MovieChat Forums > Watchmen (2019) Discussion > Proof Watchmen is titled in name only

Proof Watchmen is titled in name only

posted 5 years ago by Sandman27 (3043)
49 replies | jump to latest

From the Nicole Kassell, EP and director:

“Like a lot of us, I was left reeling from [the] election of 2016. So, wrestling, personally, with what’s happening in this country, when I read the pilot, honestly, I was shaking,” Kassell explained. “It felt like this is the answer, to me, for what I can do now to respond to this political time. As hard and scary as it is to take on, I’m so grateful to have been a part of it.”

Now what the hell does the 2016 election have anything to do with Watchmen? Because the EP is bitter that their candidate lost, she's going to exude her bitterness through the show that she is producing and directing at the cost of the integrity of the source material. That is unacceptable!

reply

[–] mcqueen (1150) 5 years ago

Elect a racist, get a show about racism.

What's so hard to understand?

reply

[–] Sandman27 (3043) 5 years ago

Wow! Zero Watchmen in that reply! Is Trump President in the show? No. It's Robert Redford. Your reply only gives further proof the show is Watchmen in name only. Thank you.

reply

[–] maul (1535) 5 years ago

Everybody is a racist if they're not far left wing, according to you nuts. You've made these words meaningless at this point. So what the fuck does Watchmen have to do with Trump? Does every show now have to deal with Trump? Yes it does, according to you TDS loons.

And you wonder why people push back when you try to inject these political narratives into every media avenue imaginable.

reply

[–] Burk48917 (11090) 5 years ago

I'd love to know which of his policies that are unique to his presidency, you view as racist? I mean, if he was racist, you'd have an example...right?

reply

[–] username2k13 (65) 5 years ago

how about removing WS groups from the fbi watchlist?

how about creating the label "black identity extremist"?

reply

[–] papamihel (1585) 5 years ago

I haven't found anything about your first claim apart from "one FBI official said". The first link in Google search actually stated that Homeland security added "white supremacists" to the list of threats.

As for the BIE, how would you classify the BLM thugs?

reply

[–] username2k13 (65) 5 years ago

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/donald-trump-cut-white-supremacism-countering-violent-extremism-programme-neo-nazi-counter-extremism-a7558796.html

after you dog whistle with your "thugs" comment, not going to reply to that

reply

[–] maul (1535) 5 years ago

Pointing out that BLM encourages violence is a dog whistle? You truly are an NPC.

And if you actually read that biased article, you'd understand that it's pure speculation and nothing came of it. Also, if it was true, the source (unidentified) only mentions that he wants to put more focus on Islamic extremists - the whole "cutting white supremacy" specifically is totally fabricated by the article writer.

reply

[–] Burk48917 (11090) 5 years ago

Exactly, and this story is being ran in foreign news, without any actual source.

reply

[–] papamihel (1585) 5 years ago

I am not an American and don't care about your obsessions but I remember seeing those riots on TV. These young men are the very textbook definition of a "thug" and I don't care what their skin color is.

As for CVE program, it had nothing to do with FBI watch-list. It was a program which was supposed to award grants to stop people from getting into gangs and how effective it was if at all. Poverty and lack of education are not the only factors in both choosing a life of crime and radicalization. In fact, we've seen lot of well educated jihadis who came from well-off families.
In any case, an Administration is within its mandate to relocate the funds to a goal it considers a higher priority.

reply

[–] username2k13 (65) 5 years ago

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/st-louis-sergeant-there-are-white-supremacists-on-the-police-force/

yea nothing came of it all right

do you watch tv after sporting events where white people riot and call them thugs too? i suspect not

i wonder what would affect the prioritization of funds if one had a WS agenda?

reply

[–] maul (1535) 5 years ago

Based on the "nothing came of it all right" comment - was that article intended as a response to my post? If so, there seriously must be something wrong with your brain (no surprise there). That has nothing to do with the original article you posted. It has nothing to do with Trump.

It was one woman making a claim about the police force in St. Louis - again, nothing to do with your original article or Trump. I really suspect you haven't even read any of these things you are posting.

reply

[–] username2k13 (65) 5 years ago

if you cant draw a line between WS and trump and how these articles are related then theres something wrong with your brain

shifting focus off WS while simultaneously seeing WS infiltrate LE is an agenda

if theyre not focused on keeping ppl from becoming WS and also letting them into LE to enforce practices, thats an agenda

im not sure if youre reading them as you conveniently skipped the part where the church shooting wasnt classified as terrorism

reply

[–] maul (1535) 5 years ago

Wow. I just don't know what to say.

