Barring the fact that the film can't physically give us everything the comic does, it manages to bring many a classic scene from the comic to the screen fairly faithfully. Unfortunately, it also manages to miss the point on so many levels it is painful. Here, you brought up a great example:
...is pure, unadulterated, Hollywood bullshit. It's awful. A brilliant scene utterly mangled in translation.
The film gives us Rorschach and Manhattan's exchange, sure, but what could've been a contemplative moment between two characters is torn asunder by a cringy Hollywood "NOOOOO" from Niteowl, followed by him then beating up the guy who not only soundly pounded him mere moments ago without breaking a sweat, but who also has a monumental enough ego that it would be completely out of character for him to simply let himself get beaten up (case in point: he never got over having his arse handed to him by The Comedian all those years ago, hence why he was so vicious during the rematch).
Now, in the comic, this scene is a quiet moment between Manhattan and Rorschach, the moral absolutist/existentialist man facing God and being judged in the snow, alone (in stark contrast to Veidt meeting Manhattan). No one else really knows what happens to him here. It's an intensely emotional moment without being trite or histrionic.
Was Niteowl's insertion into this scene necessary? Did they drive the plot along or give us a better understanding of the characters and their motivations? Did they perhaps add a layer of symbolism or thematic development? No. Why add them? They had to have Nite Owl do those things because Hollywood can't have (what is ostensibly) a "bad guy" get away with his nefarious scheme without having some kind of comeuppance. Is that a sentiment the comic holds to? No, absolutely not.
The film wears the comic's skin, but it does not have it's heart.
ukes: