10 ms·

>While it's great to understand the psychology behind the characters, this knowledge doesn't really make the movie or knowledge that much better. Disagree with

>While it's great to understand the psychology behind the characters, this knowledge doesn't really make the movie or knowledge that much better. Disagree with this so much. Knowing the depth and psychology of the characters is what makes the Watchman so much more interesting than say Superman or even my favorite superhero, Batman. Watchmen is very open and honest about the fact that people who would do this are probably riddled with psychological issues. I also like the subtle suggestion the book makes that most superheroes would fall onto the reactionary side of conservatism. I doubt there would be many incredibly liberal people out there taking the law into their own hands, but for some reazon the first time I noticed this mentioned was in Watchmen. Just a brilliantly written story with incredibly deep and realistic characters.

ctdonath 14y ago
Indeed, it does improve the story by not just leaving you with a niggling sense that something is wrong with each character, but instead opens the realization that each is, in fact, a textbook-perfect example of that wrongness - dissected, analyzed, quantified and classified as such. It's a great improvement for those of us hyperanalytical geeks now inclined to re-watch the 4-hour director's cut with the DSM IV list in hand and finding every instance where each defining point is exemplified. (And then go meta by wondering where in the DSM IV such a hyperanalytical geek is so categorized.)
- derleth 14y ago
  > where in the DSM IV such a hyperanalytical geek is so categorized I think we're often put under Asperger Syndrome (AS) (also called Asperger Disorder, Asperger's Syndrome, ass-burgers, and My God He's A Weirdo), which falls under either Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) or Pervasive Developmental Disorder (PDD). AS is often considered to overlap with High-Functioning Autism (ASD without mental retardation) and, in fact, a change being considered for DSM-V would eliminate AS entirely and lump us in under ASD, which would be rated on a severity scale. That said, the diagnostic criteria for all of those diagnoses are a bit more involved than 'is a hyperanalytical geek'.
enmaku 14y ago
Point taken. That last bit was just my personal opinion - I'd rather enjoy the suspension of disbelief than analyze every action in-depth, but that's just me. If this article gave you greater enjoyment of the movie then that makes me a very happy camper.
johnchristopher 14y ago
To me, the whole point of the movie is: "The end doesn't justify the means and when someones tells you so it certainly means you are heading for fascism". Characters are "interesting" in the "comic book/fantasy storyline" but not realistic. There's not much to gain from analyzing them other than the stereotypes they stand for. Nothing new under the sun, literary-wise.
- anamax 14y ago
  > The end doesn't justify the means If the ends don't justify the means, what does? The problem is actually on the other side. The means produce the end. Not intentions, not the morals of the persons involved, but the means. Fascism, for example, is the result of fascist acts, no matter who does them or their reasons for doing so. That fact seems to be lost on "good people".
  - DigitalJack 14y ago
    There is a food shortage in Africa. One way to solve this would be to kill 80% of the African population. The end (solved food shortage) does not justify the means (mass murder). The means must be able to stand on their own.
    - reinhardt 14y ago
      That's a poor metaphor. The end is to keep the population alive. Solving food shortage is (one) means. Failing to mass murder them is another.
    - anamax 14y ago
      > There is a food shortage in Africa. No, there's a distribution problem, but I'll play along. > One way to solve this would be to kill 80% of the African population. Nope. Killing 80% of the African population will not solve the food shortage. (It also won't solve the distribution problem.) Why? Because Africa's food production is roughly proportional to its population and not limited by anything that will be helped by killing lots of people. The "end" of killing 80% of the African population is that 80% of the population has been killed. Some "good person" might have thought that some good (less starvation) would result from killing them, but the end was a lot of dead people who got killed by said good person. Thanks for providing an example of where "he meant well" had a horrendous result, as it typically does.
pjin 14y ago
A more extreme example along the same lines as Watchmen is the anime series Neon Genesis Evangelion. NGE totally rips apart mecha anime and gives its characters psychological issues to tragic effect, mirroring the creator Hideaki Anno's own struggle with depression.
- ekianjo 14y ago
  While I like NGE very much, the all psychology aspect of it is mostly just nonsense, though. I have never seen anyone being able to explain it from beginning to end without contradicting themselves. That's part of the magic why people find it superb : they don't get it because there's nothing much to get :)
baddox 14y ago
Superman is almost entirely about the character's psychology. The whole idea, at least of modern-ish incarnations, is that Superman is unmatched physically (granted, apart from the Kryptonite thing) but is often emotionally devastated (from not being able to save anybody, or for being unable to reason with bad guys, or from keeping secrets from his loved ones, or pondering what it means to be humans, etc.).
- scott_s 14y ago
  Yes, thank you. His modern interpretation is, I think, fascinating. While I think Kingdom Come is the best treatment of this theme, I actually think Frank Miller got it perfectly in Dark Knight Returns: "Twenty million die by fire... if I am weak..."
painlord2k 14y ago
>When they battle, Oz tell them about the plan during the fight and only as a ruse to take time. In the comics it is a bit different. As from someone the other side of the political spectrum, I think "incredibly liberal people" would take the law in their hands pretty easily if they had superpower. They (at least many of them) have a pretty self-righteous attitude and would make good villains. The difference is, the conservatives could patrol the street but would give the criminals to the police/justice system. They would not start redistributing stuff taken from others. Anyway, superheroes are an US phenomenon and they are the epitome of individualism. They always start alone and act alone. They are individuals first, groups second. So they will prefer a society with extensive individual freedoms and negative rights.

