Watchmen

by Alan Moore, Dave Gibbons (Illustrator) John Higgins (Colorist) Len Wein (Editor)

book data

25,264 ratings, 4.35 average rating, 4,257 reviews (more data...)

rating	frequency	%
5		54%
4		30%
3		11%
2		2%
1		0%

edit

published

April 1st 2005 (first published 1986) by DC Comics

binding

Paperback, 408 pages

characters

Dr. Manhattan, Rorschach, Nite Owl, Daniel Dreiberg, ...more

setting

The United States

literary awards

1988 Locus Awards Winner (Non-Fiction), 1988 Hugo Award (Other Form)

isbn

0930289234 (isbn13: 9780930289232)

description

Has any comic been as acclaimed as Alan Moore and Dave Gibbons' Watchmen? Possibly only Frank Miller's The Dark Knight Returns, but Watchmen remains t...more

find at: Amazon | Half.com | Barnes & Noble | compare prices ($7.93)…

new topic
discuss this book

topics	posts	views	last activity
The Next Best Boo...: What are you reading?	13081	11057	1 hour, 25 min ago
Reading from the ...: What is your favorite film adaption of a novel?	62	73	1 hour, 30 min ago
The Next Best Boo...: OFFICIAL SUMMER CHALLENGE 2009	3878	4526	1 hour, 30 min ago

friend reviews

To see what your friends thought of this book, please sign up.

lists with this book

Best graphic novels

405 books | 586 voters

Required Reading Graphic Novels

114 books | 187 voters

More lists...

other reviews (showing 1-20 of 32,424)

sort: default (?) | date
filters: all | text-only

12/09/07

Trish rated it:

(review of isbn 3551744084)

This review has been hidden because it contains spoilers. To view it, click here.

Aaron's been telling me for a long time that I should read a select few of his favorite comic books. And I haven't been avoiding them. But when I'm looking around the house for something to read, I forget to wander over to the comics section. So finally he just made a stack of books for me, and I started with Watchmen.

And within the first few pages I was testing his patience with questions/comments including:

"Why is Rorshach the hero when he's clearly insane?"...more

Like this review? yes (41 people liked it)

3 comments

08/11/08

Schmacko rated it:

Read in August, 2008

I can understand why this is considered a holy tome in the field of graphic novels. The plot is complex, it’s unique, and it’s well drawn. Also, it’s got the Holy Grail of every geeky comic book fan's wetdreams – lots of cool gadgets and stuff.

I ain’t knocking that. Imagination abounds, and I am thoroughly impressed. I love that comic books and graphic novels create their entire world – but – BUT then again every piece of art creates it’s own world. And ALL OF TH...more I can understand why this is considered a holy tome in the field of graphic novels. The plot is complex, it’s unique, and it’s well drawn. Also, it’s got the Holy Grail of every geeky comic book fan's wetdreams – lots of cool gadgets and stuff.

I ain’t knocking that. Imagination abounds, and I am thoroughly impressed. I love that comic books and graphic novels create their entire world – but – BUT then again every piece of art creates it’s own world. And ALL OF THOSE OTHER ARTS MAKE EMOTIONALLY ENGAGING STORIES!

I get frustrated because my graphic-novel friends keep foisting these things on me. They love me, they see me as very imaginative and very supportive of their creativity, but they cannot seem to get why I go cold at graphic novels.

This one was thrust upon me, because I was affected by the movie The Dark Knight. I got emotionally engaged. I felt hopeless with Batman. I got a knot in my stomach when that horrible, unspeakable thing happened two-thirds of the way through the film. I was troubled by Joker’s logic, and I was frustrated with the people in the ferries. In other words, I WAS EMOTIONALLY ENGAGED!

A lot of these graphic novels and stuff seem to think that if they simply tickle your creative brain, they’ve succeeded. I want more – I want to laugh and cry and cheer and feel despair. I want a core of true human story. Gadgets and colors and costumes and superpowers don't make me weep or shout or ponder or giggle or sigh. Well, they make me sigh - with frustrationa nd boredom.

I know I sound angry at these things. I get frustrated, because I don’t think this is so hard to understand that I need emotional stimulation. And yet, my graphic-novel friends still press these books in my hand, hoping to unlock my wonder and amazement.

