Watchmen Series on HBO

Discussion in 'Visual Arts' started by Madness, Oct 21, 2019.

  1. bmoregnr

    bmoregnr Forum Rezident

    Location:
    1060 W. Addison
    That is an important point that I don't think has been made as clearly as this in the thread so far. IMO it is a credit to the show they captured that very vibe on top of all the other things they did.
     
    ConnieGuitar and RK2249 like this.
  2. RK2249

    RK2249 Forum Resident

    Location:
    South Jersey
    Good analysis. I highlighted your one statement above, however, because it seems that everyone seems to think Dr. M could've done more. The question is why didn't he? I would tend to think because he realized it was futile...you can't change human nature. So this again begs the question, why would he want to pass on this kind of power? I guess it's possible that in Angela he saw the perfect balance of someone willing to do something for humanity (unlike himself) and someone who won't be corrupted by power (Veidt and Trieu). We may never know.

    As a standalone story, I though it was excellent. I still think Angela's character would've been better served if they showed her at least contemplating eating the egg.
     
    bmoregnr likes this.
  3. RK2249

    RK2249 Forum Resident

    Location:
    South Jersey
    But Veidt also thought he could do good. So did Lady Trieu. In the end, as the saying goes, absolute power corrupts absolutely. Why should we think Angela would be any different?
     
  4. Well, first I ask myself, 'Does absolute power really corrupt absolutely?'

    No human being has ever had absolute power. Nobody knows for sure. I'm not even sure that Angela would find out either. What she received was a tincture of Manhattan's power. A distilled bit that fit inside of an egg. The egg never held all of Dr. Manhattan. That would be like, well...attempting to place all of Manhattan Island into a common chicken's egg.

    Besides, to me it's obvious that some part of Dr. Manhattan's consciousness lived on in the egg. He told Angela that the swimming pool would later be important to her. To me, that means that he was able to see beyond his "death," to Angela eating the egg, and stepping out onto the pool. In other words, there's a part of Dr. Manhatten's consciousness in her now. A guiding light, if you will, that will form a symbiotic relationship with Angela, allowing the powers to be grafted with her humanity, while keeping them in check by Manhattan's omnipotence. After all, if Angela can see the consequences before they happen, she would have to be corrupt in the first place to allow certain paths to unfold: paths that she knows would have ill consequences.

    All of this falls well within what I saw in the television show. Not something that I'm taking from elsewhere. There were 3 candidates for Dr. Manhattan's power. Joe Keene, Jr., who took the unfiltered power and died instantly. Lady Trieu who could have taken the power, but yes, perhaps it would have been a more corrupting power, given her predisposition for forceful gains. Then there was Angela, who at least had an idea of what it means to wield Manhattan's power. Angela had all of the behind-the-scenes knowledge that none of the others had.

    Outside of the show, however, I'd like to think that Angela fell into the pool. She did not walk on water. Therein was her first lesson.

    Otherwise, taking the original question from a psychological and historical perspective - applied to those who have had the most power in this world - it appears that we are corrupted in pockets, not as a whole. Nobody, not even Hitler, Stalin or Pol Pot, was 100% bereft of their humanity. I maintain that yes, the more power, the more potential for corruption, but that will vary per an individual's psychological makeup: the person's intrinsic weaknesses; my weaknesses may not be the same as yours.

    Therefore, instead of making a blanket statement, let's ask ourselves, what is it about Angela that are red flags for pitfalls? We only have a limited perspective of Angela's inner workings, but that she retains her grandfather's memories, her memories of her romance with Dr. Manhattan, her love for her children, and her strict sense of right and wrong as it pertains to the law and justice; we have a fair amount to work with. She's certainly a better option than Keene, Trieu, or Veidt. So, where could she fail us?
     
  5. Because Angela has heart and feels empathy. The other 2 displayed neither of these traits.
     
  6. RK2249

    RK2249 Forum Resident

    Location:
    South Jersey
    Where was it said that Angela received a distilled version of Dr. M? And, regardless of that answer, Dr. M learned his lesson in Vietnam that helping humanity is futile...human nature doesn't change. Also, Veidt and Trieu were clearly two characters that showed exactly what happens when altruistic people are given too much power...it corrupts you. So, again, why would M give some semblance of power to Angela at all knowing it's either futile or corruptible? Not to mention overwhelming. It's not like Angela is some saint. Then again, maybe the egg is a test for her, who knows?

