So I won't be going to see Watchmen.

[jhameia]

Because the screenwriter is a douchebag.

All this time, you’ve been waiting for a director who was going to hit you in the face with this story. To just crack you in the jaw, and then bend you over the pool table with this story. With its utterly raw view of the darkest sides of human nature, expressed through its masks of action and beauty and twisted good intentions. Like a fry-basket full of hot grease in the face. Like the Comedian on the Grassy Knoll. I know, I know...

You say you don't like it. You say you've got issues. I get it.

And yet... You'll be thinking about this film, down the road. It'll nag at you. How it was rough and beautiful. How it went where it wanted to go, and you just hung on. How it was thoughtful and hateful and bleak and hilarious. And for Jackie Earle Haley.

Trust me. You'll come back, eventually. Just like Sally. - Screenwriter David Hayter's Open Letter to the fans.


HONESTLY?

You did NOT just fucking say that.

You did NOT just compare watching a movie to RAPE.

You did NOT just say that people who don't like it (and by extension, RAPE) simply "have issues".

You did NOT just imply that RAPE is, by and large, just really rough, raw sex.

And you did NOT just say that going BACK "just like Sally" is a GOOD THING.

You did NOT.

Wait.

Oh yes you DID.

There are reasons why victims go back to rapists and abusive situations. Reasons include: lack of perfect agency (due to the power imbalances that render them unable to make good decisions anymore), lack of options, lack of self-esteem, lack of support beyond the situation, the utter destruction of one's own self-worth, and BECAUSE IF WE LEAVE WE ARE LIKELY TO GET HUNTED DOWN FOR FURTHER ABUSE AND POSSIBLY KILLED.

It's certainly NOT for the "rough" and "beautiful" and "thoughtful" and "hateful" and "bleak" and "hilarious" sex.

Douchebag. You and the fucking pervasive, ever-surrounding RAPE culture and your fucking male privilege which will pretty much guarantee that you are significantly at less risk to be RAPED so can make RAPE jokes with impunity like it's a fucking joke.

Fuck. You.

Comments

[zibblsnrt.livejournal.com]

You did NOT just say that people who don't like it (and by extension, RAPE)

Err... you're not saying that someone who liked the novel and/or movie likes rape by extension, I hope.

[fantasyecho.livejournal.com]

I'm not the one saying it. He is.

See why this is such a dumb way to talk to fans???

[gategrrl.livejournal.com]

Hey, can you post the link up for this, if you have the original location? I'd like to check this out. Why did he even write this? I mean, as in, what his purpose in writing this-did he feel turned away because of the response to the movie by fans of the book? Or the reaction of women to seeing up on the screen something that was in the panels of a comic book?

Literal translations of comic books are Not Good. Sin City is a great example. It was so violent, so misogynist, so unrepatent in its portrayal of violence it's the only movie (besides Pan's Labyrinth) that my husband and I kept in another room, in a closet.

[fantasyecho.livejournal.com]

I imagine it's because Watchmen isn't doing as well as he thinks it should.

Here's linkage (http://www.hardcorenerdity.com/profiles/blog/show?id=2239098:BlogPost:40658). And a post at Shakesville picking it apart (http://shakespearessister.blogspot.com/2009/03/rape-culture-watchmen-edition.html).

I liked Sin City and the rendering was pretty cool to me then. I haven't watched it again, though. In fact, I had more difficulty with the comics than with the movie. The movie was only two and a half hours.

Pan's Labyrinth is another difficult one for me. I loved it, but again, I haven't seen it again since. Mostly because I'm a wuss with horror films (and not even the fantasy aspect negated it), and anytime I feel a creepy feeling it always manifests itself in the Blind Man stalking me.

[gategrrl.livejournal.com]

Thanks--I've read through those links and a bunch of others, and combined with the RaceFail09 conversations going on, I think my brain is set to explode in a little while.

That letter...wow. Why involve that imagery in the first place? Why bring up rape at all, in any capacity in a letter to fans? He seems to *want* to piss off people who *might* go see the movie.

My husband and I had set today aside as the time to go see Watchman, but the accumulation of meh reports (aside from the splashy imagery in the ads) had me feeling like so-so about going, and he wasn't into it either, surprisingly. Good thing, too, cuz my daughter ended up sick at school and needed to be taken home. That would have been half-way through the movie anyhow.

[ardwynna-m.livejournal.com]

Damn. Two days too late for me to take back my ticket. And for all his talk, no, he didn't 'hit me in the face' with the story. Halfway through I was thinking it all looked very pretty on the screen but I wasn't giving much of a crap about the people in it and the plot was not so well-connected. For a movie with rape on its mind, it was actually fairly impotent.

