Ryan McNeil
Not long ago, I theorized that what makes a great comic book doesn’t always translate into a great movie. The two mediums have completely different ground rules when it comes to pace, target audience, and what equals success. As if to prove my point, along comes THE WATCHMEN – a great comic turned into a good movie.
The movie is set in an alternate 1985 – one where Nixon is still president, and one where America and The U.S.S.R. are rather actively threatening nuclear war. in the background of this society is a band of heroes who have been cast aside. Originally named The Minutemen, a generation has passed and their name has been changed to The Watchmen. They were enlisted during The Vietnam War to give America an advantage. Now they live as vigilantes, having been outlawed by three-term president Richard Nixon (yes, you read that correctly). Nowadays, one time heroes like The Comedian, Night Owl, Silk Spectre, and Ozymandias are adapting to a world that no longer needs them to various degrees of success. Then there’s Rorshach, who has paid no attention to the decree, and has continued on as a vigilante.
Only Dr. Manhattan – a God-like hero with unimaginable power – remains the lone Watchmen sanctioned by the government. He gives America a heavy advantage over The Soviets, so decree or no decree, they aren’t about to outlaw the might he gives their side.
What shakes The Watchmen out of the scattered stations they’ve taken to is when The Comedian gets murdered by being thrown out of his penthouse window. Rorashach believes that it’s a sign that someone somewhere is aiming to kill off these heroes one by one. But for what gain? It’s not long after this that Dr. Manhattan becomes the focus of a smear campaign, one that paints him as something that does more harm than good, and ultimately forces him to self-exile himself to Mars.
One after the other, heroes begin to find themselves as targets and subject to set-ups. Who is behind it? What is their goal? Why now, with armageddon creeping ever closer? These questions are enough to push Night Owl and Silk Spectre back into the fray, hoping that they can figure out who is behind it all before the world destroys itself.
THE WATCHMEN is a good movie that could have been a great…something (I’ll get back to that). The story hasn’t been handled well enough to transcend. So while it is a solid action/sci-fi movie, it don’t believe it will have the broader appeal that recent hits like THE DARK KNIGHT, SPIDER-MAN, and IRON MAN received. For starters, the heroes spend most of the film struggling with their own stations in a changing society, and precious little time performing acts of daring-do. Beyond that, the story is set in an age that many of its core audience will have either forgotten, or worse, not have even been born during. While neither of these are game-breaking problems, they are heavy obstacles when trying to appeal to a broader audience than the comic store frequenting base.
What will hurt this movie the most, is the heavy hype surrounding a misleading marketing campaign. To that end, let me be clear – there is action, violence, and stunts in this movie…but the moments are fewer and further between than you’ve been lead to believe. Watching this band of heroes wrestle with their role in a society that doesn’t seem to want them anymore is indeed fascinating, however it won’t fascinate those who are waiting for a great fight sequence. Personally, I’ve seen plenty of fight scenes…watching Night Owl try to figure out how he fits in anymore, or listening to Rorshach explain how depraved society has become is much more interesting.
As I mentioned, this story could have been great. However, I think to truly achieve greatness, the story needed a bigger canvas with which to work. Each of the characters has a deep dark motivation for being who they are. Trying to combine half a dozen back stories with the broader mission at hand is difficult to achieve in a feature film, even one that runs almost three hours. I can’t help but wonder if the story would have been better served as an TV miniseries, allowing for better pace and depth.
So as I said, what makes a good comic book doesn’t neccesarily make for a good movie. That theory is in play here, but not for lack of effort. I believe its because THE WATCHMEN is simply too sprawling and layered a story to adapt into a film. The filmmakers have done about as good a job as possible in adapting the story, which has resulted in a good movie…to create a great movie, something had to give. Indeed give THE WATCHMEN a watch, just make sure to leave any expectations you might have about it being a big-budget comic book action film at the door.
Thanks for the review, Hatter. I found it much more compelling then the movie itself! You’re right. The movie IS marketed all wrong. But if it had been marketed all right, I probably wouldn’t have subject myself to nearly three hours of it on opening weekend.
I haven’t seen the movie, but I have heard varying arguments to support your theory. When I read the comic book, I cast out all my aspersions and accepted that this wasn’t a super-hero story like Spider-Man or Batman or the like. I think there are many film critics who have done the same, too. They know what they’re watching, and that it isn’t IRON MAN or THE DARK KNIGHT, and makes no pretense to be any of those stories.
There’s another way to approach this movie; look at it as a conspiracy drama using an alternate history as the backdrop and a small cadre of dejected crime-fighters as it’s protagonists, and suddenly you have a much more compelling story. I knew from looking at the website and the trailers that Warner Bros. had messed up in their marketing campaign. In pre-production, WB even tried to get Snyder to drop three particular scenes from the script: The Comedian’s funeral; Dr. Manhattan on Mars; and Rorschach’s interrogation by the psychiatrist. Warner felt that since nothing “happened” in those scenes, they were expendable. Snyder told them that those three scenes were the reason why he wanted to make the movie. So right there you see how WB had already botched the movie. Fortunately, Snyder had enough clout to make the film the right way, leaving the Warner Bros. to botch the marketing.
All in all, if you haven’t read the comic, then I’d say you’re walking in to watch the world’s longest inside joke. If the film only appeals to those who’ve read the comic, then fine. Why do comic films have to appeal to everyone? Some won’t, and that’s okay. Warner should have known that and thus marketed it that way.
I realise I used the wrong word in my comment above. I meant to say “I cast out all my assumptions” instead of “aspersions”.
Forgiveness, please. I am suffering from with a cold. My vocabulary is affected as a result.
Good points Cheshire – but come back to me once you’ve seen the flick. There’s a bit of bad execution that better marketing wouldn’t have helped.
I kept thinking that the guy who played the Comedian was Javier Bardem (I found out later that it’s actually Jeffrey Dean Morgan), but the two actors definitely look alike