    I'm not sure what your point of bringing up Pol Pot, Stalin, or Hitler was. That there is some humanity in them? Ok...so what? That absolute power only corrupts you 99% of the way? Ok, again, so what? The point is that power does corrupt... that's human nature.
     
  7. RK2249

    RK2249 Forum Resident

    Location:
    South Jersey
    We're all human...it would corrupt her eventually. Veidt and Trieu had heart...they both wanted to save the world
     
  8. I didn't see this demonstrated. What was their motivation for wanting to save the world? Humans are not all the same. Some get corrupted, others may not.
     
  9. RK2249

    RK2249 Forum Resident

    Location:
    South Jersey
    Veidt killed millions to save billions in the original Watchmen.
    Trieu stated her intention numerous times. Obviously she got off track along the way. She could've been lying but nothing seemed to indicate that.
     
  10. You didn’t answer my question: why did they want to save mankind? Because they cared about people? Or because they had the power and wanted the glory? I suspect the latter is their motivation.
     
  11. Chazro

    Chazro Forum Resident

    Location:
    West Palm Bch, Fl.
    Always fun to read all the 'theories' about what did happen, and what's going to happen. Of course I'm probably wrong but from all the times I read it and watched it, I always thought it obvious that Dr. Manhattan doesn't experience the passage of time as we do. ABCD, time passes in a linear manner from one moment to the next, FOR US! NOT for the Doc! If he knows what coming, always, he had to have known what was going to happen, and beyond! Next season will probably start with him dropping outta the sky, by the pool, in a loungechair!
     
    Chris DeVoe and EVOLVIST like this.
  12. Trieu heavily implied that the reason Keene was "popped like a grape," was because Manhattan's power had to filtered first. Trieu had the means to do that.

    Secondly, when Angela and Dr. Manhattan were sitting at the bar in Saigon, it was asked if "some" of his power could transferred. He said yes, whereupon it went into the whole egg routine.

    If he was certain that his powers could be transferred, then he obviously knew that the powers must be filtered, lest they pop Angela like a grape upon ingestion.

    Thus a "distilled version" of his powers.

    Again, the only way that Manhattan would know that she would step out onto the pool was if he was able to see that moment beyond his "death." Therefore, if he could see beyond his death, that means that he really didn't die in the mortal sense. Having placed a part of himself in the egg before he "died" means that at least a part of his consciousness remained, which could only be awakened by setting it free. Angela did this. Therefore, it stands to reason that a part of his consciousness now resides in Angela, and again, with that power we can presume the ability to see the consequences of her future actions, before acting on them. It's a built in failsafe.

    If Dr. Manhattan learned anything during Vietnam was he had failed humanity. He no longer possessed the empathy to make the right choices. We have to remember, though, that even in the middle of destroying all of those Vietnamese, he knew that his actions would result in meeting Angela in the bar...so he kept destroying them in order to get to that meeting. We also have to recall Dr. Manhattan's conversation with The Comedian in another bar (or was it the same bar?). It may serve us well to remember Dr. Manhattan's conversations with Laurie on Mars, where now we see in retrospect, that Laurie could never have been his vessel to reacquaint himself with humanity.

    While it's true that Angela is not a saint; it doesn't take a saint to meet the prerequisite of what Manhattan was looking for in a vessel. It only takes a strong moral backbone and the willingness to accept the responsibility - some connective tissue that will keep the stasis between foresight and forthright. That Angela accepted the responsibility is a testament to all of the above, but also the connection must be based on something stronger. Love. Oddly enough, this is the one human emotion that Dr. Manhattan retained, though it may not be love as you and I understand it. Manhattan loved Laurie, but it was in a world behind masks: one that was too political to allow Laurie to become Manhattan's proxy.

    I'll even take it a step further. If we do not allow for the symbiosis between Dr. Manhattan and Angela, to form a new type of superhero - one better geared to helping humanity from a humanitarian point of view - then this TV show had absolutely no point at all. It said nothing. It did nothing. It expounding upon bupkiss.
     
  13. bmoregnr

    bmoregnr Forum Rezident

    Location:
    1060 W. Addison
    I think the fact that nobody could ever be expected to reach any universal agreement on any one given definition of ethics, morals and power is exactly the point. That is the reality we face. To me it goes beyond just defining these things, but extends into how we could ever face our shared problems in the world; the fact is we don’t even share the problems equally the majority of the time.

    That is the genius of the text which to me the show completely understood; the most important thing is framing the question. It is the question after all that really matters most as you are never going to get any correct answer in this world in that there are so many versions of what correct is, an effect that seems to be multiplying if anything.