I was full of wonder and amazement at The Adventures of Kavalier & Clay, a novel about a superhero and the super-human who spawned him. I am not above the magical, mystical, and fantastic (I love Harry Potter), but there has to be more than just gadgetry and explosions. There has to be honesty and the courage to plumb the human experience. I felt terribly at Kavalier’s struggles with violence and anti-Semitism in Eastern Europe. Sam Clay’s secrets were heart-breaking. Kavalier’s search for revenge and Sam’s search for respect were emotionally engaging. In Harry Potter, I rallied behind Mrs. Weasley's maternal drive. I loved Harry's indignance at cruelty. I thought Hermione's concern for elves was sweet, and complicated (who know they wanted to be slaves). Chabon succeeded at making me feel, and so did Rowling. The Watchmen did not.

The Watchmen is about two generations of heroes. One was human – using costumes, strength, and cunning. The next was led bys a superhuman, Dr. Manhattan – they were both human and somewhat superhuman. Then a law was passed making their work illegal, and they went underground. It’s only when someone starts bumping off the old retired heroes that a mystery starts, a mystery that asks the esoteric and totally intellectual (read: unemotional) question of why humans can be drawn to the edge of doom, and what they need to do to stop just at the edge.

Oh - for the people who know and love The Watchmen - I felt bad for how Dr. Manhattan couldn’t have a human relationship. And I understood why Laurie got infuriated. The thrill of Laurie and Dan becoming superheroes again was honest and wonderful. But that was it – I didn’t feel the panic of the world ending (mostly because if it did happen, there’d be no story). I didn’t care for the casual use of rape as a plot point. None of the long-winded, theoretical discussion about whether humanity was worth saving had any emotional pull to me. I didn’t care. In all 413 pages, I had four honest emotional reactions. One of my reactions was anger at the tangential pirate story (don’t ask – it doesn’t have any emotional or thematic reason for being there – it was just added because someone thought it was cool).

Cool. There’s the problem. Cool things don’t make me feel. People can imagine and draw all the cool things in the world, and it won’t make me emotional engage. Cool things don’t make my heart race or break or pause. They leave me cold. Graphic novels are mostly cool.
(less)

Like this review? yes (34 people liked it)

21 comments

07/23/08

Nicole rated it:

bookshelves: graphic-novels

I realize that what I'm about to say is as close as you can get to comic book blasphemy, but I think that 1) Alan Moore is the most overrated comic book writer ever and 2) this graphic novel is overblown, pretentious and most unforgivable of all, boring.

To be fair, I'm somewhat of a snob when it comes to my reading habits. First and foremost, I want to be entertained. If the story happens to be deep, thought provoking or groundbreaking as well, that's icing on the cake. And the bo...more

Like this review? yes (17 people liked it)

15 comments

03/25/08

Brad rated it:

bookshelves: distopian, graphic-novel, political, sci-fi, to-read-again

Read in March, 2009

This review has been hidden because it contains spoilers. To view it, click here.

I've been in many discussions over the years -- some in classes I was teaching, some over pints in the bar, and still others late at night with people I love -- about what Alan Moore was trying to say with Watchmen, discussions about the meaning of his graphic novel, and I am convinced that the meaning is not what most people think.

Most people I have talked to look at Veidt's mini-Armageddon to bring peace as inherently evil -- and the most monstrous act in a book of monstrous acts. ...more

Like this review? yes (17 people liked it)

2 comments

08/17/07

Punk rated it:

bookshelves: graphic-novel

Read in January, 2005

Graphic Novel. It's 1985. We won the Vietnam War. Nixon is still president. Someone is killing off costumed superheroes, and the world is on the brink of nuclear war. I wasn't expecting to like this book. What, I wondered, did a comic from the late eighties have to offer me, a hip and happening girl in the oughts? You can practically see the dots in the color! I'd checked it out from the library on the advice of friends, and I'd tried to read it once before, but gave up before I got even five pa...more

Like this review? yes (13 people liked it)

4 comments

02/07/09

Felicia rated it:

bookshelves: faves, graphic-novels

Read in April, 2009

Hmm, what to say. I read this AFTER I saw the movie, which was sacrilege according to some fellow geeks on Twitter, but my definition of "Geek" is someone who doesn't do what people PRESSURE them to do :P They love what they love. So anyhoo I read this and I can summarize this way:

The Movie did a great summary of the plot while formulating a story that missed the subtext of the graphic novel entirely.

