![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
puinaThese are my thoughts on yaoi Watchmen.
A little over 10 days to go for the Director's Cut release and I am way too excited about it, especially now that I have seen how a lot of the stuff that was missing might be included- this will make it the best movie ever. Unquestionable.
Hollis' death and Dan's reaction are a shoe-in, thankfully. I love that scene with Dan's reaction, because he had always been in control of his emotions up until then, but he completely loses it when he is confronted with a direct tragedy. Even if he had always been out there seeing injustice and death (which could have desensitized him) this wasn't some random person off the streets, it was his friend and mentor and someone he knew very well and cared for deeply. I do believe that in the theatrical cut of the movie they still achieved a sense of it by having him cry out like he did after Manhattan killed Rorschach. That is something I would have loved to see in the graphic novel because it means that Rorschach’s death mattered to someone, and he finally had someone to mourn him. Alan Moore didn’t give him that.
And speaking of that crazy redhead, he finally gets to be the voice of reason for once. Not only does he stop Dan -who has been merrily pounding on some random Knot Top- but he tries to comfort him.
Still, both these scenes, as much as I like them, are deeply tied to the scene with Walter's landlady- or at least they are to me.
The scene with his landlady… It’s a favorite for most people; even Jackie asked to film it (and he would have killed in it!) and in it he, as Kovacs, shows mercy for this woman who had slandered him, and accused him of doing some really bad things. That panel in which he looks over at the kids, it has to be one of the most significant panels in the comic. His expression is incredible, and Gibbons even drew his facial features in a much softer way. He looks different than he does at the beginning (or at least when the mask first comes off)
Before they even go into his apartment, he tells Dan:
“Some of us have always lived on edge, Daniel. It is possible to survive there if you observe rules. Just hang on by fingernails and never look down”.
As I see it, this is him acknowledging that all of his actions, his detachment from society (and humanity, since he tries to block out every and any kind of feelings) are nothing more than a survival mechanism. One that he has been using for a very long time, but that he is still aware of. And this, I think, is an argument against the theory that he is literally insane. He obviously doesn’t have a split personality because he knows the difference between Rorschach and Walter Kovacs. That is already a sort of breakthrough (maybe Dr. Long got to him? Or just by opening up and telling the story it made him see it differently?)
The bad thing about not having that scene in the movie is that Rorschach loses a lot of dimension because of it. Dan makes up for his “always being in control” issue when he snaps at Rorschach and when he cries for him. But Rorschach lost some much needed depth.
Now, I realize that having that scene meant that he had to kill Big Figure as Walter Kovacs and not as Rorschach (another interesting point from the novel) and having to add extra scenes that they didn’t have time for. Although, having him in costume at all times while interacting with the other “superheroes” creates more of a mystery. It also sets the tone for their relationship: he has always been his “alternate personality” (to call it something) and never Walter Kovacs- even if that is reversed for him. And this way at the end, when he takes off his mask before Doctor Manhattan, when he’s trying to keep the man he is upfront (paraphrasing Alan Moore there) that reveal is more shocking. It gives that gesture a bigger meaning.
I noticed that all through these scenes, after he breaks out of prison, the stains on his clothes are very similar to the blood stains he got after killing Gerard Grice’s dogs. It’s similar when he’s wearing the wife beater and I’m sure it’s pretty much exactly the same when he puts on the trench coat- if it’s not the same coat. And these are too events in his life that show a “change” in him. When he kills Grice he takes the final step towards transforming into Rorschach, and when he comes face to face with his landlady he is forced to stand down and put his sense of justice and morality aside for the sake of those kids. He identifies with them, like he did with Blair Roche “Thought of little child, abused, frightened. Didn’t like it. Personal reasons.”
It is directly after this scene that he tells Dan he is “a good friend” and they then have that awkward hand shake that everyone loves. That, paired with the next instances in which he both takes the lead as the voice of reason, commanding Archie (even for a little a while) and trying to comfort Dan, I think it shows that maybe he could have been set up for a little change. And that’s what makes his death even sadder.
A little over 10 days to go for the Director's Cut release and I am way too excited about it, especially now that I have seen how a lot of the stuff that was missing might be included- this will make it the best movie ever. Unquestionable.
Hollis' death and Dan's reaction are a shoe-in, thankfully. I love that scene with Dan's reaction, because he had always been in control of his emotions up until then, but he completely loses it when he is confronted with a direct tragedy. Even if he had always been out there seeing injustice and death (which could have desensitized him) this wasn't some random person off the streets, it was his friend and mentor and someone he knew very well and cared for deeply. I do believe that in the theatrical cut of the movie they still achieved a sense of it by having him cry out like he did after Manhattan killed Rorschach. That is something I would have loved to see in the graphic novel because it means that Rorschach’s death mattered to someone, and he finally had someone to mourn him. Alan Moore didn’t give him that.
And speaking of that crazy redhead, he finally gets to be the voice of reason for once. Not only does he stop Dan -who has been merrily pounding on some random Knot Top- but he tries to comfort him.
