Chambers wrote:
> nemesis wrote:
>> He set out to make a movie about super-heroes.  He had to draw some 
>> references.
> 
> Sure he had to, but can you prove that he referenced Watchmen?
> 
> When Brad Bird himself denies it, then you're left with two stories that 
> have similarities.  NOT one story based on another.
> 
> Believe it or not, coincidences DO happen.  Given the public zeitgeist, 
> the idea of a "fallen hero" has been popular for quite some time, and 
> nostalgia is always a seller.  It's no wonder that somebody made a movie 
> about retired superheroes, whether or not the person who made it has 
> seen or read Watchmen.

I don't believe in coincidences at all in this case.  It's not a "fallen 
hero", nor "retired superheroes".

I'll be redundant and repeat it again:
* *outlawed* super-heroes
* a suggested plot to kill past super-heroes
* the villain undergoes a quest for personal heroism by saving the world 
from a faked attack to a city with a huge squid monster
* huge squid monster raised on a remote Island
* "no cape"
* "villain" uses cape

I agree with Darren that all but the first 2 are pretty common elements. 
  What I don't agree is to see all these very same elements together in 
the same order as they appear in Watchmen in The Incredibles as well. 
Why not other staple elements, or at least in another order?

He also denies Fantastic Four, but still you have a family quartet with:
* similar name for the heroes (Incredible/Fantastic)
* similar uniforms (different color, i instead of 4)
* a super-strong being (Mr. Incredible/The Thing)
* an elastic being (Elastigirl/Mr Fantastic)
* an invisible woman able to create force fields (Violet/Ms. Fantastic)
* a high-energy being (Dash/Human Torch) (actually, Dash has more to do 
with The Flash sure)
* a last enemy by the name of Underminer resembles a lot the The Mole 
Man, first enemy of FF

Funnily enough, wikipedian moderators allowed the reference to Fantastic 
Four, despite no acknowledgment from Bird either.  This is what truly 
pissed me off about the whole thing.  One simply can't list the shared 
plot details between The Incredibles and Watchmen, either under 
criticism section or even in the talk page.

Post a reply to this message

nemesis wrote:
>  What I don't agree is to see all these very same elements together in 
> the same order as they appear in Watchmen in The Incredibles as well. 

They're not in the same order. Killing the superheros starts and drives 
Watchmen, and is almost incidental in Incredibles, well near the end and 
already into the rescue phase.  Just as an example.

> Why not other staple elements, or at least in another order?

There are a bunch of other staple elements in each that aren't in the other. 
Misbehaving young superhero.  Forgiveness of past crimes as age progresses.

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   There's no CD like OCD, there's no CD I knoooow!

Post a reply to this message

Darren New wrote:
> nemesis wrote:
>>  What I don't agree is to see all these very same elements together in 
>> the same order as they appear in Watchmen in The Incredibles as well. 
> 
> They're not in the same order. Killing the superheros starts and drives 
> Watchmen, and is almost incidental in Incredibles, well near the end and 
> already into the rescue phase.

No, Mr. Incredible notices Gazerbeam going missing in a newspaper early 
on and even comment it with Frozone while in the car.  It does not take 
front stage, but is acknowledged to be happening way before the story 
starts.

BTW, masked vigilantes killing in Watchmen is just a suggested plot by 
Rorschach to explain The Comedian's death.  He is truly paranoid.  No 
previous such killings before nor after, except "career" incidents in 
older times, like Dollar Bill's being shot by criminals after the cape 
gets entangled in a door, just as other such examples of similar 
old-time deaths in The Incredibles.  The Incredibles diverged here by 
making the suggested plot to be real, just like making supers truly supers.

Post a reply to this message

nemesis wrote:
> Jim Henderson wrote:
>> On Fri, 15 May 2009 19:21:56 -0300, Nicolas Alvarez wrote:
>> 
>>> And Wikipedia itself is not an acceptable source for content added to
>>> Wikipedia:
>> 
>> That would be kinda self-reinforcing, wouldn't it?
> 
> The point is not to add content to wikipedia based on wikipedia content.
>   The wikipedia content at question is merely a plot overview.  I'm just
> saying there that "The incredibles" has a very similar plot to Watchmen
> and for the purpose of illustration I link to the plot overview in the
> wikipedia entry for Watchmen.  Which itself has no other reference than
> the work itself.

