Shoot to Thrill - Watchmen Behind the Scenes

[TheNextAvrilLavigne]

@jokrol324 but the story made no sense to me, one member dies, the group's retired, and the rest is flashback after flashback

[neveah1986]

@TheNextAvrilLavigne The basic plotline is Rorschach searching for the Comedian's killer. But beneath that plotline there's so much more story to it that relates to what's going on in the world today. War, energy crisis, global warming. It shows you a new face to the superhero. How would being a hero change you as a person? And it forces you to make your own moral judgements. It doesn't just say 'Here's the villain, here's the hero. Let's watch the hero win.' Watch it again. It's worth it.

[TheNextAvrilLavigne]

this movie sucked balls

[scarforce360]

i agree

[BrambleNewbold]

Watchmen was even better than The Dark Knight, and that movie was so incredible it melted my face.

Both movies challenged the identity and role of the "superhero", but in different ways.

[Lol8922]

Wasnt Nite Owl fat in the comic?

[revowithin]

larry fong used lumix lx3, XD

[damaband41]

Hey, his wife is pretty hot.

[woowooforTAI]

watchman-y I'LL WATCH IT! :)

[anjelinacp]

we will be soon. 2009. can't wait.

[icantfindanamethis]

who watches the watchmen

[DanteGantz]

We will lol

[triplejpm]

4redrider12, you are borderline retarded, and an asshole to boot.

[disharmoniamundi23]

I'm terribly sorry we aren't all as cool as you man.

Seriously, I'm jealous.

[nubbs]

you must be a fan of pale horse, you knot-topped Katie addict

BOO yeah! who's down with the watchmen! official fanboys status!

funny how the comic actually addresses homophobes that like this

[legoman44]

4redrider12 do you honestly have anything better to do than insult people with Idiocracy quotes? Because logistically you had to watch this video to post a comment. If you don't I feel sorry for you. Considering your intellegence however I doubt you understood this comment

[stacypinoygirl]

that makes 1 out of evryone else stick to the cat in the hat bitch

[taltosravenloft]

Wow, you're articulate!!! Clearly you're an ignoramus or a snot-nosed 12-year-old.

[gangstasmurf06]

watchmen-y

[DontDrinkInRunescape]

if fox makes watchmen get cancelled im going to be pist. They worked so hard for that movie.

[honesteddison]

...it's not going to be "cancelled" they just want some free money,

[WallyWadeMovies]

Debbie Snyder is kind of hot

[kham2914]

can't..freakin'..wait!!!!

[Jmassa07]

I bought the graphic novel at barnes and novels for 40 bucks. Expensive but worth it

[ick13]

I got mine for 20.....  Why would it cost $20 more?

[jediKnightreviews]

hardback? special version was 40

[istheshiz]

shoulda gotten it at Borders

it is 40% off always.

i got mine for $20 bucks actually

coz of another discount

added.

[cheeseylovah]

me too! :P

[nurbsenvi]

Sounds like it's shaping up nicely.

[jestegloria]

Nite Owl looks like Danger Ehren from Jackass.

[Nic33rd]

Looking good.

Watchmen-y. =]

[SauronsEye]

Shoot to Thrill is an AC/DC song

[ClassicComicsMan]

Very interesting. I never the read the comic, and I guess, as a longtime comics fan, I should have. I think it was the violence that turned me off... yeah, definitely, it was that. I actually did pick up a trade paperback reprint and started to read through a few pages, and then I put it down and said forget it. So why am I looking forward to this movie? I don't know, maybe it's because my tastes have matured. Or deteriorated. One or the other. Looks good from here though. :)

[xXsouljaboyiscrapXx]

its never to late BUY IT!!! READ IT!!! NOW!!!

its good =)

[XSanXPatriciosX]

Does it come in graphic novel format? Had a quick look on ebay and only found(expensive) individual comics. Looks haw-some though.

[xXsouljaboyiscrapXx]

yeah i got it in graphic novel form i think i got from wal-mart

[ghostbuster56]

I bought my copy from amazon for only $12.00

[Homer238]

Watchmen is a graphic novel not a comic book and the definition of graphic novel is comic book for a more mature audience...

[rollingrockbrew]

it was originally 12 comic books that they put into one novel.

[Kane5260]

that and its a one story adventure, it dosent continue on and on like superman or spiderman

its one story

[masterpiraka]

What's wrong with violence?

[HeadlessJedi]

Apart from everything, you mean?

....

[masterpiraka]

Violence is a part of human life. Deal with it.

[wassup528]

hell ya

[HeadlessJedi]

Violence is a part of human life-that is correct. But that doesnt stop it from being immoral

[masterpiraka]

Everyone who diesn in this movie has it coming. Besides, it's fucking entertainment. How can you be immoral against fictional characters?

[HeadlessJedi]

How much do you actually know about watchmen? I mean seriously... The six year old girl who was murdered and then butchered and fed to dogs-she did not "have it coming".