R: “Merely suggesting that by finding mask killer can have revenge for Mason’s death. Meant to comfort you”
D: “Who in their right mind could take comfort from… Yeah, okay. Thanks Rorschach. Really, thank you.”
R: “You’re welcome”
Now this has to be one of the main reasons why he seems to be everyone's favorite character. It's not because he's sexy or such a bamf or cool, it's because he's so complex. Even after everything he has gone through, after living the way he has, he can still pull out his softer and more human side, one that had been hidden under the mask repressed for so long, to comfort his only friend.Still, both these scenes, as much as I like them, are deeply tied to the scene with Walter's landlady- or at least they are to me.
The scene with his landlady… It’s a favorite for most people; even Jackie asked to film it (and he would have killed in it!) and in it he, as Kovacs, shows mercy for this woman who had slandered him, and accused him of doing some really bad things. That panel in which he looks over at the kids, it has to be one of the most significant panels in the comic. His expression is incredible, and Gibbons even drew his facial features in a much softer way. He looks different than he does at the beginning (or at least when the mask first comes off)
Before they even go into his apartment, he tells Dan:
“Some of us have always lived on edge, Daniel. It is possible to survive there if you observe rules. Just hang on by fingernails and never look down”.
As I see it, this is him acknowledging that all of his actions, his detachment from society (and humanity, since he tries to block out every and any kind of feelings) are nothing more than a survival mechanism. One that he has been using for a very long time, but that he is still aware of. And this, I think, is an argument against the theory that he is literally insane. He obviously doesn’t have a split personality because he knows the difference between Rorschach and Walter Kovacs. That is already a sort of breakthrough (maybe Dr. Long got to him? Or just by opening up and telling the story it made him see it differently?)
The bad thing about not having that scene in the movie is that Rorschach loses a lot of dimension because of it. Dan makes up for his “always being in control” issue when he snaps at Rorschach and when he cries for him. But Rorschach lost some much needed depth.
Now, I realize that having that scene meant that he had to kill Big Figure as Walter Kovacs and not as Rorschach (another interesting point from the novel) and having to add extra scenes that they didn’t have time for. Although, having him in costume at all times while interacting with the other “superheroes” creates more of a mystery. It also sets the tone for their relationship: he has always been his “alternate personality” (to call it something) and never Walter Kovacs- even if that is reversed for him. And this way at the end, when he takes off his mask before Doctor Manhattan, when he’s trying to keep the man he is upfront (paraphrasing Alan Moore there) that reveal is more shocking. It gives that gesture a bigger meaning.
I noticed that all through these scenes, after he breaks out of prison, the stains on his clothes are very similar to the blood stains he got after killing Gerard Grice’s dogs. It’s similar when he’s wearing the wife beater and I’m sure it’s pretty much exactly the same when he puts on the trench coat- if it’s not the same coat. And these are too events in his life that show a “change” in him. When he kills Grice he takes the final step towards transforming into Rorschach, and when he comes face to face with his landlady he is forced to stand down and put his sense of justice and morality aside for the sake of those kids. He identifies with them, like he did with Blair Roche “Thought of little child, abused, frightened. Didn’t like it. Personal reasons.”
It is directly after this scene that he tells Dan he is “a good friend” and they then have that awkward hand shake that everyone loves. That, paired with the next instances in which he both takes the lead as the voice of reason, commanding Archie (even for a little a while) and trying to comfort Dan, I think it shows that maybe he could have been set up for a little change. And that’s what makes his death even sadder.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2009-07-08 03:58 pm (UTC)For some reason, it makes me smile and sad when Rorschach tells Dan, 'You're welcome.' And I can't suss out why specifically. It's just... his friend said thank you, and he said 'you're welcome.' It's such a simple, human response.
Everything you said is right. & I will always mourn that missing scene.
AND AND you get a million points for agreeing with my crazed fixation that in the GN NOBODY MOURNED RORSCHACH. Not even Dan, which made mr ereally resent him in the comic, and I didn't WANT TO, but how does he not NOTICE that Rorschach is MISSING and there is exploded person outside?
I just wanted one person in the damn GN to really miss him, to remember him as a guy who tried to do right, albeit in an unorthodox way.
Wow. Long comment. Where's my cookie?!
no subject
Date: 2009-07-08 04:19 pm (UTC)And I think I love you for reading all of that! Here are your cookies!
GN not included.
no subject
Date: 2009-07-08 06:03 pm (UTC)I would give just about anything to have gotten that scene with Walter & his landlady. It's just so powerful, and Jackie would have just blown us all away. The look on his face breaks my heart every single time. You can tell he feels for the kids, how he's been there before, and I think part of the reason he shows mercy to the lady is because he doesn't want to have a hand in making those kids more like him. Every time I look at that panel, my heart breaks a little more and I get teary.
One thing I just thought of is the interesting dichotomy between two scenes that in the movie, one that was already there & one that will be in the DC. The first is when Dan finds out about Hollis' murder, and the second is when he witnesses Rorschach's death.
I'm not sure if you've seen the B-Reel version of the first screen (I saw it on YouTube a couple of months ago), but like in the comic, Dan flips, starts to beat the hell out of the punk and it takes Rorschach pulling him off to bring him back to his senses.
