Talk:Watchmen

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Watchmen is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do.
	This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on August 23, 2006.
Article milestones Date Process Result April 27, 2006 Peer review Reviewed June 9, 2006 Featured article candidate Promoted Current Status: Featured article

To-do list for Watchmen:

edit · history · watch · refresh

Add information about Black Freighter, the comic that runs alongside the main plot of Watchmen Expand "Perspective" section Ensure that thought balloons were actually unused as a narrative device. If they were, the story is told in a 3rd person omniscient POV and the original article was incorrect; if they weren't, it is 3rd person objective POV and the original article was incorrect. If they only occur during entire sections presented in the first person, the remainder would be considered objective POV. Elaborate "Characters" section to provide better insight into who they are as characters and what powers or abilities they possess, instead of merely listing what comic heroes they were originally based on Edit Golda reference/quotes in "Artwork" and "Themes" section to flow better Create a full list of major iconography used in Watchmen and add to the article Create a full list of major historical, comic, and literary allusions and add to the article Implement Chapter Overviews. These can then be added to a new page, and the "Plot Summary" section can be used to simply summarise the story Add reference under 'Other' to Watchmen's connection to the TV series 'Lost.' One of the 'Lost' creators, either Abrams or Lindelof, admitted in an interview that he was heavily influenced by Watchmen, and fans of the show have subequently found a number of parallels between the two. Cite items in the "Symbolism" section to avoid Original Research note that another person with superpowers does exist. This is the "sensitive" who has psychic powers and provides the basis for the brain of the pseudo-extraterrestrial. Information to add relating to Moore and Gibbons' attempt to be different and eye-catching during the issue by issue publication: The title appearing sideways, the cover being a part of the first panel of the story and thus the very first entry to the story, how this was done by coincidence for the first two issues and how then Gibbons decided to keep doing it, the nine-panel grid, how the alternative covers for the collected edition represent either an earlier panel or a detailed part of the first cover, how Under the Hood was originally intnded to replace the readers page (a common practice by Moore who uses it again in Promethea 1 and Top Ten 1) and was continued when Moore started to realise around issue 3 to the possibilities of his story, how the back covers carried a motif of clock and blood tying with issues 11 and 12, how this back cover was new for the time, and the absence of ads and editorial pages. Those details also illuminate Moore's statement that Watchmen is about its structure. People who didn't catch up the story while it was first being published might get the idea of a crytallised concept from the beginning but many of its features (the covers, the back sections) developed as the story started to get published

	comics Portal This article is in the scope of WikiProject Comics, a collaborative effort to build an encyclopedic guide to comics on Wikipedia. Get involved! Help with current tasks, visit the notice board, edit the attached article or discuss it at the project talk page.
FA	This article has been rated as FA-Class on the quality scale. See comments.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.
More information: This article has been selected for use on the Comics Portal. Related work groups (nations and regions): British comics work group Related task forces (publisher): DC Comics work group

This Langlit article has been selected for Version 0.5 and subsequent release versions of Wikipedia. It has been rated FA-Class on the assessment scale (comments).

The spoken word version of this revision (diff) of this article is part of WikiProject Spoken Wikipedia, an attempt to produce recordings of Wikipedia articles being read aloud. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, where you can join the project and find out how to contribute.

Contents 1 Merchandising. 2 Spoiler Tags for (end of) Plot Summary 3 Plot Summary 4 Watching the Watchmen

[edit] Merchandising.

A few very minor notes on the merchandising section...

The badge set did not come with a bloody smiley. The bloody smiley was a promotional item that was given away in comic stores. The badge set had a Rorschach blot, a hydrogen symbol, the blood obscured clock, and one with the words "Ego ipse custude custudios" on it. I'm probably misspelling the Latin quote. The Comedian's smiley was a separate production, and about half the size of the others.

The two Watchmen gaming supplements published by Mayfair were more than just 'approved by Alan Moore'. Taking Out the Trash has original material provided by Alan Moore, and he is credited for his "special design assistance" and is listed as the co-author of a background section in the supplement. It contains, among other things, a brief section where Doctor Manhattan rationalizes his apathy (or explains it better, depending on how you view the character) on a more personal level. Who Watches the Watchmen includes original artwork by Dave Gibbons for some of the side characters in the adventure.

There were also official Watchmen t-shirts by Graffiti. One had an ink blot (I think it was the doughy blot Rorschach imagines as his mother having sex in the prison interview), and another had the six main characters standing around together in front of the bloody smiley. There were probably others, but it's difficult to remember after all this time. For some reason I think there were other ink blot shirts, with different blots than the one I had, but I might be completely wrong on that one. ~ Thirdrail

Another t-shirt was 'Nuclear Kiss' - 2 skeletons kissing, in the middle of an explosion. And a hourglass clock on there, somewhere. I'll try to dig it out and then update this.

