This was posted 8 months 28 days ago, and might be an out-dated deal.

Related
  • expired

Watchmen: The Deluxe Edition Hardcover – Illustrated $38.23 + Delivery ($0 with Prime/ $59 Spend) @ Amazon AU

800
Watchmen: The Deluxe Edition Hardcover – Illustrated $38.23 + Delivery ($0 with Prime/ $59 Spend) @ Amazon AUAffiliate
Go to Deal
Cashback
rosebank on 27/03/2024 - 13:44 amazon.com.au (2405 clicks)
This post contains affiliate links. OzBargain might earn commissions when you click through and make purchases. Please see this page for more information.

deluxe hardcover, with sketches, extra bonus material and a new introduction by series artist Dave Gibbons.

Product details
ASIN ‏ : ‎ 1401238963
Publisher ‏ : ‎ DC COMICS; 1st edition (3 June 2013)
Language ‏ : ‎ English
Hardcover ‏ : ‎ 448 pages
ISBN-10 ‏ : ‎ 9781401238964
ISBN-13 ‏ : ‎ 978-1401238964
Reading age ‏ : ‎ 13 - 16 years
Dimensions ‏ : ‎ 18.75 x 2.74 x 28.24 cm

Price History at C CamelCamelCamel.
Books & Magazines Book Graphic Novel Hardcover Watchmen

Related Stores

Amazon AU
Amazon AU
Marketplace

closed Comments

  • Exia666 on 27/03/2024 - 13:54
    +4

    Cheers, grabbed one. Can't say no to a hardcover.

  • Jimothy Wongingtons on 27/03/2024 - 13:58
    +4

    Oh damn! Love the OG story, hardcover ANDextra material??? Sign me up!!

  • poppingtags on 27/03/2024 - 14:39
    +4

    Thanks OP, been thinking of picking up the book to read before jumping into the TV series. Apparently, the book provides a lot of missing context and the TV series has a lot of references to the book that you wouldn't notice unless you've read it.

      • poppingtags on 27/03/2024 - 15:53
        +6

        I have seen the movie and loved it, the series seems to be very highly rated on IMDB? What didn't you like about it (without giving away any spoilers!)

        • rosebank on 27/03/2024 - 16:54
          +3

          The TV series is fine. I liked it when it came out, but haven't rewatched it yet. I'll watch it again after I read this thing and watch the Ultimate Cut

        • Vyviel on 27/03/2024 - 19:23

          Its 57% audience score on Rotten Tomatoes I find IMDB ratings strange these days some shows rate really high but are bad and some are really low and are decent.

          It had its good points like all the actors and actresses were excellent but just overall it really annoyed me with the lazy writing and really dumb choices by the characters kinda just to push the story along (worst was having the super genius type characters doing really silly choices lol). Hard to say without spoilers even stuff like the character arcs often didn't seem to lead anywhere satisfying. Villains were very cheesy also compared to the ones we got in the comic who were far more interesting than I'm evil type villains rather than grey like the comics etc. Plot threads that never went anywhere. Final episode was pretty meh also as most of the characters including the main one sat around not doing much when they could have done something interesting.

          The movie wasn't perfect either and I guess it demonstrates why Alan didn't want adaptions made lol

      • BartholemewH on 27/03/2024 - 18:30
        -1

        No way any TV series can be worse than that movie. Only time I've ever felt worse off after a cinema experience.

        • kiitos on 28/03/2024 - 07:18

          I presume you've read the comics and can compare? I haven't and enjoyed the movie as a result I guess.

          • BartholemewH on 28/03/2024 - 20:29

            @kiitos: Nope. Had never seen /read anything to do with the franchise. The movie was shit in its own right…

    • gardezee on 27/03/2024 - 17:06
      +5

      Good idea. Although the TV Show is completely different to the graphic novel. But reading it and going into the show will give you a better idea of the characters involved.

      Best sequence is:
      Novel
      Movie (Ultimate Edition)
      Show

    • Oceadge on 27/03/2024 - 20:52
      +2

      Others here don't see to agree but I thought the TV series was amazing. Definitely one of my favourite shows ever. And yes, it follows on from what happens in the book rather than the movie. (I wasn't a big fan of the movie but I think Zack Snyder did a good job and it's worth watching for the intro alone!)

    • Gehirn on 27/03/2024 - 14:45
      +13

      The original has multiple gay women in it. Or did you only watch the movie?