    I have to think some of the original text was about us questioning how we have come do define correct, how had Hollywood or the comics been defining it, what about the larger world? How many views can you take on the question, is it ok to kill 3 million people to save billions; ok let me show you some ways to view it. How about a few more questions on top of that doozy; I can do that too.

    A few things make me feel this way. The text points to our larger problems as the superheroes in the text didn’t really face villains in the present setting of the story; it wasn’t about the everyday of crimefighting as often traditionally in the comics, it was about the larger question the world faced at the time. It wasn’t a villain as stand in either, it was our own doing. There no doubt was a framework of past superheroes fighting crime and villains just like in the comics, but that was the past; in fact they were banned from fighting it anyway. We were given many different stand ins for moral and ethical viewpoints in how to look at and address right and wrong, how much wrong you would take to get a right etc. We are asked to question identity, time, fate; ethics and morals are divided into utilitarianism, egoism and the deontological. I am sure there is more and I am not claiming any authority on this, just it is pretty clear we are given far more tools to understand how you can view the questions now; to me the genius of the text, or how it struck me at the time anyway.

    I said earlier in the thread I felt we were being challenged in the text about our superheroes, but the same holds about how we expect them to use their powers. From there it does not seem too far of a stretch to having us question how we use our real powers in the world as societies where those superheroes were meant to be representative as stand ins for our powers… the creators of Superman origin story referenced recently if you will.

    Who Watches The Watchmen for sure, but Why Are We Watching The Watchmen Waiting For Them To Do Something And Are They The Ones With The Real Power Anyway? It is all too big to ponder of course and Dr. M is to me the perfect avatar for the question of exercising all the available powers available to us to make a stronger more loving world; in that the power can never be fully understood, agreed upon or resolved. He doesn’t do anything because we don’t do anything? He goes in and out of love and humanity because we do?

    Both the author and the show runner seem smart enough to know you can’t answer these large questions in any denoument. Better instead to find a new way to ask the question where the question itself points you in every, or at least far more than previously pointed, direction so that you begin to question the answers now rather than expecting any single answer Hollywood version or otherwise. Reality in other words.

    I personally don’t think it is an accident that the character that walks us through most of the setup is named Rorschach or that in the show his, I think most of us would agree, stand-in is Looking Glass who can detect lies from truth; to look at their eponym is to see a different answer per every viewer, or at a minimum a fairly wide array of viewer categories.

    It has been said that Laurie and Dreiberg take over in the middle of the text series representing the Everyman. There are some pages just before they visit Sally that jumped out at me as looking very much like the ending of the show— in that sense the second to the last movement in the text reversed in the show; two scenes by pools. To refresh anyone, Dr. M comes back inside after killing Rorschach and glances at Laurie and Dreiberg spooning naked by the pool, having just committed to only wanting love now that they are alive and smelling of Nostalgia. Dr. M walks across the pool.

    Here I think the author and the show runner differ slightly. I think the author states as the closing quote of the last chapter "It would be a stronger world, a stronger loving world, to die in.” and I think he believes it, or wants to believe it; but he strikes me, and apologies to him if I am misreading him, as being a little more pessimistic. I think we get from him a more open question of whether we can get there. Maybe Dr. M can create that world, maybe he can’t. We are of course left with an open question of the journal in the New Frontiersman slush pile, again returning to the question more than the answer.

    From an interview or two I’ve heard him in, I think, and apologies again if I am misreading him, the show runner is a little more committed to to concept that you have to keep hope and love center stage or you are lost in the face of these big questions. Again I think he honors the original text more than any Hollywood trope by keeping it enough of an open question, but to me he shows us love at the edge of the pool, love in who created the egg and love in accepting it along with everything unknown that comes with it. He wants it to be an open question in how he cut the scene, but from what I’ve come across he seems pretty clear that to him the water is walked upon. Whether that the power has been reframed by love and hopefulness through the experience of understanding I guess is the question every viewer will need to answer.

    I would ask the question, is the question really asking us if we believe that the power of our own collective humanity can ever be framed in a new form more suitable for our own next chapters? Can this power— whether you want to call that love, hope or anything else that makes a stronger loving world— that we more often than not turn to superheroes as stand ins to help us understand it— ever walk on the water as evidence of its existence? As to whether there is a believe that it will or won’t or whether it corrupts or ennobles, succeeds or fails or any number or other possible outcomes good, bad or indifferent, I leave it entirely in your hands.
     