"shifting focus off WS while simultaneously seeing WS infiltrate LE is an agenda"

"if theyre not focused on keeping ppl from becoming WS and also letting them into LE to enforce practices, thats an agenda"

You pulled this straight out of your ass. There's literally NOTHING in the second article you posted that has to do with Trump, or this conspiracy theory.

There's nothing even in the original article that showed he was shifting focus off WS, like I already stated. You have shown absolutely nothing to support these claims to begin with, and certainly nothing to support any connection to Trump whatsoever to the second article.

Seriously, you are borderline braindead if you aren't a troll.

reply

[–] username2k13 (65) 5 years ago

sorry theres not an article for you to refute

i dont imagine WS outline their agendas for public consumption

by the same token you take to call me names, ill chalk you up to at the least prejudiced

reply

[–] maul (1535) 5 years ago

You are a far left conspiracy nut who has no evidence to support their wild conclusions. The end.

reply

[–] username2k13 (65) 5 years ago

and youre a right wing advocate of WS the end

reply

[–] maul (1535) 5 years ago

And you just keep proving how utterly batshit you are. I don't even support Trump, I support the truth, facts, and evidence - and you have provided absolutely none of it. You think that anyone who doesn't agree with your far left conspiracy theories is a "right wing advocate of white supremacy"... which is the kind of insane shit that is making people leave the left. Like myself a few years ago. So please, continue with your batshit posts - I'm sure it's convincing a lot of people.

reply

[–] username2k13 (65) 5 years ago

if you support truth facts and evidence then become an investigative reporter and truly prove for yourself and others that trump is not advocating WS policy

go speak to WS groups and ask them if do they identify with trump

ask them about their clandestine agendas, joining of LE and come report back here that its all conspiracy and nothing more

and your adamant use of derogatory language towards me betrays your "centrist" ideals

reply

[–] maul (1535) 5 years ago

"if you support truth facts and evidence then become an investigative reporter and truly prove for yourself and others that trump is not advocating WS policy"

You are the one making the claim, the burden of proof is on you. You can't just claim someone is a white supremacist with no evidence then say "well uh, prove me wrong."

I guess in far left la-la opposite land that's how you want it be, but in reality that's not how it works. Just like in the justice system where we are innocent until proven guilty (again something you don't like, as shown in the MeToo movement).

reply

[–] username2k13 (65) 5 years ago

theres good ppl on both sides was all the evidence i need

reply

[–] papamihel (1585) 5 years ago

>https://www.cbsnews.com/news/st-louis-sergeant-there-are-white-supremacists-on-the-police-force/

You lucky bastards have municipal police forces. Unlike most of us. And as a citizen and a local resident you have real power to affect how your city is policed. I'm sorry but it's ridiculous to claim that all over the country all police departments in different states are being staffed by racists.

>do you watch tv after sporting events where white people riot and call them thugs too? i suspect not

And again, I'm not an American and don't share your national obsession with colors. I also don't see humans strictly as groups based on shallow physical traits. Skin color doesn't determine what kind of person you are any more than eye color or height.

As for prioritization of funds I can't speak for your current Administration but we've seen that every massively advertised white power\nazi rally in your country in the last few year failed to bring together more than a few hundred people. My guess: while racist attitudes clearly persist in your society the actual threat level from WS radicals is rather low. Doesn't mean it should be ignored, of course, but it might not warrant a special task force or a fund. At least at the moment.

reply

[–] username2k13 (65) 5 years ago

oh you dont see color, how nice of you

theres a notion for those WS who dont publicly show their allegiance called "ghost skin"

so while you might not see attendance in public that doesnt mean they dont exist and is all the more reason to "allocate funds" towards their activities

reply

[–] Sandman27 (3043) 5 years ago

Username, are you pro Anti-fa? Yes or no?

reply

[–] username2k13 (65) 5 years ago

no im not pro antifa

any more red herrings?

reply

[–] Sandman27 (3043) 5 years ago

So you condemn them as an organization and their actions, correct?

reply

[–] username2k13 (65) 5 years ago

no i condemn trump supporters and their actions

like the guy who ran that woman over

and the guy who sprayed ppl with bear repellant

reply

[–] Sandman27 (3043) 5 years ago

So you are pro anti-fa.

reply

[–] Burk48917 (11090) 5 years ago

Username is obviously trolling at this point. Let him do it with himself.

reply

[–] username2k13 (65) 5 years ago

no whats trolling is bringing up antifa out of nowhere

reply

[–] Sandman27 (3043) 5 years ago

I'm sorry you failed to see the correlation.

reply

[–] username2k13 (65) 5 years ago

im sorry you dont condemn acts of terror on trumps behalf they way you do trump criticism

reply

[–] Sandman27 (3043) 5 years ago

I condemn ALL acts of terror including the idiot that used the bear spray. The idiot that drove a car into a crowded street. The idiot that shot into a crowd in Vegas. And the anti-fa thugs that cowardly cover their faces violently protesting across the country and preventing an elderly lady from crossing the street just to hear a person speak.

