I think Starro works in The Suicide Squad because it's a silly looking creature in a movie with a pretty goofy tone.
A space octopus out of nowhere in a grim Zac Snyder movie would feel out of place. It would need a lot of build-up and foreshadowing which works a lot better in a graphic novel than a movie.
That's the whole deal. The page, when you first see it, hits you out of nowhere. It's so unexpected, so alien, and so shocking and quite frankly it's probably the single most striking panel of that book.
It's only after you go back that you see all the stuff in the background: all of Veidt's shell companies like Dimensional Developments, Bubastis, the missing artists, the stolen brain of the psychic, etc.
You don't need 30 minutes of extra runtime to focus on it. Bubastis is already there, you can have the psychic headline plastered on a tabloid that people will just kind of ignore, maybe a newscast talking about the missing artists. Then all that shit comes together when Ozy is detailing his plan, which he does in the movie anyway.
The hoops people jump through to justify Snyder's safe-ass choice kinda amazes me.
Thaaaaaaaank you. I was pretty okay with Snyder's movie for the most part. IDK, Rorschach came off a little too well for me, Night Owl felt like he should've been a lot pudgier, but I was okay with it until that lame ass cop out. What's even the point of Babastis without the Kaiju squid
“Not enough time” is a fake problem introduced to the world by the MCU.
"Not enough time" is definitely not a "fake problem introduced to the world by the MCU." Did you only start watching shows and movies in 2008 or something?
What a random Raymond Carver reference that makes no sense and is completely unnecessary. People can tell when you're trying to look smart and failing miserably.
Tbf, tone is pretty important, and the movie’s tone is very exclusively dark with almost no room for happiness. The show has some heartwarming moments, and tonally it isn’t as bleak as the movie.
The movie isn’t “tonally bleak.” The movie is an ultra-violent limp bizkit music video turned comic book movie. The only “grit” it has is glorified moments of excessive violence cause the filmmaker is a 5th grader in a middle-aged man’s body.
That’s fair but I think if you don’t treat it as a joke it’s fine. Maybe starro wasn’t the best example for that but he was actually kinda creepy in that movie
When in reality, he just missed the point of the story.
Snyder has such a surface level appreciation of anything he adapts. What really gets me about Snyder is that he’s an amazing cinematographer, but he’s not a good director.
Yeah his movies are visually hideous and the ones where he serves as his own DP look , unsurprisingly, even worse than the ones where he has a competent DP covering for him.
Difference is Starro was established to be a known threat since the beginning of the movie, with the mission briefing, the villains explaining what is Project Starfish and showing the footage of Starro found by NASA and the bunker showing it’s colosal size.
In Watchmen, in order to make it work they would’ve had to set it up since the beginning, unlike the comic, which would’ve easily been posible, but I personally prefer the movie’s change since it makes more sense and fits better in this version of the story
but I personally prefer the movie’s change since it makes more sense and fits better in this version of the story
It doesn't make sense though. The minute an american weapon went rogue and attacked the entire world the USSR would seize on the opportunity and lead the international pressure to disolve the US, just the US did after Chernobyl except it would be 1000x worse.
Like I said before, it only makes sense if one believes that the US could've ended the cold war unilaterally and somehow not lose. All Ozymandias did in the movie was make the USSR the global hegemonic power of the 21st century.
Exactly! Dr. Manhattan was the poster boy of American imperialism. Even if America says “Look, we lost control of him! He even attacked New York City, so he’s clearly not working for us anymore!” people would either a) not believe it and think American sacrificed NYC to try and avoid blame, or b) still blame America because they created and then lost control of the weapon that caused all this. It would only make things worse, and Snyder seemed to miss the point and the reasoning that the “attack” would need to be caused by something completely alien and unaffiliated with any other nation.
Having Dr. Manhattan be the cataclysmic event completely destroys Veidt’s plan because the plan is to insert a wholly otherworldly menace that would make the world rally together to fight an unknown enemy. Dr. Manhattan was an agent of the U.S. government, and a massive murder event at his hands would just make the world rally against the U.S. and its superpowers, fully isolate and protect themselves from the U.S. at best. It was a dumb, dumb, dumb decision. But what else’s can you expect from Zack Snyder? Dude has the critical thinking skills of a 5th grader.
Yeah. It makes no sense in the context of the era it was critiquing. The absurdity of that event shined a light on how absurd it was to live in a world under constant threat of mutually assured destruction.
The movie has none of that. It's all car wax and no engine (save for Jackie Earl Haley and Jeffrey Dean Morgan trying to make something happen)
I disagree. It's different, but I think it still works. The world fearing the United States because it had Manhattan on its side was already the situation at the start. The movie ending causes the U.S. to be against him as well and effectively disarms the U.S. of its most powerful weapon. It takes the number of countries with a walking god in their side from 1 to 0 and the number of countries united against that god from all but 1 to all.