I enjoyed both, but after reading the graphic novel, it's...more

Like this review? yes (10 people liked it)

9 comments

10/14/08

Catherine rated it:

bookshelves: fantasy, graphic-novel, urban

Read in February, 2009

This review has been hidden because it contains spoilers. To view it, click here.

Overall, these 2 quotes are the book in a nutshell:

Rorshack says in chapter 2, "Nothing is hopeless. Not while there's life." Extremely interesting considering the source.

Hollis Mason in his autobiography: "Real life is messy, inconsistent, and it's seldom when anything ever really gets resolved." So is this book!

One of the major themes is whether to act or be disengaged. A small subplot that demonstrates this is the story of Ma...more Overall, these 2 quotes are the book in a nutshell:

Rorshack says in chapter 2, "Nothing is hopeless. Not while there's life." Extremely interesting considering the source.

Hollis Mason in his autobiography: "Real life is messy, inconsistent, and it's seldom when anything ever really gets resolved." So is this book!

One of the major themes is whether to act or be disengaged. A small subplot that demonstrates this is the story of Malcolm, Rorschach's prison psychiatrist, and his wife, Gloria. He gets so involved with his patients that he ruins his marriage and ends up in a deep despair (prompted by Rorschach's poisonous mentality). Yet at the end, in Chapter 11, when he sees a woman being assaulted in the street he cannot walk away, even though Gloria demands it on pain of losing her forever. She tells him on page 20, "Don't you dare get involved..." and he replies, "...I have to. In a world like this... I mean, it's all we can do, try to help each other. It's all that means anything..."

This reflects back to Rorschach's remembrance of Kitty Genovese's story and it's impact on his becoming a masked vigilante. I identified with this because it's a story I never forgot. We learned about it in school as kids, the story of the woman brutally raped and murdered while more than 30 of her neighbors watched or listened from the safety of their homes and did nothing, not even calling the police. I think of it every time I hear a disturbance outside of my house, wondering if this is the time I need to get involved, if it's just kids horsing around or a serious problem and what I should do.

The other major theme I identified is whether it is ever possible to do good by doing evil. Hiroshima (questionable), the final reveal in this book (clear-cut to me). And Guantanamo (also clear-cut to me). I have to reject the idea that anything good can ever come from acts of torture or devastation. I think what's happened in this country with the election of President Obama shows that there is hope for a positive path forward, that the use of fear and hatred as a motivation isn't the only option. Despair can be contagious, but so can hope.

But what about the basic concept of vigilante justice? Is it ever ok to break the law? Doesn't that encourage the dissolution of the basic compact of law that holds society together? Yet is it right to sit back and not act if you see something that needs to be done? Are there ways to work within the system to improve things? What happens when the system fails?

A picky detail that bothered me throughout the book was the weird bolding of words. It often didn't seem to be for emphasis or make sense.

The discussion of costume issues by Nite Owl was interesting - armor safety vs. flexibility, how to use a mask without getting caught, capes can be dangerous, too. I've always wondered how each superhero makes their costume, how many they have, how they get the blood out, etc. Not everyone has a mom back in Iowa who can sew! I liked that Nite Owl doesn't take it too seriously, understood that guys in costumes look silly.

Overall, a very complex, fascinating and enjoyable book that I would wholeheartedly recommend.
(less)

Like this review? yes (7 people liked it)

add a comment

09/05/08

Mykle rated it:

Read in January, 1988

Once upon a time I lent my first-edition of the Watchmen graphic novel to some friend of mine. I don't remember who. They still have it, I'm pretty sure. If you are that friend, please return my book because I've just seen the movie and now I'm ready to read the book again.

My friends and I were so damn obsessed when this series was first coming out. It was a monthly serial, of course, but the issues kept coming later and later. Fortunately there was so very much detail to obsess...more Once upon a time I lent my first-edition of the Watchmen graphic novel to some friend of mine. I don't remember who. They still have it, I'm pretty sure. If you are that friend, please return my book because I've just seen the movie and now I'm ready to read the book again.

My friends and I were so damn obsessed when this series was first coming out. It was a monthly serial, of course, but the issues kept coming later and later. Fortunately there was so very much detail to obsess over in every single issue. The symbols, the allusions, the fearful symmetry, the backstory, the subplots, etc, etc.

