Talk:Adrian Veidt

Abilities
The character catches a bullet with his hands and seems to be capable of several other feats that surpass the abilities of a normal human being. I wonder how he manages to do that. Shouldn't that be mentioned? 134.106.199.1 09:07, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

I don't think it's that he actually moves faster than a bullet, but he's able to anticipate where the bullet will hit and is able to move faster than the trigger is pulled. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.32.174.24 (talk) 16:53, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

He still has to move faster than the bullet to catch it. Even if he knew when the trigger was pulled, no human being can move quickly enough to intercept a bullet. It's super speed and reaction time without a doubt.69.9.210.13 (talk) 22:10, 4 November 2011 (UTC)


 * The bullet hit his hands, injuring them (they bled). He didn't have to "catch" the bullet, just getting his hands in the way of it, before it killed him, would do. He could anticipate the bullet, and it's aim, from looking at the gun before it was fired. Laurie's never used a gun before, it's likely she's not very quick with it. Veidt is an athlete, but like everybody (except you-know-who) in Watchmen, he's an "ordinary" human person.

188.28.162.241 (talk) 14:14, 15 November 2011 (UTC) Greenaum

Analysis
I disagree with several points in this section. I don't think that Veidt likes to kill, but rather that his "sloppiness" surrounding the staged assassination attempt merely reflects his unbridled egotism. From his point of view, each of the deaths were logically necessary to achieve his goals, and I'm sure he felt that no one would be clever enough to trace his ownership of the businesses.

I'm not entirely sure analysis sections like these should even appear in articles, since they tend to be fannish and encourage speculation and "new research". -DynSkeet (talk) 11:42, August 18, 2005 (UTC)

It's also interesting to note that Veidt fits perfectly with the image of the ideal Aryan German. Ironically, he calls the Comedian "practically a Nazi," to which Rorschach points out that Veidt was more of a sell-out concerning the Keene Act. When Veidt finally teleports the monster, he is treating New York as the Nazis treated any group they persecuted. New York, with all of its weak citizens as pointed out through the book, becomes the sacrificial lamb for Veidt's plan. Veidt is also a profiteer of his own acts, using the attack to sell his already-planned "Millenium" line, featuring more Aryan imagery. Veidt is Truman, but also Hitler, Stalin and Henry Ford rolled in one. Is he right? Few people think that Hitler, Stalin and Ford were. Palexandridis 17:18, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

Something else struck me while reading the series: it's the set of ads for perfume/cosmetics from Adrian's companies, which are initially set in a somber mood and, right after the explosion, replaced by a new product line illustrated by positive themes (see 'this is the time, these are the feelings'). This illustrates the depth of his thinking, also one step ahead of others in trade as weel as in his general "world saviour" plan. I think something should be added about it.

Please, someone from Japan
Tell the americans who glorify Ozymandias and Truman for dropping the nuclear bomb in Hiroshima and killing half the population of New York to FUCK OFF! 168.243.218.2


 * BRB Busy being a cowboy and saving the world from Al Qaedadada terrorism. FREEDOM.151.205.100.243 (talk) 04:02, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm not going to comment on the above statement, but I do notice an error in the comparison to the dropping of the A-bomb. Truman wasn't elected at the time, and so Rorschach was merely holding two men up to very different standards. 69.117.143.23

Well, *I* am going to comment on the first statement: I'm not from Japan, but it's debatable whether Truman dropped the bomb in order to end the war, or to test new war tech, or to impress the Soviets. So the comparison in the article is suspect... It's not clear WHY Truman dropped the bomb at all. Some people outside the US consider him a war criminal. I know I do.201.235.51.167 23:48, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

I'm an american, most of my friends have read Watchmen, and none of us support past or future atomic warfare, but we are less decisive about Veidt for one major reason: Watchmen's central idea is that human concepts of moral absolutism are basically worthless. So anybody glorifying Veidt AND Truman must have missed the point, not only because they are glorifying a character from Watchmen, but also because they have obviously read Watchmen and are still supporting a moral absolute. -Nietzscheanlie