        • chiprillis on 27/03/2024 - 15:06
          -2

          I think we get the comment entirely but I must have missed the sequels where The Avengers, Superman or Batman were replaced by a strong gay female

        • Gehirn on 27/03/2024 - 15:25
          +4

          Yes yes parroting a south park reference is to sophisticated for me to get.

          Or maybe your comment makes no sense because the Watchmen comic has strong gay female heroes and people, feminist groups, and all sorts of diversity. It can't be lucky to be published in a different era if still has the same content.

          • endotherm on 27/03/2024 - 16:05
            -6

            @Gehirn: I'm sorry that the witty social commentary of the zeitgeist portrayed by South Park is too sophisticated for you to comprehend. Many intelligent people recognise the clever meme to accurately reflect current events, regardless of your politics. South Park wouldn't be so successful if it didn't consistently hit the mark and reflect society so accurately.

            I never said that there weren't gays/females/diverse groups in the comic. That was never the problem. It still makes perfect sense. You're reading too much into what I said. Did they replace any strong/straight/white/male characters with woke alternates in the name of diversity? Nope? My point is that the original, written in the previous era, hasn't been adulterated with the contemporary practice of rewriting and replacing loved original characters with a woke alternative just to satisfy a need for "diversity".

            • Crow K on 27/03/2024 - 16:20
              -3

              @endotherm: Alright, let's define the "put a chick in it and make her gay" era as .. 2021 onwards. That means it was around for 2+ years before South Park finally caught on to it and punished it with its "wit".

              We're talking about a comic book (not a movie) that was published in the past. Under your logic from the above, aren't all comic books published pre-2021 also "luckily" published in that era, then?

              Even ignoring the fact you picked a progressive comic book with several gay characters in it, how is "thank God it was printed before 2021" somehow a meaningful comment?

              It's not. You flubbed and picked a bad example to use your South Park line on. You (somehow) managed to fail to use the low hanging fruit of Eric Cartman's observations correctly. Sad.

            • Gehirn on 27/03/2024 - 16:38

              @endotherm:

              My point is that the original, written in the previous era, hasn't been adulterated with the contemporary practice of rewriting and replacing loved original characters with a woke alternative just to satisfy a need for "diversity".

              And why would it need to be? Watchmen was written 'woke', 'diverse', 'anti right-wing', 'political', 'social justice" and whatever else you want to say is being added, replaced, and rewritten. The characters are parodies of popular characters at the time too and made diverse.

              Your point still has no relevance to anything because what you're against is inherent to the themes of the book.

            • Bedgrub on 27/03/2024 - 19:08
              -3

              @endotherm: We get it, you just wanted to reference a clever contemporary joke. Unfortunately, it just came across as the same brand of boring humour that the racist and sexist guy work does every day.

        • Crow K on 27/03/2024 - 15:42
          +1

          Inside the mind of someone who thinks Eric Cartman is a good example of a reliable viewpoint to copy

          Still, not as bad as when they try their hand at their own satire/"jokes"

          • theguyrules on 27/03/2024 - 16:04
            +4

            @Crow K: Good lord

          • Randolph Duke on 27/03/2024 - 16:41
            +4

            @Crow K: If anything that Cartman clip is taking the piss out of all these moany go woke go broke losers on the internet 🤷‍♀️

    • Drpepper666 on 27/03/2024 - 14:48
      -7

      Luckily? It's pretty ick wish they would modernise it a bit..

    • bootlace on 27/03/2024 - 15:41
      +4

      Yeah! Phew! Because Alien, Aliens, The Abyss, Terminator 2, Contact and other films with women… they’re all terrible. Rubbish. Irredeemable.

      It’s almost like women reckon they’re slightly more than half the population or something. First they got the vote… now this. Where will it end?!

      So good on you, endotherm, someone has to keep the tide away with a broom! It’s a thankless job because the literal overwhelming majority of good hearted people have moved on, but you go get ‘em, sport.

      • Crow K on 27/03/2024 - 15:49
        -2

        It's actually more sinister than that, because Eric Cartman is bringing to our attention the fact that when a bit of IP gets a reboot and they make changes to reflect the current world, they of course erase all the old copies and we can't have the old versions anymore.