We get much the same situation in the second scene. Dan goes back into Karnack & just beats the hell out of Ozymandias, but this time, there's no Rorschach to stop him, but he does stop.
It kind of strikes me, the similarities between the two scenes & how Dan deals with his friends' deaths. He's always this mild-mannered type, but the losses drive him over the edge.
I'm not sure if I'm making sense or if I'm just rambling, lol, so I'll stop there for now. :-)
no subject
Date: 2009-07-08 06:20 pm (UTC)Thank you for reading my insane rambling XD Have a Rorschach for your trouble:
no subject
Date: 2009-07-08 06:10 pm (UTC)TOTALLY agree with this! It's the one thing I don't like about the novel {aside from the weird ending, but it works in the space of the novel, so obviously I can deal with it}. He and Dan were partners for years, and obviously friends of a sort, as much as anyone could be friends with Rorschach, and the fact that he didn't seem to care that Rorschach had died was just...really unlike Dan. You'd think he would have been in some sort of despair or at least shown SOME emotion.
I think that's another reason why I liked the ending of the movie so much. Because at least someone aside from Dr. Manhattan was there at the end.
And if I keep talking too much about this, I'll end up repeating myself.
no subject
Date: 2009-07-08 06:24 pm (UTC)I know Rorschach is a troubled character and maybe dying alone is more befitting of him, but I just can't bring myself to accept that. I think at least his one friend should be upset because he only ever tried to do the right thing even if that meant taking some questionable measures.
no subject
Date: 2009-07-08 07:58 pm (UTC)Also, I do think Zack Handled a few things better then in the GN...but that's just me.
Dang Ror...I think he's one of the few people who I am scared of, yet I wanna cuddle...AND I think he's canonly a closet homo. >_>;; Please don't kill me... I think the homo bit mainly cause his complete diacknowlagement of sex and his hatred for it. ALSO he seem's to resent gay people, people who resent these sort of things more then often have homosexual feelings themselves. They think that if they show hatred for them It'll go away. maybe theres some jealousy there as well.
I'll shut up now. >w>;;
no subject
Date: 2009-07-08 08:10 pm (UTC)Also, I do think Zack Handled a few things better then in the GN...but that's just me.
XD Not just you, I really liked all the changes he made. I think that not only did they work infinitely better for the movie, but they gave the story some more interesting points.
I can see what you mean about him being homosexual, that it's usually people who have deep rooted feelings of resentment because they hate to see that in themselves. But somehow I could never bring myself to see it in him. Not that it would be a bad thing, far from it. But I guess I can't see him, in all his broken glory, developing his sexuality enough to even have a specific orientation. I know it probably doesn't make any sense. In any case, if he was, I don't see him coming to terms with it, not the way he was presented in the GN.
But I see what you mean. :)
no subject
Date: 2009-07-08 08:56 pm (UTC)*Shrugs* Thats just what I think. I don't think he'd actually have the curage to do anything about it or even understand it, but I think the feelings are there. I PERSONALLY IMHO think that Rorschach does in fact have a sexuality (I think we all do in a way), It's just VERY under developed. Everyone has an oriantation, there are just very few people who really understand that orientaion.
But whatever, I'm just rambleing again. xD
no subject
Date: 2009-07-08 09:28 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-07-09 12:10 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-07-09 03:36 am (UTC)Regarding all the GN scenes we lost in the movie: I've seen a few fans complain that JEH played Rorschach as "too emotional" in the movie. His Rorschach definitely had apparent emotions, and I think they would have preferred him to come across as cooler and more monotone. The thing is, we don't get to spend as much time with Rorschach in the movie as we did in the GN. So the landlady scene, his multiple visits to Dan, and other more subtle elements of his story are lost. Those are some of the scenes that reveal to the reader that Rorschach isn't, in fact, completely emotionless and detached. Without those scenes, you run the risk of showing the audience an incomplete Rorschach; without the vulnerabilities, they can't see who he really is.
But JEH compensates by showing you Rorschach's vulnerabilities in his performance. Rorschach's true nature could have been lost in the film, but because of JEH's approach, it wasn't.
no subject
Date: 2009-07-09 01:14 pm (UTC)I'm glad I'm not the only one, too. It took me about 5 reads to be sure that's what I was getting from it, and as silly as it is, it may have been the raincoat thing that sealed the deal. Yeah, maybe it's a coincidence, but are there really any trivial coincidences in the GN? I don't know, I think there are all these tiny leads pointing to it. Maybe it's just us...
I hadn't heard anyone complain about Jackie playing Rorschach too emotional, but I agree completely with what you said. I think people who are fans of Watchmen and couldn't appreciate the movie just couldn't understand that such a huge change in medium requires changes to work.
Здрасте
Date: 2010-11-12 11:59 pm (UTC)Благодарю за статью
Date: 2011-06-08 09:53 am (UTC)Хороший блог!
Date: 2011-07-05 05:28 am (UTC)Отличный блог!
Date: 2011-07-09 03:31 pm (UTC)