Should Veidt live or die?

[Souperman]

Of course he has to live.

What the hell kind of question is that?

 

[sad lieutenant]

Of course he has to live.

What the hell kind of question is that?

Indeed, Soups... The question was asked because I believe both the Hayter and Tse scripts involve killing him off (Dreiberg summons Archie by remote control and crashes it into Veidt or something ludicrous like that). So this thread exists as a minor protest.

Because it's absurd. I mean... it's very Star Trek: Insurrection, isn't it?

 

[StorminNorman]

the man has committed mass murder and he's not necessarily a "bad guy"?

I personally see Veidt as the hero of the story

 

[Mysterio]

Wow. That is a sign of pure not wanting to agree with someone just cause you don't want to.

Nuking Japan and attacking New York are the same exact action. Killing a large number and preventing more war. Truman decided to murder millions to end a war with an atom bomb, Veidt decided to murder millions to prevent a war with a large alien menace. Same thing, only different weapons.

Truman's action was not murder. it was a legitimate war-time action meant to bring about defeat of the enemy. to say the two are the exact same thing is naive.

 

[Mysterio]

while veidt being killed might work fine with the layer you're recognizing, it blatantly contrasts the other layers at work in watchmen.

and those are?

 

[Mysterio]

And your assertion about the "moral cloth" is so vague as to be rendered nonsensical. That, coupled with your histrionics about those who oppose nuclear war (who doesn't?), make me suspicious that you carry your lunch (to middle school, perhaps?) in a shiny, well-kept O'Reilly Factor lunchbox.
It's as though you imply that Truman was "pro-war" or "pro-nuke" by way of ideological imperative! You have to remember that foreign policy was formed a bit differently before there was Fox News, William Kristol, etc.

and here we have another case of attacking the poster (and typos) rather than the message. how unfortunate. if you had a point somewhere, it was clouded by your immaturity.

 

[Mysterio]

I personally see Veidt as the hero of the story

i don't see anyone in the story as a hero.

 

[Motown Marvel]

and those are?

if you couldnt recognize and understand them when reading the book, then you're not gonna understand them when i lay it out for you. and if you're not intelligent enough to recognize the layers and themes presented in the book, then your opinion in the current discussion is moot, since you're not smart enough to comprehend the material appropriately. so, maybe instead of spending so much time here making closed minded arguments, you should spend that time going back, reading the book, and paying attention this time. seriously. if you dont understand the source material (which you clearly dont), then you're not worth debating this issue with.

 

[Gilpesh]

Truman's action was not murder. it was a legitimate war-time action meant to bring about defeat of the enemy. to say the two are the exact same thing is naive.

Hiroshima and Nagasaki had civilians in them, and that was the majority of the deaths.

New York was filled with civilians, some less innocent than others.

It was the same f**king thing.

 

[StorminNorman]

Truman's action was not murder. it was a legitimate war-time action meant to bring about defeat of the enemy. to say the two are the exact same thing is naive.

Truman decided to bomb civilian cities. Not necessary. Its a very good comparison. Again though, you must understand that I view both actions as necessary for the greater good, and thus justified.

 

[Mysterio]

if you couldnt recognize and understand them when reading the book, then you're not gonna understand them when i lay it out for you. and if you're not intelligent enough to recognize the layers and themes presented in the book, then your opinion in the current discussion is moot, since you're not smart enough to comprehend the material appropriately. so, maybe instead of spending so much time here making closed minded arguments, you should spend that time going back, reading the book, and paying attention this time. seriously. if you dont understand the source material (which you clearly dont), then you're not worth debating this issue with.

so you are unable to say what they are, explain them and your position, and were just talking out your ass. so you cover by resorting to personal attacks.

 

[Mysterio]

Hiroshima and Nagasaki had civilians in them, and that was the majority of the deaths.

New York was filled with civilians, some less innocent than others.

It was the same f**king thing.

i strongly disagree; they are not the same thing. this scale of innocence - some less innocent than others - is irrelevant. murder is murder. an individual - not a president, not law enforcement, not the judicial system - has taken it upon himself to be judge, jury, and executioner - the savior of humanity, and through that salvation he has committed mass murder. he is operating outside the system - outside the law. i don't know how you can look at a president in a time of war making a strategic decision and attack to defeat an enemy and say it's the same thing as some vigilante donning a costume and committing mass murder.

 

[Overman27pj]

so you are unable to say what they are, explain them and your position, and were just talking out your ass. so you cover by resorting to personal attacks.

Dude, we have explained it. Clearly. Like Crystal! You just don't seem to be understanding.

 

[Mysterio]

Dude, we have explained it. Clearly. Like Crystal! You just don't seem to be understanding.

if someone is going to say, "the story works on multiple layers," and then is asked to state what those layers are and is unable or refuses to do so, then i don't consider that an explanation. call me crazy. as for truman/veidt, i have stated numerous times that i understand the comparisons and how people can see them as similar; however, i believe the differences are more significant than any similarities. the two are not interchangeable.