But thats not the point. One cannot be immoral against someone or something. One is just immoral. Violence is a major theme of watchmen-but that doesnt stop violence in itself being immoral.

You originally wrote: "whats wrong with violence?" You might as well say "Whats wrong with rape?" Rape is just violence.

[masterpiraka]

They didn't show her die. They just showed her slightly burned clothes and a bloodless leg bone with a shoe on it.

Violence among disease is the only thing that keeps the human race in check. It's also damn fun to watch if done in the right way. It's ment to evoke a disguisted or horriffied feeling in the audience. Mereley an artistic TOOL. Call me a sadist if you must, I don't give a fuck. Violence happens every day. It's a part of life. I wouldn't even give a shit if it happened to me.

[HeadlessJedi]

Your entitle to your opinion.

I'll leave it at that.

[Kazumaster]

Morality is subjective, so you can't really say anything is 'immoral'.

Also.. it's entertainment.

[HeadlessJedi]

Fair enough. I was originally objecting to the sentiment:

"What's wrong with violence?"..

[dtstrain]

I disagree. Ethics is a science of discovery, not invention.

[Kazumaster]

Not sure what you mean. You don't think morality is subjective?

[dtstrain]

If by morality you mean "what is ethical and what is not" then no. Humans have a certain physical, mental, & social makeup that is objective. Living by certain rules will have objectively better or worse effects for them. So, there is a RIGHT answer to the question, "what is the best way to behave for human beings" (although that answer is long and complex, with many details and if/thens). While ethics is objective, our knowledge of it is imperfect and a quest. Point is: there IS a right answer.

[Kazumaster]

By morality I mean exactly that; morality. Morals as in rules we each are supposed to be born with. They are perceived differently by different people and they obviously evolve. In the past, slavery wasn't considered immoral, but it is now. That and the fact that different people consider different things immoral are proof that it is indeed subjective.

If morality were objective, where do you think people get their morals from?

[dtstrain]

Born with morality? I've never heard that before. We are born selfish creatures and must be taught morality. You think people just started being born one day who didn't like slavery? Variation among opinions about ethics is not proof of subjectivity. There was variation on how best to build an airplane too. Someone was right, and many were wrong in their varying opinions. People get morals from their culture- a consensus built over time on the best ways to behave, built from lessons learned.

[aguyyaknow]

wow, well you know, morals are morals for a reason. you gotta consider that we didn´t make morals just for the fun of it, there is always a practical function. I belive that originally those rules were made so that people could live toghter, otherwise their wills would always clash. In other words, the practical function was to have a system that would help people get through confrontations. So the "right" moral would always be different, deppending on what that had to be achived.

[dtstrain]

That 'practical function' is the reason there is a right answer - a right answer to 'what is more practical to achieving the goal of living together' - thus objective ethics. You said it would always be different *depending* - it's that system which governs how x varies *depending* on y, which is the objective universal overarching ethical Truth. So, x is wrong in case a, right in case b - for a reason. It's not all just opinion and preference, that's what I mean when I say ethics is objective.

[aguyyaknow]

aha, good point. But this is where it gets interresting. even if everyone adjusts their morls to achiving the objective then people have diferent objectives, and thus conficts occur. and what dettermines what objectives that people choose to care about? Opinion. That is how people decide what objectives they value. and besides, why would the practical function determine ones morals? A lot of ppl chose their morals through other systems, such as religion or experience. And how would you

[aguyyaknow]

determine what systems that are "correct"?

whenever I wanna decide if something is imoral I ask myself: "does it hurt anyone?" but I´m sure that people decide that in many other ways, thus conficts occur once again. It´s often that people think of the right answer as many different things.

[dtstrain]

All (sane) objectives boil down to survival & flourishing. People may have different ideas about what is to their benefit, but if those ideas include things which will harm others in just such a way that it comes back to haunt them, then the initial thing wasn't really to their benefit after all. Bottom line: Homo sapiens, variable as it may be, has a basic 'nature' physically and psychologically. The question of what behaviors are most conducive to its mutual wellbeing is an engineering issue.

[aguyyaknow]

Aha, but nonetheless, people have different objectives and different systems of sorting morals from imorals. And when people choose what systems and objectives to have it´s all a matter of opinion.

[dtstrain]

Sure, and their opinions are either correct or incorrect. If their system says it's "wrong for women to wear pants" then it is either true or false that, as an ethic, that behavior would have a beneficial effect on the survival and prosperity of human beings (the function/role of ethics for homo sapiens). That outcome, were the ethic to be followed or not followed, is an objective truth - just as it's an objective truth as to whether or not stepping into a furnace will kill me.

[aguyyaknow]

no wait, it seems you misunderstood what i meant by systems. I meant that everyone doesn´t base their moral views upon what that bennefits society. They base it on all kinds of things but how do you choose what to base them upon? Opinion.