You looked at one plot, you looked at another plot, you decided they were
similar. That's original research.

You need to quote a reliable source saying the plots are similar, not quote
reliable sources on what the plots are, and making *your* conclusion that
they are similar, or that one was inspired on the other.

Post a reply to this message

nemesis wrote:
> BTW, just found this:
>
http://www.filmstalker.co.uk/archives/2009/03/watchmen_vs_the_incredibles.html

Okay, *now* add your stuff back, and cite that blog post.

Post a reply to this message

nemesis wrote:
> Darren New wrote:
>> nemesis wrote:
>>> I'm just saying there that "The incredibles" has a very similar plot
>>> to Watchmen
>> 
>> No, you're saying Incredible was *inspired* by Watchmen, not just
>> similar.
>> 
>> You would need to show that Brad Bird, for example, was aware of
>> Watchmen and knew the plot when he was making the Incredibles, as a
>> minimum.
> 
> How could he not be aware of this classic?  You know Alan Moore was
> featured in a Simpsons episode?  You know Brad Bird was creative
> consultant to the Simpsons?  No, I don't know if the episode is from
> before or after he left, what I do know is:
> 
> * a super-hero world where heroes are banned is by itself a very
> non-conventional plot for a super-hero story (at least until Watchmen
> got it done)
> * the plot is kicked off when an older hero goes missing (and is found
> to be dead)
> * the villain threatens the world with a fake attack so that he can be
> "heroic"
> * the threat is a huge, monocular monster with tentacles
> * the monster was raised in a remote Island
> * the dead hero was killed because of what the plans he uncovered in the
> Island
> * cape is bad for your health
> 
> If that's not enough for a link, I'll eat my underwear...

Nobody cares how obvious it is. I believe you need to cite sources when you
say water is made of two hydrogen atoms and one oxygen atom.

Post a reply to this message

nemesis wrote:
> Funnily enough, wikipedian moderators allowed the reference to Fantastic
> Four, despite no acknowledgment from Bird either.  This is what truly
> pissed me off about the whole thing.  One simply can't list the shared
> plot details between The Incredibles and Watchmen, either under
> criticism section or even in the talk page.

There is no sources for the Fantastic Four similarities either (in fact,
there is a [citation needed] tag), so I just removed it.

Post a reply to this message

Nicolas Alvarez wrote:
> nemesis wrote:
>> If that's not enough for a link, I'll eat my underwear...
> 
> Nobody cares how obvious it is. I believe you need to cite sources when you
> say water is made of two hydrogen atoms and one oxygen atom.

I clarified this already elsewhere:  I tried being more polite a second 
time and just listed the shared plot points in the critics sections 
rather than plainly suggesting inspiration.

Still, the only source I can find is the book itself.  You read it and 
you realize the plots are very similar.

Post a reply to this message

Nicolas Alvarez wrote:
> You need to quote a reliable source saying the plots are similar, not quote
> reliable sources on what the plots are, and making *your* conclusion that
> they are similar, or that one was inspired on the other.

My conclusion was based on my own experience with both works.  But yes, 
I get your point.

Post a reply to this message

Nicolas Alvarez wrote:
> There is no sources for the Fantastic Four similarities either (in fact,
> there is a [citation needed] tag), so I just removed it.

The problem I see is that wikipedia simply lacks common sense.  Ok, so 
that's a encyclopedia thing.

The fact that you have to source someone saying:
* similar name for the heroes (Incredible/Fantastic)
* similar uniforms (different color, i instead of 4)
* a super-strong being (Mr. Incredible/The Thing)
* an elastic being (Elastigirl/Mr Fantastic)
* an invisible woman able to create force fields (Violet/Ms. Fantastic)
* a high-energy being (Dash/Human Torch) (actually, Dash has more to do 
with The Flash sure)
* a last enemy by the name of Underminer resembles a lot the The Mole 
Man, first enemy of FF

rather than simply lookup such info in the works themselves -- pretty 
much a part of popular "inconscient collective" by now -- doesn't sound 
credible.

Would the above newsgroups post serve as reference?  A blog entry?

Post a reply to this message