Question: Did this movie have some sort of point? That genocide of several million to prevent war was a good idea? That and how did they avoid being sued considering Batman's got an Owl Man, a Spider Woman was in existence before this spider super heroine and the white masked guy seems to be a take on The Question.
lionhead
17th Mar 2020
Watchmen (2009)
Answer: You forgot where DC ended up owning Captain Marvel claiming he was a Super Man ripoff and how Marvel sued the name away from the character.
Answer: There is no "spider super heroine" in this movie. Silk Spectre has no superpowers, so I'm not sure where you're getting the connection to Spider-Woman from. Watchmen is a DC property, as are Batman and The Question, who was acquired by DC several years before the Watchmen graphic novel was published, so there would be no plagiarism lawsuits in response. The point of the movie, much like the graphic novel it is based on, is to illustrate the dangers of nuclear tension and war, and how regular people pay the price of the actions of contentious governments.
And to show that someone who is supposedly super-smart is also usually super-insane.
Answer: I mean as in Bob Kane suing since Owl Man's sort of like Batman.
Bob Kane undoubtedly received royalties for creating Batman, but the character is owned by DC. It's not as if he had the right to start his own comic book company and take Batman away from DC, so even if he felt slighted by Nite Owl II having some similarities to Batman, he would have no legal grounds to sue for it. Furthermore, characters would have to be blatant ripoffs in many ways in order for comic book companies to be able to sue over. Marvel and DC have many characters that are similar in powers, appearance, etc, but those similarities are usually so superficial that they can be dismissed as homages or parodies and it would prove difficult for one company to sue the other over it. A really good example would be Deadpool who was practically created as a parody of Deathstroke. The only case I can think of where a lawsuit had enough merit to go to court was Marvel suing Awesome Entertainment for redesigning Fighting American into a shameless ripoff Captain America.
27th Dec 2019
Watchmen (2009)
Plot hole: Although this film is a virtual jigsaw puzzle of flashbacks, the dynamic between Dan, Laurie and Rorschach pretty much defines the movie's continuity in the present. However, when Rorschach is framed for murder and arrested, he goes directly to a maximum-security prison, apparently without trial, conviction or sentencing (all of which would require months of due-process, at least). Even if this lapse of time is some sort of artistic device to rapidly advance Rorschach's story, there is no corresponding lapse of months in the relationship between Dan and Laurie, which runs parallel with Rorschach's story. Either there is no due process for Rorschach in this story, or there is a glaring plot hole.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: Rorschach was a famous and dangerous outlaw. We are talking about an alternate 80's here with Nixon as president and a nation-wide ban on masks (the Keene Act). Rorschach probably faced the death penalty for his long list of crimes, besides the murder he was finally captured for (not to mention to handful of cops he seriously injured whilst trying to evade capture). I don't think it's strange that his trial was quick or not fully by the book. They made sure he was locked away fast and quietly. The justice system probably works a lot faster in a world of masked vigilantes.
Yes, Rorschach was a vigilante; but, before masked superheroes were outlawed, Rorschach was also responsible for sending dozens (if not scores) of far worse criminals to prison, thus benefitting society. This much is stated in the film. His contributions to justice would certainly carry weight, and testimony in his favor would have to be considered in any legal proceedings against him. Also, after his capture, authorities were still trying to assess his mental state, which implies that some sort of due-process was still in place. Rorschach should have received a months-long trial, at the very least.
To be fair, the original, Hugo Award-winning "Watchmen" graphic novel makes the same continuity leap when it comes to Rorschach's fate. Rorschach keeps a secret diary that dates everything, but it egregiously skips over his trial and sentencing, even though the relationship between Dan and Laurie remains consistent. So, we can say that the movie is faithful to the novel, but the novel itself is flawed with a gaping plot hole.
The cops of that city don't care about his past deeds, which includes dropping the body of a criminal in front of the police station with the message "Never." They don't like him. Not even his colleagues liked him. That was a long time ago too, he's been the sole masked vigilante for a long time and I bet the cops just started disliking him more and more for his antics. Thus, a quick trial.
Join the mailing list
Separate from membership, this is to get updates about mistakes in recent releases. Addresses are not passed on to any third party, and are used solely for direct communication from this site. You can unsubscribe at any time.
Check out the mistake & trivia books, on Kindle and in paperback.
Answer: Why would they be sued? DC own both the DC comics properties and the Watchmen characters.