Ultimo Gallos
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Dreams SUCK!Nightmares live FOREVER!
Posts: 15,443 
|
Post by Ultimo Gallos on Feb 20, 2017 18:45:40 GMT -5
I love how in a film with a graphic rape scene,more people choose to focus on the full frontal nudity from Dr Manhattan. Yeah but that dick was REALLY blue. When Watchmen came out my cousin's oldest son was about 8 and loved superheroes. So when he found out I was coming down to see the movie with his parents he wanted to go. Her and her husband asked me if I thought it was a film that he should see. "Well if they follow the comic no. There is a very graphic rape scene." We went opening night and all loved the film. But after it even his dad agreed with me that he rather his son see a big blue penis than the Comedian/Silk Spectre rape scene. Now that the kid is in his mid teens he watched the movie with me last time I was down. He didn't even react to seeing Dr Manhattan nude. But covered his eyes during the rape scene. But I have noticed at least in the States lots of parents have no issue letting their kids watch graphic violence. But freak out if their kid sees a boob or whatever. Thankfully my parents were the opposite. Until I was 13 and as long as the film wasn't porn or graphicly violent I could watch whatever I wanted. Kind of like how when all the CSI shows were popular I would see graphic gore on those shows. Gore so graphic if it was in a film odds are good the film would get a NC-17. But there it was airing in prime time on CBS. |
|
|
|
Post by A Platypus Rave is Correct on Feb 20, 2017 22:13:29 GMT -5
So today at work I was discussing the Watchmen movie, and I came to the end scene, where Doctor Manhattan destroys Rorschach. And I explained what I saw in that scene, when the camera looks down and sees the remains of Rorschach in its own Rorschach pattern. To me, I always took that as the film asking the audience what they see in this action, in Rorschach's destruction. Is it right, is it wrong? Was it a good move, an evil move, a necessary move above questions of morality, etc? It's the film holding up its own ink blot to the audience and leaving it to their interpretations, implications and all. I checked the comic, and it's not in there, so this is solely belonging to the movie. And I think it's utterly brilliant. What does everyone else think? And yes, Zack Snyder is the devil, blah blah blah BvS is evil incarnate, blah blah blah, gritty dark gritdark. I hope we got it out of our system. I don't know if that was the intention or if he was just chasing a slightly visual there, but that is basically the theme of the graphic novel in general, so it does work. Which is strange since Snyder kinda went out of his way to push the Ozy was wrong view. |
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Hamilton on Feb 21, 2017 1:47:18 GMT -5
It was a nice touch certainly, but as was mentioned that's pretty much the entire theme of the book--you can look at Ozymandias's plan for example at people see it different ways:he killed millions, but he DID what he set out to do. Does the end justify the means etc. Rorshach's views are very much no compromise, so maybe HE was right etc.
This was just a visual echo of that. And honestly, Snyder has never been a slouch at the visuals department. Of his weaknesses (and I'm on record of generally being a Snyder fan, despite not liking BvS), making something visually interesting is not one of them.
So it's a case of a nice visual flourish representing the larger thematic elements; and kudos there. But it's not like Zack came up with the thematic elements.
|
|
Chainsaw
T
A very BAD man.
It is what it is
Posts: 90,480
|
Post by Chainsaw on Feb 21, 2017 7:17:10 GMT -5
I think, if anything, it shows how heavy-handed Snyder is with his visual symbolism sometimes. And this is, by far, still my favorite of his movies. Which says something.
That said, I actually understand why he did what he did with Manhattan...not the penis thing, but the ending. What happens in NYC. It still pisses me off that they didn't go with how it happened in the comic, but Ozymandias using Manhattan to accomplish his goals at least plays into his character better, and kind of makes more sense in the long one. It doesn't take the edge off that I was expecting what happened in the comic and didn't get it, though.
|
|
|
|
Post by A Platypus Rave is Correct on Feb 21, 2017 9:13:51 GMT -5
I think, if anything, it shows how heavy-handed Snyder is with his visual symbolism sometimes. And this is, by far, still my favorite of his movies. Which says something. That said, I actually understand why he did what he did with Manhattan...not the penis thing, but the ending. What happens in NYC. It still pisses me off that they didn't go with how it happened in the comic, but Ozymandias using Manhattan to accomplish his goals at least plays into his character better, and kind of makes more sense in the long one. It doesn't take the edge off that I was expecting what happened in the comic and didn't get it, though. But it doesn't work. to the rest of the world Doctor Manhattan IS America. Attacking the Soviets with Manhattan would LEAD to them responding with a nuclear strike, period. and Ozy is smart enough to know this. You can debate whether or not the alien attack would have helped or not... but there is no debate if something blows up on the Soviets and it's tied to Doctor Manhattan they will treat it as an attack by America on their country especially as the Soviets were basically looking for a reason to strike throughout the book. |
|