That experience -- having to wait a month for the next chapter of the book you're utterly consumed by -- is something I miss today. Certainly Dickens wrote that way, serialized as he was in the London newspapers. And I see attempts at serialization from time to time, in weekly entertainment magazines or online. But there's something juicier about a comic book, something easier to pick up in the middle and get excited about. Maybe it's the built-in expectation that there's been 300 past issues already, and 300 more to come, so you don't expect to understand everything right away. But also, each issue of Watchmen was a dense, beautiful read. Alan Moore is just brilliant.

It was interesting to see, in the film, just how much of Moore's dialogue works and doesn't work when actors have to say it. For the most part, it's genius. The whole section with Rorshach and the Big Figure in prison is filmed almost precisely word-for-word from what Moore wrote, and it absolutely kills. So hard-boiled!

I still suspect that there's a kind of person -- women, maybe? -- who just won't ever enjoy any superhero story, no matter how meta or decon or deep it may be. Yes, it's silly and juvenile and ultraviolent, even when it's self-conscious and critical of itself. But for graphic novel fans, Watchmen is the shit.

The only negative thing I could say about Watchmen is that it ruined comics for me. Or else I grew up. Probably both happened at the same time. Once something this interesting and deep entered my mental bookrack, Todd McFarlane started looking reeeeeeely stupid. I hoovered up all the Alan Moore I could find, as well as Neil Gaiman, Garth Ennis and Frank Miller, and I did find some great stuff, yes, but in shorter and shorter supply. In comic shops I'd rifle through reams of guns, tits, explosions, talking animals and speed lines, looking for some really good writing. It's damn hard to find in comics. I eventually switched to 'zines.(less)

Like this review? yes (8 people liked it)

12 comments

06/16/07

Brendan rated it:

(review of isbn 1401207138)

Who’s watching Watchmen? Everybody apparently. This book—or comic book, or graphic novel, or whatever you want to call it—has been picked apart endlessly in the 20 years since it was first published, every frame microscopically studied, its plot, characters, and symbols charted out no less elaborately than Ulysses’. Its fans, like fans of everything else, are intensely protective and argumentative. Reading a book like this now, for the first time, is likely to result less in actual criti...more

Like this review? yes (8 people liked it)

add a comment

05/12/07

David rated it:

bookshelves: graphicnovels

Read in May, 2007

recommends it for: people interested in the nature of heroes

I just finished reading Watchmen by the very intense Alan Moore of V for Vendetta fame. I've been on a bit of a comic book/graphic novel kick recently after completing a whole host of non-fiction work for use in my Master's thesis. The Watchmen is one of those books that anyone who cares, or cared, about comic books and superheroes should read. Set in an alternate American time line, skewed by the existence of masked vigilantes (read: superheroes), Watchmen explores an America that wins the Viet...more I just finished reading Watchmen by the very intense Alan Moore of V for Vendetta fame. I've been on a bit of a comic book/graphic novel kick recently after completing a whole host of non-fiction work for use in my Master's thesis. The Watchmen is one of those books that anyone who cares, or cared, about comic books and superheroes should read. Set in an alternate American time line, skewed by the existence of masked vigilantes (read: superheroes), Watchmen explores an America that wins the Vietnam War, never catches Nixon as a crook (in fact electing him to a third term), and then makes it illegal to be a superhero without doing so in service of the government.
Like Moore's other work, there are some very thinly veiled critics of the Reagan/Thatcher era. Moore visions a cowboy Americana were everyone is in it for themselves, notions of morality are arbitrary and strictly enforced, and the only officially recognized victims are those already in power. Moore exaggerates phenomenon to make a point about them the same way a satirist might. However, Moore seems instead is reading from the Orwell literary playbook here, warning of how this course of society could devolve. Like Orwell saw an inherent danger in Stalinism, Moore is warning of the dangers of the emerging framework of the Neo-Conservatives. Tough-love for the poor, welfare for the rich, jingoism, and fundamentalism are all part of Moore's world, then called Reaganism. Although Moore personally saw this through Thatcher, the basic reactionary quality was the same on both sides of the Atlantic.
This book touched my personally because it hit upon a discomfort, stemming from an initial fascination, with heroes. I spent many hours of my childhood loving Superman. Lex Luthor, by then a crooked businessman and not the crazed scientist of earlier years, was always the easy personification of evil. His occupation always reflected an area of society that created fear (mad scientists in the 60s, corporate vultures in the 80s, and now I hear politician). With Lex Luthor as the the ultimate evil, Superman by contrast became the ultimate good. The Christ metaphors were never lost on my as a child. The most recent movie did everything but use the phrase "my only begotten son" when describing Superman. And for a time the notion that all we needed was a hero was very comforting to me. However, as Moore would be quick to point out, that desire for a hero is easily exploited.
There are many people much more schooled in comics and superheroes than I that can tell you how much Watchmen changed the genre. I simply know that it did. Characters became more sophisticated and moral choices became less clear. But it is clear to me why this is such a landmark piece. Moore has that ability of all great writers to chastise and console in the same breath, on the same thought. He tells his readers that superheroes are pathetic refuge from reality, but then invites you to share in that fantasy. And for a time you are taken with this world, think maybe there could be a place for superheroes in our world. Then the end comes and you realize what kind of world our supposed heroes really want to bring us. (less)

