Watchmen has always been the gospel of sorts in my comic book side of things. Recommendations and comparisons were sent my way lots of times, to which I always felt a genuine interest and curiosity but nonetheless moved along blissfully ignorant of what exactly I was passing up. When announcements of the Watchmen movie reached me a year or two ago I knew I had only a limited time to experience the comic book on a clean slate and picked up my own copy.
It goes without saying Watchmen is unlike anything I've read. Its plot structure is genially built on intertwining themes and concepts of morality, politics and psychology that delve extremely deeply into society even today, all the while taking place in an alternate universe of the1980’s where Nixon remains president and the cold war has spiraled toward nuclear holocaust. Expanding and building on all of these themes are the characters, all of which are extremely complex and conflicted in their own rights. Moore delivers a wide spectrum of psychoses, vulnerabilities and perspectives relevant to the superhero archetype as well as the human condition as a whole. The story is rich and fulfilling and at times poetic and tragic.
Watchmen is a visual achievement in its own right. The distinctive yellows and purples do wonders to re-enforce the tone of a drab and dull New York City and the realism and detail of characters and setting go hand in hand with the narrative elements but it’s Gibbons’ use of symmetry that continues to blow me away. It’s difficult to grasp the nature of this without reading the book for yourself but the contrasts and overlap of characters and objects in sequential frames is a breathtaking tool when illustrating flashbacks or parallels in dialogue and action. The artistry of each image is in many ways as intricate as the writing and does an incredible job of vividly expressing the story.
So how does the movie compare?
Watchmen, for all of its layers and details, has been said to be ‘unfilmable’. The script has been written and re-written, passed around Hollywood and traded among directors and actors for over twenty years, where it finally settled into the hands of Zack Snyder. It’s no question therefore, that the transition from book to film has been an extremely difficult process for everyone involved.
If nothing else Watchmen is in the very least in an interesting position; it’s been said that it is TOO faithful, or unwelcoming to newcomers to the graphic novel. I have to say that I agree that it fails to draw in a new crowd - having seen the movie twice now, all three of the people I saw it with who hadn’t read the book were completely lost. In terms of loyalty to the book, I have no complaints. It stands as one of the most devoted of any adaptation I’ve seen, but that isn’t the issue. What impresses me with Watchmen is that it effectively captured the thematic elements and tone of the story through the unavoidable trimming of the source material. This remains true with many of the characters’ personalities and back-stories as well as the plot. Everything that was cut was logical and the additions or changes were sensible and subtle enough to flow seamlessly.
In terms of the production of the film itself I feel that Zack Snyder deserves a lot of respect for his work bringing Watchmen to life. Apart from some questionable wire-work and slow-motion reflective of his previous film, 300, his direction weaves the action flawlessly through a great number of painstakingly recreated shots from the comic. It’s obvious that Snyder adores the story. Probably most impressive however, is the opening credits sequence – a montage of the history of the Watchmen, implicating them in some of the most memorable moments in American history, all set to Bob Dylan’s “Times They Are A-Changing”. Sadly, the rest of the music is often awkward and badly placed, taking away from several key scenes and rendering some of them almost laughable.
The cast reaches some big highs and awful lows. Billy Crudup and Jackie Earle Haley both do a fantastic job playing two of the most interesting and complicated personalities I’ve ever come across. Crudup shows great restraint, dehumanizing Dr. Manhattan to something other-worldly and immense, while Haley hits the sociopathic brutality of Rorschach’s mania and grounds it all in a sympathetic hero. Unfortunately, the women of The Watchmen are a huge step in the other direction. Malin Akerman is dull and one-dimensional, seemingly just along for the ride over the course of the story and Carla Gugino, terribly miscast, fails at making any understanding with the audience, removing any kind of duality or complexity and leaving her unlikeable and static. The result is two women, strong and independent in the comic, tired and stale on-screen.