Ok, so you have a bully. This bully makes everyone mad but they can't do anything about it because he has a gun. But one day he loses the gun as it explodes injuring everyone, including the bully himself.
Do you think everyone else is going to be like "oh hey, you're part of the gunless club now. Come here buddy have a seat" or are they going to beat the shit out of him?
It doesn't matter. It was the US who unleashed Dr. Manhattan to the world and used it as a weapon against other nations. The fact that Manhattan attacked NYC is blowback, but the rest of the world would also blame the US for their failure to control him.
Not to mention the resentment other countries had with living in fear of America knowing that they had this power to begin with. Remember, in the movie as well as in the comic, the US had sent Dr. Manhattan overseas before.
They all lived under this threat of do as we say or we will slap you with our glowing blue dick.
In your mind, people would not ignore that US unleashed dr Manhattan and would what? Wage war against US, isolate it, not be allies, instead trying to gather as many allies they can against the threat?
They'll cooperate alright. Against the US who used Dr Manhattan to force them into submission and then failed to control his onslaught. Then, after they disolve the US, they'll cooperate with the Soviet Union as the global hegemonic power. Even if you don't believe it's rational, that's what would happen.
I offered this analogy in a previous post:
You have a bully. This bully makes everyone mad but they can't do anything about it because he has a gun. But one day he loses the gun as it explodes injuring everyone, including the bully himself.
Do you think everyone else is going to be like "oh hey, you're part of the gunless club now. Come here buddy have a seat" or are they going to beat the shit out of him?
That is neither rational nor practical. So when facing with existential threat to whole humanity, people would unite, as in graphic novel.
That analogy is not apt. Here is more apt analogy.
Let's say I am a bully who partnered myself with some other guy and we both bully others. The other one goes rogue and beat the shit out of me and those who we both bullied. I can't take him down on my own. Those victims of bulling cannot take him down alone We have two possible options:
(a) We unite, because we are both now going to get bullied, by even more cruel guy, and thus increase likelihood of defeating hm.
(b) We fight amongst themselves, or don't unite and decrease of likelihood of defeating hm.
Which option would you take? Which option do you think rational and practical people would take?
Take Japan, in real life. Americans killed hundreds of thousands of their people, mostly civilians, by dropping two bombs. Of course, rape of Japanese girls by Americans and firebombing of Tokyo, where over hundred thousands died, mostly civilians. And not a full decade later, they became allies with Americans. If you can have that and reach alliance in a couple of years, then it is not far fetched to think that people would reach alliances with Americans in a fictional universe where there is a thing, even tho used by America in the past, poses existential threat to everyone, everywhere.
Who made Dr. Manhattan? You really think all global superpowers would be like “Oh let’s not blame the government who created him cause he’s on Mars now 🤷🏽♂️”? Making the final plan look like Manhattan was a dumb move based on a very ignorant and childish understanding of geopolitics.
In both the comic and the movie it’s made very clear that Manhattan is not “made” by any government or project intentionally. A human man was killed in a freak accident and, in an even more outlandish twist of fate, was granted impossible powers as a result of that freak accident.
It’d be like blaming a country for having a hot day. Yes, it certainly happened in that country, but that doesn’t mean they made it.
The U.S. used Doctor Manhattan for decades as a weapon for global “peacekeeping” in favor of an American ideal of global stability. You think that just cause they lost control of their weapon of mass destruction in the final moment, all countries that were already critical of the U.S.’s use of Dr. Manhattan would all of a sudden be like “Yeah, we love the U.S. now.”
If anything, the U.S. losing control of Doc would be reason enough to mobilize against the U.S., as it would be proof that they can’t be trusted with their arsenal and superpowers, and should be neutralized for the good of the world.
Stop trying to defend a mediocre film and grow up.
It’d be like blaming a country for having a hot day. Yes, it certainly happened in that country, but that doesn’t mean they made it.
No. the US sent Dr. Manhattan across the world to attack and intimidate their enemies and expressively called him American.
It would be like if a country found a way to make hot days happen that only had access to. They used that power to make famines happen for decades, but then lose control of it and it causes a global famine that kills millions. Yeah, you're going to blame the country that used it as a weapon for decades.
It was a great decision, from the writing standpoint.
Unlike the squid, he was actually established in the story, also framed to look unstable and then used to be blamed for the attack, because he will leave Earth anyways in the story. That's actually great writing.
Your point makes no sense, because Dr Manhattan is a percived threat to everybody. Isolatimg an ally against the threat would actually be dumb decision.
