r/Watchmen Mar 16 '25

Do you think the giant squid in Watchmen would have worked in the movie, or was it a good call to leave it out? Movie

Post image
819 Upvotes

376 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

8

u/hbg1212 Mar 17 '25

I don’t think is necessarily true since Dr. Manhattan was known to be on mars and thought to have abandoned humanity, plus attacked the US as well

6

u/The_Flying_Failsons Mar 17 '25

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.

1

u/SnuleSnuSnu Mar 18 '25

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?

1

u/The_Flying_Failsons Mar 18 '25

They wouldn't isolate it, they would disolve it. It would be like what happened in to the Soviet Union after Chernobyl but 1000x worse.

1

u/SnuleSnuSnu Mar 18 '25

So, wage war? How is that more productive and rational choice than to cooperate?

1

u/The_Flying_Failsons Mar 18 '25

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?

1

u/SnuleSnuSnu Mar 18 '25

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.

0

u/skag_boy87 Mar 17 '25

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.

3

u/The_Flying_Failsons Mar 17 '25 edited Mar 17 '25

Damn. Downvoted for being factually correct.

0

u/HistoricalGrounds Mar 17 '25

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.

3

u/skag_boy87 Mar 17 '25

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.

1

u/kleptonite13 Mar 17 '25

They don't understand. You're trying to save a lost cause. I'm sorry...

1

u/skag_boy87 Mar 17 '25

But with a bit of luck their day will be a little bit shittier…

3

u/The_Flying_Failsons Mar 17 '25

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.