[fantasyecho.livejournal.com]

For a movie with rape on its mind, it was actually fairly impotent.

I'm not sure that's a good way to put it either =/

**NOT Spoiler free**

[aurora-nine.livejournal.com]

Well finally I find someone to have this discussion with. I saw Watchmen last weekend and when people have been asking me about it I start off by saying "well, I haven't read the book, the special effects were amazing, interesting that this movie gets away with male full frontal nudity, but...women. But no one gets it…

Anyway, I do agree that this guy apparently writes better than he speaks but I am not going to condemn the full cast and crew because of this guy. As much as he lets crap come out of his mouth, it doesn't come out of his pen and it doesn’t reflect everyone involved in the show. This story is set in 1980s where characters reminisce about 1940 so of course there is going to be some issues about women. We've come a long long way from 1940 and a few more steps since 1980, this guy reminds us what those steps were.

I'll admit that I was hit in the face by the scene (I assume that you won't mind spoilers since you are boycotting it) where one of the main characters was sexually assaulted and then got another slap in the face when that character admits 40 years later that she still loves the man who did it to her. It is a very dark movie and difficult to watch our public version of superheroes turned on its head.

His reference to: "Like a fry-basket full of hot grease in the face. Like the Comedian on the Grassy Knoll. I know, I know..." is valid because it actually HAPPENS in the movie, a character gets a fry-basket full of grease in the face.

And I think that when he says: "You say you don't like it. You say you've got issues. I get it." I think that this statement is more general than "You've got issues if you don't condone this one scene with sexual assault in it. I think he's saying, you've got issues with that scene, and with the way the characters with the book come alive on the screen (since with every book we read we all have private versions in our heads and sometimes have issues when our thoughts aren't reality), and issues even with the hue of blue Dr. Manhattan was.

When he says:" And yet... You'll be thinking about this film, down the road. It'll nag at you. How it was rough and beautiful. How it went where it wanted to go, and you just hung on. How it was thoughtful and hateful and bleak and hilarious. And for Jackie Earle Haley." I think you (and I love you Jaymee I really do) are blowing this a bit out of proportion. This movie has one scene with sexual assault (that we as viewers are engineered to hate; which then sets us up for a shock later when we find out the assaulter is the father of one of the main characters) but it contains an entire other plot, a lot of other themes and I know that this issue is very important but it does not define the whole movie.


This movie is beautiful; the special effects and characters, it is rough; the sexual assault scene is rough to watch, the violence is abundant (but that’s a whole other post) the themes are not painted shiny and bright, and the morality is rough, it is hilarious; one of the main characters is called “The Comedian” (who, incidentally is the perpetrator of the assault) and there is another sex scene that is interrupted by the male character’s lack of libido, and it is bleak; it transforms our picture perfect vision of super heroes in their perfect body image and perfect morality and perfect ability into real human beings- and that’s thoughtful.

Go and see it, and then let’s discuss women in it some more- because it needs to be discussed.

Re: **NOT Spoiler free**

[fantasyecho.livejournal.com]

While I'm aware already of the rape scene (and of the scene where Dr. Manhattan casually dismisses his partner's disgust that he's sending duplicates to her instead of himself), I simply don't think this guy deserves to get my money. Not even in DVD sales. I have great difficulty with irresponsible artists as it is, no matter how great their work is, and I was already ambivalent of the film (and yes, I've read several positive reviews of it on my f-list), but this normalizing of rape and sexual violence is simply not on my can-do list.

I can see how you think I'm overreacting, but this is merely the culmination of my disgust over time as I've read SEVERAL discussions on Watchmen already. A movie like this is simply not necessary in our mainstream market. The marketing was irresponsibly promoting this as a superhero film; the producers stuffed a thoughtful 12-issue graphic novel into two and a half hours; the issues are not new nor entirely thought-provoking.

I can, however, direct you to places where the movie is being discussed, and in particular, the women:

Shakesville's Open Geek Thread (http://shakespearessister.blogspot.com/2009/03/watchmen-open-geek-thread.html) and more focused thread on sexual assault (http://shakespearessister.blogspot.com/2009/03/watchmen-triggering.html).
Hathor Legacy's General Review (http://thehathorlegacy.com/film-review-watchmen/) and Silk Spectre discussion thread (http://thehathorlegacy.com/watchmen-the-silk-spectre-major-spoilers/)
Amanda Marcotte's review (http://pandagon.net/index.php/site/comments/bamboo_review_watchmen/) and a previous thread on how to spot non-funny satires (http://pandagon.net/index.php/site/comments/non_funny_satires_and_how_we_even_know_how_to_spot_them/)

I've been reading the threads and enjoying them a great deal - a lot is deconstructed within them. You may like them, too - very thought-provoking discussion, and you can bet they get it. I'd be willing to have the conversation, but only because everyone makes a big fucking deal over Dr. Manhatten's cock showing and not discussing the rape scene enough. It pisses me off, because rape is so normalized in our mainstream culture already. I do know that in the graphic novel there is a huge anti-blaming seed in it. Teaspoons, but enough for me.