The colors and sets reflect the look of Watchmen perfectly and the pace of the movie moves along at a pretty solid pace. Generally it holds the soul of the source material and delivers on what Watchmen should. America is drab and dirty. The purples and yellows are vivid and mournful. The suits are sleek and utile, different and yet similar to the original fashion in the novel. The biggest flaw in the visual department is the make-up - Nixon and Sally Jupiter are almost scary-looking. The prosthetics sag and hang so visibly it’s hard not to notice. It’s a wonder they were able to do so badly here and so well with Dr. Manhattan who is a visual superstar. The CGI is really impressive, detailing the most subtle changes in expression.
Zack Snyder said in an interview that he lobbied for the job knowing that if he didn’t make it, somebody else would. It’s with that in mind that Snyder tried his best to recreate the story faithfully. Watchmen may have failed to produce a perfectly accurate adaptation of the graphic novel. I definitely agree that it is flawed. Alan Moore famously discredits adaptation of his work because he feels the comic book as a medium is a necessary part of the make-up of his stories, so it’s possible that no comic book can be adapted properly. I prefer to think of Watchmen as a visual accompaniment to the graphic novel that touches on and highlights the most visually evocative aspects of the comic and serves as a motion reel to the page. From that perspective, I believe Zack Snyder has made the ultimate fan film, and from one fan to another, I appreciate that. I’d call that a success.
It's a shame that Watchmen did so poorly at the box office. The Dark Knight to me was a huge step in the right direction, not only as a great entertainment piece, but also for movies in general. In the past Batman has been the peak of mindless entertainment. After defining camp to making arguably the worst the movie of all time, 2008 saw Batman portrayed as a brilliant and psychologically thrilling action film. As the mass media continues to dumb down our entertainment, The Dark Knight was a stellar example of intelligent, passionate people making something engaging and worthwhile. Naïve as I was, having the trailer for Watchmen premiere at the Dark Knight’s opening seemed a sure sign that the tides were changing and the public would show a demand for more stimulating movies, regardless of genre. Watchmen’s flop at the box office seemed a telltale sign to Hollywood as re-assurance that the average movie-goer isn't interested in being intellectually challenged in a movie and that they will probably continue to green light projects like Ghost Rider 2 (Seriously. They did.)
Zack Snyder said in an interview that he lobbied for the job knowing that if he didn’t make it, somebody else would. It’s with that in mind that Snyder tried his best to recreate the story faithfully. Watchmen may have failed to produce a perfectly accurate adaptation of the graphic novel. I definitely agree that it is flawed. Alan Moore famously discredits adaptation of his work because he feels the comic book as a medium is a necessary part of the make-up of his stories, so it’s possible that no comic book can be adapted properly. I prefer to think of Watchmen as a visual accompaniment to the graphic novel that touches on and highlights the most visually evocative aspects of the comic and serves as a motion reel to the page. From that perspective, I believe Zack Snyder has made the ultimate fan film, and from one fan to another, I appreciate that. I’d call that a success.
It's a shame that Watchmen did so poorly at the box office. The Dark Knight to me was a huge step in the right direction, not only as a great entertainment piece, but also for movies in general. In the past Batman has been the peak of mindless entertainment. After defining camp to making arguably the worst the movie of all time, 2008 saw Batman portrayed as a brilliant and psychologically thrilling action film. As the mass media continues to dumb down our entertainment, The Dark Knight was a stellar example of intelligent, passionate people making something engaging and worthwhile. Naïve as I was, having the trailer for Watchmen premiere at the Dark Knight’s opening seemed a sure sign that the tides were changing and the public would show a demand for more stimulating movies, regardless of genre. Watchmen’s flop at the box office seemed a telltale sign to Hollywood as re-assurance that the average movie-goer isn't interested in being intellectually challenged in a movie and that they will probably continue to green light projects like Ghost Rider 2 (Seriously. They did.)
No comments:
Post a Comment