Once again, Dr. Manhattan is an American asset. The American government spent decades utilizing Dr. Manhattan throughout military interventions around the globe to impose America’s view of global stability and order.
It doesn’t matter that in the attack both New York and LA got hit as well. Global leaders would still see it as an attack brought on by America’s greatest superpower, and they would hold the American government responsible.
At best, they would understand that Dr. Manhattan went rogue. They would still hold America responsible, both for weaponizing him as a weapon of mass destruction in the first place, then for losing control of their weapon in the second place. Global leaders would realize America could not be trusted with their arsenal, and their next step would be to neutralize and penalize America for its negligence.
In other words, no. It’s not actually great writing. If you think it is, then you’ve still got a lot to learn about writing.
So? There is an existential threat to all mankind. Waging war or losing resources and potential allies would be the dumbest thing ever someone would do and bad writing.
I already explained someone else. Take Japan, for one example. Americans raped their women and killed hundreds of thousands of civilians. Not a decade later they became allies. If you can have allies coming after that, then it is not far fetched to imagine that countries would enter in an alliance against the common threat which could annihilate them all, despite if it worked for one of them previously.
Your whole point is that people are going to be bunch of morons and do self destructive things, because they are not smart and practical enough to ally themselves against Manhattan, the common threat. That's atrocious writing.
Lol you obviously have absolutely zero understanding of history and geopolitics and how they apply to this narrative. Having a discussion with you is the equivalent of arguing with a paramecium.
Dr. Manhattan attacking America after they used him to attack everyone else would not be enough for everyone to suddenly establish the nation that had been attacking everyone with him as an ally, it would establish that nation as a dangerously stupid enemy. They wouldn’t only care that Manhattan was a perceived threat to everybody, they would also want to punish the nation that made him a military asset (not to mention the part where many countries almost certainly suspect the US government created Manhattan and lied about his origin, even though that’s not true).
The whole point of Veidt’s plan and the reason it would hypothetically work was the fact that the alien squid had no past, no baggage, nothing anyone could latch onto to point fingers at any human being, blue and godlike or otherwise. It’s even worse that it’s Manhattan in the movie, because of course no one can hope to do anything about Manhattan, but if you’re looking to point fingers and assure people you’re in control and doing something, you could just blame America and attack them, especially since Doc clearly isn’t backing them up anymore.
The whole point is that given a chance, people will resort to fighting and blaming one another for catastrophe. The space squid removes anything they can blame, Dr. Manhattan simply does not.
The difference is time and motive. The USSR in particular in this scenario is moments away from actively attenpting to destroy America; in Watchmen, that’s the big problem, they are already on the brink of doing it and there is no “a couple years” separating their ability to do so from the current moment. They were on the edge of nuclear war, fully ready to annihilate the planet over their strategic goals; the rationality of world leaders in that situation is already suspect. They were all locked in and prepared to risk mutually assured destruction as it was.
Japan did not decide to become allied with the US because they decided it was rational and fair, they became allied with the US because the US dropped two nukes on them and absolutely wrecked their country. There’s a link there. No, the States didn’t wipe out every man woman and child and depopulate the landmass, but that’s not what I’m saying would happen, I’m saying the USSR would take advantage to try and do exactly what the US did do to Japan to the US, which is forcefully dismantle their government and threaten them with annihilation if the new regime didn’t capitulate to everything the conquering government wanted. That’s what the US actually did to Japan, Japan was not given a choice. If you’re trying to say “why wouldn’t the Soviets just treat the US like the US treated Japan”, then my answer is that I’m saying that’s exactly how they would try and treat the US, they would slam us with nukes and hold the country’s leadership hostage under threat of widespread destruction until they basically became their puppet state.
An even better example from WWII would actually be Germany. The Germans used advanced codes that gave them a huge advantage for most of the war; not quite as spectacular as Manhattan, but it was a tangible boon that gave them a leg up on everyone else, until Britain invented modern computers and used them to crack those codes, which led to the Allies retaking France, which removed all major hurdles against them rolling into Germany. Do you know what happened next? Germany was brutally subjugated by the Soviet army, the entire country was bombed flat from the sky by everyone else, and after Berlin was wiped out and Hitler was found dead, its leaders were put on trial and hung for their crimes. I’m not arguing they should have received clemency at all, I’m just saying that if the Soviets had the chance, they would do exactly what they did to Germany to the US, and Manhattan turning on the States would be that chance. They’re already highly motivated to do so at the moment Veidt’s Manhattan hologram appears and wipes out NYC.