Like this review? yes (7 people liked it)

add a comment

08/09/07

John rated it:

(review of isbn 3551744084)

Read in February, 2007

recommends it for: Fanatical comic book readers

The Watchmen is considered one of the most important comic books in history. The costumes are less spectacular, the origins more bleak, the heroes more despicable and/or self-loathing, the villains almost non-existent, the relationships more strained and the political overtones more blatant than were almost ever seen in mainstream comics before. Its effects were massive: it ushered in a new wave of "cool," where Superman and Spider-Man were lame, and everyone wanted murderous and self-...more

Like this review? yes (6 people liked it)

6 comments

05/31/08

Michael rated it:

Read in June, 2008

I've heard nothing but unflinching hyperbolic praise for this book. I wonder if it's even possible for anything to live up to the kind of hype this has suffered. It's the only graphic novel/comic book to be included on Time Magazine's list of 100 greatest novels since the beginning of Time's publication. That's a lot of pressure - to be the sole symbol and representation and of an entire art form for a popular and wide audience. I mean, this thing needs to be devastatingly good.

F...more I've heard nothing but unflinching hyperbolic praise for this book. I wonder if it's even possible for anything to live up to the kind of hype this has suffered. It's the only graphic novel/comic book to be included on Time Magazine's list of 100 greatest novels since the beginning of Time's publication. That's a lot of pressure - to be the sole symbol and representation and of an entire art form for a popular and wide audience. I mean, this thing needs to be devastatingly good.

Forget all that noise, and this is just a great book. "Best ever" - I'm not sure, but it definitely stands out as a milestone, and a sort of mile marker in superhero comics, along with Frank Miller Dark Knight Returns. 1985-86 is when comics got really dark, and really sinister and scary in a real life way that had never really been approached before. Sure Galactus had come around to eat the Earth and Doctor Doom, I'm sure had hatched some Armageddon schemes, and Darkseid had set out to control everybody's thoughts, but all of those doomsday scenarios were set at a safe distance from reality, all based on ridiculous, albeit compelling, contingencies. Furthermore, those stories always provided superheros you could rely on to save the day. The great myth-makers could never get away with letting the Silver Surfer or the Fantastic Four or Superman fail at their missions to save the world.

Moore's world of Watchmen is quite different. Superheros have seen their heyday decades ago, and the American public and government now sees these masked vigilantes as nothing more than criminals, head-cases not to be trusted. What's really grim, is the evils mankind faces in reality - corrupt governments, greedy corporations - are far more sinister than anything cooked up in a comic book. Moore deals brilliantly with these issues. Why do we trust those in charge? Why do we rely on other to protect us? Should we not protect ourselves instead?

Gibbons's art is wonderful. His use of very subdued, standard layout styles lets the story speaks for itself. There's no fancy splash pages to be found here, no overwrought action sequences, no onomatopoetic sounds, no motion lines. Gibbons uses symbolism and realistic rendering to create an atmosphere of grit and foreboding terror. I'm sure there's been papers written on his use of the smiley face throughout the book. I don't want to touch on any of the specific symbols here, but they're used in such a way that they never overshadow the plot, but are not so buried to become obscure.