I have always had problems with the superhero format. I don't even understand why this movie is groundbreaking in this way in this type of issue - superhero formats have always been about feeding young boys images of hyper-masculine heroes that they can imagine themselves being, and female characters that are hyper-sexualized that they can imagine themselves consuming. But artists have been exploring "dark sides" and morality issues for a long time now; presenting it in a splashy anti-superhero action flick (which, inevitably, it is going to end up being) would be enormously difficult, and I've got no interest in subjecting myself to two and a half hours of bleak humanity when I get it enough.

You can imagine my thought patterns here: "Great. Corrective rape of lesbians to make them straight in Africa, the dismissal of comfort women and the Rape of Nanking in Japan, a young girl brutalized by a policeman for being 'lippy', Chris Brown still having a career, a mother and doctor excommunicated from the Catholic Church for giving a nine-year-old girl pregnant with twins from her father an abortion while the rapist walks free, AND I'M SUPPOSED TO GIVE A SHIT ABOUT HOW BLEAK HUMANITY IS PRESENTED TO ME IN A FICTIONAL FILM?"

Re: **NOT Spoiler free**

[aurora-nine.livejournal.com]

The scene where Dr. Manhattan splits (not duplicates but actually splits his consciousness, multitasks if you will) his attention I think is more of a play on attention span and a peek into the sexual relationship between someone who has alien abilities with someone who doesn't rather than a slam against feminism.

I disagree that this movie normalizes rape and sexual violence. The other characters in the movie react poorly to the situation when it happens and then the next generation continues that attitude. The character who gets assaulted, her daughter (who is the product of love after the assault not OF the assault) goes further to say "... even after what he did to you?" not knowing that the HE is her father. She and the other characters are quite disgusted with this event, they don't shrug it off, they pay attention and physically punish the man responsible.

I also disagree- a movie like this is TOTALLY necessary in our society. 20 years ago we were all getting sunshine blown where it usually doesn't shine; 'everything's ok in our perfect world with manicured gardens and fairy tale characters (thanks Disney- not!)' but this movie takes those images and peeks behind the curtain to see what really happens after they catch the crook and go off into the sunset. I think this movie is totally necessary to provide an opposing view point.

I also think that the "mainstream" market is overrated; controlled by those with their finger on the button that control distribution and we could do better. Mainstream is so censored, I give them props for letting a film like this be distributed. They've surprised me with films like this and Slumdog Millionaire this year- keep em coming.

Thanks for the links, I'll check em out :)

I totally understand your thought patterns but alas Jaymee, this constant river of thought is what separates you, intelligent and beautiful from the masses.

"We (royal we haha) the masses" need fiction, we can't handle the truth sometimes and need a neutral format to discuss issues in. It's a lot easier to talk about Sally being raped in Watchmen than talking about catching a glimpse of your friend "Mary" being cornered in a dark alley last night and not doing anything about it.

Re: **NOT Spoiler free**

[fantasyecho.livejournal.com]

The scene where Dr. Manhattan splits (not duplicates but actually splits his consciousness, multitasks if you will) his attention I think is more of a play on attention span and a peek into the sexual relationship between someone who has alien abilities with someone who doesn't rather than a slam against feminism.

Oh, it's definitely a peek into the sexual relationship of two people, and it's clear that the woman doesn't want that, but he does it anyway. That's pretty passive-aggressive misogyny. This is, alas, also a scene most likely to elicit laughter. "You want sex? Then DONT COMPLAIN WHEN YOU'RE GETTING IT, BITCH! What? Sex on your terms? The fuck? Only men get to call the shots."

Re: Silk Spectre and her falling in love with her rapist - this trope has been played over and over again. It can be seen in tons of soap operas - a woman falling in love with her rapist. I give props to the story for never blaming Silk Spectre I, and like I said, teaspoons, but I was referring more to the resultant reviews - people are going to care more about Dr. M's cock showing than about the rape. There will be people feeling completely justified that the rape happened. There will be people who don't care. In many movies, rape is used as a tool to tiltillate and justify heroism. Whilst I do understand that in this movie it is meant to disturb, there are probably many subtle nuances related to this issue that this movie probably isn't covering.

Mainstream Hollywood in particular is controlled by straight while male CEOs who don't want their audience turned. I've got another link for you on that if you're interested. Slumdog Millionaire was actually supposed to be an indie film, released straight to DVD. Danny Boyle only went big because of the Bombay attacks.

