RSS
Home
Hurm...another Watchmen Review
Print
Email
RSS
Subscribe
.jpg)
Watchmen Promo Poster
When a comic fan views a film adaptation, a good film adaptation for the first time, there is always that particular moment, a giddy feeling in the pit of their stomach manifesting as a scene they had been visualizing for years is played out on the screen, larger than life. It literally makes the eyes water. Superman taking flight with Lois Lane secured safely in his arms, Wolverine popping his claws with a snarl for the first time, Spidey webslinging the high rises of New York City, and the Batmobile roaring down the streets of Gotham in pursuit of a criminal mastermind, all these scenes resonate with us, transporting us to our initial encounters with the characters and the universes they inhabit.
As Rorschach snatched The Comedian’s bloody badge from the grimy streets of New York City, the butterflies made my eyes well up.
I just got back from seeing Watchmen…albeit a few days later than intended. I went with five other people, only one besides myself having read the source material, despite my best efforts to push the graphic novel on anyone who would listen these past few weeks. Hurm. When we left nearly three hours later, there were three more converts to my camp, champing at the bit to read the book…and one who absolutely hated the movie, presumably guaranteeing never to give the source material a second, or even first, glance. Snyder, you and I are in the same boat…you just can’t win ‘em all over I guess.
All things considered, I thoroughly enjoyed the film adaptation of Watchmen. This was about as close to a faithful adaptation as one could have hoped for, with the exception of the much debated different ending. Most of the issues I had with the film were the exclusion of elements I felt integral to the story (see below), but I’m optimistic for their inclusion in the director’s cut DVD. Would I have like to see excerpts from Under the Hood? Damn straight. Did it irk me they weren’t there? I got over it. I’ve always felt Watchmen would be a great televised mini-series, but with the budgetary concerns, smaller audience base, and adaptation issues, the movie fit in the best parts of the book. A good friend said it best: the film is a meat-and-potatoes version of the book.
What Worked:
Jackie Earle Haley’s portrayal of Rorschach is spot-on. Every scene with him seethes the intensity and breeds the emotion that is central to the character’s motivations. Though he wasn’t popping sugar cubes like Prozac, Haley bore down to the essence of the character, his black-and-white sense of right and wrong, better than I could have possibly hoped. Uncompromisable until the very end, Rorschach reveals himself to be the moral compass, a severely disturbed man in an even more fractured world.
Billy Crudup. Have you ever read a comic and created a voice in your head for a specific character, what you think their dialogue actually sounds like? Crudup’s Dr. Manhattan sounded like my Dr. Manhattan. His soft, reassuring voice belies a cold, antiseptic and scientific undertone and perception of the world.
I know fans of the comic are up in arms about the ending of the film, specifically the tool used to destroy New York, but in all honesty, I didn’t have too much of an issue with it. Would I have like the original? Sure. Would other audience members have put up with a probable extra half-hour of set-up for that specific ending? Probably not. It worked, for what it was worth.
The overall feeling and ambiance of the New York the characters reside in looked like it had jumped from the panels of Watchmen. It feels like a cold, otherworldly city, an alternate plain of existence, and Snyder captured that in the film.
All the slight nods and background pieces were nice for fans of the original book too. While these easter eggs show up in almost every adaptation, it was nice to see they were not lost here either.
What Didn’t:
My biggest problem was Malin Akerman’s portrayal of Silk Spectre II. Her delivery of dialogue that should have been packed with emotional resonance seemed to fall flat and wooden most of the time, and Silk was relegated to the ‘eye candy’ portion of the movie.
Most of the mystery surrounding the ending’s ‘shocking’ revelation was too foreshadowed. In the graphic novel, the clues are there, but you need to dig for them, rewarding yourself and in turn, making your interpretation more rewarding. However, in the film, it’s fairly plain to see, even to someone who hasn’t read the book, who the villain truly is. And, did we really need the “Everybody Wants to Rule the World” musak when Ozymandias was meeting with the heads of industry? If symbolism were tangible, it would have bludgeoned me to death at that point.
The energy crisis subplot seemed tacked on to contain some sort of current social relevance, and it was exactly that. Tacked on.
The virtual exclusion of Hollis Mason, the original Nite Owl and author of Under the Hood. Hopefully the director’s cut will make up for what, for myself at least, was the most glowing omission in translation.
The exclusion of Rorschach’s psychiatrist’s personal life beyond his interaction with the prisoner. While the adaptation of Chapter Six of Watchmen, The Abyss Gazes Also (my personal favorite chapter of Watchmen) was nearly perfect, seeing his personal life’s downward spiral as a direct result of his treatments with Rorschach is what makes that particular chapter so interesting.
Of course, these are just a few musings from a comic fan. I could nitpick the movie to death, and in doing so, lessen my enjoyment. The overall experience for me was excellent, and for review sake if I had to tack a grade to it, it would be a resounding A -.
Agree? Disagree? Either way, check out these other Examiner reviews of Watchmen:
Related Articles:
Comments
Single, married or something in between? Find what you need for Valentine's Day.
