too seriously and screams the word 'target'.

Well, sorry to include you in the flame attack, but it was kind of a shotgun assault that was pretty amusing and called for a commensurate response. And I don't take anything about comics seriously (like, the Ultimates delay won't wreck my life). You're a great poster. You just happened to be amid the pack of wolves who couldn't fathom why somebody wouldn't genuflect to "The Washmen."

 

[Dr.Strangefate]

Okay, you weren't a fan, we get it.

Now, unless you're offering constructive criticism, or just valid reasons you didn't like it, why don't you stop -trying- to offend the book and anyone who likes it?

That's why anyone would flame you to begin with. The minute you take this and make it personal, is the minute you'll lose all credibility.