And it's the hard issues we need to talk about. I'll understand perfectly the "baby steps" needed to take in order to be able to confront these tough issues, but dude, you can't get more visceral than just paying attention to the shit in the news.... :P One thing though, as discussed by Sir Philip Sidney - the poets tell the truth in a way that's palatable to the masses.

Re: **NOT Spoiler free**

[zibblsnrt.livejournal.com]

(and of the scene where Dr. Manhattan casually dismisses his partner's disgust that he's sending duplicates to her instead of himself),

. . .

Oh, it's definitely a peek into the sexual relationship of two people, and it's clear that the woman doesn't want that, but he does it anyway. That's pretty passive-aggressive misogyny. This is, alas, also a scene most likely to elicit laughter. "You want sex? Then DONT COMPLAIN WHEN YOU'RE GETTING IT, BITCH! What? Sex on your terms? The fuck? Only men get to call the shots."

That's not what I saw in the novel at all; I assume the film version was dramatically altered, since that's nothing like what I read.

Re: **NOT Spoiler free**

[aurora-nine.livejournal.com]

It's not what I saw on the movie either.
I found a youtube clip that shows the book (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fKCt4OmAA_8) - pause at second 24.
I tried to find a you tube clip of that part of the movie but I couldn't.

To me, this is identical to what happened in the film. He says "I don't know how to please you anymore." And to me, it seems like that statement implies that splitting his consciousness like that DID please her at one point (and I wouldn't mind trying it out haha) but it doesn't anymore.

Personally that's not misogyny, this relationship between them is complex, not one sided or hateful. And also, just for the record, I would be more skeptical about how when these guy split up and Silk Spectre II goes for Dan (Night Owl) and he is impotent during their big sex scene and how that's all perfectly ok.

Re: **NOT Spoiler free**

[fantasyecho.livejournal.com]

Like I said, that was one scene which would elicit laughter from the audience (and it did, in Melissa McEwan's area), so I'm generally leery about that kind of situation being presented in a mass-audience format. I'd probably have been better disposed towards it in the book.

Re: **NOT Spoiler free**

[aurora-nine.livejournal.com]

Ok well leery is a lot better that hateful.

Re: **NOT Spoiler free**

[fantasyecho.livejournal.com]

I'm saving the hate for the Rorschach fans.

You know, the ones who sincerely believe he's on the right track.

Re: **NOT Spoiler free**

[zibblsnrt.livejournal.com]

Having just seen it tonight, the theatre I was in took it mostly silently with a bit of "WTF's going on?" - I don't think many of them had seen the book. The book and the movie handled it in different ways (more dialogue in the movie, the Manhattans are much more emotive in the book), but it'd take a level of reinterpretation I can't agree with to see the character as being misogynistic.

There's things in the movie to react poorly to, such as damned near every thing the Comedian says, does, or is, or those insane fools who come away from either the book or the movie admiring him and/or Rorschach, but this particular objection feels like a bit of a stretch.

Re: **NOT Spoiler free**

[fantasyecho.livejournal.com]

A person doesn't need to be outrightly hateful of women to be misogynistic. Plus, even if the character's not misogynistic, the scene is. It's dismissive of the woman in the scene, and this scene, as I said, is likely to elicit laughter (several people have commented that in their theatre, people laughed at this scene, as well as the rape scene and another bit).

Re: **NOT Spoiler free**

[whoretoculture.net (from livejournal.com)]

Just dropping a note to say thanks for those links. I'm wanting to write up a critique of the whole whore-mother-screws-up-her-child stereotype Moore dropped into the book (despite self-naming himself as a feminist) as I find that no matter how good and right the critique of the way other female characters are depicted, that one seems to fly under the radar. It's misogynistic and offensive as well, yet even feminist critiques seem to simply accept it.

Incidentally, what you're saying about the superhero genre is exactly one of the things Moore was trying to express in Watchmen - that the movie missed almost completely.
http://shemale.livejournal.com - has an excellent review of the film from that perspective and how it missed the point of the original book.

Re: **NOT Spoiler free**

[fantasyecho.livejournal.com]

Thanks for the linkage too!

I understand that the movie is very different from the book in that way. Which is why I won't be seeing the movie, but I'll likely read the GN.

That is... when I manage to get over that mountain of other books I've bought to read...

Re: **NOT Spoiler free**

[fantasyecho.livejournal.com]

p.s. I love you too, and I'm not actually shouting at you.

Re: **NOT Spoiler free**

[aurora-nine.livejournal.com]

:D I know. I really appreciate your points of view and discussion.

[aurora-nine.livejournal.com]

OK just because this is hi-larious and will surely further our discussion:

http://www.newgrounds.com/portal/view/485797 (video)