ctdonath 14y ago

Indeed, it does improve the story by not just leaving you with a niggling sense that something is wrong with each character, but instead opens the realization that each is, in fact, a textbook-perfect example of that wrongness - dissected, analyzed, quantified and classified as such. It's a great improvement for those of us hyperanalytical geeks now inclined to re-watch the 4-hour director's cut with the DSM IV list in hand and finding every instance where each defining point is exemplified. (And then go meta by wondering where in the DSM IV such a hyperanalytical geek is so categorized.)

derleth 14y ago
> where in the DSM IV such a hyperanalytical geek is so categorized I think we're often put under Asperger Syndrome (AS) (also called Asperger Disorder, Asperger's Syndrome, ass-burgers, and My God He's A Weirdo), which falls under either Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) or Pervasive Developmental Disorder (PDD). AS is often considered to overlap with High-Functioning Autism (ASD without mental retardation) and, in fact, a change being considered for DSM-V would eliminate AS entirely and lump us in under ASD, which would be rated on a severity scale. That said, the diagnostic criteria for all of those diagnoses are a bit more involved than 'is a hyperanalytical geek'.

enmaku 14y ago

Point taken. That last bit was just my personal opinion - I'd rather enjoy the suspension of disbelief than analyze every action in-depth, but that's just me. If this article gave you greater enjoyment of the movie then that makes me a very happy camper.

johnchristopher 14y ago

To me, the whole point of the movie is: "The end doesn't justify the means and when someones tells you so it certainly means you are heading for fascism". Characters are "interesting" in the "comic book/fantasy storyline" but not realistic. There's not much to gain from analyzing them other than the stereotypes they stand for. Nothing new under the sun, literary-wise.

anamax 14y ago
> The end doesn't justify the means If the ends don't justify the means, what does? The problem is actually on the other side. The means produce the end. Not intentions, not the morals of the persons involved, but the means. Fascism, for example, is the result of fascist acts, no matter who does them or their reasons for doing so. That fact seems to be lost on "good people".
- DigitalJack 14y ago
  There is a food shortage in Africa. One way to solve this would be to kill 80% of the African population. The end (solved food shortage) does not justify the means (mass murder). The means must be able to stand on their own.
  - reinhardt 14y ago
    That's a poor metaphor. The end is to keep the population alive. Solving food shortage is (one) means. Failing to mass murder them is another.
  - anamax 14y ago
    > There is a food shortage in Africa. No, there's a distribution problem, but I'll play along. > One way to solve this would be to kill 80% of the African population. Nope. Killing 80% of the African population will not solve the food shortage. (It also won't solve the distribution problem.) Why? Because Africa's food production is roughly proportional to its population and not limited by anything that will be helped by killing lots of people. The "end" of killing 80% of the African population is that 80% of the population has been killed. Some "good person" might have thought that some good (less starvation) would result from killing them, but the end was a lot of dead people who got killed by said good person. Thanks for providing an example of where "he meant well" had a horrendous result, as it typically does.

pjin 14y ago

A more extreme example along the same lines as Watchmen is the anime series Neon Genesis Evangelion. NGE totally rips apart mecha anime and gives its characters psychological issues to tragic effect, mirroring the creator Hideaki Anno's own struggle with depression.

ekianjo 14y ago
While I like NGE very much, the all psychology aspect of it is mostly just nonsense, though. I have never seen anyone being able to explain it from beginning to end without contradicting themselves. That's part of the magic why people find it superb : they don't get it because there's nothing much to get :)

baddox 14y ago

Superman is almost entirely about the character's psychology. The whole idea, at least of modern-ish incarnations, is that Superman is unmatched physically (granted, apart from the Kryptonite thing) but is often emotionally devastated (from not being able to save anybody, or for being unable to reason with bad guys, or from keeping secrets from his loved ones, or pondering what it means to be humans, etc.).

scott_s 14y ago
Yes, thank you. His modern interpretation is, I think, fascinating. While I think Kingdom Come is the best treatment of this theme, I actually think Frank Miller got it perfectly in Dark Knight Returns: "Twenty million die by fire... if I am weak..."

painlord2k 14y ago

>When they battle, Oz tell them about the plan during the fight and only as a ruse to take time. In the comics it is a bit different. As from someone the other side of the political spectrum, I think "incredibly liberal people" would take the law in their hands pretty easily if they had superpower. They (at least many of them) have a pretty self-righteous attitude and would make good villains. The difference is, the conservatives could patrol the street but would give the criminals to the police/justice system. They would not start redistributing stuff taken from others. Anyway, superheroes are an US phenomenon and they are the epitome of individualism. They always start alone and act alone. They are individuals first, groups second. So they will prefer a society with extensive individual freedoms and negative rights.