193.243.227.1 (talk) 14:01, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Spoiler Tags for (end of) Plot Summary

I'd like to see if there is any consensus on this. Speaking personally I found the surprise ending of Watchmen to be the best and most satisfying plot revelation I have ever read. I certainly wouldn't want to put a spoiler tag in a plot section for just any work of fiction, but considering that this story has a brilliant revelatory plot twist which HASN'T been massively spoiled for most people who haven't read it yet (unlike Luke's father, the Sixth Sense ending, the guy who dies in Harry potter etc.) any people reading the Plot section might not realise that there is a twist which could be spoiled (I personally had no idea that there would be a big twist when I first read Watchmen). We don't necessarily have to us the spoiler tags as such, some note that the story contains a mystery/twist (without revealing it) before the reader comes to the plot section could be used if someone really dislikes spoiler tags. Do any regular editors of this article have strong feeling one way or another on this? Tomgreeny 03:31, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

all information is subject to our Wikipedia:Content disclaimer, and the section is clearly labelled as being a plot summary, which establishes it will detail elements of the plot. The lead establishes that the work is a murder mystery. I think that's enough. Hiding Talk 13:05, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

In view of the absence of agreement here, I've reverted Wedineinheck's insertion of a spoiler tag immediately after the "Plot summary" section heading. --Tony Sidaway 15:28, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

I think a spoiler tag is inappropriate here. Inasmuch as comics have classic works (a statement I make only because of the youth of the medium as a major artistic form), Watchmen is indisputably among the most classic. It's one of the few comics that, like, say, Citizen Kane, has become clearly more important in its reception than in terms of its actual narrative experience. And so as brilliant as the twist is, fundamentally, this work strikes me as one that it is particularly inappropriate to use spoiler tags on, simply because the somewhat fannish approach indicated by spoiler tags is a particularly and egregiously limited perspective for this particular work. That, combined with the basic issues of "it's over 20 years old," "it's the plot section, so if there's a twist it'll be there," and the old classic "it's been spoiled elsewhere" (most notably in casting announcements for the film), makes me think that this is a uniquely poor place for a spoiler tag. Phil Sandifer 16:33, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

I agree merely for the "it's the plot section", but it being 20 years old and it being "spoiled elsewhere" aren't that great a reason. It's a classic, but that just means that more people who didn't grow up with it are going to be finding it for the first time. Natedubya 23:31, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Full agreement to exclude spoiler tags. The section heading defines the section as a summary of the plot, and that includes the ending. Major discussion has already taken place about this at WP:SPOILER. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 16:37, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Plot Summary

I don't know how the editors for this article came to their conclusion for certain sections of the summary, but near the conclusion, the sentence "Osterman attempts to dissuade Kovacs, but when Kovacs challenges Osterman to silence him through murder, Osterman does so with almost no hesitation" is rather jarring, depending on interpretation.

Wikipedia isn't a place for personal viewpoints as the website clearly and frequently points out, but a plot summary must have a correct interpretation, if it is to have one at all. Now I'm not saying that this one is incorrect, merely that I, and a number of my friends disagree with it. I think the tears in Rorschach's eyes when he screams "DO IT!" preceded by his solemn drone of how Manhattan must, of course, kill him to preserve the peace that arose from Ozy's actions mean that Rorschach realises that he cannot be allowed to proceed with his own action which may destroy what peace Ozymandias created, but due to his failings as a person he cannot stand by and do nothing about it. When Rorschach says "Never compromise. Even in the face of Armageddon", he is merely asserting his own beliefs.

He is not daring Manhattan to kill him. He's begging him to kill him. Manhattans pause before Rorschach screams at him seems to show that Manhattan does have misgivings about killing Rorschach, but since Kovacs wants him to do it, he reluctantly obliges.

Anyhow, that's just what I think, and I won't change it until I hear more opinions on the matter, because, of course, I could be wrong. CronoDroid 13:18, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Just a quick note: It's better to add discussion at the end of a talk page for chronological ordering. :) As for the plot summary, such interpretations should be avoided when possible. It would be best to avoid any implications of characters' mindsets. Maybe it could be written to say that Rorschach yells at Dr. Manhattan to kill him, and the quantum superhero complies. No need to delve any deeper than that for the purposes of the plot summary. If there is real-world commentary about this scene (and I'm pretty sure there is some), it can be included in another part of the article. Unfortunately, this article is very poor for its FA status, and I plan to initiate the FAR process soon. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 14:55, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Why the 'sic' after the quote including the phrase 'best of breed'? There is nothing wrong with 'best of breed' - it is a category of prize in dog shows and the like. 194.176.105.40 (talk) 08:37, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

I always too the view that Rorchach already knows the end result of their investigation, and that he knows that he cannot be allowed to tell the truth or turn in his companions - Why else would he post his journal to the magazine ??

I always suspected that Dr Manhattan knows that he will be involved in the repercussions, considering his ability for time travel and his leaving for another galaxy.

193.243.227.1 (talk) 14:08, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Watching the Watchmen

Not sure if you want to add it in yet so I'll drop information in here for the moment. Titan Books press release [1] (Emperor (talk) 16:34, 30 April 2008 (UTC))