 

[Gilpesh]

i strongly disagree; they are not the same thing. this scale of innocence - some less innocent than others - is irrelevant. murder is murder. an individual - not a president, not law enforcement, not the judicial system - has taken it upon himself to be judge, jury, and executioner - the savior of humanity, and through that salvation he has committed mass murder. he is operating outside the system - outside the law. i don't know how you can look at a president in a time of war making a strategic decision and attack to defeat an enemy and say it's the same thing as some vigilante donning a costume and committing mass murder.

You're an idiot. The current administration should thank you.

Truman would have been hung at Nuremburg if the US lost WWII. And you say that scale of innocence doesn't matter, yet you gladly disregard the lives of Japanese civilians just cause their country decided to ally with the wrong nation. And, they were planning to drop more. That's right, the 'leader of the free world' was ready to kill as many Japanese civilians. So if anything Truman was worse than Veidt, Truman is just looking to make peace for the US by killing people where Veidt was looking to kill some New Yorkers to SAVE THE WORLD.

But guess what, it is mass murder in both cases. Truman killed and Veidt killed, they have done the exact same thing for the greater good.

 

[Overman27pj]

[mysterio] But truman was president so it doesn't count!!![/mysterio]

 

[sad lieutenant]

and here we have another case of attacking the poster (and typos) rather than the message. how unfortunate. if you had a point somewhere, it was clouded by your immaturity.

Umm... actually, if you read the entirety of my post (as opposed to quoting a few sentences out of their original context), you'll see that I addressed every one of the "points" you made (Veidt v. Truman and the question of the scale of their actions, your limp-wristed "moral cloth" argument, and your brazen -- and nauseating -- assertion that we have to accept a priori that the nuclear attacks on Japan were "legitmate" [sic] wartime actions.).

It is you, Mysterio, who did not address the arguments I made. And what you described as "attacking the poster" I would prefer to describe as "gravy".

So, re-read my post addressed to you above. Note my rather lucid arguments, and address them. Otherwise, quit resorting to the passive-aggressive tactics of O'Reilly and his ilk ("You're attacking ME PERSONALLY, while avoiding the issues!" -- while it's he who is allergic to any real discussion of the issues).

 

[Colossus24]

I am so amazed by this thread...just wow.

 

[Mysterio]

You're an idiot. The current administration should thank you.

more personal attacks.

 

[Ahura Mazda]

Some interesting points are made in this thread. The comparison between Truman and Veidt are valid and an important part of the book. That said.....

I think he should live as he does in the book and Rorasch should die but I would not be surprised if the powers that be decide to kill him off to make this movie more appealing to a larger audience. It would be sad but not improbable.

 

[StorminNorman]

I dont understand how Veidt dying makes this movie more appealing. The tragedy of the book is the death of millions - not the survival of Veidt. His death does not change that.

 

[Mysterio]

Umm... actually, if you read the entirety of my post

if you're going to go with namecalling, personal attacks, calling out typos, etc., then i'm not going to bother with your posts. if you are unable to present your views otherwise, then your posts - and you - aren't worth it. with all this talk of layers and themes around here, the dominating theme seems to be "personally attack and insult those who disagree with the prevailing viewpoint."

 

[sad lieutenant]

Some interesting points are made in this thread. The comparison between Truman and Veidt are valid and an important part of the book. That said.....

I think he should live as he does in the book and Rorasch should die but I would not be surprised if the powers that be decide to kill him off to make this movie more appealing to a larger audience. It would be sad but not improbable.

I think you're spot-on, with all the pathos it entails...

But if Snyder is so passionate about the Black Freighter sequence, wouldn't he be zealous about Veidt living?

Head spinning.... spots boil before my eyes... I'm going to fawking riot if Veidt gets killed by Dreiberg.

 

[sad lieutenant]

if you're going to go with namecalling, personal attacks, calling out typos, etc., then i'm not going to bother with your posts. they - and you - aren't worth it. with all this talk of layers and themes around here, the dominating theme seems to be "personally attack and insult those who disagree with the prevailing viewpoint."

That's it! Stick to your guns! Act like a martyr and avoid any real discussion of the text! I hear the McCain campaign is hiring... And don't worry, I'm done with you, too.... (Until I find myself in some anonymous theater in March of 2009, just as the flickering screen depicts the execution of Rorschach. My attention drifts for a nano-second, and our gazes find each other, a solitary tear running down each of our cheeks...And at last Mysterio and I have attained a sublime, wordless understanding)

 

[Johnichi Chiba]

Well, we haven't really heard anything from Snyder regarding Veidt. He can't overlook the importance of having him live if he gets just about everything else.