I asked you a simple question that should get a simple answer and as Robert DeNiro said, You blewwwwwwwwwwww it! You blew it!

So let me give you another chance. Do you give Trump credit for eliminating Bagdadi? Yes or no?

reply

[–] username2k13 (65) 5 years ago

i give the men and women of our armed services credit for fulfilling their duties, not a draft dodger otherwise known as capt bone spurs

reply

[–] Sandman27 (3043) 5 years ago

Spoken like a true indoctrinee. The hosts of The View would be proud. Must not deviate from the "Orange man bad" narrative. 🤣

Once again, you failed to condemn an organization that incites violence and denies 1st Amendment rights to citizens. 👍

Let's do another one shall we? We're the people that crashed planes on 9/11 terrorists, or did they just do "some things"?

reply

[–] username2k13 (65) 5 years ago

im done with this pointless back and forth

continue to believe in the cheato

have a nice life

reply

[–] Sandman27 (3043) 5 years ago

Pointless? On the contrary. We got to learn so much about you.

1. You are a proud watcher of The View. ✔
2. Violence incited that benefits your beliefs is acceptable.✔
3. Indoctrinated into the "Orange man bad" narrative.✔
4. Facts are irrelevant when it comes to your opinion. Always.✔
5. Everybody that disagree with you are automatically a racist/homophobic/xenophobic/islamophobic/transphobic/anti-semite/etc.✔
6. Socialism Rules!✔

Let me know if I missed anything. 😂

reply

[–] papamihel (1585) 5 years ago

>oh you dont see color, how nice of you

I see color. I just don't care. Why does this sound so strange for you? This is an attitude of a normal human being.

>theres a notion for those WS who dont publicly show their allegiance called "ghost skin"

It sounds like a conspiracy theory but even if it's true... So what? If they do no harm what do you care what they think?

>so while you might not see attendance in public that doesnt mean they dont exist and is all the more reason to "allocate funds" towards their activities

By the same logic should the government dedicate special funds to the investigation of alien abductions and the Bigfoot?

reply

[–] username2k13 (65) 5 years ago

no normal humans see color but dont use it as basis to discriminate

being "colorblind" is a form of bias as well

just because theyre not in public doesnt mean they arent harming anyone or doing clandestine activities

its not the same logic because aliens and bigfoot havent been shown to do any harm

reply

[–] papamihel (1585) 5 years ago

>no normal humans see color but dont use it as basis to discriminate

Er... I'm truly speechless. Repeat this sentence to yourself and simply consider how is this anything "normal". And if it sounds logical to you, there's something seriously wrong with you and\or your beliefs.

>being "colorblind" is a form of bias as well

It's bias to see humans beings as individuals?

reply

[–] username2k13 (65) 5 years ago

its bias to not take color as a factor in their individuality

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/culturally-speaking/201112/colorblind-ideology-is-form-racism

reply

[–] papamihel (1585) 5 years ago

No. Culture, social status, upbringing, education, beliefs - yes. But skin coloring?
I presume you are a PoC. However the fact that you are a Westerner born and raised in a modern Democracy has a lot more impact on who you are that then fact that your ancestors left Africa some 80000 years later than mine.

reply

[–] username2k13 (65) 5 years ago

culture, social status, upbringing, education, beliefs- what informs all of these factors in some form if not race in western society?

outcomes for poc in terms of education, housing etc in a WS system that inherently uses tactics like redlining, underfunding schools etc

your ancestors came from the same place all of humanity's did

https://www.independent.co.uk/environment/homo-sapiens-origin-humans-botswana-zambezi-river-a9174396.html?fbclid=IwAR3fNEosisXeS4XtZ7U7R10V9OOT_nfWfZ3WqqFtrL3ZvXqBSLunAUsLCME

reply

[–] papamihel (1585) 5 years ago

It's like talking to a religious fanatic.

reply

[–] maul (1535) 5 years ago

The guy is either a troll is just extremely stupid. What a waste of time.

reply

[–] Burk48917 (11090) 5 years ago

Yup

reply

[–] username2k13 (65) 5 years ago

nope

reply

[–] raymondoz2007 (2079) 5 years ago

Trump has got more jobs for blacks then Obama ever did.

reply

[–] username2k13 (65) 5 years ago

the republicans wouldnt let obama do anything for black people

reply