I definitely wasn't let down by this book, but can't give it 5 stars. First of all, about half of the chapters in the book are diversions from the main thread of the story, giving insight and history to each of the characters. Don't get me wrong, I wouldn't get rid of any of them, and honestly they are some of the best reading in the book - especially Rorschach's episodes - but therein may lie the problem. We are left with about 5 chapters that deal with the crisis at hand - the very fate of life on Earth. Most comic book stories can be dealt with in such a span, but Moore's story is too grand, too great to stop here. Or maybe that's a statement in itself. When it's too late, it's just too late. (Maybe Carole King should sing our Armageddon songs.) Any ending will come all too quickly.

Anyway, I'm willing to concede that this is probably one of the best superhero stories I've ever read - if it's actually a superhero story. It kind of destroys the whole notion of superheros, makes them irrelevant. I don't even want to get into the politics of this story. Too much, too much. (less)

Like this review? yes (5 people liked it)

add a comment

12/09/07

Evil_Dead_Junkie rated it:

bookshelves: comics

I'm rereading Watchmen for the first time in about five years and have thus decided to start a petition to officially change its name to creamy goodness.

Seriously its one of those blessed rereadings where every twenty pages or so I come across a sequence and go "Yeah I remember this this part kicks ass this is my favorite part of the book." and then twenty pages later I repeat the phrase.

People always remember how important the book is. But I think we forget ju...more

Like this review? yes (5 people liked it)

13 comments

03/03/09

Kelly rated it:

bookshelves: fantasy, fiction, worth-rereading

Read in February, 2009

I was told and told and told again that I must read this as my introduction to the graphic novel genre. There were a few dissident voices for Sandman, but they were largely drowned out by the chorus for this piece. (Piece? Book doesn't feel right.)

It did take me a little bit to adjust myself to the storytelling method, but once I got into it, I was absolutely enthralled with it. I really loved about the first 3/4 of the plot- I loved the psychology of it all, and the nuanced, beautif...more

Like this review? yes (4 people liked it)

12 comments

01/25/09

Shannon rated it:

bookshelves: 2009, alternate-history, book-club, graphic-novel, sci-fi, urban-fantasy

Read in March, 2009

Set in 1985 in New York, the Cold War is still very much alive, Nixon is settling in for yet another term as President, and masked vigilantes are considerably passé. Since the costumed adventurers of the 30s and 40s called The Minutemen disbanded in the 50s, masked vigilantes became increasingly unpopular right up to the Keene Act of '77 which made it illegal. The only one who persists is Rorschach, and everyone knows he's not exactly mentally stable.

This second generation of retir...more

Like this review? yes (4 people liked it)

add a comment

05/13/07

Keely rated it:

bookshelves: comics, reviewed, sci-fi

Read in November, 2005

Since the movie came out, I've found myself having to explain to people why Watchmen is important and interesting. Despite being the most revered comic book of all time, it never really entered the mainstream until the film. Now, people are rushing to it in droves, but coming to watchmen without an understanding of its history and influences means missing most of what makes it truly special.

The entire work is an exploration of the history and purpose of the superhero genre, from how ...more

Like this review? yes (5 people liked it)

add a comment

03/11/09

Greg rated it:

bookshelves: graphic-novels

Read in March, 2009

Maybe this is worth four stars. Or maybe even five stars, but only if I had read Watchmen when I was twelve years old. That doesn't mean that I had to be twelve to like it, but that would have been how old I would have been when these first came out. Instead of reading them then I was a pretty loyal Marvel fan at the time, and the little bit of money I had, which all went to buying comic books, was spent on the Marvel universe, with my forays into DC land coming a few years later when I reali...more Maybe this is worth four stars. Or maybe even five stars, but only if I had read Watchmen when I was twelve years old. That doesn't mean that I had to be twelve to like it, but that would have been how old I would have been when these first came out. Instead of reading them then I was a pretty loyal Marvel fan at the time, and the little bit of money I had, which all went to buying comic books, was spent on the Marvel universe, with my forays into DC land coming a few years later when I realized that Batman was just as much fun to read as Daredevil. My main comic book obsession at the time when Watchmen would have come out was the already mentioned Daredevil, and more specifically the Frank Miller issues, which at the time I didn't realize were the work of one writer, but that's because I never bothered to care about who was writing it, I just knew that the comics from the early 80's were the best ones.