 * Thats not quite right. The point of watchmen was not to debunk moral absolutism, but to make you question your own ethical values. If moore wanted to debunk moral absolutism, he would have shown the newspaper editers throwing out rorschach's journal at the end. 98.165.149.229 (talk) 06:16, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Category:Heroes who turned evil
I'm not convinced Ozymandias should be in this category, the comic has a more nuanced view of morality in both intent and action, and I don't think he is meant to be seen as an "evil" character per se. Thoughts? JoshuaZ 03:40, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Someone else has already removed it, but I agree. Comic book villians typically do what they do to "be evil" or for personal gain or vengeance.  Ozy certainly did not see himself as evil, but felt that the times called for a vision beyond conventional definitions of morality.  Though what he did would be considered evil by most, his goals were for the betterment of all mankind. Canonblack 13:41, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Not necessarily. Many comic book villians have noble intentions or at least reasonable explanations for what they want.  Take Marvel's Magneto, for instance.  As a former victim of the persecution of a racial minority (a Jew captured by the Nazis), he saw conflict between the human and mutant races to be inevitable and simply wanted his side to win.  By his own moral code, he's doing what's right to protect his people against a majority that he believes will never accept the more powerful and less numerous mutants as equals.
 * While mainstream American comics tend to have a black or white morality about them that lends to villians being evil for the sake of being evil, Watchmen is one of many works that deliberately tweaks the assumptions of the superhero comic genre. The moral ambiguity of the setting does not make Ozymandias any less of a fallen hero, though.  He clearly follows the principle that the ends justify the means, and few people would consider this to be a heroic trait. 192.133.193.80 21:19, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
 * It is absolutely a heroic trait. That is one of the things that I find so wrong about the superhero genre; we glorify these irresponsible kids for acting as vigilantes, and just because they are in the Justice League or the X-Men and they have a cool costume, that's all ok, regardless of whatever damage to private property they cause. That's also one of the things Watchmen does best; getting us to question these archetypical notions we have established about morality which are really very questionable. Juvenal said it best: Quis custodiet ipsos custodes. Sheavsey33 (talk) 12:57, 31 May 2010 (UTC)


 * "The ends justify the means" is NOT an heroic trait, not even an admirable one. Though I'm sure it's easy to come up with cases for both sides, and it's an argument at least as old as time. Veidt illustrates this point well. He's not evil out of petty reasons. He possibly saves the world "in the end"(!). There are many millions murdered to "make the world a better place". On the one hand, the self-made nature of his power is more admirable than getting it by radioactive good luck, on the other, should he use it at all? If anything, Watchmen brings up a lot of great questions, tells stories, but... nothing ever ends, Adrian. 188.28.162.241 (talk) 14:43, 15 November 2011 (UTC) Greenaum

Question
So I was reading anotehr finely written wikiarticle about the Red Hot Chili Peppers, and their music video for "Otherside". The inspiration for the visual style of it came from a groundbreaking German Expressionist film from the 1920's, called "The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari". I was in the middle of watching it over at archive.org (http://www.archive.org/stream/DasKabinettdesDoktorCaligariTheCabinetofDrCaligari/The_Cabinet_of_Dr._Caligari_256kb.mp4) and noticed in the opening credits, that the somnambulist, a key character in the film, is played by a man named Conrad Veidt. I didn't notice any mention of this in the article, but I think that there may be something to this.
 * Is their some deeper significance I am missing? Sharing the same surname isn't notable, unless the characters are markedly similar to the extent that Adrian is probably based on Conrad. Even then we would need to find a source stateing this in the outside world to furfil No Original Research. Jefffire 11:52, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Yes, that's a bit of a stretch. Conrad may be the most famous real-life Veidt, but he's certainly not the only one and the surname is not terribly uncommon.  Other than that Conrad was German-born, emigrated to the US, and championed humanitarian causes, he has little in common with Adrian.  Adrian is a wealthy philanthropist who gains incredible intelligence and vision that enables him to change the world (or attempt to do so).  Conrad was a straight gentile actor who championed Jewish and Gay causes and took a vocal anti-Nazi stance during WWII. Adrian's parents emigrated to the US when Adrian was very young; Conrad emigrated when he was already a famous and highly-regarded actor in order to try his luck in Hollywood.  The Wikipedia article for Veidt states that one of his screen portrayals was the model for Batman's nemesis the Joker, so any supposition about Veidt also being the model for a misguided vigilante seems even more tenuous without perhaps a quote from Moore.  And knowing Moore's work, if he'd intended Adrain to be based on Conrad, wouldn't he have simply named him Conrad?  It's not like "Conrad Veidt" was a household name in the late 1980s. Canonblack 14:01, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Illuminatus!
While this is an interesting parallel drawn between Illuminatus and Watchmen, this is most likely due Alan Moore's influence from Wilson and Shea as strikingly themes from Illuminatus tend to pop up in his work repeatedly (numerology and philosophy on government in V for Vendetta; direct citation of RAW's work in the notes to From Hell, etc.) Since there's no mention of trancendental immortality in Watchmen, it would seem more likely that the eye in the pyramid is an homage to Illuminatus, if you could even say that since Wilson and Shea did not create the idea of the secret society, only popularized it (although, yeah the mass murder thing is still there). In any case, where's the Karen Berger comment?