        It's simply impossible to coexist peacefully with woke rebooters because they're taking our toys away from us, etc etc. If only there was a possibility that they could have their version and we have ours, sigh

      • endotherm on 27/03/2024 - 16:33
        -3

        Where exactly did I hang shit on women? I think this says more about your thought processes and failure to comprehend, because you are so keen to get offended by something that wasn't said. My problem is that perfectly good original characters are being replaced by woke alternatives because… reasons. I'd be just as disappointed if they replaced Ripley with a man or if they replaced Schwarzenegger with a woman (no, the Terminator 3 "Terminatrix" doesn't count, that's an additional character).

        • Crow K on 27/03/2024 - 16:41
          +3

          because you are so keen to get offended by something that wasn't said

          Says the guy that starts comment threads to warn us of the dangers of reboots that haven't happened?

          • endotherm on 27/03/2024 - 16:51
            -1

            @Crow K: Where the hell did I warn of a danger of reboots? It was an observation that this was an original version without any modern tampering. That's all. I mocked the current trend of needing to change everything for the sake of it. Try comprehending my meaning before inserting your own.

            • Crow K on 27/03/2024 - 16:53

              @endotherm: So we are back to "thank God this comic containing several gay characters was published in the good old days before people tampered with storylines to insert gay characters"?

              Come on man, take the L, and join the army

              • endotherm on 27/03/2024 - 17:05
                -3

                @Crow K: Reading comprehension isn't one of your strong suits, is it?

                I.know.it.has.gay.characters.and.themes.in.it.
                I.don't.have.a.problem.with.that.
                I.am.grateful.that.EVERY.OTHER.ORIGINAL.CHARACTER.hasn't.been.replaced.using.the.lazy."put-a-chick-in-it-and-make-her-gay".formula.

                Slow enough for you to get the point yet?

                • Crow K on 27/03/2024 - 17:18

                  @endotherm: I don't understand how you can grateful that a book that was published in the 1980's hasn't been "changed" to include ideas from a 2023 South Park episode, especially given no one was discussing the book being rewritten or rebooted?

                  99.99% of all literature that's ever been published was printed before that South Park episode and hasn't been changed since.. do you say this is every book thread? "Thank God this 1920s collection of poetry hasn't been changed to insert a gay chick in it"?

                  • endotherm on 27/03/2024 - 17:45
                    -2

                    @Crow K:

                    I don't understand how you can grateful…

                    That's your problem right there — you don't want to understand. The ideas don't come from a South Park episode. The idea is already out there. South Park just packaged it into a nice little meme that any reasonable person who isn't trolling would recognise. In fact I was discussing that it was fortuitous that the book hadn't been rewritten or rebooted, or recently tampered with. Is there something wrong with wanting to preserve the original story and intent of the author? Hmmm? I do have a problem with people wanting to change history. If you want to reboot a new version with your own revisionist changes, go right ahead, just don't mess with the original.

                    You're really drawing a thin bow with your examples now. I only specified a single title. What has that got to do with any other written work since time immemorial? You are arguing just for the sake of arguing now, i.e. trolling.

                    • Crow K on 27/03/2024 - 17:49
                      -1

                      @endotherm: Right, so you're protecting us all from the imagined threat of a reboot, keeping in mind literally no one has mentioned this work being redone?

                      Inventing hypothetical reboots that bully your sensibilities and make you the victim in this all, etc etc

                      Let me see if I can find a Eric Cartman quote to sum it up: "Weak".

                      • Crow K on 27/03/2024 - 17:58
                        -1

                        @Crow K: I mean, look at it this way, let's say I think Chris Pratt is a shit actor who is in too much stuff.

                        If someone posted a Blu-ray deal of the original Godfather trilogy and I replied in the thread saying "Thank God this version doesn't have Chris Pratt in it", that would be weird, right?

                        Or "I'm glad this one hasn't been rebooted to have Chris Pratt in it, why can't people leave things alone?"

                        My point is I think Chris Pratt is shit and in too much stuff, but why did I bring it up there? Attention seeking? Christ Pratt lives in my head rent free? I can now argue my take on Chris Pratt, but it was a dumb thing to bring up in the thread in the first place because it's irrelevant.

                        That's what you did today.

                        • endotherm on 27/03/2024 - 18:23
                          -3

                          @Crow K: Absolutely agree, what you wrote is dumb and irrelevant. You are confused. Seek help.

                          • Crow K on 27/03/2024 - 18:26
                            -1

                            @endotherm: Seek approval, using South Park ideas.

