Watchmen (C+) "So, you people who are into comic books who aren't kids have been going on for the what, past twenty three years- about this 'Watchmen' comic, right?"
"Well, ah-hum, firstly, they're called 'graphic novels'-"
"Yeah, whatever, fancy. So I saw the movie that 'watchmen' comic was based on last night-"
"Well, you should know that the writer, Alan Moore, disavowed any connection with the movie adaptation of his 'graphic novel"-
"You mean, 'comic book'. Anyways, Poindexter, the movie I saw last night was a clumsy, disjointed mess. It was basically 'Mystery Men' without, you know, any of the laughs. And a lot more pointless violence. Like a lot of directors who cut their teeth on doing commercials, Zack Snyder pushes the visuals over the actual narrative. As a result, what you get isn't a movie in the regular sense, but a Cliff Notes version of the comic book."
"It's a 'graphic-"
"If you call a comic book a 'graphic novel' one more time, I will punch you in the face!"
Ok, enough with the Socratic dialogue. It's actually not bad, for being an action movie. And as an adaptation of an all but unadaptable comic book, it's about as good as that type of thing as you're going to see.
The point I was struggling with earlier is that it highlights the main problem of adapting comic books to the movies. That is, the movie's ability to get the audience to suspend its disbelief in order to enjoy the movie. (An aside: I enjoyed Iron Man a little more than The Dark Knight because Iron Man's more effective in getting an audience-well, me, at least,-on board more than Dark Knight was. Call it the Dumbo Effect. If we can't accept a flying elephant in the first place, we aren't going to enjoy the movie, 'Dumbo'. And if we can't accept the premise that people are capable of superhuman feats of agility and strength (while in high heels and capes, no less) while retaining universal human traits we can relate to...Well, you get what I'm saying.)
So it gives us a world where superheros really exist, and sets it in a time where the threat of nuclear annihilation was literally hanging over our heads. The plot involves some retired superheroes trying to find out why one of their number was killed, which leads to a global conspiracy involving another one of their type. This conspiracy involves framing another superhero for killing millions of people which will, presumably, lead to a sort of peace between the United States and Russia, as they will have to combine their forces to keep this rogue superhero at bay.
If that plotline doesn't bother you, you will probably enjoy this movie. As for myself, well, yeah, it's pretty dumb, but I guess it makes sense in the context of the movie. And let's face it, Zack Snyder managed to pull off what better directors like Paul Greengrass and Terry Gilliam couldn't do, with a lot of visual flair, so there's that. Patrick Wilson as Nite Owl, Jeffery Dean Morgan as the Comedian and Jackie Haley as Rorschach do a bang up job as actual people put into the unreal context of a superhero narrative.
My ultimate point though, is that if 'Watchmen' is a high point for comics as a respectable medium, then comics still have a long way to go. (The plot of the comic involved a giant space squid. Yup.) Snyder's direction does kind of bring up the shortcomings of the original comic.
I'm not sure what the point was to make Nixon out to use Dr. Manhattan to extend Nixon's time in office. Sure, he was a bastard, but unlike Bush the Usurper, Nixon knew his limits. (The actor in the movie does such a bad Nixon impersonation, I honestly thought for a moment that Nixon might be directly involved with the plot. He's just window dressing, though.) And some of the musical references, taken from the comic, are a little too spot on. (It's a bit like Forrest Gump without Robert Zemeckis' sense of humor)
And in a movie like this where all the details are so meticulous and so thought out, (Warner Brothers is probably counting on DVD sales to make bank.) when some details don't work, they really don't work. Casting thirty-seven year old Carla Gugino as sixty-seven year old Sally Jupiter doesn't work when you look at her bad makeup job. And Malin Akerman as Sally's daughter, Laurie, really doesn't pull off the character. (Off the top of my head, I'dve gone with Juliette Lewis, maybe?) While I'm here, the sex scene between Laurie and Dan, the Nite Owl gets my vote as Second Most Unerotic Love Scene in Movie History, The First One, of Course, Being That Scene In the Second Matrix Movie.
And the violence. I suppose you could argue that the over-the-top fight scene between Laurie, Dan, and the knot-tops was meant to emphasize the hypocrisy of a society condemning a vigilante like Rorschach while endorsing 'nicer' heroes like Silk Spectre and Nite Owl, who are equally as brutal. But I suspect it's done more out of Zack Snyder's love of meticulous gore and graphic brutality, like his earlier '300'. It's just a turn-on for him.
Overall, it's ok, just not the masterpiece it wants to be. (And not the high watermark comic fans want to validate themselves.) Like Peter Jackson's 'Lord of the Rings' movies, it shoehorns a broad, complex story into a limited time frame. It may have been better as a two-parter, but that's all academic. The only way I'd personally get bent out of shape would be if every single copy of the comic disappeared in a puff of paper dust the day the movie opened.
No comments:
Post a Comment