    Last edited: Dec 23, 2019
    Mr. H, Chrome_Head, ad180 and 2 others like this.
  14. ConnieGuitar

    ConnieGuitar Here in my balloon...

    @bmoregnr - not that it matters but just need to say a big "thank you" for posts that have been as thought-provoking and integral to my personal takeaways and enjoyment of the series as the show itself. Lots of incredible contributions to this thread by many folks frankly, so along with all the well-deserved praise the series has garnered, it warrants just as much for the discussion it's provoked.

    Happy holidays, everyone...my Wednesday will be spent re-watching every minute. And fwiw, I came across my original issues of the series today so may go through them again just for - hrrumprh - Nostalgia's sake. :)
     
    vince, Chrome_Head and bmoregnr like this.
  15. bmoregnr

    bmoregnr Forum Rezident

    Location:
    1060 W. Addison
    Ah thanks very much @ConnieGuitar that is very nice to hear. Yours and a lot of others posts here have been great for me as well. It makes sense though given all the nice, thoughtful folks you meet and learn from elsewhere on the forum that we can tackle fun topics like this together as easily.
     
    vince and ConnieGuitar like this.
  16. bmoregnr

    bmoregnr Forum Rezident

    Location:
    1060 W. Addison
    I am not so sure I see it as corruption being the problem, but rather the core approach they would have used with the power they attained. In the case of the two you cite I have to believe they would be doing the same thing they had always planned to do with the power they acquired; the archetype each represents if you will. For Lady Trieu I suppose it is harder to say because we never saw her use it. So far on the one hand she had no problem zapping white supremacists, but then she pays good money and barter for neihboring farmland. I get your point that she was looking like a mad women there in the end, but again she strikes me as roughly the same driven type as her father, assured and unwavering in whatever archetype you want to view her. It would have been interesting to explore what she would have done with it and I concede there likely would have been some level of utilitarianism to it. If we expand this to other characters in the text not delved into in the show, I, right or wrong, don't think the main point was corruption of power, but again more so the archetype each represented for how it is used. This could be argued of course maybe The Comedian most or the Minutemen, but again I am of the view that the key is the facet of power use you are looking at more than it changing anyone-- which of course the maxim says it will.

    It is my opinion that Dr. M can on some level (the beauty is there are far more than a few levels to viewing it) be seen as representing the power in question itself. That it does not work out through Dr. M as the solution for all that could be accomplished with that power is because it represents exactly why we can't get anything to work out generally speaking by the nature of our condition. Sure you can be a fatalist or an optimist about it, I am fine either way; but the track record so far says this is still an open question.

    Is Angela a new archetype? A new archetype as introduced in the Watchmen world? Again here I think Lindeloff is a little more optimistic than Moore, but it was like he played Moore's song in a slightly brighter key on this point; it is still the same song. So to your point about this not turning out well, I can agree that if you follow my logic sure the archetype you would choose for Angela in and of itself is not going to be perfect, and I don't think Lindeloff and team were implying it would be, she was shown to be as much of a flawed character as about at least a few of the averagely flawed characters in the text. It is just hard for me to put my money that it would be corruption that would be the main issue in this narrative as it does not comport with how I see the story being structured. It is a nitpicking nuance I know, and of course corruption could occur if one wanted to go that way; again I just see it as representing a new facet to look at it within the realm of there never being a simple solution as that just isn't how this story is going to end.
     
    Last edited: Dec 24, 2019
  17. bmoregnr

    bmoregnr Forum Rezident

    Location:
    1060 W. Addison
    I mostly agree with your post but I think I come down a little differently on a few points; not that this is super critical to the story anyway mind you just a different take. On this Trieu said Keen popped like a grape because he didn't filter out the radiation. My take is Trieu was going to get the full power of Dr. M, she was just smart enough to know she couldn't take the radiation. Of course without the radiation what powers do you lose? Who knows, it probably isn't important, but I am going with, sure he could put the full power in the egg because he is Dr. M.

    This is an interesting point. I felt he was dead myself and like anyone carries anyone with them once they are lost to them, Angela would carry him in spirit and maybe that is a super spirit if you will, but I so far am not sure that he put himself or his consciousness in the egg versus simply his powers. Of course Veidt's machine couldn't kill him so it is likely Lady Trieu's wouldn't either. I am guessing then it is more down to whether or not he chose to rebuild himself or by extension stash himself in a tiny fragile escape pod to keep existing. I am not sure myself, but it does seem it could go your way. I don't necessarily think he needed to see past his death to know he needed to remind her that walking on water is a key litmus test she knows from their conversations represents his power. I guess I come down that it is more about a decision of trust than the failsafe you describe, but that is maybe just more about how I want to look at it as a leap of faith more than continuing on through the Dr. M determinism. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.
     