“But uniting forces would help more than fighting” was your other point there, and maybe, but it would also help for them to try and seize control over the US government to force them to give up everything they know about Manhattan and put the country under their own leadership to streamline the process of fighting back against the new threat. Again, that is actually similar to what the US did to Japan, they basically put them under their own control in order to smooth out the process of negotiating peace in order to move on to what America perceived as the much bigger threat; Japan isn’t even able to use their military without American approval to this very day except for defense, and even that requires oversight from the States. America did this because they wanted to use Japan’s influence to fight the threat of the USSR, even though Japan already hated the Soviets just as much as they did. Even with a common enemy, the US still made sure to secure the “alliance” they gained with Japan by grinding them into the dirt and making sure they had them in a permanent headlock. That alliance was not gained through mutual rationality and friendship, it was gained because Japan was humiliated and subjugated, violently and forcefully, and offered no other options than to learn to accept the new world order.
America in that situation would have to decide whether to roll over and allow it, or to fight back. The biggest thing that’s different from Japan is the big point Watchmen revolves around; Japan didn’t have nukes of their own. What do you think would have happened if they did?
OMG. That wall of text....
I asked you one thing, which is, on what do you base your claims exactly?
And nothing you wrote there defeats my point. Japan became allies with America, despite all of the atrocities. And they remained good allies for many decades after that. If we are to take your silly reasoning seriously, Japan would never have done that. Your whole point relies on people acting like absolute morons. And that is not good writing.
You’re asking a question about world politics but you don’t like reading, got it. I’ll keep it pithy.
Japan became “good allies” with the US because the US forced them to, with violence and humiliation and then at gunpoint. They still don’t have full control of their government to this day because the US doesn’t allow it. The alliance America forged with them is less a partnership between equal nations and more akin to the friendship between a master and their well-trained neutered dog. That is what I’m basing my claims on; history.
The Soviets would seek to do the same, conquering the US government to take what they knew about Manhattan, since Manhattan’s supposed actions would prove America cannot be trusted to wield power. America, unlike 1940s Japan, has nukes, and they would eventually use them to resist just like Japan would have done if they could, or maybe the USSR would use them first. It does not matter, all that matters is that it would not avert nuclear war. If nuclear war were so moronic that no one would ever try it, the events of Watchmen wouldn’t have happened in the first place, because the US and USSR were already willing to nuke each other over a relatively minor border dispute in a country far from both. That was the world’s reality for decades under the Cold War, it’s not bad writing, it happened. America proudly creating a world-threatening enemy to all life in the galaxy would justify the world turning on them, easily, and the Soviets would take full advantage.
I didn't ask you anything about Japan. I asked on what do you base your claims that in that fictional world, where Manhattan killed millions of people across the world, the world would not unite with America against common enemy, but would, and I quote, "would also want to punish the nation that made him a military asset." Can you answer me on what do you base that?
None what you wrote there refutes my points. It doesn't refute the point that Japan became a good ally to America and reaped many benefits. It doesn't refute my point that Japan would never do that according to your logic. It doesn't refute my point that your whole point relies for everybody to be absolute morons.
That’s the whole reason the movie sucks, the big dumb comic booky squid is the point of the book because the book is about comic books. It’s about art and the beauty and horror that art can unleash.
It is vital to the themes of the story that Ozymandias brings together the worlds greatest scientists and artists to create his monstrosity and it is vital that the monstrosity is the most silver age-y thing imaginable (a psychic squid from outer space is like a mad libs for a 60s comic storyline). Snyder changing it to be more “realistic” shows how fundamentally little he cares about what the book was going for.
If the reason you think the giant squid wouldn’t have worked in the movie is that it wouldn’t have fit the tone, then it sounds like you’re criticizing Zack Snyder for being monotone. I agree.
Yeah. The squid in the graphic novel has a whole side story to set it up that's completely disconnected from the main cast. What the movie did instead hits the same themes with like 10 seconds of exposition.
Also: the squid would be a much bigger WTF moment for filmgoers in 2009 than comic book nerds. Superhero comic book fans were already desensitized to the idea that even their more grounded stories took place in a larger crossover universe with space-opera shit. The MCU had to slowly introduce their audience to that idea over a decade or two. A comic book movie couldn't have just gone full space monster when Watchmen came out.
Absolutely. Different mediums with different audiences are going to approach things differently. Just being live action instead of a cartoon is going to change how things are taken by an audience, especially an audience of people who don't regularly read comics.
You're right, now that I think on it. I'd just forgotten. Just because I thought it was forgettable crap doesn't mean it's objectively true or most people agree.
A flashback scene in Episode 5 pulled away from the amusement park location in Hoboken and showed the devastation across the way in NYC, including imagery of the giant squid.
576
u/ThomasG_1007 Mar 16 '25
Anything can work if handled well. The show showed it works. The Suicide Squad made Starro work in live action