Moving to the present day I finally decided to read this because I was going to see the movie. I had never wanted to read Watchmen. I didn't care for the artwork too much, and frankly anything with the blurbs that came on the front and back covers that this has I know would have my critical sensors on full blast, and most likely I would be looking to not like it. On the plus side there is a lot in this graphic novel, it's really a quite intricate story with subplots and allusions and all kinds of ducking and weaving going on that make it dare I say a piece of literature. On the negative side all of the stuff about in depth psychology that is touted isn't really all that groundbreaking here, for proof I point to the Frank Miller run of Daredevil, especially the Elektra story arc, and to the sort of coming out concurrently with Watchmen Born Again story arc. I'll admit though that there is an intricacy missing to the Miller stories that are here in Moore's.

Should I even mention the movie? I have to say that I liked the movie just about as much as I liked the book. I thought there were failings, but I thought there were failings in the book. Most of what was silly in the movie came right out of the book, having finished the book the morning I saw the movie much of the dialog from the book was still fresh in my mind, and the for the most part the cringe worthy lines in the movie came right from the text. Was the movie kind of dull at times? Sure, but so is the book. Both are super hero stories devoid of much action. I thought it was faithful to the book, and I think that many people who disagree are probably long time fans of Moore, and have idolized the graphic novel into something more than it really is. I have a theory of Moore's fans that they love what he did at one point so much that they are now extremely negative towards any and all adaptations just because they don't want to realize the shortcomings in the original works. I personally don't really have much of an opinion on the man, I think that he's not a genius, and that there is something really flawed in a man who spends twenty years working on a project where famous little girl literary characters get fucked a lot. That to me seems like a worse artistic decision than anything the director did to Watchmen.

I'm still tempted to come up with a list of a hundred books written in English since 1923 that are better than Watchmen, but I really have some other things I should be doing so that will have to be put off indefinitely. (less)

Like this review? yes (3 people liked it)

19 comments

01/16/09

Karen rated it:

Read in January, 2009

recommended to Karen by: Anthony M. Bookfly

I haven't read too many comic books (or graphic novels or whatever), and most of the ones I have read I haven't really enjoyed. I think it's because I lack a very basic skill, and I suspect that many literary types who disdain comics have the same problem - I suck at looking at pictures. My eye is drawn to the words and I completely ignore everything else. Well, any six-year-old will tell you that only a total moron would read a comic that way.

Anyway, repeated aggressive encourageme...more

Like this review? yes (3 people liked it)

8 comments

01/28/09

Kat rated it:

bookshelves: favorites, graphic-novels-comic-books

Read in February, 2009

I'm seriously tempted to give spoilers here, as the book was utterly mind-blowing (GAH! Rorschach! GAH!), and there were some serious twists in the book that, while I can't say I didn't see them coming, still really affected me strongly.

This is not a comic book for those who want their superheroes infallible icons of Americana. This is a graphic novel in every sense of the phrase. The violence is graphic, but not gratuitously so. It is there for impact upon the reader, and it wo...more

Like this review? yes (3 people liked it)

add a comment

01/01/09

Miss_otis rated it:

bookshelves: apathetic, apocolyptic, au, graphic-novel

I'm prepared to get pelted with rotten vegetables and bricks and all manner of nasty things, but....Watchmen didn't really do anything for me. In fact, I was so "meh" about it that I had to go do some research in order to see if I could figure out just why, exactly, it's so acclaimed.

I found a very interesting thesis someone had written (if anyone would like to read it, comment and I'll try to find it again), which gave me some nice historical background on the history of ...more

Like this review? yes (3 people liked it)

add a comment

« previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 … 1621 1622 next »

polls

Second Book! Sorry this is a little late... I blame the month of February for being so confusingly short. That's my story and I'm stickin' to it.

I know there were some suggestions for Canticle for Leibowitz but since it was in the poll last month, we'll go ahead and skip it this month.

WatchmenWatchmen

14 votes, 66.7%

Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?

5 votes, 23.8%

The Road

2 votes, 9.5%

Under the Skin

0 votes, 0.0%

21 total votes

comments and details Sign in to vote!

More...

recent status updates | recommend it | blog it

combine
other editions (24)

More editions...

quotes from this book

"There is no future. There is no past. Do you see? Time is simultaneous, an intricately structured jewel that humans insist on viewing one edge at a time, when the whole design is visible in every facet." More quotes...