Unfortunately, the comment is as yet unpublished outside of here. I hadn't read the part about DOCUMENTING sources for Wikipedia before I put this in. The exact conversation, as I recall it (it was @ 1987, Animal Man was out, and Chas. Truog was sitting beside me):

Karen (looking at 1st ILL! comic): Alan Moore would really like to see this.

Me: Yes, I noticed from reading Watchmen that he ws an Illuminatus! fan. Interesting how if you know about transcendental illumination how it totally changes the ending of Watchmen.

Karen (smiling, I believe): Yes, isn't it?

This took place at Chicago Comicon, since supplanted by Wizard World Chicago. Icarus 23

BTW, thanks for the wording change -- it reads much better. -- I23!

I am sort of surprised that he Illuminati/Freemasonry theme is not explored further in the Ozymandias entry. At the very least it seems plausible that Ozymandias symbolizes the Illuminati/Freemasons. Here are some links coincidental or otherwise between the two.
 * 1) Ozymandias being of German descent. The best known branch of Illuminati is purported to be the Bavarian Illuminati.
 * 2) His fascination with Ramses II and Egyptian history. Freemasons, of which the Illuminati are reported to be an offshoot of, were have said to have helped built the pyramids
 * 3) Ozymandias' costume contains the Illuminati symbol the "All Seeing Eye" within a pyramid.
 * 4) There is a curious use of a period within the word "illumination" on chapter 11, page 8, panel 9.  Ozymandias says "I wanted to match his accomplishment, bringing an age of illuminat.ion to a benighted world." Does this indicate that Ozymandias briefly paused while saying "illumination"?  Did he almost have a Freudian slip and say Illuminati instead?
 * 5) Ozymandias' plan to unite the world is consistent with conspiracy theories of a New World Order or one-world government.
 * 6) He use of a large number of televisions lets him monitor events from all around the world. In effect he has an "All Seeing Eye."
 * 7) His plan to unite the world took the form of a pyramid. Ozymandias says "No one will know.  Those involved are all dead. killed by killers who killed each other, a lethal pyramid."  He further says that his servants death "provided a silent capstone." Ch. 12, pg. 10, panel 6.
 * 8) Ozymandias' monster contains a single eye. In an abstract way, it looks like an eye on top of a pyramid.
 * 9) If you superimpose the letter "A" and "V" (Adrian Veidt's initials) on top of each other, you get something resembling the Masonic symbol of the Square and Compass. You can see an image of this on the back of the chair Ozymandias is sitting in Chapter 11, pg 16, panels 1 and 4, and then again on pg 17, panel 7. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Square_compasses.svg) Strongman1970 19:10, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
 * This is all massively original research. JoshuaZ 23:14, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
 * There are internet forums for that kind of thing. 121.1.51.190 13:33, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Now they will come for you... Sheavsey33 (talk) 13:04, 31 May 2010 (UTC)


 * "Illuminat.ion", that's a lot to read in to a tiny dot on the page! I'm impressed! I imagine one would have to ask Mister Moore, has anyone ever spotted that before? Also, I'm sure the blood-splash on the pyramid poster, in the room of the guy who went nuts and killed his kids has something to do with something. 188.28.162.241 (talk) 14:33, 15 November 2011 (UTC) Greenaum


 * The author of this analysis of Veidt seems to believe Veidt symbolizes the Illuminati, though he/she carefully avoided using the actual word. If you research Project Bluebird and its connections to the Illuminati, then read this page, you'll see that the argument that Veidt does symbolize the Illuminati is quite substantial. 11:17, April 19 2012 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.90.163.66 (talk) 16:23, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Homage in Watchmen#11 or 12 to an incident from Professor X's backstory
I think there was a scene in of these issues where he (Vedit) was wearing traveler's clothes walking up a hill and an artist was painting a landscape. This reminds me of a scene from X-MEN vol 1 #117, page 6 panel 7.