    Last edited: Dec 24, 2019
  18. Socrates

    Socrates Forum Resident

    Location:
    New England
    I finally got HBO again, and this is such a great series. It's both unnerving and thought provoking, in the way the series questions the nature of evil in our society, and how truly bad people can hideout under the guise of being pillars of society -- see Don Johnson's character. I've only seen the first couple of episodes, but I'm interested in catching up on the rest.

    I always thought Marvel comics had better writing than DC comics. But that's not always the case with their tv/movies adaptations. Any future 'Joker' movies might be interesting if Batman turns out to be corrupt, and the Joker ends up being the culture hero. That would be an interesting spin on an old story, but now I've gotta find a thread for that one.
     
  19. Chris DeVoe

    Chris DeVoe RIP Vickie Mapes Williams (aka Equipoise)

    Don't make that assumption. He may have been an entirely innocent man, as Angela realized to her horror.
     
  20. Socrates

    Socrates Forum Resident

    Location:
    New England
    Oh ok, I just started watching the series. I think it's the best thing that's been on tv for a while now.
     
    Chris DeVoe and EVOLVIST like this.
  21. Solitaire1

    Solitaire1 Carpenters Fan

    Jim B. wrote the following as part of a post:

    I haven't watched the Watchmen series but have read the original comic, seen the movie, and have read Doomsday Clock series (including the just-released last issue). To me, Dr. Manhattan's biggest limitation is that he exists on a rail.

    As was is shown in Watchmen, and is driven home even more strongly in Doomsday Clock (DC), is that he knows everything that has happened to him, what is happening to him now, and what will happen to him in the future. He can only do what he has done/will do, and he can't do anything else.

    One of the major issues in DC is that Dr. Manhattan knows that he will encounter Superman and either: (1) Superman will destroy him or (2) he will destroy the entire DC Universe. For all his power Dr. Manhattan can't prevent this from occurring and he can see nothing beyond that point.
     
  22. Chris DeVoe

    Chris DeVoe RIP Vickie Mapes Williams (aka Equipoise)

    I quoted that because Doctor Manhattan perceives time like the Tralfamadorians in Kurt Vonnegut's Slaughterhouse-Five. From the novel:

    The guide invited the crowd to imagine that they were looking across a desert at a mountain range on a day that was twinkling bright and clear. They could look at a peak or a bird or cloud, at a stone right in front of them, or even down into a canyon behind them. But among them was this poor Earthling, and his head was encased in a steel sphere which he could never take off. There was only one eyehole through which he could look, and welded to that eyehole were six feet of pipe.

    "This was only the beginning of Billy's miseries in the metaphor. He was also strapped to a steel lattice which was bolted to a flatcar on rails, and there was no way he could turn his head or touch the pipe. The far end of the pipe rested on a bi-pod which was also bolted to the flatcar. All Billy could see was the little dot at the end of the pipe. He didn't know he was on a flatcar, didn't even know there was anything peculiar about his situation.

    "The flatcar sometimes crept, sometimes went extremely fast, often stopped--went uphill, downhill, around curves, along straightaways. Whatever poor Billy saw through the pipe, he had no choice but to say to himself, 'That's life."
     
    Chrome_Head likes this.
  23. Chris DeVoe

    Chris DeVoe RIP Vickie Mapes Williams (aka Equipoise)

    I'm binging the series with my wife this weekend. She's not seen it. Very different experience now. Anyone else re-watched it?
     
  24. EddieMann

    EddieMann I used to be a king...

    Location:
    Geneva, IL. USA.
    I’ve watched it twice by myself (but like, the second viewing was after each first time episode) and was on week 3 with my loving and tolerant wife (her first time), but she left for California so I’ll have to wait on the rest.
    I got the original graphic novel for Christmas so I’ve been reading that.
     
    Chris DeVoe and Chrome_Head like this.
  25. Chrome_Head

    Chrome_Head Planetary Resident

    Location:
    Los Angeles, CA.
    First time reading it? Let us know your thoughts on it.
     
    EddieMann likes this.

Share This Page

molar-endocrine