[dtstrain]

I never mentioned "society", that word's a distraction. Rather, people and their mutual well being. Any outside inhuman (alien) anthropologist would recognize the human tendency to form socially reinforced normative behaviors (ethics), is a behavioral trait with the function of enhancing mutual survival/well being. Anyone who bases their "morality" on something other than that is simply mistaken - that thing to which they adhere is not ethics, but something else. It is, by definition, UNethical.

[aguyyaknow]

Once again, different minds have different ideas on what that is good, what that endangers people and what that can be considered "well-being". Opinions controll the whole perspective.

Besides, there are countless of possible scenarios in which the "goals" would clash with themselfs. Let´s say you had to hurt someone to stop someone else from getting hurt. Then no matter what you choose to do the goals would never be completely achived. There would be no "right" answer.

[pdeboer1987]

my balls itch therefore I scratch

[spidey2065]

this is quite possibly going to the second coming of TDK

[chase2kk]

cant f***ing wait for this to come out!!

[UltimateHibz]

Does anyone know what the age rating for Watchmen in the uk is going to be?

In america its rated R but, some R rated movies are certificate 15 in the uk and not 18. Is this the case here?

I have this video on my Xbox 360, AND ANOTHER 7 MORE WATCHMEN VIDS.

[cohenandloynds]

I think it might be a 15. 300 was and most of the book is going to cut out to shorten down the length. Otherwise it be 12 hours long and rated a stupid rating.

[cohenandloynds]

Batman beats Nite Owl. Rorsach beats Batman.

[unholymigit]

Agreed

[gato23]

Depends on w/c Batman though.

Frank Miller's TDKR Batman is as brutal as rorschach and is in the same skill set if not higher than Veidt.

[cohenandloynds]

You do have a point. But didn't Rorschach kill a bunch of dogs, the owner and then later on use a make shift flamethrower and his grappling gun to fend off the police? Rorschach I think will always be as brutal as anyone. But TDKR Batman was very, very brutal in his ways. Or was it just Frank Miller?

[jester18uk]

It will be hard for hollywood to film the unfilmable as the novel was pretty much created with this factor in mind "what can a novel do that a movie cant" ie very dense plot originaly spead over 12 issues against typical screenplay time aprrox 2 1/2 hours 3 max ....tricky stuff to fit in. hope it kicks as though. :D

[Killer191919]

This movie better be amazing after all the hype.

[xVxShinoxVx]

nite owl could kick batmans ass.

[RYMAN70]

nah brah

[GODZILLAANDSOUNDWAVE]

batman has stepped on bugs bigger than nite-owl. Batman is a master of the martial arts has about 5 different vehicles and is in shape. Nite-owl has lost his skills and only has one vehicle.

[xVxShinoxVx]

awesome, i was waiting for a reply like this, its true batman is superior. but no were NEAR as superior as the flash.

[GODZILLAANDSOUNDWAVE]

I personaly like Batman the best of all super heros but the flash is cool.

[comicguy12]

i like superman batmans cool to

[sploogersmoof]

wolverine would kick both there ass's.

[Sumkrazyguy55]

The heroes are meant to be portayed in a human nature, emotionaly and physically. I think that's an unfair comparison.

[CodenameLegacy]

It does take away their heroic self-image, I love it, it's weird how one is stil supposed to remember that they are still superheroes, but they're still in fact, human, but I read the 1st issue & I love the way it looks so far, the story captures me instantly

[fullclip16117]

I think that the characters are supposed to portrayed as a bunch of hapless morons who have wandered past their paygrade, even though most of them have good intentions.

[shibeth400]

its awesome how they have kept to the novel :D

[DRCTRkjcharmedfreak]

YAAAAAY!

[ImnotBritish12225]

So he's a brown version of batman?

0:44

[DRCTRkjcharmedfreak]

No, he's an owl man. Way cooler than batman! lol!

[OceanicSS]

well i think the author intended nite owl to be better than bat man because owls in nature are superior and feed off bats

[xXTequilaXx07]

I don't think Alan Moore intended to compare them at all, what he did was use comic book characters from older companies and altered them to create his characters, like Rorschach is taken from The Question and cap Metropolis is Captain Atom

[Homer238]

no he just loosely based the characters off of them off of them

[xXTequilaXx07]

I know that, but he did base the design of them as well, The Question is about as close to Rorschach as possible when it comes to design

[Gigo1337]

Actually they are classic characters from the now defunct Charlton Comics co. DC aquired the rights to these characters in 1983 specificly so Moore could use them in Watchmen.

DC later changed their minds about Blue Beetle (Night Owl) The Atom (Dr Manhattan)and The Question (Rorschach) as they decided to use the characters themselves.

[themagicgrimbo]

b mkb m, b

[2SixGraders]

I love this novel!

[Smidde]

Hm nice one.

[HiMrWoman]

sweet