23:27, 26 February 2008 (UTC)Enda80 (talk)Enda80

Fair use rationale for Image:Ozymandias.PNG
Image:Ozymandias.PNG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. BetacommandBot (talk) 20:06, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Ozymandias in mask
This article needs a picture of Ozymandias wearing his mask, in full costume. I added one but the image was removed because it is 'messy'. Snapshots from comic books often are, messy does not mean it needs to be removed. If you'd like to crop out the partial images of his teammates, go ahead. Or else, replace it with a cleaner-looking picture. Currently, Ozymandias is only shown in partial costume, it doesn't properly reflect the character. Tyciol (talk) 21:12, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Page deleted and converted to redirect
This page seems to be in some sort of deletion war in which it is periodically converted to a redirect page and then periodically converted back.

As the talk page notes, there was a discussion on deletion of the article and the result was to keep this page. It has significantly more content than the Characters of Watchmen page. If you don't like the content of the page, edit it. But there does not appear to be any reason for deleting the article. Sligocki (talk) 20:33, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
 * All notable secondary source information about the character is covered in Characters of Watchmen, hence the merge that was implemented after that discussion. Everything else is in-universe detail based on primary sources, which is discouraged. WesleyDodds (talk) 07:31, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
 * That's strange, here the decision was to keep the articles on all the separate characters, and not to merge the information into List of Watchmen characters. What eventually happened is exactly the opposite. Is there any reason to revert the keep decision? -- Gabi S. (talk) 11:25, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

Destroying New York is a Right-Wing Action?
In the section on "Personality" Veidt is accurately described as a liberal, which he is labeled as (by himself and others) throughout Watchmen. However, it then goes on to say that his "actions in destroying New York to save the world are extremely right-wing and utilitarian."

Yes to the latter, no to the former. Aside from a lack of any sourcing, this statement reveals a fundamental ignorance of what it means to be right-wing. Right-wingers are characterized by a strong aversion to change (or progress, depending on who you ask), intense nationalism, insular thinking and opposition to egalitarian social reordering.

Whatever you think of his methods, Ozymandias enacted his plan in order to change the world order, force international cooperation, broaden mankinds perspectives and shake up the world hierarchy. Does that sound right-wing?

Though they've been more common & visible in recent years, right-wingers do not have a monopoly on brutal actions. Radical liberalism can lead to decisions as dangerous as any radical conservative's. I'm a liberal myself (and proud of it!), but it's irresponsible to think that the good aspects of Veidt can be listed as liberally motivated but the bad ones are right-wing. There's no evidence that his liberalism is a "facade" because he made the "right-wing" choice to kill millions. He's a radical liberal and that informs all his decisions, whether it's to be charitable, vegetarian or homicidal.

Long story short, I move to redact the comments on Ozymandias' violent decisions being right-wing and an inherent contradiction of his liberalism. He's a bad person, but that doesn't mean he's a bad liberal. The Cap&#39;n (talk) 19:04, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Crimebusters
Actually, from how the meeting went, it seems unlikely anybody joined Nelson's "Crimebusters". While Adrian stayed behind, I doubt the two of them went off fighting crime together. It was at this point that Adrian really understood that beating up purse-snatchers was not going to save the world. This is when he started The Plan! God I love this book!

So the bit about Crimebusters is wrong.

188.28.162.241 (talk) 14:19, 15 November 2011 (UTC) Greenaum

Possibly homosexual
That line in the comic is meant more as a description of Rorschach's shattered, angry mind than anything to do with Adrian's personal life. Mentioning this, and the rather accusatory way he's referred to as politically liberal in this article seems to be from the writing of an 11-year-old who didn't really understand the comic properly. I may take my scissors to this article, there are lots of chunks that really seem to need it.

188.28.162.241 (talk) 14:52, 15 November 2011 (UTC) Greenaum


 * It's most likely an in-joke, but in the film adaptation there's a folder named "Boys" on Adrian's computer: snapshot
 * 89.69.136.52 (talk) 16:38, 10 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Well, he is called a homo because of the graphics. He wears pink, his ship is pink, his company's logo is a pink triangle, he has a cat (albeit a very big cat), and he sells cosmetics. But even these signs can be only a joke, or a red herring, to make readers forget his wealth and influence, which would easily recover him as the antagonist.
 * He may be gay. But in this story, it is insignificant.
 * 213.222.181.220 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 23:15, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

"Known Liberals"!
From the tone of the text I've replaced, it seemed that either the author was the ghost of Joe McCarthy, or a kid who doesn't understand politics. People are generally quite open about their political opinions. That makes Adrian a "liberal", not a "known" one! Dan and Laurie too seem like liberal people, so Adrian's not the "only" one of the group.

