8 Responses

  1. Flood as the Comedian…..Bruning as Rorschach…..Heineman as Ozymandias??? Sorry Neal. I’m exctited about the movie but I’m just not seeing the parallels.

    Couldn’t you have at least included a blue Ernie Chambers in the background as our departed Doctor Manhattan? On second thought, that may have been racially insensitive. You probably made the right call.

  2. Here’s what I was thinking:

    Flood has a rep as a nice guy, respectful and civil to everyone, which is represented by the smiley face. But then he’s also respected because he’s effective and gets the job done. Bruning’s figurative face changes all the time, a la the shifting Rorschach images. Consider the post-college conservative reinvention or the constant contradictions during the short-lived Senate campaign. Also, he’s widely considered to be a little kooky and unpredictable. Heineman (SPOILER ALERT!) is the brain behind it all, even when it appears he isn’t.

    Most importantly, all three characters could justify killing as punishment.

    Of course, all those assignments came after the Watchmen idea in order to make that theme fit. It wasn’t like I was sitting around and thinking “You know who Mike Flood reminds me of? The Comedian!” But if you’re concerned about not seeing the parallels, I’m not sure how Chambers could be accurately reflected in the most detached and unconcerned member of the cast.

  3. You’ve convinced me. Bravo!

    As for Chambers, he was a very dominant and imposing figure whose very existence (in the Legislature) was an obstacle to other’s machinations. It took his removal from the field of play to allow Ozy/Heineman’s plan to go into effect.

    Or something like that.

  4. Having been a big fan of your comics while still in college, I’m glad to have accidentally stumbled back onto your stuff through my youngest brother, a current student at ol’ UNL. Anyway, excellent comic. Quality satire coupled with major fan-boy appeal.

Leave a Reply