                            Oh wait, you already did.

                      • endotherm on 27/03/2024 - 18:13
                        -3

                        @Crow K: There is no reboot or threat! I'm celebrating that fact. I'm not protecting anyone from anything. YOU — you are the only one mentioning reboots. I don't know how a non-existent thing is supposed to be offending my sensibilities, or why I should be victimized by that. I'm merely respecting the original version, despite whatever scenario it is that you are trying to establish. YOU sound like you are championing for the book being edited/re-written/rebooted. Why?

                        • Crow K on 27/03/2024 - 18:25
                          -1

                          @endotherm:

                          YOU sound like you are championing for the book being edited/re-written/rebooted. Why?

                          Sentences like this are why accusing others of lacking reading comprehension is an act of hubris.

                          • hueylewis on 28/03/2024 - 08:41
                            -1

                            @Crow K: CrowReally, looks like it has been a slow day at the safe space over at the gender studies faculty…

  • BarginBrah on 27/03/2024 - 14:45

    Good movie, also enjoyed the stop motion animation(?) , maybe I'll have to grab this to complete the set.

    Heard the tv series was a bit weird.

    • pichxlonco on 27/03/2024 - 15:00
      +1

      Tv series was ok, just be mindful it follows after the events on the comics and not the movie

  • eswes on 27/03/2024 - 14:53

    Great deal!

  • wintersnow911 on 27/03/2024 - 15:18
    +1

    Is this as good as the movie?

    • servodude on 27/03/2024 - 16:03

      "as good"?

      This is on a different level altogther (and I liked the movie!)

    • Phanatic on 28/03/2024 - 12:52

      Somewhere, deep underground, a single tear rolls down Alan Moore's cheek. Which he captures in a jar and adds to The Vault.

  • theguyrules on 27/03/2024 - 16:05
    +1

    Worth mentioning "Via Amazon US" in the title? Other deals do

    • rosebank on 27/03/2024 - 16:16
      +1

      It was AU when posted. I ordered and it's arriving on Saturday, they must have sold out.

      Price is also a few cents cheap now. Will edit.

    • rosebank on 27/03/2024 - 16:24
      +1

      I can't edit anything.

      But Amazon AU is OOS, now it's $38.07 + Delivery ($0 with Prime/ $59 Spend) @ Amazon US via AU

  • hunty mcgee on 27/03/2024 - 16:08
    +3

    Speaking of the movie, Ultimate Cut is on sale atm on iTunes - $4.99 in 4K DV for those interested.

    • Rimzi on 27/03/2024 - 18:21

      Oh thank you!!

    • Rimzi on 27/03/2024 - 20:15

      Just bought it, didn’t realise it’d mixed with animation, thought it’ll be extended film scenes. :(
      Might be good though, I’m not familiar with it.

      • AngusD on 28/03/2024 - 08:57
        +2

        I'm not sure if you're familiar with the book, but the book had this comic-within-a-comic called Tales of the Black Freighter. I think the idea is that in a world where actual costumed superheroes existed there wouldn't be much demand for comics about them, so comics about pirates became popular instead. Or something. Anyway, when making the film they made the Black Freighter stuff as an animated movie that was released separately from the main movie. They then edited this back into the extended director's cut of the movie (similar to how the bits of the Black Freighter comic were interspersed throughout the book) to create the Ultimate Edition.

  • cmyk on 27/03/2024 - 16:09

    Not sure if is really the 1st edition but ordered anyway…

    • Rimzi on 27/03/2024 - 20:17

      2013 release so it isn’t 1st

  • Subere on 27/03/2024 - 19:57

    I try avoiding Amazon for hardcover graphic novels because their packaging is terrible and there's a high chance the book will be damaged in some way.

    • Maltopia on 28/03/2024 - 00:00

      Free returns for damaged goods.

    • Willy Beamish on 28/03/2024 - 06:49

      I order a lot of hardcovers from Amazon and most of the time they are packaged fine, it's more like a low chance. Even if they don't you just complain and it's resolved. When you order some of the more higher end usually the dark horse ones come in their own cardboard packaging for added protection.

    • Hawk Tuah on 08/04/2024 - 23:23

      Arrived today with zero padding in the box :)

  • rwps on 28/03/2024 - 07:53
    +2

    A great find OP - this is the classic graphic novel - so good. As always a pity its Bezos store, but love that the watchmen is out there being read

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join