I added the bit about the Indian famine aid to back up the point on this.

I mentioned The Plan, to back up the original author's point about Adrian's high self-regard, and because really The Plan is the culmination of Adrian's personality and what's relevant about it.

I removed the bit about homosexual. He's not seen or mentioned to be romantically involved with anybody in the book. The only "source" for this opinion is Rorschach, who as a reliable witness is hardly "without stain", as you might say. And SAY, there's that stain on his overcoat! Just noticed that. Man I love that book!

188.28.162.241 (talk) 15:38, 15 November 2011 (UTC) Greenaum

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Ozymandias (comics). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081229070626/http://scifiscripts.com/scripts/wtchmn.txt to http://www.scifiscripts.com/scripts/wtchmn.txt

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 02:55, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

Characters mentioned but never identified. Links?
The last full paragraph includes the following sentence:
 * Veidt's plan succeeds, but Veidt also intends to kill Dreiberg and Laurie afterwards.

Who are Dreiberg and Laurie? For people who don't already know, they should be identified. Ileanadu (talk) 17:50, 7 November 2019 (UTC)
 * , fixed. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:54, 7 November 2019 (UTC)

Requested move 31 January 2020

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 

The result of the move request was: moved as requested per the discussion below. Dekimasu よ! 10:24, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

Ozymandias (character) → Ozymandias (Watchmen) – (or perhaps Ozymandias (DC Comics)). The current title is an incomplete disambiguation. There are many characters called Ozymandias: see Ozymandias (disambiguation). After the move, Ozymandias (character) should redirect to the disambiguation page. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 13:54, 31 January 2020 (UTC)


 * Support - This move is the clearest disambiguation alternative. -- Netoholic @ 14:38, 31 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Support - as above In ictu oculi (talk) 08:11, 1 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Support per nom.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 10:57, 10 February 2020 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Moving sections
Is there anyway you can move the "Events of Watchmen (HBO Series)" paragraph to "in other media"? His biography should just be his comic book history, ending at doomsday clock. You already have the events of the HBO series under "in other media," so there is no reason to include it twice.

--138.88.227.232 (talk) 18:37, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

Requested move 8 May 2023

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. There were two main arguments at play in the discussion. The first is WP:COMMONNAME; this line of discussion led to disagreement over whether "Adrian Veidt" or "Ozymandias" is the subject's common name. As far as evidence for this claim, Google search results were provided, which showed around three times as many results for "Ozymandias" as for "Adrian Veidt" (663k vs. 203k when I checked the links); it was also alleged that the primary sources (the graphic novel and HBO series) predominantly use "Adrian Veidt". On the whole, neither side of the COMMONNAME argument appeared to make a strong case, and I would not have found a consensus from that alone. However, it was also pointed out that the title "Adrian Veidt" was preferable under WP:NATURAL, as it allowed for the removal of parenthetical disambiguation. This additional factor sways the balance of the arguments in favor of "Adrian Veidt". (non-admin closure) ModernDayTrilobite (talk • contribs) 20:33, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

Ozymandias (Watchmen) → Adrian Veidt – Per WP:COMMONNAME. Primarily known as Veidt in comics and other media, and even in this article as currently written. U-Mos (talk) 09:59, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

Additionally, while I argue that the proposed title is the common name, it also provides WP:NATURAL disambiguation. U-Mos (talk) 13:34, 8 May 2023 (UTC) The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
 * Oppose per WP:COMMONNAME In ictu oculi (talk) 12:53, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Support per NATURAL.--Ortizesp (talk) 02:42, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Oppose there is no way Adrian Veidt is the common name. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 12:15, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
 * I thought this was pretty self-evident, but maybe it's worth outlining the common name matter further. For secondary material, Google searches for ozymandias watchmen and adrian veidt suggest a fairly even split: almost all discussion using both names, some leading with Ozymandias, some leading with Veidt. This evenness means WP:NATURAL should be considered, in Veidt's favour. However, the primary texts are much more weighted. The Watchmen graphic novel uses Veidt dominantly, with Ozymandias mentioned sporadically as the character's superhero alias in the narrative past, long since abandoned and with his true identity known throughout the story. In the recent HBO series, the character is unidentified for a time, referred to as Veidt while missing presumed dead, and also by that name when his identity is revealed. That, in my view, clearly tips the common name balance towards the proposed title. U-Mos (talk) 18:19, 9 May 2023 (UTC)